DETAILED ACTION
The applicant amended claims 1-4, 8-9, 11-12 and 16 and canceled claims 5 and 13 in the amendment filed on 05/08/2025.
Claims 1-4, 6-12, and 14-16 are pending.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 and 16 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1-4, 6-12, and 14-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jadallah et al. (US 2014/0052847) in view of McCrory et al. (US 2022/0100625).
With respect to claim 1, Jadallah teaches determining traffic flow, application and network parameters (e.g., determining key performance indicator (KPI) for each of network resources where KPIs include bandwidth, application and types, subscriber, sections [0008]-[0009], [0051], and [0078]). Jadallah teaches collecting the network parameters for a predetermined time period (e.g., collecting utilization data, [0050]-[0052], [0055], and [0059]). Jadallah teaches determining growth wherein the growth comprise: node or link growth, application and category growth and subscriber tier plan growth, based on the traffic flow, application and network parameters (e.g., determining a growth rate for each of the KPIs, where KPIs include bandwidth, application and types, subscriber, sections [0008]-[0010], [0013], [0040]. [0043], and [0078]). Jadallah teaches correlating the growths (e.g., aggregating each of the KPIs, sections [0008], [0053]-[0055], and [0075]). Jadallah teaches determining the growth of the network based on the correlated growths to determine network capacity planning and congestion management planning for the network (e.g., determining a predicted utilization metric based on the aggregated KIPs and a growth rate, sections [0009], [0011], [0040], [0056], [0075]. [0077]-[0078], and [0082]). Jadallah does not explicitly disclose a growth model. However, McCrory teaches a growth model (e.g., building a models for predicting the growth areas (storage capacity, population growth, applications, etc., section [0099]) in order to provide recommendations for growth prediction. Therefore, based on Jadallah in view of McCrory, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teaching of McCrory to the system of Jadallah in order to provide recommendations for growth prediction.
With respect to claim 2, Jadallah teaches the network and application parameters are related to application throughput, subscriber throughput and node throughput (e.g., data throughput, section [0003]).
With respect to claim 3, Jadallah teaches the network and application parameters are related to application Quality of Experience (QoE), subscriber QoE and node QoE (e.g., KPIs include a quality of experience metric (QoE), such as round-trip time, Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) mean opinion score (MOS), and video quality of experience score, section [0072]).
With respect to claim 4, Jadallah teaches the network and application parameters are high frequency parameters that are aggregated over a predetermined time period (e.g., peak usage of each network resource, sections [0059], [0061], [0065], and [0072]).
With respect to claim 6, Jadallah teaches the capacity planning is in a period of months in the future (e.g., projections for next year, section [0056]).
With respect to claim 7, Jadallah teaches the capacity planning is performed for one of node, link, or network device (e.g., network resource (device) for optimization, section [0060]).
With respect to claim 8, Jadallah teaches the capacity planning is performed for at least one of Node growth based on node capacity or throughput; Node growth based on Quality of Experience (QoE); and Node growth based on subscriber throughput (e.g., network resource (cable channel, router ports) for optimization, sections [0060] and [0087]).
The limitations of claim 9 are rejected in the analysis of claims 1 and 3 above, and the claim is rejected on that basis.
The limitations of claim 10 are rejected in the analysis of claim 2 above, and the claim is rejected on that basis.
The limitations of claim 11 are rejected in the analysis of claim 3 above, and the claim is rejected on that basis.
The limitations of claim 12 are rejected in the analysis of claim 4 above, and the claim is rejected on that basis.
The limitations of claim 14 are rejected in the analysis of claim 6 above, and the claim is rejected on that basis.
The limitations of claim 15 are rejected in the analysis of claim 7 above, and the claim is rejected on that basis.
The limitations of claim 16 are rejected in the analysis of claim 8 above, and the claim is rejected on that basis.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOON H HWANG whose telephone number is (571)272-4036. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 9:00 am - 5:00 pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JOON H HWANG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2447
07/02/2026
Prosecution Insights