Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/393,871

Service Function Chaining Parallelism and Diversions

Non-Final OA §102
Filed
Dec 22, 2023
Examiner
CATTUNGAL, AJAY P
Art Unit
2467
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
89%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 6m
To Grant
96%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 89% — above average
89%
Career Allow Rate
795 granted / 895 resolved
+30.8% vs TC avg
Moderate +7% lift
Without
With
+6.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 6m
Avg Prosecution
17 currently pending
Career history
912
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
5.8%
-34.2% vs TC avg
§103
43.2%
+3.2% vs TC avg
§102
31.2%
-8.8% vs TC avg
§112
3.7%
-36.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 895 resolved cases

Office Action

§102
DETAILED ACTION 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 . Specification The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action: A person shall be entitled to a patent unless – (a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. (a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claim(s) 1-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Chang et al. (US 2020/0169506 A1). Regarding claim 1, Chang et al. discloses a service function chain (SFC) diversion method implemented by a service function (SF) node, the SFC diversion method comprising: receiving an SFC packet; determining, based on packet data, that the SFC packet is to be rerouted from a first Service Function Forwarder (SFF) of the SFC to a second SFF of the SFC (Para 24 teaches of bypassing SFF ); modifying a service index (SI) in a network service header (NSH) of the SFC packet to reroute the SFC packet to the second SFF; and transmitting the SFC packet (Para 24 teaches “SFF may modifies the service index 804 in the NSH 802 to the SF 441 which belong to another SF group different from the SF 422. The first packet bypassing the SFF 330, the SFs 431 and 432 is directly forwarded to the SFF 340 and the SF 441. The SFs and the SFFs apply the method to subsequent packets in the flow 801a of the first exemplary SFP to improve efficiency of processing the SFC for the flow 801a.”). Regarding claim 2, Chang et al. discloses a SFC diversion method, wherein the SFC packet is received from a third SFF of the SFC, and wherein transmitting the SFC packet comprises returning the SFC packet with the SI as modified to the third SFF for forwarding to the second SFF. (Para 24 teaches “SFF may modifies the service index 804 in the NSH 802 to the SF 441 which belong to another SF group different from the SF 422. The first packet bypassing the SFF 330, the SFs 431 and 432 is directly forwarded to the SFF 340 and the SF 441. The SFs and the SFFs apply the method to subsequent packets in the flow 801a of the first exemplary SFP to improve efficiency of processing the SFC for the flow 801a.”). Regarding claim 3, Chang et al. discloses a SFC diversion method, wherein the SF node is also configured as an SFF (See Fig 1 ), and wherein transmitting the SFC packet comprises transmitting the SFC packet with the SI as modified to the second SFF. (Para 24 teaches “SFF may modifies the service index 804 in the NSH 802 to the SF 441 which belong to another SF group different from the SF 422. The first packet bypassing the SFF 330, the SFs 431 and 432 is directly forwarded to the SFF 340 and the SF 441. The SFs and the SFFs apply the method to subsequent packets in the flow 801a of the first exemplary SFP to improve efficiency of processing the SFC for the flow 801a.”). Regarding claim 4, Chang et al. discloses a SFC diversion method, further comprising modifying a service path index (SPI) in the NSH. (Para 24 teaches “SFF may modifies the service index 804 in the NSH 802 to the SF 441 which belong to another SF group different from the SF 422. The first packet bypassing the SFF 330, the SFs 431 and 432 is directly forwarded to the SFF 340 and the SF 441. The SFs and the SFFs apply the method to subsequent packets in the flow 801a of the first exemplary SFP to improve efficiency of processing the SFC for the flow 801a.”). Regarding claim 5, Chang et al. discloses a SFC diversion method, wherein the second SFF is an existing SFF along a Service Function Path (SFP) of the SFC packet or a new SFF added to the SFC. (Para 24 teaches “SFF may modifies the service index 804 in the NSH 802 to the SF 441 which belong to another SF group different from the SF 422. The first packet bypassing the SFF 330, the SFs 431 and 432 is directly forwarded to the SFF 340 and the SF 441. The SFs and the SFFs apply the method to subsequent packets in the flow 801a of the first exemplary SFP to improve efficiency of processing the SFC for the flow 801a.”). Claim(s) 6-9, and 17-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Gage et al. (US 2022/0060370 A1). The applied reference has a common Assignee with the instant application. Based upon the earlier effectively filed date of the reference, it constitutes prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2). This rejection under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) might be overcome by: (1) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(a) that the subject matter disclosed in the reference was obtained directly or indirectly from the inventor or a joint inventor of this application and is thus not prior art in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(A); (2) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(b) of a prior public disclosure under 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(B) if the same invention is not being claimed; or (3) a statement pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) establishing that, not later than the effective filing date of the claimed invention, the subject matter disclosed in the reference and the claimed invention were either owned by the same person or subject to an obligation of assignment to the same person or subject to a joint research agreement. Regarding claim 6, Gage et al. discloses a service function chain (SFC) multi-path diversion method implemented by a service function (SF) node, the SFC multi-path diversion (See Fig 2 Para 44) method comprising: receiving a SFC packet; determining, based on packet data, that the SFC packet is to be diverted to multiple Service Function Paths (SFPs) of the SFC(See Fig 2 Para 51); generating a copy of the SFC packet for each of the multiple SFPs to produce a plurality of diverted SFC packets (Para 8 Para 51-55 teaches of generating replicas for the SF, where a packet flow if replicated over multiple service function in a stateful manner. So that in case of a failure of a SF a replica could be used); modifying the plurality of diverted SFC packets to include merging information for merging the plurality of diverted SFC packets; and transmitting the plurality of diverted SFC packets (Para 15 Para 59-60 and Para 65-66 teaches of an indication that indicates the primary instance of the packet flow and a segment list that used the order the segment of the packet flow. Para 80 teaches “If the current SF is the last SF in the SFP then, at step 853, the SFN or SFF associated with the last SF extracts the user packet from the payload 630 of the encapsulation packet 600 and, at step 855, forwards the user packet towards a destination node indicated by a destination address field in a header of the user packet”). Regarding claim 7, Gage et al. discloses SFC muti-path diversion method, wherein the SFC packet is received from a Service Function Forwarder (SFF) of the SFC, and wherein transmitting the plurality of diverted SFC packets comprises returning the plurality of diverted SFC packets to the SFF (Para 15 Para 59-60 and Para 65-66 teaches of an indication that indicates the primary instance of the packet flow and a segment list that used the order the segment of the packet flow). Regarding claim 8, Gage et al. discloses SFC muti-path diversion method, further comprising removing unnecessary saved metadata from one or more of the diverted SFC packets in the plurality of diverted SFC packets prior to returning the plurality of diverted SFC packets to the SFF (Para 80 teaches “If the current SF is the last SF in the SFP then, at step 853, the SFN or SFF associated with the last SF extracts the user packet from the payload 630 of the encapsulation packet 600 and, at step 855, forwards the user packet towards a destination node indicated by a destination address field in a header of the user packet”.). Regarding claim 9, Gage et al. discloses SFC muti-path diversion method, wherein the SF node is also configured as a Service Function Forwarder (SFF), and wherein transmitting the plurality of diverted SFC packets comprises transmitting each of the diverted SFC packets to a different SFF of the SFC (Para 40 teaches “When the SF 135 has finished processing the packet, the processed packet is returned to the SFF 130 which is further responsible for forwarding the packet to the next SFF or SFN. SFNs 140 can host one or more SFs 135 and can have one or more SFFs 130 associated with them.”). Regarding claim 17, Gage et al. discloses service function chain (SFC) merging method implemented by a service function (SF) node, the SFC merging method comprising: receiving a plurality of diverted SFC packets; determining a set of matching diverted SFC packets from the plurality of diverted SFC packets; merging the set of matching diverted SFC packets into a merged SFC packet; and transmitting the merged SFC packet. (Para 15 Para 59-60 and Para 65-66 teaches of an indication that indicates the primary instance of the packet flow and a segment list that used the order the segment of the packet flow. Para 80 teaches “If the current SF is the last SF in the SFP then, at step 853, the SFN or SFF associated with the last SF extracts the user packet from the payload 630 of the encapsulation packet 600 and, at step 855, forwards the user packet towards a destination node indicated by a destination address field in a header of the user packet”.). Regarding claim 18, Gage et al. discloses SFC merging method, further comprising buffering the set of matching diverted SFC packets in a memory buffer until all SFC packets in the set of matching diverted SFC packets are received. (Para 94 teaches “The state packet 1042 is propagated through subsequent backup instances of the SF, with each backup instance of the SF incrementing the SF instance identifier field 646 in the state packet destination address, until it is received by the SF 1050 associated with SFP instance k−1. Backup SF instance k−1 1050 forwards a modified state packet 1052 where the SF instance identifier of the state packet 1052 destination address is incremented to k and the SF instance identifier of the unmodified source address of the state packet 1052 is also set to k. When the state packet 1052 is received by the originating SF instance 1010, the originating SF instance 1010 recognizes the matching source and destination addresses, indicting successful propagation of the state packet through the SF instance set.) Regarding claim 19, Gage et al. discloses SFC merging method, wherein merging the set of matching diverted SFC packets into the merged SFC packet comprises extracting merging information from each diverted SFC packet in the set of matching diverted SFC packets (Para 80 teaches “If the current SF is the last SF in the SFP then, at step 853, the SFN or SFF associated with the last SF extracts the user packet from the payload 630 of the encapsulation packet 600 and, at step 855, forwards the user packet towards a destination node indicated by a destination address field in a header of the user packet”.). Regarding claim 20, Gage et al. discloses SFC merging method, further comprising restoring a saved time to live (TTL) from a diverted SFC packet in the set of matching diverted SFC packets into a network service header (NSH) of the merged SFC packet (Para 93 teaches, “At step 990, the originating SF instance determines whether the synchronisation timer T has expired. If the synchronisation timer T expires before the originating SF instance receives a copy of its SF state packet, the “Yes” branch from step 990 is followed indicating that the SF state synchronization across the SF instance set has not succeeded and fault recovery procedures may be initiated at step 995. Such fault recovery procedures can include the originating SF instance resending the SF state packet according to operation 900 or other recovery procedures known to those skilled in the art can be used.). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 10-16 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AJAY P CATTUNGAL whose telephone number is (571)270-7525. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00-5:00 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. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Hassan Phillips can be reached at 5712723940. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. 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. /AJAY CATTUNGAL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2467
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 22, 2023
Application Filed
Jan 10, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12604232
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR REDUCING CONGESTION IN MESH NETWORK
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12604336
DELEGATED PEER-TO-PEER SCHEDULING ON ALLOCATED CHANNELS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12598627
METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR MANAGING CONFIGURATION AND CONTROL INFORMATION OF MBS SERVICES IN WIRELESS NETWORK
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12593308
COMMUNICATION METHOD AND APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12588052
QoS SUPPORT FOR P2P COMMUNICATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
89%
Grant Probability
96%
With Interview (+6.7%)
2y 6m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 895 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month