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 .
Status of Claims:
Claims 1-21 are pending in this application.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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) 1-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mueck et al. (US 20240314058), herein Mueck in view of Merriman (U.S. Patent App Pub 20130290249).
Regarding claims 1, 8 and 15,
Mueck teaches an edge computing device, comprising: a processor configured to: configure network parameters for an edge computing system, the configuring including setting up trusted domains and security protocols (see para. 103-104, edge compute nodes comprising the hardware system to configure data network architecture/services/capabilities (i.e. network parameters) for an edge data network (i.e., edge computing server), wherein the configuring of the entities/edge compute nodes may be set up in a trusted domain (i.e., trusted domain) with privacy and security data (i.e., security protocols) (see further, para. 43-44));
offload all or portions of a software application from a user computing device to one or more edge compute nodes (ECNs) or cloud servers based on resource availability, network latency, and application requirements (see para. 179-180, offload applications from a user equipment UE (i.e. user computing device) to one or more edge compute nodes or edge server based on service requirements (i.e. application requirements) needed from edge node/cloud/server (see further, paras. 193-194));
establish a computing mesh for sharing hardware and software resources among multiple ECNs in the network (see para. 151, establish a computing mesh for partitioning and sharing edge node resources (see further, para. 208) among a set of edge computing nodes (i.e. multiple ECNs));
dynamically allocate resources of the ECNs in the computing mesh based on a result of the monitoring (see para. 170, dynamic resource allocation of the edge devices in the mesh based on data measurements (see further, para. 160 and 165));
manage the trusted domains or groupings within the network to facilitate secure and efficient data sharing among ECNs across different groups or geographical locations (see para. 148, managing group/containers within the network to allow for security, integrity capabilities and coordinated orchestration (i.e. secure and efficient data sharing) among the edge compute nodes across the different containers/partitions);
and adjust network configurations, resource allocations, and/or offloading strategies based on real-time performance data and changing requirements (see para. 209, a pod controller oversees the partitioning and allocation of containers and resources, orchestrator instructs the controller on how best to partition physical resources, pod controller determines which container requires which resources and for how long in order to complete the workload and satisfy the SLA).
Mueck does not explicitly teach but Merriman teaches wherein a master ECN facilitates policy-based routing of ingress and egress network packet traffic among the ECNs; (See paragraphs 7, 64-65, Merriman teaches primary ECN facilitated propagating operations)
monitor workloads, computation capacities, and performance requirements of each ECN in the computing mesh (See paragraphs 16, 111, 114, 308, Merriman teaches monitor workloads, capacities and performance.)
in response to detecting a loss of connectivity of the master ECN, reassign a master ECN role to another ECN based on at least the monitored workloads, computation capacities, and connectivity status, and retain the reassigned master ECN role until the previously assigned master ECN has rejoined the computing mesh and has remained stable for a predetermined period of time; (See paragraphs 16, 64-65, 112, Merriman teaches cannot communicate with other nodes and former primary node reassign enters recovery)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have known to combine the teachings of Merriman with Mueck because both deal with mesh network resource sharing. The advantage of incorporating the above limitation(s) of Merriman into Mueck is that Merriman provides configurable consistency and simplicity of management in an eventually or strongly consistent setting while preserving scalability and fault tolerance and data consistency, therefore making the overall system more robust and efficient. (See paragraphs 4-7, Merriman)
Regarding claim 2, 9 and 16,
Mueck and Merriman teach the limitations as described in claim 1, 8 and 15 above.
Mueck further teaches wherein the processor is further configured to implement network segmentation for the entire network or specific subsections of the network (see para. 39, the network slice selection function (NSSF) selects the set of network slice instances serving the UE and determines which network function/amf to use).
Regarding claim 3, 10 and 17,
Mueck and Merriman teach the limitations as described in claim 1, 8 and 15 above.
Mueck further teaches wherein the processor is further configured to assign specific network resource slices to different network segments, including at least one or more of a user cluster (UC), a single ECN (SE), a site cluster (SC), or a multi-site cluster (MSC) (see para. 128, NSACF monitors and controls the number of registered UEs (i.e. user cluster) per network slice for the network slices that are subject to Network Slice Admission Control (NSAC)).
Regarding claim 4, 11 and 18,
Mueck and Merriman teach the limitations as described in claim 3, 10 and 17 above.
Mueck further teaches wherein the processor is configured to assign specific network resource slices to different network segments by assigning a network resource slice to a UC that includes multiple edge or user devices associated with a single user (see para. 128, The NSACF is configured with the maximum number of UEs per network slice which are allowed to be served by each network slice that is subject to NSAC. The NSACF controls (e.g., increase or decrease) the current number of UEs registered for a network slice so that it does not exceed the maximum number of UEs allowed to register with user with that network slice).
Regarding claim 5, 12, and 19,
Mueck and Merriman teach the limitations as described in claim 3, 19 and 17 above.
Mueck further teaches wherein the processor is configured to assign specific network resource slices to different network segments by assigning a network resource slice to an SC that includes a plurality of interconnected ECNs located within the same geographic area (see para. 128, The NSACF is configured with the maximum number of UEs per network slice which are allowed to be served by each network slice that is subject to NSAC, wherein the network slices may be for connected edge devices that are connected geographically (i.e. same geographic location)(see also, para. 215)).
Regarding claim 6, 13, and 20,
Mueck and Merriman teach the limitations as described in claim 3, 10 and 17 above.
Mueck further teaches wherein the processor is configured to assign specific network resource slices to different network segments by assigning a network resource slice to an MSC that includes several SCs managed by a single organization (see para. 128, The NSACF is configured with the maximum number of UEs per network slice which are allowed to be served by each network slice that is subject to NSAC, wherein the network slices may be for connected edge devices that are connected as a group based on being managed by a single organization (see para. 156)).
Regarding claim 7, 14 and 21,
Mueck and Merriman teach the limitations as described in claim 1, 8 and 15 above.
Mueck further teaches wherein the processor is configured to establish a computing mesh for sharing hardware and software resources among multiple ECNs in the network by implementing a virtualized network overlay that interconnects different ECNs so that they share computational and storage resources (see para. 190, wherein edge devices can comprise standardized compute hardware that performs virtualized network functions/overlay so that compute resources for the execution of services and consumer functions for connected devices are shared and devices are interconnected (see also, paras. 158 and 202)).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 20180183855 – Sabella, offloading for edge computing.
US 11360982– Liu, endpoint device group monitoring.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NINOS DONABED whose telephone number is (571)272-8757. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00pm - 4:00pm.
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, John Follansbee can be reached on (571) 272-3964. 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.
/NINOS DONABED/Primary Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2444