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 .
This office correspondence is in response to Election Restriction filed on October 2, 2025. Applicant elects Group I: claims 24-31 and 39-43 with traverse. Claims 1-23 are canceled. Claims 32-38 are Non-Examined.
Claims 24-31 and 39-43 will be examined.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Group I: claims 24-31 and 39-43 in the reply filed on 10/02/2025 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that Group I and II have different inventions and are distinguished in nature, therefore, it will be a burden on the examiner to examine when it requires a different field of search. The previous action dated 08/05/2025 clearly states how Group I and II are distinct. This reply is not found persuasive because the applicant did not specifically point out or raise any arguments regarding the restriction with traverse. Furthermore, applicant is reminded to cancel the non-elected claims 32-38.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 11/09/2023 was filed with the application, IDSs submitted on 11/27/2023 was filed after the mailing date of the instant application on 11/09/2023, and IDSs filed on 10/02/2025 was filed with the response to restriction on 10/02/2025. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 24-31, and 39-43 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Giust et al. (US Publication 2022/0303196) hereafter Giust, in view of GE et al. (US Publication 2023/0239343) hereafter GE.
As per claim 24, Giust discloses an apparatus comprising: memory to store deployment requirements for instantiation of an edge application server (EAS) virtual network function (VNF) (paragraphs 0011, 0026-28); and processing circuitry, coupled with the memory, to: retrieve the deployment requirements from the memory, wherein the deployment requirements are received within a request from an application service provider (ASP) and include an indication of software image information associated with the instantiation of the EAS VNF (paragraphs 0011, 0022, 039-40: deployment requirements including software image information for that of its application); and instantiate the EAS VNF based on the deployment requirements (paragraph 0060: initiates operations). Although, Giust discloses allowing multiple tenants to shared MEC system, but he fails to expressly disclose the deployment requirements are received within a request from an application service provider (ASP).
However, in the same field of endeavor, GE disclose the claimed limitation of the deployment requirements are received within a request from an application service provider (ASP) (paragraphs 0074-75, 0082: application user to receive service from application provider).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate GEs’ teaching with Giust. One would be motivated to fulfill the service area requirements to enhancing the system.
As per claim 25, Giust discloses an apparatus wherein the software image information includes: a minimum disk attribute, a minimum random access memory (RAM) attribute, a role attribute, or a software image reference attribute (paragraphs 0046, 0039-40: deployment requirements of a given service over MEC platform).
As per claim 26, Giust discloses the apparatus wherein the minimum RAM attribute is an integer value, disclose wherein the minimum RAM attribute is an integer value to indicate a minimum number of megabytes required for EAS software (paragraphs 0039, 0063).
As per claim 27, Giust discloses an apparatus wherein the deployment requirements include a geographical location attribute of a serving location, or a topological location attribute of the serving location (paragraphs 0036, 0047).
As per claim 28, Giust discloses an apparatus wherein the topological location attribute (claim 3, paragraphs 0055, 0061), but fails to expressly disclose wherein the topological location attribute includes a next-generation NodeB (gNB) identifier list associated with one or more cell identifiers for the serving location.
However, in the same field of endeavor, GE discloses the claimed limitation of wherein the topological location attribute includes a next-generation NodeB (gNB) identifier list associated with one or more cell identifiers for the serving location (paragraphs 0113, 0124).
The same motivation that was utilized in the combination of claim 24 applies equally as well to claim 28.
As per claim 29, Giust discloses an apparatus wherein the topological location attribute includes: a tracking area identifier list associated with one or more tracking area identifiers for the serving location; or a serving public land mobile network (PLMN) identifier associated with the serving location (paragraphs 0027, 0043, 0047-49).
As per claim 30, Giust discloses an apparatus, wherein: the geographical location attribute includes a latitude value and a longitude value; or the geographical location attribute includes a civic location attribute of the serving location (paragraphs 0027, 0043, 0047-49).
As per claim 31, Giust discloses an apparatus, wherein the apparatus comprises an edge computing service provider (ECSP) management system or portion thereof (paragraphs 0011, 0028).
As per claim 39, Giust discloses one or more non-transitory computer-readable media storing instructions that, when executed by one or more processors, configure an edge computing service provider (ECSP) management system to: receive, from an application service provider (ASP), a request for instantiation of an edge application server (EAS) virtual network function (VNF) that includes deployment requirements associated with the instantiation of the EAS VNF (paragraphs 0011, 0022, 039-40), wherein the deployment requirements comprise: a geographical location attribute of a serving location, or a topological location attribute of the serving location (paragraphs 0036, 0047-49); and instantiate the EAS VNF based on the deployment requirements. Although, Giust discloses allowing multiple tenants to shared MEC system, but he fails to expressly disclose from an application service provider (ASP), a request for instantiation of an edge application server (EAS) (paragraph 0060: initiates operations).
However, in the same field of endeavor, GE disclose the claimed limitation of from an application service provider (ASP), a request for instantiation of an edge application server (paragraphs 0074-75, 0082).
The same motivation that was utilized in the combination of claim 24 applies equally as well to claim 39.
Claims 40-43 are listed all the same elements of claims 34-35, 37-38 and respectively. Therefore, the supporting rationales of the rejection to claims 34-35, 37-38 apply equally as well to claims 40-43 respectively.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FARZANA B HUQ whose telephone number is (571)270-3223. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday: 8:30-5:30 ET.
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, Emmanuel L Moise can be reached at 571-272-3865. 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.
/FARZANA B HUQ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2455
Prosecution Insights