Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/576,525

MANAGEMENT OF AT LEAST ONE ORCHESTRATION ENTITY IN A COMPUTER NETWORK

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Jan 04, 2024
Examiner
BENGZON, GREG C
Art Unit
2444
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Conservatoire National Des Arts Et Metiers
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
58%
Grant Probability
Moderate
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 11m
To Grant
64%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 58% of resolved cases
58%
Career Allow Rate
283 granted / 486 resolved
At TC average
Moderate +6% lift
Without
With
+5.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 11m
Avg Prosecution
38 currently pending
Career history
524
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
12.2%
-27.8% vs TC avg
§103
65.8%
+25.8% vs TC avg
§102
4.9%
-35.1% vs TC avg
§112
9.0%
-31.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 486 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
DETAILED ACTION This application has been examined. Claims 1-13,15-18 are pending. Claim 14 is cancelled. Claims 16-18 are submitted as a new claims. 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 . Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114 A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 12/18/2025 has been entered. Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 12/18/2025 have been fully considered but they are moot in view of the new grounds for rejection. Priority This application claims benefits of priority from Foreign Application FR2107239 (FRANCE) filed July 5, 2021. The effective date of the claims described in this application is July 5, 2021. 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) 1-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yousaf (USPGPUB 2017/0279735) further in view of McDowall (USPGPUB 2014/0280802) further in view of Lozano (USPGPUB 2022/0043811) Regarding Claim 1 Yousaf Paragraph 6 disclosed wherein an orchestrator entity inside the data center then selects one or more suitable physical machines which fulfill best the stipulated requirements of the application/function provider and one or more suitable virtual machines are instantiated on which the specific application function(s) can be hosted. Yousaf disclosed (re. Claim 1) a method for managing at least one orchestration device in a software network,(Yousaf-Paragraph 23, operating a virtual network infrastructure, preferably in form of a software-defined network) the method being implemented by a management device (Yousaf-Figure 5,Paragraph 55, virtual infrastructure controller VIC) for managing said at least one orchestration device,( Yousaf-Paragraph 6,an orchestrator entity inside the data center then selects one or more suitable physical machines which fulfill best the stipulated requirements of the application/function provider and one or more suitable virtual machines are instantiated on which the specific application function(s) can be hosted.) obtaining, from said orchestration device, an indication that said orchestration device has performed at least one orchestration action (Yousaf-Paragraph 55, VIC-agent sends the RRAS reports to the virtual infrastructure controller VIC to make appropriate management decisions, Paragraph 51, optimized decisions in performing management actions such as but not limited to virtual machine deployment and instantiation, virtual machine migration, virtual machine cloning, virtual machine scaling horizontal and/or vertical and/or run-time dynamic resource provisioning ) in said network during a time window; (Yousaf-Paragraph 44, a time indication is attached to the RRAS and/or AS when calculating the RRAS and/or AS. By attaching or assigning a time indication, for example the time of the day, the RRAS report enables to provide e.g. the times at which the affinity is the strongest or weakest. This enables an even more optimal management of resources at different times,Paragraph 79, The RRAS values are computed by a VIC or VIC-agent based on the resource utilization levels monitored by the VMM over a specific time period T.) obtaining at least one state of the network in said time window (Yousaf- Paragraph 79, The RRAS values are computed by a VIC or VIC-agent based on the resource utilization levels monitored by the VMM over a specific time period T.) and a state of at least one operational layer of the network for implementation of said orchestration action ;(Yousaf-Paragraph 39, RRAS-report is provided including the utilization levels of the resource units on the respective resource for all virtual resources) While Yousaf substantially disclosed the claimed invention Yousaf does not disclose (re. Claim 1) said state of the network including a state of a service implemented in the network and a state of at least one operational layer of the network for implementation of said service; obtaining, from said state of the network and a reference state of said network, a reputation value representative of an improvement or degradation of a state of the network; and sending said reputation value to said orchestration device. McDowall Paragraph 45 disclosed wherein an agent is registered to receive updates from the network elements, such that state changes in the SDN enabled network are reflected in the graph. State changes in the underlying SDN enabled network may be reflected as events that may be subscribed to by the agent. McDowall disclosed (re. Claim 1) obtaining said state of the network including a state of a service implemented in the network (McDowall-Paragraph 49, element service set include the ability to provide information representing the hardware that hosts the network element's operating system and providing services to requesting applications) and a state of at least one operational layer of the network for implementation of said service.( McDowall Paragraph 45,an agent is registered to receive updates from the network elements, such that state changes in the SDN enabled network are reflected in the graph. State changes in the underlying SDN enabled network may be reflected as events that may be subscribed to by the agent.) Yousaf and McDowall are analogous art because they provide concepts and practices regarding SDN service deployment and monitoring. Before the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention it would have been obvious to combine McDowall into Yousaf. The motivation for the said combination would have been to enable introspection into network element interfaces and ports, and providing an abstraction for virtual and/or physical interfaces on a network element. Using the combination of introspective services and reflective services, connected applications may modify, configure, and monitor network elements and the data flows within the network elements. (McDowall-Paragraph 50, Paragraph 55) While Yousaf-McDowall substantially disclosed the claimed invention Yousaf -McDowall does not disclose (re. Claim 1) obtaining, from said state of the network and a reference state of said network, a reputation value representative of an improvement or degradation of a state of the network; and sending said reputation value to said orchestration device. Lozano Paragraph 40 disclosed comparing the state in one time window with the state of a subsequent (e.g., consecutive or non-consecutive) time window and identifying significant changes between states. Lozano disclosed (re. Claim 1) obtaining, from said state of the network and a reference state of said network, (Lozano-Paragraph 40,comparing the state in one time window with the state of a subsequent (e.g., consecutive or non-consecutive) time window and identifying significant changes between states.) a reputation value representative of an improvement or degradation of a state of the network; (Lozano-Paragraph 60, a distance function may be used to evaluate how similar consecutive observations of a request graph may be. The amount of change between densities is a measure of similarity.) Yousaf,McDowall and Lozano are analogous art because they provide concepts and practices regarding SDN service deployment and monitoring. Before the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention it would have been obvious to combine Lozano into Yousaf-McDowall. The motivation for the said combination would have been to enable taking into account either the structure of the call paths (i.e. the sequence micro-services involved in a request) of the different components or the resource allocation across all different tenants of the system in order to detect abnormal changes in a cloud service.(Lozano-Paragraph 43) Yousaf-McDowall-Lozano disclosed (re. Claim 1) sending said reputation value (Lozano-Paragraph 60, a distance function may be used to evaluate how similar consecutive observations of a request graph may be. The amount of change between densities is a measure of similarity.) to said orchestration device. (Yousaf-Paragraph 55, VIC-agent sends the RRAS reports to the virtual infrastructure controller VIC to make appropriate management decisions) Regarding Claim 8 Claim 8 (re. device) recites substantially similar limitations as Claim 1. Claim 8 is rejected on the same basis as Claim 1. Regarding Claim 9 Claim 9 (re. method) recites substantially similar limitations as Claim 1. Claim 9 is rejected on the same basis as Claim 1. Yousaf-McDowall-Lozano disclosed (re. Claim 9) taking into account said reputation value (Lozano-Paragraph 60, a distance function may be used to evaluate how similar consecutive observations of a request graph may be. The amount of change between densities is a measure of similarity.) to select an orchestration action to be performed in said network. (Yousaf-Paragraph 55, VIC-agent sends the RRAS reports to the virtual infrastructure controller VIC to make appropriate management decisions) Regarding Claim 10 Claim 10 (re. orchestration device) recites substantially similar limitations as Claim 1 and 9. Claim 10 is rejected on the same basis as Claim 1 and 9. Regarding Claim 11 Claim 11 (re. system) recites substantially similar limitations as Claim 1 and 9. Claim 11 is rejected on the same basis as Claim 1 and 9. Regarding Claim 12 Claim 12 (re. non-transitory computer readable medium) recites substantially similar limitations as Claim 1. Claim 12 is rejected on the same basis as Claim 1. Regarding Claim 13 Claim 13 (re. non-transitory computer readable medium) recites substantially similar limitations as Claim 1 and 9. Claim 13 is rejected on the same basis as Claim 1 and 9. Regarding Claim 2 Yousaf-McDowall-Lozano disclosed (re. Claim 2) wherein said at least one operational layer is a layer of hardware and software resources or a layer of virtual resources of said network, said state of said at least one operational layer being obtained from metrics describing said layer at different said time window. (Lozano-Paragraph 40,comparing the state in one time window with the state of a subsequent (e.g., consecutive or non-consecutive) time window and identifying significant changes between states.) Regarding Claim 3 Yousaf-McDowall-Lozano disclosed (re. Claim 3) wherein said operational layer is described from metrics of a single group of resources chosen from CPU type metrics, memory type metrics, (McDowall-Paragraph 49, process information about the network element may also be returned, such as CPU and memory status, which indicate the processes running on the network elements ) disk type metrics or network-type metrics. Regarding Claim 4 Yousaf-McDowall-Lozano disclosed (re. Claim 4) wherein said state of said service is obtained from metrics describing said service at different time instants within said time window. (Lozano-Paragraph 40,comparing the state in one time window with the state of a subsequent (e.g., consecutive or non-consecutive) time window and identifying significant changes between states.) Regarding Claim 5 Yousaf-McDowall-Lozano disclosed (re. Claim 5) wherein said state of the network is computed by a learning-based system taking as input said metrics.(Yousaf-Paragraph 73, the affinity signature AS of the resource units RU can also be used in performing cloud/data center DC infrastructure resource analytics. It can be utilized by the machine learning algorithms/methods in formulating effective future actions.) Regarding Claim 6 Yousaf-McDowall-Lozano disclosed (re. Claim 6) wherein said reputation value is increased or decreased depending on whether said state of the network approaches or deviates from said reference state (Lozano-Paragraph 60, a distance function may be used to evaluate how similar consecutive observations of a request graph may be. The amount of change between densities is a measure of similarity.) relative to a state of the network in a time window prior to said time window. (Lozano-Paragraph 40,comparing the state in one time window with the state of a subsequent (e.g., consecutive or non-consecutive) time window and identifying significant changes between states.) Regarding Claim 7 Yousaf-McDowall-Lozano disclosed (re. Claim 7) wherein to calculate a distance between two states of the network, (Lozano-Paragraph 60, a distance function may be used to evaluate how similar consecutive observations of a request graph may be. The amount of change between densities is a measure of similarity.) the two states are represented in a two-dimensional space in which a first dimension represents said state of the service and a second dimension represents said state of said at least one operational layer.(Lozano-Figure 8,Paragraph 60) Claim(s) 15,18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yousaf (USPGPUB 2017/0279735) further in view of McDowall (USPGPUB 2014/0280802) further in view of Lozano (USPGPUB 2022/0043811) further in view of Bellamkonda (US Patent 11304074) Regarding Claim 15 While Yousaf-McDowall-Lozano substantially disclosed the claimed invention Yousaf-McDowall-Lozano does not disclose (re. Claim 15) wherein said state of said service is obtained from at least one of a latency metric. Bellamkonda Column 6 Lines disclosed wherein GOS 105 may modify one or more sector models, configuration frameworks, and/or other information based on whether the performed (at 108) actions increased the overall optimization score associated with sector 101, and/or based on how much the overall optimization score associated with sector 101 was modified based on the performance of the actions. Bellamkonda Column 7 Lines 5-10 disclosed sector KPIs, such as latency, throughput, jitter, quantity of active connections, quantity and/or proportion of dropped calls. Bellamkonda Column 8 Lines 15-20 disclosed wherein overall optimization score 309 may be generated and/or modified on an ongoing basis, as updated sector KPIs 305 are received or determined. Bellamkonda disclosed (re. Claim 15) wherein said state of said service is obtained from at least one of: a latency metric (Bellamkonda-Column 7 Lines 5-10,KPIs, such as latency, throughput, jitter, quantity of active connections, quantity and/or proportion of dropped calls.) Yousaf, McDowall and Bellamkonda are analogous art because they provide concepts and practices regarding optimization of QOE in wireless networks. Before the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention it would have been obvious to combine Bellamkonda into Yousaf-McDowall. The motivation for the said combination would have been to calculate framework-action affinity scores 513 that generally indicate how effective a given set of actions/parameters 205 are for increasing an overall optimization score of a particular sector 101, given configuration framework 201 associated with sector 101.(Bellamkonda-Column 11 Lines 60-65) Regarding Claim 18 While Yousaf-McDowall-Lozano substantially disclosed the claimed invention Yousaf-McDowall-Lozano does not disclose (re. Claim 18) wherein said state of said service is obtained from at least one of a number of failed calls. Bellamkonda disclosed (re. Claim 18) wherein said state of said service is obtained from at least one of: a number of failed calls (Bellamkonda-Column 7 Lines 5-10,KPIs, such as latency, throughput, jitter, quantity of active connections, quantity and/or proportion of dropped calls.) Yousaf, McDowall and Bellamkonda are analogous art because they provide concepts and practices regarding optimization of QOE in wireless networks. Before the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention it would have been obvious to combine Bellamkonda into Yousaf-McDowall. The motivation for the said combination would have been to calculate framework-action affinity scores 513 that generally indicate how effective a given set of actions/parameters 205 are for increasing an overall optimization score of a particular sector 101, given configuration framework 201 associated with sector 101.(Bellamkonda-Column 11 Lines 60-65) Claim(s) 16,17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yousaf (USPGPUB 2017/0279735) further in view of McDowall (USPGPUB 2014/0280802) further in view of Lozano (USPGPUB 2022/0043811) further in view of Li (USPGPUB 2019/0182169) Regarding Claim 16 While Yousaf-McDowall-Lozano substantially disclosed the claimed invention Yousaf-McDowall-Lozano does not disclose (re. Claim 16) wherein said state of said service is obtained from at least in part on a jitter metric. Li Paragraph 36 disclosed dynamic resource allocation in an SDN/NFV environment, aiming at optimizing the dynamic resource allocation with respect to multimedia services. Li disclosed (re. Claim 16) wherein said state of said service is obtained from at least in part on a jitter metric.(Li-Paragraph 33, QoS involves many factors. Certain factors include packet jitter (PJ), packet delay (PD) and bandwidth (BW). A weight corresponding to each factor is calculated using an analytic hierarchy process, so as to obtain the following formula for calculating the normalized QoS) Yousaf, McDowall and Li are analogous art because they provide concepts and practices regarding SDN service deployment and monitoring. Before the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention it would have been obvious to combine Li into Yousaf-McDowall. The motivation for the said combination would have been to enable represent a proportion of impact exerted by its corresponding factor on the overall QoS.(Li-Paragraph 33) Regarding Claim 17 While Yousaf-McDowall-Lozano substantially disclosed the claimed invention Yousaf-McDowall-Lozano does not disclose (re. Claim 17) wherein said state of said service is obtained from at least in part on a bandwidth metric. Li disclosed (re. Claim 17) wherein said state of said service is obtained from at least in part on a bandwidth metric.(Li-Paragraph 33, QoS involves many factors. Certain factors include packet jitter (PJ), packet delay (PD) and bandwidth (BW). A weight corresponding to each factor is calculated using an analytic hierarchy process, so as to obtain the following formula for calculating the normalized QoS) Yousaf, McDowall and Li are analogous art because they provide concepts and practices regarding SDN service deployment and monitoring. Before the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention it would have been obvious to combine Li into Yousaf-McDowall. The motivation for the said combination would have been to enable represent a proportion of impact exerted by its corresponding factor on the overall QoS.(Li-Paragraph 33) Conclusion Examiner’s Note: In the case of amending the claimed invention, Applicant is respectfully requested to indicate the portion(s) of the specification which dictate(s) the structure relied on for proper interpretation and also to verify and ascertain the metes and bounds of the claimed invention. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GREG C BENGZON whose telephone number is (571)272-3944. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday 8 AM - 4:30 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, 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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /GREG C BENGZON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2444
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 04, 2024
Application Filed
Jan 04, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 21, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
May 27, 2025
Response Filed
Aug 07, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Nov 06, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Nov 06, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Nov 12, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Dec 11, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Dec 18, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Dec 19, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 05, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12574727
EMERGENCY REPORTING SYSTEM FOR VEHICLE, AND VEHICLE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12549481
PROACTIVE HASHING FOR PACKET PROCESSING ENGINE
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Patent 12543231
METHOD AND DEVICE FOR COMMUNICATION ON MULTIPLE LINKS, AND COMPUTER-READABLE STORAGE MEDIUM
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 03, 2026
Patent 12537789
METHODS AND SYSTEM FOR DISTRIBUTING INFORMATION VIA MULTIPLE FORMS OF DELIVERY SERVICES
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 27, 2026
Patent 12530951
METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR ENROLLING A CAMERA INTO A VIDEO SURVEILLANCE SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 20, 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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
58%
Grant Probability
64%
With Interview (+5.9%)
3y 11m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 486 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