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 the amendment filed on November 18, 2025.
Claims 1-20 are pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on 11/18/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues, “determine, based on a first context of the first stimulus, an association between each node of the first plurality of nodes and a node layer” and “load the first plurality of nodes into the executable graph-based model such that a set of nodes, of the first plurality of nodes, is loaded into at least a first node layer of the first set of node layers based on the association therebetween, wherein the first plurality of nodes are loaded simultaneously, and wherein the first plurality of nodes that are loaded into the executable graph-based model constitute a first projection.”
Examiner respectfully disagrees. The application is directed towards resource utilization in overlay system using projections. Similarly, combination of prior arts, Benyo and Freimuth disclose handling graph-based service request and managing resources available to handle service requests with client attachment of nodes of an overlay network. Benyo discloses each node in an overlay network corresponds to a respective node in the underlying network. Accordingly, each node in an overlay network is associated with both an overlay address (to address the overlay node) and an underlay address (to address the underlay node that implements the overlay node). An overlay node may be a digital device and/or a software process (for example, a virtual machine, an application instance, or a thread). A link that connects overlay nodes may be implemented as a tunnel through the underlying network. The overlay nodes at either end of the tunnel may treat the underlying multi-hop path between them as a single logical link. Tunneling is performed through encapsulation and decapsulation. Computing the first graph-based opportunity associated with satisfying the service request. A first graph corresponding to a current state of available resources before satisfying the service request with a second graph corresponding to a projected state of available resources after satisfying the service. The first graph-based opportunity may be based at least on weights of edges between a first set of nodes corresponding to the plurality of available resources and a second set of nodes corresponding to current service requests and predicted future service requests, and the weights of the edges may be based, at least in part, on one or more of service request priorities and resource affinities for satisfying service requests. Computing a second graph-based opportunity metric associated with satisfying the service request, where the first graph-based opportunity metric is based on a first resource allocation from among the available resources, where the second graph-based opportunity is based on a second resource allocation from among the available resources, and where handling the service request includes satisfying the service request using one of the first resource allocation or the second resource allocation. Furthermore, comparing a first graph corresponding to a current state of available resources before satisfying the service request with a second graph corresponding to a projected state of available resources after satisfying the service request, where the first graph-based opportunity is based on one or more of a difference between a first sum of edge weights in the first graph and a second sum of edge weights in the second graph and (b) an inverse exponential function applied to a first incoming edge count in the first graph and a second incoming edge count in the second graph. The second graph may include one or more resources predicted to become available in a time interval needed to satisfy the service request. The request handler may handle service requests by comparing a current state with a projected state. The projected state corresponds to a state if the service platform were to satisfy a particular service request. Current service requests may require changes with respect to the resources. Predicted service requests are potential future service requests that may be considered. The service platform may be configured to use rules, statistical analysis, user input (e.g., by a subject matter expert), and/or machine learning techniques (for example, based on a history of service request handling) to model the predicted service requests.
Freimuth discloses dynamically determining an optimal node of an overlay network for client through which the client can establish a connection to the overlay network. The network optimization model can be used to determine based on network parameter data associated with the group of potential attachment nodes. If a different node than a current attachment node is determined to be a new optimal node, a connection path can be established between this new optimal node and the client, and an existing connection path between the client and the previous optimal node can be terminated or simultaneously maintained. Determine based at least in part on network parameter data associated with the group of potential attachment nodes, the optimal node for the client to attach to. Use of the network optimization model to select the optimal node can include determining that network parameter data associated with the optimal node satisfies one or more optimization/selection criteria. Data traffic to and from the client can then occur through the overlay network via the connection path formed as a result of attachment of the client to the node that was determined to be the optimal node for connecting the client to the overlay network. The network characteristics change over time, a different node in the overlay network can exhibit network characteristics that are more optimal than a node that a client is currently attached to. Additionally, the current attachment node can exhibit a change in network characteristics that causes it to no longer satisfy minimum selection criteria. If a different node than a current attachment node is determined to be a new optimal node, a connection path can be established between this new optimal node and the client, and optionally, the existing connection path between the client and the previous optimal node can be terminated. Alternatively, connection paths can be simultaneously maintained between the client and multiple attachment nodes of the overlay network such that data traffic can occur to/from the client over the overlay network at least partially concurrently via multiple connection paths. The network optimization can be a graph-based algorithm. The network optimization model can be thought of as a scoring mechanism that assigns a respective score to each potential attachment node and selects the potential attachment node having a score that indicates the most optimal performance characteristics as the optimal node. The network parameter data can be dynamically generated/obtained on a periodic basis. Network optimization model can establish certain minimum/maximum thresholds that must be satisfied in order for a potential attachment node to be considered a candidate for selection as the optimal node and data traffic can flow along multiple connection paths at least partially concurrently. Additionally, the node selection modules can determine that network performance characteristics of the overlay network have changed so as to necessitate a re-evaluation of the appropriate optimal nodes to which client should attach. Therefore, after carefully reviewing the prior arts to have resource utilization to improve the performance characteristics of an overlay network, thus, rejection is sustained.
For at least the foregoing reasons, claim 20 recite similar features to claim 1. Claims 2-19 each depend from one of the respective independent claims, and rendered obvious by the combination of the prior arts Benyo and Freimuth for at least the same reasons by virtue of their dependencies. Examiner respectfully sustains the rejections.
Furthermore, as it is Applicant's right to continue to claim as broadly as possible their invention, it is also the Examiner's right to continue to interpret the claim language as broadly as possible. It is the Examiner's position that the detailed functionality that allows Applicant’s invention to overcome the prior art used in the rejection, fails to differentiate in detail how these features are unique. By the rejection above, the applicant must submit amendments to the claims in order to distinguish over the prior art use in the rejection that discloses different features of Applicant's claimed invention.
Applicant has not yet submitted claims drawn to limitations, which distinguishes over the prior art or to significantly narrow definition/scope of the claims and supply arguments commensurate in scope with the claims implies the Applicant intends broad interpretation be given to the claims. It is requested that Applicant clearly and distinctly define the claimed invention.
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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Benyo et al. (US Publication 2022/0036270) hereafter Benyo, in view of Freimuth et al. (US Publication 2018/0270330) hereafter Freimuth.
As per claim 1, Benyo discloses an overlay system, comprising: a storage element configured to store an executable graph-based model that comprises a first set of node layers (paragraphs 0011, 0106); and processing circuitry that is coupled to the storage element, and configured to: receive a first stimulus associated with the overlay system (paragraphs 0058, 0102-104); identify a first plurality of nodes associated with processing of the first stimulus (paragraphs 0013, 0062-64: nodes corresponding to requests and resources); determine, based on a first context of the first stimulus, an association between each node of the first plurality of nodes and a node layer (paragraphs 0063-64); load the first plurality of nodes into the executable graph-based model such that a set of nodes, of the first plurality of nodes, is loaded into at least a first node layer of the first set of node layers based on the association therebetween, wherein the first plurality of nodes are loaded simultaneously, and wherein the first plurality of nodes that are loaded into the executable graph-based model constitute a first projection (paragraphs 0023, 0030, 0061-63, 0111); and execute an operation associated with the first stimulus based on the first plurality of nodes of the first projection (paragraphs 0061, 0063, 0074-75). Although, Benyo discloses graph-based handling of service requests and managing resources, but fails to expressly disclose an association between each node of the first plurality of nodes and a node layer of the first set of node layers; and at least a first node layer of the first set of node layers based on the association therebetween, wherein the first plurality of nodes are loaded simultaneously.
In the same field of endeavor, Freimuth discloses the claimed limitation of an association between each node of the first plurality of nodes and a node layer of the first set of node layers (paragraphs 0003, 0036-39); and at least a first node layer of the first set of node layers based on the association therebetween, wherein the first plurality of nodes are loaded simultaneously (paragraphs 0003, 0016, 077).
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 Freimuths’ teaching with Benyo. One would be motivated to improve the efficiency of utilizing time and resources for loading content in the overlay system.
As per claim 2, Benyo discloses the overlay system wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to: determine, during processing of a second stimulus, that resource of the storage element is exhausted, wherein the second stimulus is processed after the first stimulus (paragraphs 0017, 0027, 0030); and unload one or more nodes of the first projection from the executable graph-based model based on the determination that the resource of the storage element is exhausted, wherein the one or more nodes are unloaded (paragraphs 0032-34, 0058). Although, Benyo discloses graph-based handling of service requests and managing resources, but fails to expressly disclose the one or more nodes are unloaded simultaneously.
In the same field of endeavor, Freimuth discloses the claimed limitation of the one or more nodes are unloaded simultaneously (paragraphs 0003, 0016, 077).
The same motivation that was utilized in the combination of claim 1 applies equally as well to claim 2.
As per claim 3, Benyo discloses the overlay system wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to: receive the second stimulus; identify a second plurality of nodes associated with processing of the second stimulus (paragraphs 0058, 0102-104); determine, based on a second context of the second stimulus, an association between each node of the second plurality of nodes and a node layer of one of a group consisting of (i) the first set of node layers and (ii) a second set of node layers of the executable graph-based model, wherein the processing circuitry determines that the resource of the storage element is exhausted upon the determined association (paragraphs 0023, 0030, 0061-63); load, after the unloading of the one or more nodes of the first projection, the second plurality of nodes into the executable graph-based model based on the determined association, wherein the second plurality of nodes are loaded simultaneously (paragraphs 0032-34, 0058), and wherein the second plurality of nodes that are loaded into the executable graph-based model constitute a second projection; and execute an operation associated with the second stimulus based on the second plurality of nodes of the second projection (paragraphs 0061, 0063, 0074-75). Although, Benyo discloses graph-based handling of service requests and managing resources, but fails to expressly disclose plurality of nodes are loaded simultaneously.
In the same field of endeavor, Freimuth discloses the claimed limitation of plurality of nodes are loaded simultaneously (paragraphs 0003, 0016, 077).
The same motivation that was utilized in the combination of claim 1 applies equally as well to claim 3.
As per claim 4, Benyo discloses the overlay system wherein the first plurality of nodes and the second plurality of nodes comprise at least a common set of nodes, and wherein the first set of node layers and the second set of node layers comprise at least one common node layer that comprises the common set of nodes (paragraphs 0032, 0062-64).
As per claim 5, Benyo discloses the overlay system wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to: determine, during processing of a second stimulus, that resource of the storage element is exhausted, wherein the second stimulus is processed after the first stimulus, and wherein a third projection is loaded in the executable graph-based model prior to the second stimulus, where one or more nodes of the third projection are loaded into the first node layer (paragraphs 0030, 0061, 0074-75); and unload the first node layer from the executable graph-based model based on the determination that the resource of the storage element is exhausted, wherein the unloading of the first node layer results in unloading of the set of nodes of the first projection and the one or more nodes of the third projection, and wherein the set of nodes of the first projection and the one or more nodes of the third projection are unloaded (paragraphs 0061, 0063, 0074-75). Although, Benyo discloses graph-based handling of service requests and managing resources, but fails to expressly disclose one or more nodes of the third projection are unloaded simultaneously.
In the same field of endeavor, Freimuth discloses the claimed limitation of one or more nodes of the third projection are unloaded simultaneously (paragraphs 0003, 0016, 077).
The same motivation that was utilized in the combination of claim 1 applies equally as well to claim 5.
As per claim 6, Benyo discloses the overlay system wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to unload, from the executable graph-based model, at least the first node layer of the first set of node layers based on utilization of the first node layer for the execution of the operation associated with the first stimulus (paragraphs 0023, 0030, 0061-63).
As per claim 7, Benyo discloses the overlay system wherein a second node layer, of the first set of node layers, is dependent on the first node layer, and wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to unload the second node layer along with the first node layer based on the dependency associated therewith (paragraphs 0032-34, 0058).
As per claim 8, Benyo discloses the overlay system wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to unload, from the executable graph-based model, the first projection based on the execution of the operation associated with the first stimulus, and wherein the first plurality of nodes of the first projection are unloaded simultaneously (paragraphs 0061, 0063, 0074-75).
As per claim 9, Benyo discloses the overlay system wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to unload, from the executable graph-based model, at least a first node of the first plurality of nodes based on lapse of a predetermined time duration after the execution of the operation associated with the first stimulus (paragraphs 0032-34, 0058).
As per claim 10, Benyo discloses the overlay system wherein each node layer of the first set of node layers has a unique node-layer-type, and wherein the first plurality of nodes are loaded into the first set of node layers such that each node layer, of the first set of node layers, is loaded with the set of nodes, of the first plurality of nodes, having a same node-type as a node-layer-type of the corresponding node layer (paragraphs 0030, 0034, 0075-76).
As per claim 11, Benyo discloses the overlay system wherein the first set of node layers comprises at least one of a group consisting of a vertex node layer, an edge node layer, at least a first type of overlay node layer, an index node layer, a history node layer, a message node layer, and a role node layer (paragraphs 0061-63).
As per claim 12, Benyo discloses the overlay system wherein the first plurality of nodes comprise at least a first set of nodes, a second set of nodes, and a third set of nodes, wherein each node of the first set of nodes has a first node type, each node of the second set of nodes has a second node type, and each node of the third set of nodes has a third node type, wherein the first node type, the second node type, and the third node type are different, and wherein the loading of the first plurality of nodes corresponds to loading of the first set of nodes and the second set of nodes into one node layer of the first set of node layers, and loading of the third set of nodes into a different node layer of the first set of node layers (paragraphs 0075-76, 0111).
As per claim 13, Benyo discloses the overlay system wherein the first plurality of nodes comprise one or more sets of nodes with each of the one or more sets of nodes having a different node type, and wherein the loading of the first plurality of nodes corresponds to loading of each of the one or more sets of nodes into one node layer of the first set of node layers (paragraphs 0063, 0074-75, 0111).
As per claim 14, Benyo discloses the overlay system wherein each node of the first plurality of nodes has a node type that corresponds to one of a group consisting of a vertex node type, an edge node type, at least a first overlay node type, an index node type, a history node type, a message node type, and a role node type (paragraphs 0061-63).
As per claim 15, Benyo discloses the overlay system wherein each node of the first plurality of nodes comprises a node template that corresponds to a predefined node structure, and a node instance that corresponds to an implementation of the node template such that the first plurality of nodes comprise a first plurality of node templates and a first plurality of node instances, wherein the first set of node layers comprises a first set of node template layers and a first set of node instance layers such that the first node layer comprises a first node template layer and a first node instance layer, wherein a set of node templates, of the set of nodes, is loaded into the first node template layer, and a set of node instances, of the set of nodes, is loaded into the first node instance layer, and wherein the first plurality of node templates loaded into the executable graph-based model constitute a first projection template, and the first plurality of node instances loaded into the executable graph-based model constitute a first projection instance (paragraphs 0074-76, 0082).
As per claim 16, Benyo discloses the overlay system wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to receive a second stimulus associated with the overlay system (paragraphs 0011, 0106); identify a second plurality of node instances associated with processing of the first stimulus, wherein the second plurality of node instances correspond to a plurality of implementations of the first plurality of node templates; determine, based on a second context of the second stimulus, an association between each node instance of the second plurality of node instances and a node instance layer of the first set of node instance layers; load the second plurality of node instances into the executable graph-based model such that one or more node instances of the second plurality of node instances are loaded into at least the first node instance layer of the first set of node instance layers based on the association therebetween, wherein the second plurality of node instances are loaded simultaneously, and wherein the second plurality of node instances that are loaded into the executable graph-based model constitute a second projection instance; and execute an operation associated with the second stimulus based on the second plurality of node instances and the first plurality of node templates (paragraphs 0074-76, 0082).
As per claim 17, Benyo discloses the overlay system wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to unload, from the executable graph-based model, at least one node instance layer based on utilization of the corresponding node instance layer projection (paragraphs 0023, 0030, 0061-63).
As per claim 18, Benyo discloses the overlay system wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to: receive a second stimulus; determine one or more additional nodes associated with the processing of the second stimulus; load, in the executable graph-based model, the one or more additional nodes in association with the first projection such that the first projection comprises the first plurality of nodes and the one or more additional nodes, wherein the one or more additional nodes are loaded into an additional node layer, in addition to the first set of node layers, present in the executable graph-based model; and execute an operation associated with the second stimulus based on the first plurality of nodes and the one or more additional nodes, of the first projection (paragraphs 0061, 0063, 0074-75).
As per claim 19, Benyo discloses the overlay system wherein a third plurality of nodes is associated with the overlay system, wherein the third plurality of nodes is arranged in form of a plurality of node groups, and wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to (i) identify, from the plurality of node groups, one or more node groups based on the first context of the first stimulus, and (ii) extract, for the processing of the first stimulus, one or more nodes from each identified node group, such that the one or more nodes extracted from each identified node group constitute the first plurality of nodes (paragraphs 0061-63, 0074-75).
Claim 20 is an Independent claim with similar limitation but different in preamble and hence are rejected based on the rejection provided in claim 1.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 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