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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. 202341021016, filed on 24 March 2023 AD.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) were submitted on 25 March 2024 AD and 30 September 2024 AD. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
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.
Claims 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pateromichelakis et al. (WO 2024022597 A1) or Pateromichelakis in view of GSMA Operator Plateform Telco Edge Requirements Version 1.0 or GSMA.
Claim 1
Pateromichelakis teaches,
A method performed by a leading operator platform (L-OP) for deploying application servers on a federated edge network, the method comprising:
(See Pateromichelakis paragraph 0056, Figure 8 depicts this edge node sharing scenario between a first operator platform (OP) 800 and a second OP 802. In this example, OP may refer to the ECSP or other operator platform.)
Shows two operator plateforms of OP 800 or FIG. 8 OP B and OP 802 for FIG. 8 OP A in an edge node sharing
(See Pateromichelakis paragraph 0060, The above scenarios have in common that the interactions among different ECSPs (or CSPs) are needed for supporting federated edge services (to allow for dependencies among EAS, and/ or joint deployment of an EAS in more than one EDN, and/ or for edge node sharing).)
Shows the OP A and OP B interactions include federated edge services in at least one edge data network or EDN with deployment of an edge application server or EAS
(See Pateromichelakis paragraph 135, ...the scenario is related to the edge resource sharing scenario, and in particular the charging of OP-B for utilizing OP-A resources/edge services. For example, the procedure 1400 may be implemented when OP-B does not have the infrastructure to provide such services in an area of interest.)
Shows FIG. 14 consists of federated edge network with OP-A and OP-B
receiving, from an application service provider (ASP), a deployment request for deploying an application server;
(See Pateromichelakis paragraph 0140, At S1415, the ASP 1402 sends an EAS/EES LCM request to the MnS 1404 of the first ECSP. The EAS/EES LCM request may be sent via createMOI, modifyMOIAttributes and/or deleteMOI operation (as described in more detail in TS 28.532) for the EASFunction IOC (as described in more detail in TS 28.538) or the EESFunction IOC.)
checking whether the L-OP is able to deploy at least one application server based on the deployment request; and
(See Pateromichelakis paragraph 0141, At sl420, the first ECSP checks whether EAS/EES LCM request can be fulfilled.)
in case that the L-OP is not able to deploy the at least one application server, selecting a participating operator platform (P-OP) from a plurality of P-Ops…
(See Pateromichelakis paragraph 0141, In the event that the first ECSP determines that such an EAS/EES is not available, and/ or that the first ECSP does not have the required capability, the first ECSP discovers a target ECSP (i.e. the second ECSP in this embodiment) to provide the service/resource for the EES/EAS to meet the requirement of the ASP 1402 (or end user). Such discovery can be performed directly (e.g., the first ECSP may become a consumer of the MnS 1408 of a second ECSP) or indirectly via using a Federation Manager/Broker, such as Federation Manager 1406.)
Shows the L-OP unable to deploy at least one application server and selecting a P-OP from a plurality of P-Ops
(See Pateromichelakis paragraph 0060, The present inventors have realized that a problem to be solved is that of how to charge the end user for a federated service (among two or more ECSP/ CSP-owned platforms) and in particular how to trigger and execute the charging for one or more user equipment apparatuses requiring a federated service (apparatuses may be unaware of the federation service).)
Shows the plurality of P-OPs with two or more ECSP/CSP-owned platforms
However, Pateromichelakis fails to explicitly teach,
…having a predefined federation association with the L-OP for management of application servers.
Nevertheless, GSMA, in the same field of endeavor, teaches,
…having a predefined federation association with the L-OP for management of application servers.
(See GSMA clause 3.3.5 paragraph 4, A subscriber of Operator B accesses its home network/operator platform and asks for the required Edge-Enhanced or Edge-Native Application. When Operator B's OP identifies that the most suitable edge node is in Partner A, Operator B's OP requests the Edge Cloud service through the E/WBI to Partner A's OP. In this example, since the OPs have a long running partnership, they have pre-established commercial agreements, security relationships and policy decisions (for instance, QoS-related). Thus (assuming enough edge resource is available), Partner A can reply with the application endpoint (e.g. FQDN) on the Cloudlet at which the subscriber can connect to the application.)
Shows the pre-established federation
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling data of the claimed invention to combine deploying application servers on a federated edge network by a leading operator platform or L-OP, receiving from an application service provider or ASP a deployment request for deploying an application server, checking if the L-OP possesses the capacity to deploy at least one application server, and if the L-OP fails to possesses the capacity, selecting a participating operator platform or P-OP from several P-OPs as disclosed by Pateromichelakis with the establishing a predefined federation association with the L-OP for management of application servers as disclosed by GSMA to increase the efficiency of the system (i.e. to reduce the number of steps required to deploy an application server on a federated edge network).
Claim 2
Pateromichelakis teaches,
The method of claim 1, further comprising:
transmitting, to the selected P-OP, a request including deployment requirements including identifier attributes associated with the P-OP along with the requirements associated with the application server to be deployed.
(See Pateromichelakis paragraph 0143, At sl430, the Federated Manager 1406 or the MnS 1404 sends the federated EAS LCM notification (e.g., notifyMOICreation, notifyMOIAttributeValueChanges, or notifyMOIDeletion) to the FCCSP 1410, i.e. to the FCCS function, which in some embodiments can be also the CEF, or CTF, or an entity in one or both of the first or second ECSPs, or the Federation Manager/Broker.)
Shows the MnS 1404 transmitting the federated EAS LCM notification to the second ESCP or P-OP
(See Pateromichelakis paragraph 0142, The EAS LCM result may include the information related to the target, second ECSP, such as but not limited to ID, address, charging model, exposure level and capabilities, EAS KPIs, and/or Slice ID/DNN/DNAI.)
Shows the EAS LCM Notification possess identifier attributes for the application to be deployed
The motivation to combine Pateromichelakis and GSMA in the dependent claim consists of the same motivation as stated in claim 1.
Claim 4
Pateromichelakis teaches,
The method of claim 2, wherein the identifier attributes further comprise: at least one of an edge data network identifier associated with an edge data network of the P-OP for deploying the application server, or a reservation identifier to identify a block of reserved resources for the L-OP in the P-OP.
(See Pateromichelakis paragraph 0005, The EES collects the following charging information for converged charging of edge-enabling services charging: ....The charging information identifying the EDN in which the EAS is /was deployed;)
The motivation to combine Pateromichelakis and GSMA in the dependent claim consists of the same motivation as stated in claim 1.
Claim 5
Pateromichelakis teaches,
The method of claim 1, wherein the application server comprises an edge application server (EAS).
(See Pateromichelakis paragraph 0140, At S1415, the ASP 1402 sends an EAS/EES LCM request to the MnS 1404 of the first ECSP. The EAS/EES LCM request may be sent via createMOI, modifyMOIAttributes and/or deleteMOI operation (as described in more detail in TS 28.532) for the EASFunction IOC (as described in more detail in TS 28.538) or the EESFunction IOC.)
The motivation to combine Pateromichelakis and GSMA in the dependent claim consists of the same motivation as stated in claim 1.
Claim 7
Pateromichelakis fails to explicitly teach limitations of claim 7. However, GSMA, in the same field of endeavor, teaches,
The method of claim 1, wherein the predefined federation association is established between the L-OP and each of the plurality of P-OPs, prior to receiving the deployment request for deploying the application server.
(See GSMA clause 3.3.5 paragraph 4, A subscriber of Operator B accesses its home network/operator platform and asks for the required Edge-Enhanced or Edge-Native Application. When Operator B's OP identifies that the most suitable edge node is in Partner A, Operator B's OP requests the Edge Cloud service through the E/WBI to Partner A's OP. In this example, since the OPs have a long running partnership, they have pre-established commercial agreements, security relationships and policy decisions (for instance, QoS-related). Thus (assuming enough edge resource is available), Partner A can reply with the application endpoint (e.g. FQDN) on the Cloudlet at which the subscriber can connect to the application.)
Shows the pre-established federation
The motivation to combine Pateromichelakis and GSMA in the dependent claim consists of the same motivation as stated in claim 1.
Claim 8
A leading operator platform (L-OP) of a communication network for deploying application servers on a federated network, the L-OP comprising:
(See Pateromichelakis paragraph 0056, Figure 8 depicts this edge node sharing scenario between a first operator platform (OP) 800 and a second OP 802. In this example, OP may refer to the ECSP or other operator platform.)
Shows two operator plateforms of OP 800 or FIG. 8 OP B and OP 802 for FIG. 8 OP A in an edge node sharing
(See Pateromichelakis paragraph 0060, The above scenarios have in common that the interactions among different ECSPs (or CSPs) are needed for supporting federated edge services (to allow for dependencies among EAS, and/ or joint deployment of an EAS in more than one EDN, and/ or for edge node sharing).)
Shows the OP A and OP B interactions include federated edge services in at least one edge data network or EDN with deployment of an edge application server or EAS
(See Pateromichelakis paragraph 135, ...the scenario is related to the edge resource sharing scenario, and in particular the charging of OP-B for utilizing OP-A resources/edge services. For example, the procedure 1400 may be implemented when OP-B does not have the infrastructure to provide such services in an area of interest.)
Shows FIG. 14 consists of federated edge network with OP-A and OP-B
one or more processors (See Pateromichelakis FIG. 10 [1005] [processor]); and memory communicatively coupled to the one or more processors,
(See Pateromichelakis paragraph 0079, The processor 1005 is communicatively coupled to the memory 1010,…)
wherein the memory store one or more computer programs including computer-executable instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the L-OP to:
(See Pateromichelakis paragraph 0079, The processor 1005 may execute instructions stored in the memory 1010 to perform the methods and routines described herein.)
receive, from an application service provider (ASP), a deployment request for deploying an application server,
(See Pateromichelakis paragraph 0140, At S1415, the ASP 1402 sends an EAS/EES LCM request to the MnS 1404 of the first ECSP. The EAS/EES LCM request may be sent via createMOI, modifyMOIAttributes and/or deleteMOI operation (as described in more detail in TS 28.532) for the EASFunction IOC (as described in more detail in TS 28.538) or the EESFunction IOC.)
check whether the L-OP is able to deploy at least one application server based on the deployment request, and
(See Pateromichelakis paragraph 0141, At sl420, the first ECSP checks whether EAS/EES LCM request can be fulfilled.)
in case that the L-OP is not able to deploy the at least one application server, select a participating operator platform (P-OP) from a plurality of P-Ops…
(See Pateromichelakis paragraph 0141, In the event that the first ECSP determines that such an EAS/EES is not available, and/ or that the first ECSP does not have the required capability, the first ECSP discovers a target ECSP (i.e. the second ECSP in this embodiment) to provide the service/resource for the EES/EAS to meet the requirement of the ASP 1402 (or end user). Such discovery can be performed directly (e.g., the first ECSP may become a consumer of the MnS 1408 of a second ECSP) or indirectly via using a Federation Manager/Broker, such as Federation Manager 1406.)
Shows the L-OP unable to deploy at least one application server and selecting a P-OP from a plurality of P-Ops
(See Pateromichelakis paragraph 0060, The present inventors have realized that a problem to be solved is that of how to charge the end user for a federated service (among two or more ECSP/ CSP-owned platforms) and in particular how to trigger and execute the charging for one or more user equipment apparatuses requiring a federated service (apparatuses may be unaware of the federation service).)
Shows the plurality of P-OPs with two or more ECSP/CSP-owned platforms
However, Pateromichelakis fails to explicitly teach,
…having a predefined federation association with the L-OP for management of application servers.
Nevertheless, GSMA, in the same field of endeavor, teaches,
…having a predefined federation association with the L-OP for management of application servers.
(See GSMA clause 3.3.5 paragraph 4, A subscriber of Operator B accesses its home network/operator platform and asks for the required Edge-Enhanced or Edge-Native Application. When Operator B's OP identifies that the most suitable edge node is in Partner A, Operator B's OP requests the Edge Cloud service through the E/WBI to Partner A's OP. In this example, since the OPs have a long running partnership, they have pre-established commercial agreements, security relationships and policy decisions (for instance, QoS-related). Thus (assuming enough edge resource is available), Partner A can reply with the application endpoint (e.g. FQDN) on the Cloudlet at which the subscriber can connect to the application.)
Shows the pre-established federation
The motivation to combine Pateromichelakis and GSMA in the dependent claim consists of the same motivation as stated in claim 1.
Claim 9
Pateromichelakis teaches limitations of claim 9 as stated in claim 2. The motivation to combine Pateromichelakis and GSMA in the dependent claim consists of the same motivation as stated in claim 1.
Claim 11
Pateromichelakis teaches limitations of claim 11 as stated in claim 4. The motivation to combine Pateromichelakis and GSMA in the dependent claim consists of the same motivation as stated in claim 1.
Claim 12
Pateromichelakis teaches limitations of claim 12 as stated in claim 5. The motivation to combine Pateromichelakis and GSMA in the dependent claim consists of the same motivation as stated in claim 1.
Claim 14
Pateromichelakis fails to explicitly teach limitations of claim 14. However, GSMA, in the same field of endeavor, teaches limitations of claim 14 as stated in claim 7. The motivation to combine Pateromichelakis and GSMA in the dependent claim consists of the same motivation as stated in claim 1.
Claims 3 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pateromichelakis et al. (WO 2024022597 A1) or Pateromichelakis in view of GSMA Operator Plateform Telco Edge Requirements Version 1.0 or GSMA in further view of Shah et al. (US 20250293956 A1) or Shah.
Claim 3
Pateromichelakis fails to explicitly teach limitations of claim 3. However, Shah, in the same field of endeavor, teaches,
The method of claim 2, wherein the identifier attributes comprise a federation identification number.
(See Shah paragraph 0021, ...the registered EAS information subscription request includes an edge computing service provider (ECSP) identifier, an ECS identifier, security parameters, and a federation identifier.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling data of the claimed invention to combine deploying application servers on a federated edge network by a leading operator platform or L-OP, receiving from an application service provider or ASP a deployment request for deploying an application server, checking if the L-OP possesses the capacity to deploy at least one application server, and if the L-OP fails to possesses the capacity, selecting a participating operator platform or P-OP from several P-OPs as disclosed by Pateromichelakis with the identifier attributes consisting of a federation identification number as disclosed by Shah to increase the efficiency of the system (i.e. to increase the accuracy of correctly identifying an edge application server or EAS in a federated network).
Claim 10
Pateromichelakis fails to explicitly teach limitations of claim 14. However, Shah, in the same field of endeavor, teaches limitations of claim 10 as stated in claim 3. The motivation to combine Pateromichelakis, GSMA, and Shah in the dependent claim consists of the same motivation as stated in claim 3.
Claims 6 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pateromichelakis et al. (WO 2024022597 A1) or Pateromichelakis in view of GSMA Operator Plateform Telco Edge Requirements Version 1.0 or GSMA in further view of Vaishnavi et al. (US 20260040089 A1) or Vaishnavi.
Claim 6
Pateromichelakis fails to explicitly teach limitations of claim 14. However, Vaishnavi, in the same field of endeavor, teaches,
The method of claim 1, further comprising:
identifying an edge data network (EDN) from one or more edge data networks associated with the corresponding P-OP based on the deployment request for deploying the requested application server,
wherein the selected P-OP deploys the application server on the identified EDN based on the deployment request.
(See Vaishnavi paragraph 0119, The one or more processors of the management system are further arranged to identify at least one Edge Data Network, EDN, to use to provide the requested Edge Service based on at least a part of the indicated geography; and request, or cause, (for example, to a remote ECSP or management system of a remote ECSP) deployment of an Edge Application Server, EAS, in the identified EDN to provide the requested Edge Service in the specified geography.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling data of the claimed invention to combine deploying application servers on a federated edge network by a leading operator platform or L-OP, receiving from an application service provider or ASP a deployment request for deploying an application server, checking if the L-OP possesses the capacity to deploy at least one application server, and if the L-OP fails to possesses the capacity, selecting a participating operator platform or P-OP from several P-OPs as disclosed by Pateromichelakis with the identifying an edge data network or EDN associated with the corresponding P-OP for deploying the requested application server and the selected P-OP deploying the application server on the identified EDN as disclosed by Vaishnavi to increase the efficiency of the system (i.e. to reduce the amount of energy required to deploy application servers).
Claim 13
Pateromichelakis fails to explicitly teach limitations of claim 13. However, Vaishnavi, in the same field of endeavor, teaches limitations of claim 13 as stated in claim 6. The motivation to combine Pateromichelakis, GSMA, and Vaishnavi in the dependent claim consists of the same motivation as stated in claim 6.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Xu (US 20250310740 A1) teaches implementing service provisioning based on a request from a user equipment or UE in different networks with federation agreements.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SAMUEL ROBERGE BETTENDORF whose telephone number is (571)272-4352. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri, 8:30a.m.-5:00p.m..
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, Edan Orgad can be reached at 571-272-7884. 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.
/SAMUEL ROBERGE BETTENDORF/Examiner, Art Unit 2414
/EDAN ORGAD/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2414
Prosecution Insights