DETAILED ACTION
This action is responsive to the communication filed on 04/11/2024.
Claims 1-20 are pending.
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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-9, 11-14 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticpated by Augé at al (US Patent No. 12058205 B1 herein as “Augé”).
As per claim 1, Augé discloses device, comprising:
a processing system including a processor (Augé, col. 2 line 11-14: a system…further includes one or more processors); and
a memory that stores executable instructions that, when executed by the processing system, facilitate performance of operations (Augé, col. e line 14-18: one or more computer-readable non-transitory storage media coupled to the one or more processors that stores instructions operable when executed…to cause the system to perform a method), the operations comprising:
obtaining a first request from a first user equipment for a first communication service (Augé, col. 2 line 19-20: receiving a signal from a client device requesting a resource);
acquiring, based on the obtaining of the first request, first information (Augé, col. 2 line 22-26: calculate the distance between each cloud server and the client device…determine the approximate location of the client device based on the calculated distance);
analyzing, based on the acquiring of the first information, the first information to rank a first plurality of servers for serving as an edge application server in respect of the first user equipment, resulting in a first plurality of ranked servers (Augé, col. 2 line 50-53: each of the one or more edge servers that are within the predetermined distance is ranked based on its distance from the approximate location of the client device); and
selecting a server of the first plurality of ranked servers to serve as the edge application server in respect of the first user equipment (Augé, col. 3 line 21-23, line 58-60: the edge server to be selected based on the distance between the edge server and an approximate location of the client device).
As per claim 2, Augé discloses the device of claim 1, wherein the operations further comprise: obtaining a second request from a second user equipment for a second communication service; acquiring, based on the obtaining of the second request, second information; analyzing, based on the acquiring of the second information, the second information to rank a second plurality of servers for serving as an edge application server in respect of the second user equipment, resulting in a second plurality of ranked servers; and selecting a server of the second plurality of ranked servers to serve as the edge application server in respect of the second user equipment (Augé, col. 2 line 19-53 and col. 3 line 21-23, 58-60).
As per claim 3, Augé discloses the device of claim 2, wherein the second user equipment is different from the first user equipment, wherein the second plurality of servers is at least partially different from the first plurality of servers, wherein the second information is at least partially different from the first information, and wherein the second communication service is different from the first communication service (Augé, col. 2 line 43-45 & col 6 line 42).
As per claim 4, Augé discloses the device of claim 1, wherein the obtaining of the first request is based on the first user equipment being powered-on or the first user equipment initiating an execution of a first application associated with the first communication service (Augé, col. 6 line 41-42).
As per claim 5, Augé discloses the device of claim 1, wherein the operations further comprise: providing, based on the selecting, an identifier of the server to the first user equipment to cause the first user equipment to establish a connection with the server to facilitate the first communication service (Augé, col. 9 line 47-48).
As per claim 6, Augé discloses the device of claim 1, wherein the server is a highest ranked server included in the first plurality of ranked servers (Augé, col. 9 line 44-45).
As per claim 7, Augé discloses the device of claim 1, wherein the first plurality of servers is included in a second plurality of servers, and wherein the operations further comprise: computing a respective score for each server of the second plurality of servers for serving as the edge application server in respect of the first user equipment; comparing the respective score of a first server of the second plurality of servers to a threshold, resulting in a first comparison; and based on the first comparison, including the first server in the first plurality of servers (Augé, col. 2 line 39-45).
As per claim 8, Augé discloses the device of claim 7, wherein the operations further comprise: comparing the respective score of a second server of the second plurality of servers to the threshold, resulting in a second comparison; and based on the second comparison, omitting the second server from the first plurality of servers (Augé, col. 7 line 66 – col. 8 line 2).
As per claim 9, Augé discloses the device of claim 7, wherein the ranking of the first plurality of servers for serving as the edge application server in respect of the first user equipment is based on the respective score for each server of the second plurality of servers (Augé, col. 7 line 66 – col. 8 line 2).
As per claim 11, Augé discloses the device of claim 1, wherein the first information includes an identification of a first location of the first user equipment and a respective second location of each server of the first plurality of servers (Augé, col. 2 line 40-60).
As per claim 12, Augé discloses the device of claim 1, wherein the first information includes an identification of a first application associated with the first communication service, a threshold corresponding to a minimum acceptable performance for the first communication service, and a user preference pertaining to a combination of latency and cost (Augé, col. 8 line 29-40).
As per claim 13, Augé discloses the device of claim 1, wherein the first information includes an identification of: a processing capacity of each server of the first plurality of servers, a storage capacity of each server of the first plurality of servers, a latency associated with each server of the first plurality of servers, and a cost associated with each server of the first plurality of servers (Augé, col. 8 line 29-40).
As per claim 14, Augé discloses the device of claim 1, wherein the first information includes an identification of a respective processing load associated with each server of the first plurality of servers (Augé, col. 8 line 29-40).
As per claim 19, Augé discloses a method, comprising:
analyzing, by a processing system including a processor, first information to select an edge application server from among a plurality of edge application servers for providing a communication service to a first user equipment, wherein the first information includes an identification of: an amount of traffic that is to be distributed amongst the plurality of edge application servers, a first location of the first user equipment, a second location of a second user equipment, a service requirement associated with the communication service expressed in terms of at least one of latency or cost, and a security requirement associated with the communication service (Augé, col. 8 line 25-40: determine the best edge server 216A-216N to connect with based on other factor besides distance, such as, but not limited to, latency, network conditions, capacity, speed, and other factors as configured by the application, control plane, system administrator, developer, or other party…Other criteria may be used to provide a ranking, and the disclosure is not limited to what has been described); and
selecting, by the processing system and based on the analyzing of the first information, a first application server of the plurality of edge application servers as the edge application server at a first point in time selection (Augé, col. 9 line 44-46: where the edge server is selected that has the highest rank as well as best performance as determined by the probing).
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) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Augé and further in view of Jujjuri et al (US Pub. No. 2020/0274923 herein after “Jujjuri”).
As per claim 10, Augé does not disclose, however, Jujjuri discloses the device of claim 7, wherein the respective score is a weighted score that prioritizes a first parameter included in the first information relative to a second parameter that is included in the first information (Jujjuri, para[0061,0068]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Jujjuri’s teaching of weighting of metrics into Augé’s teaching of Opportunistic Client Locating for Fast Edge Server Selection because one of the ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to provide a more balanced selection of servers.
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Augé and further in view of Houston et al (US Pub. No. 2014/0259109 herein after “Houston”).
As per claim 15, Augé does not disclose, however, Houston discloses the device of claim 1, wherein the operations further comprise: processing a payment of a fee by a user of the first user equipment; and selecting, based on the processing of the payment of the fee, the server for inclusion in the first plurality of servers (Houston, para[0029]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Houston’s teaching of paying a subscription fee into Augé’s teaching of Opportunistic Client Locating for Fast Edge Server Selection because one of the ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to limit use of the enhanced services network to paid subscribers.
Claim(s) 16-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Augé and further in view of Shinichiro Tsuda (WO 2024029281 A1 herein after “Tsuda”).
As per claim 16, Augé discloses a non-transitory machine-readable medium, comprising executable instructions that, when executed by a processing system including a processor, facilitate performance of operations, the operations comprising:
obtaining a request from a communication device (Augé, col. 2 line 19-20: receiving a signal from a client device requesting a resource);
based on the obtaining of the request, acquiring information to facilitate a provisioning of a communication service in respect of the communication device (Augé, col. 2 line 22-26: calculate the distance between each cloud server and the client device…determine the approximate location of the client device based on the calculated distance), wherein the information includes an identification of: a type of the communication service, a location of the communication device, and a quality of service that is owed to the communication device in respect of the communication service ((Augé, col. 8 line 29-40: determine the best edge server 216A-216N to connect with based on other factor besides distance, such as, but not limited to, latency, network conditions, capacity, speed, and other factors as configured by the application, control plane, system administrator, developer, or other party);
analyzing the information to select an application server from a plurality of application servers, resulting in a selection (Augé, col. 9 line 44-46: where the edge server is selected that has the highest rank as well as best performance as determined by the probing); and based on the selection, providing a second identifier of the application server to the communication device (Augé, col. 9 line 47-49: then communicates to the client device the identity of the selected edge server in step 316).
Augé does not disclose, however, Tsuda discloses obtaining a request from a communication device based on the communication device having obtained a first identifier of the processing system (Tsuda, page 33 para[0011] the SMF 306 includes the IP address of the EASDF 311 as a DNS server or resolver in a PDU Session Establishment Accept message sent to the UE 10).
Tsuda also further discloses acquiring information to facilitate a provisioning of a communication service in respect of the communication device; and analyzing the information to select an application server from a plurality of application servers, resulting in a selection (Tsuda, page 34 para[0002-0004] the EASDF 311 may select the edge application server 41 based on the load state of the edge application server 41 in addition to the information related to the location of the UE 10).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Tsuda’s teaching of Information Processing Device into Augé’s teaching of Opportunistic Client Locating for Fast Edge Server Selection because one of the ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to use other criteria to provide a ranking of the edge servers.
As per claim 17, the combination of Augé and Tsuda discloses the non-transitory machine-readable medium of claim 16, wherein the first identifier is a first address and the second identifier is a second address (Augé, col. 9 line 47-49; Tsuda, page 34 para[0002-0004]).
As per claim 18, Augé discloses the non-transitory machine-readable medium of claim 16, wherein the information further includes an identification of: a respective load of each application server included in the plurality of application servers relative to a respective capacity of each application server included in the plurality of application servers, a prediction of a change in at least one load of the respective loads, and a respective location of each application server included in the plurality of application servers (Augé, col. 8 line 29-40).
Claim(s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Augé and further in view of Patel et al (EU Patent No. 2332349 B1 herein after “Patel”).
As per claim 20, Augé does not disclose, however, Patel discloses the method of claim 19, further comprising: analyzing, by the processing system, second information that is at least partially different from the first information; and selecting, by the processing system and based on the analyzing of the second information, a second application server as the edge application server at a second point in time that is subsequent to the first point in time, wherein the selecting of the second application server as the edge application server causes a communication session associated with the communication service to be transferred from the first application server to the second application server (Patel, para[0028,0035]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Patel’s teaching of transferring a communication session into Augé’s teaching of Opportunistic Client Locating for Fast Edge Server Selection because one of the ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to transfer a session to another network/application server that will provide better QoS and/or priority.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure. See form 892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Natisha Cox whose telephone number is (571)270-7167. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday to Friday, 10:00 am - 6:00pm EST.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Umar Cheema can be reached on (571)270-3037. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is (571) 273-8000.
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://pairdirect.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.
/NATISHA D COX/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2458