Prosecution Insights
Last updated: May 29, 2026
Application No. 18/644,503

NETWORK DATA ANALYTIC FUNCTION NODE, NETWORK FUNCTION NODE, AND CONTROL METHOD THEREFOR

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Apr 24, 2024
Priority
Jul 22, 2020 — EU 20187246.2 +2 more
Examiner
BARRY, LANCE LEONARD
Art Unit
2457
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
NEC Corporation
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
84%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
9m
Est. Remaining
90%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 84% — above average
84%
Career Allowance Rate
336 granted / 398 resolved
+26.4% vs TC avg
Moderate +5% lift
Without
With
+5.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 10m
Avg Prosecution
21 currently pending
Career history
424
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
7.6%
-32.4% vs TC avg
§103
67.0%
+27.0% vs TC avg
§102
1.7%
-38.3% vs TC avg
§112
17.4%
-22.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 398 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
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 . Authorization for Internet Communication In the interest of compact prosecution, the Examiner recommends filing a written authorization for Internet communication. Doing so would permit the USPTO to communicate using Internet e-mail to schedule interviews or discuss other aspects of the application. Without a written authorization in place, the USPTO cannot respond to Internet e-mail correspondence. The preferred method of providing authorization is by filing form PTO/SB/439, available at: https://www.uspto.gov/patent/forms/forms. See MPEP § 502.03. Authorizations in an Internet e-mail do not have the same effect as filing the form in the record. Specification The abstract is objected to for not being descriptive as it could be. It should be amended to reflect the amendments of Jan. 26, 2026. Claim Objections Claims 1-12 are objected to because of the following informalities. Regarding claims 1 and 5, “the analytics indicated by the Analytics ID upon receiving the Analytics ID” would be better written as the analytics “identified” by the Analytics ID upon receiving the Analytics ID to parallel the “an Analytics Identifier (ID) that identifies analytics regarding an application” (emphasis added). Further regarding claims 1 and 5, “an Internet Protocol (IP) address and a port number, and Domain Name information” would be better written as “an Internet Protocol (IP) address[,] Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Specifically, the meaning of the acronym “URL” is unclear. This could be overcome by spelling-out the acronym. Other Art The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to the instant disclosure. For example, WO 2017125698 discloses a requests with a PFD (abs.) Conclusion 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 Lance Leonard Barry whose telephone number is (571)272-5856. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 700-430 ET 730-1630. 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 email the Examiner. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Ario Etienne can be reached on 571-272-4001. 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. /LANCE LEONARD BARRY/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2457
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Show 9 earlier events
Aug 06, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Aug 06, 2025
Examiner Interview (Telephonic)
Aug 18, 2025
Final Rejection mailed — §112
Jan 20, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Jan 23, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 10, 2026
Examiner Interview (Telephonic)
Feb 10, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary
Feb 27, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12641161
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR REAL-TIME REPOSITORY MANAGEMENT FOR UNIVERSAL SERVICE DEPLOYMENT
1y 7m to grant Granted May 26, 2026
Patent 12634374
TRAFFIC INFLUENCE FOR INITIAL EAS SELECTION
2y 0m to grant Granted May 19, 2026
Patent 12627630
TECHNIQUES FOR ROTATING SERVICE ENDPOINTS IN PREFAB REGIONS
2y 6m to grant Granted May 12, 2026
Patent 12627743
METHODS, SYSTEMS, AND COMPUTER READABLE MEDIA FOR PROVIDING FOR EFFICIENT AUDITING OF NETWORK FUNCTION (NF) PROFILES BY SERVICE COMMUNICATION PROXIES (SCPs)
2y 0m to grant Granted May 12, 2026
Patent 12580993
METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR DISCOVERING USER PLANE FUNCTION UPF IN WIRELESS COMMUNICATION SYSTEM
1y 10m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
84%
Grant Probability
90%
With Interview (+5.1%)
2y 10m (~9m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 398 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance 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