Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 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
Examiner
BARRY, LANCE LEONARD
Art Unit
2457
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
NEC Corporation
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
85%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 11m
To Grant
90%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 85% — above average
85%
Career Allow Rate
335 granted / 395 resolved
+26.8% vs TC avg
Moderate +6% lift
Without
With
+5.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 11m
Avg Prosecution
27 currently pending
Career history
422
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
12.0%
-28.0% vs TC avg
§103
44.4%
+4.4% vs TC avg
§102
2.9%
-37.1% vs TC avg
§112
29.3%
-10.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 395 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

Apr 24, 2024
Application Filed
Jan 15, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Jan 15, 2025
Examiner Interview (Telephonic)
Jan 24, 2025
Examiner Interview (Telephonic)
Jan 24, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Feb 13, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Jun 17, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Jun 17, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Jul 18, 2025
Response Filed
Aug 06, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Aug 06, 2025
Examiner Interview (Telephonic)
Aug 14, 2025
Final Rejection — §112
Jan 20, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Jan 23, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 10, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary
Feb 10, 2026
Examiner Interview (Telephonic)
Feb 25, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12580993
METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR DISCOVERING USER PLANE FUNCTION UPF IN WIRELESS COMMUNICATION SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12568149
DYNAMIC PLACEMENT OF SERVICES CLOSER TO ENDPOINT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12562792
METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR CSI CONFIGURATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12556610
Devices and Methods for Location-Dependent Prioritized Communication
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12550218
APPARATUSES AND METHODS FOR ENABLING SECONDARY CELL GROUP (SCG) SUSPENSION AND RESUMPTION OR PRIMARY SECONDARY CELL (PSCELL) DEACTIVATION AND ACTIVATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 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
85%
Grant Probability
90%
With Interview (+5.6%)
2y 11m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 395 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