DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . This action is in response to the amendments filed 07/28/2026. Claims 1-20 are pending.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9, 11, 12, 16, 18, and 19 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims, overcoming claim objections and 35 USC § 103 Rejections.
Claim Interpretation
Examiner notes that in review of the amendments filed 07/28/2026, for independent claim 1, the limitation recites, “in response to determining that the first processing node has less than the threshold amount of computing capacity required to process the data,” where the Examiner believes that the recitation of “required to process the data” should have been for the previous limitation, which should be recited as, “determining whether the first processing node has at least a threshold amount of computing capacity required to process the data”. For examining purposes, Examiner will be interpreting claim 1, as “determining whether the first processing node has at least a threshold amount of computing capacity required to process the data.”
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1, line 6, recites “determining whether the first processing node has at least a threshold amount of computing capacity” and should be changed to -- determining whether the first processing node has at least a threshold amount of computing capacity required to process the data--.
Claim 1, line 7, recites “in response to determining that the first processing node has less than the threshold amount of computing capacity required to process the data” and should be changed to --in response to determining that the first processing node has less than the threshold amount of computing capacity
Appropriate corrections are required.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 07/28/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
(A) Examiner finds the applicant's arguments on pages [10-13] are not persuasive regarding claims 1, 13, and 20, specifically, claim limitation, “determining whether the first processing node has at least a threshold amount of computing capacity required to process the data”.
Examiner notes that Butler discloses that the system estimates the minimal processing capacity and resource performance characterization required to ensure optimal performance (para. 168). Butler discloses that the system performs an assessment of the task based on the various insights and capabilities and calculates scores to generate a plan (para. 228). (See claims 1, 13, and 20 supra). Therefore, Butler does teach “determining whether the first processing node has at least a threshold amount of computing capacity required to process the data” as claimed.
(B) Examiner finds the applicant's arguments on pages [13] are not persuasive regarding claims 1, 13, and 20, specifically, the first processing node performs all the claimed operations.
Examiner notes that Butler discloses that the edge node 410 becomes overloaded, it uses a peer selection algorithm to select a peer edge node 420 to handle the processing of certain segment(s), which are replicated from the original edge node to the peer edge node to handle the offloaded processing and rebalance the overall processing load (para. 91) (See claims 1, 13, and 20 supra). Therefore, Butler does teach the first processing node performs all the claimed operations.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1-8, 10, 13-15, 17, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rangel Augusto et al. (2022/0385579, hereinafter Rangel) in view of Butler et al. (2022/0197773, hereinafter Butler) and further in view of Choi et al. (2023/0155959, hereinafter Choi).
Regarding claim 1, Rangel discloses a non-transitory computer-readable medium (Rangel, para. 76) comprising program code for a first agent (Rangel discloses that the computer 700 comprise one or more of data nodes, control nodes, firewall nodes, edge routers, etc.) (Rangel, para. 78), the first agent being executable on a first processing node (Rangel discloses that data nodes 116) (Rangel, para. 36) of a computing cluster (Rangel, para. 32) to perform operations including:
receiving data, from a data provider (Rangel discloses that the network environment 102 may provide, host, provide connectivity to, or otherwise support one or more services 110 for client devices 106 to connect to and use) (Rangel, para. 32), for processing by the first processing node (Rangel discloses that the data node(s) of a network may predict or estimate the capacity of the data node(s) during a period of time to process traffic or packets) (Rangel, para. 19);
determining whether the first processing node has at least a threshold amount of computing capacity (Rangel discloses that the controller determines the difference between the actual capacity (the threshold amount of computing capacity) of the first data node and the predicted capacity of the first data node is greater than a threshold difference; the threshold difference may be a percentage between the available computing resources and/or capacity of the data nodes and the predicted capacity) (Rangel, para. 63); and
in response to determining that the first processing node has less than the threshold amount of computing capacity (Rangel discloses that the controller determines the difference between the actual capacity (less than the threshold amount of computing capacity) of the first data node and the predicted capacity of the first data node is greater than a threshold difference; the threshold difference may be a percentage between the available computing resources and/or capacity of the data nodes and the predicted capacity) (Rangel, para. 63):
receiving, from a lookup service and at the first processing node, one or more processing nodes in the computing cluster that have the at least the threshold amount of computing capacity (Rangel discloses that the controller determines that it has the capacity to receive additional data flows or, that it is over capacity (threshold) and needs to reduce the number of data flows being sent it, then the data node may send an indication to a load balancer to either increase or decrease the number of data flows being sent to it) (Rangel, para. 20);
selecting, a second processing node that has the at least the threshold amount of computing capacity (Rangel discloses that the controller may determine to redirect the one or more specific data flow(s) based on the current capacity of the one or more second data node(s) based on the estimated capacity) (Rangel, para. 27).
Rangel does not explicitly disclose determining whether the first processing node has at least a threshold amount of computing capacity required to process the data; receiving, from a lookup service and at the first processing node, a list of one or more processing nodes in the computing cluster that have the at least the threshold amount of computing capacity; selecting, from the list and at the first processing node, a second processing node that has the at least the threshold amount of computing capacity; and based on the selecting the second processing node, causing the data to be transmitted to a second agent executing on the second processing node, the second agent being configured to process the data and provide the processed data to a backend server system.
In analogous art, Butler teaches determining whether the first processing node has at least a threshold amount of computing capacity required to process the data (Butler discloses that the system estimates the minimal processing capacity and resource performance characterization required to ensure optimal performance; the system performs an assessment of the task based on the various insights and its capabilities and calculates utility scores to generate an actuation plan or partial plan) (Butler, para. 168, 228);
receiving, from a lookup service and at the first processing node, a list of one or more processing nodes (Butler discloses that the information about the location of a certain category (lookup service) of UEs 3120 currently served by the radio nodes associated with the MEC server 3036; the information includes the list of UEs 3120 (processing nodes) in a particular location with information about the location of all radio nodes currently associated with the MEC server 3036) (Butler, para. 438) in the computing cluster that have the at least the threshold amount of computing capacity (Butler discloses that the infrastructure capacity plan is generated based on the possible resource capacity allocation actions that could be performed) (Butler, para. 191); and
selecting, from the list and at the first processing node, a second processing node that has the at least the threshold amount of computing capacity (Butler discloses that when the edge node 410 becomes overloaded, it uses a peer selection algorithm to select a peer edge node 420 to handle the processing of segments, which the optimal peer edge nodes is chosen for offloading compute tasks and rebalancing the overall load) (Butler, para. 91).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to take the teachings of Butler related to determining that the processing node has the computing capacity to process data, receiving a list of processing nodes that have at least the threshold amount of computing capacity and selecting a second processing node that have the at least threshold amount of computing capacity and to combine with Rangel in order to increase the efficiency of selecting the appropriate peer node to handle the processing of compute tasks and rebalance the overall load (Butler, para. 91).
Rangel and Butler does not explicitly disclose based on the selecting the second processing node, causing the data to be transmitted to a second agent executing on the second processing node, the second agent being configured to process the data and provide the processed data to a backend server system.
In analogous art, Choi teaches based on the selecting the second processing node, causing the data to be transmitted to a second agent (Choi discloses that the intelligent edge service receives data from mobile devices or various sensors over a network, analyzes the data, and returns a result or provides the results through applications) (Choi, para. 67) executing on the second processing node, the second agent being configured to process the data and provide the processed data (Choi discloses that selecting the worker server include receiving a list of worker servers (processing nodes) satisfying a preset congestion condition and available resources for execution of the service and selecting the worker server having the I/O congestion level corresponding to the preset condition from the list) (Choi, para. 78) to a backend server system (Choi discloses that the global scheduler of a master server (backend server system) receives information required for executing an application in a virtual environment as well as resource requirements) (Choi, para. 118).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to take the teachings of Choi related to causing the data to be transmitted to a second agent executing on a second processing node and to combine with Rangel and Butler in order to enhance the improvement of the service execution performance by optimally allocating resources for the intelligent edge service (Choi, para. 165).
Regarding claim 2, Rangel, Butler, and Choi discloses the non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 1, wherein the data provider is software executing on the first processing node, the software being separate from the first agent (Rangel discloses that the networked environment 102 includes devices that are housed or located in one or more data centers 104 that may be located at different physical and/or virtual locations, and/or cloud based service provider needs) (Rangel, para. 30).
Regarding claim 3, Rangel, Butler, and Choi discloses the non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 1, wherein the data provider is a client device that is remote from the first processing node (Rangel discloses that the computer 700 can operate in a networked environment using logical connections to remote computing devices and remote computer systems through a network(s)) (Rangel, para. 69).
Regarding claim 4, Rangel, Butler, and Choi discloses the non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 3, wherein the data is telemetry data (Rangel discloses that the telemetry data indicates the actual capacity of the first data node and/or the number of available or unavailable computing resources of the first data node) (Rangel, para. 26), and the client device is an edge device (Rangel discloses that the client devices 106 communicates using various communication protocols over the networks) (Rangel, para. 32), the edge device being remote from the computing cluster (Rangel discloses that the computer 700 can operate in a networked environment using logical connections to remote computing devices and remote computer systems through a network(s)) (Rangel, para. 69).
Regarding claim 5, Rangel, Butler, and Choi discloses the non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 1, wherein the lookup service is remote from the first processing node, and wherein the lookup service is configured to:
collect capacity information from a plurality of processing nodes in the computing cluster (Butler discloses that the infrastructure capacity model and the service data identifies possible placements of the respective services or workloads across the respective resources of the computing infrastructure) (Butler, para. 188);
receive, from the first agent, details about the data to be processed (Butler discloses that the placement options identify possible mappings of the underlying tasks and dependencies of the services to the resources of the computing infrastructure based on service requirements and available capacities) (Butler, para. 188);
generate the list of one or more processing nodes based on the details about the data and the collected capacity information (Butler discloses that the planning component 2016 will use a ranked list of functions and determine possible configurations and best possible set of actions 2018a-c) (Butler, para. 351); and
transmit the list to the first agent (Butler discloses that the desired deployment includes a list of UEs in a particular location and grouped radio nodes that are associated to a MEC host or MEC server 3036) (Butler, para. 438).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to take the teachings of Butler related to collecting capacity information and generating a list of processing nodes to be transmitted and to combine with Rangel, Butler, and Choi in order to increase the efficiency of selecting the appropriate peer node to handle the processing of compute tasks and rebalance the overall load (Butler, para. 91).
Regarding claim 6, Rangel, Butler, and Choi discloses the non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 1, wherein the operations comprise:
selecting the second processing node from the list based at least in part on a capacity level of the second processing node and one or more other factors, the one or more other factors including a geographical location associated with the second processing node (Butler discloses that the desired deployment includes a list of UEs in a particular location and grouped radio nodes that are associated to a MEC host or MEC server 3036) (Butler, para. 438), a latency associated with the second processing node (Butler discloses to achieve results with low latency, the services executed within the edge cloud 2610 balance varying requirements such as priority (throughput or latency) and QoS, reliability and resiliency, and physical constraints) (Butler, para. 370), a security policy associated with the second processing node (Butler discloses security enforcement point which allows distinct resource allocations to be allotted for specific tenant(s) or within tenant boundaries) (Butler, para. 469), and/or a predefined priority associated with the second processing node (Butler discloses to achieve results with low latency, the services executed within the edge cloud 2610 balance varying requirements such as priority (throughput or latency) and QoS, reliability and resiliency, and physical constraints) (Butler, para. 370).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to take the teachings of Butler related to selecting the processing node based on the capacity level and other factors and to combine with Rangel, Butler, and Choi in order to increase the efficiency of selecting the appropriate peer node to handle the processing of compute tasks and rebalance the overall load (Butler, para. 91).
Regarding claim 7, Rangel, Butler, and Choi discloses the non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 1, wherein the backend server system is separate from the computing cluster (Choi discloses that the global scheduler of a master server (backend server system) receives the request to execute an intelligent edge service based on resource requirements and selects the worker server (separate) of one or more worker servers (computing cluster)) (Choi, para. 108-111; Fig. 4).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to take the teachings of Choi related to the backend server system is separate from the computing cluster and to combine with Rangel, Butler, and Choi in order to enhance the improvement of the service execution performance by optimally allocating resources for the intelligent edge service (Choi, para. 165).
Regarding claim 8, Rangel, Butler, and Choi discloses the non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 1, wherein the operations further comprise:
in response to determining that the first processing node has the at least the threshold amount of computing capacity, processing the data and providing the processed data (Choi discloses that the global scheduler selects the worker server (first processing node) having the lowest I/O congestion level from the first candidate list that includes one or more worker servers, the data input device in the resource requirements is checked (has the threshold amount of computing capacity), and the worker server in which the corresponding device is selected) (Choi, para. 122) to the backend server system (Choi discloses that the global scheduler of a master server (backend server system) receives information required for executing an application in a virtual environment as well as resource requirements) (Choi, para. 118).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to take the teachings of Choi related to determining that the first processing node has at least the threshold amount of computing capacity and to combine with Rangel, Butler, and Choi in order to enhance the improvement of the service execution performance by optimally allocating resources for the intelligent edge service (Choi, para. 165).
Regarding claim 10, Rangel, Butler, and Choi discloses the non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 1, wherein causing the data to be transmitted to the second processing node involves the first agent transmitting the data to the second agent (Choi discloses that the one or more worker servers are selected to execute the service based on the congestion level of the server and based on a network selected as the input resource, which allocates resources from multiple NUMA nodes (agents)) (Choi, para. 118).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to take the teachings of Choi related to causing the data to be transmitted to the second processing node involves the first agent transmitting data to the second agent and to combine with Rangel, Butler, and Choi in order to enhance the improvement of the service execution performance by optimally allocating resources for the intelligent edge service (Choi, para. 165).
Regarding claim 13, Rangel discloses a method comprising:
receiving, by a first agent executing on a first processing node of a computing cluster, and from a data provider (Rangel discloses that the network environment 102 may provide, host, provide connectivity to, or otherwise support one or more services 110 for client devices 106 to connect to and use) (Rangel, para. 32), data for processing by the first processing node (Rangel discloses that the data node(s) of a network may predict or estimate the capacity of the data node(s) during a period of time to process traffic or packets) (Rangel, para. 19);
determining, by the first agent, whether the first processing node has at least a threshold amount of computing capacity (Rangel discloses that the controller determines the difference between the actual capacity (the threshold amount of computing capacity) of the first data node and the predicted capacity of the first data node is greater than a threshold difference; the threshold difference may be a percentage between the available computing resources and/or capacity of the data nodes and the predicted capacity) (Rangel, para. 63); and
in response to determining that the first processing node has less than the threshold amount of computing capacity (Rangel discloses that the controller determines the difference between the actual capacity (less than the threshold amount of computing capacity) of the first data node and the predicted capacity of the first data node is greater than a threshold difference; the threshold difference may be a percentage between the available computing resources and/or capacity of the data nodes and the predicted capacity) (Rangel, para. 63):
receiving, by the first agent executing on the first processing node and from a lookup service, a list of one or more processing nodes in the computing cluster that have the at least the threshold amount of computing capacity (Rangel discloses that the controller determines that it has the capacity to receive additional data flows or, that it is over capacity (threshold) and needs to reduce the number of data flows being sent it, then the data node may send an indication to a load balancer to either increase or decrease the number of data flows being sent to it) (Rangel, para. 20); and
selecting, by the first agent, a second processing node that has the at least the threshold amount of computing capacity (Rangel discloses that the controller may determine to redirect the one or more specific data flow(s) based on the current capacity of the one or more second data node(s) based on the estimated capacity) (Rangel, para. 27).
Rangel does not explicitly disclose determining, by the first agent, whether the first processing node has at least a threshold amount of computing capacity required to process the data; receiving, by the first agent executing on the first processing node and from a lookup service, a list of one or more processing nodes in the computing cluster that have at least the threshold amount of computing capacity; selecting, by the first agent and from the list, a second processing node that has the at least the threshold amount of computing capacity; and based on the selecting the second processing node, causing, by the first agent, the data to be transmitted to a second agent executing on the second processing node, the second agent being configured to process the data and provide the processed data to a backend server system.
In analogous art, Butler teaches determining, by the first agent, whether the first processing node has at least a threshold amount of computing capacity required to process the data (Butler discloses that the system estimates the minimal processing capacity and resource performance characterization required to ensure optimal performance; the system performs an assessment of the task based on the various insights and its capabilities and calculates utility scores to generate an actuation plan or partial plan) (Butler, para. 168, 228);
receiving, by the first agent executing on the first processing node and from a lookup service, a list of one or more processing nodes (Butler discloses that the information about the location of a certain category (lookup service) of UEs 3120 currently served by the radio nodes associated with the MEC server 3036; the information includes the list of UEs 3120 (processing nodes) in a particular location with information about the location of all radio nodes currently associated with the MEC server 3036) (Butler, para. 438) in the computing cluster that have at least the threshold amount of computing capacity (Butler discloses that the infrastructure capacity plan is generated based on the possible resource capacity allocation actions that could be performed) (Butler, para. 191); and
selecting, by the first agent and from the list, a second processing node that has the at least the threshold amount of computing capacity (Butler discloses that when the edge node 410 becomes overloaded, it uses a peer selection algorithm to select a peer edge node 420 to handle the processing of segments, which the optimal peer edge nodes is chosen for offloading compute tasks and rebalancing the overall load) (Butler, para. 91).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to take the teachings of Butler related to determining that the processing node has the computing capacity to process data, receiving a list of processing nodes that have at least the threshold amount of computing capacity and selecting a second processing node that have the at least threshold amount of computing capacity and to combine with Rangel in order to increase the efficiency of selecting the appropriate peer node to handle the processing of compute tasks and rebalance the overall load (Butler, para. 91).
Rangel and Butler does not explicitly disclose based on the selecting the second processing node, causing, by the first agent, the data to be transmitted to a second agent executing on the second processing node, the second agent being configured to process the data and provide the processed data to a backend server system.
In analogous art, Choi teaches based on the selecting the second processing node, causing, by the first agent, the data to be transmitted to a second agent (Choi discloses that the intelligent edge service receives data from mobile devices or various sensors over a network, analyzes the data, and returns a result or provides the results through applications) (Choi, para. 67) executing on the second processing node, the second agent being configured to process the data and provide the processed data (Choi discloses that selecting the worker server include receiving a list of worker servers (processing nodes) satisfying a preset congestion condition and available resources for execution of the service and selecting the worker server having the I/O congestion level corresponding to the preset condition from the list) (Choi, para. 78) to a backend server system (Choi discloses that the global scheduler of a master server (backend server system) receives information required for executing an application in a virtual environment as well as resource requirements) (Choi, para. 118).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to take the teachings of Choi related to causing the data to be transmitted to a second agent executing on a second processing node and to combine with Rangel and Butler in order to enhance the improvement of the service execution performance by optimally allocating resources for the intelligent edge service (Choi, para. 165).
Regarding claim 14, Rangel, Butler, and Choi discloses the method of claim 13, wherein the lookup service is remote from the first processing node, and wherein the lookup service is configured to:
collect capacity information from a plurality of processing nodes in the computing cluster (Butler discloses that the infrastructure capacity model and the service data identifies possible placements of the respective services or workloads across the respective resources of the computing infrastructure) (Butler, para. 188);
receive, from the first agent, details about the data to be processed (Butler discloses that the placement options identify possible mappings of the underlying tasks and dependencies of the services to the resources of the computing infrastructure based on service requirements and available capacities) (Butler, para. 188);
generate the list of one or more processing nodes based on the details about the data and the collected capacity information (Butler discloses that the planning component 2016 will use a ranked list of functions and determine possible configurations and best possible set of actions 2018a-c) (Butler, para. 351); and
transmit the list to the first agent (Butler discloses that the desired deployment includes a list of UEs in a particular location and grouped radio nodes that are associated to a MEC host or MEC server 3036) (Butler, para. 438).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to take the teachings of Butler related to collecting capacity information and generating a list of processing nodes to be transmitted and to combine with Rangel, Butler, and Choi in order to increase the efficiency of selecting the appropriate peer node to handle the processing of compute tasks and rebalance the overall load (Butler, para. 91).
Regarding claim 15, Rangel, Butler, and Choi discloses the method of claim 13, further comprising selecting the second processing node from the list based at least in part on a capacity level of the second processing node and one or more other factors, the one or more other factors including a geographical location associated with the second processing node (Butler discloses that the desired deployment includes a list of UEs in a particular location and grouped radio nodes that are associated to a MEC host or MEC server 3036) (Butler, para. 438), a latency associated with the second processing node (Butler discloses to achieve results with low latency, the services executed within the edge cloud 2610 balance varying requirements such as priority (throughput or latency) and QoS, reliability and resiliency, and physical constraints) (Butler, para. 370), a security policy associated with the second processing node (Butler discloses security enforcement point which allows distinct resource allocations to be allotted for specific tenant(s) or within tenant boundaries) (Butler, para. 469), and/or a predefined priority associated with the second processing node (Butler discloses to achieve results with low latency, the services executed within the edge cloud 2610 balance varying requirements such as priority (throughput or latency) and QoS, reliability and resiliency, and physical constraints) (Butler, para. 370).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to take the teachings of Butler related to selecting the processing node based on the capacity level and other factors and to combine with Rangel, Butler, and Choi in order to increase the efficiency of selecting the appropriate peer node to handle the processing of compute tasks and rebalance the overall load (Butler, para. 91).
Regarding claim 17, Rangel, Butler, and Choi discloses the method of claim 13, wherein the data provider is a client device that is remote from the first processing node (Rangel discloses that the computer 700 can operate in a networked environment using logical connections to remote computing devices and remote computer systems through a network(s)) (Rangel, para. 69).
Regarding claim 20, Rangel discloses a first processing node (Rangel, para. 76) of a computing cluster (Rangel, para. 32), the first processing node comprising:
a processor (Rangel, para. 76); and
a memory (Rangel, para. 76) including program code for a first agent executing on the first processing node, the first agent being executable by the processor to perform operations including:
receiving data, from a data provider (Rangel discloses that the network environment 102 may provide, host, provide connectivity to, or otherwise support one or more services 110 for client devices 106 to connect to and use) (Rangel, para. 32), for processing by the first processing node (Rangel discloses that the data node(s) of a network may predict or estimate the capacity of the data node(s) during a period of time to process traffic or packets) (Rangel, para. 19);
determining whether the first processing node has at least a threshold amount of computing capacity (Rangel discloses that the controller determines the difference between the actual capacity (the threshold amount of computing capacity) of the first data node and the predicted capacity of the first data node is greater than a threshold difference; the threshold difference may be a percentage between the available computing resources and/or capacity of the data nodes and the predicted capacity) (Rangel, para. 63); and
in response to determining that the first processing node has less than the threshold amount of computing capacity (Rangel discloses that the controller determines the difference between the actual capacity (less than the threshold amount of computing capacity) of the first data node and the predicted capacity of the first data node is greater than a threshold difference; the threshold difference may be a percentage between the available computing resources and/or capacity of the data nodes and the predicted capacity) (Rangel, para. 63):
receiving, from a lookup service, one or more processing nodes in the computing cluster that have the at least the threshold amount of computing capacity (Rangel discloses that the controller determines that it has the capacity to receive additional data flows or, that it is over capacity (threshold) and needs to reduce the number of data flows being sent it, then the data node may send an indication to a load balancer to either increase or decrease the number of data flows being sent to it) (Rangel, para. 20);
selecting, a second processing node that has the at least the threshold amount of computing capacity (Rangel discloses that the controller may determine to redirect the one or more specific data flow(s) based on the current capacity of the one or more second data node(s) based on the estimated capacity) (Rangel, para. 27).
Rangel does not explicitly disclose determining whether the first processing node has at least a threshold amount of computing capacity required to process the data; receiving, from a lookup service, a list of one or more processing nodes in the computing cluster that have the at least the threshold amount of computing capacity; selecting, from the list, a second processing node that has the at least the threshold amount of computing capacity; and based on the selecting the second processing node, causing the data to be transmitted to a second agent executing on the second processing node, the second agent being configured to process the data and provide the processed data to a backend server system.
In analogous art, Butler teaches determining whether the first processing node has at least a threshold amount of computing capacity required to process the data (Butler discloses that the system estimates the minimal processing capacity and resource performance characterization required to ensure optimal performance; the system performs an assessment of the task based on the various insights and its capabilities and calculates utility scores to generate an actuation plan or partial plan) (Butler, para. 168, 228);
receiving, from a lookup service, a list of one or more processing nodes (Butler discloses that the information about the location of a certain category (lookup service) of UEs 3120 currently served by the radio nodes associated with the MEC server 3036; the information includes the list of UEs 3120 (processing nodes) in a particular location with information about the location of all radio nodes currently associated with the MEC server 3036) (Butler, para. 438) in the computing cluster that have the at least the threshold amount of computing capacity (Butler discloses that the infrastructure capacity plan is generated based on the possible resource capacity allocation actions that could be performed) (Butler, para. 191); and
selecting, from the list, a second processing node that has the at least the threshold amount of computing capacity (Butler discloses that when the edge node 410 becomes overloaded, it uses a peer selection algorithm to select a peer edge node 420 to handle the processing of segments, which the optimal peer edge nodes is chosen for offloading compute tasks and rebalancing the overall load) (Butler, para. 91).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to take the teachings of Butler related to determining that the processing node has the computing capacity to process data, receiving a list of processing nodes that have at least the threshold amount of computing capacity and selecting a second processing node that have the at least threshold amount of computing capacity and to combine with Rangel in order to increase the efficiency of selecting the appropriate peer node to handle the processing of compute tasks and rebalance the overall load (Butler, para. 91).
Rangel and Butler does not explicitly disclose based on the selecting the second processing node, causing the data to be transmitted to a second agent executing on the second processing node, the second agent being configured to process the data and provide the processed data to a backend server system.
In analogous art, Choi teaches based on the selecting the second processing node, causing the data to be transmitted to a second agent (Choi discloses that the intelligent edge service receives data from mobile devices or various sensors over a network, analyzes the data, and returns a result or provides the results through applications) (Choi, para. 67) executing on the second processing node, the second agent being configured to process the data and provide the processed data (Choi discloses that selecting the worker server include receiving a list of worker servers (processing nodes) satisfying a preset congestion condition and available resources for execution of the service and selecting the worker server having the I/O congestion level corresponding to the preset condition from the list) (Choi, para. 78) to a backend server system (Choi discloses that the global scheduler of a master server (backend server system) receives information required for executing an application in a virtual environment as well as resource requirements) (Choi, para. 118).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to take the teachings of Choi related to causing the data to be transmitted to a second agent executing on a second processing node and to combine with Rangel and Butler in order to enhance the improvement of the service execution performance by optimally allocating resources for the intelligent edge service (Choi, para. 165).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 ANDREW WOO whose telephone number is (571)270-7521. The examiner can normally be reached Telework 9:00AM-6:00PM | IFP M-F 9:00AM-6:00PM.
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, Umar Cheema can be reached at 571-270-3037. 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.
/A.W./Examiner, Art Unit 2458
/UMAR CHEEMA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2458
Prosecution Insights