DETAILED ACTION
In response to communications filed 03/05/2026.
Claims 1-20 are pending for examination.
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 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.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Shaw et al. (US 2018/0316799 A1) hereinafter “Shaw.”
Regarding Claim 1, Shaw teaches A computer-implemented method (Shaw: paragraphs 0030-0031 & Fig. 1 manager SDN controller), comprising:
receiving a request for a service (Shaw: paragraph 0059, Manager SDN Controller can receive or obtain the service request from communication device) from a radio-based network (Shaw: paragraphs 0029-0030, cloud service provider) from a first client device (Shaw: paragraph 0040, user devices that preempt (i.e. having resources shifted toward their usage and away from other lower priority user devices)):
determining that a network function in the radio-based network is at a capacity limit of a number of client devices capable of being serviced by the network function (Shaw: paragraphs 0072 & 0094, denying a service to a specific communication in response to (resulting) network outages and/or failures; see also paragraphs 0074 & 0083, approaching or exceeding available resources);
suspending the service from the network function to a second client device in response to determining that the network function in the radio-based network is at the capacity limit (Shaw: paragraph 0040, user devices that are preempted (i.e. have resources shift away from their usage and toward other higher priority user devices), thereby preventing and/or outright denying access to the service for the lower priority device(s); see also paragraphs 0087 & 0090, suspend data service to a communication device (as directed by profile)) and based at least in part on a rule set specific to the radio-based network that establishes a priority of the first client device over the second client device (Shaw: paragraph 0040, said user devices that preempt having higher priority than other lower priority user devices); and
providing the first client device access to the network function instead of the second client device (Shaw: paragraph 0040, user devices that preempt (i.e. having resources shifted toward their usage and away from other lower priority user devices), thus providing access to the network function of a first client device of higher priority).
Regarding Claim 2, Shaw teaches the respective claim(s) as presented above and further teaches receiving a specification of the priority associated with the first client device from an operator of the radio-based network (Shaw: paragraph 0091, priority of communications assigned to the communication device); and
determining to provide the first client device the service from the network function instead of the second client device based at least in part on the priority (Shaw: paragraph 0040, user devices that preempt having higher priority than other lower priority user devices).
Regarding Claim 3, Shaw teaches the respective claim(s) as presented above and further teaches dynamically assigning the first client device to a network slice in the radio-based network based at least in part on the rule set, the network slice being associated with a quality-of-service requirement (Shaw: paragraph 0110, allocate resources to domains to specific devices/groups of devices within the required aggregated QoS parameters and can prioritize the allocations).
Regarding Claim 4, Shaw teaches the respective claim(s) as presented above and further teaches selecting the second client device for which the service from the network function is to be suspended from a plurality of client devices currently using the network function based at least in part on the rule set (Shaw: paragraph 0040, user devices that preempt having higher priority than other lower priority user devices).
Regarding Claim 5, Shaw teaches the respective claim(s) as presented above and further teaches wherein the rule set defines a different rule for handling the capacity limit in the network function than a default rule of the network function (Shaw: paragraph 0076, service level information associated with the communication devices to provide requested services according to Quality of Service (QoS) levels associated with the service level).
Regarding Claim 6, Shaw teaches the respective claim(s) as presented above and further teaches wherein the default rule denies the first client device the service from the network function (Shaw: paragraph 0069, policies for a service including when to allow or not allow the service).
Regarding Claim 7, Shaw teaches the respective claim(s) as presented above and further teaches scaling computing resources allocated to the network function based at least in part on the rule set and in response to determining that the network function in the radio-based network is at the capacity limit (Shaw: paragraph 0120 & Fig. 3, SDN Controller can analyze QoS parameters over all the domains of the network to determine an aggregated set of QoS parameters needed to provide services within quality limits of the network for its totality of customers).
Regarding Claim 8, Shaw teaches the respective claim(s) as presented above and further teaches wherein the radio-based network is provisioned by a cloud provider network (Shaw: paragraphs 0029-0030, cloud service provider) for a customer (Shaw: paragraphs 0029-0030, customers), and the rule set is configured by the customer (Shaw: paragraph 0037, 0040, user preferences stored in user profile including QoS Profile Information including QoS requirements and/or configurations).
Regarding Claim 9, Shaw teaches the respective claim(s) as presented above and further teaches wherein the rule set configures the network function to fail in a predictable way in response to the capacity limit being reached while continuing to provide service to the first client device based at least in part on the priority (Shaw: paragraph 0072, if the Manager SDN Controller determines a shortage or shortfall in a needed resource, then the Manager SDN Controller can direct instantiation of one or more new SDN Controller to perform all or part of the requested service).
Regarding Claim 10, Shaw teaches the respective claim(s) as presented above and further teaches wherein network traffic from the second client device is associated with a higher quality-of-service parameter than network traffic from the first client device (Shaw: paragraph 0076, service level information associated with the communication devices to provide requested services according to Quality of Service (QoS) levels associated with the service level).
Regarding Claim 11, Shaw teaches A non-transitory computer-readable medium storing instructions executable in at least one computing device, wherein when executed the instructions (Shaw: paragraph 0018, machine-readable storage medium, including executable instructions that, when executed by a processing system) cause the at least one computing device to at least:
receive a capacity limit plan from an operator of a radio-based network (Shaw: paragraph 0120 & Fig. 3, SDN Controller can analyze QoS parameters over all the domains of the network to determine an aggregated set of QoS parameters needed to provide services within quality limits of the network for its totality of customers), the capacity limit plan including an operator-specified rule that prioritizes a service (Shaw: paragraph 0076, service level information associated with the communication devices to provide requested services according to Quality of Service (QoS) levels associated with the service level) from a network function to a first client device (Shaw: paragraph 0040, user devices that preempt (i.e. having resources shifted toward their usage and away from other lower priority user devices)) over a second client device (Shaw: paragraph 0040, user devices that are preempted (i.e. have resources shift away from their usage and toward other higher priority user devices) thereby preventing and/or denying access to the service for the lower priority device(s)) in response to the network function being at a capacity limit beyond which a failure of the service will occur (Shaw: paragraphs 0072 & 0094, denying a service to a specific communication in response to (resulting) network outages and/or failures); and
configure the network function in the radio-based network to implement the operator-specified rule instead of a default rule for handling the capacity limit (Shaw: paragraph 0076, Manager SDN Controller can decide how to use network resources to fulfill the data needs and instantiate additional resources and/or adjust priority levels of currently instantiated resources to provide requested services according to Quality of Service (QoS) levels associated with the service level).
Regarding Claim 12, Shaw teaches the respective claim(s) as presented above and further teaches wherein the operator-specified rule defines an approach to selecting the second client device for suspending the service from the network function from a plurality of second client devices that are receiving the service from the network function (Shaw: paragraph 0040, user devices that are preempted (i.e. have resources shift away from their usage and toward other higher priority user devices), thereby preventing and/or outright denying access to the service for the lower priority device(s); see also paragraphs 0087 & 0090, suspend data service to a communication device (as directed by profile))
Regarding Claim 13, Shaw teaches the respective claim(s) as presented above and further teaches wherein when executed the instructions further cause the at least one computing device to at least configure the network function to dynamically assign a network slice to the first client device based at least in part on the operator-specified rule (Shaw: paragraph 0110, allocate resources to domains to specific devices/groups of devices within the required aggregated QoS parameters and can prioritize the allocations).
Regarding Claim 14, Shaw teaches the respective claim(s) as presented above and further teaches wherein the radio-based network comprises a radio access network (Shaw: paragraph 0024 & Fig. A1, communication network), the network function is implemented in the radio access network (Shaw: paragraph 0025 & Fig. 1A), and the capacity limit corresponds to a maximum number of client devices concurrently served by the network function (Shaw: paragraph 0017, determine an aggregated set of QoS parameters needed to provide services within quality limits of the network for its totality of customers).
Regarding Claim 15, Shaw teaches A system, comprising:
a radio-based network (Shaw: paragraphs 0029-0030, cloud service provider; see also paragraph 0050, SDN network) comprised of a plurality of network functions (Shaw: paragraph 0050, network functions); and
at least one computing device (Shaw: paragraphs 0030-0031 & Fig. 1 manager SDN controller), configured to at least:
receive a request for a service (Shaw: paragraph 0059, Manager SDN Controller can receive or obtain the service request from communication device) from a radio-based network (Shaw: paragraphs 0029-0030, cloud service provider) from a first client device (Shaw: paragraph 0040, user devices that preempt (i.e. having resources shifted toward their usage and away from other lower priority user devices)):
determine that a network function in the radio-based network is at a capacity limit of a number of client devices capable of being serviced by the network function (Shaw: paragraphs 0072 & 0094, denying a service to a specific communication in response to (resulting) network outages and/or failures; see also paragraphs 0074 & 0083, approaching or exceeding available resources);
suspend the service from the network function to a second client device in response to determining that the network function in the radio-based network is at the capacity limit (Shaw: paragraph 0040, user devices that are preempted (i.e. have resources shift away from their usage and toward other higher priority user devices), thereby preventing and/or outright denying access to the service for the lower priority device(s); see also paragraphs 0087 & 0090, suspend data service to a communication device (as directed by profile)) and based at least in part on a rule set specific to the radio-based network that establishes a priority of the first client device over the second client device (Shaw: paragraph 0040, said user devices that preempt having higher priority than other lower priority user devices); and
provide the first client device access to the network function instead of the second client device (Shaw: paragraph 0040, user devices that preempt (i.e. having resources shifted toward their usage and away from other lower priority user devices), thus providing access to the network function of a first client device of higher priority).
Regarding Claim 16, Shaw teaches the respective claim(s) as presented above and further teaches receive a specification of the priority associated with the first client device from an operator of the radio-based network (Shaw: paragraph 0091, priority of communications assigned to the communication device); and
determine to provide the first client device the service from the network function instead of the second client device based at least in part on the priority (Shaw: paragraph 0040, user devices that preempt having higher priority than other lower priority user devices).
Regarding Claim 17, Shaw teaches the respective claim(s) as presented above and further teaches wherein the at least one computing device is configured to at least dynamically assign the first client device to a network slice in the radio-based network based at least in part on the rule set, the network slice being associated with a quality-of-service requirement (Shaw: paragraph 0110, allocate resources to domains to specific devices/groups of devices within the required aggregated QoS parameters and can prioritize the allocations).
Regarding Claim 8, Shaw teaches the respective claim(s) as presented above and further teaches wherein the at least one computing device is configured to at least scale computing resources allocated to the network function based at least in part on the rule set and in response to determining that the network function in the radio-based network is at the capacity limit (Shaw: paragraph 0104, SDN Controller can then dynamically adjust the resource allocation for each NF within each slice).
Regarding Claim 19, Shaw teaches the respective claim(s) as presented above and further teaches wherein the rule set configures the network function to fail in a predictable way in response to the capacity limit being reached while continuing to provide service to the first client device based at least in part on the priority (Shaw: paragraph 0072, if the Manager SDN Controller determines a shortage or shortfall in a needed resource, then the Manager SDN Controller can direct instantiation of one or more new SDN Controller to perform all or part of the requested service).
Regarding Claim 20, Shaw teaches the respective claim(s) as presented above and further teaches wherein network traffic from the second client device is associated with a higher quality-of-service parameter than network traffic from the first client device (Shaw: paragraph 0076, service level information associated with the communication devices to provide requested services according to Quality of Service (QoS) levels associated with the service level).
Response to Arguments
Applicants' arguments:
a) Shaw alone or in combination fails to teach determining a network function is at a capacity limit of a number of client devices capable of being serviced by the network function since congestion or outages referenced in Shaw may not necessarily be due to reaching a limit in terms of number of client devices capable of being serviced by a network function but instead may be caused by a smaller number of devices using excessive bandwidth (remarks, pages 9-10).
b) Shaw alone or in combination fails to teach receiving a capacity limit from an operator of a radio-based network (remarks, page 11).
c) Shaw alone or in combination fails to teach an operator-specified rule that prioritizes a service since the congestion or exceeding available resources is not associated with an operator-specified rule (remarks, page 12).
Examiner’s response:
Applicant's arguments filed 03/05/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding argument a), Shaw teaches a Manager SDN controller can determine one or more network functions that are needed or used to support a service request from one or more communication devices. As service requests are processed, the Manager SDN Controller can evaluate the service request requirements and compare the required resources and capacities for these resources with the resources and capacities currently available at the level 2 SDN Controllers (i.e. access resources at eNodeB controllers, RAN controllers, Gateways, User Plane etc.) (Shaw, paragraph 0070 & 0072-0073). As previously presented, Shaw teaches denying a service to a specific communication device in response to (resulting) network outages or failures when approaching or exceeding available resources (paragraphs 0072, 0074, 0083 & 0094) and further prioritizing resources for another communication device that is given priority over the service requested by the one or more of the communication devices (Shaw, paragraphs 0079, 0091 & 0094). Examiner notes since Shaw compares the required capacities of each respective controller with the current resources available for handling or processing a service request from a communication device and determines to deny a communication device resources and/or prioritize an additional communication device based on the comparison, Shaw similarly teaches determining whether a network function is able to service a request for resources from each communication device therefore determining a number of communication devices or client devices that are capable of being serviced by the network function based on the required resources needed or a capacity limit.
Regarding arguments b & c), Shaw specifically teaches the communication network is managed by an operator provider (Shaw, paragraph 0097). Examiner notes since the Manager SDN Controller denies a service to a specific communication device in response to (resulting) network outages or failures when approaching or exceeding available resources and/or prioritizes resources for another communication device that is given priority over the service requested by the one or more of the communication devices, Shaw inherently teaches the operator provided rules of denying or prioritizing a communication device thus teaching an operator-specified rule to deny and/or prioritize a given communication device.
Therefore the rejection(s) of claims 1-20 as being anticipated by Shaw is maintained.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 NAJEEB ANSARI whose telephone number is (571)270-5446. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 10am to 2pm.
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, ASAD NAWAZ can be reached at (571) 272-3988. 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.
/NAJEEB ANSARI/Examiner, Art Unit 2463
/ASAD M NAWAZ/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2463
Prosecution Insights