Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/692,657

METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR SELECTIVE IMPORTING IP ROUTE

Non-Final OA §101§102
Filed
Mar 15, 2024
Examiner
THAWNG, MANG BOI
Art Unit
2476
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Telefonaktiebolaget Lm Ericsson (Publ)
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
92%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 1m
To Grant
90%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 92% — above average
92%
Career Allow Rate
62 granted / 67 resolved
+34.5% vs TC avg
Minimal -2% lift
Without
With
+-2.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 1m
Avg Prosecution
24 currently pending
Career history
91
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.8%
-38.2% vs TC avg
§103
56.6%
+16.6% vs TC avg
§102
23.4%
-16.6% vs TC avg
§112
17.6%
-22.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 67 resolved cases

Office Action

§101 §102
DETAILED ACTION 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 . Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement(s) was/were submitted on 03/15/2024 and 07/01/2025. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement(s) is/are being considered by the examiner. Preliminary Amendment The present Office Action is based upon the original patent application filed as modified by the preliminary amendment filed on 03/15/2024. Claim(s) 1-13 are now pending in the present application. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101 35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows: Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title. Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claim(s) does/do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because “a computer-readable storage medium” is not precluded from being a signal per se under broadest reasonable interpretation. The disclosure ¶[0043] and ¶[0114]- ¶[0116] do not further define any hardware components which will make the claim statutory. Non-statutory subject matter such as software does not belong to one of the four statutory categories. This rejection will be withdraw and/or overcome if the claim is amended to recite “a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium”. 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. (a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claim(s) 1-3 and 7-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Sajassi et al. “Integrated Routing and Bridging in EVPN draft-ietf-bess-evpn-inter-subnet-forwarding-15”, IDS submitted on 07/01/2025, hereinafter referred to as Sajassi. Regarding claim 1, Sajassi teaches: A method performed by a first provider edge node in a network (Figure 4, PE2), comprising: receiving an Internet Protocol route for a customer device in a broadcast domain from a second provider edge node (Figure 4, PE1) in the network (Page 13, section 5.1, When a PE (e.g., PE1 in figure 4 above) 1earns MAC and IP address of a TS (e.g., via an ARP request or Neighbor So1icitation), it adds the MAC address to the corresponding MAC-VRF/bridge table of that tenant's subnet and adds the IP address to the IP-VRF for that tenant. Furthermore, it adds this TS's MAC and IP address association to its ARP tab1e or NDP cache. It then builds an EVPN MAC/IP Advertisement route (type 2) as fo11ows; section 5.2, When a PE (e.g., PE2 in figure 4 above) receives this EVPN MAC/IP Advertisement route; Page 18, section 6.2, When a PE (e.g., PE2 in figure 4 above) receives this EVPN MAC/IP Advertisement route, it performs the fo11owing); and determining whether to import the IP route to an IP routing table of the first provider edge node based on a policy (see Page 14, section 5.2, When a PE (e.g., PE2 in figure 4 above) receives this EVPN MAC/IP Advertisement route, it performs the fo11owing… The IP-VRF route target is used to identify the correct IP-VRF and if it is found the IP address is imported; Page 19, section 6.2, If IP-VRF route target is inc1uded, it may be used to import the route to IP-VRF. If IP-VRF route-target is not inc1uded, MAC-VRF is used to derive corresponding IP-VRF for import). Regarding claim 2, Sajassi teaches: The method according to claim 1, further comprising: importing the IP route to the IP routing table of the first provider edge node when determining to import the IP route to the IP routing table of the first provider edge node (see Page 14, section 5.2, When a PE (e.g., PE2 in figure 4 above) receives this EVPN MAC/IP Advertisement route, it performs the fo11owing… The IP-VRF route target is used to identify the correct IP-VRF and if it is found the IP address is imported; Page 19, section 6.2, When a PE (e.g., PE2 in figure 4 above) receives this EVPN MAC/IP Advertisement route, it performs the fo11owing…If IP-VRF route target is inc1uded, it may be used to import the route to IP-VRF. If IP-VRF route-target is not inc1uded, MAC-VRF is used to derive corresponding IP-VRF for import); and/or skipping importing the IP route to the IP routing table of the first provider edge node when determining to skip importing the IP route to the IP routing table of the first provider edge node. (Note: The limitation(s) of claim 2 is written in the alternative “and/or”, therefore, there only needs to be a showing that one of the alternative limitations is taught by the applied reference ) Regarding claim 3, Sajassi teaches: The method according to claim 1, wherein determining whether to import the IP route to an IP routing table of the first provider edge node based on a policy comprises: when at least one customer device connected to the first provider edge node is in the broadcast domain (Page 9, The following sections define the control and data plane procedures for symmetric and asymmetric IRB on ingress and egress PEs. The following figure is used to describe these procedures, showing a single IP-VRF and a number of broadcast domains on each PE for a given tenant. I.e., an IP-VRF connects one or more EVIs, each EVI contains one MAC-VRF, each MAC VRF consists of one or more bridge tables, one per broadcast domain, and a PE has an associated IRB interface for each broadcast domain; see FIG 4), determining to import the IP route to the IP routing table of the first provider edge node (Page 14, section 5.2, When a PE (e.g., PE2 in figure 4 above) receives this EVPN MAC/IP Advertisement route, it performs the fo11owing… The IP-VRF route target is used to identify the correct IP-VRF and if it is found the IP address is imported). Regarding claim 7, Sajassi teaches: The method according to claim 1, wherein the IP route comprises an Ethernet Virtual Private Network Medium Access Control/Internet Protocol Advertisement Route (Page 13, section 5.1, When a PE (e.g., PE1 in figure 4 above) 1earns MAC and IP address of a TS (e.g., via an ARP request or Neighbor So1icitation), it adds the MAC address to the corresponding MAC-VRF/bridge table of that tenant's subnet and adds the IP address to the IP-VRF for that tenant. Furthermore, it adds this TS's MAC and IP address association to its ARP tab1e or NDP cache. It then builds an EVPN MAC/IP Advertisement route (type 2) as fo11ows and advertises it to other PEs participating in that tenant's VPN). Regarding claim 8, Sajassi teaches: The method according to claim 1, wherein the IP routing table comprises a Virtual Private Network Routing and Forwarding table for IP routes (Page 14, section 5.2, When a PE (e.g., PE2 in figure 4 above) receives this EVPN MAC/IP Advertisement route, it performs the fo11owing: o The MAC-VRF route target and Ethernet Tag, if the 1atter is nonzero, are used to identify the correct MAC-VRF and bridge tab1e and if they are found the MAC address is imported. The IP-VRF route target is used to identify the correct IP-VRF and if it is found the IP address is imported; page 3, IP-VRF: A Virtual Routing and Forwarding table for IP routes on an NVE/PE). Regarding claim 9, Sajassi teaches: The method according to claim 1, wherein the broadcast domain corresponds to a Virtual Local Area Network (Page 3, Broadcast Domain: As per [RFC7432], an EVI consists of a single or mu1tiple broadcast domains. In the case of VLAN-bundle and VLAN based service model (see [RFC7432]), a broadcast domain is equivalent to an EVI. In the case of VLAN-aware bund1e service model, an EVI contains multiple broadcast domains). Regarding claim 10, Sajassi teaches: The method according to claim 1, wherein the network comprises Ethernet Virtual Private Network Integrated Routing and Bridging feature (see Figure 4, IRB forwarding; title, Integrated Routing and Bridging in EVPN). Regarding claim 11, Sajassi teaches: A first provider edge node in a network (Figure 4, provider edge device, PE2), comprising: a processor; and a memory coupled to the processor, said memory containing instructions executable by said processor ( it is well known in the art that networking device(s) such as provider edge (PE) comprise a processor and a memory), whereby said first provider edge node is operative to: receive an Internet Protocol route for a customer device in a broadcast domain from a second provider edge node (Figure 4, Provider edge device, PE1) in the network (Page 13, section 5.1, When a PE (e.g., PE1 in figure 4 above) 1earns MAC and IP address of a TS (e.g., via an ARP request or Neighbor So1icitation), it adds the MAC address to the corresponding MAC-VRF/bridge table of that tenant's subnet and adds the IP address to the IP-VRF for that tenant. Furthermore, it adds this TS's MAC and IP address association to its ARP tab1e or NDP cache. It then builds an EVPN MAC/IP Advertisement route (type 2) as fo11ows; section 5.2, When a PE (e.g., PE2 in figure 4 above) receives this EVPN MAC/IP Advertisement route; Page 18, section 6.2, When a PE (e.g., PE2 in figure 4 above) receives this EVPN MAC/IP Advertisement route, it performs the fo11owing); and determine whether to import the IP route to an IP routing table of the first provider edge node based on a policy (see Page 14, section 5.2, When a PE (e.g., PE2 in figure 4 above) receives this EVPN MAC/IP Advertisement route, it performs the fo11owing… The IP-VRF route target is used to identify the correct IP-VRF and if it is found the IP address is imported; Page 19, section 6.2, If IP-VRF route target is inc1uded, it may be used to import the route to IP-VRF. If IP-VRF route-target is not inc1uded, MAC-VRF is used to derive corresponding IP-VRF for import). Regarding claim 12, Sajassi teaches: The first provider edge node according to claim 11, wherein the first provider edge node is further operative to perform operations comprising: importing the IP route to the IP routing table of the first provider edge node when determining to import the IP route to the IP routing table of the first provider edge node (see Page 14, section 5.2, When a PE (e.g., PE2 in figure 4 above) receives this EVPN MAC/IP Advertisement route, it performs the fo11owing… The IP-VRF route target is used to identify the correct IP-VRF and if it is found the IP address is imported; Page 19, section 6.2, When a PE (e.g., PE2 in figure 4 above) receives this EVPN MAC/IP Advertisement route, it performs the fo11owing…If IP-VRF route target is inc1uded, it may be used to import the route to IP-VRF. If IP-VRF route-target is not inc1uded, MAC-VRF is used to derive corresponding IP-VRF for import); and/or skipping importing the IP route to the IP routing table of the first provider edge node when determining to skip importing the IP route to the IP routing table of the first provider edge node. (Note: The limitation(s) of claim 12 is written in the alternative “and/or”, therefore, there only needs to be a showing that one of the alternative limitations is taught by the applied reference ) Allowable Subject Matter Claim(s) 4-6 is/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. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Mohanty et al. ( US 2022/0255835 A1), Integrated routing and bridging route reduction in ethernet virtual private network Thoria et al. ( US 2022/0417141 A1), Interoperability between symmetric and asymmetric evpn irb modes Thoria et al. ( US 2021/0392069 A1), Multiple network interfacing Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MANG BOI THAWNG whose telephone number is (703)756-4751. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30 am - 5:00 pm. 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, Ayaz Sheikh can be reached at (571)272-3795. 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. /MANG BOI THAWNG/Examiner, Art Unit 2476 /AYAZ R SHEIKH/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2476
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 15, 2024
Application Filed
Mar 12, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §101, §102 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12587895
MANAGING THE QOS OF AN END-TO-END APPLICATION SESSION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12580713
UPDATING BANDWIDTH PART WIDTH FROM DEFAULT CONFIGURATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12574798
ENHANCEMENTS TO 5G ACCESS TRANSPORT STEERING SWITCHING & SPLITTING FOR STEERING NETWORK TRAFFIC
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12562863
TRP-Specific PUSCH Transmissions for Multi-TRP Operation
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12556965
LOGICAL CHANNEL GROUPS FOR SIDELINK BUFFER STATUS REPORT FORWARDING
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
92%
Grant Probability
90%
With Interview (-2.4%)
3y 1m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 67 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