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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 07/13/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. -Regarding 112 rejection, applicant argued that the specification as amended provides support for the claim limitation rejected for 112a.
Examiner respectfully disagrees:
The specification as originally filed on 05/16/2024 should have a written description support for claim limitations. Amending the specification at a later date after the application prosecution started to provide support for claim amendments amounts to adding a new matter to the specification and the claims. At the time the specification was originally filed on 05/16/2024, the specification does not have written description support for the limitation “a preset concurrency degree”. Applicant amended , the disclosure as an example [0001], [0006], [0009] and many more paragraphs. In [0009], applicant amended the disclosure that comprise “concurrency degree of a preset seed network element” as originally filed to “a preset concurrency degree of the time of original filing. The amendments to the disclosure could not provide written description support for the claim amendments.
-Regarding 103 rejection, the rejection is withdrawn, hence applicant`s arguments are moot for this ground of rejection.
Objection To New Matter Added to Specification
The amendment filed 02/11/2026, 03/12/2026, and 04/01/2026 is objected to under 35 U.S.C. 132(a) because it introduces new matter into the disclosure. 35 U.S.C. 132(a) states that no amendment shall introduce new matter into the disclosure of the invention. The added material which is not supported by the original disclosure is as follows:
-Applicant amended at least [0001], [0006], [0009], [0029], [0048], [0049], and [0055] of the disclosure , that was originally filed on 05/16/2024.
Applicant is required to cancel all amendments to the disclosure added after the original filing date 05/16/2024 in the reply to this Office Action.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
1/ Claims 1, and 4-6, and 9-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claims 1 and 10 comprises a limitation “a preset concurrency degree” where this limitation does not have a support in specification originally filed on 05/16/2024.
Specifications filed in 04/01/2026, 02/11/2026 and 03/12/2026 have content such as “preset concurrency degree of the seed network element” in paragraphs [0006], [0009], [0028], [0048], [0049], [0055] where this content is a new addition to originally filed specification filed on 05/16/2024 and are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The specification contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed. The newly added amendment to the disclosure could not be written description support for the above claim limitation. Further, the specification amended paragraph [0001] of the disclosure to include “the entirety of which is incorporated by reference” statement to pull support from priority documents. The amendment to paragraph [0001] is not proper, and the above limitation does not have written description support from originally filed specification on 05/16/2024.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 20180192294.
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 MESSERET F. GEBRE whose telephone number is (571)272-8272. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 am-5:30PM.
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, Oscar Louie can be reached at 5712701684. 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.
/MESSERET F GEBRE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2445
Prosecution Insights