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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on August 14, 2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
The amendments filed on August 14, 2026 have been entered. Claims 1, 11, 13, 24, and 36 have been amended. Claims 2-4, 6-9, 14-20, 22, 23, 25-32, 34, 35, and 37-43 have been cancelled. Claims 1, 5, 10-13, 21, 24 , 33, and 36 remain pending in the application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed on August 14, 2026 in response to the Final Office Action dated May 15, 2026 have been fully considered.
Regarding claim objections:
The amendments fails to overcome the claim objection related to the phrase “a layer 4 protocol connection”, recited in line 18 of claim 1. All subsequent recital of this phrase should be “the layer 4 protocol connection”. Similar amendment is needed for the other independent claims.
Regarding 35 U.S.C. 112 (b) rejections of independent claims 1 and 36:
The amendments overcome the previous 35 U.S.C. 112 (b) rejections of independent claims 1 and 36. Therefore, the previous 35 U.S.C. 112 (b) rejections are withdrawn.
Regarding 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection of claim 1:
Applicant argues, in page 12 and 13 of the Remarks, “What Landais completely fails to disclose or suggest is "the network function comprising a network function of a 3rd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP) fifth generation system and two or more workloads, the two or more workloads being a specific application, service, capability or a specific amount of work that can be run on a cloud resource" as recited in amended independent Claims 1, 13, 24 and 36. Landais teaches that a failure of an NF instance such as e.g., SMF, may be detected by heartbeat messages and upon failure, the specific SMF may be registered as 'suspended' and this information may be conveyed to the other NFs. While Landais teaches about a method to detect failure of a NF instance, the claimed solution rather discloses a method to detect failure of a connection to a specific workload when the NF instance e.g., SMF comprises multiple workloads. The claimed solution further teaches to delete only the specific connection to that workload of the NF instance without suspending the entire NF instance. Landais never discloses determining that a workload of two or more workloads a network function is out of service wherein the two or more workloads are specific applications, services, capabilities or amounts of work that can be run on a cloud resource as variously recited in amended independent Claims 1, 13, 24 and 36.”.
In response, Examiner respectfully disagrees. Paragraph 0058 of Landais discloses network functions are part of fifth-generation (5G) architecture. Paragraph 0025 discloses 3GPP. Paragraph 025 discloses V-SMF and H-SMH instances i.e. the claimed two or more workloads. Paragraph 0028 discloses determining failure of an instance of SMF. Paragraph 0028 also discloses sending a message to AMF/NF to delete the active status of the instance of the SMF and modified it to suspended. Therefore, Landais teaches the SMF comprises multiple instances and failure of a particular instances causes connection information of that particular instance to be modified. Landais does not explicitly teach the instances of the SMF being deployed on a cloud node. Paragraph 0029 of Radunovic teaches VNF application instances are implemented as virtual machine in the cloud. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Landais to incorporate the teaching of Radunovic about implementing VNF in the cloud. One would be motivated to use cloud to virtualize networks services more efficiently (see paragraphs 0002 of Radunovic).
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 13, 24, and 36 are objected to because of the following informalities:
the phrase “the layer 4 connection”, recited in claim 1, should be amended as “the layer 4 protocol connection”.
the phrase “the layer 4 connection”, recited in claim 13, should be amended as “the layer 4 protocol connection”.
the phrase “the layer 4 connection”, recited in claim 24, should be amended as “the layer 4 protocol connection”.
the phrase “the layer4 connection”, recited in claim 36, should be amended as “the layer 4 protocol connection”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Examiner’s Note about the Format of 35 U.S.C. 102/103 Rejections
Generally, limitations of a claim are reproduced identically and followed by examiner’s explanation with citation from prior art in Italic enclosed by a parenthesis, (), for each limitation. In examiner’s explanation, the mapping of the key elements of a limitation to the disclosed elements of prior art is shown by stating the disclosed element immediately followed by the claimed element inside a parenthesis. Specific quotation from prior art is delineated with quotation mark, ““. If primary art fails to teach a limitation or part of the limitation, the limitation or the part of the limitation is placed inside double square brackets, [[ ]], for better understandability, and appropriate secondary art(s) is/are applied later addressing the deficiency of the primary art.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1, 5, 10-13, 21, 24, 33, and 36 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Landais (US PGPUB No. US 20210306211 A1), hereinafter, Landais, in view of Radunovic et al. (US PGPUB No. US 20200272525 A1), hereinafter, Radunovic.
Regarding claim 1:
Landais teaches:
A method performed by a monitoring function, comprising (Fig. 3 shows NRF (monitoring function)):
receiving a heartbeat message from a workload at a predetermined period, [[the workload being deployed on a cloud node]] (paragraph 0030 discloses receiving heartbeat from a SMF instance (workload));
determining that the workload of a network function is out of service (paragraph 0028 discloses determining failure of an instance of SMF (network function) as stated “In such an example scenario, one or more AMFs may detect an SMF (or PDUSession service) instance failure by receiving no responses to signaling sent from the SMF (or PDUSession service) instance. AMFs (and/or other NFs, for example) may also subscribe to the NRF to be notified regarding NF instance status changes (such as NF profile changes and/or NF deregistration events, for example). Consequently the NRF can detect an NF instance failure using the NRF heartbeat mechanism, then responsively change a status indicator (such as by changing the NFStatus value of the NF instance to SUSPENDED, for example), and notify one or more subscribed NFs that the given NF instances is suspended and/or deregistered),
the network function comprising a network function of a 3rd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP) fifth generation system and two or more workloads, the two or more workloads being a specific application, service, capability or a specific amount of work that [[can be run on a cloud resource]], the workload being determined as out of service based on at least one of: the monitoring function cannot receive the heartbeat message from the workload within the predetermined period; and a predefined number of heartbeat messages are not received from the workload (paragraph 0058 discloses network functions are part of fifth-generation (5G) architecture. Paragraph 0025 discloses 3GPP. Paragraph 028 discloses out of service is determined based on not receiving heartbeat signal. Paragraph 0086 discloses heartbeat interval. Therefore, the failure is detected based not receiving heartbeat with predetermined period. Paragraph 025 discloses V-SMF and H-SMH instances (two or more workloads) with V-SMF and H-SMF services); and
sending a message to a connection management function, the message requesting the connection management function to delete at least one connection record of at least one connection related to the workload from a connection tracking system (paragraph 0028 discloses sending a message to AMF/NF (connection management function) to delete the active status of the instance of the SMF and modified it to suspended. Also see paragraph 0054-0055 disclosing removing information of the failed service instance and updating NF profile. Paragraph 0076 discloses clean up action after receiving status message),
the at least one connection comprises [[a layer 4 protocol connection, the layer 4 connection]] comprising a long lived layer 4 connection using an Service Based Interface (SBI) (paragraph 0024 discloses 5G core uses service based architecture. Therefore, connection involving SMF uses service based interface. As paragraph 0065 discloses connection state monitoring via heartbeat, the connection is a long-lived connection).
Landais does not explicitly teach the workload being deployed on a cloud node; can be run on a cloud resource; a layer 4 protocol connection.
Radunovic teaches the workload being deployed on a cloud node; can be run on a cloud resource; a layer 4 protocol connection (paragraph 0029 discloses VNF application instances are implemented as virtual machine in the cloud. Fig. 7B shows plurality of instances of SMF. Paragraph 0060 discloses connection with SCTP (layer 4 protocol)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Landais to incorporate the teaching of Radunovic about virtual machine in the cloud and layer 4 connection. One would be motivated to use cloud to virtualize networks service more efficiently and to use SCTP for storing connection state individually (see paragraphs 0002 and 00049 of Radunovic).
As to claim 5, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated. Landais in view of Radunovic teaches all the limitations of claim 1 as shown above.
Landais further teaches wherein the network function of the 3GPP fifth generation system comprises at least one of: Session Management Function (SMF)[[,]];Access and mobility Function (AMF); Authentication Service Function (AUSF); Unified Data Management (UDM); Policy Control Function (PCF); Application Function (AF); Network Exposure Function (NEF); User plane Function (UPF); Network Repository Function (NRF); service communication proxy (SCP); network data analytics function (NWDAF); Network Slice Selection Function (NSSF); Network Slice-Specific Authentication and Authorization Function (NSSAAF); or Network Slice Admission Control Function (NSACF) (Fig. 3 shows the network function is SMF).
As to claim 10, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated. Landais in view of Radunovic teaches all the limitations of claim 1 as shown above.
Landais do not teach wherein a load balancer is responsible for forwarding initial traffic of a connection from a consumer of the network function to a selected workload of the network function, the connection tracking system is responsible for recording a path of the initial traffic to the selected workload, and subsequent traffic of the connection from the consumer of the network function is forwarded to the selected workload according to the path of the initial traffic.
Radunovic teaches wherein a load balancer is responsible for forwarding initial traffic of a connection from a consumer of the network function to a selected workload of the network function, the connection tracking system is responsible for recording a path of the initial traffic to the selected workload, and subsequent traffic of the connection from the consumer of the network function is forwarded to the selected workload according to the path of the initial traffic (paragraph 0036 discloses load balancer delivers all packets for a particular flow to the target VNF instance. Paragraph 0037 discloses storing metadata for each flow and corresponding VNF instance for forwarding subsequent packets. Paragraph 0038 discloses metadata is extracted from initial packet and stored for subsequent traffic forwarding ).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Landais to incorporate the teaching of Radunovic about storing metadata for each flow and corresponding VNF instance for forwarding subsequent packets. One would be motivated to do that for efficient delivery of packets related to a particular user context (see paragraphs 0031 of Radunovic).
As to claim 11, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated. Landais in view of Radunovic teaches all the limitations of claim 1 as shown above.
Landais does not teach wherein a connection record in the connection tracking system comprises at least one of source address, destination address, source port number, destination port number, layer-4 protocol information, or layer-3 protocol information.
Radunovic teaches wherein a connection record in the connection tracking system comprises at least one of source address, destination address, source port number, destination port number, layer-4 protocol information, or layer-3 protocol information (paragraph 0060 discloses SCTP packet with SA, DA, SP, DP ).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Landais to incorporate the teaching of Radunovic about SCTP packet with SA, DA, SP, DP. One would be motivated to do that for storing connection state individually (see paragraph 0049 of Radunovic).
As to claim 12, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated. Landais in view of Radunovic teaches all the limitations of claim 1 as shown above.
Landais does not teach wherein a connection record in the connection tracking system comprises a 5 tuple record or entry.
Radunovic teach wherein a connection record in the connection tracking system comprises a 5 tuple record or entry (Fig. 3 shows stored metadata of each flow. Paragraph 0060 discloses SCTP packet with SA, DA, SP, DP. Also see paragraph 0039).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Landais to incorporate the teaching of Radunovic about SCTP packet with SA, DA, SP, DP. One would be motivated to do that for storing connection state individually (see paragraph 0049 of Radunovic).
Regarding claim 13:
Landais teaches:
A method performed by a connection management function, the method comprising (Fig. 3 shows AMF (connection management function)):
receiving a message from a monitoring function, the message requesting the connection management function to delete at least one connection record of at least one connection related to a workload of a network function from a connection tracking system (paragraph 0066 disclose receiving a message from NRF (connection monitoring function) to delete the active status of a instance (workload) of a SMF (network function) and modified it to suspended.),
[[the workload being deployed on a cloud node]], the network function comprising a network function of a 3rd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP) fifth generation system and two or more workloads, the two or more workloads being a specific application, service, capability or a specific amount of work that [[can be run on a cloud resource]], the at least one connection comprising [[a layer 4 protocol connection]], the layer-4 connection comprising a long lived layer 4 connection using an Service Based Interface (SBI) interface (paragraph 0058 discloses network functions are part of fifth-generation (5G) architecture. Paragraph 0025 discloses 3GPP. Paragraph 0024 discloses 5G core uses service based architecture. Therefore, connection involving SMF uses service based interface. Paragraph 025 discloses V-SMF and H-SMH instances (two or more workloads) with V-SMF and H-SMF services. As paragraph 0065 discloses connection state monitoring via heartbeat, the connection is a long-lived connection); and
deleting the at least one connection record of the at least one connection related to the workload of the network function from the connection tracking system by sending a command to the connection tracking system to delete the at least one connection record of the at least one connection related to the workload of the network function, the command comprising information of the at least one connection record or the identity of the workload (paragraph 0028 discloses sending a message to AMF/NF to delete the active status of the instance of the SMF and modified it to suspended. Paragraph 0076 discloses clean up action of the instances of the NF after receiving the status message as stated “Upon receiving the indication that the NF Status of NF(B) 504 is SUSPENDED, NF(A) 502 and/or any other relevant NFs may trigger appropriate restoration and/or clean-up actions to address the impact of the change in status of NF(B) 504.”. Also see paragraph 0054-0055 disclosing removing information of the failed service instance and updating NF profile. The clean-up action inherently include command with identification of the failed instance of NF ).
Landais does not explicitly teach the workload being deployed on a cloud node; can be run on a cloud resource ; a layer 4 protocol connection.
Radunovic teaches the workload being deployed on a cloud node; can be run on a cloud resource ; a layer 4 protocol connection (paragraph 0029 discloses VNF application instances are implemented as virtual machine in the cloud. Paragraph 0060 discloses connection with SCTP (layer 4 protocol)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Landais to incorporate the teaching of Radunovic about virtual machine in the cloud and layer 4 connection. One would be motivated to use cloud to virtualize networks service more efficiently and to use SCTP for storing connection state individually (see paragraphs 0002 and 00049 of Radunovic).
Claim 21 recites limitations similar to claim 10. Accordingly, it is rejected under similar rationale.
Regarding claim 24:
Landais teaches:
A method performed by a workload of a network function, the method comprising: sending a heartbeat message to a monitoring function at a predetermined period, the network function comprising a network function of a 3rd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP) fifth generation system and two or more workloads, the two or more workloads being a specific application, service, capability or a specific amount of work that [[can be run on a cloud resource, the workload being deployed on a cloud node]], a connection served by the workload comprising [[a layer 4 protocol connection]], the layer 4 connection comprising a long lived layer 4 connection using an Service Based Interface (SBI), the heartbeat message being used for determining whether the workload of the network function is out of service (paragraph 0030 discloses an instance (workload) of SMF (network function) sends heartbeat to NRF (monitoring function). Paragraph 0086 discloses heartbeat interval. Fig. 3 shows NRF. Paragraph 0058 discloses network functions are part of fifth-generation (5G) architecture. Paragraph 0025 discloses 3GPP. Paragraph 0024 discloses 5G core uses service based architecture. Therefore, connection involving SMF uses service based interface. Paragraph 025 discloses V-SMF and H-SMH instances (two or more workloads) with V-SMF and H-SMF services. As paragraph 0065 discloses connection state monitoring via heartbeat, the connection is a long-lived connection. Paragraph 0028 discloses determining failure of an instance of SMF (network function) as stated “In such an example scenario, one or more AMFs may detect an SMF (or PDUSession service) instance failure by receiving no responses to signaling sent from the SMF (or PDUSession service) instance. AMFs (and/or other NFs, for example) may also subscribe to the NRF to be notified regarding NF instance status changes (such as NF profile changes and/or NF deregistration events, for example). Consequently the NRF can detect an NF instance failure using the NRF heartbeat mechanism, then responsively change a status indicator (such as by changing the NFStatus value of the NF instance to SUSPENDED, for example), and notify one or more subscribed NFs that the given NF instances is suspended and/or deregistered),
the workload being determined as out of service based on at least one of: the monitoring function cannot receive the heartbeat message from the workload within the predetermined period; and a predefined number of heartbeat messages are not received from the workload (paragraph 0028 discloses out of service is determined based on not receiving heartbeat signal as stated. Paragraph 0086 discloses heartbeat interval. Therefore, the failure is detected based not receiving heartbeat with predetermined period).
Landais does not explicitly teach can be run on a cloud resource, the workload being deployed on a cloud node; a layer 4 protocol connection.
Radunovic teaches can be run on a cloud resource, the workload being deployed on a cloud node; a layer 4 protocol connection (paragraph 0029 discloses VNF application instances are implemented as virtual machine in the cloud. paragraph 0060 discloses connection with SCTP (layer 4 protocol)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Landais to incorporate the teaching of Radunovic about virtual machine in the cloud and layer 4 connection. One would be motivated to use cloud to virtualize networks service more efficiently and to use SCTP for storing connection state individually (see paragraphs 0002 and 00049 of Radunovic).
Claim 33 recites limitations similar to claim 10. Accordingly, it is rejected under similar rationale.
Regarding claim 36:
Claim 36 is directed towards a monitoring function performing the method of claim 1. Accordingly, it is rejected under similar rationale.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KAMAL M HOSSAIN whose telephone number is (571)270-3070. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30-5:30 M-F.
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, John Follansbee can be reached at (571)272-3964. 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.
August 21, 2026
/KAMAL M HOSSAIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2444
Prosecution Insights