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 .
Detailed Action
This action is responsive to the application 18/768,213 filed on July 10, 2024. Claims 1-20 are pending.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-20 (hereafter “examined claim”) are rejected on the ground of non-statutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 (hereafter “patent claim”) of U.S. Patent No. 12,107,740. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because limitations of the patent claim 1 anticipates the limitations of the examined claim 1 (see claims comparison table below). The patent claim teaches substantially the same limitations as those recited in the examined claim. Therefore, Examiner finds these claims to be patentably indistinct from each other.
The examined claims 2-20 recite limitations similar to those of the patent claims 2-20 and are therefore also rejected as dependent therefrom.
This is a non-statutory double patenting rejection.
Examined claim 1
A method comprising:
obtaining one or more input service level parameters for at least one service related to an application; and
based on the one or more input service level parameters, providing one or more target service level parameters to one or more network controllers to configure the one or more network controllers to enforce the one or more target service level parameters in a network domain that carries traffic for the application.
Patent claim 1
A method comprising:
obtaining one or more input service level parameters for at least one service offered by an application; and
based on the one or more input service level parameters, providing one or more target service level parameters to a plurality of network controllers, wherein each network controller of the plurality of network controllers is configured to enforce the one or more target service level parameters in a respective network domain configured to carry network traffic associated with the application.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-20 are allowed over prior art. Applicant is advised to file Terminal Disclaimer to overcome the Double Patenting Rejection in order to advance the prosecution of the application.
Reasons for Allowance
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: the prior art does not teach nor would it be obvious to one ordinary skill in the art to combine the teach. For example, the independent claims contain limitations, obtaining one or more input service level parameters for at least one service related to an application; and based on the obtained one or more input service level parameter, providing one or more target service level parameters to one or more network controllers to enforce the one or more target service level parameters in a network domain that carries traffic for the application. Thus, the Examiner agrees that the limitations of the totality of independent claims, within its environment, is allowable subject matter over the prior art in light of specification.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure (see PTO-892).
US 8,572,235 issued to Eslambolchi et al., teaches providing operational status of monitored assets at the service level of a complex information technology infrastructure.
US 8,429,097 issued to Sivasubramanian et al., teaches providing dynamic resource allocation through resource isolation in computing environment using reinforcement learning techniques and domain specific constraints.
US 6,728,748 issued to Mangipudi et al., teaches providing policy that based class of service and adaptive service level management within the context of an internet and intranet.
Correspondence Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MINH CHAU N NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-4242. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 8am-4pm.
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, TONIA DOLLINGER can be reached on (571)272-4170. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/MINH CHAU NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2459