Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 17, 2026
Application No. 18/786,460

END-TO-END NETWORK SECURITY SERVICE FOR WORKLOADS ACROSS DIFFERENT NETWORK ENVIRONMENTS

Non-Final OA §101§103
Filed
Jul 27, 2024
Examiner
ROBINSON, CHRISTOPHER B
Art Unit
2443
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
level 3 communications LLC
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
89%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 2m
To Grant
96%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 89% — above average
89%
Career Allow Rate
422 granted / 472 resolved
+31.4% vs TC avg
Moderate +6% lift
Without
With
+6.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 2m
Avg Prosecution
27 currently pending
Career history
499
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
9.4%
-30.6% vs TC avg
§103
60.0%
+20.0% vs TC avg
§102
18.6%
-21.4% vs TC avg
§112
5.1%
-34.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 472 resolved cases

Office Action

§101 §103
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 (IDS) submitted on 07/30/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. 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(s) 1-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The claim(s) recite(s) generating a performance threshold (data analysis), simulating a network configuration (mathematical modeling) and selecting a network environment (decision making). These fall into recognized abstract ideas categories such as mathematical concepts and certain method of organizing human activity. This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the claim only recites a processing device and non-transitory computer-readable medium. The processing device is used to generate, simulate and select data. The medium is used to store the data. The processing device in the stated steps is recited at a high-level of generality (i.e., as a generic processor performing a generic computer function of ranking information based on a determined amount of use) such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Accordingly, this additional element does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claim is directed to an abstract idea. The claim does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the processor is generic and conventional. In addition, the non-transitory computer-readable storage medium is generic/conventional, running simulations is routine computer functions, generating threshold is abstract related modeling and choosing a network environment is abstract related logic and resource allocation. These are mere steps and instructions using a generic computer component to apply the exception, there is no inventive concept present. The claim is not patent eligible. 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. Claim(s) 1-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Canion et al. (US 2013/0346628 A1) and further in view of Chang et al. (US 2013/0297769 A1). Re Claim 1, Canion teaches a system for operating a network, the system comprising: a processing device; and a non-transitory computer-readable medium encoded with instructions, which when executed by the processing device, cause the processing device to: generate, based on a service parameter, a performance threshold value for providing a security service for network traffic corresponding to a destination workload; (Canion; FIG. 1-60; Background, Summary, ¶ simulate, on a model of a network configuration, providing the security services for the network traffic; and (Canion; FIG. 1-60; Background, Summary, ¶ [0083]-[0097]; Simulating/testing a model of network configuration, in which security related services/function for network traffic are provided.) Canion does not explicitly suggest select, based on a comparison of an output of the simulation to a performance threshold value, a network environment from a plurality of available network environments for instantiating the destination workload. However, in analogous art, Chang teaches select, based on a comparison of an output of the simulation to a performance threshold value, a network environment from a plurality of available network environments for instantiating the destination workload. (Chang; FIG. 1-7; Background, ¶ [0011]-[0013], [0050]-[0070]; The cited embodiment(s) detail comparable methodology that includes simulation of network conditions, that test security related functions and analyzes the data in order for the user to make a migration selection based on performance related metrics.) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to modify Canion in view of Chang to compare simulated output for environmental selection for the reasons of simulating and validating network resources in order to migration enterprise network environments. (Chang Abstract) Re Claim 2, Canion-Change teaches the system of claim 1 wherein the instructions further cause the processing device to: monitor a network performance value for providing the security services to the network traffic over a period of time; and (Canion; FIG. 1, 15; ¶ [0080]-[0084]; Monitoring network performance characteristics over a period of time.) modify the model of the network configuration based on the monitored network performance value. (Canion; FIG. 1-15; ¶ [0116], [0248], [0263], [0274]-[0278]; Modifying the models based on various parameters/characteristics related to testing and simulations.) Re Claim 3, Canion-Chang discloses the system of claim 1 wherein the instructions further cause the processing device to: migrate, based on the selection of the network environment, a secure communication tunnel to connect to the destination workload. (Chang; FIG. 1; ¶ [0013]-[0020], [0024]-[0028], [0037]-[0040]; Migrating a secure communication tunnel.) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to modify Canion in view of Chang to compare simulated output for environmental selection for the reasons of simulating and validating network resources in order to migration enterprise network environments. (Chang Abstract) Re Claim 4, Canion-Chang discloses the system of claim 1 wherein the network environment comprises at least one of a public cloud environment, a private cloud environment, or a compute environment of the network. (Change; FIG. 1; ¶ [0011]-[0017]; Public, enterprise related cloud environment.) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to modify Canion in view of Chang to compare simulated output for environmental selection for the reasons of simulating and validating network resources in order to migration enterprise network environments. (Chang Abstract) Re Claim 5, Canion-Chang discloses the system of claim 4 wherein the network performance values comprise one of a maximum transmission speed, an expected packet loss, or an available bandwidth. (Canion; FIG. 1; ¶ [0085], [0178]-[0203]; High-speed packet generation and measurement system.) Re Claim 6, Canion-Chang discloses the system of claim 5 wherein the performance threshold is based on a service level agreement. (Chang; FIG. 1; ¶ [0018], [0048], [0054]; Performance related SLA.) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to modify Canion in view of Chang to compare simulated output for environmental selection for the reasons of simulating and validating network resources in order to migration enterprise network environments. (Chang Abstract) Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER B ROBINSON whose telephone number is (571)270-0702. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:00-3:00 EST. 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, Nicholas R Taylor can be reached at 571-272-3889. 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. /CHRISTOPHER B ROBINSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2443
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 27, 2024
Application Filed
Dec 10, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §101, §103
Apr 02, 2026
Response Filed

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12604193
AUTOMATIC SWITCHING METHOD FOR INTRUSION DETECTION FUNCTION AND WIRELESS DETECTION SYSTEM CAPABLE OF AUTOMATICALLY SWITCHING INTRUSION DETECTION FUNCTION TRANSCEIVER
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12598084
External Authentication Method, Communication Apparatus, and Communication System
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12596835
PERSONAL FEATURE INFORMATION SECURITY ASSURANCE SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12598203
ANALYZING AND RECOMMENDING ROGUE CLASSIFICATION POLICIES FOR A COMMUNICATION NETWORK
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12593217
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR MANAGING APPLICATION AUTHENTICATION IN A WIRELESS NETWORK
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 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
89%
Grant Probability
96%
With Interview (+6.4%)
2y 2m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 472 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month