Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/797,702

SERVICE MANAGEMENT AND ORCHESTRATION (SMO) BASED ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE OR MACHINE LEARNING MODEL MANAGEMENT

Non-Final OA §102
Filed
Aug 08, 2024
Examiner
MUNDUR, PADMAVATHI V
Art Unit
2441
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Qualcomm Incorporated
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
82%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 5m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 82% — above average
82%
Career Allow Rate
434 granted / 529 resolved
+24.0% vs TC avg
Strong +25% interview lift
Without
With
+25.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 5m
Avg Prosecution
17 currently pending
Career history
546
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
10.2%
-29.8% vs TC avg
§103
36.9%
-3.1% vs TC avg
§102
18.0%
-22.0% vs TC avg
§112
27.0%
-13.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 529 resolved cases

Office Action

§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 . 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)(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. Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Pravinchandra Bhatt et al. (US 2023/0344652 A1, hereinafter Bhatt). Regarding claim 1, Bhatt teaches a method, comprising: identifying, by a Service Management and Orchestration (SMO) framework, at least one data model to manage an artificial intelligence or machine learning (AI/ML) model associated with a Network Function (NF) via at least one management function, [Abstract, certificate update trigger for a network function (data model) using AI/ML model; Par,[0045] describes CUO as part of SMO and NMS for management functions]; receiving, by the SMO framework, AI/ML associated data from the NF via the at least one management function according to the data model, [Abstract, Par.[0043], [0046] receives information (in this case about certificate update procedure) from a NF to use an associated AI/ML model; Figurers 2 and 3 and associated description]; updating, by the SMO framework, a network configuration based on the AI/ML associated data, [Par.[0047] among others describes update to network configurations based on certificate update schedule using AI/ML model; Par.[0064] The CUO can apply the AI/ML model 210 to determine an optimum schedule for certificate updates for network function]; and transmitting, by the SMO framework, the updated network configuration to the NF to control wireless communications, [Par.[0048] among others describes CUO/SMO triggers the network function to perform certificate updates based on updated schedule; see Figures 4, 6 among others]. Claim 13 corresponds to claim 1 and Figure 1, 4-7 show various system related elements. Regarding claim 2, Bhatt teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the at least one data model comprises at least one of a configuration data model, a performance data model, or a fault data model, wherein the configuration data model comprises at least one AI/ML configuration parameter, [Abstract, Par.[0043], [0046] receives configuration related information (in this case about certificate update procedure) from a NF to use an associated AI/ML model to determine a schedule (configuration parameter)], wherein the performance data model comprises at least one AI/ML performance measurement indication, [notice that the certificate update procedure may relate to performance also as in Par.[0050] monitoring network performance parameters], and wherein the fault data model comprises at least one AI/ML fault indication, [notice that the certificate update procedure may relate to fault/failure also due to expiration and unavailability]. Regarding claim 3, Bhatt teaches the method of claim 2, further comprising: updating the at least one AI/ML configuration parameter based on the AI/ML associated data, [Par.[0043] update schedule using AI/ML model; and transmitting the at least one AI/ML configuration parameter to the NF to apply the at least one AI/ML configuration parameter to the AI/ML model using an online model update, an offline model update, or an external framework, [Par.[0046] describes CUO/DB to train the AI/ML model for predicting the time/schedule required for updating certificates; Par.[0064] The CUO can apply the AI/ML model 210 to determine an optimum schedule for certificate updates for various network functions; see also Par.[0055]. [0059] for a framework to train/update AI/ML model]. Regarding claim 4, Bhatt teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the at least one data model comprises an AI/ML data model, and wherein the AI/ML data model comprises at least one AI/ML configuration parameter, [Abstract, Par.[0043], [0046] receives configuration related information (in this case about certificate update procedure) from a NF to use an associated AI/ML model to determine a schedule (configuration parameter)], at least one AI/ML performance measurement indication. [notice that the certificate update procedure may relate to performance also as in Par.[0050] monitoring network performance parameters], and at least one AI/ML fault indication, [notice that the certificate update procedure may relate to fault/failure also due to expiration and unavailability]. Regarding claim 5, Bhatt teaches the method of claim 4, wherein the at least one management function comprises a management function to use the at least one AI/ML configuration parameter, the at least one AI/ML performance measurement indication, and the at least one AI/ML fault indication, [claim is not clear about what management function does and is interpreted as managing AI/ML model meaning training and updating the model itself, in addition to the citation in claim 4, see Par.[0054], [0055], [0059], [0064] about training and updating the AI/ML model]. Regarding claim 6, Bhatt teaches the method of claim 4, wherein the at least one management function comprises a plurality of management functions corresponding to the at least one AI/ML configuration parameter, the at least one AI/ML performance measurement indication, and the at least one AI/ML fault indication, [claim is not clear about what management function does and is interpreted as CUO/SMO managing AI/ML model meaning training and updating the model itself, in addition to the citation in claim 4, see Par.[0054], [0055], [0059], [0064] about training and updating the AI/ML model]. Regarding claim 7, Bhatt teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising: receiving network operation information from the NF, wherein the updated network configuration is further determined based on the network operation information, [Abstract and elsewhere from the citations above, certificate information (network operation from the NF) and CUO/SMO determines a schedule for triggering certificate update (updated network configuration)]. Regarding claim 8, Bhatt teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising: training a second AI/ML model associated with the AI/ML model, re-training the AI/ML model, or using a different trained version of the AI/ML model based on the AI/ML associated data to determine the updated network configuration associated with the AI/ML model, [claim recited in the alternative; see Par.[0054], [0055], [0059], [0064] about training and updating the AI/ML model]. Regarding claim 9, Bhatt teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising: registering the at least one management function associated with the AI/ML model in a service registry of the SMO framework to be discovered by a service consumer, [Par.[0045] CUO acts as part of a management function installed in SMO framework for managing certificate updates using an associated AI/ML model; CA/RA in Figure 1 and Par.[0052] for service consumer aspect of an operator]. Regarding claim 10, Bhatt teaches the method of claim 9, further comprising: managing authorization of the service consumer to access the at least one data model, CA/RA in Figure 1 and Par.[0052] The system 100 may also comprise a certification authority (CA) or registration authority (RA) 150 of an operator. The CA/RA 150 may transmit an announcement about certificate revocation to the CUO 110. The network functions 130 may execute certificate update procedure with the CA/RA]. Regarding claim 11, Bhatt teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the NF comprises a physical network function, and wherein transmitting the updated network configuration using an adapter in the SMO framework, [Par.[0046] describes network functions may be physical network functions and Par.[0048] describes CUO/SMO triggers the network functions to perform certificate updates based on updated schedule; see Figures 4, 6]. Regarding claim 12, Bhatt teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the NF is a first network function of a radio access network (RAN) or a second network function of a core network, [Figure 1 and Par.[0045]]. Claim 14 corresponds to claim 2 and is rejected as above. Claim 15 corresponds to claim 3 and is rejected as above. Claim 16 corresponds to claim 5 and is rejected as above. Claim 17 corresponds to claim 6 and is rejected as above. Claim 18 corresponds to claim 7 and is rejected as above. Claim 19 corresponds to claim 8 and is rejected as above. Claim 20 corresponds to claims 9 and 10 together and is rejected as above. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PADMA MUNDUR whose telephone number is (571)272-5383. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30 AM to 6:00 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, Nicholas 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. /PADMA MUNDUR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2441
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 08, 2024
Application Filed
Feb 18, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12603821
NETWORK SLICE FEASIBILITY ASSESSMENT FOR A LATENCY-BASED SERVICE LEVEL AGREEMENT (SLA)
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12603815
STATE-BASED ENTITY BEHAVIOR ANALYSIS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12603934
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR SCHEDULING PACKAGES TO SYNCHRONIZE CONTENT ACROSS COMPUTER SYSTEMS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12598115
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR PUSH-BASED DATA COMMUNICATIONS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12592856
DISTRIBUTED COORDINATION BETWEEN CONCURRENT ML FUNCTIONS
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
82%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+25.1%)
2y 5m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 529 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