Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/836,607

Counterfactual and Recourse Method for Recommending Network Configurations towards Favorable Outcome

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Aug 07, 2024
Examiner
CHRISTENSEN, SCOTT B
Art Unit
2444
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Telefonaktiebolaget Lm Ericsson (Publ)
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
78%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 5m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 78% — above average
78%
Career Allow Rate
764 granted / 983 resolved
+19.7% vs TC avg
Strong +33% interview lift
Without
With
+32.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 5m
Avg Prosecution
40 currently pending
Career history
1023
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
10.0%
-30.0% vs TC avg
§103
51.6%
+11.6% vs TC avg
§102
14.1%
-25.9% vs TC avg
§112
13.1%
-26.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 983 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 § 103 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) 29-48 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2017/0272317 (Singla) in view of US 2022/0231939 (Mermoud). With regard to claim 29, Singla discloses a method for improving communication network performance, the method comprising: identifying a favorability status of individual predictions and/or decisions of a plurality of predictions and/or decisions of a machine-learning algorithm acting on at least a portion of the communication network, and providing said favorability statuses along with corresponding values of network parameters used as features in the machine-learning algorithm (Singla: Abstract, Paragraphs [0062] and [0242] to [0252], and Figure 25. Singla teaches the use of machine learning techniques to optimize Wi-Fi networks, where a favorability status (e.g. optimized Wi-Fi networks, such as, for example, networks with minimal interference.) is at least recognized for the optimizations (e.g. minimal interference). Singla fails to disclose expressly, but Mermoud teaches: that the favorability statuses are stored; generating a counterfactual algorithm based on the stored favorability statuses and corresponding values of network parameters, to derive rules for producing a favorable status, based on one or more of the network parameters; identifying a proposed recourse action comprising a change in at least one of the network parameters, based on the rules derived in the counterfactual algorithm; generating a decision network and determining a confidence level estimating a reliability of achieving a favorable status by changing the at least one network parameter; and determining whether to implement the proposed recourse action on the communication network, based on the confidence level (Mermoud: Abstract, Paragraphs [0034] and [0070], and Figure 7. Mermoud teaches the use of counterfactual explanations to make predictions as to whether an SLA (stored favorability status) would be violated, and can cause actions to be performed responsive to the likelihoods of violations (confidence levels).). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to utilize counterfactual algorithms (an algorithm that involves counterfactuals, such as counterfactual explanations) to perform the optimizations of Singla based on specific requirements/goals, such as an SLA (favorability status) to ensure that the configuration meets any requirements of the users of the networks while performing the least amount of change needed to realize any optimizations of the network (Singla: Abstract, Paragraphs [0062] and [0242] to [0252], and Figure 25 and Mermoud: Paragraphs [0070] and [0081]). With regard to claim 30, Singla in view of Mermoud teaches implementing the change in the at least one network parameter, in response to determining that the confidence level equals or exceeds a threshold (Mermoud: Paragraph [0081] and Singla: Figure 25). With regard to claim 31, Singla fails to teach, but knowledge possessed by one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing teaches generating the counterfactual algorithm comprises generating a tree-based classification algorithm, based on the stored favorability statuses and corresponding values of network parameters, and wherein the derived rules correspond to branches in the tree-based classification algorithm (More specifically, Official Notice is taken that the use of tree-based classification algorithms with rules corresponding to branches were well-known to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to generate a tree-based classification algorithm with the branches corresponding to the derived rules for the algorithm of Singla in view of Mermoud to leverage the simplicity and efficiency of such algorithms (e.g. decision trees) to arrive at the minimal number of changes to arrive at the desired conclusion, realizing well-known benefits in the efficiency, diversity of data sets, speed, etc. With regard to claim 32, Singla in view of Mermoud teaches counterfactual algorithm comprises one or more of any of the following: a combinatorial optimization algorithm; an evolutionary algorithm; a random search algorithm; a support-vector machine algorithm; Pearl's causal model; a variational autoencoder; a shortest path algorithm on a graph; and an integer programming technique (Mermoud: Paragraph [0036]. Mermoud at least teaches the use of support vector machines, where the language “one or more” provides that only one item from the listing is required to teach the instant claim subject matter.). With regard to claim 33, Singla in view of Mermoud teaches that each of one or more of the favorability statuses is: represented as a binary value; or a numerical score representing a degree of favorability (Mermoud: Abstract, Paragraphs [0034] and [0070], and Figure 7. Mermoud would at least present that whether the SLA is violated or not, which would be a binary value.). With regard to claim 34, Singla fails to teach, but knowledge possessed by one of ordinary skill in the art teaches wherein identifying the favorability status of individual predictions and/or decisions of the plurality of predictions and/or decisions comprises collecting at least one favorability status from a user or operator of the communication system (More specifically, Official Notice is taken that the providing of requirements, such as SLA or other requirements, by a user was well-known to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing.). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to collect at least one favorability status from a user or operator to provide the user has an opportunity to define such requirements for the network, thus ensuring that any requirements of the user are recognized and used in the decision process. With regard to claim 35, Singla in view of Mermoud teaches identifying the favorability status of individual predictions and/or decisions of the plurality of predictions and/or decisions comprises computing at least one favorability status based on at least one threshold value and/or at least one target value for a performance metric (Mermoud: Paragraph [0002]). With regard to claims 36-48, the instant claims are similar to claims 29-35, and are rejected for similar reasons. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SCOTT B CHRISTENSEN whose telephone number is (571)270-1144. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday, 6AM to 2PM. 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. SCOTT B. CHRISTENSEN Examiner Art Unit 2444 /SCOTT B CHRISTENSEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2444
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 07, 2024
Application Filed
Oct 30, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12603765
METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR PRIVACY-PRESERVING LINEAR OPTIMIZATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12598156
PROVIDING EXTENDIBLE NETWORK CAPABILITIES FOR MANAGED COMPUTER NETWORKS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12596843
Methods And System For Context-Preserving Sensitive Data Anonymization
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12566866
IDENTIFICATION OF AN UNDESIRABLE SOFTWARE IMAGE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12563029
PROVISIONING CLOUD RESOURCE INSTANCES ASSOCIATED WITH A VIRTUAL CLOUD NETWORK
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 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
78%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+32.8%)
3y 5m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 983 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