Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 02, 2026
Application No. 18/874,761

METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR APPLICATION SESSION INFORMATION MANAGEMENT IN EDGE COMPUTING

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Dec 13, 2024
Priority
Jun 14, 2022 — CN PCT/CN2022/098672 +1 more
Examiner
ANYAN, BARBARA BURGESS
Art Unit
2457
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson
OA Round
2 (Final)
78%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
1y 7m
Est. Remaining
54%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 78% — above average
78%
Career Allowance Rate
575 granted / 738 resolved
+19.9% vs TC avg
Minimal -24% lift
Without
With
+-24.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 5m
Avg Prosecution
10 currently pending
Career history
744
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
17.9%
-22.1% vs TC avg
§103
31.0%
-9.0% vs TC avg
§102
38.1%
-1.9% vs TC avg
§112
9.6%
-30.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 738 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 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, 3-5, 7, 12, 21 are rejected under 35 USC 103 as being unpatentable by Bouazizi et al. (hereinafter “Bou”, US Publication 20240396795 A1) in view of Zhang et al. (US Patent Application 20250056387 A1). As per Claim 1, Bou discloses A method performed by an edge enabler server, EES, comprising: Receiving a first request from an edge enabler client, EEC, wherein the first request comprises service session context and first information indicating an edge application server, EAS, in use (paragraphs [0005-6, 0059, 0062], Receiving, by and edge enabler client (EEC) of a user equipment, data representing a bundle identifier (ID) for a bundle of EASs from an application service provider (ASP). Sending a service provisioning request including the bundle ID and information representing each EASs in the bundle. Sending, by the EEC, a discovery request to edge enabler servers (EESs) including bundles of EASs); Creating the service session context based on the application session information (paragraphs [0006, 0019, 0022, 0034]). Bou does not teach the first information, wherein the application session information for creating the service session context comprises at least one of an identifier of the EAS, endpoint information the EAS, or an identifier of an application client. However, Zhang teaches deciding to discover a first edge application server (EAS) for a terminal device. The information about the first EAS comprises at least one of an identifier of the first EAS, endpoint information of the first EAS, or an identity of an application client (Absract, paragraphs [0009, 0015, 0018-19]) Therefor one of ordinary skill in the art would have implement or incorporate Zhang’s the first information, wherein the application session information for creating the service session context comprises at least one of an identifier of the EAS, endpoint information the EAS, or an identifier of an application client in Bou’s teaching in order to provide the security credentials to an edge enabler servers. . As per claim 3, Bou discloses The method according to claim 1, further comprising: sending a first response to the EEC (paragraph [0005). As per claim 4, Bou discloses The method according to claim 1, wherein the first request allows the EES to be aware of application session information so that the EES can create the service session context for initial application traffic (paragraphs [0003, 0028, 0030]). As per claim 5, Bou discloses The method according to claim 1, wherein the service session context is used for edge-specific operation or processing (paragraphs [0028-30]). 7. (Currently Amended) A method performed by an edge enabler client, EEC, comprising: Determining an edge application server, EAS, in use for an application client, AC (paragraphs [0004-6]); Sending a first request to an edge enabler server, EES, wherein the first request comprises service session context and first information indicating the EAS in use (paragraphs [0005-6, 0059, 0062], Receiving, by and edge enabler client (EEC) of a user equipment, data representing a bundle identifier (ID) for a bundle of EASs from an application service provider (ASP). Sending a service provisioning request including the bundle ID and information representing each EASs in the bundle. Sending, by the EEC, a discovery request to edge enabler servers (EESs) including bundles of EASs). As per claim 10, Bou discloses The method according to claim 7, further comprising: receiving a first response from the EES (paragraphs [0005-6]). As per claim 11, Bou discloses The method according to claim 7, wherein the first request allows the EES to be aware of application session information so that the EES can create the service session context for initial application traffic (paragraphs [0003, 0028, 0030]). As per claim 12, Bou discloses The method according to, wherein the service session context is used for edge-specific operation or processing (paragraphs [0028-30]). 21. (Currently Amended) An edge enabler server, EES, comprising: A processor; A memory coupled to the processor, said memory containing instructions executable by said processor, whereby the EES is operative to: receive a first request from an edge enabler client, EEC, wherein the first request comprises service session context and first information indicating an edge application server, EAS, in use; and store the service session context based on the first information (paragraphs [0005-6, 0019, 0022, 0034, 0059, 0062], Receiving, by and edge enabler client (EEC) of a user equipment, data representing a bundle identifier (ID) for a bundle of EASs from an application service provider (ASP). Sending a service provisioning request including the bundle ID and information representing each EASs in the bundle. Sending, by the EEC, a discovery request to edge enabler servers (EESs) including bundles of EASs). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 6, 8, 13-14 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Conclusion THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BARBARA BURGESS ANYAN whose telephone number is (571)272-3996. The examiner can normally be reached IFP M-F 8am-5pm. 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, Ario Etienne can be reached at 571-272-4001. 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. May 14, 2026 /BARBARA B Anyan/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2457
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 13, 2024
Application Filed
May 18, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §103
Aug 18, 2026
Response Filed
Sep 10, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12748855
HIERARCHICAL REPRESENTATION MODELS
2y 9m to grant Granted Sep 29, 2026
Patent 12726491
NETWORK ANTI-REPLAY METHOD AND APPARATUS, ELECTRONIC DEVICE, AND STORAGE MEDIUM
2y 3m to grant Granted Sep 01, 2026
Patent 12726457
MANAGEMENT DEVICE AND MANAGEMENT METHOD
1y 8m to grant Granted Sep 01, 2026
Patent 12711216
INFORMATION PROCESSING SYSTEM, INFORMATION PROCESSING METHOD, AND NON-TRANSITORY COMPUTER-READABLE MEDIUM
2y 4m to grant Granted Aug 18, 2026
Patent 12701120
THIRD-PARTY ACCESS-CONTROL SUPPORT USING ROLE HISTORY ANALYSIS
1y 9m to grant Granted Aug 04, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
78%
Grant Probability
54%
With Interview (-24.0%)
3y 5m (~1y 7m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 738 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance 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