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 .
This action is response to the application filed on 09/19/2024. Claims 1-16 are pending and herein considered.
Oath/Declaration
The receipt of oath/declaration is acknowledged.
Drawings
The drawings were received on 09/19/2024. These drawings are reviewed and accepted by the Examiner.
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS), submitted on 09/22/2024, is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CRR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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 §§ 706.02(l)(1) - 706.02(l)(3) 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 USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The 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/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
Claim(s) 1-16 is/are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim(s) 1-18 of U.S. Patent No. 10,880,439 (Application no. 16/425,714). Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claims of the instant application merely broaden the scope of the claims of U.S. Patent No. 10,880,439 (Application no. 16/425,714) by eliminating the elements and their functions of the claims. It has been held that the omission an element and its function is an obvious expedient if the remaining elements perform the same function as before. In re Karlson, 136 USPQ 184 (CCPA). Also note Ex parte Rainu, 168 USPQ 375 (Bd.App.1969); omission of a reference element whose function is not needed would be obvious to one skilled in the art and where the patent and the application are directed to storing user account data indicating that a first application associated with a first device has been enabled for use by a second application on a second device; receiving audio data representing a user utterance to enable the first device to communicate with the second application associated with the second device and generating, based at least in part on determining that the first application has been enabled for use by the second application and that the first device is associated with the third device, a first command configured to associate the first device and the third device with the second application; sending the first command to the first device and the third device causing the first device and the third device to transition to a mode configured to enable associating the first device and the third device with the second application; and receiving confirmation data indicating that the first device and the third device have been associated with the second application. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify claims 1-18 of U.S. Patent No. 10,880,439 (Application no. 16/425,714) to teach the invention of the claims 1-16 of the current application.
Instant Application 18/890,291
U.S. Patent No. 10,88,439
For claim 1:
1. A method, comprising: receiving, with a computing system from a calling party at an originating point in at least one first network, a request to establish a call between the calling party and a called party at a destination point in at least one second network;
receiving, with the computing system, a first set of network information from one or more first routing databases associated with the at least one first network that is operated by a first service provider;
receiving, with the computing system, a second set of network information from one or more second routing databases associated with the at least one second network that is operated by a second service provider that is separate from the first service provider;
analyzing, with the computing system, the received first set of network information and the received second set of network information to generate a unified routing model for optimizing routing of the call between the calling party and the called party through the at least one first network and the at least one second network;
selecting, with the computing system, an optimized route through the at least one first network and the at least one second network for establishing the call based at least in part on the generated unified routing model; and
establishing, with the computing system, the call based at least in part on the selected optimized route.
For claim 2:
2. The method of claim 1, wherein the computing system comprises at least one of a call server, a call controller, a call manager, a media gateway controller, centralized call server, a centralized call controller, a centralized call manager, or a centralized media gateway controller.
For claim 3:
3. The method of claim 1, wherein the calling device associated with the calling party comprises at least one of a telephone, a voice over Internet protocol ("VoIP") private branch exchange ("PBX"), a time-division multiplexing ("TDM") voice PBX, a VoIP soft client, a facsimile machine, or a voice origination device.
For claim 4:
4. The method of claim 1, wherein the at least one first network and the at least one second network each comprises at least one of a circuit-switched network, a public switched telephone network, a voice over Internet protocol ("VoIP") network, a computer network, or the Internet.
For claim 5:
5. The method of claim 1, wherein the first set of network information and the second set of network information each comprises at least one of private peering agreements, private commercial exchange data, traffic exchange agreements, cost data for traffic exchange, service level agreements, minimum contractually required traffic, maximum contractually required traffic, local exchange routing guide ("LERG") data, number portability, key performance indicator ("KPI") data, data regarding health of network routes, capacity of network routes, quality of service ("QoS"), industry data, service level agreements ("SLA"), connectivity details, usage data, call detail records, call statistics, network connectivity statistics, network configuration data, or other attributes from each network.
For claim 7:
7. The method of claim 6, wherein the weighting factors are based on at least one of key performance indicator ("KPI") data, data regarding health of network routes, capacity of network routes, quality of service ("QoS"), industry data, service level agreements ("SLA"), or private commercial exchange data.
For claim 9:
9. An apparatus, comprising: at least one processor; and a non-transitory computer readable medium communicatively coupled to the at least one processor, the non-transitory computer readable medium having stored thereon computer software comprising a set of instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, causes the apparatus to: receive, from a calling party at an originating point in at least one first network, a request to establish a call between the calling party and a called party at a destination point in at least one second network; receive a first set of network information from one or more first routing databases associated with the at least one first network that is operated by a first service provider; receive a second set of network information from one or more second routing databases associated with the at least one second network that is operated by a second service provider that is separate from the first service provider; analyze the received first set of network information and the received second set of network information to generate a unified routing model for optimizing routing of the call between the calling party and the called party through the at least one first network and the at least one second network; select an optimized route through the at least one first network and the at least one second network for establishing the call based at least in part on the generated unified routing model; and establish the call based at least in part on the selected optimized route.
For claim 10:
10. The apparatus of claim 9, wherein the apparatus comprises at least one of a call server, a call controller, a call manager, a media gateway controller, centralized call server, a centralized call controller, a centralized call manager, or a centralized media gateway controller.
For claim 11:
11. The apparatus of claim 9, wherein the at least one first network and the at least one second network each comprises at least one of a circuit-switched network, a public switched telephone network, a voice over Internet protocol ("VoIP") network, a computer network, or the Internet.
For claim 12:
12. The apparatus of claim 9, wherein the first set of network information and the second set of network information each comprises at least one of private peering agreements, private commercial exchange data, traffic exchange agreements, cost data for traffic exchange, service level agreements, minimum contractually required traffic, maximum contractually required traffic, local exchange routing guide ("LERG") data, number portability, key performance indicator ("KPI") data, data regarding health of network routes, capacity of network routes, quality of service ("QoS"), industry data, service level agreements ("SLA"), connectivity details, usage data, call detail records, call statistics, network connectivity statistics, network configuration data, or other attributes from each network.
For claim 14:
14. The apparatus of claim 13, wherein the weighting factors are based on at least one of key performance indicator ("KPI") data, data regarding health of network routes, capacity of network routes, quality of service ("QoS"), industry data, service level agreements ("SLA"), or private commercial exchange data.
For claim 15:
15. The apparatus of claim 9, wherein the set of instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, further causes the apparatus to: normalize routing data to fit each subnetwork within each of the at least one first network and the at least one second network; and data fill each routing engine in each corresponding subnetwork within each of the at least one first network and the at least one second network with the normalized routing data; wherein establishing the call based on the selected optimized route comprises sending routing instructions to each routing engine in each corresponding subnetwork within each of the at least one first network and the at least one second network to route the call based on the normalized routing data.
For claim 16:
16. A system, comprising: a computing system, comprising: at least one first processor; and a first non-transitory computer readable medium communicatively coupled to the at least one first processor, the first non-transitory computer readable medium having stored thereon computer software comprising a first set of instructions that, when executed by the at least one first processor, causes the computing system to: receive, from a calling party at an originating point in at least one first network, a request to establish a call between the calling party and a called party at a destination point in at least one second network; receive a first set of network information from one or more first routing databases associated with the at least one first network that is operated by a first service provider; receive a second set of network information from one or more second routing databases associated with the at least one second network that is operated by a second service provider that is separate from the first service provider; analyze the received first set of network information and the received second set of network information to generate a unified routing model for optimizing routing of the call between the calling party and the called party through the at least one first network and the at least one second network; select an optimized route through the at least one first network and the at least one second network for establishing the call based at least in part on the generated unified routing model; and establish the call based at least in part on the selected optimized route.
For claim 1:
1. A method, comprising: receiving, with a computing system from a calling party at an originating point in at least one first network, a request to establish a call between the calling party and a called party at a destination point in at least one second network;
receiving, with the computing system, a first set of network information from one or more first routing databases associated with the at least one first network that is operated by a first service provider;
receiving, with the computing system, a second set of network information from one or more second routing databases associated with the at least one second network that is operated by a second service provider that is separate from the first service provider;
applying, with the computing system, weighting factors to predetermined categories of data among each of the first set of network information and the second set of network information; analyzing, with the computing system, the received first set of network information and the received second set of network information to generate a unified routing model for optimizing routing of the call between the calling party and the called party through the at least one first network and the at least one second network based at least in part on the applied weighting factors to the predetermined categories of data among each of the first set of network information and the second set of network information;
selecting, with the computing system, an optimized route through the at least one first network and the at least one second network for establishing the call based at least in part on the generated unified routing model; and
establishing, with the computing system, the call based at least in part on the selected optimized route.
For claim 2:
2. The method of claim 1, wherein the computing system comprises at least one of a call server, a call controller, a call manager, a media gateway controller, centralized call server, a centralized call controller, a centralized call manager, or a centralized media gateway controller.
For claim 3:
3. The method of claim 1, wherein the calling device associated with the calling party comprises at least one of a telephone, a voice over Internet protocol (“VoIP”) private branch exchange (“PBX”), a time-division multiplexing (“TDM”) voice PBX, a VoIP soft client, a facsimile machine, or a voice origination device.
For claim 4:
4. The method of claim 1, wherein the at least one first network and the at least one second network each comprises at least one of a circuit-switched network, a public switched telephone network, a voice over Internet protocol (“VoIP”) network, a computer network, or the Internet.
For claim 5:
5. The method of claim 1, wherein the first set of network information and the second set of network information each comprises at least one of private peering agreements, private commercial exchange data, traffic exchange agreements, cost data for traffic exchange, service level agreements, minimum contractually required traffic, maximum contractually required traffic, local exchange routing guide (“LERG”) data, number portability, key performance indicator (“KPI”) data, data regarding health of network routes, capacity of network routes, quality of service (“QoS”), industry data, service level agreements (“SLA”), connectivity details, usage data, call detail records, call statistics, network connectivity statistics, network configuration data, or other attributes from each network.
For claim 6:
6. The method of claim 1, wherein the weighting factors are based on at least one of key performance indicator (“KPI”) data, data regarding health of network routes, capacity of network routes, quality of service (“QoS”), industry data, service level agreements (“SLA”), or private commercial exchange data.
For claim 10:
10. An apparatus, comprising: at least one processor; and a non-transitory computer readable medium communicatively coupled to the at least one processor, the non-transitory computer readable medium having stored thereon computer software comprising a set of instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, causes the apparatus to: receive, from a calling party at an originating point in at least one first network, a request to establish a call between the calling party and a called party at a destination point in at least one second network; receive a first set of network information from one or more first routing databases associated with the at least one first network that is operated by a first service provider; receive a second set of network information from one or more second routing databases associated with the at least one second network that is operated by a second service provider that is separate from the first service provider; apply weighting factors to predetermined categories of data among each of the first set of network information and the second set of network information; analyze the received first set of network information and the received second set of network information to generate a unified routing model for optimizing routing of the call between the calling party and the called party through the at least one first network and the at least one second network based at least in part on the applied weighting factors to the predetermined categories of data among each of the first set of network information and the second set of network information; select an optimized route through the at least one first network and the at least one second network for establishing the call based at least in part on the generated unified routing model; and establish the call based at least in part on the selected optimized route.
For claim 11:
11. The apparatus of claim 10, wherein the apparatus comprises at least one of a call server, a call controller, a call manager, a media gateway controller, centralized call server, a centralized call controller, a centralized call manager, or a centralized media gateway controller.
For claim 12:
12. The apparatus of claim 10, wherein the at least one first network and the at least one second network each comprises at least one of a circuit-switched network, a public switched telephone network, a voice over Internet protocol (“VoIP”) network, a computer network, or the Internet.
For claim 13:
13. The apparatus of claim 10, wherein the first set of network information and the second set of network information each comprises at least one of private peering agreements, private commercial exchange data, traffic exchange agreements, cost data for traffic exchange, service level agreements, minimum contractually required traffic, maximum contractually required traffic, local exchange routing guide (“LERG”) data, number portability, key performance indicator (“KPI”) data, data regarding health of network routes, capacity of network routes, quality of service (“QoS”), industry data, service level agreements (“SLA”), connectivity details, usage data, call detail records, call statistics, network connectivity statistics, network configuration data, or other attributes from each network.
For claim 14:
14. The apparatus of claim 10, wherein the weighting factors are based on at least one of key performance indicator (“KPI”) data, data regarding health of network routes, capacity of network routes, quality of service (“QoS”), industry data, service level agreements (“SLA”), or private commercial exchange data.
For claim 16:
16. The apparatus of claim 10, wherein the set of instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, further causes the apparatus to: normalize routing data to fit each subnetwork within each of the at least one first network and the at least one second network; and data fill each routing engine in each corresponding subnetwork within each of the at least one first network and the at least one second network with the normalized routing data; wherein establishing the call based on the selected optimized route comprises sending routing instructions to each routing engine in each corresponding subnetwork within each of the at least one first network and the at least one second network to route the call based on the normalized routing data.
For claim 18:
18. A system, comprising: a computing system, comprising: at least one first processor; and a first non-transitory computer readable medium communicatively coupled to the at least one first processor, the first non-transitory computer readable medium having stored thereon computer software comprising a first set of instructions that, when executed by the at least one first processor, causes the computing system to: receive, from a calling party at an originating point in at least one first network, a request to establish a call between the calling party and a called party at a destination point in at least one second network; receive a first set of network information from one or more first routing databases associated with the at least one first network that is operated by a first service provider; receive a second set of network information from one or more second routing databases associated with the at least one second network that is operated by a second service provider that is separate from the first service provider; apply weighting factors to predetermined categories of data among each of the first set of network information and the second set of network information; analyze the received first set of network information and the received second set of network information to generate a unified routing model for optimizing routing of the call between the calling party and the called party through the at least one first network and the at least one second network based at least in part on the applied weighting factors to the predetermined categories of data among each of the first set of network information and the second set of network information; select an optimized route through the at least one first network and the at least one second network for establishing the call based at least in part on the generated unified routing model; and establish the call based at least in part on the selected optimized route.
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 of this title, 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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1, 3-5, 9, 11-12 and 16 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over of Mufti (U.S 2014/0269496) in view of Eng et al. (U.S 2012/0321058) further in view of Pierrat et al. (U.S 2005/0076316).
For claim 1:
Mufti discloses a method, comprising: receiving, with a computing system from a calling party at an originating point in at least one first network (see Mufti, abstract; paragraph [0011]; a terminating side MSC server in the MSS pool generally randomly allocates a media gateway for a mobile to mobile call, or a mobile to PSTN call, between MSC servers upon receiving a message regarding the call from an originating MSC server), a request to establish a call between the calling party and a called party at a destination point in at least one second network (see Mufti, paragraph [0042]; Upon receiving the INVITE message acknowledgement from the terminating MSC server 3, the call session is established. Once the call session is established, the originating MSC server 1 sends a final ACK message to acknowledge the call session to the terminating MSC server3 and the voice data for the established call is exchanged between the calling and the called parties over RTP and RTP is a protocol for delivering audio/video over the mobile network); receiving, with the computing system, a first set of network information from one or more first routing databases associated with the at least one first network that is operated by a first service provider; receiving, with the computing system, a second set of network information from one or more second routing databases associated with the at least one second network that is operated by a second service provider that is separate from the first service provider (see Mufti, paragraph [0027]; [0028]; the call route table may include information such as the IP address of media gateways); analyzing, with the computing system, the received first set of network information and the received second set of network information to generate a unified routing model for optimizing routing of the call between the calling party and the called party through the at least one first network and the at least one second network (see Mufti, paragraph [0027]; [0096]; the optimizer may use the trunk group identifier to select a terminating media gateway that is geographically nearest to the originating
media gateway in order to minimize the distance the call payload would need to travel); selecting, with the computing system, an optimized route through the at least one first network and the at least one second network for establishing the call based at least in part on the generated unified routing model (see Mufti, paragraph [0027]-[0038]; the optimizer may use the routing information in the internal routing table to select a call route that is mapped to the trunk group identifier); and establishing, with the computing system, the call based at least in part on the selected optimized route (see Mufti, paragraph [0027]).
Mufti does not explicitly disclose a first set of network information from one 6or more first routing databases associated with the at least one first network 7that is operated by a first service provider; 8receiving, with the computing system, a second set of network information from 9one or more second routing databases associated with the at least one second 10network that is operated by a second service provider that is separate from the 11first service provider and establishing, with the computing system, the call based at least in part on the 21selected optimized route.
Eng, from the same or similar fields of endeavor, disclose the optimization of the routing of multimedia communications among user devices across convergent
networks wherein receiving a transmission in a first format through a first communication network from a first access device of a calling party, the transmission comprising a signaling message related to one of establishing and transmitting voice communication for a phone call in one of a digital telephone network, an analog telephone network, and a cellular network from the calling party to a called party (see Eng, paragraph [0006]; [0012]; selectively route multimedia communications
among multiple parties, transparent and seamless to the users, through one or more service providers), and network operators based on user requirements and establishing a call session through a cellular, a circuit switched or an IP network and the access device being responsive to a user selection of the called party for communication and establishes a call session with the called party via the IP based communication service provider when the IP based communication service provider indicates the called party is available (see Eng, paragraph [0036]; [0098]; [0133]; [0144]-[0147]; [0165]-[0172]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious statement before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a system comprises a method as taught by Eng. The motivation for doing this is to provide a system networks can have an advantage of such technique is to enable a service provider to optimize the local bandwidth usage of local networks.
Mufti-Eng does not explicitly disclose unified routing model.
Pierrat, from the same or similar fields of endeavor, disclose a high-level view of routing using the unified model (see Pierrat, figure 22, paragraph [0130]; [0018]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious statement before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a system comprises unified routing model as taught by Pierrat. The motivation for doing this is to provide a system networks can improve integrated circuit creation via the use of a unified model of fabrication processes and circuit elements that can complement or replace design rules.
For claim 3:
In addition to rejection in claim 3, Mufti- Eng- Pierrat further disclose wherein the calling device associated with the calling party comprises at least one of a telephone, a voice over Internet protocol ("VoIP") private branch exchange ("PBX"), a time-division multiplexing ("TDM") voice PBX, a VoIP soft client, a facsimile machine, or a voice origination device (see Eng, paragraph [0036]; {0079]-[0080]; a telephone, fax machine, and [0147]; PBX).
The motivation for doing this is to provide a system networks can improve the the quality of the route and would be useful to know the quality level of each particular host along a route so that packets requiring a higher quality could be routed using hosts having a high quality measurement score.
For claims 4 and 11:
In addition to rejection in claims 4 and 11, Mufti- Eng- Pierrat further disclose wherein the at least one first network and the at least one second network each comprises at least one of a circuit-switched network, a public switched telephone network, a voice over Internet protocol ("VoIP") network, a computer network, or the Internet (see Mufti, at least at paragraph [0021]; Circuit Switched (CS) networks; [0044]; Internet OR see Eng, paragraph [0100]; computer network)).
For claims 5 and 12:
In addition to rejection in claims 5 and 12, Mufti- Eng- Pierrat further disclose wherein the first set of network information and the second set of network information each comprises at least one of private peering agreements, private commercial exchange data, traffic exchange agreements, cost data for traffic exchange, service level agreements, minimum contractually required traffic, maximum contractually required traffic, local exchange routing guide ("LERG") data, number portability, key performance indicator ("KPI") data, data regarding health of network routes, capacity of network routes, quality of service ("QoS"), industry data, service level agreements ("SLA"), connectivity details, usage data, call detail records, call statistics, network connectivity statistics, network configuration data, or other attributes from each network (see Eng, paragraph [0092]; call detail or [0135]; a QoS management). The motivation for doing this is to provide a system networks can improve the the quality of the route and would be useful to know the quality level of each particular host along a route so that packets requiring a higher quality could be routed using hosts having a high quality measurement score). The motivation for doing this is to provide a system networks can have an advantage of such technique is to enable a service provider to optimize the local bandwidth usage of local networks.
For claim 9:
For claim 9, claim 9 is directed to an apparatus which has similar scope as claim 1. Therefore, claim 9 remains un-patentable for the same reasons.
147
For claim 16:
For claim 16, claim 16 is directed to a system which has similar scope as claim 1. Therefore, claim 16 remains un-patentable for the same reasons.
Claims 2 and 10 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over of Mufti (U.S 2014/0269496) in view of Eng et al. (U.S 2012/0321058) further in view of Pierrat et al. (U.S 2005/0076316) further in view of Butler et al. (U.S 7,934,206).
For claims 2 and 10:
In addition to rejection in claims 2 and 10, Mufti- Eng- Pierrat does not explicitly disclose wherein the computing system comprises at least one of a call server, a call controller, a call manager, a media gateway controller, centralized call server, a centralized call controller, a centralized call manager, or a centralized media gateway controller.
Butler, from the same or similar fields of endeavor, discloses what Mufti- Eng- Pierrat fails: to provide client and server systems for run-time management of individual service execution functional entities where the media gateway controller (MGC) 28 performs interworking between an SX 14 and one or more MGs 16, and provides termination to a collection of endpoints in one or more domains (see Butler, at least column 4, lines 25-52 and column 9, lines 10-29).
Therefore, it would have been obvious statement before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a system comprises a method as taught by Butler. The motivation for doing this is to provide a system networks can supports which allows a new MGC function to take over control at any given point of time.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6-8 and 13-15 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in all independents form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims and if rewritten or amended to overcome any objection claims set forth in this Office action.
Conclusion
The prior arts made or record and not relied upon are considered pertinent to applicant's disclosures. Erb et al. (U.S 2001/0013066); describes method of optimizing route selection of a communication connection over diverse media.
Shaikh et al. (U.S 2019/0173750), discloses integrated alarming, availability, performance, service quality, and SLA conformance information making it a single view for comprehensive assessment of service health.
Brueing et al. (U.S 7,899,177), discloses derives information from the call (or other communications request) and compares it with agent attribute data to route the call at the agent level. The call-routing system provides intelligent and dynamic call-routing in a scalable, scriptable, network-based routing environment.
Ma et al. (U.S 2015/0189087), discloses methods for a calling routing system, whereby the call routing service provider is associated with a series of partners.
Shaikh et al. (U.S 2019/0173750), discloses a method for controlling a software defined network (SDN). Comprising providing one or more voice-user interfaces which are configured for facilitating users controlling networked devices.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LAN-HUONG TRUONG whose telephone number is (571) 270-5829. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 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, Ricky Ngo can be reached on 571-272-3139. 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.
/LAN-HUONG TRUONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2464
07/25/2026
Prosecution Insights