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 12/4/2024 was filed after the mailing date of the application on 10/01/2024. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 11/08/2024 was filed after the mailing date of the application on 10/01/2024. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 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 § 2146 et seq. 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 filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual 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/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Double Patenting
Claims 2, 4, 6-7, 11, 13, 16, 18, 20-21 are rejected on the ground of non statutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 3, 5, 7, 9-10, 12, 15-16 and 19-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12107828. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the limitations in each claim set relate to the same concept.
19/904,011
18/530,052
A cloud network for delivering local content to a user of a plurality of users at a user location, the cloud network comprising:
a client device comprising a local application, the local application runs on the client device;
a mid-link server configured to:
receive from the local application on the client device, a request for local data
from the user of the plurality of users at the user location from a plurality of locations;
route the request to a sub-data center, wherein the sub-data center is assigned an Internet Protocol (IP) address for the user location, and the sub-data center is a data center nearest to the user location which is assigned the IP address for the user location; and
provide the user at the user location, the local data based on the score using the IP address of the sub-data center; and
a cloud provider configured to provide the local data to the user based on the
request for the local data from the user.
A cloud network for delivering local content to a user of a plurality of users at a user location, the cloud network comprising:
a client device comprising a local application, the local application runs on the client device;
a mid-link server configured to:
receive from the local application on the client device, a request for local data from the user at the user location from a plurality of locations;
route the request to the sub-data center, wherein each data center of the plurality
of data centers have IP addresses for different locations to deliver the local content on the respective IP address for the location; and
provide the user at the user location, the local data using the IP address of the sub-data center; and
a cloud provider configured to provide the local data to the user based on the
request for the local data from the user.
Relevant Prior Art References
The following prior art is cited as being of interest to the claimed invention but has not been applied in any of the current rejections.
Warburton et al. - US Patent 10,911,407 A: The prior art teaches techniques for providing localization at scale for a cloud-based security service
Beredimas et al. - US Patent Pub. 2023/0421471 A1: The prior art teaches optimization of zero trust network access cloud edge nodes
Hoffman et al. – US Patent Pub. 2024/0187438 A1: The prior art teaches policy-based IP address allocation
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANTHONY D BROWN whose telephone number is (571)270-1472. The examiner can normally be reached 730-330pm.
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, Jeffrey Pwu can be reached on 571-272-6798. 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.
/ANTHONY D BROWN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2433
Prosecution Insights