DETAILED ACTION
Response to Amendment
Claims 52-71 are pending. Claims 1-51 have been cancelled.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed 08/04/2026 have been fully considered.
Regarding the rejection of claim 52 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Azizi et al. (US20190364492A1) in view of Thompson (US20170249192A1), Applicant argues on page 7 that in Azizi an application having a highest use will be selected regardless of whether a particular media content is available or not.
Applicant’s arguments are not persuasive. Azizi discloses fails to teach “identifying a first application [video streaming], from a plurality of applications on a device of the user, having a higher likelihood of being accessed to retrieve the media content than a second application [file download], from the plurality of applications, wherein the media content is available for access from both the first application and the second application" by showing in para [1298] edge computing server 14602 may detect data streams running through network access node 13610, which may be video streams, file downloads, etc. (e.g., the media contents are available for access from both the first application and the second application); para [1604] shows terminal device 18206 may identify types of multimedia (e.g., media content) that a user of terminal device 18206 frequently accesses; para [4133] shows identifying a first application of the one or more applications that is executed more often than a second application of the one or more applications. Therefore Azizi discloses the language of the claim.
As to any argument not specifically addressed, they are the same as those discussed above.
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.
Claims 52-71 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Azizi et al. (US20190364492A1) in view of Thompson (US20170249192A1).
Regarding claim 52, Azizi discloses a method for adapting network performance comprising (para [0290] shows to flexibly adapt bandwidth to communication needs):
determining that media content of interest to a user is available for access (para [1298] shows edge computing server 14602 may detect data streams running through network access node 13610, which may be video streams (live or buffered), file downloads, etc.; para [1604] shows terminal device 18206 may provide context information in 18406 that indicates user data content (e.g., media content) preferences. For example, terminal device 18206 may identify types of multimedia that a user of terminal device 18206 frequently accesses);
in response to determining that media content of interest to the user is available for access, identifying a first application, from a plurality of applications on a device of the user, having a higher likelihood of being accessed to retrieve the media content than a second application, from the plurality of applications (para [4133] shows identifying a first application of the one or more applications that is executed more often than a second application of the one or more applications),
wherein the media content is available for access from both the first application [video streaming] and the second application [file download] (para [1298] shows edge computing server 14602 may detect data streams running through network access node 13610, which may be video streams (live or buffered), file downloads, etc. Edge computing server 14602 may then enable a user of the terminal device (or autonomous application) to adjust the data stream.)
Azizi discloses to allocate bandwidth (para [1757]) but fails to teach in response to identifying the application, increasing a bandwidth associated with the first application.
However, Thompson discloses in response to identifying the application, increasing a bandwidth associated with the first application (para [0005] shows determining a need to download one or more visual assets associated with one or more applications; para [0016] shows each of the applications 124, 126, 128 may perform a variety of tasks, and that such tasks represent different “workloads” to the respective applications 124, 126, 128; para [0020] shows information regarding the most frequently or heavily used applications may be known or determined for a particular use; para [0039] shows the asset registry 320 may include information indicating the most frequently used applications for a particular user (e.g. based on usage history); para [0034] shows the downloading controller 122 may then download (at 206) one or more visual assets at a data transfer rate associated with higher priority data transfers to enable the user to immediately invoke the highest priority workload (e.g., the most frequently used application) without experiencing downloading delays.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the method of Azizi with the teaching of Thompson in order to enable the user to immediately invoke the highest priority workload (e.g., the most frequently used application task) without experiencing downloading delays (Thompson; para [0034]).
Regarding claim 53, Azizi-Thompson as applied to claim 52 discloses the computing system to: obtain the additional network data from the network platform data repository, the additional network data including one or more of: platform specific network configurations or network diagrams (Azizi; para [1500] shows a diagram that illustrates aspects of a communications scheme. Network access node 16510 may therefore transmit and receive radio signals with terminal device 16502 according to a multiple access scheme that defines rules and parameters for performing multilateral communications; para [2047] shows mobile infrastructure node 24002 may dynamically activate the mobile infrastructure functions in accordance with a network configuration protocol. Thompson; [Abstract] shows the asset registry is configured to determine a priority ranking based on the prior usage; facilitate downloading of one or more visual assets based on the priority ranking.)
Regarding claim 54, Azizi-Thompson as applied to claim 53 discloses preprocessing the source network configuration includes executing intent-revealing commands on the one or more devices connected to the first network platform to obtain the network data, the network data including one or more of: routing protocols, access control lists, interface configurations, or a running network configuration (Azizi; para [1604] shows terminal device 18206 may identify types of multimedia (e.g., media content) that a user of terminal device 18206 frequently accesses; para [2047] shows mobile infrastructure node 24002 may dynamically activate the mobile infrastructure functions in accordance with a network configuration protocol.)
Regarding claim 55, Azizi-Thompson as applied to claim 52 discloses increasing the bandwidth associated with the first application comprises: determining that a bandwidth consumption of the second application, from the plurality of applications, exceeds a threshold value; and in response to determining that the bandwidth consumption of the second application exceeds the threshold value, pausing a network activity of the second application (Azizi; para [0699] shows triggering criteria can include detecting that the bandwidth actually being used is above or below a certain threshold; para [0755] shows network access node 1510 may delay low priority data bearer to later time slots that have sufficient bandwidth; para [1340] shows control module 13810 may stop limited non-priority service data; para [1227] shows radio communication network 13600 may therefore give priority to data traffic for high priority network bearers.)
Regarding claim 56, Azizi-Thompson as applied to claim 52 discloses decreasing the bandwidth associated with the second application proportional to the increased bandwidth associated with the first application (Azizi; para [0699] shows triggering criteria can include detecting that the bandwidth actually being used is above or below a certain threshold; para [0755] shows network access node 1510 may delay low priority data bearer to later time slots that have sufficient bandwidth; para [1340] shows control module 13810 may stop limited non-priority service data; para [1227] shows radio communication network 13600 may therefore give priority to data traffic for high priority network bearers.)
Regarding claim 57, Azizi-Thompson as applied to claim 52 discloses determining that the media content of interest to the user is available for access comprises: comparing a set of user preferences to one or more attributes of the media content; and determining that the user preference matches the one or more attributes of the media content (Azizi; para [0039] shows the asset registry 320 may include information indicating the most frequently used for one or more available applications for a particular user (e.g. based on usage history); para [4890] shows obtaining user data content preferences.)
Regarding claim 58, Azizi-Thompson as applied to claim 52 discloses determining that the media content of interest to the user is available for access comprises: identifying a geographic location associated with the media content; and determining that the geographic location associated with the media content matches a geographic location of the user (Azizi; para [2043] shows a critical network scenario may be focused in a geographic area.)
Regarding claim 59, Azizi-Thompson as applied to claim 52 discloses identifying the first application having the higher likelihood of being accessed to retrieve the media content than the second application comprises (Azizi; para [4133] shows identifying a first application of the one or more applications that is executed more often than a second application of the one or more applications):
identifying a first plurality of characteristics associated with the first application, a second plurality of characteristics associated with the second application, and a characteristics associated with the media content (Azizi; para [1295] shows content (e.g., for popular videos or other multimedia); para [4133] shows identifying a first application of the one or more applications that is executed more often than a second application of the one or more applications); and
determining that the characteristic associated with the media content matches a characteristic from the first plurality of characteristics but does not match any characteristics from the second plurality of characteristics (Azizi; para [1390] shows if the service indicator matches a service indicator of a user-priority service, classification module 15904 may classify the data packet as critical traffic; para [4133] shows identifying a first application of the one or more applications that is executed more often than a second application of the one or more applications.)
Regarding claim 60, Azizi-Thompson as applied to claim 52 discloses identifying the first application having the higher likelihood of being accessed to retrieve the media content than the second application comprises: accessing an application usage history from a profile of the user; and determining, based on the application usage history, that the first application has greater usage than the second application (Azizi; para [1604] shows terminal device 18206 may identify types of multimedia (e.g., media content) that a user of terminal device 18206 frequently accesses; para [4133] shows identifying a first application of the one or more applications that is executed more often than a second application of the one or more applications). Thompson; para [0039] shows the asset registry 320 may include information indicating the most frequently used for one or more available applications for a particular user (e.g. based on usage history).)
Regarding claim 61, Azizi-Thompson as applied to claim 52 discloses decreasing the bandwidth associated with the first application in response to detecting an end of an output of the media content by the first application (Azizi; para [1516] shows network access node 16510 may perform distributed-coordinated channel access to access the channel prior to the end of a transmission).
Regarding claims 62-71, claims 62-71 are directed to a system. Claims 62-71 require limitations that are similar to those recited in the method claims 52-61 to carry out the method steps. And since the references of Azizi-Thompson combined teach the method including limitations required to carry out the method steps, therefore claims 62-71 would have also been obvious in view of the structures disclosed in Azizi-Thompson combined.
Furthermore, Azizi-Thompson as combined discloses the system comprising control circuitry (Azizi; para [1241]).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 TAN DOAN whose telephone number is (571)270-0162. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8am - 5pm ET.
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, Oscar Louie, can be reached at (571) 270-1684 . 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.
/TAN DOAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2445
Prosecution Insights