Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/910,767

CONFLICT RESOLUTION IN NETWORK VIRTUALIZATION SCENARIOS

Non-Final OA §DP
Filed
Oct 09, 2024
Examiner
PENA-SANTANA, TANIA M
Art Unit
2443
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Nokia Solutions and Networks Oy
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
72%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 10m
To Grant
66%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 72% — above average
72%
Career Allow Rate
176 granted / 245 resolved
+13.8% vs TC avg
Minimal -6% lift
Without
With
+-6.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 10m
Avg Prosecution
29 currently pending
Career history
274
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
10.4%
-29.6% vs TC avg
§103
54.8%
+14.8% vs TC avg
§102
17.6%
-22.4% vs TC avg
§112
10.0%
-30.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 245 resolved cases

Office Action

§DP
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 . Claims Status Claims 1-20 are pending and have been rejected. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 10/09/2024 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 obviousness-type 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 LongL 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Omum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); and In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ644 (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 a nonstatutory double patenting ground provided the conflicting application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with this application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. Effective January 1, 1994, a registered attorney or agent of record may sign a terminal disclaimer. A terminal disclaimer signed by the assignee must fully comply with 37 CFR 3.73(b). Claims 1 and 4 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 5 & 10 of U.S. Patent No. 12,119,988. Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because all elements of instant Application No. 18/910767 correspond to elements the U.S. Patent No. 12,119,988. The above claim of the present application would have been obvious over claims 1, 5 & 10 of the U.S. Patent No. 12,119,988 because each element of the claims of the present application is anticipated by the claims of the U.S. Patent No. 12,119,988. This is a provisional obviousness-type double patenting rejection because the conflicting claims have not in fact been patented. Instant Application 18/910767 US Patent No. 12,119,988 Claims 1 and 4 A method comprising: receiving, by a second network function virtualization orchestrator from a first network function virtualization orchestrator, a request for alternation of a virtualized network function utilized by a first virtualized network service managed by the first network function virtualization orchestrator and utilized by a second virtualized network service managed by the second network function virtualization orchestrator, the request comprising information indicative of the alteration of the virtualized network function; in response to determining, by the second network virtualization orchestrator, that the alteration of the virtualized network function does not impact the second virtualized network service, approving the alteration of the virtualized network function and triggering the first network function virtualization orchestrator to implement the alteration of the virtualized network function by scaling the virtualized network function; and in response to determining, by the second network virtualization orchestrator, that the alteration of the virtualized network function impacts the second virtualized network service, sending to the first network function virtualization orchestrator an alternative alteration of the virtualized network function and triggering the first network function virtualization orchestrator to implement the alternative alteration of the virtualized network function by scaling the virtualized network function. Claim 1, 5 and 10 As method comprising: requesting, by a first network function virtualization orchestrator for managing a first virtualized network service, an alteration of a virtualized network function; transmitting, by the first network function virtualization orchestrator, information indicative of the alteration of the virtualized network function to a second network function virtualization orchestrator for managing a second virtualized network service, wherein the virtualized network function is utilized by the first virtualized network service and the second virtualized network service; determining, by the first network function virtualization orchestrator, whether the alteration of the virtualized network function impacts the second virtualized network service; in response to determining, by the first network function virtualization orchestrator, that the alteration of the virtualized network function does not impact the second virtualized network service: approving the alteration of the virtualized network function; and triggering implementation of the alteration of the virtualized network function by scaling the virtualized network function; and in response determining, by the first network function virtualization orchestrator, that the alteration of the virtualized network function impacts the second virtualized network service: sending, to the second work function virtualization orchestrator, a request for approval of the alteration of the virtualized network function: receiving a reply to the request for approval, the reply comprising an alternative alteration of the virtualized network function; and triggering the first network function virtualization orchestrator to implementation of the alternative alteration by scaling the virtualized network function. Claim 1 and 4 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1 and 7 of U.S. Patent No. 11,570,044. Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because all elements of instant Application No. 18/910767 correspond to elements the U.S. Patent No. 11,570,044. The above claim of the present application would have been obvious over claims 1 and 7 of the U.S. Patent No. 11,570,044 because each element of the claims of the present application is anticipated by the claims of the U.S. Patent No. 12,119,988. This is a provisional obviousness-type double patenting rejection because the conflicting claims have not in fact been patented. Instant Application 18/910767 US Patent No. 11,570,044 Claims 1 and 4 A method comprising: receiving, by a second network function virtualization orchestrator from a first network function virtualization orchestrator, a request for alternation of a virtualized network function utilized by a first virtualized network service managed by the first network function virtualization orchestrator and utilized by a second virtualized network service managed by the second network function virtualization orchestrator, the request comprising information indicative of the alteration of the virtualized network function; in response to determining, by the second network virtualization orchestrator, that the alteration of the virtualized network function does not impact the second virtualized network service, approving the alteration of the virtualized network function and triggering the first network function virtualization orchestrator to implement the alteration of the virtualized network function by scaling the virtualized network function; and in response to determining, by the second network virtualization orchestrator, that the alteration of the virtualized network function impacts the second virtualized network service, sending to the first network function virtualization orchestrator an alternative alteration of the virtualized network function and triggering the first network function virtualization orchestrator to implement the alternative alteration of the virtualized network function by scaling the virtualized network function. Claim 1 and 7 A method in a network virtualization scenario, wherein a virtualized network function is utilized by a first virtualized network service managed by a first network function virtualization orchestrator and a second virtualized network service managed by a second network function virtualization orchestrator, comprising: requesting, by the first network function virtualization orchestrator, an alteration of the virtualized network function, transmitting, by the first network function virtualization orchestrator, information indicative of the alteration of the virtualized network function to the second network function virtualization orchestrator, determining, by the second network function virtualization orchestrator, when the alteration of the virtualized network function impacts the second virtualized network service based upon utilization of at least one additional virtualized network function by at least one additional virtualized network service, the determining step further comprising at least one of the following: in response to approving the alteration of the virtualized network function, triggering the first network function virtualization orchestrator to implement the alteration by scaling the virtualized network function, and in response to offering an alternative alteration of the virtualized network function. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not listed upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure. This includes: U.S. Publication 2015/0365352, which describes managing capacity in a virtualized network. U.S. Publication 2018/0309626, which describes virtualized network function decomposition. U.S. Publication 2019/0146827, which describes virtualized network function resource management. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TANIA M PENA-SANTANA whose telephone number is (571)270-0627. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8am to 4pm EST. 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, Nicholas R Taylor can be reached at 5712723889. 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. /TANIA M PENA-SANTANA/Examiner, Art Unit 2443 /CHRISTOPHER B ROBINSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2443
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 09, 2024
Application Filed
Mar 21, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §DP (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12592924
SMART HUB QUANTUM KEY DISTRIBUTION AND SECURITY MANAGEMENT IN ADVANCED NETWORKS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12585754
TRUSTED ROOT RECOVERY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12574343
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR MULTI-AGENT CONVERSATIONS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12574260
CONSENSUS PROCESSING METHOD, APPARATUS, AND SYSTEM FOR BLOCKCHAIN NETWORK, DEVICE, AND MEDIUM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12561477
AUTOMATED SPARSITY FEATURE SELECTION
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
72%
Grant Probability
66%
With Interview (-6.0%)
2y 10m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 245 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