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 .
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 1-2, 7-11 and 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over BONAUD et al. Pub. No.: US 20200293356 (Hereinafter “Bonaud”) in view of Bookman et al. Pub. No.: US 20160210173 (Hereinafter “Bookman”).
Regarding Claim 1, Bonaud discloses a computer-implemented (see abstract) method comprising:
receiving, at one or more computing devices controlling nodes running in clusters on a containerized mobile network (see paragraph [0052]), performance metrics associated with a first application of a plurality of applications running on the containerized mobile network (see paragraphs [0052, 0057, 0059 ]), wherein the first application is deployed on one or more nodes of a first cluster of the containerized mobile network in accordance with an initial configuration indicative of computational resources allocated to the first application (see paragraph [0052]);
generating, based on the performance metrics, a performance profile associated with the first application, the performance profile defining computational resources to be allocated to the first application based on a current usage of the first application to provide services to subscribers of the containerized mobile network (see paragraphs [0059-0060]); and
Bonaud fails to disclose:
providing, by the one or more computing devices, an instruction to update the initial configuration for the first application in accordance with the performance profile to adjust the computational resources allocated to the first application according to the performance profile.
In analogous art, Bookman teaches:
providing, by the one or more computing devices, an instruction to update the initial configuration for the first application in accordance with the performance profile to adjust the computational resources allocated to the first application according to the performance profile (see paragraph [0064]).
It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Bonaud with the teaching as
taught by Bookman in order to provide software applications by launching the set of resources in a containerized resource instance. Such a modification would have predictably enabled more efficient deployment and execution of software applications while reducing computational/storage bandwidth requirements, thereby improve system resource utilization.
Regarding Claim 2, Bonaud in view of Bookman disclose the method as discussed in the rejection of claim 1. Bookman further discloses wherein generating the performance profile associated with the first application comprises: determining computational resources required by each of a plurality of components of the first application based on the current usage of the first application (see paragraph [0064]), wherein each component is deployed and runs on a node of the one or more nodes of the first cluster associated with the first application (see Bookman, paragraph [0049]. In addition, see Bonaud, paragraph [0053]); and defining the performance profile for the first application for adjusting the computational resources allocated to each component in accordance with the required computational resources as determined (see paragraph [0064]).
Regarding Claim 7, Bonaud in view of Bookman disclose the method as discussed in the rejection of claim 1. Bonaud further discloses wherein the computational resources provided by the one or more nodes of the first cluster include CPU and memory resource (see paragraphs [0052 and 0060]).
Regarding Claim 8, Bonaud in view of Bookman disclose the method as discussed in the rejection of claim 1. Bonaud further discloses wherein each cluster on the containerized mobile network comprises a set of nodes that run containerized applications, wherein each cluster runs a networking application deployed on at least one node of the respective cluster, and wherein the networking application encapsulates physical and virtual resources (see paragraphs [0052 and 0060]).
Regarding Claim 9, Bonaud in view of Bookman disclose the method as discussed in the rejection of claim 1. Bookman further discloses persisting one or more latest-used configurations for the first application while monitoring the performance metrics of the first application running on the containerized mobile network (see paragraph [0064]).
Regarding Claim 10, Bonaud in view of Bookman disclose a system comprising: one or more processors; and one or more computer-readable memories coupled to the one or more processors and having instructions stored thereon that are executable by the one or more processors (Bonaud, paragraphs [0064-0066], in view of Bookman, see fig.1 and paragraphs [0059-0064]) to perform the computer-implemented as discussed in the rejection of claim 1.
Regarding Claim 11, the claim is being analyzed wit respect to the rejection of claim 2.
Regarding Claim 16, the claim is directed toward embody the method of claim 1 in a “non-transitory computer readable medium”. It would have been obvious to embody the procedures Bonaud in view of Bookman discussed with respect to claim 1 in a “computer readable medium” in order that the instructions could be automatically performed by a processor.
Regarding Claim 17, the claim is directed toward embody the method of claim 2 in a “non-transitory computer readable medium”. It would have been obvious to embody the procedures Bonaud in view of Bookman discussed with respect to claim 2 in a “computer readable medium” in order that the instructions could be automatically performed by a processor.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-6, 12-15 and 18-20 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
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Alazar Tilahun whose telephone number is (571)270-5712. The examiner can normally be reached Monday -Friday, From 9:00 AM-6:00 PM.
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, Benjamin Bruckart can be reached at 571-272-3982. 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.
/ALAZAR TILAHUN/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2424
/A.T/August 01, 2026
Prosecution Insights