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 .
Response to Amendment
Claim(s) 1-20 is/are pending in the application.
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.
Claim(s) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu (U.S. Patent App Pub 20170187572) in view of Ni (U.S. Patent App Pub 20190245741).
Regarding claim 1,
Wu teaches a method performed by a virtual network function manager (VNFM) of management and orchestration (MANO), the method comprising: (See paragraphs 8-10, Wu)
receiving, from network function virtualization orchestrator (NFVO), a software (SW) upgrade request for a virtual network function(VNF); (See figure 5, and paragraphs 98-100, Wu teaches the admin tarts the NFVO to execute the upgrade plan based on the request)
transmitting, to the VNF, a request message requesting an identifier (ID) of a (SW) upgrade for the VNF; (See paragraphs 7-8, 19, 72, 79, Wu teaches an upgrade of software request from the original version to the new version VNF.)
receiving, from the VNF, a response message including the ID of the SW upgrade the VNF; (See paragraphs 239, 241, 244, 246, 254, figure 4, Ni teaches receiving from VNF response with upgrade ID)
transmitting, to the VNF, a task query message requesting a task to be performed by the VNFM for the SW upgrade; (See paragraphs 271, 274-278, figure 4, Ni teaches transmitting request)
receiving, from the VNF, a task response message including information on the task; and performing the task for the SW upgrade based on the task response message. (See paragraphs 275-278, figure 4, Ni teaches receiving task response)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have known to combine the teachings of Ni with Wu because both deal with NFV lifecycle management of VNF upgrades. The advantage of incorporating the above limitation(s) of Ni into Wu is that Ni enables implementing automatic operation of VNF software modification in the network function virtualization (NFV) system, therefore making the overall system more robust and efficient. (See paragraphs [0004] - [0006], Ni)
Regarding claim 2,
Wu and Ni teach the method of claim 1, further comprising: receiving, from the VNF, a task response message indicating a completion of the SW upgrade; and updating an (See paragraphs 104-106, Wu teaches VNFM notifies the management system that the upgrade is completed)
Regarding claim 3,
Wu and Ni teach the method of claim 2, further comprising: notifying an operator of the completion of the SW upgrade through the NFVO after updating the ID of the VNFD. (See figure 7 and paragraphs 109-110,129, Wu teaches the upgrade is completed and a notification is sent)
Regarding claim 4,
Wu and Ni teach the method of claim 1, wherein the SW upgrade request of the VNF includes information on a VNF. (See paragraphs 101, 79, Wu teaches upgrade request using the VNF parameters)
Regarding claim 5,
Wu and Ni teach the method of claim 1. wherein the ID of the SW upgrade is used for the task query message and the task response message. (See paragraphs 275-277, figure 4, Ni teaches receiving from VNF response with upgrade ID)
Regarding claim 6,
Wu and Ni teach the method of claim 1, wherein the performing the task comprises: based on the task indicating a wait for the SW upgrade, waiting for an internal task of the VNF for a designated time, and wherein the task response message further includes information on the designated time. (See paragraphs 7, 75, Wu teaches the system internally wait for the VNF test completion before moving to next step.)
Regarding claim 7,
Wu and Ni teach the method of claim 1, wherein the performing the task comprises: based on the task indicating a rebuild of the SW upgrade, transmitting a request of the rebuild to a virtualized infrastructure manager (VIM) of the MANO; and receiving a response to the request for the rebuild from the VIM. (See paragraphs 18, 78, 80, Wu teaches the VIM created VMS and VNFM receives a response from VIM)
Regarding claim 8,
Wu and Ni teach the method of claim 1, wherein the task response message includes a VNF component (VNFC) list, an (ID) of a source VNF, and a target VNFD ID. (See paragraphs 100-102, Wu teaches, a new-version and earlier-version VNF lists)
Regarding claim 9
Wu and Ni teach the method of claim 1, further comprising: transmitting, to the VNF, a next task query message for requesting a next task for the SW upgrade,wherein the next task query message includes information on a task type which is a type of the next task to be performed by the VNFM and information on a task result for the task. (See paragraphs 254, 273, 275-276, figure 4, Ni teaches receiving from VNF response with upgrade ID)
Regarding claim 10,
Wu and Ni teach the method of claim 9, wherein the task result is one of completed, failed, retry, rollback, rollback completed, or lifecycle end of the task. (See paragraphs 78 and 99, Wu teaches rollback is executed and completed)
Claims 11-18 list all the same elements of claims 1-8, but in system form rather than method form. Therefore, the supporting rationale of the rejection to claims 1-8 applies equally as well to claims 11-18. Furthermore with regards to the limitation of
Wu and Ni teach the electronic device configured to perform functions of a virtual network function manager (VNFM) of management and orchestration (MANO), comprising: at least one transceiver; at least one processor, comprising processing circuitry, coupled to the at least one transceiver; and memory storing instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor individually and/or collectively, cause the electronic device to: (See paragraph 49-50, Wu
Claim 19 list all the same elements of claim 9-10, but in system form rather than method form. Therefore, the supporting rationale of the rejection to claim 9-10 applies equally as well to claim 19.
Claim 20 list all the same elements of claim 1, but in system form rather than method form. Therefore, the supporting rationale of the rejection to claim 1 applies equally as well to claim 20. Furthermore with regards to the limitation of 20. An electronic device of a virtual network function (VNF), the electronic device comprising: at least one transceiver; and at least one processor, comprising processing circuitry, coupled to the at least one transceiver; and memory storing instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor individually and/or collectively, cause the electronic device to: (See paragraph 144-145, Wu)
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure and located in the PTO-892 form.
1.Felstaine, U.S. Patent 9853914, teaches a system, method, and computer program product are provided for selecting at least one new physical element and/or virtual element for use in a system including a network function virtualization orchestrator (NFV-O). In use, information corresponding to data traffic associated with a network system including an NFV-O module is identified, the NFV-O module being operable to manage data flow associated with one or more Virtual Network Functions (VNFs) and one or more physical elements of the network system. Additionally, an overall expected usage of the network system is determined based on the information corresponding to the data traffic. Further a cost of implementing at least one of one or more new physical elements or one or more VNFs is determined, based on the overall expected usage. Moreover, at least one of the one or more new physical elements or the one or more VNFs to implement in the network system is selected based at least partially on the determined cost of implementing the one or more new physical elements and the cost of implementing the one or more VNFs.
2. Clarke, U.S. Patent App 20170134307, teaches a method for mediating resource allocation includes a step of receiving from at least one first computation module, a first proposed resource allocation for completing a computational task. The method further includes a step of comparing the received first proposed resource allocation to at least one of a predetermined resource allocation criteria and at least one second proposed resource allocation received from at least one second computation module, and a step of determining a resource allocation instruction based, at least in part, on a result of the step of comparing.
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 NINOS DONABED whose telephone number is (571)272-8757. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00pm - 4:00pm.
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, John Follansbee can be reached on (571) 272-3964. 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.
/NINOS DONABED/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2444
Prosecution Insights