DETAILED ACTION
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 10/22/2025 has been entered.
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 § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 282-289, 291-302, 305-312, and 315-327 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 282, claim 282 recites “a unit capacity per time period for each of a plurality of resources”, “the unit capacity per time period”, and “the unit capacity per time period of a resource”. The relationship between these elements is unclear. For the purposes of examination, these limitations are interpreted as: “a unit capacity per time period for each of a plurality of resources”, “the unit capacity per time period for each of the plurality of resources”, and “a second unit capacity per time period of a resource”.
Claim 282 further recites “based on the received assignments”. The claim previously recites “receive an assignment of a plurality of items” and “receive an assignment of units”. It is unclear if “the assignments” is intended to refer back to assignment of items, assignment of units, or different assignments. For the purposes of examination, this limitation is interpreted as: based on a plurality of received assignment
Claim 282 further recites “the received input quantifying designated capacities of resources independently of specific tasks”. The claim previously recites “receive an input indicative of a unit capacity per time period for each of a plurality of resources, wherein the unit capacity per time period is a measure that quantifies a designated capacity of a corresponding resource independently of a specific task”. It is unclear if “the received input” is intended to refer back to “receive an input indicative of a unit capacity per time period for each of a plurality of resources”. It is unclear if “designated capacities of resources independently of specific tasks” is intended to refer back to “a measure that quantifies a designated capacity of a corresponding resource independently of a specific task”. For the purposes of examination, this limitation is interpreted as: a second received input quantifying second designated capacities of second resources independently of second specific tasks
Claim 282 further recites “an excepted workload of the specific resource in a second time period”. It is unclear what is meant by an excepted workload. For the purposes of examination, this limitation is interpreted as: a second workload of the specific resource in a second time period
Regarding claims 298 and 302, claims 298 and 302 contain substantially similar limitations to those found in claim 282. Consequently, claims 298 and 302 is rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding claims 283-289, 291-297, 299-301, 305-312, and 315-322, claims 283-289, 291-297, 299-301, 305-312, and 315-322 are also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for depending on an indefinite parent claim.
Regarding claims 286, 316, 317, 319, 320, 326, and 327, claims 286, 316, 317, 319, 320, 326, and 327 “the unit capacity per time period associated with the particular resource”, “the unit capacity per time period in the first associated time period”, “the unit capacity per time period of the resource”, “the unit capacity per time period”, “the unit capacity per time period associated with the specific resource”. It is unclear whether this limitation is intended to relate to “a unit capacity per time period for each of a plurality of resources”, “the unit capacity per time period”, or “the unit capacity per time period of a resource” of parent claim 282. For the purposes of examination, these limitations are interpreted as: a second unit capacity per time period
Regarding claims 288, 289, 291-297, 320, 323, and 324, claims 288, 289, 291-297, 320, 323, and 324 recite “the resource utilization indicator”. It is unclear whether this limitation is intended to relate to “a set of resource utilization indicators for each of the plurality of resources”, “a specific set of resource utilization indicators for a specific resource”, “a first resource utilization indicator”, or “a second resource utilization indicator” of parent claim 282. For the purposes of examination, these limitations are interpreted as: a third resource utilization indicator
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 282-289, 291-302, 305-312, 315-322, 326, and 327 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Steinglass et al. (US 20090234699 A1, published 09/17/2009), hereinafter Steinglass, in view of Schweitzer et al. (US 20040078257 A1, published 04/22/2004), hereinafter Schweitzer.
Regarding claim 282, Steinglass teaches the claim comprising:
A system for managing resource utilization, the system comprising: at least one processor configured to (Steinglass Figs. 1-8; [0019], Embodiments of the invention may be implemented as a computer process (method), a computing system, or as an article of manufacture, such as a computer program product or computer readable media; [0022], vast numbers of projects and associated tasks for which embodiments of the present invention may be utilized; [0026], the scheduling view 106 immediately shows the project manager or user a graphical representation of the utilization of his/her resources 130, 135, 140; [0048], The computer 800 includes at least one central processing unit 808 ("CPU"), a system memory 812, including a random access memory 818 ("RAM") and a read-only memory ("ROM") 820, and a system bus 810 that couples the memory to the CPU 808):
receive data indicative of a unit capacity per time period for each of a plurality of resources, wherein the unit capacity per time period is a measure that quantifies a designated capacity of a corresponding resource independently of a specific task; receive an assignment of a plurality of items to each of the plurality of resources; maintain the plurality of items in at least one board; receive an assignment of units to each of the plurality of items (Steinglass Figs. 1-8; [0021], scheduling view 105 includes a resource column 110 and a number of date columns 115, 120, 125. As should be appreciated, the information illustrated in the scheduling view 105 is for purposes of example only and is not limiting of the vast numbers of different resources and task start or stop times that may be utilized in the scheduling view 105, as described below. The scheduling view, 105 illustrated in FIG. 1, includes three example resources 130, 135, 140 in the form of three workers or professionals to which one or more tasks of a given project may be assigned; [0024], the rectangular portion of the view 105 containing the task 145 (excavation) may be colored or shaded with a highlighting color, for example, gray, to show the duration of the task 145; [0025], a project manager or user of the scheduling view 105 may manipulate the displayed schedule of tasks by moving tasks from one location in the scheduling view 105 to a different location in the scheduling view 105 to place a desired task at a different scheduling point (e.g., start time), or for assigning a desired task from one human resource 135 to a different human resource 140; [0026], the scheduling view 106, illustrated immediately beneath the scheduling view 105 in FIG. 1, shows a resulting view of the tasks of the associated project after the project manager or user has dragged the "build frame" task 155 from the human resource 135 and start date of June 21 to the human resource 140 and a start date of June 14. Accordingly, the scheduling view 106 immediately shows the project manager or user a graphical representation of the utilization of his/her resources 130, 135, 140 if the project manager moves the "build frame" task 155 from its previous resource and start time to a different resource and different start time; [0043], a "buffer" task may be assigned to Jon, for example, a buffer task called "management duties." This buffer task is not sized in hours, but rather has a duration and a percentage effort associated with the required buffer. For example, Jon may have a two week task called "management duties" that will take up 50% of his time. The net result is that, unlike other tasks, the "management duties" task can be scheduled and executed in parallel to the other tasks; 20% of Jon's 40 hour week (8 hours) is assumed to be accounted for by the buffer task);
based on the received assignments and the data quantifying designated capacities of resources independently of specific tasks, output a display signal for causing presentation, in a tablature common to the plurality of resources and including a plurality of adjacent cells arranged in a plurality of horizontal rows and vertical columns, a set of resource utilization indicators for each of the plurality of resources, wherein a specific set of resource utilization indicators for a specific resource includes a first resource utilization indicator graphically representing an expected workload of the specific resource in a first time period and a second resource utilization indicator graphically representing an excepted workload of the specific resource in a second time period after the first time period of a plurality of time periods (Steinglass Figs. 1-8; [0021], scheduling view 105 includes a resource column 110 and a number of date columns 115, 120, 125. As should be appreciated, the information illustrated in the scheduling view 105 is for purposes of example only and is not limiting of the vast numbers of different resources and task start or stop times that may be utilized in the scheduling view 105, as described below. The scheduling view, 105 illustrated in FIG. 1, includes three example resources 130, 135, 140 in the form of three workers or professionals to which one or more tasks of a given project may be assigned; [0024], the rectangular portion of the view 105 containing the task 145 (excavation) may be colored or shaded with a highlighting color, for example, gray, to show the duration of the task 145; [0026], the scheduling view 106, illustrated immediately beneath the scheduling view 105 in FIG. 1, shows a resulting view of the tasks of the associated project after the project manager or user has dragged the "build frame" task 155 from the human resource 135 and start date of June 21 to the human resource 140 and a start date of June 14; [0028], it is possible to over-allocate a resource by moving a task to a resource during a time the resource is already allocated with a project task. If a given resource 130, 135, 140 is over-allocated, a user interface highlighting method may be used for showing the over-allocation. For example, overlapping tasks may be highlighted with an alarming highlighting color, for example, red, and the overlapping tasks may be illustrated in the view 105 in a collapsed mode. The program manager/user of the view 105 may then expand the tasks for the over-allocated resource to cause tasks assigned to the over-allocated resource to be displayed in multiple lines. Over-allocation may then be manually resolved by dragging one of the conflicting/over-allocating tasks to a different resource or to a different start time; [0029], referring to the resource scheduling view 105, if the task 150 (pour cement) is assigned to the resource 130 (Alice) wherein the resource Alice is assigned both tasks 145 and 150 to be started and completed at the same time, the rectangular space displayed in the view 105 for the subject time period may be highlighted in an alarming color, for example, red. According to an embodiment, the program manager may selectively expand the row containing tasks for the resource 130 (Alice) so that the tasks assigned to Alice are displayed on two lines which will allow the program manager to see that the over-allocation has been caused by the fact that Alice has been assigned tasks 145 and 150 to be processed during the same period. According to an embodiment, the program manager may then drag one of the over-allocated tasks from the resource 130 (Alice) to a different resource, for example, the resource 135 or 140, and thus, the program manager will quickly and efficiently resolve the over-allocation and receive an updated resource scheduling view 105 showing the new allocation of tasks to the available resources 130, 135, 140; [0036], the plumbing task may be inserted out one week past the build frame task 155 if the plumbing task will place the resource Tim in an over-allocation mode; if the plumbing task may begin as early as June 21, while still respecting any constraints or dependencies associated with the plumbing task in relation to other tasks of the project, the project manager may drag the plumbing task to a start date of June 21 to be performed by one of the two resources 130, 135);
and maintain a connection between the tablature, the plurality of resources, and the plurality of items, wherein the connection is configured to cause the tablature to re-render in response to either an alteration to the unit capacity per time period of a resource or an alteration to the assignment of the plurality of items (Steinglass Figs. 1-8; [0025], a project manager or user of the scheduling view 105 may manipulate the displayed schedule of tasks by moving tasks from one location in the scheduling view 105 to a different location in the scheduling view 105 to place a desired task at a different scheduling point (e.g., start time), or for assigning a desired task from one human resource 135 to a different human resource 140; [0026], For purposes of example, the scheduling view 106, illustrated immediately beneath the scheduling view 105 in FIG. 1, shows a resulting view of the tasks of the associated project after the project manager or user has dragged the "build frame" task 155 from the human resource 135 and start date of June 21 to the human resource 140 and a start date of June 14. Accordingly, the scheduling view 106 immediately shows the project manager or user a graphical representation of the utilization of his/her resources 130, 135, 140 if the project manager moves the "build frame" task 155 from its previous resource and start time to a different resource and different start time; [0028-0029], the program manager may selectively expand the row containing tasks for the resource 130 (Alice) so that the tasks assigned to Alice are displayed on two lines which will allow the program manager to see that the over-allocation has been caused by the fact that Alice has been assigned tasks 145 and 150 to be processed during the same period. According to an embodiment, the program manager may then drag one of the over-allocated tasks from the resource 130 (Alice) to a different resource, for example, the resource 135 or 140, and thus, the program manager will quickly and efficiently resolve the over-allocation and receive an updated resource scheduling view 105 showing the new allocation of tasks to the available resources 130, 135, 140)
However, Steinglass fails to expressly disclose receive an input indicative of a unit capacity per time period for each of a plurality of resources, wherein the unit capacity per time period is a measure that quantifies a designated capacity of a corresponding resource independently of a specific task; based on the received input quantifying designated capacities of resources independently of specific tasks. In the same field of endeavor, Schweitzer teaches:
receive an input indicative of a unit capacity per time period for each of a plurality of resources, wherein the unit capacity per time period is a measure that quantifies a designated capacity of a corresponding resource independently of a specific task; based on the received input quantifying designated capacities of resources independently of specific tasks (Schweitzer Figs. 1-28; [0600], FIGS. 20-21 illustrate screen displays 2000, 2100 provided by the labor and resource scheduling system 210 for entry and display of data defining employees to be scheduled for events at the facility. The employee definition data includes name and address, allowed work hours, minimum and maximum work weeks and shifts, pay rates and more to assist in the automatic scheduling procedure discussed above, to select the appropriate employee for task assignments. These employee definitions are entered both at configuration and as changes arise during use of the system (unit capacity per time period input independent of tasks, such as minimum shift hours, maximum shift hours, minimum work week hours, maximum work week hours, max days per week); [0599], FIGS. 18-19 illustrate screen displays 1800, 1900 provided by the labor and resource scheduling system 210 for entry and display of data defining tasks at the facility; [0601], FIGS. 22 and 23 illustrate screen displays 2200, 2300 presented by the labor and resource scheduling system that are used during scheduling)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have incorporated receive an input indicative of a unit capacity per time period for each of a plurality of resources, wherein the unit capacity per time period is a measure that quantifies a designated capacity of a corresponding resource independently of a specific task; based on the received input quantifying designated capacities of resources independently of specific tasks as suggested in Schweitzer into Steinglass. Doing so would be desirable because Schweitzer provides an automated labor and resource scheduling system provides automated assistance to scheduling managers for scheduling labor and resources (see Schweitzer abs.). The present invention relates to labor and resource scheduling, and more particularly relates to scheduling to provide more efficient utilization of labor and resources (see Schweitzer [0001]). Labor schedules are currently developed on a manual basis throughout the world. The task of scheduling is a difficult exercise which requires managers to sift through countless contracts, in an attempt to cover all staffing requirements necessary. Effectiveness in labor planning is highly dependent upon the education and capability of each manager. Unfortunately, the complexity and time required to cover all aspects of is often a staggering task which, due to human nature, results in inefficiencies and excessive labor costs (see Schweitzer [0003]). Implementations described herein of a labor and resource scheduling system more effectively schedules labor to make efficient use of labor and resources, so as to avoid excess labor costs. The described labor and resource scheduling system performs more efficient scheduling for widely varying event requirements and facilities based on facility-specific time analysis of task assignments. More particularly, a time and distance analysis is made of a specific facility and resources (see Schweitzer [0004]). The system further ensures users enhanced communication, improved customer service and optimum productivity (see Schweitzer [0005]). Additionally, the system of Schweitzer would improve the system of Steinglass by enabling managers to flexibly define employees with various different minimum and maximum capacities, thereby better enabling managers to schedule and manage tasks and employees, as needed. The system would further improve the under and over utilization measures of Steinglass, such that the system can accurately track utilization in situations where different employees may have different capacities.
Regarding claims 298 and 302, claims 298 and 302 contain substantially similar limitations to those found in claim 282. Consequently, claims 298 and 302 are rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding claim 283, Steinglass in view of Schweitzer teaches all the limitations of claim 282, further comprising:
wherein the at least one processor is further configured to: enable selection of specific assigned units associated with a particular resource; and in response to the selection, disburse the selected specific assigned units to resources other than the particular resource (Steinglass Figs. 1-8; [0025], a project manager or user of the scheduling view 105 may manipulate the displayed schedule of tasks by moving tasks from one location in the scheduling view 105 to a different location in the scheduling view 105 to place a desired task at a different scheduling point (e.g., start time), or for assigning a desired task from one human resource 135 to a different human resource 140; [0026], For purposes of example, the scheduling view 106, illustrated immediately beneath the scheduling view 105 in FIG. 1, shows a resulting view of the tasks of the associated project after the project manager or user has dragged the "build frame" task 155 from the human resource 135 and start date of June 21 to the human resource 140 and a start date of June 14. Accordingly, the scheduling view 106 immediately shows the project manager or user a graphical representation of the utilization of his/her resources 130, 135, 140 if the project manager moves the "build frame" task 155 from its previous resource and start time to a different resource and different start time; [0028-0029], the program manager may then drag one of the over-allocated tasks from the resource 130 (Alice) to a different resource, for example, the resource 135 or 140, and thus, the program manager will quickly and efficiently resolve the over-allocation and receive an updated resource scheduling view 105 showing the new allocation of tasks to the available resources 130, 135, 140)
Regarding claim 299, claim 299 contains substantially similar limitations to those found in claim 283. Consequently, claim 299 is rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding claim 284, Steinglass in view of Schweitzer teaches all the limitations of claim 283, further comprising:
wherein disbursing the selected specific assigned units to the particular resource includes enabling reassignment of units to a different time period associated with the particular resource (Steinglass Figs. 1-8; [0025], a project manager or user of the scheduling view 105 may manipulate the displayed schedule of tasks by moving tasks from one location in the scheduling view 105 to a different location in the scheduling view 105 to place a desired task at a different scheduling point (e.g., start time), or for assigning a desired task from one human resource 135 to a different human resource 140; [0026], For purposes of example, the scheduling view 106, illustrated immediately beneath the scheduling view 105 in FIG. 1, shows a resulting view of the tasks of the associated project after the project manager or user has dragged the "build frame" task 155 from the human resource 135 and start date of June 21 to the human resource 140 and a start date of June 14. Accordingly, the scheduling view 106 immediately shows the project manager or user a graphical representation of the utilization of his/her resources 130, 135, 140 if the project manager moves the "build frame" task 155 from its previous resource and start time to a different resource and different start time; [0028-0029], the program manager may then drag one of the over-allocated tasks from the resource 130 (Alice) to a different resource, for example, the resource 135 or 140, and thus, the program manager will quickly and efficiently resolve the over-allocation and receive an updated resource scheduling view 105 showing the new allocation of tasks to the available resources 130, 135, 140)
Regarding claim 285, Steinglass in view of Schweitzer teaches all the limitations of claim 283, further comprising:
wherein the selected specific assigned units to the particular resource include at least one of a time measure, a task measure, a volume measure, a distance measure, or an item measure (Steinglass Figs. 1-8; [0021], scheduling view 105 includes a resource column 110 and a number of date columns 115, 120, 125. As should be appreciated, the information illustrated in the scheduling view 105 is for purposes of example only and is not limiting of the vast numbers of different resources and task start or stop times that may be utilized in the scheduling view 105, as described below. The scheduling view, 105 illustrated in FIG. 1, includes three example resources 130, 135, 140 in the form of three workers or professionals to which one or more tasks of a given project may be assigned; [0024], the rectangular portion of the view 105 containing the task 145 (excavation) may be colored or shaded with a highlighting color, for example, gray, to show the duration of the task 145; [0025], a project manager or user of the scheduling view 105 may manipulate the displayed schedule of tasks by moving tasks from one location in the scheduling view 105 to a different location in the scheduling view 105 to place a desired task at a different scheduling point (e.g., start time), or for assigning a desired task from one human resource 135 to a different human resource 140; [0026], the scheduling view 106, illustrated immediately beneath the scheduling view 105 in FIG. 1, shows a resulting view of the tasks of the associated project after the project manager or user has dragged the "build frame" task 155 from the human resource 135 and start date of June 21 to the human resource 140 and a start date of June 14. Accordingly, the scheduling view 106 immediately shows the project manager or user a graphical representation of the utilization of his/her resources 130, 135, 140 if the project manager moves the "build frame" task 155 from its previous resource and start time to a different resource and different start time; [0043], a "buffer" task may be assigned to Jon, for example, a buffer task called "management duties." This buffer task is not sized in hours, but rather has a duration and a percentage effort associated with the required buffer. For example, Jon may have a two week task called "management duties" that will take up 50% of his time. The net result is that, unlike other tasks, the "management duties" task can be scheduled and executed in parallel to the other tasks; 20% of Jon's 40 hour week (8 hours) is assumed to be accounted for by the buffer task)
Regarding claim 286, Steinglass in view of Schweitzer teaches all the limitations of claim 282, further comprising:
wherein the at least one processor is further configured to receive a selection of a particular resource utilization indicator associated with a particular resource, and upon selection, output a second display signal for presenting information associated with underlying assigned items relative to the unit capacity per time period associated with the particular resource (Steinglass Figs. 1-8; [0006], the project manager/user may "zoom in" and/or "zoom out" to view the overall project or portions of the overall project at different levels in the hierarchical outline of project or work task; [0028], overlapping tasks may be highlighted with an alarming highlighting color, for example, red, and the overlapping tasks may be illustrated in the view 105 in a collapsed mode. The program manager/user of the view 105 may then expand the tasks for the over-allocated resource to cause tasks assigned to the over-allocated resource to be displayed in multiple lines. Over-allocation may then be manually resolved by dragging one of the conflicting/over-allocating tasks to a different resource or to a different start time; [0029], the program manager may selectively expand the row containing tasks for the resource 130 (Alice) so that the tasks assigned to Alice are displayed on two lines which will allow the program manager to see that the over-allocation has been caused by the fact that Alice has been assigned tasks 145 and 150 to be processed during the same period. According to an embodiment, the program manager may then drag one of the over-allocated tasks from the resource 130 (Alice) to a different resource, for example, the resource 135 or 140, and thus, the program manager will quickly and efficiently resolve the over-allocation and receive an updated resource scheduling view 105 showing the new allocation of tasks to the available resources 130, 135, 140; [0033], Referring to FIG. 3, the scheduling view 305 illustrates a "zooming in" to the lowest level tasks assigned to two resources "Alice" and "Jon" and shows the start dates for the associated tasks)
Regarding claim 300, claim 300 contains substantially similar limitations to those found in claim 286. Consequently, claim 300 is rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding claim 287, Steinglass in view of Schweitzer teaches all the limitations of claim 286, further comprising:
wherein the at least one processor is further configured to reassign items or units to a different time period associated with the particular resource (Steinglass Figs. 1-8; [0028], overlapping tasks may be highlighted with an alarming highlighting color, for example, red, and the overlapping tasks may be illustrated in the view 105 in a collapsed mode. The program manager/user of the view 105 may then expand the tasks for the over-allocated resource to cause tasks assigned to the over-allocated resource to be displayed in multiple lines. Over-allocation may then be manually resolved by dragging one of the conflicting/over-allocating tasks to a different resource or to a different start time; [0029], the program manager may selectively expand the row containing tasks for the resource 130 (Alice) so that the tasks assigned to Alice are displayed on two lines which will allow the program manager to see that the over-allocation has been caused by the fact that Alice has been assigned tasks 145 and 150 to be processed during the same period. According to an embodiment, the program manager may then drag one of the over-allocated tasks from the resource 130 (Alice) to a different resource, for example, the resource 135 or 140, and thus, the program manager will quickly and efficiently resolve the over-allocation and receive an updated resource scheduling view 105 showing the new allocation of tasks to the available resources 130, 135, 140)
Regarding claim 301, claim 301 contains substantially similar limitations to those found in claim 287. Consequently, claim 301 is rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding claim 288, Steinglass in view of Schweitzer teaches all the limitations of claim 282, further comprising:
wherein receiving the assignment of units includes enabling a plurality of entities to assign units to a common resource, wherein outputting the display signal for presenting includes updating the resource utilization indicator on multiple displays of the plurality of entities when one entity assigns units to a resource (Steinglass Figs. 1-8; [0005], moving a task onto a resource already allocated for the time associated with the moved task may be resolved automatically or manually; [0025-0026], tasks may be moved by any suitable means for moving text of other displayed objects in a user interface, for example, by dragging and dropping, keyboard entry, voice activated text movement; [0027], a project manager/user may optionally use an "automatic" scheduling mechanism which will avoid resource over-allocation. According to this mechanism, tasks assigned to a given resource are adjusted so that the resource is considered as the "drop target" of the dragged task only, and so that selected tasks are from the "drop point" forward in time; [0028-0029], the program manager may then drag one of the over-allocated tasks from the resource 130 (Alice) to a different resource, for example, the resource 135 or 140, and thus, the program manager will quickly and efficiently resolve the over-allocation and receive an updated resource scheduling view 105 showing the new allocation of tasks to the available resources 130, 135, 140; [0031], allows a project manager/user to select a project outline; [0040], Referring now to FIG. 6, according to an embodiment, the project management resource scheduling view 605 may be utilized in combination with a classic Gantt chart view of work tasks for allowing a project manager to view a mix of task-based and resource-based scheduling for better and more efficiently managing his/her project resources; [0041], The resource-based scheduling view 605 of the present invention may be provided in combination with a task-based view 610 provided in the form of a Gantt chart to allow the project manager an efficient visualization of the utilization of his/her resources in combination with a task-based visualization provided by a Gantt chart. Referring to FIG. 6, a scheduling view 605 is illustrated showing three tasks assigned to resources Alice, Jon, and Tim to allow the project manager to visualize the tasks in a resource-based manner. A Gantt chart 610 is presented immediately adjacent to the scheduling view 605 showing the tasks 145, 150, 155 in a task-based Gantt chart for allowing the project manager to visualize the tasks in a task-based manner. According to an embodiment, the scheduling view 605 and the Gantt chart 610 may be functionally associated with each other via the project management application 100. Thus, if the project manager moves a task in the scheduling view 605 from one resource to another resource or from one start date to a different start date, as described above, the change will be illustrated in the scheduling view 605, and correspondingly, the change will be illustrated in the task-based Gantt chart 610 for allowing the project manager a quick and efficient visualization of the effects of the changes made to the project schedule and assignments; [0046], the invention may also be implemented in combination with other types of computer systems and program modules; [0047], the invention may be practiced with other computer system configurations, including hand-held devices, multiprocessor systems, microprocessor-based or programmable consumer electronics, minicomputers, mainframe computers, and the like. The invention may also be practiced in distributed computing environments where tasks are performed by remote processing devices that are linked through a communications network. In a distributed computing environment, program modules may be located in both local and remote memory storage devices)
Regarding claim 289, Steinglass in view of Schweitzer teaches all the limitations of claim 282, further comprising:
wherein receiving the assignment of units includes enabling at least one entity to assign units to a common resource, wherein outputting the display signal for presenting includes updating the resource utilization indicator on multiple displays of the at least one entity when at least one entity assigns units to a resource (Steinglass Figs. 1-8; [0025-0026], the scheduling view 106, illustrated immediately beneath the scheduling view 105 in FIG. 1, shows a resulting view of the tasks of the associated project after the project manager or user has dragged the "build frame" task 155 from the human resource 135 and start date of June 21 to the human resource 140 and a start date of June 14; [0028-0029], the program manager may then drag one of the over-allocated tasks from the resource 130 (Alice) to a different resource, for example, the resource 135 or 140, and thus, the program manager will quickly and efficiently resolve the over-allocation and receive an updated resource scheduling view 105 showing the new allocation of tasks to the available resources 130, 135, 140; [0040], Referring now to FIG. 6, according to an embodiment, the project management resource scheduling view 605 may be utilized in combination with a classic Gantt chart view of work tasks for allowing a project manager to view a mix of task-based and resource-based scheduling for better and more efficiently managing his/her project resources; [0041], The resource-based scheduling view 605 of the present invention may be provided in combination with a task-based view 610 provided in the form of a Gantt chart to allow the project manager an efficient visualization of the utilization of his/her resources in combination with a task-based visualization provided by a Gantt chart. Referring to FIG. 6, a scheduling view 605 is illustrated showing three tasks assigned to resources Alice, Jon, and Tim to allow the project manager to visualize the tasks in a resource-based manner. A Gantt chart 610 is presented immediately adjacent to the scheduling view 605 showing the tasks 145, 150, 155 in a task-based Gantt chart for allowing the project manager to visualize the tasks in a task-based manner. According to an embodiment, the scheduling view 605 and the Gantt chart 610 may be functionally associated with each other via the project management application 100. Thus, if the project manager moves a task in the scheduling view 605 from one resource to another resource or from one start date to a different start date, as described above, the change will be illustrated in the scheduling view 605, and correspondingly, the change will be illustrated in the task-based Gantt chart 610 for allowing the project manager a quick and efficient visualization of the effects of the changes made to the project schedule and assignments)
Regarding claim 291, Steinglass in view of Schweitzer teaches all the limitations of claim 282, further comprising:
wherein the resource utilization indicator is configured to change depending on a resource utilization of a resource in a particular time period, wherein the resource utilization of the resource in the particular time period is determined by comparing aggregated assigned units to the unit capacity of the resource for that particular time period (Steinglass Figs. 1-8; [0005], Over-allocations of a given resource caused by moving a task onto a resource already allocated for the time associated with the moved task may be resolved automatically or manually; [0024], any number of highlighting methods, for example colors, symbols, icons, and the like may be used to indicate the duration of a given task in the views 105, 106; [0028], it is possible to over-allocate a resource by moving a task to a resource during a time the resource is already allocated with a project task. If a given resource 130, 135, 140 is over-allocated, a user interface highlighting method may be used for showing the over-allocation. For example, overlapping tasks may be highlighted with an alarming highlighting color, for example, red, and the overlapping tasks may be illustrated in the view 105 in a collapsed mode. The program manager/user of the view 105 may then expand the tasks for the over-allocated resource to cause tasks assigned to the over-allocated resource to be displayed in multiple lines. Over-allocation may then be manually resolved by dragging one of the conflicting/over-allocating tasks to a different resource or to a different start time; [0029], referring to the resource scheduling view 105, if the task 150 (pour cement) is assigned to the resource 130 (Alice) wherein the resource Alice is assigned both tasks 145 and 150 to be started and completed at the same time, the rectangular space displayed in the view 105 for the subject time period may be highlighted in an alarming color, for example, red. According to an embodiment, the program manager may selectively expand the row containing tasks for the resource 130 (Alice) so that the tasks assigned to Alice are displayed on two lines which will allow the program manager to see that the over-allocation has been caused by the fact that Alice has been assigned tasks 145 and 150 to be processed during the same period. According to an embodiment, the program manager may then drag one of the over-allocated tasks from the resource 130 (Alice) to a different resource, for example, the resource 135 or 140, and thus, the program manager will quickly and efficiently resolve the over-allocation and receive an updated resource scheduling view 105 showing the new allocation of tasks to the available resources 130, 135, 140; see also [0021])
Regarding claim 292, Steinglass in view of Schweitzer teaches all the limitations of claim 291, further comprising:
wherein changing the resource utilization indicator includes a change in color (Steinglass Figs. 1-8; [0024], any number of highlighting methods, for example colors, symbols, icons, and the like may be used to indicate the duration of a given task in the views 105, 106; [0028], it is possible to over-allocate a resource by moving a task to a resource during a time the resource is already allocated with a project task. If a given resource 130, 135, 140 is over-allocated, a user interface highlighting method may be used for showing the over-allocation. For example, overlapping tasks may be highlighted with an alarming highlighting color, for example, red, and the overlapping tasks may be illustrated in the view 105 in a collapsed mode. The program manager/user of the view 105 may then expand the tasks for the over-allocated resource to cause tasks assigned to the over-allocated resource to be displayed in multiple lines. Over-allocation may then be manually resolved by dragging one of the conflicting/over-allocating tasks to a different resource or to a different start time; [0029], referring to the resource scheduling view 105, if the task 150 (pour cement) is assigned to the resource 130 (Alice) wherein the resource Alice is assigned both tasks 145 and 150 to be started and completed at the same time, the rectangular space displayed in the view 105 for the subject time period may be highlighted in an alarming color, for example, red. According to an embodiment, the program manager may selectively expand the row containing tasks for the resource 130 (Alice) so that the tasks assigned to Alice are displayed on two lines which will allow the program manager to see that the over-allocation has been caused by the fact that Alice has been assigned tasks 145 and 150 to be processed during the same period. According to an embodiment, the program manager may then drag one of the over-allocated tasks from the resource 130 (Alice) to a different resource, for example, the resource 135 or 140, and thus, the program manager will quickly and efficiently resolve the over-allocation and receive an updated resource scheduling view 105 showing the new allocation of tasks to the available resources 130, 135, 140; see also [0021])
Regarding claim 293, Steinglass in view of Schweitzer teaches all the limitations of claim 291, further comprising:
wherein changing the resource utilization indicator includes a change in a graphical representation (Steinglass Figs. 1-8; [0024], any number of highlighting methods, for example colors, symbols, icons, and the like may be used to indicate the duration of a given task in the views 105, 106; [0028], it is possible to over-allocate a resource by moving a task to a resource during a time the resource is already allocated with a project task. If a given resource 130, 135, 140 is over-allocated, a user interface highlighting method may be used for showing the over-allocation. For example, overlapping tasks may be highlighted with an alarming highlighting color, for example, red, and the overlapping tasks may be illustrated in the view 105 in a collapsed mode. The program manager/user of the view 105 may then expand the tasks for the over-allocated resource to cause tasks assigned to the over-allocated resource to be displayed in multiple lines. Over-allocation may then be manually resolved by dragging one of the conflicting/over-allocating tasks to a different resource or to a different start time; [0029], referring to the resource scheduling view 105, if the task 150 (pour cement) is assigned to the resource 130 (Alice) wherein the resource Alice is assigned both tasks 145 and 150 to be started and completed at the same time, the rectangular space displayed in the view 105 for the subject time period may be highlighted in an alarming color, for example, red. According to an embodiment, the program manager may selectively expand the row containing tasks for the resource 130 (Alice) so that the tasks assigned to Alice are displayed on two lines which will allow the program manager to see that the over-allocation has been caused by the fact that Alice has been assigned tasks 145 and 150 to be processed during the same period. According to an embodiment, the program manager may then drag one of the over-allocated tasks from the resource 130 (Alice) to a different resource, for example, the resource 135 or 140, and thus, the program manager will quickly and efficiently resolve the over-allocation and receive an updated resource scheduling view 105 showing the new allocation of tasks to the available resources 130, 135, 140; see also [0021])
Regarding claim 294, Steinglass in view of Schweitzer teaches all the limitations of claim 291, further comprising:
wherein changing the resource utilization indicator includes a change in size of a graphical representation (Steinglass Figs. 1-8; [0024], any number of highlighting methods, for example colors, symbols, icons, and the like may be used to indicate the duration of a given task in the views 105, 106; [0028], it is possible to over-allocate a resource by moving a task to a resource during a time the resource is already allocated with a project task. If a given resource 130, 135, 140 is over-allocated, a user interface highlighting method may be used for showing the over-allocation. For example, overlapping tasks may be highlighted with an alarming highlighting color, for example, red, and the overlapping tasks may be illustrated in the view 105 in a collapsed mode. The program manager/user of the view 105 may then expand the tasks for the over-allocated resource to cause tasks assigned to the over-allocated resource to be displayed in multiple lines. Over-allocation may then be manually resolved by dragging one of the conflicting/over-allocating tasks to a different resource or to a different start time; [0029], referring to the resource scheduling view 105, if the task 150 (pour cement) is assigned to the resource 130 (Alice) wherein the resource Alice is assigned both tasks 145 and 150 to be started and completed at the same time, the rectangular space displayed in the view 105 for the subject time period may be highlighted in an alarming color, for example, red. According to an embodiment, the program manager may selectively expand the row containing tasks for the resource 130 (Alice) so that the tasks assigned to Alice are displayed on two lines which will allow the program manager to see that the over-allocation has been caused by the fact that Alice has been assigned tasks 145 and 150 to be processed during the same period. According to an embodiment, the program manager may then drag one of the over-allocated tasks from the resource 130 (Alice) to a different resource, for example, the resource 135 or 140, and thus, the program manager will quickly and efficiently resolve the over-allocation and receive an updated resource scheduling view 105 showing the new allocation of tasks to the available resources 130, 135, 140 [0033], Referring to FIG. 3, the scheduling view 305 illustrates a "zooming in" to the lowest level tasks assigned to two resources "Alice" and "Jon" and shows the start dates for the associated tasks. However, if the project manager desires to "zoom out" on the subject resources to quickly ascertain higher level tasks associated with the lower level tasks displayed in the view 305, the project manager may "zoom out" to a higher outline level, for example, outline level "2", and the project manager will receive a display of the tasks associated with the subject resources at the selected outline or hierarchical level. For example, as illustrated in the scheduling view 306 illustrated in FIG. 3 beneath the scheduling view 305, the project manager has "zoomed out" to outline level "2" which shows that the resources 130, 135 (Alice and Jon) are assigned to tasks that are part of the "foundation" level of the subject project; see also [0021])
Regarding claim 295, Steinglass in view of Schweitzer teaches all the limitations of claim 282, further comprising:
wherein the resource utilization indicator is at least one of an emoji, a GIF, or a resource shaped indicator (Steinglass Figs. 1-8; [0024], any number of highlighting methods, for example colors, symbols, icons, and the like may be used to indicate the duration of a given task in the views 105, 106; [0028], it is possible to over-allocate a resource by moving a task to a resource during a time the resource is already allocated with a project task. If a given resource 130, 135, 140 is over-allocated, a user interface highlighting method may be used for showing the over-allocation. For example, overlapping tasks may be highlighted with an alarming highlighting color, for example, red, and the overlapping tasks may be illustrated in the view 105 in a collapsed mode. The program manager/user of the view 105 may then expand the tasks for the over-allocated resource to cause tasks assigned to the over-allocated resource to be displayed in multiple lines. Over-allocation may then be manually resolved by dragging one of the conflicting/over-allocating tasks to a different resource or to a different start time; [0029], referring to the resource scheduling view 105, if the task 150 (pour cement) is assigned to the resource 130 (Alice) wherein the resource Alice is assigned both tasks 145 and 150 to be started and completed at the same time, the rectangular space displayed in the view 105 for the subject time period may be highlighted in an alarming color, for example, red. According to an embodiment, the program manager may selectively expand the row containing tasks for the resource 130 (Alice) so that the tasks assigned to Alice are displayed on two lines which will allow the program manager to see that the over-allocation has been caused by the fact that Alice has been assigned tasks 145 and 150 to be processed during the same period. According to an embodiment, the program manager may then drag one of the over-allocated tasks from the resource 130 (Alice) to a different resource, for example, the resource 135 or 140, and thus, the program manager will quickly and efficiently resolve the over-allocation and receive an updated resource scheduling view 105 showing the new allocation of tasks to the available resources 130, 135, 140; see also [0021])
Regarding claim 296, Steinglass in view of Schweitzer teaches all the limitations of claim 282, further comprising:
wherein when utilization for one of the plurality of resources is at under-capacity, the resource utilization indicator is further configured to graphically present a level of under capacity (Steinglass Figs. 1-8; [0021], The scheduling view, 105 illustrated in FIG. 1, includes three example resources 130, 135, 140 in the form of three workers or professionals to which one or more tasks of a given project may be assigned. As should be appreciated, the resources 130, 135, 140 may also be in the form of equipment or other resources to which a given task or tasks of a project may be assigned (as shown John is at capacity and Tim and Alice are under capacity); [0024], the rectangular portion of the view 105 containing the task 145 (excavation) may be colored or shaded with a highlighting color, for example, gray, to show the duration of the task 145; [0026], the scheduling view 106, illustrated immediately beneath the scheduling view 105 in FIG. 1, shows a resulting view of the tasks of the associated project after the project manager or user has dragged the "build frame" task 155 from the human resource 135 and start date of June 21 to the human resource 140 and a start date of June 14; [0028], it is possible to over-allocate a resource by moving a task to a resource during a time the resource is already allocated with a project task; see also [0021], [0029], [0036])
Regarding claim 297, Steinglass in view of Schweitzer teaches all the limitations of claim 282, further comprising:
wherein the at least one processor is further configured to receive an input for selecting a particular plurality of resources; and in response to receiving the input, output a second display signal to re-render the resource utilization indicator for each of the selected plurality of resources (Steinglass Figs. 1-8; [0025], a project manager or user of the scheduling view 105 may manipulate the displayed schedule of tasks by moving tasks from one location in the scheduling view 105 to a different location in the scheduling view 105 to place a desired task at a different scheduling point (e.g., start time), or for assigning a desired task from one human resource 135 to a different human resource 140; [0026], For purposes of example, the scheduling view 106, illustrated immediately beneath the scheduling view 105 in FIG. 1, shows a resulting view of the tasks of the associated project after the project manager or user has dragged the "build frame" task 155 from the human resource 135 and start date of June 21 to the human resource 140 and a start date of June 14. Accordingly, the scheduling view 106 immediately shows the project manager or user a graphical representation of the utilization of his/her resources 130, 135, 140 if the project manager moves the "build frame" task 155 from its previous resource and start time to a different resource and different start time; [0028-0029], the program manager may then drag one of the over-allocated tasks from the resource 130 (Alice) to a different resource, for example, the resource 135 or 140, and thus, the program manager will quickly and efficiently resolve the over-allocation and receive an updated resource scheduling view 105 showing the new allocation of tasks to the available resources 130, 135, 140; [0033], Referring to FIG. 3, the scheduling view 305 illustrates a "zooming in" to the lowest level tasks assigned to two resources "Alice" and "Jon" and shows the start dates for the associated tasks. However, if the project manager desires to "zoom out" on the subject resources to quickly ascertain higher level tasks associated with the lower level tasks displayed in the view 305, the project manager may "zoom out" to a higher outline level, for example, outline level "2", and the project manager will receive a display of the tasks associated with the subject resources at the selected outline or hierarchical level. For example, as illustrated in the scheduling view 306 illustrated in FIG. 3 beneath the scheduling view 305, the project manager has "zoomed out" to outline level "2" which shows that the resources 130, 135 (Alice and Jon) are assigned to tasks that are part of the "foundation" level of the subject project; [0040-0041], A Gantt chart 610 is presented immediately adjacent to the scheduling view 605 showing the tasks 145, 150, 155 in a task-based Gantt chart for allowing the project manager to visualize the tasks in a task-based manner. According to an embodiment, the scheduling view 605 and the Gantt chart 610 may be functionally associated with each other via the project management application 100. Thus, if the project manager moves a task in the scheduling view 605 from one resource to another resource or from one start date to a different start date, as described above, the change will be illustrated in the scheduling view 605, and correspondingly, the change will be illustrated in the task-based Gantt chart 610 for allowing the project manager a quick and efficient visualization of the effects of the changes made to the project schedule and assignments)
Regarding claim 305, Steinglass in view of Schweitzer teaches all the limitations of claim 282, further comprising:
wherein each of the plurality of items is configured to be retrieved from the at least one board from at least two disbursed workspaces (Steinglass Figs. 1-8; [0025], a project manager or user of the scheduling view 105 may manipulate the displayed schedule of tasks by moving tasks from one location in the scheduling view 105 to a different location in the scheduling view 105 to place a desired task at a different scheduling point (e.g., start time), or for assigning a desired task from one human resource 135 to a different human resource 140; [0026], the scheduling view 106 immediately shows the project manager or user a graphical representation of the utilization of his/her resources 130, 135, 140 if the project manager moves the "build frame" task 155 from its previous resource and start time to a different resource and different start time; [0028-0029], the program manager may then drag one of the over-allocated tasks from the resource 130 (Alice) to a different resource, for example, the resource 135 or 140, and thus, the program manager will quickly and efficiently resolve the over-allocation and receive an updated resource scheduling view 105 showing the new allocation of tasks to the available resources 130, 135, 140; [0031], Referring to FIG. 2, a user interface 205 is illustrated and described which allows a project manager/user to select a project outline level for viewing project tasks at a selected level in a hierarchical outline of project tasks; the user may use a "zoom in"/"zoom out" function for zooming to different levels of the project task hierarchy; [0033], Referring to FIG. 3, the scheduling view 305 illustrates a "zooming in" to the lowest level tasks assigned to two resources "Alice" and "Jon" and shows the start dates for the associated tasks. However, if the project manager desires to "zoom out" on the subject resources to quickly ascertain higher level tasks associated with the lower level tasks displayed in the view 305, the project manager may "zoom out" to a higher outline level, for example, outline level "2", and the project manager will receive a display of the tasks associated with the subject resources at the selected outline or hierarchical level. For example, as illustrated in the scheduling view 306 illustrated in FIG. 3 beneath the scheduling view 305, the project manager has "zoomed out" to outline level "2" which shows that the resources 130, 135 (Alice and Jon) are assigned to tasks that are part of the "foundation" level of the subject project. As should be appreciated, according to the example illustrated herein, if the project manager "zooms out" to yet a higher level, then the tasks illustrated for both resources 130, 135 (Alice and Jon) would show "build house" because the task "foundation" is a child task of the overall project "build house" according to the example hierarchical task structure/outline illustrated and described herein; [0040-0041], if the project manager moves a task in the scheduling view 605 from one resource to another resource or from one start date to a different start date, as described above, the change will be illustrated in the scheduling view 605, and correspondingly, the change will be illustrated in the task-based Gantt chart 610 for allowing the project manager a quick and efficient visualization of the effects of the changes made to the project schedule and assignments)
Regarding claim 306, Steinglass in view of Schweitzer teaches all the limitations of claim 282, further comprising:
wherein the time period is measured according to user preference (Steinglass Figs. 1-8; [0025], a project manager or user of the scheduling view 105 may manipulate the displayed schedule of tasks by moving tasks from one location in the scheduling view 105 to a different location in the scheduling view 105 to place a desired task at a different scheduling point (e.g., start time), or for assigning a desired task from one human resource 135 to a different human resource 140; [0026], the scheduling view 106 immediately shows the project manager or user a graphical representation of the utilization of his/her resources 130, 135, 140 if the project manager moves the "build frame" task 155 from its previous resource and start time to a different resource and different start time; [0028-0029], the program manager may then drag one of the over-allocated tasks from the resource 130 (Alice) to a different resource, for example, the resource 135 or 140, and thus, the program manager will quickly and efficiently resolve the over-allocation and receive an updated resource scheduling view 105 showing the new allocation of tasks to the available resources 130, 135, 140; [0031], Referring to FIG. 2, a user interface 205 is illustrated and described which allows a project manager/user to select a project outline level for viewing project tasks at a selected level in a hierarchical outline of project tasks; the user may use a "zoom in"/"zoom out" function for zooming to different levels of the project task hierarchy; [0033], Referring to FIG. 3, the scheduling view 305 illustrates a "zooming in" to the lowest level tasks assigned to two resources "Alice" and "Jon" and shows the start dates for the associated tasks. However, if the project manager desires to "zoom out" on the subject resources to quickly ascertain higher level tasks associated with the lower level tasks displayed in the view 305, the project manager may "zoom out" to a higher outline level, for example, outline level "2", and the project manager will receive a display of the tasks associated with the subject resources at the selected outline or hierarchical level. For example, as illustrated in the scheduling view 306 illustrated in FIG. 3 beneath the scheduling view 305, the project manager has "zoomed out" to outline level "2" which shows that the resources 130, 135 (Alice and Jon) are assigned to tasks that are part of the "foundation" level of the subject project. As should be appreciated, according to the example illustrated herein, if the project manager "zooms out" to yet a higher level, then the tasks illustrated for both resources 130, 135 (Alice and Jon) would show "build house" because the task "foundation" is a child task of the overall project "build house" according to the example hierarchical task structure/outline illustrated and described herein; [0040-0041], if the project manager moves a task in the scheduling view 605 from one resource to another resource or from one start date to a different start date, as described above, the change will be illustrated in the scheduling view 605, and correspondingly, the change will be illustrated in the task-based Gantt chart 610 for allowing the project manager a quick and efficient visualization of the effects of the changes made to the project schedule and assignments)
Regarding claim 307, Steinglass in view of Schweitzer teaches all the limitations of claim 282, further comprising:
wherein the designated capacity of a corresponding resource independently of a specific task is associated with a time measure (Steinglass Figs. 1-8; [0021], scheduling view 105 includes a resource column 110 and a number of date columns 115, 120, 125. As should be appreciated, the information illustrated in the scheduling view 105 is for purposes of example only and is not limiting of the vast numbers of different resources and task start or stop times that may be utilized in the scheduling view 105, as described below; [0023], As illustrated in the scheduling view 105, a first human resource 130 is assigned a first task "excavation" scheduled to begin on June 14 and scheduled to run for one week; [0024], the task 155 which has an example duration of two weeks would be highlighted to show that the task lasts two weeks along the timeline extending from the example June 14 through the end of the week commencing on June 28; [0025], a project manager or user of the scheduling view 105 may manipulate the displayed schedule of tasks by moving tasks from one location in the scheduling view 105 to a different location in the scheduling view 105 to place a desired task at a different scheduling point (e.g., start time), or for assigning a desired task from one human resource 135 to a different human resource 140; [0026], the scheduling view 106 immediately shows the project manager or user a graphical representation of the utilization of his/her resources 130, 135, 140 if the project manager moves the "build frame" task 155 from its previous resource and start time to a different resource and different start time; [0028-0029], it is possible to over-allocate a resource by moving a task to a resource during a time the resource is already allocated with a project task. If a given resource 130, 135, 140 is over-allocated, a user interface highlighting method may be used for showing the over-allocation. For example, overlapping tasks may be highlighted with an alarming highlighting color, for example, red, and the overlapping tasks may be illustrated in the view 105 in a collapsed mode. The program manager/user of the view 105 may then expand the tasks for the over-allocated resource to cause tasks assigned to the over-allocated resource to be displayed in multiple lines. Over-allocation may then be manually resolved by dragging one of the conflicting/over-allocating tasks to a different resource or to a different start time; [0034], If the user were to select the three week "foundation" task assigned to the resource 135 and move it out one week, the corresponding child tasks of "pour cement" and "cure cement" likewise would be moved out one week; [0036], the plumbing task may be inserted out one week past the build frame task 155 if the plumbing task will place the resource Tim in an over-allocation mode; if the plumbing task may begin as early as June 21, while still respecting any constraints or dependencies associated with the plumbing task in relation to other tasks of the project, the project manager may drag the plumbing task to a start date of June 21 to be performed by one of the two resources 130, 135; [0040-0041], if the project manager moves a task in the scheduling view 605 from one resource to another resource or from one start date to a different start date, as described above, the change will be illustrated in the scheduling view 605, and correspondingly, the change will be illustrated in the task-based Gantt chart 610 for allowing the project manager a quick and efficient visualization of the effects of the changes made to the project schedule and assignments; [0043], Jon's 40 hour week (8 hours) is assumed to be accounted for by the buffer task)
Regarding claim 308, Steinglass in view of Schweitzer teaches all the limitations of claim 282, further comprising:
wherein the designated capacity of a corresponding resource independently of a specific task is associated with a task measure (Steinglass Figs. 1-8; [0021], scheduling view 105 includes a resource column 110 and a number of date columns 115, 120, 125. As should be appreciated, the information illustrated in the scheduling view 105 is for purposes of example only and is not limiting of the vast numbers of different resources and task start or stop times that may be utilized in the scheduling view 105, as described below; [0023], As illustrated in the scheduling view 105, a first human resource 130 is assigned a first task "excavation" scheduled to begin on June 14 and scheduled to run for one week; [0024], the task 155 which has an example duration of two weeks would be highlighted to show that the task lasts two weeks along the timeline extending from the example June 14 through the end of the week commencing on June 28; [0025], a project manager or user of the scheduling view 105 may manipulate the displayed schedule of tasks by moving tasks from one location in the scheduling view 105 to a different location in the scheduling view 105 to place a desired task at a different scheduling point (e.g., start time), or for assigning a desired task from one human resource 135 to a different human resource 140; [0026], the scheduling view 106 immediately shows the project manager or user a graphical representation of the utilization of his/her resources 130, 135, 140 if the project manager moves the "build frame" task 155 from its previous resource and start time to a different resource and different start time; [0028-0029], it is possible to over-allocate a resource by moving a task to a resource during a time the resource is already allocated with a project task. If a given resource 130, 135, 140 is over-allocated, a user interface highlighting method may be used for showing the over-allocation. For example, overlapping tasks may be highlighted with an alarming highlighting color, for example, red, and the overlapping tasks may be illustrated in the view 105 in a collapsed mode. The program manager/user of the view 105 may then expand the tasks for the over-allocated resource to cause tasks assigned to the over-allocated resource to be displayed in multiple lines. Over-allocation may then be manually resolved by dragging one of the conflicting/over-allocating tasks to a different resource or to a different start time; [0034], If the user were to select the three week "foundation" task assigned to the resource 135 and move it out one week, the corresponding child tasks of "pour cement" and "cure cement" likewise would be moved out one week; [0036], the plumbing task may be inserted out one week past the build frame task 155 if the plumbing task will place the resource Tim in an over-allocation mode; if the plumbing task may begin as early as June 21, while still respecting any constraints or dependencies associated with the plumbing task in relation to other tasks of the project, the project manager may drag the plumbing task to a start date of June 21 to be performed by one of the two resources 130, 135; [0040-0041], if the project manager moves a task in the scheduling view 605 from one resource to another resource or from one start date to a different start date, as described above, the change will be illustrated in the scheduling view 605, and correspondingly, the change will be illustrated in the task-based Gantt chart 610 for allowing the project manager a quick and efficient visualization of the effects of the changes made to the project schedule and assignments; [0043], Jon's 40 hour week (8 hours) is assumed to be accounted for by the buffer task)
Regarding claim 309, Steinglass in view of Schweitzer teaches all the limitations of claim 282, further comprising:
wherein the designated capacity of a corresponding resource independently of a specific task is associated with a volume measure (Steinglass Figs. 1-8; [0021], scheduling view 105 includes a resource column 110 and a number of date columns 115, 120, 125. As should be appreciated, the information illustrated in the scheduling view 105 is for purposes of example only and is not limiting of the vast numbers of different resources and task start or stop times that may be utilized in the scheduling view 105, as described below (volume of work shown); [0023], As illustrated in the scheduling view 105, a first human resource 130 is assigned a first task "excavation" scheduled to begin on June 14 and scheduled to run for one week; [0024], the task 155 which has an example duration of two weeks would be highlighted to show that the task lasts two weeks along the timeline extending from the example June 14 through the end of the week commencing on June 28; [0025], a project manager or user of the scheduling view 105 may manipulate the displayed schedule of tasks by moving tasks from one location in the scheduling view 105 to a different location in the scheduling view 105 to place a desired task at a different scheduling point (e.g., start time), or for assigning a desired task from one human resource 135 to a different human resource 140; [0026], the scheduling view 106 immediately shows the project manager or user a graphical representation of the utilization of his/her resources 130, 135, 140 if the project manager moves the "build frame" task 155 from its previous resource and start time to a different resource and different start time; [0028-0029], it is possible to over-allocate a resource by moving a task to a resource during a time the resource is already allocated with a project task. If a given resource 130, 135, 140 is over-allocated, a user interface highlighting method may be used for showing the over-allocation. For example, overlapping tasks may be highlighted with an alarming highlighting color, for example, red, and the overlapping tasks may be illustrated in the view 105 in a collapsed mode. The program manager/user of the view 105 may then expand the tasks for the over-allocated resource to cause tasks assigned to the over-allocated resource to be displayed in multiple lines. Over-allocation may then be manually resolved by dragging one of the conflicting/over-allocating tasks to a different resource or to a different start time; [0034], If the user were to select the three week "foundation" task assigned to the resource 135 and move it out one week, the corresponding child tasks of "pour cement" and "cure cement" likewise would be moved out one week; [0036], the plumbing task may be inserted out one week past the build frame task 155 if the plumbing task will place the resource Tim in an over-allocation mode; if the plumbing task may begin as early as June 21, while still respecting any constraints or dependencies associated with the plumbing task in relation to other tasks of the project, the project manager may drag the plumbing task to a start date of June 21 to be performed by one of the two resources 130, 135; [0040-0041], if the project manager moves a task in the scheduling view 605 from one resource to another resource or from one start date to a different start date, as described above, the change will be illustrated in the scheduling view 605, and correspondingly, the change will be illustrated in the task-based Gantt chart 610 for allowing the project manager a quick and efficient visualization of the effects of the changes made to the project schedule and assignments; [0043], Jon's 40 hour week (8 hours) is assumed to be accounted for by the buffer task)
Regarding claim 310, Steinglass in view of Schweitzer teaches all the limitations of claim 282, further comprising:
wherein the designated capacity of a corresponding resource independently of a specific task is associated with a distance measure (Steinglass Figs. 1-8; [0021], scheduling view 105 includes a resource column 110 and a number of date columns 115, 120, 125. As should be appreciated, the information illustrated in the scheduling view 105 is for purposes of example only and is not limiting of the vast numbers of different resources and task start or stop times that may be utilized in the scheduling view 105, as described below (distances of tasks shown); [0023], As illustrated in the scheduling view 105, a first human resource 130 is assigned a first task "excavation" scheduled to begin on June 14 and scheduled to run for one week; [0024], the task 155 which has an example duration of two weeks would be highlighted to show that the task lasts two weeks along the timeline extending from the example June 14 through the end of the week commencing on June 28; [0025], a project manager or user of the scheduling view 105 may manipulate the displayed schedule of tasks by moving tasks from one location in the scheduling view 105 to a different location in the scheduling view 105 to place a desired task at a different scheduling point (e.g., start time), or for assigning a desired task from one human resource 135 to a different human resource 140; [0026], the scheduling view 106 immediately shows the project manager or user a graphical representation of the utilization of his/her resources 130, 135, 140 if the project manager moves the "build frame" task 155 from its previous resource and start time to a different resource and different start time; [0028-0029], it is possible to over-allocate a resource by moving a task to a resource during a time the resource is already allocated with a project task. If a given resource 130, 135, 140 is over-allocated, a user interface highlighting method may be used for showing the over-allocation. For example, overlapping tasks may be highlighted with an alarming highlighting color, for example, red, and the overlapping tasks may be illustrated in the view 105 in a collapsed mode. The program manager/user of the view 105 may then expand the tasks for the over-allocated resource to cause tasks assigned to the over-allocated resource to be displayed in multiple lines. Over-allocation may then be manually resolved by dragging one of the conflicting/over-allocating tasks to a different resource or to a different start time; [0034], If the user were to select the three week "foundation" task assigned to the resource 135 and move it out one week, the corresponding child tasks of "pour cement" and "cure cement" likewise would be moved out one week; [0036], the plumbing task may be inserted out one week past the build frame task 155 if the plumbing task will place the resource Tim in an over-allocation mode; if the plumbing task may begin as early as June 21, while still respecting any constraints or dependencies associated with the plumbing task in relation to other tasks of the project, the project manager may drag the plumbing task to a start date of June 21 to be performed by one of the two resources 130, 135; [0040-0041], if the project manager moves a task in the scheduling view 605 from one resource to another resource or from one start date to a different start date, as described above, the change will be illustrated in the scheduling view 605, and correspondingly, the change will be illustrated in the task-based Gantt chart 610 for allowing the project manager a quick and efficient visualization of the effects of the changes made to the project schedule and assignments; [0043], Jon's 40 hour week (8 hours) is assumed to be accounted for by the buffer task)
Regarding claim 311, Steinglass in view of Schweitzer teaches all the limitations of claim 282, further comprising:
wherein at least one of the plurality of resources includes an individual or group of individuals (Steinglass Figs. 1-8; [0021], scheduling view 105 includes a resource column 110 and a number of date columns 115, 120, 125. As should be appreciated, the information illustrated in the scheduling view 105 is for purposes of example only and is not limiting of the vast numbers of different resources and task start or stop times that may be utilized in the scheduling view 105, as described below; The scheduling view, 105 illustrated in FIG. 1, includes three example resources 130, 135, 140 in the form of three workers or professionals to which one or more tasks of a given project may be assigned; [0023], As illustrated in the scheduling view 105, a first human resource 130 is assigned a first task "excavation" scheduled to begin on June 14 and scheduled to run for one week)
Regarding claim 312, Steinglass in view of Schweitzer teaches all the limitations of claim 282, further comprising:
wherein at least one of the plurality of resources includes a material, machinery, real estate, or a natural resource (Steinglass Figs. 1-8; [0021], scheduling view 105 includes a resource column 110 and a number of date columns 115, 120, 125. As should be appreciated, the information illustrated in the scheduling view 105 is for purposes of example only and is not limiting of the vast numbers of different resources and task start or stop times that may be utilized in the scheduling view 105, as described below; The scheduling view, 105 illustrated in FIG. 1, includes three example resources 130, 135, 140 in the form of three workers or professionals to which one or more tasks of a given project may be assigned; the resources 130, 135, 140 may be in the form of machines utilized on a shop floor to which tasks of an overall project must be assigned; [0023], As illustrated in the scheduling view 105, a first human resource 130 is assigned a first task "excavation" scheduled to begin on June 14 and scheduled to run for one week)
Regarding claim 315, Steinglass in view of Schweitzer teaches all the limitations of claim 282, further comprising:
wherein the at least one processor is further configured to display row headings identifying each of the plurality of time periods (Steinglass Figs. 1-8; [0021], scheduling view 105 includes a resource column 110 and a number of date columns 115, 120, 125. As should be appreciated, the information illustrated in the scheduling view 105 is for purposes of example only and is not limiting of the vast numbers of different resources and task start or stop times that may be utilized in the scheduling view 105, as described below; The scheduling view, 105 illustrated in FIG. 1, includes three example resources 130, 135, 140 in the form of three workers or professionals to which one or more tasks of a given project may be assigned; [0023], As illustrated in the scheduling view 105, a first human resource 130 is assigned a first task "excavation" scheduled to begin on June 14 and scheduled to run for one week)
Regarding claim 316, Steinglass in view of Schweitzer teaches all the limitations of claim 282, further comprising:
wherein the at least one processor is further configured to cause at least one resource utilization indicator to reflect an overcapacity upon a determination that a compared aggregated assigned units exceed the unit capacity per time period in the first associated time period (Steinglass Figs. 1-8; [0005], Over-allocations of a given resource caused by moving a task onto a resource already allocated for the time associated with the moved task may be resolved automatically or manually; [0024], any number of highlighting methods, for example colors, symbols, icons, and the like may be used to indicate the duration of a given task in the views 105, 106; [0028], it is possible to over-allocate a resource by moving a task to a resource during a time the resource is already allocated with a project task. If a given resource 130, 135, 140 is over-allocated, a user interface highlighting method may be used for showing the over-allocation. For example, overlapping tasks may be highlighted with an alarming highlighting color, for example, red, and the overlapping tasks may be illustrated in the view 105 in a collapsed mode. The program manager/user of the view 105 may then expand the tasks for the over-allocated resource to cause tasks assigned to the over-allocated resource to be displayed in multiple lines. Over-allocation may then be manually resolved by dragging one of the conflicting/over-allocating tasks to a different resource or to a different start time; [0029], referring to the resource scheduling view 105, if the task 150 (pour cement) is assigned to the resource 130 (Alice) wherein the resource Alice is assigned both tasks 145 and 150 to be started and completed at the same time, the rectangular space displayed in the view 105 for the subject time period may be highlighted in an alarming color, for example, red. According to an embodiment, the program manager may selectively expand the row containing tasks for the resource 130 (Alice) so that the tasks assigned to Alice are displayed on two lines which will allow the program manager to see that the over-allocation has been caused by the fact that Alice has been assigned tasks 145 and 150 to be processed during the same period. According to an embodiment, the program manager may then drag one of the over-allocated tasks from the resource 130 (Alice) to a different resource, for example, the resource 135 or 140, and thus, the program manager will quickly and efficiently resolve the over-allocation and receive an updated resource scheduling view 105 showing the new allocation of tasks to the available resources 130, 135, 140; [0036], the plumbing task may be inserted out one week past the build frame task 155 if the plumbing task will place the resource Tim in an over-allocation mode; see also [0021])
Regarding claim 317, Steinglass in view of Schweitzer teaches all the limitations of claim 282, further comprising:
wherein the at least one processor is further configured to, upon the assignment of units reaching the unit capacity per time period of the resource in at least one of a first associated time period or a second associated time period, reassign additional units to a different time period shown in the tablature (Steinglass Figs. 1-8; [0005], Over-allocations of a given resource caused by moving a task onto a resource already allocated for the time associated with the moved task may be resolved automatically or manually; [0024], any number of highlighting methods, for example colors, symbols, icons, and the like may be used to indicate the duration of a given task in the views 105, 106; [0027], a project manager/user may optionally use an "automatic" scheduling mechanism which will avoid resource over-allocation. According to this mechanism, tasks assigned to a given resource are adjusted so that the resource is considered as the "drop target" of the dragged task only, and so that selected tasks are from the "drop point" forward in time. All passed tasks are left undisturbed, and tasks or sets of tasks are moved based on start date/priority such that a given resource is not over-allocated with any work at any given point. At the same time, future tasks are not moved forward if such movement is not necessary to resolve an over-allocation caused by the movement of a given task; [0028], it is possible to over-allocate a resource by moving a task to a resource during a time the resource is already allocated with a project task. If a given resource 130, 135, 140 is over-allocated, a user interface highlighting method may be used for showing the over-allocation. For example, overlapping tasks may be highlighted with an alarming highlighting color, for example, red, and the overlapping tasks may be illustrated in the view 105 in a collapsed mode. The program manager/user of the view 105 may then expand the tasks for the over-allocated resource to cause tasks assigned to the over-allocated resource to be displayed in multiple lines. Over-allocation may then be manually resolved by dragging one of the conflicting/over-allocating tasks to a different resource or to a different start time; [0029], referring to the resource scheduling view 105, if the task 150 (pour cement) is assigned to the resource 130 (Alice) wherein the resource Alice is assigned both tasks 145 and 150 to be started and completed at the same time, the rectangular space displayed in the view 105 for the subject time period may be highlighted in an alarming color, for example, red. According to an embodiment, the program manager may selectively expand the row containing tasks for the resource 130 (Alice) so that the tasks assigned to Alice are displayed on two lines which will allow the program manager to see that the over-allocation has been caused by the fact that Alice has been assigned tasks 145 and 150 to be processed during the same period. According to an embodiment, the program manager may then drag one of the over-allocated tasks from the resource 130 (Alice) to a different resource, for example, the resource 135 or 140, and thus, the program manager will quickly and efficiently resolve the over-allocation and receive an updated resource scheduling view 105 showing the new allocation of tasks to the available resources 130, 135, 140; [0036], the plumbing task may be inserted out one week past the build frame task 155 if the plumbing task will place the resource Tim in an over-allocation mode; see also [0021])
Regarding claim 318, Steinglass in view of Schweitzer teaches all the limitations of claim 284, further comprising:
wherein the different time period is a different week (Steinglass Figs. 1-8; [0021], scheduling view 105 includes a resource column 110 and a number of date columns 115, 120, 125. As should be appreciated, the information illustrated in the scheduling view 105 is for purposes of example only and is not limiting of the vast numbers of different resources and task start or stop times that may be utilized in the scheduling view 105, as described below; The scheduling view, 105 illustrated in FIG. 1, includes three example resources 130, 135, 140 in the form of three workers or professionals to which one or more tasks of a given project may be assigned; [0023], As illustrated in the scheduling view 105, a first human resource 130 is assigned a first task "excavation" scheduled to begin on June 14 and scheduled to run for one week; [0025], a project manager or user of the scheduling view 105 may manipulate the displayed schedule of tasks by moving tasks from one location in the scheduling view 105 to a different location in the scheduling view 105 to place a desired task at a different scheduling point (e.g., start time), or for assigning a desired task from one human resource 135 to a different human resource 140; [0026], For purposes of example, the scheduling view 106, illustrated immediately beneath the scheduling view 105 in FIG. 1, shows a resulting view of the tasks of the associated project after the project manager or user has dragged the "build frame" task 155 from the human resource 135 and start date of June 21 to the human resource 140 and a start date of June 14. Accordingly, the scheduling view 106 immediately shows the project manager or user a graphical representation of the utilization of his/her resources 130, 135, 140 if the project manager moves the "build frame" task 155 from its previous resource and start time to a different resource and different start time; [0028-0029], the program manager may then drag one of the over-allocated tasks from the resource 130 (Alice) to a different resource, for example, the resource 135 or 140, and thus, the program manager will quickly and efficiently resolve the over-allocation and receive an updated resource scheduling view 105 showing the new allocation of tasks to the available resources 130, 135, 140; [0036], the plumbing task may be inserted out one week past the build frame task 155 if the plumbing task will place the resource Tim in an over-allocation mode; if the plumbing task may begin as early as June 21, while still respecting any constraints or dependencies associated with the plumbing task in relation to other tasks of the project, the project manager may drag the plumbing task to a start date of June 21 to be performed by one of the two resources 130, 135)
Regarding claim 319, Steinglass in view of Schweitzer teaches all the limitations of claim 282, further comprising:
wherein the at least one processor is further configured to: determine that the compared aggregated assigned units exceed the unit capacity per time period of the resource in the first associated time period; and in response to the determination, automatically disburse assigned units that exceed the unit capacity per time period to a time period earlier than the first associated time period (Steinglass Figs. 1-8; [0005], Over-allocations of a given resource caused by moving a task onto a resource already allocated for the time associated with the moved task may be resolved automatically or manually; [0024], any number of highlighting methods, for example colors, symbols, icons, and the like may be used to indicate the duration of a given task in the views 105, 106; [0027], a project manager/user may optionally use an "automatic" scheduling mechanism which will avoid resource over-allocation. According to this mechanism, tasks assigned to a given resource are adjusted so that the resource is considered as the "drop target" of the dragged task only, and so that selected tasks are from the "drop point" forward in time. All passed tasks are left undisturbed, and tasks or sets of tasks are moved based on start date/priority such that a given resource is not over-allocated with any work at any given point. At the same time, future tasks are not moved forward if such movement is not necessary to resolve an over-allocation caused by the movement of a given task; [0028], it is possible to over-allocate a resource by moving a task to a resource during a time the resource is already allocated with a project task. If a given resource 130, 135, 140 is over-allocated, a user interface highlighting method may be used for showing the over-allocation. For example, overlapping tasks may be highlighted with an alarming highlighting color, for example, red, and the overlapping tasks may be illustrated in the view 105 in a collapsed mode. The program manager/user of the view 105 may then expand the tasks for the over-allocated resource to cause tasks assigned to the over-allocated resource to be displayed in multiple lines. Over-allocation may then be manually resolved by dragging one of the conflicting/over-allocating tasks to a different resource or to a different start time; [0029], referring to the resource scheduling view 105, if the task 150 (pour cement) is assigned to the resource 130 (Alice) wherein the resource Alice is assigned both tasks 145 and 150 to be started and completed at the same time, the rectangular space displayed in the view 105 for the subject time period may be highlighted in an alarming color, for example, red. According to an embodiment, the program manager may selectively expand the row containing tasks for the resource 130 (Alice) so that the tasks assigned to Alice are displayed on two lines which will allow the program manager to see that the over-allocation has been caused by the fact that Alice has been assigned tasks 145 and 150 to be processed during the same period. According to an embodiment, the program manager may then drag one of the over-allocated tasks from the resource 130 (Alice) to a different resource, for example, the resource 135 or 140, and thus, the program manager will quickly and efficiently resolve the over-allocation and receive an updated resource scheduling view 105 showing the new allocation of tasks to the available resources 130, 135, 140; [0036], the plumbing task may be inserted out one week past the build frame task 155 if the plumbing task will place the resource Tim in an over-allocation mode; if the plumbing task may begin as early as June 21, while still respecting any constraints or dependencies associated with the plumbing task in relation to other tasks of the project, the project manager may drag the plumbing task to a start date of June 21 to be performed by one of the two resources 130, 135; see also [0021])
Regarding claim 320, Steinglass in view of Schweitzer teaches all the limitations of claim 284, further comprising:
wherein user selection of one resource utilization indicator causes the display of resource periods that are combined with the associated resource units and compared to the resource unit capacity per time period to determine resource utilization for a resource (Steinglass Figs. 1-8; [0006], the project manager/user may "zoom in" and/or "zoom out" to view the overall project or portions of the overall project at different levels in the hierarchical outline of project or work task; [0028], overlapping tasks may be highlighted with an alarming highlighting color, for example, red, and the overlapping tasks may be illustrated in the view 105 in a collapsed mode. The program manager/user of the view 105 may then expand the tasks for the over-allocated resource to cause tasks assigned to the over-allocated resource to be displayed in multiple lines. Over-allocation may then be manually resolved by dragging one of the conflicting/over-allocating tasks to a different resource or to a different start time; [0029], the program manager may selectively expand the row containing tasks for the resource 130 (Alice) so that the tasks assigned to Alice are displayed on two lines which will allow the program manager to see that the over-allocation has been caused by the fact that Alice has been assigned tasks 145 and 150 to be processed during the same period. According to an embodiment, the program manager may then drag one of the over-allocated tasks from the resource 130 (Alice) to a different resource, for example, the resource 135 or 140, and thus, the program manager will quickly and efficiently resolve the over-allocation and receive an updated resource scheduling view 105 showing the new allocation of tasks to the available resources 130, 135, 140; [0033], Referring to FIG. 3, the scheduling view 305 illustrates a "zooming in" to the lowest level tasks assigned to two resources "Alice" and "Jon" and shows the start dates for the associated tasks; [0036], the plumbing task may be inserted out one week past the build frame task 155 if the plumbing task will place the resource Tim in an over-allocation mode; if the plumbing task may begin as early as June 21, while still respecting any constraints or dependencies associated with the plumbing task in relation to other tasks of the project, the project manager may drag the plumbing task to a start date of June 21 to be performed by one of the two resources 130, 135; see also [0021])
Regarding claim 321, Steinglass in view of Schweitzer teaches all the limitations of claim 320, further comprising:
wherein a user may interact with a resource period indicator to balance a workload of a resource (Steinglass Figs. 1-8; [0025], a project manager or user of the scheduling view 105 may manipulate the displayed schedule of tasks by moving tasks from one location in the scheduling view 105 to a different location in the scheduling view 105 to place a desired task at a different scheduling point (e.g., start time), or for assigning a desired task from one human resource 135 to a different human resource 140; [0026], For purposes of example, the scheduling view 106, illustrated immediately beneath the scheduling view 105 in FIG. 1, shows a resulting view of the tasks of the associated project after the project manager or user has dragged the "build frame" task 155 from the human resource 135 and start date of June 21 to the human resource 140 and a start date of June 14. Accordingly, the scheduling view 106 immediately shows the project manager or user a graphical representation of the utilization of his/her resources 130, 135, 140 if the project manager moves the "build frame" task 155 from its previous resource and start time to a different resource and different start time; [0028-0029], the program manager may then drag one of the over-allocated tasks from the resource 130 (Alice) to a different resource, for example, the resource 135 or 140, and thus, the program manager will quickly and efficiently resolve the over-allocation and receive an updated resource scheduling view 105 showing the new allocation of tasks to the available resources 130, 135, 140; [0036], the plumbing task may be inserted out one week past the build frame task 155 if the plumbing task will place the resource Tim in an over-allocation mode; if the plumbing task may begin as early as June 21, while still respecting any constraints or dependencies associated with the plumbing task in relation to other tasks of the project, the project manager may drag the plumbing task to a start date of June 21 to be performed by one of the two resources 130, 135)
Regarding claim 322, Steinglass in view of Schweitzer teaches all the limitations of claim 291, further comprising:
wherein the tablature includes at least one of a form, a sheet, a grid, or a list (Steinglass Figs. 1-8; [0021], scheduling view 105 includes a resource column 110 and a number of date columns 115, 120, 125. As should be appreciated, the information illustrated in the scheduling view 105 is for purposes of example only and is not limiting of the vast numbers of different resources and task start or stop times that may be utilized in the scheduling view 105, as described below. The scheduling view, 105 illustrated in FIG. 1, includes three example resources 130, 135, 140 in the form of three workers or professionals to which one or more tasks of a given project may be assigned; [0025], a project manager or user of the scheduling view 105 may manipulate the displayed schedule of tasks by moving tasks from one location in the scheduling view 105 to a different location in the scheduling view 105 to place a desired task at a different scheduling point (e.g., start time), or for assigning a desired task from one human resource 135 to a different human resource 140; [0026], For purposes of example, the scheduling view 106, illustrated immediately beneath the scheduling view 105 in FIG. 1, shows a resulting view of the tasks of the associated project after the project manager or user has dragged the "build frame" task 155 from the human resource 135 and start date of June 21 to the human resource 140 and a start date of June 14. Accordingly, the scheduling view 106 immediately shows the project manager or user a graphical representation of the utilization of his/her resources 130, 135, 140 if the project manager moves the "build frame" task 155 from its previous resource and start time to a different resource and different start time)
Regarding claim 326, Steinglass in view of Schweitzer teaches all the limitations of claim 282, further comprising:
received from a user interface (Steinglass Figs. 1-8; [0021], The scheduling view, 105 illustrated in FIG. 1, includes three example resources 130, 135, 140 in the form of three workers or professionals to which one or more tasks of a given project may be assigned. As should be appreciated, the resources 130, 135, 140 may also be in the form of equipment or other resources to which a given task or tasks of a project may be assigned (as shown John is at capacity and Tim and Alice are under capacity); [0024], the rectangular portion of the view 105 containing the task 145 (excavation) may be colored or shaded with a highlighting color, for example, gray, to show the duration of the task 145; [0026], the scheduling view 106, illustrated immediately beneath the scheduling view 105 in FIG. 1, shows a resulting view of the tasks of the associated project after the project manager or user has dragged the "build frame" task 155 from the human resource 135 and start date of June 21 to the human resource 140 and a start date of June 14; [0028], it is possible to over-allocate a resource by moving a task to a resource during a time the resource is already allocated with a project task; overlapping tasks may be highlighted with an alarming highlighting color; see also [0021], [0029], [0036])
Schweitzer further teaches:
wherein the input indicative of the unit capacity per time period is received from a user interface (Schweitzer Figs. 1-28; [0600], FIGS. 20-21 illustrate screen displays 2000, 2100 provided by the labor and resource scheduling system 210 for entry and display of data defining employees to be scheduled for events at the facility. The employee definition data includes name and address, allowed work hours, minimum and maximum work weeks and shifts, pay rates and more to assist in the automatic scheduling procedure discussed above, to select the appropriate employee for task assignments. These employee definitions are entered both at configuration and as changes arise during use of the system (unit capacity per time period input independent of tasks, such as minimum shift hours, maximum shift hours, minimum work week hours, maximum work week hours, max days per week); [0599], FIGS. 18-19 illustrate screen displays 1800, 1900 provided by the labor and resource scheduling system 210 for entry and display of data defining tasks at the facility; [0601], FIGS. 22 and 23 illustrate screen displays 2200, 2300 presented by the labor and resource scheduling system that are used during scheduling)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have incorporated wherein the input indicative of the unit capacity per time period is received from a user interface as suggested in Schweitzer into Steinglass. Doing so would be desirable because Schweitzer provides an automated labor and resource scheduling system provides automated assistance to scheduling managers for scheduling labor and resources (see Schweitzer abs.). The present invention relates to labor and resource scheduling, and more particularly relates to scheduling to provide more efficient utilization of labor and resources (see Schweitzer [0001]). Labor schedules are currently developed on a manual basis throughout the world. The task of scheduling is a difficult exercise which requires managers to sift through countless contracts, in an attempt to cover all staffing requirements necessary. Effectiveness in labor planning is highly dependent upon the education and capability of each manager. Unfortunately, the complexity and time required to cover all aspects of is often a staggering task which, due to human nature, results in inefficiencies and excessive labor costs (see Schweitzer [0003]). Implementations described herein of a labor and resource scheduling system more effectively schedules labor to make efficient use of labor and resources, so as to avoid excess labor costs. The described labor and resource scheduling system performs more efficient scheduling for widely varying event requirements and facilities based on facility-specific time analysis of task assignments. More particularly, a time and distance analysis is made of a specific facility and resources (see Schweitzer [0004]). The system further ensures users enhanced communication, improved customer service and optimum productivity (see Schweitzer [0005]). Additionally, the system of Schweitzer would improve the system of Steinglass by enabling managers to flexibly define employees with various different minimum and maximum capacities, thereby better enabling managers to schedule and manage tasks and employees, as needed.
Regarding claim 327, Steinglass in view of Schweitzer teaches all the limitations of claim 282, further comprising:
wherein the at least one processor is further configured to aggregate a plurality of units assigned to a specific resource; make a comparison between the aggregated assigned units and the unit capacity per time period associated with the specific resource to determine when utilization of the specific resource is at over-capacity; and based on the comparison, graphically present that the utilization for the specific resource is at over-capacity (Steinglass Figs. 1-8; [0021], scheduling view 105 includes a resource column 110 and a number of date columns 115, 120, 125. As should be appreciated, the information illustrated in the scheduling view 105 is for purposes of example only and is not limiting of the vast numbers of different resources and task start or stop times that may be utilized in the scheduling view 105, as described below. The scheduling view, 105 illustrated in FIG. 1, includes three example resources 130, 135, 140 in the form of three workers or professionals to which one or more tasks of a given project may be assigned; [0028], it is possible to over-allocate a resource by moving a task to a resource during a time the resource is already allocated with a project task. If a given resource 130, 135, 140 is over-allocated, a user interface highlighting method may be used for showing the over-allocation. For example, overlapping tasks may be highlighted with an alarming highlighting color, for example, red, and the overlapping tasks may be illustrated in the view 105 in a collapsed mode. The program manager/user of the view 105 may then expand the tasks for the over-allocated resource to cause tasks assigned to the over-allocated resource to be displayed in multiple lines. Over-allocation may then be manually resolved by dragging one of the conflicting/over-allocating tasks to a different resource or to a different start time; [0029], referring to the resource scheduling view 105, if the task 150 (pour cement) is assigned to the resource 130 (Alice) wherein the resource Alice is assigned both tasks 145 and 150 to be started and completed at the same time, the rectangular space displayed in the view 105 for the subject time period may be highlighted in an alarming color, for example, red. According to an embodiment, the program manager may selectively expand the row containing tasks for the resource 130 (Alice) so that the tasks assigned to Alice are displayed on two lines which will allow the program manager to see that the over-allocation has been caused by the fact that Alice has been assigned tasks 145 and 150 to be processed during the same period. According to an embodiment, the program manager may then drag one of the over-allocated tasks from the resource 130 (Alice) to a different resource, for example, the resource 135 or 140, and thus, the program manager will quickly and efficiently resolve the over-allocation and receive an updated resource scheduling view 105 showing the new allocation of tasks to the available resources 130, 135, 140; [0036], the plumbing task may be inserted out one week past the build frame task 155 if the plumbing task will place the resource Tim in an over-allocation mode; if the plumbing task may begin as early as June 21, while still respecting any constraints or dependencies associated with the plumbing task in relation to other tasks of the project, the project manager may drag the plumbing task to a start date of June 21 to be performed by one of the two resources 130, 135)
Claims 323 and 324 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Steinglass in view of Schweitzer in view of Bhandari et al. (US 20180285149 A1, published 10/04/2018), hereinafter Bhandari.
Regarding claim 323, Steinglass in view of Schweitzer teaches all the limitations of claim 282, further comprising:
wherein graphically presenting when utilization for one of the plurality of resources is at under-capacity includes adjusting the resource utilization indicator (Steinglass Figs. 1-8; [0021], The scheduling view, 105 illustrated in FIG. 1, includes three example resources 130, 135, 140 in the form of three workers or professionals to which one or more tasks of a given project may be assigned. As should be appreciated, the resources 130, 135, 140 may also be in the form of equipment or other resources to which a given task or tasks of a project may be assigned (as shown John is at capacity and Tim and Alice are under capacity); [0024], the rectangular portion of the view 105 containing the task 145 (excavation) may be colored or shaded with a highlighting color, for example, gray, to show the duration of the task 145; [0026], the scheduling view 106, illustrated immediately beneath the scheduling view 105 in FIG. 1, shows a resulting view of the tasks of the associated project after the project manager or user has dragged the "build frame" task 155 from the human resource 135 and start date of June 21 to the human resource 140 and a start date of June 14; [0028], it is possible to over-allocate a resource by moving a task to a resource during a time the resource is already allocated with a project task; overlapping tasks may be highlighted with an alarming highlighting color; see also [0021], [0029], [0036])
However, Steinglass in view of Schweitzer fails to expressly disclose wherein graphically presenting when utilization for one of the plurality of resources is at under-capacity includes adjusting a relative size of the resource utilization indicator. In the same field of endeavor, Bhandari teaches:
wherein graphically presenting when utilization for one of the plurality of resources is at under-capacity includes adjusting a relative size of the resource utilization indicator (Bhandari Figs. 1-8; [0014], a visual identifier for a resource icon may include a partial circle or a full circle. A full circle indicates that the resource, corresponding to the resource icon, has maximum availability. A partial circle indicates that the resource, corresponding to the resource icon, has partial availability. The circle may be constructed using a unique color or pattern which uniquely identifies the corresponding resource; a pattern associated with a resource icon corresponding to the selected resource is added as a filler to the task icon corresponding to the selected task. Additionally, the resource chart interface is updated to illustrate availability of the selected resource; [0015], the system may update a full circle corresponding to the resource icon to a partial circle to reflect the updated availability of the corresponding resource; [0021], a task may include pouring concrete or drafting a report; [0052], a pattern in the border of the resource icon corresponding to the assigned resource is reduced corresponding to the workload associated with the selected task; [0065], In the embodiment of FIG. 4, the task chart 400 additionally includes the resource panel 124. The resource panel 124 may include resource icons 122A-122C. The resource icons 122A-122C may have different indicators for quick identification; [0074], the resource icon 122C has an open outer circle, which indicates no additional availability. In another example, the resource icon 122D has a free component 704 in the associated availability lane 132D. The resource icon 122D has a partially-filled outer circle, which indicates that the resource associated therewith has partial availability. The resource of resource icon 122D may be assigned to a task during that time associated with the free component 704)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have incorporated wherein graphically presenting when utilization for one of the plurality of resources is at under-capacity includes adjusting a relative size of the resource utilization indicator as suggested in Bhandari into Steinglass in view of Schweitzer. Doing so would be desirable because there task management systems display tasks corresponding to various projects. A resource is assigned to a task to execute that task. A resource may be over-allocated to multiple tasks during a period of time. The result of over-allocating a resource may include delay or non-completion of tasks. While a resource may be over-allocated, other resources may remain idle or be under-allocated. Project managers often prefer to avoid over-allocation and under-utilization of resources when possible (see Bhandari [0002]). Additionally, the display of Bhandari would improve the interface of Steinglass by providing a simple and user-friendly method of indicating resource utilization, such that the user can quickly and easily understand utilization for a plurality of resources.
Regarding claim 324, Steinglass in view of Schweitzer in further view of Bhandari teaches all the limitations of claim 283. Bhandari further teaches:
wherein the resource utilization indicator includes a graphical gauge, and wherein adjusting the relative size of the resource utilization indicator includes adjusting a filled portion of the graphical gauge (Bhandari Figs. 1-8; [0014], a visual identifier for a resource icon may include a partial circle or a full circle. A full circle indicates that the resource, corresponding to the resource icon, has maximum availability. A partial circle indicates that the resource, corresponding to the resource icon, has partial availability. The circle may be constructed using a unique color or pattern which uniquely identifies the corresponding resource; a pattern associated with a resource icon corresponding to the selected resource is added as a filler to the task icon corresponding to the selected task. Additionally, the resource chart interface is updated to illustrate availability of the selected resource; [0015], the system may update a full circle corresponding to the resource icon to a partial circle to reflect the updated availability of the corresponding resource; [0021], a task may include pouring concrete or drafting a report; [0052], a pattern in the border of the resource icon corresponding to the assigned resource is reduced corresponding to the workload associated with the selected task; [0065], In the embodiment of FIG. 4, the task chart 400 additionally includes the resource panel 124. The resource panel 124 may include resource icons 122A-122C. The resource icons 122A-122C may have different indicators for quick identification; [0074], the resource icon 122C has an open outer circle, which indicates no additional availability. In another example, the resource icon 122D has a free component 704 in the associated availability lane 132D. The resource icon 122D has a partially-filled outer circle, which indicates that the resource associated therewith has partial availability. The resource of resource icon 122D may be assigned to a task during that time associated with the free component 704; examiner note, per the instant specification [0995], a gauge may be a circle)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have incorporated wherein the resource utilization indicator includes a graphical gauge, and wherein adjusting the relative size of the resource utilization indicator includes adjusting a filled portion of the graphical gauge as suggested in Bhandari into Steinglass in view of Schweitzer. Doing so would be desirable because there task management systems display tasks corresponding to various projects. A resource is assigned to a task to execute that task. A resource may be over-allocated to multiple tasks during a period of time. The result of over-allocating a resource may include delay or non-completion of tasks. While a resource may be over-allocated, other resources may remain idle or be under-allocated. Project managers often prefer to avoid over-allocation and under-utilization of resources when possible (see Bhandari [0002]). Additionally, the display of Bhandari would improve the interface of Steinglass by providing a simple and user-friendly method of indicating resource utilization, such that the user can quickly and easily understand utilization for a plurality of resources.
Claim 325 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Steinglass in view of Schweitzer in further view of Bhandari in view of Normandin (US 20170201428 A1, published 07/13/2017).
Regarding claim 325, Steinglass in view of Schweitzer in further view of Bhandari teaches all the limitations of claim 283. Bhandari further teaches:
wherein the graphical gauge includes a larger circle, and wherein the adjusting the filled portion of the graphical gauge includes adjusting the larger circle (Bhandari Figs. 1-8; [0014], a visual identifier for a resource icon may include a partial circle or a full circle. A full circle indicates that the resource, corresponding to the resource icon, has maximum availability. A partial circle indicates that the resource, corresponding to the resource icon, has partial availability. The circle may be constructed using a unique color or pattern which uniquely identifies the corresponding resource; a pattern associated with a resource icon corresponding to the selected resource is added as a filler to the task icon corresponding to the selected task. Additionally, the resource chart interface is updated to illustrate availability of the selected resource; [0015], the system may update a full circle corresponding to the resource icon to a partial circle to reflect the updated availability of the corresponding resource; [0021], a task may include pouring concrete or drafting a report; [0052], a pattern in the border of the resource icon corresponding to the assigned resource is reduced corresponding to the workload associated with the selected task; [0065], In the embodiment of FIG. 4, the task chart 400 additionally includes the resource panel 124. The resource panel 124 may include resource icons 122A-122C. The resource icons 122A-122C may have different indicators for quick identification; [0074], the resource icon 122C has an open outer circle, which indicates no additional availability. In another example, the resource icon 122D has a free component 704 in the associated availability lane 132D. The resource icon 122D has a partially-filled outer circle, which indicates that the resource associated therewith has partial availability. The resource of resource icon 122D may be assigned to a task during that time associated with the free component 704)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have incorporated wherein the graphical gauge includes a larger circle, and wherein the adjusting the filled portion of the graphical gauge includes adjusting the larger circle as suggested in Bhandari into Steinglass in view of Schweitzer. Doing so would be desirable because there task management systems display tasks corresponding to various projects. A resource is assigned to a task to execute that task. A resource may be over-allocated to multiple tasks during a period of time. The result of over-allocating a resource may include delay or non-completion of tasks. While a resource may be over-allocated, other resources may remain idle or be under-allocated. Project managers often prefer to avoid over-allocation and under-utilization of resources when possible (see Bhandari [0002]). Additionally, the display of Bhandari would improve the interface of Steinglass by providing a simple and user-friendly method of indicating resource utilization, such that the user can quickly and easily understand utilization for a plurality of resources.
However, Steinglass in view of Schweitzer in further view of Bhandari fails to expressly disclose adjusting a size of a smaller circle inside the larger circle.
adjusting a size of a smaller circle inside the larger circle (Normandin Figs. 1-8; [0041], the relative sizes of the inner and outer circles convey information regarding the amount of resources used relative to the amount of resources that are available; The color, as stated above, may convey certain information about the amount of resources used relative to the amount of resources that are available; [0036], concentric circles comprising an inner circle 68.sub.I and an outer circle 68.sub.O. Each circle 68.sub.I, 68.sub.O represents information that is relative to the information represented in the other circle 68.sub.I, 68.sub.O.; [0037], control computer 50 may generate the outer circle 68.sub.O such that its size conveys the amount of bandwidth available to the sites 30, 40 in the Western region 66a. The more bandwidth that is available, the larger the size of the outer circle 68.sub.O. Similarly, control computer 50 could generate the inner circle 68.sub.I such that its size conveys the amount of bandwidth that is actually being used by the sites 30, 40 in the Western region 66a. Thus, the more bandwidth that is being used by the devices at sites 30, 40, the bigger the inner circle 68.sub.I will appear on GUI 60; [0038], the user could determine a relationship between the amount of bandwidth used at the sites 30, 40 in the Western region 66a to the amount of bandwidth that is available to the sites 30, 40 in the Western region simply by visually comparing the sizes of the inner and outer circles 68.sub.I, 68.sub.O of graphical indicator 68. That is, if the circles 68.sub.I, 68.sub.O are close in size, it may indicate that almost all of the bandwidth available to the sites 30, 40 in the Western region 66a is being used. Conversely, if inner circle 68.sub.I is much smaller than the outer circle 68.sub.O, then it would indicate that perhaps much of the bandwidth available to the sites 30, 40 in the Western region 66a is not being used; [0040], the outer circles of each graphical indicator 68, 70, 72, 74, 76 may be given the color blue or some other color to uniformly identify the outer circles as conveying information related to the total amount of bandwidth available to the devices at sites 30, 40 in the corresponding region 66. Similarly, the inner circles of the graphical indicators 68, 70, 72, 74, 76 may be generated to have another color that indicates the actual amount of bandwidth used by the devices at sites 30, 40 in their corresponding regions 66. For example, inner circles that are colored green may indicate that no problems exist with respect to bandwidth utilization in that region 66. Inner circles that are colored yellow may indicate that the bandwidth usage in the region 66 is approaching some predefined threshold level that is considered too high. Inner circles that are colored red may indicate that the bandwidth usage in the region 66 has exceeded a predefined maximum threshold level)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have incorporated adjusting a size of a smaller circle inside the larger circle as suggested in Normandin into Steinglass in view of Schweitzer in further view of Bhandari. Doing so would be desirable because operators and administrators of such sites usually need to view and to understand the health and performance metrics, both individually and collectively, with respect to the resources and constraints. The operators also need to identify actual or potential issues as well as to project and understand the potential capacity of resources (see Normandin [0003]). Embodiments of the present disclosure provide an easy, intuitive manner in which to determine the various resource-related aspects. Simply by viewing the graphical indicators, operators are able to accurately determine the health and performance (see Normandin [0004]), such as using relative sizes of the inner and outer circles convey information regarding the amount of resources used relative to the amount of resources that are available (see Normandin [0041]). The user could determine a relationship between the amount of resources available by visually comparing the sizes of the inner and outer circles. That is, if the circles are close in size, it may indicate that almost all of the available resources are being used. Conversely, if the inner circle is much smaller than the outer, then it would indicate that perhaps much of the available resources are not being used (see Normandin [0038]).
Response to Arguments
The Examiner acknowledges the Applicant’s amendments to claims 282, 285-287, 291, 298, 302, 307-310, 316-320, and 326 and the addition of claim 327. The previous objections to claims 285, 307-310, and 317 are respectfully withdrawn.
Regarding claims 282-289,291-302,305-312 and 315-326, applicant alleges the claims have been amended to overcome the rejection. Examiner respectfully disagrees. As discussed in the rejection, the metes and bounds of claimed invention are unclear. Per the MPEP 2173, the definiteness of claim language is to ensure that the scope of the claims is clear so the public is informed of the boundaries of what constitutes infringement of the patent. During examination, a claim must be given its broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the specification as it would be interpreted by one of ordinary skill in the art. If the language of a claim, given its broadest reasonable interpretation, is such that a person of ordinary skill in the relevant art would read it with more than one reasonable interpretation, then a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph is appropriate (see MPEP 2173).
Regarding independent claim 282, the applicant alleges that Steinglass as described in the previous Office action, does not explicitly teach receive an input indicative of a unit capacity per time period for each of a plurality of resources, wherein the unit capacity per time period is a measure that quantifies a designated capacity of a corresponding resource independently of a specific task and based on the received assignments and the received input quantifying designated capacities of resources independently of specific tasks, output a display signal, as has been amended to the claim. Examiner has therefore rejected independent claim 1 under 35 U.S.C § 103 as unpatentable over Steinglass in view of Schweitzer.
Applicant specifically alleges Steinglass fails to teach that "the unit capacity per time period is a measure that quantifies a designated capacity of a corresponding resource independently of a specific task”. Examiner respectfully disagrees.
As discussed in the rejection above, Steinglass discloses a project management resources scheduling user interface is provided in which resource information may be displayed in a condensed timeline for each resource over the duration of a project (abs.). The scheduling view, 105 illustrated in FIG. 1, includes three example resources 130, 135, 140 in the form of three workers or professionals to which one or more tasks of a given project may be assigned ([0021]).
Steinglass further discloses each resource has a unit capacity that does not depend on a specific task. For example, Steinglass discloses that resources may have 40 hour work weeks ([0042]). A project manager may manipulate the task-independent capacities of resources by moving tasks from one location in the scheduling view 105 to reschedule tasks or to assign a desired task from one human resource 135 to a different human resource 140 ([0025]). It is possible to over-allocate a resource by moving a task to a resource during a time the resource is already allocated with a project task. If a given resource 130, 135, 140 is over-allocated, a user interface highlighting method may be used for showing the over-allocation. For example, overlapping tasks may be highlighted with an alarming highlighting color, for example, red ([0028]). For example, if the task 150 (pour cement) is assigned to the resource 130 (Alice) wherein the resource Alice is assigned both tasks 145 and 150 to be started and completed at the same time, the rectangular space displayed in the view 105 for the subject time period may be highlighted in an alarming color ([0029]). Schweitzer is cited to clarify receiving an input indicative of a unit capacity per time period for each of a plurality of resources, wherein the unit capacity per time period is a measure that quantifies a designated capacity of a corresponding resource independently of a specific task (Figs. 1-28; [0599-0601]).
Examiner notes the claims place no limitations on what the unit capacity per time period is a measure that quantifies a designated capacity of a corresponding resource independently of a specific task. Thus, Steinglass’ disclosure of a unit capacity per time period is a measure that quantifies a designated capacity of a corresponding resource independently of a specific task (Figs. 1-8; [0021], [0024], [0026], [0028-0029], [0036]) in combination with Schweitzer is considered within the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claimed limitations.
Similar arguments have been presented for claims 298 and 302 and thus, Applicant’s arguments are not persuasive for the same reasons.
Applicant states that the dependent claims recite all the limitations of the independent claims, and thus, are allowable in view of the remarks set forth regarding the independent claims. However, as discussed above, Steinglass in view of Schweitzer is considered to teach the independent claims, and consequently, the dependent claims are rejected.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Kakaire (US 11531446 B1) see Figs. 1-32 and col. 35 [line 46].
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN T REPSHER III whose telephone number is (571)272-7487. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8AM-5PM 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, Jennifer Welch can be reached at (571) 272-7212. 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.
/JOHN T REPSHER III/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2143