DETAILED ACTION
This Office Action is responsive to the Applicant’s submission, filed on June 18, 2025, amending claims 1, 12 and 20. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on August 27, 2025 has been considered by the Examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1, 2, 12, 13, 21 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2008/0109731 to Chang et al. (“Chang”), over U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2020/0221346 to Park et al. (“Park”), over U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2003/0214517 to Gossweiler, III et al. (“Gossweiler”), and also over U.S. Patent No. 12,177,683 to Gadalin (“Gadalin”).
Regarding claims 1 and 12, Chang describes a management system and graphical user interface for managing a wireless communication network (see e.g. paragraphs 0009 and 0011). Similar to the claimed invention, Chang particularly teaches:
obtaining, by processing circuitry, topology information of interconnected resources categorized into a plurality of domains including one or more of a cell site domain, an edge domain, a regional domain, and a national domain (see e.g. paragraphs 0020-0021: Chang discloses that the management system can be applied to manage a Global System for Mobile communication network, which comprises a plurality of network components deployed as a multi-level structure. The multi-level structure comprises a cell level – see e.g. paragraph 0021 – and each of the network components is associated with a location in a geographic region or area – see e.g. paragraph 0026 and FIG. 4. The network components are thus considered as categorized into a plurality of domains including a cell site domain, an edge domain, a regional domain and/or a national domain. Chang further discloses that the management system displays a graphical user interface comprising a network tree graph that indicates the multi-level relationship of network components and a map that shows where the network components are located – see e.g. paragraphs 0022 and 0025-0026, and FIG. 2. Accordingly, to display the network tree graph and map, it is apparent that the processing circuitry of the management system necessarily obtains topology information of interconnected resources, i.e. the network components, which are categorized into a plurality of domains including one or more of a cell site domain, an edge domain, a regional domain and a national domain.);
displaying, by processing circuitry, based at least in part on the topology information, and via a user interface, a first plurality of icons, each icon of the first plurality of icons representing a resource associated with a cell site domain (see e.g. paragraphs 0022 and 0025, and FIGS. 2 and 4: like noted above, Chang discloses that the management system displays a graphical user interface comprising a network tree graph that indicates the multi-level relationship between network components. The tree graph particularly comprises a plurality of icons, i.e. “+” or “-“ symbols, each of which is associated with a network component – see e.g. paragraph 0025 and FIG. 4. A “+” symbol corresponding to a component can understandably be selected to display lower-level components under the component, wherein the lower-level components are managed by the component – see e.g. paragraph 0025 and FIG. 4. Moreover, Chang demonstrates that a level of the hierarchy can comprises a plurality of such icons/symbols that each correspond to a mobile switching center (MSC) associated with a plurality of cell sites – see e.g. paragraphs 0021 and 0025, and FIG. 4. The processing circuitry of the management system thus displays, based at least in part on the topology information and via a user interface, a first plurality of icons, i.e. “+” or “-“ symbols, wherein each of the first plurality of icons represents a resource, i.e. an MSC, associated with a cell site domain.);
receiving, by the processing circuitry and via the user interface, a selection of a first icon of the first plurality of icons (see e.g. paragraph 0025 and FIG. 4: like noted above, Chang discloses that the management system displays a network tree graph that comprises a plurality of icons, i.e. “+” or “-“ symbols, each of which is associated with a network component. As further noted above, a “+” symbol corresponding to a component can understandably be selected to display lower-level components under the component, wherein the lower-level components are managed by the component – see e.g. paragraph 0025 and FIG. 4. It is therefore apparent that a user can select a first icon of the first plurality of icons, i.e. select a “+” symbol corresponding to an MSC, to display lower-level components in the tree graph that are managed by the MSC.); and
responsive to the selection of the first icon, displaying, by the processing circuitry, based at least in part of the topology information, and via the user interface, a second plurality of icons, each icon of the second plurality of icons connected to the selected first icon via a corresponding first edge, each icon of the second plurality of icons representing a resource group of the cell site domain associated with the selected first icon, the resource group comprising one or more cell sites of the cell site domain (see e.g. paragraph 0025 and FIG. 4: like noted above, Chang teaches that a “+” symbol corresponding to a network component within the tree graph can be selected to display lower-level components managed by that component. Chang particularly demonstrates that a base station controller (BSC) level is located below the MSC level in the tree graph, whereby an MSC is indicated as being associated with a plurality of BSCs – see e.g. paragraphs 0021 and 0025, and FIG 4. It is therefore apparent that selecting a “+” symbol corresponding to an MSC in the tree graph would result in the display of the plurality of BSCs managed by that MSC, wherein like in FIG. 4, each of the BSCs is itself associated with a “+” symbol that is selectable to display elements managed by that BSC. Figure 4 also demonstrates that each “-“ symbol associated with a selected MSC is graphically linked to the “+” or “-“ symbols associated with each BSC managed by that MSC. Chang also discloses that each BSC can manage a plurality of base transceiver stations (BTSs), each of which can be associated with one or more cells; selecting a “+” symbol next to a BSC in the tree graph would reveal a plurality of BTSs managed by that BSC – see e.g. paragraphs 0021 and 0025, and FIG. 4. Each BSC and it’s “+” symbol is thus considered to represent a resource group, i.e. a group of BTSs, of the cell site domain and wherein the resource group comprises one or more cell sites of the cell site domain. Accordingly, Chang teaches, in response to selecting the first icon, i.e. in response to selecting a “+” symbol corresponding to an MSC in the tree graph, displaying by the processing circuitry based at least in part on the topology information, and via the user interface, a second plurality of icons, i.e. a second plurality of “+” or “-“ symbols that each corresponds to a BSC, wherein each icon of the second plurality of icons is connected to the selected first icon via a corresponding first edge and each icon of the second plurality of icons represents a resource group, i.e. a group of BTSs managed by a BSC, of the sell site domain associated with the resource represented by the selected first icon, the resource group comprising one or more cell sites of the cell site domain.).
Accordingly, Chang teaches a method similar to that of claim 1. It is apparent that such teachings are implemented via a computing system comprising processing circuitry having access to memory, wherein the processing circuitry is configured to perform the above-noted tasks; such a computing system is understandably necessary to render the user interface described by Chang (see e.g. FIG. 2). Such a computing system comprising circuitry having access to memory and being configured to perform the above tasks is considered a computing system similar to that of claim 12. However, Chang does not explicitly teach that the topology information is of interconnected clouds and resources, wherein each icon of the first plurality of icons represents a cloud provider or data center associated with a network slice of the cell site domain, as is required by claims 1 and 12. Chang also does not disclose or suggest that the second plurality of icons is concentrically arranged around the first plurality of icons, as is further required by claims 1 and 12. Moreover, Chang does not explicitly teach provisioning, by the processing circuitry and based at least in part on a user input, received via the user interface, a communication service comprising the network slice upon at least one resource group of the resource groups hosted by the cloud provider or the data center represented by the selected first icon, as is also required by claims 1 and 12.
Park nevertheless generally describes network slices and teaches that the network infrastructure over which the network slices are operated can include one or more interconnected clouds having cloud-based data centers, inter alia (see e.g. paragraphs 0006-0007, 0010, 0085-0091 and 0100, and FIG. 1B). Park further teaches that a topological map of a region of the network infrastructure on which a slice is operated can be displayed to an operator, wherein the map comprises graphical representations of network resources implementing the network slice, including presumably data centers connected to cell site resources of a cell site domain (e.g. base stations for a radio access technology (RAT) such as 5G) (see e.g. paragraphs 0237-0241 and FIGS. 24-27).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Chang and Park before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the method and computing system taught by Chang so as to present topological information for a network slice like taught by Park, i.e. wherein the topology information is of interconnected clouds and resources categorized into the plurality of domains (e.g. a cell site domain or region domain). Particularly, it would have been obvious to employ the first plurality of icons taught by Chang to represent, for example, the data centers or clouds associated with the network slice of a cell site domain, and to employ the second plurality of icons displayed in response to a selection of one of the first plurality of icons to represent a resource group (e.g. base stations, MSCs, and/or BSCs) of the cell site domain hosted by the cloud provider or data center. It would have been advantageous to one of ordinary skill to utilize such a combination because it would enable an operator to identify the infrastructure of a network slice, as is evident from Park (see e.g. paragraphs 0237-0241 and FIGS. 24-27).
Gossweiler generally describes a system and method for displaying hierarchical and non-hierarchical data structures (e.g. paragraphs 0008-0010). Regarding the claimed invention, Gossweiler particularly teaches displaying a hierarchical data structure via concentric circles, wherein a first plurality of nodes within a first level of the data structure are displayed as a first plurality of icons and children of a selected one of the first plurality of icons are displayed as a second plurality of icons that that are concentrically arranged around the first plurality of icons, and wherein each icon of the second plurality of icons is connected to the selected icon via a corresponding edge (see e.g. paragraphs 0029-0030 and 0042, and FIG. 7).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Chang, Park and Gossweiler before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the method and computing system taught by Chang and Park such that the hierarchy of network elements (e.g. data centers, resource groups, etc.) associated with a network slice are displayed like taught by Gossweiler, wherein a first plurality of nodes (i.e. the data centers) within a first level of the data structure are displayed as a first plurality of icons and children (i.e. resource groups) of a selected one of the first plurality of icons are displayed as a second plurality of icons that are concentrically arranged around the first plurality of icons, and wherein each icon of the second plurality of icons is connected to the selected icon via a corresponding edge. It would have been advantageous to one of ordinary skill to utilize such a combination because it would enable the user to obtain an overview of the hierarchical structure and the connections between the nodes therein, as is evident from Gossweiler (see e.g. paragraph 0042 and FIG. 7).
Gadalin generally teaches creating radio-based networks, or slices of radio-based networks, that meet network topology locality rules (see e.g. column 2, line 39-67). Regarding the claimed invention, Gadalin further suggests provisioning, based at least in part on a user input received via a user interface, a communication service comprising a network slice upon at least one resource group of resource groups hosted by a selected cloud provider or data center (see e.g. column 2, line 45 – column 3, line 3; column 4, lines 38-61; column 5, lines 25-50; column 7, line 44 – column 8, line 34; column 9, lines 29-59; column 24, lines 39-57; column 26, lines 15-30; column 32, line 56 – column 33, line 12; and column 37, line 61 – column 38, line 12).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Chang, Park, Gossweiler and Gadalin before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the method and computing system taught by Chang, Park and Gossweiler so as to provision, by the processing circuitry and based at least in part on a user input received via the user interface, a communication service comprising the network slice upon at least one resource group of the resource groups hosted by a selected cloud provider or data center (i.e. the cloud provider or data center represented by the selected first icon), as is taught by Gadalin. It would have been advantageous to one of ordinary skill to utilize such a combination because it would enable a user to efficiently provision a network slice that meets his or her requirements, as is evident from Gadalin (see e.g. column 2, line 45 – column 3, line 3). Accordingly, Chang, Park, Gossweiler and Gadalin are considered to teach, to one of ordinary skill in the art, a method like that of claim 1 and a computing system like that of claim 12.
Regarding claims 2 and 13, it would have been obvious, as is described above, to employ the first plurality of icons taught by Chang to represent, for example, the data centers or clouds associated with the network slice of a cell site domain like taught by Park, and to employ the second plurality of icons displayed in response to a selection of one of the first plurality of icons to represent a resource group (e.g. base stations, MSCs, and/or BSCs) of the cell site domain hosted by the cloud provider or data center. Like in claim 12, Chang further teaches:
receiving, by the processing circuitry and via the user interface, a selection of a second icon of the second plurality of icons (see e.g. paragraph 0025 and FIG. 4: like noted above, Chang teaches that a “+” symbol corresponding to a network component within the tree graph can be selected to display lower-level components managed by that component. It is therefore apparent that a user can thus select a second icon of the second plurality of icons, e.g. select a “+” symbol associated with a BSC element in the tree graph.);
responsive to the selection of the second icon, displaying, by the processing circuitry, based at least in part on the topology information, and via the user interface, a third plurality of icons arranged with respect to the first plurality of icons and the second plurality of icons, each icon of the third plurality of icons connected to the selected second icon via a corresponding second edge, each icon of the third plurality of icons representing a resource of the resource group of the cell site domain represented by the selected second icon, the resource comprising a cell site of the one or more cell sites of the cell site domain (see e.g. paragraphs 0021 and 0025, and FIG. 4: Chang teaches that selecting a “+” symbol next to a BSC in the tree graph would reveal a plurality of BTSs managed by that BSC, and that each BTS is associated with one or more cells. Figure 4 also demonstrates that each “-“ symbol associated with a selected BSC is graphically linked to the “+” or “-“ symbols associated with each revealed BTS managed by that BSC. Each BTS is considered a resource of the resource group of the cell site domain represented by the second icon, i.e. by the “+” or “-“ symbol associated with the selected BSC, the resource comprising a cell site of the one or more cell sites of the cell site domain. Accordingly, Chang further teaches, responsive to the selection of the second icon, i.e. in response to selection of a “+” symbol corresponding to a BSC in the tree graph, displaying by the processing circuitry based at least in part on the topology information, and via the user interface, a third plurality of icons, i.e. a third plurality of “+” and/or “-“ symbols, each icon of the third plurality of icons connected to the selected second icon via a corresponding second edge, each icon of the third plurality of icons representing a resource, i.e. a BTS, of the resource group of the cell site domain represented by the selected second icon, the resource comprising a cell site of the one or more cell sites of the cell site domain.);
receiving, by the processing circuitry and via the user interface, a selection of a third icon of the third plurality of icons (see e.g. paragraphs 0021 and 0025, and FIG. 4: Chang teaches that selecting a “+” symbol next to a BTS in the tree graph would reveal a one or more cells associated with that BTS. Chang thus teaches receiving a user selection of a third icon of the third plurality of icons, i.e. a selection of “+” symbol associated with a BTS in the tree graph.); and
responsive to the selection of the third icon, displaying, by the processing circuitry, based at least in part on the topology information, and via the user interface, a fourth plurality of icons arranged with respect to first plurality of icons, the second plurality of icons, and the third plurality of icons, each icon of the fourth plurality of icons connected to the selected third icon via a corresponding third edge, each icon of the fourth plurality of icons representing one of a manager node or a worker node of the cell site of the resource represented by the selected third icon (see e.g. paragraphs 0021 and 0025, and FIG. 4: like noted above, Chang teaches that selecting a “+” symbol next to a BTS in the tree graph would reveal a one or more cells associated with that BTS. Figure 4 also demonstrates that each “-“ symbol associated with the selected BTS is graphically linked to each revealed cell under that BTS in the tree graph. Each cell displayed within the tree graph can be considered an icon representing a manager node or a worker node of the cell site of the selected BTS. Accordingly, Chang further teaches, responsive to the selection of the third icon, i.e. in response to selecting a “+” symbol corresponding to a BTS in the tree graph, displaying by the processing circuitry based at least in part on the topology information, and via the user interface, a fourth plurality of icons, i.e. cells, arranged with respect to the first plurality of icons, the second plurality of icons and the third plurality of icons, each icon of the fourth plurality of icons connected to the selected third icon via a corresponding third edge, and each icon of the fourth plurality of icons representing one of a manager node or a worker node of the cell site of the resource, i.e. BTS, represented by the selected third icon.).
As further described above, it would have been obvious to modify the method and computing system taught by Chang and Park such that the hierarchy of network elements (e.g. data centers, resource groups, etc.) associated with a network slice are displayed like taught by Gossweiler. Gossweiler generally teaches, in response to receiving user-selection of a first icon of a plurality of icons displayed within a level of the hierarchy, displaying children of the selected icon via an additional plurality of icons in a next level of the hierarchy that is concentrically arranged around the plurality of icons and their ancestors and wherein each icon of the additional plurality of icons is connected to the selected first icon via a corresponding edge (see e.g. see e.g. paragraphs 0029-0030 and 0042, and FIG. 7). It therefore would have been apparent to likewise display the third plurality of icons taught by Chang concentrically arranged around the second plurality of icons (which are themselves concentrically arranged around the first plurality of icons), wherein each icon of the third plurality of icons is connected to the selected second icon, and to display the fourth plurality of icons taught by Chang concentrically arranged around the third plurality of icons (which are themselves concentrically arranged around the first plurality of icons and the second plurality of icons), and wherein each icon of the fourth plurality of icons is connected to the selected third icon. Accordingly, the above-described combination of Chang, Park, Gossweiler and Gadalin further teaches a method like that of claim 2 and a computing system like that of claim 13.
As per claim 21, it would have been obvious, as is described above, to modify the method taught by Chang and Park such that the hierarchy of network elements (e.g. data centers, resource groups, etc.) associated with a network slice are displayed like taught by Gossweiler, wherein a first plurality of nodes (i.e. the data centers) within a first level of the data structure are displayed as a first plurality of icons and children (i.e. resource groups) of a selected one of the first plurality of icons are displayed as a second plurality of icons that that are concentrically arranged around the first plurality of icons. Gossweiler particularly teaches that the spacing (i.e. distance between nodes) of the second plurality of icons concentrically arranged around the first plurality of icons can be based at least in part on topology information (see e.g. paragraph 0033). Accordingly, the above-described combination of Chang, Park, Gossweiler and Gadalin is further considered to teach a method like that of claim 21.
As per claim 22, it would have been obvious, as is described above, to modify the method taught by Chang and Park such that the hierarchy of network elements (e.g. data centers, resource groups, etc.) associated with a network slice are displayed like taught by Gossweiler, wherein a first plurality of nodes (i.e. the data centers) within a first level of the data structure are displayed as a first plurality of icons and children (i.e. resource groups) of a selected one of the first plurality of icons are displayed as a second plurality of icons that that are concentrically arranged around the first plurality of icons. Gossweiler particularly teaches that the second plurality of icons can be concentrically arranged around the first plurality of icons (i.e. sequentially placed) according to like criteria shared by the nodes represented by respective icons of the second plurality of icons (see e.g. paragraph 0033). Accordingly, the above-described combination of Chang, Park, Gossweiler and Gadalin is further considered to teach a method like that of claim 22.
Claims 3, 4, 6, 14, 15, 17 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Chang, Park, Gossweiler and Gadalin, which is described above, and also over U.S. Patent No. 7,716,586 to Dieberger et al. (“Dieberger”).
Regarding claims 3 and 14, Chang, Park, Gossweiler and Gadalin teach a method like that of claim 1 and a system like that of claim 12, as is described above, which entail obtaining topology information of interconnected clouds and resources, and displaying a first plurality of icons, each representing a cloud provider or data center associated with a network slice. As particularly noted above, it would have been obvious to modify the method and computing system taught by Chang so as to present topological information for a network slice like taught by Park, i.e. wherein the topology information is of interconnected clouds and resources. Park suggests that a network slice can be provisioned in a plurality of cloud providers or data centers of interconnected clouds and resources (e.g. local data centers and a main data center)(see e.g. paragraphs 0091 and 0100, and FIG. 1B). Chang, Park, Gossweiler and Gadalin, however, do not explicitly teach that displaying the first plurality of icons comprises (i) applying a grouping logic to the plurality of cloud providers or data centers to organize the plurality of cloud providers or data centers into sets of two or more cloud providers or data centers, and (ii) displaying the first plurality of icons, each icon of the first plurality of icons representing a set of the sets of two or more cloud providers or data centers, as is further required by claims 3 and 14.
Dieberger generally teaches representing an IT system comprising a plurality of data centers, wherein each data center can be represented by an icon, and each of a plurality of resource groups (e.g. a storage group, mainframe group, etc.) hosted by a selected data center can be represented by an additional icon (see e.g. column 1, line 56 – column 2, line 21; column 8, lines 21-63; column 9, lines 3-22; column 12, lines 16-61; and FIG. 7). Regarding claims 3 and 14, Dieberger generally teaches that entities in a network map can be grouped, via grouping logic, into sets of two or more entities, and whereby an icon is presented in the network map to represent each set of two or more entities (see e.g. column 11, lines 1-40; column 13, line 57 – column 14, line 14; and FIGS. 10A-B).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Chang, Park, Gossweiler, Gadalin and Dieberger before him prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the method and computing system taught by Chang, Park, Gossweiler and Gadalin such that grouping logic is applied to a plurality of entities (e.g. the cloud providers or data centers) in the network map to organize the entities into sets of two or more entities, and whereby an icon is displayed to represent each set of two or more entities, as is taught by Dieberger. In the case of the entities being the cloud providers or data centers, this can result in a display of a first plurality of icons, wherein each icon of the first plurality of icons represents a set of two or more cloud providers or data centers. It would have been advantageous to one of ordinary skill to utilize such a combination because it can simplify the display of the network, as is evident from Dieberger (see e.g. column 13, line 57 – column 14, line 14; and FIGS. 10A-B). Accordingly, Chang, Park, Gossweiler, Gadalin and Dieberger are considered to teach, to one of ordinary skill in the art, a method like that of claim 3 and a computing system like that of claim 14.
Regarding claims 4 and 15, Chang, Park, Gossweiler and Gadalin teach a method like that of claim 1 and a system like that of claim 12, as is described above, which entail obtaining topology information of interconnected clouds and resources, and displaying a first plurality of icons, each representing a cloud provider or data center associated with a network slice. Particularly, like noted above, it would have been obvious to employ the first plurality of icons taught by Chang to represent, for example, the data centers or clouds associated with a network slice, and to employ a second plurality of icons displayed in response to a selection of one of the first plurality of icons to represent a resource group (e.g. base stations, MSCs, and/or BSCs) of the cell site domain hosted by the cloud provider or data center. Chang, Park, Gossweiler and Gadalin are thus further considered to teach that the first icon can represent a cloud provider associated with the network slice, and wherein the cloud provider represented by the first icon hosts a plurality of resource groups (e.g. base stations, MSCs, and/or BSCs). However, Chang, Park, Gossweiler and Gadalin do not explicitly teach that displaying the second plurality of icons comprises (i) applying grouping logic to the plurality of resource groups to organize the plurality of resource groups into sets of two or more resource groups, and (ii) displaying the second plurality of icons, each icon of the second plurality of icons representing a set of the sets of two or more resource groups, as is required by claims 4 and 15.
Nevertheless, like noted above, Dieberger generally teaches that entities in a network map can be grouped, via grouping logic, into sets of two or more entities, and whereby an icon is presented in the network map to represent each set of two or more entities (see e.g. column 11, lines 1-40; column 13, line 57 – column 14, line 14; and FIGS. 10A-B).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Chang, Park, Gossweiler, Gadalin and Dieberger before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the method and computing system taught by Chang, Park, Gossweiler and Gadalin such that grouping logic is applied to a plurality of entities (e.g. the resource groups) in the network map to organize the entities into sets of two or more entities, and whereby an icon is displayed to represent each set of two or more entities, as is taught by Dieberger. In the case of the entities being the resource groups, this can result in a display of a second plurality of icons, wherein each icon of the second plurality of icons represents a set of two or more resource groups. It would have been advantageous to one of ordinary skill to utilize such a combination because it can simplify the display of the network, as is evident from Dieberger (see e.g. column 13, line 57 – column 14, line 14; and FIGS. 10A-B). Accordingly, Chang, Park, Gossweiler, Gadalin and Dieberger are considered to teach, to one of ordinary skill in the art, a method like that of claim 4 and a computing system like that of claim 15.
Regarding claims 6 and 17, Chang, Park, Gossweiler and Gadalin teach a method like that of claim 1 and a system like that of claim 12, as is described above, which entail displaying a first plurality of icons representing a cloud provider or data center associated with a network slice, and displaying a second plurality of icons in response to selecting a first icon of the first plurality of icons. Chang, Park, Gossweiler and Gadalin, however, do not explicitly teach (i) receiving, by the processing circuitry and via the user interface, a selection of a second icon of the second plurality of icons, and (ii) displaying, by the processing circuitry, based at least in part on the topology information, and via the user interface, a window depicting information about a resource group represented by the second icon, as is claimed.
Dieberger nevertheless generally teaches receiving a selection of an icon representing a network object, and displaying based at least in part on topology information a window depicting information about the network object represented by the icon (see e.g. column 15, lines 8-33; and FIG. 12).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Chang, Park, Gossweiler, Gadalin and Dieberger before him prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the method and computing system taught by Chang, Park, Gossweiler and Gadalin so as to: (i) receive (i.e. by the processing circuitry and via the user interface) a selection of an icon representing a network object (e.g. a selection of a second icon of the second plurality of icons representing resource groups); and (ii) display (i.e. by the processing circuitry, based at least in part on the topology information, and via the user interface) a window depicting information about the network object (e.g. a resource group) represented by the selected icon, as is taught by Dieberger. It would have been advantageous to one of ordinary skill to utilize such a combination because it would enable a user to efficiently access information about network objects, as is evident from Dieberger (see e.g. column 15, lines 8-33; and FIG. 12). Accordingly, Chang, Park, Gossweiler, Gadalin and Dieberger are considered to teach, to one of ordinary skill in the art, a method like that of claim 6 and a computing system like that of claim 17.
Regarding claim 20, Chang describes a management system and graphical user interface for managing a wireless communication network (see e.g. paragraphs 0009 and 0011). Similar to the claimed invention, Chang particularly teaches:
obtaining, by processing circuitry, topology information of interconnected resources categorized into a plurality of domains including one or more of a cell site domain, an edge domain, a regional domain, and a national domain (see e.g. paragraphs 0020-0021: Chang discloses that the management system can be applied to manage a Global System for Mobile communication network, which comprises a plurality of network components deployed as a multi-level structure. The multi-level structure comprises a cell level – see e.g. paragraph 0021 – and each of the network components is associated with a location in a geographic region or area – see e.g. paragraph 0026 and FIG. 4. The network components are thus considered as categorized into a plurality of domains including a cell site domain, an edge domain, a regional domain and/or a national domain. Chang further discloses that the management system displays a graphical user interface comprising a network tree graph that indicates the multi-level relationship of network components and a map that shows where the network components are located – see e.g. paragraphs 0022 and 0025-0026, and FIG. 2. Accordingly, to display the network tree graph and map, it is apparent that the processing circuitry of the management system necessarily obtains topology information of interconnected resources, i.e. the network components, which are categorized into a plurality of domains including one or more of a cell site domain, an edge domain, a regional domain and a national domain.);
displaying, by processing circuitry, based at least in part on the topology information, and via a user interface, a representation of a network comprising first icons, each icon of the first icons representing a resource associated with the cell site domain (see e.g. paragraphs 0022 and 0025, and FIGS. 2 and 4: like noted above, Chang discloses that the management system displays a graphical user interface comprising a network tree graph that indicates the multi-level relationship between network components. The tree graph particularly comprises a plurality of icons, i.e. “+” or “-“ symbols, each of which is associated with a network component – see e.g. paragraph 0025 and FIG. 4. A “+” symbol corresponding to a component can understandably be selected to display lower-level components under the component, wherein the lower-level components are managed by the component – see e.g. paragraph 0025 and FIG. 4. Moreover, Chang particularly demonstrates that a level of the hierarchy can comprises a plurality of such icons/symbols that each correspond to a mobile switching center (MSC) associated with a plurality of cell sites – see e.g. paragraphs 0021 and 0025, and FIG. 4. The processing circuitry of the management system thus displays, based at least in part on the topology information and via a user interface, a representation of a network comprising first icons, i.e. “+” or “-“ symbols, wherein each of the first icons represents a resource, i.e. an MSC, associated with a cell site domain.);
responsive to a selection of a first icon of the first icons, displaying, by the processing circuitry, based at least in part of the topology information, and via the user interface, second icons arranged with respect to the first icons, each icon of the second icons connected to the selected first icon via a corresponding first edge, each icon of the second icons representing a resource group of the cell site domain associated with the selected first icon, the resource group comprising one or more cell sites of the cell site domain (see e.g. paragraph 0025 and FIG. 4: like noted above, Chang discloses that the management system displays a network tree graph that comprises a plurality of icons, i.e. “+” or “-“ symbols, each of which is associated with a network component. As further noted above, a “+” symbol corresponding to a component can understandably be selected to display lower-level components under the component, wherein the lower-level components are managed by the component – see e.g. paragraph 0025 and FIG. 4. It is therefore apparent that a user can select a first icon of the first plurality of icons, i.e. select a “+” symbol corresponding to an MSC, to display lower-level components in the tree graph that are managed by the MSC. Chang particularly demonstrates that a base station controller (BSC) level is located below the MSC level in the tree graph, whereby an MSC is indicated as being associated with a plurality of BSCs – see e.g. paragraphs 0021 and 0025, and FIG 4. It is therefore apparent that selecting a “+” symbol corresponding to an MSC in the tree graph would result in the display of the plurality of BSCs managed by that MSC, wherein like in FIG. 4, each of the BSCs is itself associated with a “+” symbol that is selectable to display elements managed by that BSC. Figure 4 also demonstrates that each “-“ symbol associated with a selected MSC is graphically linked to the “+” or “-“ symbols associated with each BSC managed by that MSC. Chang also discloses that each BSC can manage a plurality of base transceiver stations (BTSs), each of which can be associated with one or more cells; selecting a “+” symbol next to a BSC in the tree graph would reveal a plurality of BTSs managed by that BSC – see e.g. paragraphs 0021 and 0025, and FIG. 4. Each BSC and it’s “+” symbol is thus considered to represent a resource group, i.e. a group of BTSs, of the cell site domain and wherein the resource group comprises one or more cell sites of the cell site domain. Accordingly, Chang teaches, in response to selecting a first icon of the first icons, i.e. in response to selecting a “+” symbol corresponding to an MSC in the tree graph, displaying by the processing circuitry based at least in part on the topology information, and via the user interface, second icons, i.e. a second plurality of “+” or “-“ symbols that each corresponds to a BSC, wherein each icon of the second icons is connected to the selected first icon via a corresponding first edge and each icon of the second icons represents a resource group, i.e. a group of BTSs managed by a BSC, of the sell site domain associated with the resource represented by the selected first icon, the resource group comprising one or more cell sites of the cell site domain.);
responsive to a selection of a second icon of the second icons, displaying, by the processing circuitry, based at least in part on the topology information, and via the user interface, third icons arranged with respect to the first icons and the second icons, each icon of the third icons connected to the selected second icon via a corresponding second edge, each icon of the third icons representing a resource of the resource group of the cell site domain represented by the selected second icon, the resource comprising a cell site of the one or more cell sites of the cell site domain (see e.g. paragraphs 0021 and 0025, and FIG. 4: Chang teaches that selecting a “+” symbol next to a BSC in the tree graph would reveal a plurality of BTSs managed by that BSC, and that each BTS is associated with one or more cells. Figure 4 also demonstrates that each “-“ symbol associated with a selected BSC is graphically linked to the “+” or “-“ symbols associated with each revealed BTS managed by that BSC. Each BTS is considered a resource of the resource group of the cell site domain represented by the second icon, i.e. by the “+” or “-“ symbol associated with the selected BSC, the resource comprising a cell site of the one or more cell sites of the cell site domain. Accordingly, Chang further teaches, responsive to a selection of a second icon of the second icons, i.e. in response to selection of a “+” symbol corresponding to a BSC in the tree graph, displaying by the processing circuitry based at least in part on the topology information, and via the user interface, third icons, i.e. a third plurality of “+” and/or “-“ symbols, each icon of the third icons connected to the selected second icon via a corresponding second edge, and each icon of the third icons representing a resource, i.e. a BTS, of the resource group of the cell site domain represented by the selected second icon, the resource comprising a cell site of the one or more cell sites of the cell site domain.);
responsive to the selection of a third icon of the third icons, displaying, by the processing circuitry, based at least in part on the topology information, and via the user interface, fourth icons arranged with respect to first icons, the second icons, and the third icons, each icon of the fourth icons connected to the selected third icon via a corresponding third edge, each icon of the fourth icons representing one of a manager node or a worker node of the cell site of the resource represented by the selected third icon (see e.g. paragraphs 0021 and 0025, and FIG. 4: Chang teaches that selecting a “+” symbol next to a BTS in the tree graph would reveal a one or more cells associated with that BTS. Figure 4 also demonstrates that each “-“ symbol associated with the selected BTS is graphically linked to each revealed cell under that BTS in the tree graph. Each cell displayed within the tree graph can be considered an icon representing a manager node or a worker node of the cell site of the selected BTS. Accordingly, Chang further teaches, responsive to the selection of a third icon of the third icons, i.e. in response to selecting a “+” symbol corresponding to a BTS in the tree graph, displaying by the processing circuitry based at least in part on the topology information, and via the user interface, fourth icons, i.e. cells, arranged with respect to the first icons, the second icons and the third icons, each icon of the fourth icons connected to the selected third icon via a corresponding third edge, and each icon of the fourth icons representing one of a manager node or a worker node of the cell site of the resource, i.e. BTS, represented by the selected third icon.).
Accordingly, Chang teaches a method similar to that of claim 20. However, Chang does not explicitly teach that the topology information is of interconnected clouds and resources, wherein each icon of the first icons represents a cloud provider or data center associated with a network slice of the cell site domain, as is required by claim 20. Chang also does not disclose or suggest that the second icons are concentrically arranged around the first icons, that the third icons are concentrically arranged around the first icons and the second icons, and that the fourth icons are concentrically arranged around the first icons, the second icons, and the third icons, as is further required by claim 20. Moreover, Chang does not explicitly teach provisioning, based at least in part on a user input, received via the user interface, a communication service comprising the network slice upon at least one resource group of the resource groups hosted by the cloud provider or the data center represented by the selected first icon, as is also required by claim 20. Chang also does not explicitly teach displaying, responsive to a selection of a fourth icon of the fourth icons, by the processing circuitry and based at least in part on the topology information, and via the user interface, information about the one of the manager node or the worker node represented by the selected fourth icon, as is required by claim 20.
Nevertheless, like described above, Park generally describes network slices and teaches that the network infrastructure over which the network slices are operated can include one or more interconnected clouds having cloud-based data centers, inter alia (see e.g. paragraphs 0006-0007, 0010, 0085-0091 and 0100, and FIG. 1B). Park further teaches that a topological map of a region of the network infrastructure on which a slice is operated can be displayed to an operator, wherein the map comprises graphical representations of network resources implementing the network slice, including presumably data centers connected to cell site resources of a cell site domain (e.g. base stations for a radio access technology (RAT) such as 5G) (see e.g. paragraphs 0237-0241 and FIGS. 24-27).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Chang and Park before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the method taught by Chang so as to present topological information for a network slice like taught by Park, i.e. wherein the topology information is of interconnected clouds and resources of a network slice categorized into the plurality of domains (e.g. a cell site domain or region domain). Particularly, it would have been obvious to employ the first icons taught by Chang to represent, for example, the data centers or clouds associated with the network slice of a cell site domain, and to employ the second icons displayed in response to a selection of one of the first icons to represent a resource group (e.g. base stations, MSCs, and/or BSCs) of the cell site domain hosted by the cloud provider or data center. It would have been advantageous to one of ordinary skill to utilize such a combination because it would enable an operator to identify the infrastructure of a network slice, as is evident from Park (see e.g. paragraphs 0237-0241 and FIGS. 24-27).
Like further described above, Gossweiler particularly teaches displaying a hierarchical data structure via concentric circles, wherein a first plurality of nodes within a first level of the data structure are displayed as a first plurality of icons and children of a selected one of the first plurality of icons are displayed as a second plurality of icons that that are concentrically arranged around the first plurality of icons, and wherein each icon of the second plurality of icons is connected to the selected icon via a corresponding edge (see e.g. paragraphs 0029-0030 and 0042, and FIG. 7).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Chang, Park and Gossweiler before him prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the method taught by Chang and Park such that the hierarchy of network elements (e.g. data centers, resource groups, etc.) associated with a network slice are displayed like taught by Gossweiler, wherein a first plurality of nodes (i.e. the data centers) within a first level of the data structure are displayed as a first icons and children (i.e. resource groups) of a selected one of the first icons are displayed as a second icons that that are concentrically arranged around the first icons, and wherein each icon of the second icons is connected to the selected first icon via a corresponding edge. It would have been obvious to likewise display the third icons taught by Chang concentrically arranged around the second icons (which are themselves concentrically arranged around the first icons), wherein each icon of the third icons is connected to the selected second icon, and to display the fourth icons taught by Chang concentrically arranged around the third icons (which are themselves concentrically arranged around the first icons and the second icons), and wherein each icon of the fourth icons is connected to the selected third icon. It would have been advantageous to one of ordinary skill to utilize such a combination because it would enable the user to obtain an overview of the hierarchical structure and the connections between the nodes therein, as is evident from Gossweiler (see e.g. paragraph 0042 and FIG. 7).
As further described above, Gadalin generally teaches creating radio-based networks, or slices of radio-based networks, that meet network topology locality rules (see e.g. column 2, line 39-67). Regarding the claimed invention, Gadalin further suggests provisioning, based at least in part on a user input received via a user interface, a communication service comprising a network slice upon at least one resource group of resource groups hosted by a selected cloud provider or data center (see e.g. column 2, line 45 – column 3, line 3; column 4, lines 38-61; column 5, lines 25-50; column 7, line 44 – column 8, line 34; column 9, lines 29-59; column 24, lines 39-57; column 26, lines 15-30; column 32, line 56 – column 33, line 12; and column 37, line 61 – column 38, line 12).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Chang, Park, Gossweiler and Gadalin before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the method taught by Chang, Park and Gossweiler so as to provision, by the processing circuitry and based at least in part on a user input received via the user interface, a communication service comprising the network slice upon at least one resource group of the resource groups hosted by a selected cloud provider or data center (i.e. the cloud provider or data center represented by the selected first icon), as is taught by Gadalin. It would have been advantageous to one of ordinary skill to utilize such a combination because it would enable a user to efficiently provision a network slice that meets his or her requirements, as is evident from Gadalin (see e.g. column 2, line 45 – column 3, line 3). Chang, Park, Gossweiler and Gadalin are thus considered to teach a method similar to that of claim 20, but do not explicitly teach displaying, responsive to a selection of a fourth icon of the fourth icons, by the processing circuitry and based at least in part on the topology information, and via the user interface, information about the one of the manager node or the worker node represented by the selected fourth icon, as is required by claim 20.
Dieberger nevertheless generally teaches receiving a selection of an icon representing a network object, and displaying based at least in part on topology information a window depicting information about the network object represented by the icon (see e.g. column 15, lines 8-33; and FIG. 12).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Chang, Park, Gossweiler, Gadalin and Dieberger before him prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the method taught by Chang, Park, Gossweiler and Gadalin so as to, in response to receiving a selection of an icon (e.g. a fourth icon of the fourth icons) in the topological display of network elements, display (i.e. by the processing circuitry, based at least in part on the topology information, and via the user interface) information about the associated network element (e.g. the manager node or the worker node) represented by the selected icon, as is taught by Dieberger. It would have been advantageous to one of ordinary skill to utilize such a combination because it would enable a user to efficiently access information about network objects, as is evident from Dieberger (see e.g. column 15, lines 8-33; and FIG. 12). Accordingly, Chang, Park, Gossweiler, Gadalin and Dieberger are considered to teach, to one of ordinary skill in the art, a method like that of claim 20.
Claims 5 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the above-described combination of Chang, Park, Gossweiler and Gadalin, and also over U.S. Patent No. 8,352,620 to Conrad (“Conrad”).
As described above, Chang, Park, Gossweiler and Gadalin teach a method like that of claim 1 and a computing system like that of claim 12, which entail displaying a first plurality of icons that each represent a cloud provider or data center associated with a network slice, and in response to receiving a selection of a first icon of the first plurality of icons, displaying a second plurality of icons that each represent a resource group hosted by the cloud provider or data center represented by the first icon. Particularly, like noted above, it would have been obvious to employ the first plurality of icons taught by Chang to represent, for example, the data centers or clouds associated with a network slice, and to employ the second plurality of icons displayed in response to a selection of one of the first plurality of icons to represent a resource group (e.g. base stations, MSCs, and/or BSCs) of the cell site domain hosted by the cloud provider or data center. Chang, Park, Gossweiler and Gadalin are thus further considered to teach that the first icon can represent a cloud provider associated with the network slice, and wherein the cloud provider represented by the first icon hosts a plurality of resource groups (e.g. base stations, MSCs, and/or BSCs). Chang, Park, Gossweiler and Gadalin, however, do not teach that displaying the second plurality of icons comprises: (i) receiving, via the user interface, one or more criteria; (ii) filtering the plurality of resource groups based on the one or more criteria to obtain a subset of resource groups hosted by the cloud provider; and (iii) displaying a subset of the second plurality of icons, each icon of the subset of the second plurality of icons representing a resource group of the subset of resource groups hosted by the cloud provider, as is further required by claims 5 and 16.
Conrad nevertheless teaches filtering the amount of objects to be displayed in a network topology map by: (i) receiving, via a user interface, one or more criteria; (ii) filtering a plurality of network objects based on the one or more criteria to obtain a subset of network objects; and (iii) displaying a subset of icons, each icon of the subset representing a network object of the subset of network objects (see e.g. column 3, lines 5-42; and FIG. 3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Chang, Park, Gossweiler, Gadalin and Conrad before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the method and computing system taught by Chang, Park, Gossweiler and Gadalin so as to enable the user to filter the amount of objects (e.g. resource groups) represented in the network topology map like taught by Conrad, i.e. by: (i) receiving, via a user interface, one or more criteria; (ii) filtering a plurality of network objects (e.g. a plurality of resource groups hosted by a cloud provider/data center) based on the one or more criteria to obtain a subset of network objects; and (iii) displaying a subset of icons (e.g. of the second plurality of icons), each icon of the subset representing a network object of the subset of network objects, as is taught by Conrad. It would have been advantageous to one of ordinary skill to utilize such a combination because it can enable an operator to more meaningfully digest the information presented via the network topology map, as is suggested by Conrad (see e.g. column 1, lines 19-29). Accordingly, Chang, Park, Gossweiler, Gadalin and Conrad are considered to teach, to one of ordinary skill in the art, a method like that of claim 5 and a computing system like that of claim 16.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the above-described combination of Chang, Park, Gossweiler, Dieberger and Gadalin, and also over U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2013/0311891 to Sankala et al. (“Sankala”).
As described above, Chang, Park, Gossweiler, Gadalin and Dieberger teach a method like that of claim 6, which includes receiving a selection of a second icon of a second plurality of icons, and displaying a window depicting information about a resource group represented by the second icon. Chang, Park, Gossweiler, Gadalin and Dieberger, however, do not explicitly teach that the information about the resource group comprises at least one of: (i) bandwidth or latency metrics for one or more links of the resource group; or (ii) workload, storage, computer, or traffic throughput statistics for the cloud provider hosting the resource group, as is required by claim 7.
Nevertheless, presenting such information is known in the art. In particular, Sankala teaches receiving a selection of a network element represented in a displayed communication network layout, and displaying performance information about the selected network element, wherein the performance information comprises at least one or more of bandwidth or latency metrics for one or more links associated with the element, or workload, storage, compute or traffic throughput statics for the network element (see e.g. paragraphs 0003, 0020-0021, 0024 and 0027-0028).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Chang, Park, Gossweiler, Gadalin, Dieberger and Sankala before him prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the method taught by Chang, Park, Gossweiler, Gadalin and Dieberger such that the information displayed in response to receiving the user selection of the second icon representing the network element (i.e. resource group) includes performance information like taught by Sankala that is associated with the network element, wherein the performance information comprises at least one or more of bandwidth or latency metrics for one or more links associated with the element, or workload, storage, compute or traffic throughput statics for the network element (i.e. for the resource group, and thus for the cloud provider/data center hosting the resource group). It would have been advantageous to one of ordinary skill to utilize such a combination because it would enable an operator to more efficiently determine the performance of components of the network, as is evident from Sankala (see e.g. paragraphs 0003, 0020-0021, 0024 and 0027-0028). Accordingly, Chang, Park, Gossweiler, Gadalin, Dieberger and Sankala are considered to teach, to one of ordinary skill in the art, a method like that of claim 7.
Claims 8, 9 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the above-described combination of Chang, Park, Gossweiler and Gadalin, and also over U.S. Patent No. 9,621,428 to Lev et al. (“Lev”).
Regarding claims 8 and 18, Chang, Park, Gossweiler and Gadalin teach a method like that of claim 1 and a system like that of claim 12, as is described above, which entail displaying a first plurality of icons that each represent a cloud provider or data center associated with a network slice, and in response to receiving a selection of a first icon of the first plurality of icons, displaying a second plurality of icons that each represent a resource group hosted by the cloud provider or data center represented by the first icon. Chang, Park, Gossweiler and Gadalin, however, do not explicitly teach: (i) receiving (i.e. by the processing circuitry and via the user interface) an input specifying configuration information for a cloud; and (ii) onboarding (i.e. by the processing circuitry) an instance of the cloud based on the configuration information, as is required by claims 8 and 18.
Lev generally teaches a multi-tiered cloud application topology modeling tool (see e.g. column 2, lines 37-53). Like claimed, Lev particularly teaches: (i) receiving, by processing circuitry and via a user interface, an input specifying configuration information for a cloud (i.e. input specifying a cloud application topology); and (ii) onboarding, by the processing circuitry, an instance of the cloud based on the configuration information (i.e. converting the cloud application topology to a stack blueprint that can be executed to instantiate the cloud application topology) (see e.g. column 2, lines 37-53; column 10, lines 16-36; and column 18, lines 1-24).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Chang, Park, Gossweiler, Gadalin and Lev before him prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the method and system taught by Chang, Park, Gossweiler an Gadalin so as to: (i) receive, i.e. by the processing circuitry and via the user interface, an input specifying configuration information for a cloud; and (ii) onboard, by the processing circuitry, an instance of the cloud based on the configuration information, as is taught by Lev. It would have been advantageous to one of ordinary skill to utilize such a combination because it would enable a user to easily deploy an application for implementation on a cloud, as is evident from Lev (see e.g. column 5, lines 14-18). Accordingly, Chang, Park, Gossweiler, Gadalin and Lev are considered to teach, to one of ordinary skill in the art, a method like that of claim 8 and a system like that of claim 18.
As per claim 9, it would have been obvious, as is described above, to modify the method taught by Chang, Park, Gossweiler and Gadalin so as to include receiving an input specifying configuration information for a cloud (i.e. input specifying a cloud application topology), as is taught by Lev. Lev particularly teaches that receiving the input specifying the configuration information for the cloud can include displaying a visualization of one or more of: (i) an overview (e.g. topology) of the cloud; (ii) one or more physical network functions (e.g. a router) of the cloud; (iii) one or more inter-domain links to the cloud; (iv) one or more virtual local area networks (VLANS) of the cloud; or (v) one or more labels assigned to the cloud (see e.g. column 15, line 47 – column 16, line 10; and FIG. 9). Accordingly, the above-described combination of Chang, Park, Gossweiler, Gadalin and Lev is further considered to teach a method like that of claim 9.
Claims 10, 11 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the above-described combination of Chang, Park, Gossweiler and Gadalin, and also over U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2013/0268861 to Bailey et al. (“Bailey”).
Regarding claims 10 and 19, Chang, Park, Gossweiler and Gadalin teach a method like that of claim 1 and a system like that of claim 12, as is described above, which entail displaying a first plurality of icons that each represent a cloud provider or data center associated with a network slice, and in response to receiving a selection of a first icon of the first plurality of icons, displaying a second plurality of icons that each represent a resource group hosted by the cloud provider or data center represented by the first icon. Chang, Park, Gossweiler and Gadalin, however, do not explicitly teach: (i) receiving (i.e. by the processing circuitry and via the user interface) an input specifying an instance of a cloud to be removed; and (ii) responsive to the input, removing (i.e. by the processing circuitry) the instance of the cloud, as is required by claims 10 and 19.
Bailey generally describes a method for allocating cloud resources (see e.g. paragraph 0003). Regarding the claimed invention, Bailey particularly teaches: (i) receiving, by processing circuitry and via a user interface, an input specifying an instance of a cloud (i.e. a “workload” deployed on a cloud) to be removed; and (ii) responsive to the input, removing, by the processing circuitry, the instance of the cloud (see e.g. paragraphs 0053-0055 and 0057, and FIG. 5).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Chang, Park, Gossweiler, Gadalin and Bailey before him prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the method and system taught by Chang, Park, Gossweiler and Gadalin so as to: (i) receive, i.e. by the processing circuitry and via the user interface, an input specifying an instance of a cloud to be removed; and (ii) responsive to the input, remove, by the processing circuitry, the instance of the cloud, as is taught by Bailey. It would have been advantageous to one of ordinary skill to utilize such a combination because it would enable a user to more easily manage cloud resources, as is evident from Bailey (see e.g. paragraphs 0053-0055 and 0057, and FIG. 5). Accordingly, Chang, Park, Gossweiler, Gadalin and Bailey are considered to teach, to one of ordinary skill in the art, a method like that of claim 10 and a system like that of claim 19.
As per claim 11, it would have been obvious, as is described above, to modify the method taught by Chang, Park, Gossweiler and Gadalin so as to include receiving an input specifying an instance of a cloud to be removed, as is taught by Bailey. Bailey further teaches that the user interface enabling selection of the instance of the cloud to be removed also displays a visualization of one or more of: (i) severity information for the cloud; (ii) a service level agreement (SLA) for the cloud; or (iii) one or more traffic details of the cloud (see e.g. paragraphs 0055-0057, and FIG. 5). Accordingly, the above-described combination of Chang, Park, Gossweiler, Gadalin and Bailey is further considered to teach a method like that of claim 11.
Response to Arguments
The Examiner acknowledges the Applicant’s amendments to claims 1, 12 and 20. Regarding the 35 U.S.C. § 103 rejections, the Applicant argues that Chang, Park and Gossweiler fail to disclose or suggest “provisioning…based at least in part on a user input, received via the user interface, a communication service comprising the network slice upon at least one resource group of the resource groups hosted by the cloud provider or the data center represented by the selected first icon,” as is now recited in amended claim 1 (and similarly expressed in amended claims 12 and 20).
These arguments have been considered, but are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection presented above, which are required in response to the Applicant’s amendments.
Further regarding the 35 U.S.C. § 103 rejections, the Applicant also argues that Chang, Park and Gossweiler fail to disclose or suggest “displaying…based at least in part on the topology information, and via a user interface, a first plurality of icons, each icon of the first plurality of icons representing a cloud provider or a data center associated with a network slice of the cell site domain” and “responsive to the selection of the first icon, displaying…based at least in part on the topology information, and via the user interface, a second plurality of icons…, each icon of the second plurality of icons connected to the selected first icon via a corresponding first edge, each icon of the second plurality of icons representing a resource group of the cell site domain hosted by the cloud provider or the data center represented by the selected first icon, the resource group comprising one or more cell sites of the cell site domain.”
The Examiner, however, respectfully disagrees. Like described above, Chang generally teaches displaying a tree of icons (i.e. a network tree graph) to represent the components of a multi-level wireless communication network (see e.g. paragraphs 0021, 0022 and 0025, and FIGS. 2 and 4). The hierarchical structure of the network entails that the components are organized into groups: e.g., a set of cells is associated with a base transceiver station (BTS), a set of BTSs is associated with a base station controller (BSC), and a set of BSCs is associated with a mobile switching center (MSC) (see paragraphs 0021 and 0025, and FIG. 4). Any of the MSC, BSC or BTS can be considered a “resource group,” like claimed, when the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claimed “resource group” is considered, as each of the MSC, BSC or BTS is indicative of a group of resources (e.g. a BSC is associated with a group of BTSs) comprising one or more cell sites of a cell site domain. Chang further teaches that one of a plurality of higher-level icons in the tree is selectable to display the lower-level icons associated with the selected icon (e.g. one of a plurality of MSCs can be selected to display the plurality of BSCs associated the selected MSC) (see e.g. paragraph 0025 and FIG. 4). Moreover, Chang demonstrates that each of the lower-level icons is connected to the higher-level icon with a corresponding edge (see e.g. FIG. 4). Accordingly, like noted above, Chang is considered to teach displaying, based at least in part on topology information, and via a user interface, a first plurality of icons (e.g. MSCs), each icon of the first plurality of icons representing a network resource associated with a cell site domain, and, in response to receiving user selection of a first icon, displaying, based at least in part on the topology information, and via the user interface, a second plurality of icons (e.g. BSCs), wherein each icon of the second plurality of icons is connected to the selected first icon via a corresponding first edge, and each icon of the second plurality of icons represents a resource group of the cell site domain represented by the selected first icon, the resource group comprising one or more cell sites of the cell site domain.
Like noted above, Chang does not explicitly teach that the topology information is of interconnected clouds and resources, wherein each icon of the first plurality of icons represents a cloud provider or data center associated with a network slice of the cell site domain, as is required by the claims. Nevertheless, like further noted above, this deficiency is remedied by Park. Park generally describes network slices and teaches that the network infrastructure over which the network slices are operated can include one or more interconnected clouds having cloud-based data centers, inter alia (see e.g. paragraphs 0006-0007, 0010, 0085-0091 and 0100, and FIG. 1B). Park further teaches that a topological map of a region of the network infrastructure on which a slice is operated can be displayed to an operator, wherein the map comprises graphical representations of network resources implementing the network slice, including presumably the data centers connected to cell site resources of a cell site domain (e.g. base stations for a radio access technology (RAT) such as 5G) (see e.g. paragraphs 0237-0241 and FIGS. 24-27).
The Applicant argues: “Merely displaying a ‘topological map of a region of the network infrastructure,’ as advanced by the Office, and displaying ‘the network slices configured for a terminal by regions and RATs to the operator,’ fails to disclose or suggest the specific subject matter of claim 1, i.e., ‘displaying…a first plurality of icons, each icon of the first plurality of icons representing a cloud provider or a data center associated with a network slice of the cell site domain’ and ‘responsive to the selection of the first icon, displaying,…a second plurality of icons…, each icon of the second plurality of icons connected to the selected first icon via a corresponding first edge, each icon of the second plurality of icons representing a resource group of the cell site domain hosted by the cloud provider or the data center represented by the selected first icon, the resource group comprising one or more cell sites of the cell site domain.’” (Applicant’s Remarks, page 17; emphasis omitted).
In response, the Examiner respectfully notes that the rejection does not rely on Park alone to teach such features. As noted above, Chang already teaches displaying a tree of icons to represent the components of a multi-level wireless communication network, wherein displaying the tree comprises: (a) displaying a first plurality of icons, each icon of the first plurality of icons representing a network resource associated with a cell site domain, and (b) in response to receiving user selection of a first icon, displaying, based at least in part on the topology information, and via the user interface, a second plurality of icons, wherein each icon of the second plurality of icons is connected to the selected first icon via a corresponding first edge, and each icon of the second plurality of icons represents a resource group of the cell site domain represented by the selected first icon, the resource group comprising one or more cell sites of the cell site domain. As further noted above, Park teaches that the components of a multi-level wireless network for a network slice comprise one or more interconnected clouds having cloud-based data centers and lower-level radio access technologies.
Like noted above, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Chang and Park before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the method and computing system taught by Chang so as to present topological information for a network slice like taught by Park, i.e. wherein the topology information is of interconnected clouds and resources categorized into the plurality of domains (e.g. a cell site domain or region domain), and includes higher-level data centers for managing lower-level radio communication resources. Particularly, it would have been obvious to employ a first plurality of icons like taught by Chang to represent, for example, the data centers or clouds associated with the network slice of a cell site domain, and to employ the second plurality of icons displayed in response to a selection of one of the first plurality of icons to represent a lower-level resource group (e.g. base stations, MSCs, and/or BSCs) of the cell site domain hosted by the cloud provider or data center. It would have been advantageous to one of ordinary skill to utilize such a combination because it would enable an operator to identify the infrastructure of a network slice, as is evident from Park (see e.g. paragraphs 0237-0241 and FIGS. 24-27).
Accordingly, the Examiner respectfully maintains that the combination of Chang and Park teaches “displaying…based at least in part on the topology information, and via a user interface, a first plurality of icons, each icon of the first plurality of icons representing a cloud provider or a data center associated with a network slice of the cell site domain” and “responsive to the selection of the first icon, displaying…based at least in part on the topology information, and via the user interface, a second plurality of icons…, each icon of the second plurality of icons connected to the selected first icon via a corresponding first edge, each icon of the second plurality of icons representing a resource group of the cell site domain hosted by the cloud provider or the data center represented by the selected first icon, the resource group comprising one or more cell sites of the cell site domain.”
The Applicant argues that the Office Action fails establish that a person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to modify Chang with the teachings of Park to arrive at the above-noted subject matter.
The Examiner, however, respectfully disagrees. It would have been obvious to modify the method and computing system taught by Chang so as to apply the tree structure to present topological information for a network slice like taught by Park. It would have been advantageous to one of ordinary skill to utilize such a combination because it would enable an operator to identify the infrastructure of a network slice, as is evident from Park (see e.g. paragraphs 0237-0241 and FIGS. 24-27). This infrastructure of a network slice comprises higher-level data centers and lower-level radio communication technologies. Park in turn teaches that the radio-technologies can comprise multiple levels of resource groups. Accordingly, the Examiner respectfully maintains that it would have been obvious to employ a first plurality of icons to represent, for example, the higher level data centers or clouds associated with the network slice of a cell site domain, and to employ the second plurality of icons displayed in response to a selection of one of the first plurality of icons to represent a lower-level resource group (e.g. base stations, MSCs, and/or BSCs) of the cell site domain hosted by the cloud provider or data center.
Accordingly, the Examiner again respectfully maintains that the combination of Chang and Park teaches “displaying…based at least in part on the topology information, and via a user interface, a first plurality of icons, each icon of the first plurality of icons representing a cloud provider or a data center associated with a network slice of the cell site domain” and “responsive to the selection of the first icon, displaying…based at least in part on the topology information, and via the user interface, a second plurality of icons…, each icon of the second plurality of icons connected to the selected first icon via a corresponding first edge, each icon of the second plurality of icons representing a resource group of the cell site domain hosted by the cloud provider or the data center represented by the selected first icon, the resource group comprising one or more cell sites of the cell site domain.”
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BLAINE T BASOM whose telephone number is (571)272-4044. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 9:00 am - 5:30 pm, 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, Kieu Vu can be reached at (571)272-4057. 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.
/BTB/
10/18/2025
/KIEU D VU/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2141
Prosecution Insights