DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendment
The office action is in response to the amendment filed 03/16/2026 which has been entered and made of record. Claims 1, 9 and 17 have been amended. Claims 1-2, 4-10, 12-22 are pending in the application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed 03/16/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Mortsolf, Brun and Palmer as fully explained below.
Applicant argues Mortsolf and Brun taken individually or in combination, do not teach the newly amended independent claims 1, 9 and 17, especially the limitation of “the lack of physical presence of any distributed computing component including the at least one of the distributed computing components associated with the location data for intended deployment”.
Examiner agrees Mortsolf and Brun do not teach the newly amended independent claims. However, a new ground of rejection is made in view of Mortsolf, Brun and Palmer.
Applicant argues Claims 2, 4-8, 10, 12-16 and 18-22 depend on independent claims 1, 9 and 17, they include all newly amended limitation.
Examiner agrees Mortsolf and Brun do not teach the newly amended independent claims. However, a new ground of rejection is made in view of Mortsolf, Brun and Palmer.
Conclusions: The rejections set in the previous Office Action are shown to have been proper, and the claims are rejected below. New citations and parenthetical remarks can be considered new grounds of rejection and such new grounds of rejection are necessitated by the Applicant's amendments to the claims. Therefore, the present Office Action is made final.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1, 7-9, 15-17 and 19-22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mortsolf et al. (US 20200274773 A1), hereinafter as Mortsolf, in view of Brun et al. (US 20230042715 A1), hereinafter as Brun, further in view of Palmer et al. (US 20150256394 A1), hereinafter as Palmer.
Regarding claim 1, Mortsolf teaches A computer-implemented method (Mortsolf paragraph [0015] “One or more aspects are directed to a method for remotely monitoring and controlling physical assets”) comprising: receiving a request for asset visualization (Mortsolf Figure 3, paragraph [0042] “FIG. 3 illustrates an example of model-driven maps and other interface components that can be presented on console 230…… The maps can represent physical and/or logical or virtual data and information as well as relationships. Various layers of information and objects are selectable by the operator or user 140 and are conveyed on a scene as appropriate.”), wherein the request is associated with a plurality of distributed datacenter computing components associated with disparate physical datacenter installations (Mortsolf Figure 4 and paragraph [0036] “the system may have a plurality of distributed assets 210 (for example, information system assets, communications assets, hardware, software, or combinations thereof, or any other networked assets)… Assets 210 are distributed in a logical, virtual or physical domain or scene 22” and paragraph [0043] “resources such as networked resources 440, data centers 430 or other resources are shown in relation to the infrastructure 410 with which they are associated, e.g., at certain locations can be shown in relation to their physical locations on the map”); …… and generating the asset visualization for presentation to a user associated with the request wherein the asset visualization is a digital representation of the disparate physical datacenter installations including a visual representation of a presence of at least a portion of the distributed datacenter computing components associated with each disparate physical datacenter installation …… (Mortsolf teaches a terrain map 500 to show different physical locations of assets on a display panel for the user, and further teaches a digital representation of 510 to demonstrate each asset. Mortsolf Figure 5 and paragraph [0045] “FIG. 5 illustrates an exemplary application layer 501 of the present system and method. The application layer 501 can depict further examples of data, objects and attributes of networked resources 510 with respect to a map layer terrain map 500. The application layer 501 has a controls panel 520 accessible to the user of the console, which allows customizing the display and viewing of various things in the application layer 501 …… Application stats are displayed in some aspects in a display panel 550 dedicated for this purpose. …… Applications 530 may be associated with corresponding resources 510 using visual connections 532 such as dashed or dotted lines.”);
Mortsolf fails to teach …… determining location data for the distributed datacenter computing components, wherein the location data comprises location data for intended deployment of at least one of the distributed computing components to an intended physical datacenter location associated with the location data; …… and a visual representation of an absence indicating the lack of physical presence of any distributed computing component including the at least one of the distributed computing components associated with the location data for intended deployment at the intended physical datacenter location.
Brun teaches …… determining location data for the distributed datacenter computing components, wherein the location data comprises location data for intended deployment of at least one of the distributed computing components to an intended physical datacenter location associated with the location data (Brun paragraph [0165-0170] “A work order may be generated designating the type of network asset to be installed and the location of the installation…… At block 402, the machine vision system may receive a work order to install, change position, or remove a network asset 82, including, but not limited to a rack 28, housings/shelves 32, chassis 312, panels 34, cables, patch cords 38, or the like. The work order may be received from a remote processing center or database or may be entered by an installer on the I/O interface 126.”); …… and a visual representation of …… (Brun teaches a verification method before, during and after the execution of work order, and further teaches a visualization result based on the verification status, paragraph [0110] “The machine vision system 86 may be used to periodically capture images of the rack 28 or other network assets 82 before, during, and after execution of a work order to identify assets 82 which are to be reconfigured, to facilitate proper reconfiguration of the assets 82 according to the work order, to validate that the work order has been executed” and paragraph [0179] “At block 412, the machine vision system may determine if the asset equipment information satisfies the work order asset. The machine vision system 86 may compare the asset equipment information to the work order asset to determine if the network asset 82 is desired equipment. …… If the asset equipment information does not satisfy the work order asset, the machine vision may provide an indication of improper equipment at block 420, such as a text, color, icon, audible sound, or tactile feedback, or other suitable indication.”, paragraph [0231] “the computer program code is further configured to cause the processor to verify the asset equipment information matches equipment information associated with the work order location and cause an indication of a verification status to be displayed on the user interface.”).
Mortsolf and Brun are in the same field of endeavor, namely visualization of multiple assets in multiple data centers. Brun teaches a method to allow users to monitor and check physical locations of each asset in order to achieve accuracy and integrity with multiple assets (Brun paragraph [0014] “network service providers desire an improved approach for providing accurate information on the physical structure of data networks, whether that be within the context of a large data center, in a distribution point of a carrier network”).Therefore, It would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of Brun with the method of Mortsolf to achieve accuracy and integrity with multiple assets.
Mortsolf in view of Brun is not replied on for the below claim language …… an absence indicating the lack of physical presence of any distributed computing component including the at least one of the distributed computing components associated with the location data for intended deployment at the intended physical datacenter location. Palmer teaches …… an absence indicating the lack of physical presence of any distributed computing component including the at least one of the distributed computing components associated with the location data for intended deployment at the intended physical datacenter location (Palmer teaches checking if a panel is absence in the server rack, if so, an alert is provided, It would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of Palmer with the visual presentation of Brun. Palmer paragraph [0126] “FIG. 26 illustrates a server rack 2600 including a RMC 2610, a panel detection module 2620, and a panel ground detection module 2630…… Panel detection module 2620 operates to determine if a side panel 2640 is installed on server rack 2600 and to provide an indication to RMC 2610 as to the presence or absence of the panel.” And paragraph [0162] “FIG. 47 illustrates a method for detecting a panel in a server rack beginning at block 4702 where a RMC detects whether or not a panel is installed on a server rack …… For example, RMC 2610 can operate to detect the presence or absence of panel 2640 …… Returning to decision block 4704, if the panel is not present in the server rack, the "NO" branch is taken, the RMC provides an alert that indicates that the panel is missing from the server rack in block 4708”).
Mortsolf, Brun and Palmer are in the same field of endeavor, namely visualization of multiple assets in multiple data centers. Palmer teaches a rack management controller (RMC) to allow users to monitor equipment hardware (Palmer paragraph [0072] “RMC 910 operates to provide a management access point for the equipment in server rack 900, such that the RMC can manage the service processor functions for the entire server rack. For example, RMC 910 can provide for the management of the sensor data and power functions of the servers and chassis that are installed in server rack 900, manage the inventory of the server rack, monitor equipment hardware, operating software and environmental statuses in the servers and chassis, provide lifecycle management and firmware updates, or other service processor functions, as needed or desired.”).Therefore, It would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of Palmer with the method of Mortsolf in view of Brun to achieve accuracy and integrity with multiple assets.
Regarding claim 7, Mortsolf in view of Brun and Palmer teach the method of claim 1, The computer-implemented method according to Claim 1, and further teach wherein a relative positioning between distributed datacenter computing components associated with each disparate physical datacenter installation is displayed via the asset visualization (Mortsolf paragraph [0042] “FIG. 3 illustrates a geographic map 300 showing a region and can furthermore depict other information on said map or in connection with it such as relative relationships of some infrastructure resources 310 to map 300 and to each other on map layer 301.”).
Regarding claim 8, Mortsolf in view of Brun and Palmer teach the method of claim 1, The computer-implemented method according to Claim 1, further comprising: determining one or more performance parameters associated with the distributed datacenter computing components (Mortsolf paragraph [0066] “The network may be a data communication network that can send and/or receive status monitoring data informing a remote operator or control center about one or more conditions of a networked asset. The network can also send and/or receive control or configuration signals that cause an asset or a controller of said asset to change a controllable feature on said asset.”); and modifying the asset visualization based upon the one or more performance parameters (Mortsolf paragraph [0068] “For example, the system can monitor a valve in an industrial plant, rendering a representation of the valve based on a model and dataset containing information about the actual condition of the valve, depicting the valve in an open, closed or other condition as appropriate. In yet another example, a communications or information technology asset can be represented by the present method and system to show its state of operation, e.g., a modem communication can visually show the state of any status lights on its front panel, or a data storage device may be depicted with a graphical representation of how full the device is.”).
Regarding claim 9, it recites similar limitations of claim 1 but in a system form. The rationale of claim 1 rejection is applied to reject claim 9. In addition, Mortsolf teaches A system comprising: a non-transitory storage device; and a processor coupled to the non-transitory storage device, wherein the processor is configured to (Mortsolf paragraph [0063] “FIG. 11 illustrates a paradigm for providing tools in a system 1110 and method as described herein. The system and method permit a user to monitor and control a selected asset or group of networked assets using an apparatus comprising a CPU processor, data store, graphics circuitry (standalone or part of said CPU)”).
Regarding claim 15, claim 15 has similar limitations as claim 7, therefore it is rejected under the same rationale as claim 7.
Regarding claim 16, claim 16 has similar limitations as claim 8, therefore it is rejected under the same rationale as claim 8.
Regarding claim 17, it recites similar limitations of claim 1 but in a computer program product form. The rationale of claim 1 rejection is applied to reject claim 17. In addition, Mortsolf teaches A computer program product comprising at least one non-transitory computer-readable storage medium having computer program code thereon that, in execution with at least one processor, configures the computer program product for (Mortsolf paragraph [0071] “The console 1300 is specially configured and arranged according to the present disclosure and is capable of storing, reading and executing machine-readable instructions in its processor(s) 1310 and rendering visible outputs on its display screen 1320 according to the present disclosure.”).
Regarding claim 19, claim 19 has similar limitations as claim 7, therefore it is rejected under the same rationale as claim 7.
Regarding claim 20, claim 20 has similar limitations as claim 8, therefore it is rejected under the same rationale as claim 8.
Regarding claim 21, Mortsolf in view of Brun and Palmer teach the computer-implemented method of claim 1, The computer-implemented method according to Claim 1, and further teach wherein an illumination for the visual representation of a presence of at least a portion of the distributed datacenter computing components is greater than an illumination for the visual representation of the absence for the at least one of the distributed datacenter computing components (Palmer teaches a graphical representation of all equipment locations, further teaches an alert if detecting absence of panel in server rack; Brun teaches using lighter color green to represent matching existing computing asset and darker color red to represent unmatching missing computing asset. It would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of Palmer with the color of Brun. Brun paragraph [0196] “At block 458, the machine vision system 86 may verify the asset equipment information matches logged equipment information associated with the search location……. At block 460, the machine vision system 86 may cause an indication of the verification status, such as highlighting the search matrix location in green, if the verification is a match, or red, if the verification is not a match.”, Palmer paragraph [0067] “DCMC 720 can derive a map of the physical locations of the server racks in the data center and the equipment in the server racks, and provide a graphical representation of the locations.”, paragraph [0162] “For example, RMC 2610 can operate to detect the presence or absence of panel 2640 …… Returning to decision block 4704, if the panel is not present in the server rack, the "NO" branch is taken, the RMC provides an alert that indicates that the panel is missing from the server rack in block 4708”).
Mortsolf, Brun and Palmer are in the same field of endeavor, namely visualization of multiple assets in multiple data centers. Palmer teaches a rack management controller (RMC) to allow users to monitor equipment hardware (Palmer paragraph [0072] “RMC 910 operates to provide a management access point for the equipment in server rack 900, such that the RMC can manage the service processor functions for the entire server rack. For example, RMC 910 can provide for the management of the sensor data and power functions of the servers and chassis that are installed in server rack 900, manage the inventory of the server rack, monitor equipment hardware, operating software and environmental statuses in the servers and chassis, provide lifecycle management and firmware updates, or other service processor functions, as needed or desired.”).Therefore, It would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of Palmer with the method of Mortsolf in view of Brun to achieve accuracy and integrity with multiple assets.
Regarding claim 22, Mortsolf in view of Brun and Palmer teach the computer-implemented method of claim 1, The computer-implemented method according to Claim 1, and further teach further comprising receiving one or more transmissions from the at least one of the distributed computing components associated with the location data for intended deployment (Brun teaches a work order to install computing asset at the intended location, further teaches the RFID tag with the computing asset to identify the location of the asset, it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of RFID tag with the intended installation of computing asset, paragraph [0118] “In cases where a network asset 82 is associated with an RFID tag (e.g., the RFID tag is embedded in or otherwise attached to the asset), the response may enable the process 150 to positively identify what network assets 82 are present. In the case of relatively large or widely spaced assets 82 (e.g., a data center rack 28 or room 26), the process 150 may be able to positively identify a network asset 82 in the image or a location of the machine vision system 86 based on data received from an RFID tag alone. Based on this information, the process 150 may be able to determine if an asset identifier 84 has been identified for each asset 82 proximate to the current location.”); and modifying the visual representation of the absence for the at least one of the distributed datacenter computing components based on the received one or more transmissions (Palmer teaches the panel detection module 2620 on the server rack 2600 to detect the absence of computing components, further teaches the RFID readers on the server rack. Mortsolf teaches updated visualization of datacenter computing components based on status monitoring data. It would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of Palmer with the method of Mortsolf and Brun. Mortsolf paragraph [0068] “In yet another example, a communications or information technology asset can be represented by the present method and system to show its state of operation, e.g., a modem communication can visually show the state of any status lights on its front panel, or a data storage device may be depicted with a graphical representation of how full the device is.”, Palmer paragraph [0060] “FIG. 3 illustrates a portion of floor 200 of FIG. 2, including floor tiles 202 and 204 . A server rack 310 is located on floor tile 202 , and a server rack 320 is located on floor tile 204 . Server rack 310 includes an RFID tag reader 312 , and server rack 320 includes an RFID tag reader 322 . RFID tag 203 is activated by a magnetic field created by RFID tag reader 312 , and provides the stored information via radio waves that are received by the RFID tag reader.”).
Mortsolf, Brun and Palmer are in the same field of endeavor, namely visualization of multiple assets in multiple data centers. Palmer teaches a rack management controller (RMC) to allow users to monitor equipment hardware (Palmer paragraph [0072] “RMC 910 operates to provide a management access point for the equipment in server rack 900, such that the RMC can manage the service processor functions for the entire server rack. For example, RMC 910 can provide for the management of the sensor data and power functions of the servers and chassis that are installed in server rack 900, manage the inventory of the server rack, monitor equipment hardware, operating software and environmental statuses in the servers and chassis, provide lifecycle management and firmware updates, or other service processor functions, as needed or desired.”).Therefore, It would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of Palmer with the method of Mortsolf in view of Brun to achieve accuracy and integrity with multiple assets.
Claim(s) 2, 10 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mortsolf et al. (US 20200274773 A1), hereinafter as Mortsolf, in view of Brun et al. (US 20230042715 A1), hereinafter as Brun, further in view of Palmer et al. (US 20150256394 A1), hereinafter as Palmer, and Reineke et al. (US 20210104098 A1), hereinafter as Reineke.
Regarding claim 2, Mortsolf in view of Brun and Palmer teach the method of claim 1, The computer-implemented method according to Claim 1, but fail to teach further comprising rendering the asset visualization in a virtual reality (VR) environment; or rendering the asset visualization as an augmented reality (AR) overlay via a user device associated with the user. Reineke teaches further comprising rendering the asset visualization in a virtual reality (VR) environment (Reineke paragraph [0016] “illustrative embodiments enable the visualization of predicted/projected movement of virtual machines, pods, or databases projected onto a representation of one or more equipment racks of a data center. Such a representation, in various embodiments, can be a real-time image of the equipment racks (augmented reality (AR) or virtual reality (VR) environment) and/or a stored image of the equipment racks. The visual representation of the racks with metadata overlays can be presented on smart devices, mobile AR/VR interfaces, or even the wall of the data center itself.”); or rendering the asset visualization as an augmented reality (AR) overlay via a user device associated with the user (Reineke paragraph [0070] “The image 400 may be captured by the smart device 220 using image capture module 222. FIG. 4B illustrates an image 402, which shows the closed physical data center rack from image 400 as well as three additional racks 404 that are populated. Using broadcasting/beaconing technology such as Bluetooth, it is determined that additional assets exist in the data center shown in image 400. In this case, it is assumed that such additional assets are racks and servers. The image 400 may thus be augmented as shown in FIG. 4B. Thus, the image in FIG. 4B is an augmented image 402, where three additional racks 404 are populated in the image 400.”).
Mortsolf in view of Brun, Palmer and Reineke are in the same field of endeavor, namely multiple assets visualization. Reineke teaches visual representation of the racks with metadata overlays using VR/AR overlay, to enable intelligent decision-making (Reineke paragraph [0016] “Illustrative embodiments further enable intelligent decision-making based on proposed changes during hands-on infrastructure management using smart devices”). Therefore, It would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of VR/AR overlay of Reineke with the method of Mortsolf in view of Brun and Palmer to improve users interaction and help users to make intelligent decision.
Regarding claim 10, claim 10 has similar limitations as claim 2, therefore it is rejected under the same rationale as claim 2.
Regarding claim 18, claim 18 has similar limitations as claim 2, therefore it is rejected under the same rationale as claim 2.
Claim(s) 4-6, 12-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mortsolf et al. (US 20200274773 A1), hereinafter as Mortsolf, in view of Brun et al. (US 20230042715 A1), hereinafter as Brun, further in view of Palmer et al. (US 20150256394 A1), hereinafter as Palmer, and Cartwright et al. (US 20140244325 A1), hereinafter as Cartwright.
Regarding claim 4, Mortsolf in view of Brun and Palmer teach the method of claim 1, The computer-implemented method according to Claim 1, but fail to explicitly teach wherein determining the location data further comprises receiving one or more transmissions from at least a portion of the distributed datacenter computing components comprising the location data. Cartwright teaches wherein determining the location data further comprises receiving one or more transmissions from at least a portion of the distributed datacenter computing components comprising the location data (Cartwright paragraph [0085] “Datacenter Example: To populate the system (FIG. 5), the assets are tagged with passive or active RFID tags. These tags are matched with the serial number of the asset to provide the database location; physical building location, room, rack and uPosition, asset information; manufacturer, model, configuration, power rating and other identification information. This information is gathered automatically through sensors and readers, passes through proprietary LightsOn API's and interfaces and then loads into the database”).
Mortsolf, Brun, Palmer and Cartwright are in the same field of endeavor, namely visualization of multiple assets in multiple data centers. Cartwright teaches a method to allow users to request asset visualization and tracking physical locations of each asset in real time in order to achieve accuracy and integrity with multiple assets (Cartwright paragraph [0052-0053] “The combination of these two attributes enables the system to associate, capture, monitor and timestamp data from other data sources that pertain to the Asset within the system and ensures its accuracy and integrity. …The system then monitors asset provisioning, movement and use thereby reducing and in some cases eliminating the need for human intervention in physical "in-theater" monitoring. It provides the ultimate in asset security and theft deterrence identifying an asset's status, immediately flagging all movements to key stakeholders.”).Therefore, It would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of Cartwright with the method of Mortsolf, Brun and Palmer to achieve accuracy and integrity with multiple assets.
Regarding claim 5, Mortsolf in view of Brun, Palmer and Cartwright teach the method of claim 4, The computer-implemented method according to Claim 4, and further teach wherein the visual representation of the presence of the distributed datacenter computing components is provided in response to the transmission from at least the portion of the distributed datacenter computing components comprising the location data (Cartwright paragraph [0088] “Due to the 3 dimensional nature of assets and enclosures and their physical geospatial attributes the system captures the location and orientation of each asset so that it can be identified and tracked on any movement. For example, FIG. 12-1 shows the Manage Capability for datacenter racks highlighting the orientation attributes captured for this type of enclosure including "X" and "Y" co-ordinates and the direction the front of the asset is facing.”).
Mortsolf, Brun, Palmer and Cartwright are in the same field of endeavor, namely visualization of multiple assets in multiple data centers. Cartwright teaches a method to allow users to request asset visualization and tracking physical locations of each asset in real time in order to achieve accuracy and integrity with multiple assets (Cartwright paragraph [0052-0053] “The combination of these two attributes enables the system to associate, capture, monitor and timestamp data from other data sources that pertain to the Asset within the system and ensures its accuracy and integrity. …The system then monitors asset provisioning, movement and use thereby reducing and in some cases eliminating the need for human intervention in physical "in-theater" monitoring. It provides the ultimate in asset security and theft deterrence identifying an asset's status, immediately flagging all movements to key stakeholders.”).Therefore, It would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of Cartwright with the method of Mortsolf, Brun and Palmer to achieve accuracy and integrity with multiple assets.
Regarding claim 6, Mortsolf in view of Brun and Palmer teach the method of claim 1, The computer-implemented method according to Claim 1, and further teach wherein the visual representation of the presence of the distributed datacenter computing components further comprises a …… digital twin representative of the datacenter computing components (Mortsolf teaches a graphical representation of a physical asset, and a display area showing the condition and status of an asset, that is monitored and changed. Mortsolf’s teaching reads on a digital twin representation for an physical asset. Figure 13 and paragraph [0072-0073] “the condition or state of various aspects of the monitored and controlled physical assets. Changes in the condition of one or more assets or features or parameters of the assets will be reflected in said database in datastore 1330….the display 1320 includes a portion of said display 1321 dedicated to showing the condition and status of asset 1355” and paragraph [0076] “the rendered physical asset is rendered to show an actual condition of the asset. For example, if a satellite communication dish is the networked physical asset, the satellite communication dish may be rendered and displayed, using a graphics model and resources, so as to indicate the asset's actual elevation angle, azimuthal position, or other aspect of the asset. In another example, if the asset is a piece of computing hardware with LED indicator lights on its control panel or front or back interface (in real life) then the invention may use the graphics capabilities of the console to generate and display a real-time or near-real-time representation of the same or similar piece of equipment including the state (on/off, color) of any such indicator lights. This greatly assists a console user in quickly visually observing an accurate state of the asset”) that further illustrates one or more physical attributes and/or performance parameters of the respective distributed datacenter computing component (Mortsolf paragraph [0048] “Each of these stats panels provides a view of a respective set of performance data (stats) aggregated at its respective layer of the present solution. Panel 650 may provide a user with performance data aggregated for an entire rack of servers. Panel 652 may provide the user with performance data aggregated for a specific group or subset of servers.”).
Mortsolf in view of Brun and Palmer fails to teach ……manipulatable…… Cartwright teaches ……manipulatable…… (Cartwright paragraph [0087] “Within Manage a user can see in detail the status of assets, which projects they are assigned to, their physical location, the contracts they were procured under, which RFID readers are tracking the asset and the RFID tags associated with the assets. A user can also manage and manipulate the racks in which assets are stored.”).
Mortsolf, Brun, Palmer and Cartwright are in the same field of endeavor, namely visualization of multiple assets in multiple data centers. Cartwright teaches a method to allow users to request asset visualization and tracking physical locations of each asset in real time in order to achieve accuracy and integrity with multiple assets (Cartwright paragraph [0052-0053] “The combination of these two attributes enables the system to associate, capture, monitor and timestamp data from other data sources that pertain to the Asset within the system and ensures its accuracy and integrity. …The system then monitors asset provisioning, movement and use thereby reducing and in some cases eliminating the need for human intervention in physical "in-theater" monitoring. It provides the ultimate in asset security and theft deterrence identifying an asset's status, immediately flagging all movements to key stakeholders.”).Therefore, It would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of Cartwright with the method of Mortsolf, Brun and Palmer to achieve accuracy and integrity with multiple assets.
Regarding claim 12, claim 12 has similar limitations as claim 4, therefore it is rejected under the same rationale as claim 4.
Regarding claim 13, claim 13 has similar limitations as claim 5, therefore it is rejected under the same rationale as claim 5.
Regarding claim 14, claim 14 has similar limitations as claim 6, therefore it is rejected under the same rationale as claim 6.
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 XIAOMING WEI whose telephone number is (571)272-3831. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00-5:00.
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, Kee Tung can be reached at (571)272-7794. 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.
/XIAOMING WEI/ Examiner, Art Unit 2611
/KEE M TUNG/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2611
Prosecution Insights