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 .
Status of Claims
This communication is a Final Office Action in response to Applicant’s amendment for application number 18/224,522 received on 08/07/2025.
In accordance with Applicant’s amendment, claims 1-23 are amended. Claims 1-23 are currently pending and have been examined.
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed on 08/07/2025 has been entered.
Applicant’s amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection set forth in this Office Action.
Response to Arguments
Response to §101 arguments – Applicant’s arguments (Remarks at pgs. 14-20) with respect to the §101 rejections previously applied to the original claims are primarily raised in support of the amended claims. The amendments and supporting arguments are believed to be fully addressed in the updated §101 rejections below.
Response to §103 arguments – Applicant’s arguments (Remarks at pgs. 21-27) with respect to the §103 rejections previously applied to the original claims are primarily raised in support of the amended claims. The amendments and supporting arguments are believed to be fully addressed in the updated §103 rejections below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-patentable subject matter. The claims are directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception as further set forth in MPEP 2106.
Step 1: The claimed invention is analyzed to determine if it falls outside one of the four statutory categories of invention. See MPEP 2106.03
Claim(s) 1-13 is/are directed to a method (i.e., Process), and claim(s) 14-23 is/are directed to a system (i.e., Machine). Therefore, claims 1-23 are directed to patent eligible categories of invention. Accordingly, the claims satisfy Step 1 of the eligibility inquiry.
Step 2A, Prong 1: In prong one of step 2A, the claim(s) is/are analyzed to evaluate whether they recite a judicial exception. See MPEP 2106.04
Independent claims 1 and 14 recite a method and a system for the acquisition of components. As drafted, the limitations recited by claims 1, and 14 fall under the “Mental Processes” abstract idea group by setting forth activities that could be performed mentally by a human (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion) (see MPEP § 2106.04(a)(2), subsection III), and “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity” abstract idea group, directed to “Managing Personal Behavior or Relationships or Interactions Between People” (see MPEP § 2106.04(a)(2), subsection II).
Independent claims 1 and 14 recite a method and a system comprising at least one programmable integrated circuit, with the following limitations:
obtain one or more inward data factors that include at least one of workspace configuration or one or more usage patterns on how a given user utilizes existing information handling system hardware components of a local information handling system, (The step to “obtain one or more inward data factors” could be accomplished mentally, such as by human observation, evaluation, judgement, or with the help of pen and paper. Additionally, even if considered as an additional element, this step amounts to insignificant extra-solution activity as mere data gathering.);
determine an identity of multiple different available information handling system hardware component types that are different from the local information handling system and that currently physically exist and are available in at least one warehouse by automatically reading barcodes or radio frequency identification (RFID) tags of all the available information handling system hardware components that are currently physically present within the warehouse, (The step to “determine an identity” could be accomplished mentally, such as by human observation, evaluation, judgement, or with the help of pen and paper. Additionally, even when considering the limitation for “automatically reading barcodes or radio frequency identification (RFID) tags” as an additional element, this step amounts to insignificant extra-solution activity as pre-solution activity directed to mere data gathering.);
obtain one or more outward data factors for each of the multiple different available information handling system hardware component types that are different from the local information handling system and that are determined to currently physically exist and are available in the at least one warehouse, the one or more outward data factors including at least one of device or system life cycle data, manufacturer report/s, or manufacturer certification/s for each of the multiple different available information handling system hardware component types, (The step to “obtain one or more outward data factors” could be accomplished mentally, such as by human observation, evaluation, judgement, or with the help of pen and paper. Additionally, even if considered as an additional element, this step amounts to insignificant extra-solution activity as mere data gathering.);
then combine the inward data factors with the outward data factors of each of the multiple different available information handling system hardware component types that are determined to currently physically exist and are available in the at least one warehouse to determine a hardware component acquisition score for each of the multiple different available information handling system hardware component types that are determined to currently physically exist and are available in the at least one warehouse, (The steps to “combine the inward data factors with the outward data factors” and “determine a hardware component acquisition score“ could be accomplished mentally, such as by human observation, evaluation, judgement, or with the help of pen and paper.);
then compare the hardware component acquisition scores of the multiple different available information handling system hardware component types that are determined to currently physically exist and are available in the at least one warehouse to each other, (The step to “compare the hardware component acquisition scores“ could be accomplished mentally, such as by human observation, evaluation, judgement, or with the help of pen and paper.);
and then select a given one of the multiple different available information handling system hardware component types that are determined to currently physically exist and are available in the at least one warehouse that has the highest hardware component acquisition score relative to all other of the multiple different available information handling system types that are determined to currently physically exist and are available in the at least one warehouse; (The step to “select a given one of the multiple different available information handling system hardware component types “ could be accomplished mentally, such as by human observation, evaluation, judgement, or with the help of pen and paper.);
and then automatically in response to the selection of the given one of the multiple different available information handling system hardware components types by the at least one programmable integrated circuit: executing the at least one programmable integrated circuit to automatically physically acquire the selected given one of the multiple different available information handling system hardware component types for the given user of the local information handling system by automatically deploying a shipping robot or drone to carry the selected given one of the multiple different available information handling system hardware component types to physically transfer the selected given one of the multiple different available information handling system hardware component types from a first physical location of the warehouse to a second physical location of the local information handling system and the given user of the local information handling system. (But for the additional elements – underlined – recited in this claim limitation, the limitation to “automatically physically acquire the selected given one of the multiple different available information handling system hardware component types” recites an abstract idea based on the “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity” abstract idea group, directed to “Managing Personal Behavior or Relationships or Interactions Between People”. Additionally, even when considering the limitation for “automatically physically acquire the selected given one of the multiple different available information handling system hardware component types for the given user of the local information handling system by automatically deploying a shipping robot or drone to carry the selected given one of the multiple different available information handling system hardware component types to physically transfer the selected given one of the multiple different available information handling system hardware component types from a first physical location of the warehouse to a second physical location of the local information handling system and the given user” as an additional element, this step amounts to insignificant extra-solution activity as post-solution activity directed to insignificant application.).
The additional elements beyond the abstract idea for consideration under Step 2A, Prong 2, and Step 2B recited by independent claims 1/9/10 are: at least one programmable integrated circuit, and shipping robot or drone.
Dependent claims 2-13, and 15-23 further narrows the abstract idea and introduce the following additional elements for consideration under said steps: peripheral devices or other devices connected to the local information handling system, unsupervised machine learning, machine learning, host programmable integrated circuit, and local information handling system.
Step 2A, Prong 2: An evaluation is made whether a claim recites any additional element, or combination of additional elements, that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application of the exception. See MPEP 2106.04(d).
Regarding the computing additional elements, namely at least one programmable integrated circuit from the independent claims, and peripheral devices or other devices connected to the local information handling system, unsupervised machine learning, machine learning, host programmable integrated circuit, and local information handling system, from the dependent claims, these additional elements have been evaluated but fail to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they amount to using generic computing elements or instructions (software) to perform the abstract idea, similar to adding the words “apply it” (or equivalent), which merely serves to link the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment (generic computing environment). See MPEP 2106.05(f) and 2106.05(h). In addition, these limitations fail to provide an improvement to the functioning of a computer or to any other technology or technical field, fail to apply the exception with a particular machine, fail to apply the judicial exception to effect a particular treatment or prophylaxis for a disease or medical condition, fail to effect a transformation of a particular article to a different state or thing, and fail to apply/use the abstract idea in a meaningful way beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment (generic computing environment). With respect to the shipping robot or drone, it has been considered under Step 2A Prong Two, however the shipping robot or drone is recited at a high level of generality and fails to provide a technical improvement or otherwise integrate the abstract idea into a practical application.
Accordingly, because the Step 2A Prong One and Prong Two analysis resulted in the conclusion that the claims are directed to an abstract idea, additional analysis under Step 2B of the eligibility inquiry must be conducted in order to determine whether any claim element or combination of elements amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Step 2B: The claims are analyzed to determine whether any additional element, or combination of additional elements, is/are sufficient to ensure that the claims amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. This analysis is also termed a search for "inventive concept." See MPEP 2106.05.
Regarding the computing additional elements, namely at least one programmable integrated circuit from the independent claims, and peripheral devices or other devices connected to the local information handling system, unsupervised machine learning, machine learning, host programmable integrated circuit, and local information handling system, from the dependent claims, these additional element(s) has/have been evaluated, but fail to add significantly more to the claims because they amount to using generic computing elements (computer hardware) or instructions/software (engine) to perform the abstract idea, similar to adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent), which merely serves to link the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment (network computing environment, the internet, online) and does not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea itself. Applicant’s specification recites the computing additional elements at a high level of generality. Therefore, the additional elements merely describe generic computing elements or computer-executable instructions (software) merely serve to tie the abstract idea to a particular operating environment, which does not add significantly more to the abstract idea. See, e.g., Alice Corp., 134 S. Ct. 2347, 110 USPQ2d 1976; Versata Dev. Group, Inc. v. SAP Am., Inc., 793 F.3d 1306, 1334, 115 USPQ2d 1681, 1701 (Fed. Cir. 2015). With respect to the shipping robot or drone, it has been considered under Step 2B, however the shipping robot or drone is recited at a high level of generality and fails to provide a technical improvement or otherwise add significantly more to the abstract idea.
Furthermore, even if the obtain one or more inward data factors, automatically reading barcodes or radio frequency identification (RFID) tags, obtain one or more outward data factors, and automatically physically acquire the selected given one of the multiple different available information handling system hardware component types for the given user of the local information handling system by automatically deploying a shipping robot or drone to carry the selected given one of the multiple different available information handling system hardware component types to physically transfer the selected given one of the multiple different available information handling system hardware component types from a first physical location of the warehouse to a second physical location of the local information handling system and the given user steps are interpreted as additional elements, these activities at most amount to insignificant extra-solution activity (mere data gathering and insignificant application, respectively), which does not add significantly more to the abstract idea, as noted in MPEP 2106.05(g). Additionally, obtain one or more inward data factors, automatically reading barcodes or radio frequency identification (RFID) tags, and obtain one or more outward data factors extra-solution activity have been recognized as well-understood, routine, and conventional, and thus insufficient to add significantly more to the abstract idea. See MPEP 2106.05(d) - Receiving or transmitting data over a network, e.g., using the Internet to gather data, Symantec, 838 F.3d at 1321, 120 USPQ2d at 1362 (utilizing an intermediary computer to forward information); TLI Communications LLC v. AV Auto. LLC, 823 F.3d 607, 610, 118 USPQ2d 1744, 1745 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (using a telephone for image transmission); OIP Techs., Inc., v. Amazon.com, Inc., 788 F.3d 1359, 1363, 115 USPQ2d 1090, 1093 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (sending messages over a network); buySAFE, Inc. v. Google, Inc., 765 F.3d 1350, 1355, 112 USPQ2d 1093, 1096 (Fed. Cir. 2014) (computer receives and sends information over a network)).
In addition, when taken as an ordered combination, the ordered combination adds nothing that is not already present as when the elements are taken individually. Their collective functions merely provide generic computer implementation. Therefore, when viewed as a whole, these additional claim elements do not provide meaningful limitations to amount to significantly more than the abstract idea itself. The ordered combination of elements in the claims (including the limitations inherited from the parent claim(s)) add nothing that is not already present as when the elements are taken individually. There is no indication that the combination of elements improves the functioning of a computer or improves any other technology. Their collective functions merely provide generic computer implementation. Accordingly, the subject matter encompassed by the dependent claims fails to amount to significantly more than the abstract idea itself.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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, 3-6, 8-11, 14, 16-18, and 20-23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Karro et al. (US 20180253709 A1, hereinafter “Karro”), in view of Cochran et al. (US 20190197643 A1, hereinafter “Cochran”), in further view of Roy et al. (US 20190172012 A1, hereinafter “Roy”).
Regarding claims 1/14: Karro teaches a programmable integrated circuit ([0030] The term “engine” as used herein is defined as a real-world device, component, or arrangement of components implemented using hardware, such as by an application specific integrated circuit (ASIC) or field-programmable gate array (FPGA)); and a system comprising at least one programmable integrated circuit ([0030] the system or components thereof can comprise or include various modules or engines, each of which is constructed, programmed, configured, or otherwise adapted, to autonomously carry out a function or set of functions. The term “engine” as used herein is defined as a real-world device, component, or arrangement of components implemented using hardware, such as by an application specific integrated circuit (ASIC) or field-programmable gate array (FPGA)) that is programmed to:
obtain one or more inward data factors that include at least one of workspace configuration or one or more usage patterns on how a given user utilizes existing information handling system hardware components of a local information handling system, ([0007] Such data can include, for example, the age of the equipment, the frequency and/or extent of IT past repairs, the amount of usage of the equipment, the sales revenue generated by the equipment, the location of the site, and information regarding local competitors.);
determine an identity of multiple different available information handling system hardware component types that are different from the local information handling system and that currently physically exist ([0020] For example, a scanner 108A can pass data communicating the identity of one or more items to be purchased, returned, or the like to the primary computer 104.; [0022] the POS system 102 can store IT asset information, such as age of the equipment (i.e., years in service), and the frequency and/or extent of IT maintenance calls and/or repairs.; [0042] in response to a user selection certain equipment type, for example, lighting systems within a given region, user interface 132 can display in a map form, or other view, the locations of retail sites having lighting systems with certain characteristics);
obtain one or more outward data factors for each of the multiple different available information handling system hardware component types that are different from the local information handling system and that are determined to currently physically exist and are available in the at least one warehouse, the one or more outward data factors including at least one of device or system life cycle data, manufacturer report/s, or manufacturer certification/s for each of the multiple different available information handling system hardware component types, ([0041] Within any particular critical site, additional factors or information (e.g., age, years in service, expected useful life, category average, etc.) then can be used or applied to particular systems to determine if or when each system should or will be replaced.; [0042] in response to a user selection certain equipment type, for example, lighting systems within a given region, user interface 132 can display in a map form, or other view, the locations of retail sites having lighting systems with certain characteristics);
then combine the inward data factors with the outward data factors of each of the multiple different available information handling system hardware component types that are determined to currently physically exist and are available in the at least one warehouse to determine a hardware component acquisition score for each of the multiple different available information handling system hardware component types that are determined to currently physically exist and are available in the at least one warehouse, ([0009] In one embodiment, the present disclosure provides a system for assessing site-wide equipment replacement criticality that comprises, at each of a plurality of sites, a point-of-sale (POS) system having a years in service number and configured to accumulate transaction data, the transaction data comprising an item rate of a number of items in each transaction processed by the POS system, a total number of transactions processed by the POS system, one or more diagnostic alerts generated by the POS system, a site revenue value, and; a transaction database configured to receive the years in service number and the transaction data comprising the item rate, the total number of transactions, and the site revenue value from the POS system at each of the plurality of sites; [0042] in response to a user selection certain equipment type, for example, lighting systems within a given region, user interface 132 can display in a map form, or other view, the locations of retail sites having lighting systems with certain characteristics);
then compare the hardware component acquisition scores of the multiple different available information handling system hardware component types that are determined to currently physically exist and are available in the at least one warehouse to each other, ([0016] FIG. 3 is a schematic depicting a system configured to assess site-wide IT equipment replacement criticality in accordance with an embodiment of the disclosure.; [0039] The weighted comparisons for each of the fields can then be added together to form a criticality score. In one embodiment, for a given retail site 114A.sub.1, a criticality score of less than 1.1 indicates that replacement of the IT equipment is of a low priority, a criticality score of between 1.1 and 1.24 indicates that the replacement of the IT equipment is of a medium priority, a criticality score of between 1.25 and 1.39 indicates that the replacement of the IT equipment is of a high priority, and a critical score of above 1.4 indicates that the replacement of the IT equipment is critical (i.e., of the highest priority). In other embodiments, criticality scores can be curved, or other divisions of scores can be used, to determine the relative prioritization (e.g., low, medium, high, critical).; [0040] In other embodiments, the described systems and methods can be utilized for more general IT and/or sitewide equipment replacement criticality scores for other electronic devices utilized within the retail environment, not being limited to POS systems 102. For example, in one embodiment, the described systems and methods can be utilized to generate criticality scores for servers, inventory systems, switches, handheld devices, security systems, refrigeration and/or other food preservation equipment, lighting, photocopy equipment, communications equipment, and/or other devices or equipment that may be used in a retail store or other site environment.; [0042] in response to a user selection certain equipment type, for example, lighting systems within a given region, user interface 132 can display in a map form, or other view, the locations of retail sites having lighting systems with certain characteristics);
and then select a given one of the multiple different available information handling system hardware component types that are determined to currently physically exist and are available in the at least one warehouse that has the highest hardware component acquisition score relative to all other of the multiple different available information handling system types that are determined to currently physically exist and are available in the at least one warehouse; ([0042] As depicted in FIG. 3, in one embodiment, the criticality scores can be presented to a user via a user interface 132.; [0041] a sitewide criticality score can be computed as discussed herein in order to identify a relative ranking of sites, or sites in more critical need of IT equipment attention. Within any particular critical site, additional factors or information (e.g., age, years in service, expected useful life, category average, etc.) then can be used or applied to particular systems to determine if or when each system should or will be replaced.; [0042] in response to a user selection certain equipment type, for example, lighting systems within a given region, user interface 132 can display in a map form, or other view, the locations of retail sites having lighting systems with certain characteristics; [0044] The criticality data can enable a service technician to repair or replace only those POS systems 102 having a higher criticality score.);
Karro doesn’t teach:
and are available in at least one warehouse by automatically reading barcodes or radio frequency identification (RFID) tags of all the available information handling system hardware components that are currently physically present within the warehouse,
and then automatically in response to the selection of the given one of the multiple different available information handling system hardware components types by the at least one programmable integrated circuit: executing the at least one programmable integrated circuit to automatically physically acquire the selected given one of the multiple different available information handling system hardware component types for the given user of the local information handling system
by automatically deploying a shipping robot or drone to carry the selected given one of the multiple different available information handling system hardware component types to physically transfer the selected given one of the multiple different available information handling system hardware component types from a first physical location of the warehouse to a second physical location of the local information handling system and the given user of the local information handling system.
Cochran teaches:
and then automatically in response to the selection of the given one of the multiple different available information handling system hardware components types by the at least one programmable integrated circuit: executing the at least one programmable integrated circuit to automatically physically acquire the selected given one of the multiple different available information handling system hardware component types for the given user of the local information handling system ([0030] a “transport task” can generally involve a UAV picking up an item or item from one location (e.g., a source location specified by the item provider), delivering the item or items to another location, and returning to a base location (e.g., a UAV nest or charging station); [0094] In some embodiments, dispatch of the UAVs 304 may additionally or alternatively be accomplished via one or more automated processes.; [0104] the local dispatch system 312 may be implemented by a computing system installed at a building, such as a warehouse, where the deployment system(s) 314 and UAV(s) 304 that are associated with the particular local dispatch system 312 are also located. In other embodiments, the local dispatch system 312 may be implemented at a location that is remote to its associated deployment system(s) 314 and UAV(s) 304.);
by automatically deploying a shipping robot or drone to carry the selected given one of the multiple different available information handling system hardware component types to physically transfer the selected given one of the multiple different available information handling system hardware component types from a first physical location of the warehouse to a second physical location of the local information handling system and the given user of the local information handling system. ([0030] Note that herein, a “transport task” can generally involve a UAV picking up an item or item from one location (e.g., a source location specified by the item provider), delivering the item or items to another location); [0031] Further, it should be understood that an “item providers” may include any entity that has items to be delivered to any type of “recipient.” Item recipients may be any entities or locations capable of receiving delivery of an item, such as merchants, vendors, dealers, retailers, seller, shippers, and laypersons, among other possibilities.; [0050] For example, a remote operator could control high level navigation decisions for a UAV, such as by specifying that the UAV should travel from one location to another (e.g., from a warehouse in a suburban area to a delivery address in a nearby city), while the UAV's navigation system autonomously controls more fine-grained navigation decisions, such as the specific route to take between the two locations, specific flight controls to achieve the route and avoid obstacles while navigating the route, and so on.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of applicant’s invention, to combine Karro with Cochran’s feature(s) listed above. One would’ve been motivated to do so in order to achieve a desired distribution of UAVs at a certain time (Cochran; [0032]). By incorporating the teachings of Cochran, one would’ve been able to use a drone or robot to deliver the requested goods.
The combination of Karro and Cochran doesn’t teach:
and are available in at least one warehouse by automatically reading barcodes or radio frequency identification (RFID) tags of all the available information handling system hardware components that are currently physically present within the warehouse,
Roy teaches:
and are available in at least one warehouse by automatically reading barcodes or radio frequency identification (RFID) tags of all the available information handling system hardware components that are currently physically present within the warehouse, ([0047] the fulfillment capability and warehouse management system 206 manages inventory, fulfills orders, scans inventory to an order, tracks order status, and delivers supplies for each case in consolidated containers to the hospital at agreed time windows. In some embodiments, the in-hospital supply management system 208 accounts for the containerized orders received at the hospital for each patient procedure and adds to case cart processing efforts. The in-hospital management system 208 may utilize a variety of existing tools such as manual systems entry, mobile scanners, RFID scanners, voice recognition, cameras, and/or blockchain technology to account for the received orders.);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of applicant’s invention, to combine Karro and Cochran with Roy’s feature(s) listed above. One would’ve been motivated to do so in order to create customized orders using the procedure schedule data and the preference card data (Roy; [0047]). By incorporating the teachings of Roy, one would’ve been able to use RFID tags to keep track of available inventory.
Regarding claim 3: Karro further teaches:
further comprising placing the acquired given one of the multiple different available information handling system hardware component types into operation at the second physical location for the given user of the local information handling system after physically transferring the selected given one of the multiple different available information handling system hardware component types from the first physical location of the warehouse to the second physical location of the local information handling system and the given user of the local information handling system. ([0044] Automatically created service requests can reduce costs and increase the reliability of systems at retail sites 114. For example, by dispatching a service technician to repair, replace, or upgrade a component of POS system 102 prior to total failure, downtime can be avoided. In addition, by determining a criticality score based on granular actual use data, unnecessarily early service on components can be avoided. For example each retail site may have high-use and low-use POS systems 102. Without granular criticality data, a retailer may choose to repair or replace all POS systems 102 in order to avoid costly downtime. The criticality data can enable a service technician to repair or replace only those POS systems 102 having a higher criticality score. This can additionally benefit a retailer where full refreshes of retail equipment can be extremely costly, requiring a large investment of labor and capital, while normal service calls can be relatively low cost. In these situations, it can be especially beneficial to request a number of additional smaller service calls in order to extend the time needed between full refreshes (or mitigate the need for a full refresh altogether).; [0045] In embodiments, a service scheduling system can use criticality score, alerts, or other data to modify the parameters of a previously scheduled service call to include one or more additional work items at a particular retail site. This can enable service technicians to be more efficient where a high priority service call is necessary at a retail site where a number of lower priority service items can also be addressed.).
Regarding claims 4/16: Karro further teaches:
further comprising executing the at least one programmable integrated circuit to obtain the one or more inward data factors by monitoring and gathering data regarding at least one of past workspace configuration or usage trends of the local information handling system for the given user of the local information handling system. ([0007] Instead of relying on subjective employee opinions for the identification and prioritization IT equipment replacement, as is done in conventional systems, embodiments of the present disclosure utilize only objective data from actual stores. Such data can include, for example, the age of the equipment, the frequency and/or extent of IT past repairs, the amount of usage of the equipment).
Regarding claims 5/17: Karro further teaches:
further comprising executing the at least one programmable integrated circuit to obtain the one or more outward data factors across a network from one or more remote information handling systems. ([0008] Collected usage data for a given retail site can be combined with usage data from other sites across a retail network to compute network averages for each aspect of actual usage data.; [0041] Within any particular critical site, additional factors or information (e.g., age, years in service, expected useful life, category average, etc.) then can be used or applied to particular systems to determine if or when each system should or will be replaced).
Regarding claims 6/18: Karro further teaches:
where the multiple different available information handling system hardware component types correspond to types of information handling system hardware components that are contained within an inventory of information handling system hardware components that currently physically exist and are available in the at least one warehouse. ([0043] Requesting service can comprise creating and sending one or more messages including a service request, creating an entry in a service database including the location and type of service required, scheduling a service call based on technician and/or material availability, or the like.; [0044] Automatically created service requests can reduce costs and increase the reliability of systems at retail sites 114. For example, by dispatching a service technician to repair, replace, or upgrade a component of POS system 102 prior to total failure).
Regarding claims 8/20: Karro further teaches:
further comprising executing the at least one programmable integrated circuit to display on a display device at least one of
the identity of the selected given one of the multiple different available information handling system hardware component types, ([0020] For example, a scanner 108A can pass data communicating the identity of one or more items to be purchased, returned, or the like to the primary computer 104.; [0042] in response to a user selection certain equipment type, for example, lighting systems within a given region);
the hardware component acquisition score for each given one of the multiple different available information handling system hardware component types,
or the hardware component acquisition score for only the selected given one of the multiple different available information handling system hardware component types. ([0042] For example, in response to a user selection certain equipment type, for example, lighting systems within a given region, user interface 132 can display in a map form, or other view, the locations of retail sites having lighting systems with certain characteristics (such as criticality score).).
Regarding claims 9/21: Karro further teaches:
where the executing the at least one programmable integrated circuit to automatically physically acquire selected given one of the multiple different available information handling system hardware component types for the given user of the local information handling system comprises: executing at least first one programmable integrated circuit to automatically transmit a transfer request across a network to a second programmable integrated circuit… ([0044] Automatically created service requests can reduce costs and increase the reliability of systems at retail sites 114. For example, by dispatching a service technician to repair, replace, or upgrade a component of POS system 102 prior to total failure, downtime can be avoided.; [0030] The term “engine” as used herein is defined as a real-world device, component, or arrangement of components implemented using hardware, such as by an application specific integrated circuit (ASIC) or field-programmable gate array (FPGA)… In certain implementations, at least a portion, and in some cases, all, of an engine can be executed on the processor(s) of one or more computing platforms that are made up of hardware (e.g., one or more processors, data storage devices such as memory or drive storage, input/output facilities such as network interface devices, video devices, keyboard, mouse or touchscreen devices, etc.) that execute an operating system, system programs, and application programs, while also implementing the engine using multitasking, multithreading, distributed (e.g., cluster, peer-peer, cloud, etc.) processing where appropriate, or other such techniques.);
…from an existing inventory that currently physically exists and is available in the at least one warehouse and that contains the selected given one of the multiple different available information handling system hardware component types; ([0043] Requesting service can comprise creating and sending one or more messages including a service request, creating an entry in a service database including the location and type of service required, scheduling a service call based on technician and/or material availability, or the like.; [0044] Automatically created service requests can reduce costs and increase the reliability of systems at retail sites 114. For example, by dispatching a service technician to repair, replace, or upgrade a component of POS system 102 prior to total failure).
Karro doesn’t teach:
…for physical transfer of the selected given one of the multiple different available information handling system hardware component types to the second physical location of the local information handling system and the given user of the local information handling system…
and executing the second programmable integrated circuit to automatically respond to the transfer request by physically transferring the selected type of available information handling system hardware component to the second physical location of the local information handling system and the given user of the local information handling system.
Cochran further teaches:
…for physical transfer of the selected given one of the multiple different available information handling system hardware component types to the second physical location of the local information handling system and the given user of the local information handling system… ([0030] a “transport task” can generally involve a UAV picking up an item or item from one location (e.g., a source location specified by the item provider), delivering the item or items to another location, and returning to a base location (e.g., a UAV nest or charging station); [0094] In some embodiments, dispatch of the UAVs 304 may additionally or alternatively be accomplished via one or more automated processes.; [0104] the local dispatch system 312 may be implemented by a computing system installed at a building, such as a warehouse, where the deployment system(s) 314 and UAV(s) 304 that are associated with the particular local dispatch system 312 are also located. In other embodiments, the local dispatch system 312 may be implemented at a location that is remote to its associated deployment system(s) 314 and UAV(s) 304.);
and executing the second programmable integrated circuit to automatically respond to the transfer request by physically transferring the selected type of available information handling system hardware component to the second physical location of the local information handling system and the given user of the local information handling system. ([0054] UAV 200 also includes one or more processors 208. A processor 208 may be a general-purpose processor or a special purpose processor (e.g., digital signal processors, application specific integrated circuits, etc.).; ([0030] a “transport task” can generally involve a UAV picking up an item or item from one location (e.g., a source location specified by the item provider), delivering the item or items to another location, and returning to a base location (e.g., a UAV nest or charging station); [0094] In some embodiments, dispatch of the UAVs 304 may additionally or alternatively be accomplished via one or more automated processes.; [0104] the local dispatch system 312 may be implemented by a computing system installed at a building, such as a warehouse, where the deployment system(s) 314 and UAV(s) 304 that are associated with the particular local dispatch system 312 are also located. In other embodiments, the local dispatch system 312 may be implemented at a location that is remote to its associated deployment system(s) 314 and UAV(s) 304.);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of applicant’s invention, to combine Karro, Cochran and Roy with Cochran’s feature(s) listed above. One would’ve been motivated to do so in order to achieve a desired distribution of UAVs at a certain time (Cochran; [0032]). By incorporating the teachings of Cochran, one would’ve been able to deliver the requested goods.
Regarding claims 10/22: Karro further teaches:
where the at least one programmable integrated circuit is an integral host programmable integrated circuit component of the local information handling system. ([0030] The term “engine” as used herein is defined as a real-world device, component, or arrangement of components implemented using hardware, such as by an application specific integrated circuit (ASIC) or field-programmable gate array (FPGA)).
Regarding claims 11/23: Karro further teaches:
where the at least one programmable integrated circuit is an integral component of an administrative information handling system that is coupled by a network to the local information handling system. ([0030] In embodiments, the system or components thereof can comprise or include various modules or engines, each of which is constructed, programmed, configured, or otherwise adapted, to autonomously carry out a function or set of functions. The term “engine” as used herein is defined as a real-world device, component, or arrangement of components implemented using hardware, such as by an application specific integrated circuit (ASIC) or field-programmable gate array (FPGA), for example, or as a combination of hardware and software, such as by a microprocessor system and a set of program instructions that adapt the engine to implement the particular functionality, which (while being executed) transform the microprocessor system into a special-purpose device.).
Claim(s) 2 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Karro et al. (US 20180253709 A1, hereinafter “Karro”), in view of Cochran et al. (US 20190197643 A1, hereinafter “Cochran”), in further view of Roy et al. (US 20190172012 A1, hereinafter “Roy”) as applied to claims 1 and 14 above, in further view of Srinivasan et al. (US 20210256066 A1, hereinafter “Srinivasan”), in further view of Saratsis et al. (US 20180260920 A1, hereinafter “Saratsis”).
Regarding claims 2/15: Karro further teaches:
where the workspace configuration inward data factors comprise at least one of data that specifies an identity of a number or a type of peripheral devices or other devices connected to the local information handling system; ([0019] the POS system 102 can include a central or primary computer 104, a monitor 106 (e.g., a cashier facing monitor 106), one or more input devices 108 (e.g., scanners 108A, keyboards 108B, scales, or the like), one or more payment devices 110 (e.g., cash drawers 110A, card readers 110B) for receiving or returning payments, one or more output devices 112 (e.g., customer facing display 112A or monitor 112A, receipt printer 112B) or combinations thereof.
and where the device or system life cycle data of the outward data factors comprise at least one of supply chain management information, energy and type of material used in manufacturing information, end-user delivery information, durability and life expectancy information, repair and refurbishment capability information, or end-of-life recycling potential information. ([0041] additional factors or information (e.g., age, years in service, expected useful life, category average, etc.) then can be used or applied to particular systems to determine if or when each system should or will be replaced.).
Karro doesn’t teach:
and where the usage pattern inward data factors comprise at least one of battery utilization pattern, central processing unit (CPU) resource utilization, graphics resource utilization, memory resource utilization, or user application utilization;
Srinivasan teaches:
and where the usage pattern inward data factors comprise at least one of battery utilization pattern, central processing unit (CPU) resource utilization, graphics resource utilization, memory resource utilization, or user application utilization; ([0014] The CUE stack may analyze computing resource utilization tracking data; [0061] CUL 200 may determine an input rate of credits based on the size of a cloud computing instance such as the CPU, determine an output rate of credits based on the computing resource utilization tracking data with respect to the CPU.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of applicant’s invention, to combine Karro, Cochran and Roy with Srinivasan’s feature(s) listed above. One would’ve been motivated to do so in order to compare the input and output rates to determine a credit accumulation (Srinivasan; [0061]). By incorporating the teachings of Srinivasan, one would’ve been able to monitor the usage of computing resources assigned to an employee.
Srinivasan doesn’t teach:
and where the manufacturer reports and manufacturer certifications of the outward data factors comprise at least one of Swedish Confederation of Professional Employees (TCO) certification information, Product Attribute to Impact Algorithm (PAIA ) information, Product Carbon Footprint (PCF) report information, greenhouse gas (GHG) emission information, or Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Certification;
Saratsis teaches:
and where the manufacturer reports and manufacturer certifications of the outward data factors comprise at least one of Swedish Confederation of Professional Employees (TCO) certification information, Product Attribute to Impact Algorithm (PAIA ) information, Product Carbon Footprint (PCF) report information, greenhouse gas (GHG) emission information, or Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Certification; ([0046] teaches the data sources in Databases 304 can further comprise an Energy Star Certifications database, LEED Certification database; [0047] teaches building data 402 can comprise leed/energystar certifications.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of applicant’s invention, to combine Karro, Cochran, Roy and Srinivasan with Saratsis’ feature(s) listed above. One would’ve been motivated to do so in order to generate a Utility Distributed Energy Resource (“DER”) Roadmap 501 (Saratsis; [0048]). By incorporating the teachings of Saratsis, one would’ve been able to maintain updated inventory of resources and the users that the equipment is assigned to.
Claim(s) 7 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Karro et al. (US 20180253709 A1, hereinafter “Karro”), in view of Cochran et al. (US 20190197643 A1, hereinafter “Cochran”), in further view of Roy et al. (US 20190172012 A1, hereinafter “Roy”) as applied to claims 1 and 14 above, in further view of Cella et al. (US 20230222531 A1, hereinafter “Cella”).
Regarding claims 7/19: Karro doesn’t teach:
further comprising executing the at least one programmable integrated circuit to: use unsupervised machine learning to determine and assign a weight for each of the outward data factors and the inward data factors of each of the multiple different available information handling system hardware component types,
and to apply the assigned weight of each of the given outward data factors to the corresponding respective given outward data factor to determine a corresponding respective weighted outward data factor and apply the assigned weight of each of the given inward data factors to the corresponding respective given inward data factor to determine a corresponding respective weighted inward data factor; and
then use machine learning to determine the hardware component acquisition score for each given one of the multiple different available information handling system hardware component types from the determined weighted outward data factors and the determined weighted inward data factors of the respective given one of the multiple different available information handling system hardware component types.
Cella teaches:
further comprising executing the at least one programmable integrated circuit to: use unsupervised machine learning to determine and assign a weight for each of the outward data factors and the inward data factors of each of the multiple different available information handling system hardware component types, ([0538] In some embodiments, the machine learning model 3000 may be defined via unsupervised learning, i.e., one or more algorithms configured to build a mathematical model of a set of data containing only inputs by finding structure in the data such as grouping or clustering of data points.; [0542] the feature learning algorithm may be performed by the machine learning model 3000 in a supervised, unsupervised, or semi-supervised manner; [0531] One or more of the units and/or nodes and connections therebetween may have one or more numerical “weights” assigned. The assigned weights may be configured to facilitate learning, i.e., training, of the machine learning model 3000.);
and to apply the assigned weight of each of the given outward data factors to the corresponding respective given outward data factor to determine a corresponding respective weighted outward data factor and apply the assigned weight of each of the given inward data factors to the corresponding respective given inward data factor to determine a corresponding respective weighted inward data factor; and ([0531] The assigned weights may increase and/or decrease one or more signals between one or more units and/or nodes, and in some embodiments may have one or more thresholds associated with one or more of the weights.; [1166] The weights of output neurons may be changed (e.g., the weights may be trained based on feedback).);
then use machine learning to determine the hardware component acquisition score for each given one of the multiple different available information handling system hardware component types from the determined weighted outward data factors and the determined weighted inward data factors of the respective given one of the multiple different available information handling system hardware component types. ([0151] teaches the system is programmed: to train the robotic agent with interactions within an enterprise demand planning software suite as the set of inputs, to train the robotic agent to interact with a set of demand models that at least one of forecast demand factors, forecast supply factors, forecast pricing factors, forecast anticipated equilibria between supply and demand, generate estimates of appropriate inventory, generate recommendations for supply, or generate recommendations for distribution, to automatically execute to obtain commitments for supply in response to discovery of a pre-defined market condition associated with the adverse contingency.; [0531] One or more of the units and/or nodes and connections therebetween may have one or more numerical “weights” assigned. The assigned weights may be configured to facilitate learning, i.e., training, of the machine learning model 3000. The weights assigned weights may increase and/or decrease one or more signals between one or more units and/or nodes, and in some embodiments may have one or more thresholds associated with one or more of the weights.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of applicant’s invention, to combine Karro, Cochran and Roy with Cella’s feature(s) listed above. One would’ve been motivated to do so in order to enable an enterprise to manage a set of value chain network entities from a point of origin to a point of customer use (Cella; [0576]). By incorporating the teachings of Cella, one would’ve been able to maintain updated inventory of resources and the users that the equipment is assigned to.
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Karro et al. (US 20180253709 A1, hereinafter “Karro”), in view of Cochran et al. (US 20190197643 A1, hereinafter “Cochran”), in further view of Roy et al. (US 20190172012 A1, hereinafter “Roy”) as applied to claim 1, in further view of Rousso et al. (US 20080126157 A1, hereinafter “Rousso”).
Regarding claim 12: Karro teaches:
further comprising executing the at least one programmable integrated circuit to: analyze the obtained inward data factors to identify a given category of information handling system hardware component that is needed by the given user of the local information handling system, ([0041] Within any particular critical site, additional factors or information (e.g., age, years in service, expected useful life, category average, etc.) then can be used or applied to particular systems to determine if or when each system should or will be replaced. In addition, the category of the equipment can be used as a weighting factor in determining criticality scores.);
…that are determined to currently physically exist and are available in the at least one warehouse… ([0043] Requesting service can comprise creating and sending one or more messages including a service request, creating an entry in a service database including the location and type of service required, scheduling a service call based on technician and/or material availability, or the like.; [0044] Automatically created service requests can reduce costs and increase the reliability of systems at retail sites 114. For example, by dispatching a service technician to repair, replace, or upgrade a component of POS system 102 prior to total failure).
and then perform the selecting of the given one of the multiple different available information handling system hardware component types that are determined to currently physically exist and are available in the at least one warehouse by selecting the given one of the multiple different available information handling system hardware component types from the identified given category of information handling system hardware component that has the highest hardware component acquisition score relative to all other of the multiple different available information handling system types that are determined to currently physically exist and are available in the at least one warehouse included within the identified given category of information handling system hardware component. ([0042] in response to a user selection certain equipment type, for example, lighting systems within a given region, user interface 132 can display in a map form, or other view, the locations of retail sites having lighting systems with certain characteristics (such as criticality score).; [0043] Requesting service can comprise creating and sending one or more messages including a service request, creating an entry in a service database including the location and type of service required, scheduling a service call based on technician and/or material availability, or the like.; [0044] Automatically created service requests can reduce costs and increase the reliability of systems at retail sites 114. For example, by dispatching a service technician to repair, replace, or upgrade a component of POS system 102 prior to total failure).
Karro doesn’t teach:
and where each of the multiple different available information handling system hardware component types… …is included within the given category of information handling system hardware component;
Rousso teaches:
and where each of the multiple different available information handling system hardware component types… …is included within the given category of information handling system hardware component; ([0064] The buyer may select a specific goods/services 308 search. The system determines if the buyer entered a valid goods search term 341. If the system determines that the search term is invalid, the system may generate a suggested manufacturer/industry search term based on the invalid goods search term. Alternately, the system may be configured to request the buyer enter a new search term 343. If the buyer has entered a valid product search term, the system may provide access to the system product database 345 by generating and displaying a goods search result 347. For example, the system may display a search result listing that includes exact product search result matches and in some implementations system generated related product search results.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of applicant’s invention, to combine Karro, Cochran and Roy with Rousso’s feature(s) listed above. One would’ve been motivated to do so, so the buyer may select a particular good 349 for inclusion as part of a purchase shopping cart, potential product catalog offering and/or simply to view product specification/pricing details 350 (Rousso; [0064]). By incorporating the teachings of Rousso, one would’ve been able to maintain updated inventory of resources.
Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Karro et al. (US 20180253709 A1, hereinafter “Karro”), in view of Cochran et al. (US 20190197643 A1, hereinafter “Cochran”), in further view of Roy et al. (US 20190172012 A1, hereinafter “Roy”) as applied to claim 1, in further view of McMahon (US 20070233531 A1, hereinafter “McMahon”).
Regarding claim 13: Karro further teaches:
…that currently physically exist and are available in the at least one warehouse; ([0043] Requesting service can comprise creating and sending one or more messages including a service request, creating an entry in a service database including the location and type of service required, scheduling a service call based on technician and/or material availability, or the like.; [0044] Automatically created service requests can reduce costs and increase the reliability of systems at retail sites 114. For example, by dispatching a service technician to repair, replace, or upgrade a component of POS system 102 prior to total failure).
Karro doesn’t teach:
further comprising executing the at least one programmable integrated circuit to: analyze the obtained inward data factors to identify at least one existing first information handling system hardware component that is currently deployed for use with the local information handling system that is not used by the given user of the local information handling system;
analyze the obtained inward data factors to determine the selected given one of the multiple different available information handling system hardware component types for the given user of the local information handling system is at least one second information handling system hardware component that is not currently deployed for use with the local information handling system but that is needed for use by the given user of the local information handling system and that currently physically exists and is available in the at least one warehouse;
and then each of: automatically initiate return of the existing first information handling system hardware component to an inventory of information handling system hardware components that currently physically exist and are available in the at least one warehouse;
and automatically physically acquire the selected at least one second information handling system hardware component for the local information handling system and the given user of the local information handling system from the inventory of information handling system hardware components that currently physically exist and are available in the at least one warehouse by automatically deploying a shipping robot or drone to carry the selected second information handling system hardware component to physically transfer the selected second information handling system hardware component from the first physical location of the warehouse to the second physical location of the local information handling system and the given user of the local information handling system.
Cochran teaches:
and automatically physically acquire the selected at least one second information handling system hardware component for the local information handling system and the given user of the local information handling system from the inventory of information handling system hardware components that currently physically exist and are available in the at least one warehouse by automatically deploying a shipping robot or drone to carry the selected second information handling system hardware component to physically transfer the selected second information handling system hardware component from the first physical location of the warehouse to the second physical location of the local information handling system and the given user of the local information handling system. ([0030] Note that herein, a “transport task” can generally involve a UAV picking up an item or item from one location (e.g., a source location specified by the item provider), delivering the item or items to another location); [0031] Further, it should be understood that an “item providers” may include any entity that has items to be delivered to any type of “recipient.” Item recipients may be any entities or locations capable of receiving delivery of an item, such as merchants, vendors, dealers, retailers, seller, shippers, and laypersons, among other possibilities.; [0050] For example, a remote operator could control high level navigation decisions for a UAV, such as by specifying that the UAV should travel from one location to another (e.g., from a warehouse in a suburban area to a delivery address in a nearby city), while the UAV's navigation system autonomously controls more fine-grained navigation decisions, such as the specific route to take between the two locations, specific flight controls to achieve the route and avoid obstacles while navigating the route, and so on.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of applicant’s invention, to combine Karro with Cochran’s feature(s) listed above. One would’ve been motivated to do so in order to achieve a desired distribution of UAVs at a certain time (Cochran; [0032]). By incorporating the teachings of Cochran, one would’ve been able to use a drone or robot to deliver the requested goods.
Cochran doesn’t teach:
further comprising executing the at least one programmable integrated circuit to: analyze the obtained inward data factors to identify at least one existing first information handling system hardware component that is currently deployed for use with the local information handling system that is not used by the given user of the local information handling system;
analyze the obtained inward data factors to determine the selected given one of the multiple different available information handling system hardware component types for the given user of the local information handling system is at least one second information handling system hardware component that is not currently deployed for use with the local information handling system but that is needed for use by the given user of the local information handling system and that currently physically exists and is available in the at least one warehouse;
and then each of: automatically initiate return of the existing first information handling system hardware component to an inventory of information handling system hardware components…
McMahon teaches:
further comprising executing the at least one programmable integrated circuit to: analyze the obtained inward data factors to identify at least one existing first information handling system hardware component that is currently deployed for use with the local information handling system that is not used by the given user of the local information handling system; (Fig. 4 (Quit/Termination 66, Close Accounts, Reclaim Resources, Cancel Entitlements); [0040] teaches termination 66 may be associated with employee 20 quitting, being fired, retiring, being laid off, etc. In certain embodiments, termination 66 may require accounts to be closed, resources to be reclaimed, and/or entitlements to be cancelled.);
analyze the obtained inward data factors to determine the selected given one of the multiple different available information handling system hardware component types for the given user of the local information handling system is at least one second information handling system hardware component that is not currently deployed for use with the local information handling system but that is needed for use by the given user of the local information handling system and that currently physically exists and is available in the at least one warehouse; (Fig. 4: Change in Responsibilities 64, New Resources; [0039] In certain embodiments, change in responsibilities 64 may be related to a status change (such as a change in physical location and/or a change in job title) and/or a change in the business of organization 10. In certain embodiments, change in responsibilities 64 may be associated with the provision of new accounts, new resources, and/or new entitlements. In certain embodiments of employee life cycle 60, change in responsibilities 64 may occur several times and may have different provisions each time.);
and then each of: automatically initiate return of the existing first information handling system hardware component to an inventory of information handling system hardware components… ([0039] In certain embodiments, change in responsibilities 64 may be related to a status change (such as a change in physical location and/or a change in job title) and/or a change in the business of organization 10. In certain embodiments, change in responsibilities 64 may be associated with the provision of new accounts, new resources, and/or new entitlements. In certain embodiments of employee life cycle 60, change in responsibilities 64 may occur several times and may have different provisions each time.; [0088] If it is determined at step 589 that a manual account cleanup is required, then at step 590, one or both of Application Manager 509 and provisioning system 511 deprovision the employee 504 identified at step 582; [0090] At step 583, Security Manager 512 automatically collects user entitlements.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of applicant’s invention, to combine Karro, Cochran and Roy with McMahon’s feature(s) listed above. One would’ve been motivated to do so in order to deprovision the customer/partner 501 identified at step 582 (McMahon; [0090]). By incorporating the additional teachings of McMahon, one would’ve been able to recover resources no longer needed by a user
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 GABRIEL J TORRES CHANZA whose telephone number is (571)272-3701. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday 8am - 5pm ET.
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, Brian Epstein can be reached on (571)270-5389. 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.
/G.J.T./Examiner, Art Unit 3625
/TIMOTHY PADOT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3625
Prosecution Insights