FINAL OFFICE ACTION
Response to Arguments
Applicant's Remarks filed 9/2/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
With respect to the rejection of the claims under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1), Remarks argues that Tiwari does not disclose predefined anomaly types or classification of anomalies. However, the Examiner respectfully disagrees. Tiwari discloses categorizing a network incident, including predefined incident types (para. [0038]). Remarks further state that Tiwari does not describe selecting remediation actions according to predefined anomaly type. However, Tiwari discloses performing resolution actions according to the categorization of network incident (paras. [0036], [0038]).
Furthermore, the amended claims contain a number of limitations that violate the written description requirement of 35 U.S.C. 112(a).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1, 4-6, 9, 12-17, and 20-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claims contain subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventors, at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Claims 1, 9, and 17 have been amended to recite “classifying each detected anomaly according to a predefined anomaly type.” However, this is not described in the Specification as filed. There is no mention of the classifying detected anomalies, or of predefined anomaly types, as required by the claims. At best, the Specification lists particular types of anomalies which may correspond to the detect anomaly (para. [0038]). However, this is not the same as recited in the claims. Dependent claims 4 and 5 also suffer a similar deficiency.
Since the Specification does not provide support for the claimed recitation of “classifying each detected anomaly according to a predefined anomaly type,” it also follows that there is no discussion of “wherein the self-remediation procedure is selected based on the predefined anomaly type,” and “performing an escalation action that is mapped to the predefined anomaly type.” There is no mention of these concepts within the Specification.
The amended claims also recite “wherein the mapping of escalation actions to anomaly types is predefined and independent of historical incident clustering or candidate action scoring,” however, this is not described in the Specification as filed. The Specification does not include any discussion related to predefined anomaly types or predefined escalation actions, or any mapping between them. The subject matter of claim 24 relates to the same concepts and suffers the same deficiency.
Therefore, it is not clear that the inventor, at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention due to the recited subject matter. The claims are accordingly not in compliance with the written description requirement of 35 U.S.C. 112(a).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 4-6, 9, 12-17, and 20-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent Pub. No. 2021/0397497 to Tiwari et al. (hereinafter Tiwari).
Tiwari discloses:
1. A method for providing a zero touch operations and self-healing data platform, the method comprising:
receiving data corresponding to a mobile communications network, the data received from a plurality of sources (para. [0025] and Fig. 1, fault mitigation device 110 and nodes 132, 134, 136, 138m user devices 140 – fault mitigation device 110 receives messages from nodes);
training a machine learning model to detect anomalies corresponding to the data (paras. [0008], [0029], [0059] and Fig. 1, modelling logic 116);
classifying each detected anomaly according to a predefined anomaly type (para. [0038] – network incident categorized);
initiating a self-remediation procedure for a detected anomaly (paras. [0034], [0036] – candidate action determined and automatically executed), wherein the self-remediation procedure is selected based on the predefined anomaly type (paras. [0038], [0039] – action corresponds to category of network incident); and
monitoring the self-remediation procedure and, upon determining the self-remediation procedure exceeds a configurable number of attempts or duration of time, automatically performing an escalation action that is mapped to the predefined anomaly type (paras. [0034], [0041], [0050], [0051] – ticket processed if candidate actions related to type of fault do not resolve fault), wherein the escalation action comprises one or more of:
automatically initiating an alert corresponding to the detected anomaly (para. [0051]); or
automatically creating a ticket corresponding to the detected anomaly (para. [0051]),
wherein the mapping of escalation actions to anomaly types is predefined and independent of historical incident clustering or candidate action scoring (para. [0042]).
4. The method of claim 1, wherein classifying the detected anomaly comprises assigning the detected anomaly to the predefined anomaly type selected from Vintela Authentication Services (VASD), input/output (I/O) error, redundant array of independent disks (RAID), or backup battery unit (BBU), and wherein the self-remediation procedure is selected based on the assigned anomaly type (paras. [0026], [0038], [0039] – monitoring nodes for network connectivity, signal quality, individual ports/interfaces).
5. The method of claim 1, wherein classifying the detected anomaly comprises assigning the detected anomaly to the predefined anomaly type selected from packet inter-network groper (PING), disk monitoring, or file system monitoring, and wherein the escalation action comprises automatically creating a ticket when the configurable number of attempts or duration is exceeded (paras. [0026], [0051] – monitoring nodes for performance of memory).
6. The method of claim 1, further comprising pre-processing the received data (paras. [0028]-[0029]), wherein pre-processing comprises:
reading one or more files corresponding to the data (paras. [0028], [0045]-[0046] – fault data 402 and input parameters 414 read); and
queueing the one or more files for job scheduling (Fig. 4).
Claims 9 and 12-16 are a non-transitory computer storage media storing computer-usable instructions that perform the identical steps performed by the method of claims 1 and 4-6, and are rejected under the same rationale.
17. A system for providing a zero touch operation and self-healing data platform, the system comprising:
one or more UEs (paras. [0023]-[0024] and Fig. 1, nodes 132, 134, 136, 138, user devices 140); and
a node configured to wirelessly communicate with the one or more UEs (para. [0018] and Fig. 1, fault mitigation device 110), wherein the node is configured to:
(1) receive data corresponding to a mobile communications network, the data received from a plurality of sources (para. [0025] and Fig. 1, fault mitigation device 110 and nodes 132, 134, 136, 138 – fault mitigation device 110 receives messages from nodes);
(2) train a machine learning model to detect anomalies corresponding to the data (paras. [0008], [0029], [0059] and Fig. 1, modelling logic 116);
(3) classify each detected anomaly according to a predefined anomaly type (para. [0038] – network incident categorized);
(4) initiate a self-remediation procedure for a detected anomaly , wherein the self-remediation procedure is selected based on the predefined anomaly type (paras. [0034], [0036] – candidate action determined and automatically executed); and
(5) monitor the self-remediation procedure and, upon determining the self-remediation exceeds a configurable number of attempts or duration of time, automatically perform an escalation action selected from a plurality of predefined actions mapped to respective anomaly types (paras. [0034], [0041], [0050], [0051] – ticket processed if candidate actions related to type of fault do not resolve fault), wherein the action comprises one or more of:
automatically initiating an alert corresponding to the anomaly (para. [0051]); or
automatically creating a ticket corresponding to the anomaly (para. [0051]).
20. The system of claim 17, wherein the data comprises event data records, call data records, and location session records (paras. [0025]-[0026]).
21. The method of claim 1, wherein the self-remediation comprises automatically restarting a platform service associated with the anomaly (para. [0050]).
22. The method of claim 1, wherein the anomaly comprises a job execution failure, and the automatically created ticket identifies the job execution failure (paras. [0027], [0051]).
23. The method of claim 1, further comprising providing a unified monitoring interface that presents real-time status of data ingestion, anomaly detection, self- remediation, and action escalation via a single pane of glass (para. [0031] and Figs. 2, 3).
24. The method of claim 1, wherein the mapping of escalation actions to anomaly types is stored in memory as one or more data structures defining predetermined associations between specific anomaly types and corresponding escalation actions (para. [0042]).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 Philip Guyton whose telephone number is (571)272-3807. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00-4:30.
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, Bryce Bonzo can be reached at (571)272-3655. 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.
/PHILIP GUYTON/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2113