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 .
Status of Claims
This is a final office action in response to the amendment filed 06 October 2025. No claim amendments have been entered. Claims 1-20 remain pending and have been examined.
This action is a final rejection and closes the prosecution of this application. Applicant’s reply under 37 CFR 1.113 to this action is limited to an appeal to the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, an amendment complying with the requirements set forth below, or a request for continued examination (RCE) to reopen prosecution where permitted. Please note that the Office also offers initiatives that are available to applicants after the close of prosecution. See https://www.uspto.gov/patents/initiatives/uspto-patent-applications-iniatives-timeline for more information.
General information on the Patent Trial and Appeal Board is available at: www.uspto.gov/patents/ptab. The information at this page includes guidance on time limited options that may assist the applicant contemplating appealing an examiner’s rejection. It also includes information on pro bono (free) legal services and advice available for those who are under-resourced and considering an appeal at: https://www.uspto.gov/patents/ptab/free-legal-assistance. The page is best reviewed promptly after applicant has received a final rejection or the claims have been twice rejected because some of the noted assistance must be requested within one month from the date of the latest rejection. See MPEP § 1204 for more information on filing a notice of appeal.
If applicant should desire to appeal any rejection made by the examiner, a Notice of Appeal must be filed within the period for reply. The Notice of Appeal must be accompanied by the fee required by 37 CFR 41.20(b)(1). The current fee amount is available at: www.uspto.gov/Fees.
If applicant should desire to file an after-final amendment, entry of the proposed amendment cannot be made as a matter of right unless it merely cancels claims or complies with a formal requirement made in a previous Office action. Amendments touching the merits of the application which otherwise might not be proper may be admitted upon a showing of good and sufficient reasons why they are necessary and why they were not presented earlier.
A reply under 37 CFR 1.113 to a final rejection must include cancellation of or appeal from the rejection of, each rejected claim. The filing of an amendment after final rejection, whether or not it is entered, does not stop the running of the statutory period for reply to the final rejection unless the examiner holds all of the claims to be in condition for allowance.
If applicant should desire to continue prosecution in a utility or plant application filed on or after May 29, 2000 and have the finality of this Office action withdrawn, an RCE under 37 CFR 1.114 may be filed within the period for reply. See MPEP § 706.07(h) for more information on the requirements for filing an RCE.
The application will become abandoned unless a Notice of Appeal, an after final reply that places the application in condition for allowance, or an RCE has been filed properly within the period for reply, or any extension of this period obtained under either 37 CFR 1.136(a) or (b).
Response to Amendment
No claim amendments have been entered.
The 35 U.S.C. 101 rejection is maintained and restated below.
The 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection is maintained and restated below.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments regarding the 35 U.S.C. 101 prior art rejection have been fully considered, but are not persuasive. Applicant asserts that the “the user interface fundamentally changes how users interact with work items management software,” and that the present invention’s primary utility arises from an improved work item management software that amounts to a technological improvement that is significantly more than collecting information, analyzing it, and displaying certain results because these steps require a computer. Applicant further asserts that to replace the inventio with it being performed purely in the human mind, or by a human using pen and pencil is impossible, or at least highly impractical because to do so without the benefit and use of a computer that hosts the invention would be so burdensome that it is impractical to do so not just because of the continuous time involve, but because it would be onerous and an old-fashioned approach, and further because calculating and organizing progression threshold timestamps without computer-based means will almost always be inaccurate. Examiner respectfully disagrees.
While a computer and a computer user interface are additional elements used to perform the claimed limitations for storing, acquiring, and presenting, the claims do not improve the underlying computer processing or user interface technology. Using a generic computer or user interface to perform functions of receiving, storing, and presenting user input or analyzed data does not amount to a practical application of computing or user interface technologies when the functionality of the computer or interface is not improved. The claimed method, apparatus, and system claims improve a business process for managing and resolving information technology or product support issues more efficiently. Improving efficiency or accuracy alone is insufficient for patent subject matter eligibility. Examiner directs Application to the Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Examples, particularly Example 40 related to user interface technology. Claim 2 of Example 40, is ineligible under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claims are directed to mere data gathering steps that automate the comparison of data without significantly more than the recited insignificant extra solution activity and mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components. The claim language is in contrast to that of Example 37 wherein, the claimed subject matter was determined to be patent subject matter eligible because, the additional elements recite a specific manner of automatically displaying icons to the user based on usage which provides a specific improvement over prior systems, resulting in an improved interface for electronic devices. See https://www.uspto.gov/patents/laws/examination-policy/subject-matter-eligibility.
Applicant further asserts that the invention’s utility is not only or mainly in organizing human activity as suggested, but mainly in achieving timely, attentive work required to progress and complete work items in a way that is acceptable to stakeholders by meeting their needs and expectations that amounts to a transformational operational improvement. Examiner respectfully disagrees. An operational improvement is not necessarily patent subject matter eligible. While the claimed invention may improve a business process using a computer and interface, the technical detail regarding how the business process is achieved in a manner that improves how the data is processed in a manner that improves computer functionality, how the data is presenting in a manner that improves interface technology, or how the data is stored in a manner that improves memory is not claimed or disclosed in the specification. Therefore, using a computer or interface as tools to implement the abstract idea of presenting work item status information based on user data input for business decision making is insufficient to overcome the pending 35 U.S.C. 101 rejection. Therefore, the rejection is maintained and restated below.
Applicant’s arguments regarding the 35 U.S.C. 103 prior art rejection have been fully considered, but are not persuasive. Applicant asserts that the prior art of record Templeton et al. and Fletcher et al. combined, are not similar to the claimed invention. Applicant states that the present invention “guides the timeliness of all steps/operations necessary to eventually complete work items in good time. The present invention relates not to single tickets or other work items individually, but rather to the coordinated timely delivery of them all.” Applicant further states, “the present invention relates to producing useful data and presenting it on a graphical user interface so that timely activity is provided to stakeholders, whether or not users of the invention are monitored for their performance in progressing work items ahead of progression threshold timestamps… the present invention is to switch operational focus from merely responding to and completing work items, to all of the timely activity that is required for attentive provision. This is far removed from the nature of Templeton et al. and Fletcher et al.” Examiner respectfully disagrees.
Applicant’s arguments are more specific than the recited claim language. The Examiner respectfully directs Applicant to the broadest reasonable interpretation standard. See MPEP 2111 - Claim Interpretation, e.g., "During examination, the claims must be interpreted as broadly as their terms reasonably allow." In re American Academy of Science Tech Center, 367 F.3d 1359, 1369, 70 USPQ2d 1827, 1834 (Fed. Cir. 2004) (The USPTO uses a different standard for construing claims than that used by district courts; during examination the USPTO must give claims their broadest reasonable interpretation.) In Phillips v. AWH Corp., 415 F.3d 1303, 75 USPQ2d 1321 (Fed. Cir. 2005), the court further elaborated on the “broadest reasonable interpretation" standard and recognized that “The Patent and Trademark Office (“PTO") determines the scope of claims in patent applications not solely on the basis of the claim language, but upon giving claims their broadest reasonable construction." Thus, when interpreting claims, the courts have held that Examiners should interpret claim terms as broadest reasonable interpretation as know by a skill artisan.
Examiner asserts that Templeton et al. and Fletcher et al. combined disclose the claimed invention. Both references present work item visualization data related to the status of a issues/tickets of an issue tracking system or performance of a task. Templeton et al. discloses systems and methods for operating an issue tracking system to receive external data as input such that the external data can be displayed within a common graphical user interface with individual tickets tracked by the issue tracking system. As a result of the systems and methods described herein, a user of the issue tracking system can quickly and easily determine whether all steps/operations necessary to close a ticket or perform another task with the ticket are conveniently presented within the ticket itself; context switching delays are substantially eliminated (Templeton et al. [para. 0028]). Therefore, Templeton et al. is in the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention and achieves the same inventive concept stated by the Applicant, “guides the timeliness of all steps/operations necessary to eventually complete work items in good time. The present invention relates not to single tickets or other work items individually, but rather to the coordinated timely delivery of them all.”
Fletcher et al. is directed to monitoring performance of a system at a service level using key performance indicators derived from machine data. Implementations of the present disclosure provide users with insight to the performance of monitored services, such as, services pertaining to an information technology (IT) environment (Fletcher et al. [para. 0213]). Per the Specification Background section at [0001] the invention relates to “work item management software in this discussion includes software for Information Technology Service Management (ITSM), Enterprise Service Management (ESM), Customer Relationship Management (CRM), Project Management, Product Management, and any other software that can manage work requirements, workload, jobs, or tasks of a person or enterprise team including software that combines workload management across different enterprise functions or divisions.” Fletcher at al. is directed to “ monitoring performance of a system at a service level using key performance indicators derived from machine data. Implementations of the present disclosure provide users with insight to the performance of monitored services, such as, services pertaining to an information technology (IT) environment,” and is therefore in the same field of endeavor. (Fletcher et al. [para. 0213]). The Specification at [0038] states: “… each time a work item’s lifecycle status or state is set or changed, whether by a user of work item management software or automatically by a workflow or by any work item management software system event procedure, a stored status progression threshold period that has been designated for the status or state is applied to generate and store a status progression threshold timestamp and so when work items are ordered and presented in sequence according to their status progression threshold timestamp, the present invention is of a system for the dynamic and appropriate prioritization of work items that adjusts to changing circumstances as each work item moves through its lifecycle.” Fletcher et al. discloses monitoring service performance at a point in time or during a period of time, indicating the current state of a performance indicator in a graphical user interface and based on user input of threshold conditions indicating the state corresponding to different time frames. The deep dive visual interface allows an in-depth look at KPI data that reflects how a service or entity is performing over a certain period of time. By having multiple graphical visualizations, each representing a different service or a different aspect of the same service, the deep dive visual interface allows a user to visually correlate the respective KPIs over a defined period of time. Applying the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim language in view of the specification, the combination of Templeton et al. and Fletcher et al. discloses the claimed invention and the 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection is proper, maintained, and restated 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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea of collecting information, analyzing it and displaying certain results of the collection and analysis, without significantly more. Independent claim 1 recites a process, independent claim 2 recites a process, independent claim 11 recites a device, independent claim 16 recites a device for to maintain a record of when work items should be progressed.
Independent claim 1 recites at least the following limitations:
storing, from user input at a computer, a progression threshold time period for each of a plurality of work item lifecycle statuses or states corresponding to the work of an organization;
acquiring, by a computer and as part of a workflow, the progression threshold time period when a work item status or state is set or changed, and
storing, by a computer, a progression threshold timestamp generated via a computer processor;
presenting progression threshold timestamps to users on a computer user interface; wherein a progression threshold timestamp is determined as the date and time that the work item lifecycle status or state is set or changed plus its progression threshold time period plus or minus any adjustment that might be applied; wherein a user is an agent of the organization.
Independent claim 2 recites at least the following limitations:
storing, from user input at a computer, a progression threshold time period for each of a plurality of work item lifecycle statuses or states corresponding to the work of an organization;
acquiring, by a computer, the progression threshold time period of one or more work items that correspond to search criteria, and
storing, by a computer, a progression threshold timestamp generated via a computer processor for each corresponding work item;
presenting progression threshold timestamps to users on a computer user interface; wherein a progression threshold timestamp is determined as the date and time that a work item lifecycle status or state is set or changed plus its progression threshold time period plus or minus any adjustment that might be applied; wherein a user is an agent of the organization.
Independent claim 11 recites at least the following limitations:
at least one computer processor coupled to at least one processor-readable storage device, wherein a processor-readable storage device includes one or more instructions executable by a computer processor to perform the following acts:
store, from user input, a progression threshold time period for each of a plurality of work item lifecycle statuses or states;
generate and store progression threshold timestamps;
present progression threshold timestamps to users; wherein a progression threshold timestamp is determined as the date and time that the lifecycle status or state of a work item is set or changed plus the progression threshold time period that is stored for the status or state plus or minus any adjustment that might be applied; wherein a user is an agent of an organization that uses the apparatus.
Independent claim 16 recites at least the following limitations:
at least one computer processor coupled to at least one processor-readable storage device; a status management module for storage of work item statuses or states and their progression threshold time period; a workflow module for storage of instructions to generate progression threshold timestamps via a processor; and
storage of one or more data presentation module user interface for presenting progression threshold timestamps to users; wherein a progression threshold timestamp is determined as the date and time that the status or state of a work item is set or changed plus the progression threshold time period stored for the work item plus or minus any adjustment that might be applied; wherein a user is an agent of an organization that uses the system.
Under Step 1, independent claims 1, 2, 11, and 16 recite at least one step or act including storing a progression threshold time period or storage of one or more data presentation module user interface. Thus, the claims fall within one of the statutory categories of invention.
Under Step 2A Prong One, the limitations of claims 1, 2, 11, and 16 for storing a progression threshold, acquiring the progression threshold time period, presenting progression threshold timestamps to users, and storage of one or more data presentation module user interface for presenting progression threshold timestamps to users, as drafted, illustrates a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation covers performance of the limitation in the mind (collecting information analyzing it and displaying certain results), but for the recitation of generic computer components. That is, other than reciting that a system includes a processor and memories to perform the steps, none of the additional elements preclude the steps from practically being performed in the human mind, or by a human using a pen and paper. Therefore, the limitations fall into the mental processes grouping and accordingly the claims recite an abstract idea.
The claims are also directed to managing IT service workflow progression by tracking timestamps and completion status according to service level agreement terms. Because tracking task completion is a form of managing worker performance/behavior, the claims reasonably fall within the certain methods of organizing human activity grouping of abstract concepts.
Under Step 2A Prong Two, the judicial exception of claims 1, 2, 11, and 16 is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claims only recite a processor and storage device for performing the recited steps. These elements are recited at a high level of generality (i.e., as a generic processor performing a generic computer function) and amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components. See MPEP 2106.05(f). For example, Applicant’s specification at paragraph [0143] states: “Embodiments of the present invention require a computer. In the present discussion, a computer might have, as is common of all computers, a processor to process data, a computer readable temporary data storage memory, and computer readable long term or permanent data storage, often with other hardware devices that might include a computer network adapter, computer monitor, keyboard, and mouse. A computer can execute instructions of computer coded software applications, an example of which is work item management software.” Adding generic computer components to perform generic functions, such as data gathering, performing calculations, and outputting a result would not transform the claim into eligible subject matter. See MPEP 2106.05(h). Accordingly, the additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea.
Under Step 2B, the claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to the integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional elements of a processor and storage device amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component which cannot provide an inventive concept.
Dependent claims 3-10, 12-15, and 17-20 include the abstract idea of the independent claims. The limitations of the dependent claims merely narrow the mental process/method of organizing human activity by detailing how progress is monitored, how alert statuses are managed, and how progression threshold timestamps are presented. The limitations of the dependent claims are not integrated into a practical application because none of the additional elements set forth any limitations that meaningfully limit the abstract idea implementation. There are no additional elements that transform the claim into a patent eligible idea by amounting to significantly more. The analysis above applies to all statutory categories of invention. Accordingly independent claims 1, 2, 11, and 16 and the claims that depend therefrom are rejected as ineligible for patenting under 35 U.S.C. 101. Therefore, claims 1 - 20 are ineligible under 35 U.S.C. 101.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or non-obviousness.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Templeton et al. (US 2023/0145461) in view of Fletcher et al. (US 2016/0105338).
Regarding Claim 1, Templeton et al. discloses a method for at least one computer to maintain a record of when work items should be progressed, the method comprising: storing, from user input at a computer, a progression threshold time period for each of a plurality of work item lifecycle statuses or states corresponding to the work of an organization; (… systems and methods for operating an issue tracking system to receive external data as input such that the external data can be displayed within a common graphical user interface with individual tickets tracked by the issue tracking system. … a user of the issue tracking system can quickly and easily determine whether all steps/operations necessary to close a ticket or perform another task with the ticket are conveniently presented within the ticket itself. … The user of the laptop can operate the graphical user interface of the frontend application to access information, such as issues/tickets, stored by the backend application. …more than one issue report can be updated and/or modified in response to a single input. Templeton et al. [para. 0028-0032, 0036-0042 (generation of status visualization, modification in response to input)]. See also Templeton et al. [para. 0002-0004, 0017-0024, 0125-0127 (computer processing system)]);
Templeton et al. fails to explicitly disclose acquiring, by a computer and as part of a workflow, the progression threshold time period when a work item status or state is set or changed, and storing, by a computer, a progression threshold timestamp generated via a computer processor. Fletcher et al. discloses these limitations. (A correlation search can be created to determine the status of a set of KPIs for a service over a defined window of time… Thresholds can be set on the distribution of the state of each individual KPI and if the distribution thresholds are exceeded then an alert/alarm can be generated. Fletcher et al. [para. 0225-0229, 0571-0574 (receiving user input to set a threshold); Fig. 45 A]. … a service-monitoring dashboard… can display KPI widgets providing a numerical or graphical representation of the value 108 for a respective KPI 106. Fletcher et al. [para. 0241-0245; Fig. 35, 40-42]. …The KPI module 240 can receive input to define one or more thresholds for one or more KPIs. …. The entity definitions, the service definitions, and the KPI definitions can be stored in the data store(s) 290 that are coupled to the service monitoring system 210. Fletcher et al. [para. 0257-0262, 0277 (event data), 0501-0507 (static and dynamic monitoring), 0608-0609 (visualization over time period); Fig. 31D-31F]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of workflow management before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to monitor the work item information to include acquiring, by a computer and as part of a workflow, the progression threshold time period when a work item status or state is set or changed, and storing, by a computer, a progression threshold timestamp generated via a computer processor as disclosed by Fletcher et al. to provide users with insight to the performance of monitored services, such as, services pertaining to an information technology (IT) environment (Fletcher et al. [para. 0213]), in a manner that would yield predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention.
presenting progression threshold timestamps to users on a computer user interface; wherein a progression threshold timestamp is determined as the date and time that the work item lifecycle status or state is set or changed plus its progression threshold time period plus or minus any adjustment that might be applied; (… the issue tracking system can be configured to display that a static analysis process has been complete/passed for N hours, based on a time difference from a render time of a graphical user interface and a timestamp at which the most recent status message relating to the status analysis process was received. In other cases, numerical status (e.g., percent complete, number of remaining tasks, and so on) can be plotted over time by the issue tracking system after receiving periodic updates from an external system. Templeton et al. [para. 0048-0051]);
wherein a user is an agent of the organization. (… an issue tracking system may be used by a team of software developers to track work items related to maintaining and improving a particular software product. Templeton et al. [para. 0017-0018, 0021-0022, 0047]).
Regarding Claim 2, Templeton et al. discloses a method for at least one computer to generate records of when work items should be progressed, the method comprising: storing, from user input at a computer, a progression threshold time period for each of a plurality of work item lifecycle statuses or states corresponding to the work of an organization; (… systems and methods for operating an issue tracking system to receive external data as input such that the external data can be displayed within a common graphical user interface with individual tickets tracked by the issue tracking system. … a user of the issue tracking system can quickly and easily determine whether all steps/operations necessary to close a ticket or perform another task with the ticket are conveniently presented within the ticket itself. … The user of the laptop can operate the graphical user interface of the frontend application to access information, such as issues/tickets, stored by the backend application. …more than one issue report can be updated and/or modified in response to a single input. Templeton et al. [para. 0028-0032, 0036-0042 (generation of status visualization, modification in response to input)]. See also Templeton et al. [para. 0002-0004, 0017-0024, 0125-0127 (computer processing system)]);
Templeton et al. fails to explicitly disclose acquiring, by a computer, the progression threshold time period of one or more work items that correspond to search criteria, and storing, by a computer, a progression threshold timestamp generated via a computer processor for each corresponding work item. Fletcher et al. discloses these limitations. (A correlation search can be created to determine the status of a set of KPIs for a service over a defined window of time… Thresholds can be set on the distribution of the state of each individual KPI and if the distribution thresholds are exceeded then an alert/alarm can be generated. Fletcher et al. [para. 0225-0229, 0560-0561, 0571-0574 (receiving user input to set a threshold); Fig. 45A]. … a service-monitoring dashboard… can display KPI widgets providing a numerical or graphical representation of the value 108 for a respective KPI 106. Fletcher et al. [para. 0241-0245; Fig. 35, 40-42]. …The KPI module 240 can receive input to define one or more thresholds for one or more KPIs. …. The entity definitions, the service definitions, and the KPI definitions can be stored in the data store(s) 290 that are coupled to the service monitoring system 210. Fletcher et al. [para. 0257-0262, 0277 (event data), 0501-0507 (static and dynamic monitoring), 0608-0609 (visualization over time period); Fig. 31D-31F], 0737-0739 (search query)). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of workflow management before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to monitor the work item information to include acquiring, by a computer, the progression threshold time period of one or more work items that correspond to search criteria, and storing, by a computer, a progression threshold timestamp generated via a computer processor for each corresponding work item as disclosed by Fletcher et al. to provide users with insight to the performance of monitored services, such as, services pertaining to an information technology (IT) environment (Fletcher et al. [para. 0213]), in a manner that would yield predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention.
presenting progression threshold timestamps to users on a computer user interface; wherein a progression threshold timestamp is determined as the date and time that a work item lifecycle status or state is set or changed plus its progression threshold time period plus or minus any adjustment that might be applied; (… the issue tracking system can be configured to display that a static analysis process has been complete/passed for N hours, based on a time difference from a render time of a graphical user interface and a timestamp at which the most recent status message relating to the status analysis process was received. In other cases, numerical status (e.g., percent complete, number of remaining tasks, and so on) can be plotted over time by the issue tracking system after receiving periodic updates from an external system. Templeton et al. [para. 0048-0051]);
wherein a user is an agent of the organization. (… an issue tracking system may be used by a team of software developers to track work items related to maintaining and improving a particular software product. Templeton et al. [para. 0017-0018, 0021-0022, 0047]).
Regarding Claim 3, Templeton et al. and Fletcher et al. combined disclose the method, further comprising: monitoring, via a computer processor, work item progression threshold timestamps to find those that are in the past; changing the lifecycle status or state of each work item that has a progression threshold timestamp that is in the past, to a predetermined alert status or state. Fletcher et al. discloses this limitation. (… specific actions can be defined that are to be taken when the aggregate KPI indicating the overall health of a service, for example, exceeds a particular threshold. … correlation search represents a search query that has a triggering condition and one or more actions that correspond to the trigger condition. Thresholds can be set on the distribution of the state of each individual KPI and if the distribution thresholds are exceeded then an alert/alarm can be generated. Fletcher et al. [para. 0226-0229, 0662-0663, 0680]. … performance of a service can be assessed using a KPI's values that may change over time. As the KPI values change, they may exceed a specific threshold or fall below a specific threshold, which may cause the state of the KPI to change over time, for example, a KPI may be in a high state for a few hours and then enter a critical state for an hour before entering a low state. Fletcher et al. [para. 0693, 0820 (display KPI label (green, yellow, red, critical), 0881-0885 (gauge with time range); Fig. 34AQ, 40]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of workflow management before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to monitor the work item information to include monitoring, via a computer processor, work item progression threshold timestamps to find those that are in the past; changing the lifecycle status or state of each work item that has a progression threshold timestamp that is in the past, to a predetermined alert status or state as disclosed by Fletcher et al. to provide users with insight to the performance of monitored services, such as, services pertaining to an information technology (IT) environment (Fletcher et al. [para. 0213]), in a manner that would yield predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention.
Regarding Claim 4, Templeton et al. and Fletcher et al. combined disclose the method, wherein the lifecycle status or state is not changed, ( the issue tracking system can cause to be generated a visual indication of pendency near a graphical user interface element displaying the text “Static Analysis.” The visual indication of completeness may be a ellipse, a green colored box, or any other suitable visual indication. … every time the developer referenced above opens the issue tracking system to determine whether ticket 1235 can be closed, the developer can be immediately presented with a visual indication corresponding to the status of the static analysis operation(s) conducted by—and required to be conducted by—the code repository system. … , numerical status (e.g., percent complete, number of remaining tasks, and so on) can be plotted over time by the issue tracking system after receiving periodic updates from an external system. Templeton et al. [para. 0036-0049]).
and an alert status or state is stored additionally for each work item that has a progression threshold timestamp that is in the past. Fletcher et al. discloses this limitation. (Thresholds can be set on the distribution of the state of each individual KPI and if the distribution thresholds are exceeded then an alert/alarm can be generated. Fletcher et al. [para. 0226-0229, 0662-0663, 0680]. … performance of a service can be assessed using a KPI's values that may change over time. Fletcher et al. [para. 0693, 0820 (display KPI label (green, yellow, red, critical), 0881-0885 (gauge with time range); Fig. 34AQ, 40]. … the values (e.g., values 108A) produced by a search query for a KPI (e.g., KPI 106A) by executing the search query on a schedule are stored in a data store. Fletcher et al. [para. 0243, 0246 (historic searches on data)]. … , the computing machine derives one or more values for each of the identified KPIs. … The derived value(s) for each KPI can be stored in an index. Fletcher et al. [para. 0628-0629, 0723-0724, 0851-0852 (historic events)]. … The KPI values derived over time may be stored to build a valuable repository of current and historical performance information for the service, which may itself be queried. Fletcher et al. [para. 1165]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of workflow management before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to monitor the work item information to include an alert status or state is stored additionally for each work item that has a progression threshold timestamp that is in the past as disclosed by Fletcher et al. to identify a pattern of interest to a user and may notify the user when the pattern occurs (Fletcher et al. [para. 0827]), in a manner that would yield predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention.
Regarding Claim 5, Templeton et al. and Fletcher et al. combined disclose the method, wherein the lifecycle status or state of a work item is changed to a predetermined alert status or state when its progression threshold timestamp is in the past. (… specific actions can be defined that are to be taken when the aggregate KPI indicating the overall health of a service, for example, exceeds a particular threshold. … correlation search represents a search query that has a triggering condition and one or more actions that correspond to the trigger condition. Thresholds can be set on the distribution of the state of each individual KPI and if the distribution thresholds are exceeded then an alert/alarm can be generated. Fletcher et al. [para. 0226-0229, 0662-0663, 0680]. … performance of a service can be assessed using a KPI's values that may change over time. As the KPI values change, they may exceed a specific threshold or fall below a specific threshold, which may cause the state of the KPI to change over time, for example, a KPI may be in a high state for a few hours and then enter a critical state for an hour before entering a low state. Fletcher et al. [para. 0693, 0820 (display KPI label (green, yellow, red, critical), 0881-0885 (gauge with time range); Fig. 34AQ, 40]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of workflow management before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to monitor the work item information to include the lifecycle status or state of a work item is changed to a predetermined alert status or state when its progression threshold timestamp is in the past as disclosed by Fletcher et al. to provide users with insight to the performance of monitored services, such as, services pertaining to an information technology (IT) environment (Fletcher et al. [para. 0213]), in a manner that would yield predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention.
Regarding Claim 6, Templeton et al. and Fletcher et al. combined disclose the method, wherein the lifecycle status or state is not changed, ( the issue tracking system can cause to be generated a visual indication of pendency near a graphical user interface element displaying the text “Static Analysis.” The visual indication of completeness may be a ellipse, a green colored box, or any other suitable visual indication. … every time the developer referenced above opens the issue tracking system to determine whether ticket 1235 can be closed, the developer can be immediately presented with a visual indication corresponding to the status of the static analysis operation(s) conducted by—and required to be conducted by—the code repository system. … , numerical status (e.g., percent complete, number of remaining tasks, and so on) can be plotted over time by the issue tracking system after receiving periodic updates from an external system. Templeton et al. [para. 0036-0049]).
and an alert status or state is stored additionally for each work item that has a progression threshold timestamp that is in the past. Fletcher et al. discloses this limitation. (Thresholds can be set on the distribution of the state of each individual KPI and if the distribution thresholds are exceeded then an alert/alarm can be generated. Fletcher et al. [para. 0226-0229, 0662-0663, 0680]. … performance of a service can be assessed using a KPI's values that may change over time. Fletcher et al. [para. 0693, 0820 (display KPI label (green, yellow, red, critical), 0881-0885 (gauge with time range); Fig. 34AQ, 40]. … the values (e.g., values 108A) produced by a search query for a KPI (e.g., KPI 106A) by executing the search query on a schedule are stored in a data store. Fletcher et al. [para. 0243, 0246 (historic searches on data)]. … , the computing machine derives one or more values for each of the identified KPIs. … The derived value(s) for each KPI can be stored in an index. Fletcher et al. [para. 0628-0629, 0723-0724, 0851-0852 (historic events)]. … The KPI values derived over time may be stored to build a valuable repository of current and historical performance information for the service, which may itself be queried. Fletcher et al. [para. 1165]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of workflow management before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to monitor the work item information to include an alert status or state is stored additionally for each work item that has a progression threshold timestamp that is in the past as disclosed by Fletcher et al. to identify a pattern of interest to a user and may notify the user when the pattern occurs (Fletcher et al. [para. 0827]), in a manner that would yield predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention.
Regarding Claim 7, Templeton et al. and Fletcher et al. combined disclose the method, wherein one or more lifecycle status or state has stored a plurality of uniquely identifiable progression threshold time periods whereby one is specifically acquired to generate and store a progression threshold timestamp. Fletcher et al. discloses this limitation. (Thresholds can be set on the distribution of the state of each individual KPI and if the distribution thresholds are exceeded then an alert/alarm can be generated. Fletcher et al. [para. 0225-0229, 0571-0574 (receiving user input to set a threshold); Fig. 45 A]. …The KPI module 240 can receive input to define one or more thresholds for one or more KPIs. …. The entity definitions, the service definitions, and the KPI definitions can be stored in the data store(s) 290 that are coupled to the service monitoring system 210. Fletcher et al. [para. 0257-0262, 0277 (event data), 0501-0507 (static and dynamic monitoring), 0608-0609 (visualization over time period); Fig. 31D-31F]. … The service monitoring data can include, and is not limited to, KPI data (e.g., KPI values, KPI states, timestamps, etc.) and KPI specifications. … The search information 34003 can include one or more record selection components 34005 to identify the KPI names and/or corresponding KPI states to search for in the service monitoring data store Fletcher et al. [para. 0737-0739, 0759]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of workflow management before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to monitor the work item information to include one or more lifecycle status or state has stored a plurality of uniquely identifiable progression threshold time periods whereby one is specifically acquired to generate and store a progression threshold timestamp as disclosed by Fletcher et al. to provide users with insight to the performance of monitored services, such as, services pertaining to an information technology (IT) environment (Fletcher et al. [para. 0213]), in a manner that would yield predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention.
Regarding Claim 8, Templeton et al. and Fletcher et al. combined disclose the method, wherein presented progression threshold timestamps include those that have been manually entered by users via a user interface. Fletcher et al. discloses this limitation. (A graphical interface can be provided to facilitate user input for creating one or more thresholds for each KPI, naming the states for the KPI, and associating a visual indicator (e.g., color, pattern) to represent a respective state. Fletcher et al. [para. 0224-0227]. … Input (e.g., user input) can be received that defines one or more thresholds for the counts of each state in a defined (e.g., user-defined) time window for each KPI. Fletcher et al. [para. 0716, 1054, 1183-1185]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of workflow management before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to monitor the work item information to include presented progression threshold timestamps include those that have been manually entered by users via a user interface as disclosed by Fletcher et al. to provide users with insight to the performance of monitored services, such as, services pertaining to an information technology (IT) environment (Fletcher et al. [para. 0213]), in a manner that would yield predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention.
Regarding Claim 9, Templeton et al. and Fletcher et al. combined disclose the method, wherein only business work hours are included in a progression threshold time period for generating a progression threshold timestamp. Fletcher et al. discloses this limitation. (With a time varying static thresholds, a user may configure the thresholds based on time frames so that alarms would be avoided when the behavior is expected and alarms would be activated for abnormal behavior. The time frames may be based on any unit of time, such as for example, time of the day, days of the week, certain months, holiday seasons or other duration of time. The time frames may apply in a cyclical manner, such that each of the multiple sets of KPI thresholds may apply sequentially over and over, for example, a first set of KPI thresholds may apply during weekdays and a second set of KPI thresholds may apply during weekends and the sets may be repeated for each consecutive week. Fletcher et al. [para. 0680-0685]. … the user may specify thresholds for the first time frame (e.g., working hours). Fletcher et al. [para. 0691]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of workflow management before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to monitor the work item information to include only business work hours are included in a progression threshold time period for generating a progression threshold timestamp as disclosed by Fletcher et al. to provide users with insight to the performance of monitored services, such as, services pertaining to an information technology (IT) environment (Fletcher et al. [para. 0213]), in a manner that would yield predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention.
Regarding Claim 10, Templeton et al. and Fletcher et al. combined disclose the method, wherein only business work hours are included in a progression threshold time period for generating a progression threshold timestamp. Fletcher et al. discloses this limitation. (With a time varying static thresholds, a user may configure the thresholds based on time frames so that alarms would be avoided when the behavior is expected and alarms would be activated for abnormal behavior. The time frames may be based on any unit of time, such as for example, time of the day, days of the week, certain months, holiday seasons or other duration of time. The time frames may apply in a cyclical manner, such that each of the multiple sets of KPI thresholds may apply sequentially over and over, for example, a first set of KPI thresholds may apply during weekdays and a second set of KPI thresholds may apply during weekends and the sets may be repeated for each consecutive week. Fletcher et al. [para. 0680-0685]. … the user may specify thresholds for the first time frame (e.g., working hours). Fletcher et al. [para. 0691]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of workflow management before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to monitor the work item information to include only business work hours are included in a progression threshold time period for generating a progression threshold timestamp as disclosed by Fletcher et al. to provide users with insight to the performance of monitored services, such as, services pertaining to an information technology (IT) environment (Fletcher et al. [para. 0213]), in a manner that would yield predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention.
Regarding Claim 11, Templeton et al. discloses an apparatus comprising: at least one computer processor coupled to at least one processor-readable storage device, wherein a processor-readable storage device includes one or more instructions executable by a computer processor to perform the following acts: (… systems and methods for integrating external data into a graphical user interface of an issue tracking system. Templeton et al. [para. 0002-0004, 0017-0024]… the processing unit 502 may communicate with one or more machine readable storage (memory) devices which store computer readable instructions and/or data which are executed by the processing unit 502 to control operation of the processing system. Templeton et al. [para. 0125-0127, 0135]):
store, from user input, a progression threshold time period for each of a plurality of work item lifecycle statuses or states; (… systems and methods for operating an issue tracking system to receive external data as input such that the external data can be displayed within a common graphical user interface with individual tickets tracked by the issue tracking system. … a user of the issue tracking system can quickly and easily determine whether all steps/operations necessary to close a ticket or perform another task with the ticket are conveniently presented within the ticket itself. … The user of the laptop can operate the graphical user interface of the frontend application to access information, such as issues/tickets, stored by the backend application. …more than one issue report can be updated and/or modified in response to a single input. Templeton et al. [para. 0028-0032, 0036-0042 (generation of status visualization, modification in response to input)]);
Templeton et al. fails to explicitly disclose instructions to generate and store progression threshold timestamps. Fletcher et al. discloses these limitations. (Thresholds can be set on the distribution of the state of each individual KPI and if the distribution thresholds are exceeded then an alert/alarm can be generated. Fletcher et al. [para. 0225-0229, 0571-0574 (receiving user input to set a threshold); Fig. 45 A]. … a service-monitoring dashboard… can display KPI widgets providing a numerical or graphical representation of the value 108 for a respective KPI 106. Fletcher et al. [para. 0241-0245; Fig. 35, 40-42]. …The KPI module 240 can receive input to define one or more thresholds for one or more KPIs. …. The entity definitions, the service definitions, and the KPI definitions can be stored in the data store(s) 290 that are coupled to the service monitoring system 210. Fletcher et al. [para. 0257-0262, 0277 (event data), 0501-0507 (static and dynamic monitoring), 0608-0609 (visualization over time period); Fig. 31D-31F]. … the system may be configured to generate suggested thresholds. Fletcher et al. [para. 0665-0667]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of workflow management before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to monitor the work item information to include instructions to generate and store progression threshold timestamps as disclosed by Fletcher et al. to provide users with insight to the performance of monitored services, such as, services pertaining to an information technology (IT) environment (Fletcher et al. [para. 0213]), in a manner that would yield predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention.
present progression threshold timestamps to users; wherein a progression threshold timestamp is determined as the date and time that the lifecycle status or state of a work item is set or changed plus the progression threshold time period that is stored for the status or state plus or minus any adjustment that might be applied; (… the issue tracking system can be configured to display that a static analysis process has been complete/passed for N hours, based on a time difference from a render time of a graphical user interface and a timestamp at which the most recent status message relating to the status analysis process was received. In other cases, numerical status (e.g., percent complete, number of remaining tasks, and so on) can be plotted over time by the issue tracking system after receiving periodic updates from an external system. Templeton et al. [para. 0048-0051]);
wherein a user is an agent of an organization that uses the apparatus. (… an issue tracking system may be used by a team of software developers to track work items related to maintaining and improving a particular software product. Templeton et al. [para. 0017-0018, 0021-0022, 0047]).
Regarding Claim 12, Templeton et al. and Fletcher et al. combined disclose an apparatus, wherein the apparatus is further caused to: monitor work item progression threshold timestamps to find those that are in the past; Fletcher et al. discloses this limitation. (Thresholds can be set on the distribution of the state of each individual KPI and if the distribution thresholds are exceeded then an alert/alarm can be generated. Fletcher et al. [para. 0226-0229, 0662-0663, 0680]. … performance of a service can be assessed using a KPI's values that may change over time. As the KPI values change, they may exceed a specific threshold or fall below a specific threshold, which may cause the state of the KPI to change over time Fletcher et al. [para. 0693, 0820 (display KPI label (green, yellow, red, critical), 0881-0885 (gauge with time range); Fig. 34AQ, 40]. … The service monitoring data can include, and is not limited to, KPI data (e.g., KPI values, KPI states, timestamps, etc.) and KPI specifications. … The search information 34003 can include one or more record selection components 34005 to identify the KPI names and/or corresponding KPI states to search for in the service monitoring data store Fletcher et al. [para. 0737-0739, 0759]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of workflow management before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to monitor the work item information to include monitor work item progression threshold timestamps to find those that are in the past as disclosed by Fletcher et al. to provide users with insight to the performance of monitored services, such as, services pertaining to an information technology (IT) environment (Fletcher et al. [para. 0213]), in a manner that would yield predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention.
and store a predetermined alert status or state for each work item that has a progression threshold timestamp that is in the past. Fletcher et al. discloses this limitation. (Thresholds can be set on the distribution of the state of each individual KPI and if the distribution thresholds are exceeded then an alert/alarm can be generated. Fletcher et al. [para. 0226-0229, 0662-0663, 0680]. … performance of a service can be assessed using a KPI's values that may change over time. Fletcher et al. [para. 0693, 0820 (display KPI label (green, yellow, red, critical), 0881-0885 (gauge with time range); Fig. 34AQ, 40]. … the values (e.g., values 108A) produced by a search query for a KPI (e.g., KPI 106A) by executing the search query on a schedule are stored in a data store. Fletcher et al. [para. 0243, 0246 (historic searches on data)]. … , the computing machine derives one or more values for each of the identified KPIs. … The derived value(s) for each KPI can be stored in an index. Fletcher et al. [para. 0628-0629, 0723-0724, 0851-0852 (historic events)]. … The KPI values derived over time may be stored to build a valuable repository of current and historical performance information for the service, which may itself be queried. Fletcher et al. [para. 1165]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of workflow management before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to monitor the work item information to include store a predetermined alert status or state for each work item that has a progression threshold timestamp that is in the past as disclosed by Fletcher et al. to identify a pattern of interest to a user and may notify the user when the pattern occurs (Fletcher et al. [para. 0827]), in a manner that would yield predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention.
Regarding Claim 13, Templeton et al. and Fletcher et al. combined disclose an apparatus, wherein the apparatus is further caused to store, from user input, a plurality of uniquely identifiable progression threshold time periods for each lifecycle status or state whereby one is specifically acquired to generate and store a progression threshold timestamp. Fletcher et al. discloses this limitation. (Thresholds can be set on the distribution of the state of each individual KPI and if the distribution thresholds are exceeded then an alert/alarm can be generated. Fletcher et al. [para. 0225-0229, 0571-0574 (receiving user input to set a threshold); Fig. 45 A]. …The KPI module 240 can receive input to define one or more thresholds for one or more KPIs. …. The entity definitions, the service definitions, and the KPI definitions can be stored in the data store(s) 290 that are coupled to the service monitoring system 210. Fletcher et al. [para. 0257-0262, 0277 (event data), 0501-0507 (static and dynamic monitoring), 0608-0609 (visualization over time period); Fig. 31D-31F]. … The service monitoring data can include, and is not limited to, KPI data (e.g., KPI values, KPI states, timestamps, etc.) and KPI specifications. … The search information 34003 can include one or more record selection components 34005 to identify the KPI names and/or corresponding KPI states to search for in the service monitoring data store Fletcher et al. [para. 0737-0739, 0759]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of workflow management before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to monitor the work item information to include the apparatus is further caused to store, from user input, a plurality of uniquely identifiable progression threshold time periods for each lifecycle status or state whereby one is specifically acquired to generate and store a progression threshold timestamp as disclosed by Fletcher et al. to provide users with insight to the performance of monitored services, such as, services pertaining to an information technology (IT) environment (Fletcher et al. [para. 0213]), in a manner that would yield predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention.
Regarding Claim 14, Templeton et al. and Fletcher et al. combined disclose an apparatus, wherein the apparatus is further caused to present progression threshold timestamps including those that are manually entered by users via a user interface. Fletcher et al. discloses this limitation. (A graphical interface can be provided to facilitate user input for creating one or more thresholds for each KPI, naming the states for the KPI, and associating a visual indicator (e.g., color, pattern) to represent a respective state. Fletcher et al. [para. 0224-0227]. … Input (e.g., user input) can be received that defines one or more thresholds for the counts of each state in a defined (e.g., user-defined) time window for each KPI. Fletcher et al. [para. 0716, 1054, 1183-1185]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of workflow management before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to monitor the work item information to include the apparatus is further caused to present progression threshold timestamps including those that are manually entered by users via a user interface as disclosed by Fletcher et al. to provide users with insight to the performance of monitored services, such as, services pertaining to an information technology (IT) environment (Fletcher et al. [para. 0213]), in a manner that would yield predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention.
Regarding Claim 15, Templeton et al. and Fletcher et al. combined disclose an apparatus, wherein the apparatus is further caused to include only business work hours in a progression threshold time period. Fletcher et al. discloses this limitation. (With a time varying static thresholds, a user may configure the thresholds based on time frames so that alarms would be avoided when the behavior is expected and alarms would be activated for abnormal behavior. The time frames may be based on any unit of time, such as for example, time of the day, days of the week, certain months, holiday seasons or other duration of time. The time frames may apply in a cyclical manner, such that each of the multiple sets of KPI thresholds may apply sequentially over and over, for example, a first set of KPI thresholds may apply during weekdays and a second set of KPI thresholds may apply during weekends and the sets may be repeated for each consecutive week. Fletcher et al. [para. 0680-0685]. … the user may specify thresholds for the first time frame (e.g., working hours). Fletcher et al. [para. 0691]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of workflow management before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to monitor the work item information to include the apparatus is further caused to include only business work hours in a progression threshold time period as disclosed by Fletcher et al. to provide users with insight to the performance of monitored services, such as, services pertaining to an information technology (IT) environment (Fletcher et al. [para. 0213]), in a manner that would yield predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention.
Regarding Claim 16, Templeton et al. discloses a system comprising: at least one computer processor coupled to at least one processor-readable storage device; … systems and methods for integrating external data into a graphical user interface of an issue tracking system. Templeton et al. [para. 0002-0004, 0017-0024] … server 112 can leverage such resources to instantiate a number of discrete subservices or purpose-configured modules, containers, virtual or physical networks, or virtual machines each configured to perform, coordinate, host, serve, or otherwise provide one or more services, functions, or operations of the host server 112, such as an issue tracking service 116. Templeton et al. [para. 0101-0107]. … the processing unit 502 may communicate with one or more machine readable storage (memory) devices which store computer readable instructions and/or data which are executed by the processing unit 502 to control operation of the processing system. Templeton et al. [para. 0125-0127, 0135]);
a status management module for storage of work item statuses or states and their progression threshold time period; (… a user of the issue tracking system can quickly and easily determine whether all steps/operations necessary to close a ticket or perform another task with the ticket are conveniently presented within the ticket itself. … The user of the laptop can operate the graphical user interface of the frontend application to access information, such as issues/tickets, stored by the backend application. …more than one issue report can be updated and/or modified in response to a single input. Templeton et al. [para. 0028-0032, 0036-0042 (generation of status visualization, modification in response to input)]);
Templeton et al. fails to explicitly disclose a workflow module for storage of instructions to generate progression threshold timestamps via a processor. Fletcher et al. discloses these limitations. (Thresholds can be set on the distribution of the state of each individual KPI and if the distribution thresholds are exceeded then an alert/alarm can be generated. Fletcher et al. [para. 0225-0229, 0571-0574 (receiving user input to set a threshold); Fig. 45 A]. … a service-monitoring dashboard… can display KPI widgets providing a numerical or graphical representation of the value 108 for a respective KPI 106. Fletcher et al. [para. 0241-0245; Fig. 35, 40-42]. …The KPI module 240 can receive input to define one or more thresholds for one or more KPIs. …. The entity definitions, the service definitions, and the KPI definitions can be stored in the data store(s) 290 that are coupled to the service monitoring system 210. Fletcher et al. [para. 0257-0262, 0277 (event data), 0501-0507 (static and dynamic monitoring), 0608-0609 (visualization over time period); Fig. 31D-31F]. … the system may be configured to generate suggested thresholds. Fletcher et al. [para. 0665-0667]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of workflow management before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to monitor the work item information to include a workflow module for storage of instructions to generate progression threshold timestamps via a processor as disclosed by Fletcher et al. to provide users with insight to the performance of monitored services, such as, services pertaining to an information technology (IT) environment (Fletcher et al. [para. 0213]), in a manner that would yield predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention.
and storage of one or more data presentation module user interface for presenting progression threshold timestamps to users; wherein a progression threshold timestamp is determined as the date and time that the status or state of a work item is set or changed plus the progression threshold time period stored for the work item plus or minus any adjustment that might be applied; (… the issue tracking system can be configured to display that a static analysis process has been complete/passed for N hours, based on a time difference from a render time of a graphical user interface and a timestamp at which the most recent status message relating to the status analysis process was received. In other cases, numerical status (e.g., percent complete, number of remaining tasks, and so on) can be plotted over time by the issue tracking system after receiving periodic updates from an external system. Templeton et al. [para. 0048-0051]);
wherein a user is an agent of an organization that uses the system. (… an issue tracking system may be used by a team of software developers to track work items related to maintaining and improving a particular software product. Templeton et al. [para. 0017-0018, 0021-0022, 0047]).
Regarding Claim 17, Templeton et al. and Fletcher et al. combined disclose a system, further comprising: an alert status or state identified in the status management module; and a workflow to monitor work item progression threshold timestamps to find those that are in the past and for those that are found, to set the alert status or state. Fletcher et al. discloses this limitation. (Thresholds can be set on the distribution of the state of each individual KPI and if the distribution thresholds are exceeded then an alert/alarm can be generated. Fletcher et al. [para. 0226-0229, 0662-0663, 0680]. … performance of a service can be assessed using a KPI's values that may change over time. Fletcher et al. [para. 0693, 0820 (display KPI label (green, yellow, red, critical), 0881-0885 (gauge with time range); Fig. 34AQ, 40]. … the values (e.g., values 108A) produced by a search query for a KPI (e.g., KPI 106A) by executing the search query on a schedule are stored in a data store. Fletcher et al. [para. 0243, 0246 (historic searches on data)]. … , the computing machine derives one or more values for each of the identified KPIs. … The derived value(s) for each KPI can be stored in an index. Fletcher et al. [para. 0628-0629, 0723-0724, 0851-0852 (historic events)]. … The KPI values derived over time may be stored to build a valuable repository of current and historical performance information for the service, which may itself be queried. Fletcher et al. [para. 1165]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of workflow management before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to monitor the work item information to include an alert status or state identified in the status management module; and a workflow to monitor work item progression threshold timestamps to find those that are in the past and for those that are found, to set the alert status or state as disclosed by Fletcher et al. to identify a pattern of interest to a user and may notify the user when the pattern occurs (Fletcher et al. [para. 0827]), in a manner that would yield predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention.
Regarding Claim 18, Templeton et al. and Fletcher et al. combined disclose a system, wherein the system includes configurable storage of a plurality of uniquely identifiable progression threshold time periods for each status or state whereby one is specifically acquired to generate and store a progression threshold timestamp. Fletcher et al. discloses this limitation. (Thresholds can be set on the distribution of the state of each individual KPI and if the distribution thresholds are exceeded then an alert/alarm can be generated. Fletcher et al. [para. 0225-0229, 0571-0574 (receiving user input to set a threshold); Fig. 45 A]. …The KPI module 240 can receive input to define one or more thresholds for one or more KPIs. …. The entity definitions, the service definitions, and the KPI definitions can be stored in the data store(s) 290 that are coupled to the service monitoring system 210. Fletcher et al. [para. 0257-0262, 0277 (event data), 0501-0507 (static and dynamic monitoring), 0608-0609 (visualization over time period); Fig. 31D-31F]. … The service monitoring data can include, and is not limited to, KPI data (e.g., KPI values, KPI states, timestamps, etc.) and KPI specifications. … The search information 34003 can include one or more record selection components 34005 to identify the KPI names and/or corresponding KPI states to search for in the service monitoring data store Fletcher et al. [para. 0737-0739, 0759]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of workflow management before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to monitor the work item information to include configurable storage of a plurality of uniquely identifiable progression threshold time periods for each status or state whereby one is specifically acquired to generate and store a progression threshold timestamp as disclosed by Fletcher et al. to provide users with insight to the performance of monitored services, such as, services pertaining to an information technology (IT) environment (Fletcher et al. [para. 0213]), in a manner that would yield predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention.
Regarding Claim 19, Templeton et al. and Fletcher et al. combined disclose a system, wherein the system includes presentation of progression threshold timestamps including those that are manually entered by users via a user interface. Fletcher et al. discloses this limitation. (A graphical interface can be provided to facilitate user input for creating one or more thresholds for each KPI, naming the states for the KPI, and associating a visual indicator (e.g., color, pattern) to represent a respective state. Fletcher et al. [para. 0224-0227]. … Input (e.g., user input) can be received that defines one or more thresholds for the counts of each state in a defined (e.g., user-defined) time window for each KPI. Fletcher et al. [para. 0716, 1054, 1183-1185]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of workflow management before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to monitor the work item information to include presentation of progression threshold timestamps including those that are manually entered by users via a user interface as disclosed by Fletcher et al. to provide users with insight to the performance of monitored services, such as, services pertaining to an information technology (IT) environment (Fletcher et al. [para. 0213]), in a manner that would yield predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention.
Regarding Claim 20, Templeton et al. and Fletcher et al. combined disclose a system, wherein the system includes only business work hours in a progression threshold time period. Fletcher et al. discloses this limitation. (With a time varying static thresholds, a user may configure the thresholds based on time frames so that alarms would be avoided when the behavior is expected and alarms would be activated for abnormal behavior. The time frames may be based on any unit of time, such as for example, time of the day, days of the week, certain months, holiday seasons or other duration of time. The time frames may apply in a cyclical manner, such that each of the multiple sets of KPI thresholds may apply sequentially over and over, for example, a first set of KPI thresholds may apply during weekdays and a second set of KPI thresholds may apply during weekends and the sets may be repeated for each consecutive week. Fletcher et al. [para. 0680-0685]. … the user may specify thresholds for the first time frame (e.g., working hours). Fletcher et al. [para. 0691]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of workflow management before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to monitor the work item information to include only business work hours in a progression threshold time period as disclosed by Fletcher et al. to provide users with insight to the performance of monitored services, such as, services pertaining to an information technology (IT) environment (Fletcher et al. [para. 0213]), in a manner that would yield predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Carter et al. (US 2020/0293977) - a requestor may submit a plurality of work item requests. The user interface allows the requestor to input or select information about the work item; state change actions comprise at least one of: view list of a plurality of work items; view list of a plurality of human resources; view a single work item; and, actions performed by a human resource. The view list of a plurality of work items is periodically refreshed. The view list comprises a view of a personal queue associated with a human resource. The single work item view comprises viewing a representation of the work item that the human resource receives.
Correll et al. (US 8,156,050) - system includes a computing system and programs to acquire and manipulate project data. The project data is presented to a user for manipulation with a graphical user interface (GUI) with which the user can, at a glance, sense the status of requirements of a plurality of projects based on alert indicia, e.g. color coding schemes. The status of the requirements is determined by rules applied to project data. The user may drill down into a project using the GUI, select a group of projects related to a facility based on a status category, auto-initiate material movement forms, interface to a budgeting process, and provide timely notification of upcoming events and requirements via standard messaging processes. The installations dashboard may be used to modify project data. The dashboard may facilitate drill-down into secondary, e.g. sequential, processes to identify bottlenecks.
Luo (US 2005/0144057) - a work item displaying system and method which can be used for calculating priority indexes of work items of projects, prioritizing the work items in ascending order (or in descending order) based on their priority indexes, and displaying the prioritized work items.
Kinsella (US 2003/0171970) - interface creates tasks, assignments, and resources in the project scheduling program which are then used in the work order program. The interface enables a project manager to detect and update tasks in the scheduling program based on competed work orders in the work order program, updates and gives progress status for tasks in the project schedule from actual work order data, and updates schedule dates for the work orders issued based on project scheduling needs such that work orders may be generated in draft from scheduled project tasks in advance.
Soman et al. (US 2017/0161666) - computer-implemented method executed by a computing device for providing the process transaction visibility of one or more steps in a process lifecycle. The method includes identifying a current status of one or more process transaction at a first step of a process lifecycle based on a unique ID tagged to the process transaction at the first step; determining a change in the status of the process transaction at the first step based a completion of a milestone of the one or more process transaction and progression of the one or more process transaction to a second step of the process lifecycle; graphical representation of KPIs views illustrating functional flow in the system 200 of FIG. The business tracking view of FIG. 5A provides a granular level information such as a right-time tracking view for the process transactions being processed to track adherence to specific SLAs, to address the problems or issues at an early stage in a process workflow by getting right-time updates from ongoing transactions in real-time.
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 LETORIA G KNIGHT whose telephone number is (571)270-0485. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am-5pm.
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, Rutao WU can be reached at 571-272-6045. 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.
/L.G.K/Examiner, Art Unit 3623 /RUTAO WU/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3623