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 .
This communication is in response to the Amendment filed 12/30/2025.
Response to Arguments
Claims 1 – 20 are pending in this Office Action. After a further search and a thorough examination of the present application, claims 1 – 20 remain rejected.
Applicant's arguments filed with respect to claims 1 – 20 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that the amendment presented is not disclosed in the cited references.
In response to the amendments filed and the arguments presented the Examiner disagrees and submits that Cheng in combination with Li and further in view of Chen teaches the amendment presented in regards with determining that the information handling system is set to a maximum performance mode and in response to the information handling system being set to the maximum performance mode increase a data expiration of a second data type. Cheng teaches in paragraphs 195 – 198 better performance being represented and the data collection device determines based in threshold the indicator and a collection interval for the data to be collected. Furthermore, paragraphs 278 – 279 teach the key performance indicator and values of the collection frequencies used and the KPI is correlated to the size of the data which is correlated with the performance being poor, average or good/maximum.
Remaining claims in instant application recite the same subject matter and for the same reasons as cited above the rejection is maintained. Hence, Applicant’s arguments do not distinguish the claimed invention over the prior art of record. In light of the foregoing arguments, the 103 rejections are maintained.
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 pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter 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 pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) 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 nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a), the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned at the time any inventions covered therein were made absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and invention dates of each claim that was not commonly owned at the time a later invention was made in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(c) and potential pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(e), (f) or (g) prior art under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a).
Claims 1 – 20 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Cheng et al. (US 2023/0142028 A1) (‘Cheng’ herein after) further in view of LI et al. (US 2018/0159746 A1) (‘Li’ herein after) further in view of CHEN et al. (US 2017/0085447 A1) (‘Chen’ herein after).
With respect to claim 1, 9, 17,
Cheng teaches an information handling system comprising: a memory to store a data tolerance table and a plurality of data collection policies (figure 15, 18A, 18B and paragraphs 26 – 28 and 31 – 35 teaches data collection and the data collection policies along with the intervals or periodicities for collection, Cheng); and an embedded controller to communicate with the memory, the embedded controller to: create the data tolerance table (paragraphs 38 – 41 and 44 – 46, Cheng); receive the data collection policies (figures 15, 18A, 18B and paragraphs 53 – 66, Cheng); based on the data collection policies, create a timer associated with a data collection frequency of a first data type identified in a first data collection policy of the data collection policies (paragraphs 38 – 41 and 44 – 46, Cheng); determine a data collection duration for the data collection frequency of the first data type (figures 15, 18A, 18B and paragraphs 53 – 66 and 143 – 147, Cheng), determine that the information handling system is set to a maximum performance mode (paragraphs 195 – 198 and 278 – 279, Cheng) in response to the information handling system being set to the maximum performance mode increase a data expiration of a second data (paragraph 254 – 257 teaches data collection device may alternatively increase the collection frequency directly and the available collection interval is reduced, so that the data collection amount is improved. Alternatively, the data collection device may decrease the collection frequency directly and the available collection interval is improved, so that the data collection amount is reduced, Cheng) and in response to the timer no longer being needed for any of the data collection policies, disable the timer (figures 15, 18A, 18B and paragraphs 53 – 66 and 143 – 147, Cheng).
Cheng teaches adjusting the periodicities and intervals but does not explicitly teach timers as claimed.
However, Li teaches creating timer and intervals for session and data reporting frequency and durations in paragraphs 71 and 90 – 102 teaching the duration of data collection process and the policy about the data collection relationship.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Li to the teachings of Cheng because both are in the same field of study, namely data collections policies and processing. Furthermore, Li teaches that the Data Collection Component (DC) can collect real-time data from input sources at service layer (e.g., other existing CSFs). The DC can use a procedure for data collection relationship and policy establishment and the related new message structure, a procedure for data collecting and reporting and the related new message structure; and a procedure for data collection relationship and policy updating, paragraphs 17 – 21, Li.
Cheng in combination with Li teaches adjusting the periodicities and intervals but does not explicitly teach the data collection policy identifies a time range of a day that the data is collected as claimed.
However, Chen teaches the data collection policy identifies a time range of a day that the data is collected in paragraph 297 stating a data collection node may be configured to collect data from one or more data sources based on a data collection policy, where the data collection policy instructs the data collection node to request data from one or more data sources based on a specified schedule. The schedule may instruct the data collection node, for example, to send data collection requests at particular intervals (e.g., once every minute, once every hour, etc.) … , within particular time constraints (e.g., send requests only between the hours of 8 AM and 9 PM, only on weekdays, etc.), or based on any other scheduling constraints.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Chen to the teachings of the combination of Cheng and Li because both are in the same field of study, namely data collections policies and processing. Furthermore, Chen teaches that a cloud computing management application includes the ability to collect data related to a collection of cloud computing resources from one or more cloud computing services and/or other sources. The collected data generally may include any data that provides information about the operating status, performance characteristics, relationships with other resources, cost data, or any other attributes of the resources. The data related to the cloud computing resources may originate from one or more cloud computing service providers (e.g., including various types of log data generated by the services) or may originate from other sources (e.g., from external monitoring tools or other applications, paragraphs 275 – 279, Chen.
With respect to claim 2, 10,
Cheng as modified teaches the information handling system of claim 1, wherein the embedded controller further to: determine a total number of data types for data collection in the data collection policies and based on the total number of data types exceeding a threshold number, update the data tolerance table (paragraphs 73 – 78 and 85 – 89, Cheng and paragraphs 98 – 103, Li).
With respect to claim 3, 11,
Cheng as modified teaches the information handling system of claim 2, wherein the update of the data tolerance table includes the embedded controller further to: increase a data tolerance for the second data type in the data tolerance table, wherein the second data type is not a data type identified in the data collection policies (figures 15, 18A, 18B and paragraphs 53 – 66 and 143 – 147, Cheng).
With respect to claim 4, 12, 18,
Cheng as modified teaches the information handling system of claim 3, wherein the increase of the data tolerance is only for a period of time that the total number of data types exceeds the threshold number, wherein the data tolerance for the second data type is decreased when the period of time expires (paragraphs 73 – 78, 85 – 89, 253 – 257, Cheng and paragraphs 110, 115 – 117, Li).
With respect to claim 5, 13,
Cheng as modified teaches the information handling system of claim 1, wherein each of the data collection policies identifies a different collection frequency for each of a plurality of data types identified in the respective data collection policy (figures 15, 18A, 18B and paragraphs 53 – 66 and 143 – 147, Cheng).
With respect to claim 6, 14, 19,
Cheng as modified teaches the information handling system of claim 1, wherein the embedded controller further to: determine a second data collection frequency for the second data type in a second data collection policy; based on the second data collection frequency, determine whether the second data collection frequency matches the created timer and if the second data collection frequency does not match the created timer, create a second timer for data collection of the second data type (paragraphs 73 – 78, 85 – 89, 253 – 257, Cheng and paragraphs 110, 115 – 117, Li).
With respect to claim 7, 15, 20,
Cheng as modified teaches the information handling system of claim 6, wherein the embedded controller to: if the second data collection frequency matches the created timer, utilize the created timer for data collection of the second data type (figures 15, 18A, 18B and paragraphs 53 – 66 and 143 – 147, Cheng and paragraphs 71 and 90 – 102, Li).
With respect to claim 8, 16,
Cheng as modified teaches the information handling system of claim 1, wherein the data collection policies are created based on the data tolerance table (paragraphs 73 – 78, 85 – 89, 253 – 257, Cheng).
Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 20160050514 A1 teaches a user interface, which can display, for example, graphs of collection statistics and trends (e.g., collection frequency, usage, temperature, etc.), collection reports, device settings, collection schedules, collection configurations, historical data, status information, collection policies, configuration options, device information, collection routes and information, alerts, etc.
US 7472182 B1 teaches collecting data for a storage area network includes providing a plurality of agents that collect data from objects of the storage area network, providing a plurality of data collection policies, where each of the policies indicates a type of data to be collected and a frequency of collection, and applying the policies to the agents, where the agents collect data according to the type of data and the frequencies indicated by the data collection policies. At least one of the agents may have a plurality of data collection policies applied thereto to cause the at least one agent to collect the types of data at the frequencies indicated by the merge of all of the data collection policies applied to the at least one agent.
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 extension fee 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.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NAVNEET K GMAHL whose telephone number is 571-272-5636.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, SANJIV SHAH can be reached on . The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/NAVNEET GMAHL/Examiner, Art Unit 2166 Dated: 1/23/2026
/SANJIV SHAH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2166
Prosecution Insights