DETAILED ACTION
This Communication is a First Action on the Merits (FAOM). Claims 1-20, as originally filed, are pending and have been considered as follows.
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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5, 10, 11, 13 and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Zhakov et al (2014/0079207 A1).
As per Claim 1, Zhakov teaches a system for automatic traffic routing, the system comprising: one or more processors (Page 3, Paragraph [0049]; Page 4, Paragraph [0058]); and memory in communication with the one or more processors and storing instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors (Page 3, Paragraph [0049]; Page 4, Paragraph [0058]), are configured to cause the system to: receive data associated with an application (Figure 32 – Reference 530; Page 22, Paragraph [0263]).
(Note: Zhakov teaches a system and method for providing dynamic elasticity of contact center resources. An application data stack [i.e. recited stack] is being considered to be a collection of integrated cloud-based tools/technologies that serve as the backbone for data driven operations from raw input to actionable intelligence)
(Note: In paragraph [0263], Zhakov describes a health monitor that collects healthy states [i.e. operating within tolerance], transitions [i.e. what happens when operating state falls outside of tolerance] and migration procedures [i.e. actions taken to alleviate stress on the system]. Zhakov indicates an expert system [i.e. machine learning model – MLM] learns and recommends optimal deployments based on monitored conditions)
Zhakov also teaches responsive to receiving the data, assign a first portion of application traffic to be routed to a new stack, and a second portion of the application traffic to be routed to a previous stack (Figure 32 – Reference 528; Page 22, Paragraph [0266]); continuously monitor the application traffic by utilizing a plurality of monitoring systems (Figure 32 – Reference 526; Page 22, Paragraph [0266]).
(Note: In paragraph [0266], Zhakov describes an elasticity server in constant communication with a monitoring server. Zhakov indicates the elasticity server analyzes and compares the collected data to a variety of predetermined thresholds to identify if there is a condition that calls for the adjustment of contact center resources [i.e. rerouting some amount traffic to a different stack based on detected actual/run time conditions] due to some degree of variance from normally anticipated conditions [e.g. communication traffic greater/less than established threshold requirement])
Zhakov further teaches utilize a machine learning model (MLM) to iteratively: transmit one or more respective monitoring queries to each of the plurality of monitoring systems (What/If test scenario: Figure 32 – Reference 528; Page 22, Paragraphs [0263] and [0271]); determine whether at least one aspect of a first monitoring query of the one or more respective monitoring queries exceeds a threshold (Page 22, Paragraph [0266]).
(Note: In paragraph [0271], Zhakov describes a what/if test scenario to test all of certain aspects [i.e. iterative query testing] of the selected adjustment strategy in order to assess the risk of implementing the adjustment strategy. In paragraph [0271], Zhakov describes determining that a server load is more or less than a predetermined threshold load and then taking action to mitigate the fact that the server load is not in compliance with the specified limits)
Zhakov additionally teaches responsive to determining that the at least one aspect of the first monitoring query does not exceed the threshold: assign a third portion of the application traffic to be routed to the new stack by modifying the first portion of the application traffic (Figure 32 – Reference 528; Page 19, Paragraphs [0232] – [0236]; Page 20, Paragraphs [0239], [0241] and [0243]); and assign a fourth portion of the application traffic to be routed to the previous stack by modifying the second portion of the application traffic (Figure 32 – Reference 528; Page 19, Paragraphs [0232] – [0236]; Page 20, Paragraphs [0239], [0241] and [0243]).
(Note: In paragraphs [0232] – [0236]; Zhakov describes the elasticity server implementing an elasticity function that takes input functions [i.e. the current condition and configuration of the system with respect to the established operating thresholds] and generates output parameters in response [i.e. a solution that adjusts the current out of tolerance system with a new configuration that brings the system back within the established threshold conditions that define a healthy system. In paragraphs [0239], [0241] and [0243]; Zhakov provides context and further examples describing this process)
As per Claim 2, Zhakov teaches wherein the data comprises one or more operational features of the application as described in Claim 1.
As per Claims 3, 11 and 19, Zhakov teaches receiving, via a graphical user interface (GUI), user input associated with the application, wherein assigning the first portion and second portion of the application traffic is further responsive to receiving the user input (Page 6, Paragraphs [0075] and [0076]; Page 13, Paragraph [0160]; Page 16, Paragraph [0208]; Page 23, Paragraph [0274]).
(Note: In paragraph [0274], Zhakov indicates that the elasticity server prompts an administrator to manually perform the adjustment [i.e. receiving, via a graphical user interface (GUI), user input associated with the application, wherein assigning the first portion and second portion of the application traffic is further responsive to receiving the user input])
As per Claims 5 and 13, Zhakov teaches modifying the first portion of the application traffic comprises increasing the first portion of the application traffic; and modifying the second portion of the application traffic comprises decreasing the second portion of the application traffic as described in Claim 1.
As per Claim 10, Zhakov teaches a method and system as described in Claim 1.
As per Claim 13, The system of claim 10, wherein: modifying the first portion of the application traffic comprises increasing the first portion of the application traffic; and modifying the second portion of the application traffic comprises decreasing the second portion of the application traffic.
As per Claim 18, Zhakov teaches a method and system as described in Claims 1 and 10.
As per Claim 20, Zhakov teaches wherein modifying the first portion of the application traffic comprises increasing the first portion of the application traffic as described in Claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 4, 6-9, 12 and 14-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhakov et al (2014/0079207 A1) in view of Baskaran et al (11,392,605 B1).
As per Claims 4 and 12, Zhakov teaches the system of Claims 1 and 10; but does not teach utilizing the MLM to iteratively: determine whether a first monitoring system of the plurality of monitoring systems is not functioning. However, Baskaran teaches determine whether a first monitoring system of the plurality of monitoring systems is not functioning (Column 22, Lines 22-47; Column 60, Lines 24-58).
(Note: In Column 60, Lines 24-58; Baskaran describes a data intake and query system that includes a monitoring platform responsible for real-time monitoring and observation of data environments. The platform monitors software applications along with hardware and software infrastructure. Baskaran indicates the monitoring platform is capable of detecting failures in hardware or software as well as the over/under utilization of resources)
The combination of Zhakov and Baskaran teaches responsive to determining the first monitoring system is not functioning, segregate the first monitoring system from the remaining monitoring systems. (Note: The elasticity function described by Zhakov enable to allocation/enabling or removal/disabling of functional elements [i.e. first monitoring system]. The disabling of a non-functional monitoring system and the allocation of an alternative monitoring system is found to read on the claimed language)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system taught by Zhakov with the system taught by Baskaran to produce a streamlined infrastructure that is easier to manage, monitor and scale while simplifying troubleshooting due to fewer components it is easier to diagnose and resolve system issues.
As per Claims 6-9 and 14-16, the combination of Zhakov and Baskaran teaches wherein the at least one aspect of the first monitoring query comprises one or more of an error count, a health status, a response time, a stage duration, or combinations thereof (Zhakov: Figure 32 – Reference 530; Page 21, Paragraph [0254] and [0257]; Page 25; Paragraph [0298]; Baskaran: Column 60, Lines 29-58; Column 65, Lines 7-18).
The combination of Zhakov and Baskaran also teaches wherein the error count is based on a volume of service associated with the application; wherein the response time comprises an amount of time elapsed before a portion of traffic is routed to the new stack; and wherein the stage duration corresponds to a period of time during which a number of errors are received (Zhakov: Figure 32 – Reference 530; Page 21, Paragraph [0254] and [0257]; Page 25; Paragraph [0298]; Baskaran: Column 60, Lines 29-58; Column 65, Lines 7-18).
(Note: In Figure 32 of Zhakov a health monitor is shown [i.e. determination of health status]. In paragraphs [0257] and [0298], Zhakov describes monitoring the health of a particular deployment or state and generating metadata related to that state [average handling time/abandonment rate - period of time during which a number of errors are received]. Column 60, Lines 29-58; Baskaran indicates the monitoring platform determines latency [i.e. a period of time during which a number of errors are received] and response time. In Column 65, Lines 7-18; Baskaran describes key performance indicators including response time, number of faults detected [i.e. number or errors])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system taught by Zhakov with the system taught by Baskaran to produce a streamlined infrastructure that is easier to manage, monitor and scale while simplifying troubleshooting due to fewer components it is easier to diagnose and resolve system issues.
As per Claim 17, the combination of Zhakov and Baskaran teaches wherein the instructions are further configured to cause the system to: responsive to determining that the at least one aspect of the first monitoring query exceeds the threshold, assign a fifth portion of the application traffic to be routed to the previous stack as described in Claims 1 and 10 above. (Note: The use of the elasticity function in combination with the health monitor described by Zhakov allows for the deployment of solutions designed to bring the system back into the tolerance in according with predetermined thresholds.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system taught by Zhakov with the system taught by Baskaran to produce a streamlined infrastructure that is easier to manage, monitor and scale while simplifying troubleshooting due to fewer components it is easier to diagnose and resolve system issues.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Muenkel et al (2024/0202190 A1), Popelka et al (2023/0090607 A1), Liu et al (2016/0103665 A1), Zhang et al (2013/0073542 A1), Merza et al (2013/0326620 A1), Coates et al (9,286,413 B1) O’Neill et al (2019/0332554 A1) and Stickle (10,560,353 B1). Each of these describes systems and methods of implementing communications in a packet switched environment.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KHARYE POPE whose telephone number is (571)270-5587. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8AM - 4PM.
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, Ahmad Matar can be reached at 571-272-7488. 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.
KHARYE POPE
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2693
/KHARYE POPE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2693