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. DETAILED ACTION 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 a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more. Regarding independent claims the limitations identifying a time , as drafted, recites functions that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers a function that could reasonably be performed in the mind, including with the aid of pen and paper, but for the recitation of generic computer components. That is, the limitations as cited above as drafted, are functions that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, recite the abstract idea of a mental process. Thus, these limitation falls within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas under Prong 1. Under Prong 2, this judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. The claim recites the following additional limitations: media and processors . The additional elements are recited at a high-level of generality such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer, and/or mere computer components, MPEP 2106.05(f), and steps of receiving, updating , and sending do nothing more than add insignificant extra solution activity to the judicial exception of merely gathering data. Accordingly, the additional elements do not integrate the recited judicial exception into a practical application and the claim is therefore directed to the judicial exception. See MPEP 2106.05(g) (Ex. v. Consulting and updating an activity log, Ultramercial , 772 F.3d at 715, 112 USPQ2d at 1754). 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 integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional elements of media and processors , amount to no more than mere instructions, or generic computer/computer components to carry out the exception. Furthermore, the limitations directed to receiving, updating , and sending the courts have identified mere data gathering is well-understood, routine and conventional activity. See MPEP 2106.05(d) (Ex. iv. Storing and retrieving information in memory, Versata Dev. Group, Inc. v. SAP Am., Inc., 793 F.3d 1306, 1334, 115 USPQ2d 1681, 1701 (Fed. Cir. 2015); OIP Techs., 788 F.3d at 1363, 115 USPQ2d at 1092-93;). The recitation of generic computer instruction and computer components to apply the judicial exception, and mere data gathering do not amount to significantly more, thus, cannot provide an inventive concept. Accordingly, the claims are not patent eligible under 35 USC 101. Regarding claim 2 , 9, 10, 12, 13, 14, 16, 20 the limitations of details of identifying, determining of different power sources and metrics, determining impact, are functions that can be reasonably performed in the human mind , thus, additional mental process defined in the claims. The claim does not include any additional element, thus, no limitation that needs to be analyzed under prong 2 for practical application, or under step 2B for significantly more. Regarding claim 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 , 18, 19 the limitation of what information corresponds to, visual representations of an interface, details of interface elements, are considered mere instructions, or generic computer/computer components to carry out the exception Accordingly, the additional element recited in claim 3 fails to provide a practical application under prong 2, or amount to significantly more under step 2B. Regarding claim 15 the limitations of sending data is nothing more than insignificant extra solution activity which is not a practical application under prong 2. Under step 2B, the courts of identified the generic function of gathering/storing data, the results of the judicial exception, is well-understood, routine and conventional activity. See MPEP 2106.05(d) - i . Receiving or transmitting data over a network, e.g., using the Internet to gather data, Symantec, 838 F.3d at 1321, 120 USPQ2d at 1362 (utilizing an intermediary computer to forward information); TLI Communications LLC v. AV Auto. LLC, 823 F.3d 607, 610, 118 USPQ2d 1744, 1745 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (using a telephone for image transmission); OIP Techs., Inc., v. Amazon.com, Inc., 788 F.3d 1359, 1363, 115 USPQ2d 1090, 1093 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (sending messages over a network); buySAFE , Inc. v. Google, Inc., 765 F.3d 1350, 1355, 112 USPQ2d 1093, 1096 (Fed. Cir. 2014) (computer receives and sends information over a network); 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 1, 2-5, 7, 10-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mishra (Pub. No. US 2024/0427644 ) in view of Okamura (P ub . No. US 2025/0199855 ). Claim 1 , 11 Mishra teaches “o ne or more computer-readable media storing instructions which, when executed by one or more hardware processors, cause the hardware processors to perform actions comprising: receiving a request to schedule a computing operation to be performed ([0020] The computing device may identify a set of candidate execution environments for one or more received workloads and may corresponding governance controls for the workload.) ; identifying environmentally-friendly time slots for performing the computing operation, wherein the environmentally-friendly time slots correspond to times at which an environmental impact of performing the computing operation is below a threshold ([0005] determining the execution information associated with the candidate execution environment may include determining the carbon intensity average value for each time of multiple processing start times. [0053] The recommendation information 130 may be generated based on multiple workloads that include the workload 110. For example, the computing device 102 may determine a schedule to minimize the overall carbon intensity for multiple workloads that include the workload 110, based on the operating requirements of all of the multiple workloads. ) ; … and sending an indication to control a scheduling service to schedule the computing operation to be performed at the selected time slot ([0055] The computing device 102 may be configured to output a first indicator 118 that indicates the recommendation information 130. The first indicator 118 may be output as a message, notification, or other indication that includes all or part of the recommendation information 130. In certain indications, the first indicator 118 may include a button or other mechanism to receive approval (such as from the user) for the recommendation information 130 (such as approval to execute the workload 110 using the first execution environment 180). In certain implementations, the computing device 102 may further receive a second indicator 120 that confirms the first execution environment may be acceptable for processing the workload 110. For example, a user may accept the recommendation information 130 included within the first indicator 118. Based on the confirmation, the computing device 102 may generate a schedule to indicate when the workload 110 should be processed at the first execution environment. In certain implementations, based on the schedule, the computing device 102 may transfer the workload 110 to the first execution environment 180 for execution at the designated time (such as by transferring the workload 110 from a storage location to the first execution environment 180). In particular, based on the execution information 114, the computing device 102 may determine a schedule as explained above that identifies times and selected cloud computing environments to execute the workloads 110. This schedule may be determined to comply with timing requirements for the workload 110 and minimize predicted carbon emissions caused by executing the workload 110.)” receiving a selection of a selected time slot of the environmentally-friendly time slots via the user interface ( [0055] In certain indications, the first indicator 118 may include a button or other mechanism to receive approval (such as from the user) for the recommendation information 130 (such as approval to execute the workload 110 using the first execution environment 180). [0038] The second indicator 120 may be received from another computing device. For example, the second indicator 120 may be received in response to a user's actions on another computing device. In certain implementations, the second indicator 120 may indicate user feedback (such as metadata or an indication of user feedback) regarding the recommendation information 130. For example, the second indicator 120 may include approval or denial of all or part of the recommendation information 130, such as an approval of using the first execution environment 180 to execute the workload 110. In one particular implementation, the second indicator 120 may contain an identifier of the workload 110, the recommendation information 130, and an approval indicator (such as a Boolean true value) corresponding to the workload 110 and the recommendation information 130. [0039] In some implementations, the computing device 102 includes one or more input/output (I/O) devices that include one or more display devices, a keyboard, a stylus, one or more touchscreens, a mouse, a trackpad, a microphone, a camera, one or more speakers, haptic feedback devices, or other types of devices that enable a user to receive information from or provide information to the computing device 102.)”. However, Mishra may not explicitly teach additional limitations of the user interface. Okamura teaches “ updating a user interface to present the environmentally-friendly time slots to a user of the user interface ([Fig. 20 ] interface with environmentally-friendly time slots [ 0183] FIG. 20 is a diagram showing an example of the workload transfer information screen 13000. The workload transfer information screen 13000 includes a pre-transfer information display field 13100 in which a value 13101 of the power consumption amount in each time slot is displayed when the IT workload control processing S22 is not executed (when the execution timing (time slot) of the batch job is not changed), a post-transfer information display field 13200 in which an actual value 13102 of the power consumption amount in each time slot after execution of the IT workload control processing S22 is displayed, an effect display field 13300 in which information indicating an effect of the execution of the IT workload control processing S22 is displayed, a schedule change history display field 13400 in which the information of the batch workload whose execution timing (time slot) is changed from the IT workload control processing S22 is displayed, and a roger designation field 13500 in which the workload transfer information screen 13000 is closed. [0184] In each of the pre-transfer information display field 13100 and post-transfer information display field 13200, the actual value 13103 of the power generation amount of the renewable energy in each time slot is displayed as a comparison. [0185] In the effect display field 13300, information such as an increase rate of the utilization rate of the renewable energy and a decrease rate of cost per unit time calculated in the past predetermined period based on the IT workload control processing S22 is displayed. [0186] In the schedule change history display field 13400, information 13401 of the batch workload in which the time slot to be executed in the IT workload control processing S22 is changed and information 13402 of the batch workload in which the slot to be executed in the time slot after the most recent time slot is changed are displayed.) ”. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to apply the teachings of Okamura with the teachings of Mishra in order to provide a system that teaches a display of timeslots. The motivation for applying Okamura teaching with Mishra teaching is to provide a system that allows for situational awareness. Mishra, Okamura are analogous art directed towards processing jobs. Together Mishra, Okamura teaches every limitation of the claimed invention. Since the teachings were analogous art known at the filing time of invention, one of ordinary skill could have applied the teachings of Okamura with the teachings of Mishra by known methods and gained expected results. Claim 2 , the combination teaches the claim, wherein Mishra teaches “t he one or more computer-readable media of claim 1, wherein identifying the environmentally-friendly time slots comprises receiving, from a calculator service, an indication of the environmentally-friendly time slots based on energy consumption information retrieved by the calculator service from one or more external web services ([0052] Returning back to FIG. 1, the computing device 102 may select the first execution environment from the set of candidate execution environments 180, 182, 184 based on the execution information 114. The selection may be based on scheduling information 116 associated with the set of candidate execution environments 180, 182, 184, historic workload 110 scheduling data, or a combination thereof. In certain implementations, for each candidate execution environment of the set of candidate execution environments 180, 182, 184, determining the execution information 114 associated with the candidate execution environment may include determining the carbon intensity average value 128 for each time of multiple processing start times. For example, energy sources for certain execution environments may differ over the course of the day and may have different carbon intensities at those times of day. In such instances, different carbon intensity average values 128 may be determined at different times of day, and corresponding carbon intensity values 124 may similarly be determined for executing the workload 110 at different times of day. [0040] For example, the one or more networks 136 may include any type of communications network, such as a direct PC-to-PC connection, a local area network (LAN), a wide area network (WAN), a modem-to-modem connection, the Internet, intranet, extranet, cable transmission system, cellular communication network, any combination of the above, or any other communications network now known or later developed within which permits two or more electronic devices to communicate.) ” . Claim 3 , the combination teaches the claim, wherein Okamura teaches “t he one or more computer-readable media of claim 2, wherein the energy consumption information retrieved by the calculator service corresponds to a data center at which the computer operation is to be performed ([0049] The power consumption and price prediction program 9000 calculates a prediction value of the executable period and the power consumption amount of the workload to be executed in the future time slot, a prediction value of the power generation amount in the future time slot, a prediction value of a price of power in the future time slot, and the like. [0050] Further, the management computer 2000 further stores each database of a DC power prediction table 8100, a time slot table 8200, a delay limit time prediction distribution table 8300, a user policy table 8400, a workload table 8500, a workload power consumption prediction distribution table 8600, and a prediction workload table 8650. [0051] The DC power prediction table 8100 stores a power generation amount and a price of renewable energy predicted by the power consumption and price prediction program 9000, a predicted price of power provided by the power system, and actual values thereof. [0052] The time slot table 8200 stores information on each time slot such as a prediction value and an actual value of power consumption in each time slot, a target value of power consumption, the parameter α, and the risk allowance.) ” . Rationale to claim 1 is applied here. Claim 4 , the combination teaches the claim, wherein Okamura teaches “t he one or more computer-readable media of claim 1, wherein the environmentally-friendly time slots are presented to the user by visually differentiating the environmentally-friendly time slots from other time slots at which the environmental impact of performing the computing operation is at or above the threshold ([Fig. 20] interface [0183] FIG. 20 is a diagram showing an example of the workload transfer information screen 13000. The workload transfer information screen 13000 includes a pre-transfer information display field 13100 in which a value 13101 of the power consumption amount in each time slot is displayed when the IT workload control processing S22 is not executed (when the execution timing (time slot) of the batch job is not changed), a post-transfer information display field 13200 in which an actual value 13102 of the power consumption amount in each time slot after execution of the IT workload control processing S22 is displayed, an effect display field 13300 in which information indicating an effect of the execution of the IT workload control processing S22 is displayed, a schedule change history display field 13400 in which the information of the batch workload whose execution timing (time slot) is changed from the IT workload control processing S22 is displayed, and a roger designation field 13500 in which the workload transfer information screen 13000 is closed. [0184] In each of the pre-transfer information display field 13100 and post-transfer information display field 13200, the actual value 13103 of the power generation amount of the renewable energy in each time slot is displayed as a comparison. [0185] In the effect display field 13300, information such as an increase rate of the utilization rate of the renewable energy and a decrease rate of cost per unit time calculated in the past predetermined period based on the IT workload control processing S22 is displayed. [0186] In the schedule change history display field 13400, information 13401 of the batch workload in which the time slot to be executed in the IT workload control processing S22 is changed and information 13402 of the batch workload in which the slot to be executed in the time slot after the most recent time slot is changed are displayed. ) ” . Rationale to claim 1 is applied here. Claim 5 , the combination teaches the claim, wherein Okamura teaches “t he one or more computer-readable media of claim 4, wherein the user interface comprises a clock portion of a scheduling widget that shows selectable user interface elements corresponding to times at which the computing operation is able to be performed, and wherein the environmentally-friendly time slots are shown as a first set of the selectable user interface elements that are highlighted in the clock portion relative to the other time slots, which are shown as a second set of the selectable user interface elements ([Fig. 20] interface [0183] FIG. 20 is a diagram showing an example of the workload transfer information screen 13000. The workload transfer information screen 13000 includes a pre-transfer information display field 13100 in which a value 13101 of the power consumption amount in each time slot is displayed when the IT workload control processing S22 is not executed (when the execution timing (time slot) of the batch job is not changed), a post-transfer information display field 13200 in which an actual value 13102 of the power consumption amount in each time slot after execution of the IT workload control processing S22 is displayed, an effect display field 13300 in which information indicating an effect of the execution of the IT workload control processing S22 is displayed, a schedule change history display field 13400 in which the information of the batch workload whose execution timing (time slot) is changed from the IT workload control processing S22 is displayed, and a roger designation field 13500 in which the workload transfer information screen 13000 is closed. [0184] In each of the pre-transfer information display field 13100 ( i.e.widget ) and post-transfer information display field 13200, the actual value 13103 of the power generation amount of the renewable energy in each time slot is displayed as a comparison. [0185] In the effect display field 13300, information such as an increase rate of the utilization rate of the renewable energy and a decrease rate of cost per unit time calculated in the past predetermined period based on the IT workload control processing S22 is displayed. [0186] In the schedule change history display field 13400, information 13401 of the batch workload in which the time slot to be executed in the IT workload control processing S22 is changed and information 13402 of the batch workload in which the slot to be executed in the time slot after the most recent time slot is changed are displayed. ) ” . Rationale to claim 1 is applied here. Claim 7 , the combination teaches the claim, wherein Okamura teaches “t he one or more computer-readable media of claim 1, wherein updating the user interface to present the environmentally-friendly time slots comprises providing a first, scheduling view of the user interface, and wherein the actions further comprise providing a second, dashboard view of the user interface, the second, dashboard view showing metrics relating to respective environmental impact metrics for scheduled computing operations ([Fig. 20] interface [0183] FIG. 20 is a diagram showing an example of the workload transfer information screen 13000. The workload transfer information screen 13000 includes a pre-transfer information display field 13100 in which a value 13101 of the power consumption amount in each time slot is displayed when the IT workload control processing S22 is not executed (when the execution timing (time slot) of the batch job is not changed), a post-transfer information display field 13200 in which an actual value 13102 of the power consumption amount in each time slot after execution of the IT workload control processing S22 is displayed, an effect display field 13300 in which information indicating an effect of the execution of the IT workload control processing S22 is displayed, a schedule change history display field 13400 in which the information of the batch workload whose execution timing (time slot) is changed from the IT workload control processing S22 is displayed, and a roger designation field 13500 in which the workload transfer information screen 13000 is closed. [0184] In each of the pre-transfer information display field 13100 (i.e. widget) and post-transfer information display field 13200, the actual value 13103 of the power generation amount of the renewable energy in each time slot is displayed as a comparison. [0185] In the effect display field 13300, information such as an increase rate of the utilization rate of the renewable energy and a decrease rate of cost per unit time calculated in the past predetermined period based on the IT workload control processing S22 is displayed. [0186] In the schedule change history display field 13400, information 13401 of the batch workload in which the time slot to be executed in the IT workload control processing S22 is changed and information 13402 of the batch workload in which the slot to be executed in the time slot after the most recent time slot is changed are displayed. )” . Rationale to claim 1 is applied here. Claim 10 , the combination teaches the claim, wherein Mishra teaches “t he one or more computer-readable media of claim 1, wherein the environmental impact for the times is respectively determined based on respective carbon emissions expected to be produced by a data center at which the computing operation is to be performed [0052] Returning back to FIG. 1, the computing device 102 may select the first execution environment from the set of candidate execution environments 180, 182, 184 based on the execution information 114. The selection may be based on scheduling information 116 associated with the set of candidate execution environments 180, 182, 184, historic workload 110 scheduling data, or a combination thereof. In certain implementations, for each candidate execution environment of the set of candidate execution environments 180, 182, 184, determining the execution information 114 associated with the candidate execution environment may include determining the carbon intensity average value 128 for each time of multiple processing start times. For example, energy sources for certain execution environments may differ over the course of the day and may have different carbon intensities at those times of day. In such instances, different carbon intensity average values 128 may be determined at different times of day, and corresponding carbon intensity values 124 may similarly be determined for executing the workload 110 at different times of day.) ” . Claim 12 , the combination teaches the claim, wherein Mishra teaches “t he method of claim 11, wherein determining the environmentally-friendly time slots comprises retrieving information from one or more external web services to determine when the computing system operates using a power mix that includes at least a threshold percentage or amount of renewable energy sources ([0053] The recommendation information 130 may be generated based on multiple workloads that include the workload 110. For example, the computing device 102 may determine a schedule to minimize the overall carbon intensity for multiple workloads that include the workload 110, based on the operating requirements of all of the multiple workloads. In additional or alternative implementations, the recommendation information 130 may be determined based on the set of candidate execution environments 180, 182, 184, such as based on carbon intensities, availability predictions, and the like for the candidate execution environments 180, 182, 184. In additional or alternative implementations, the recommendation information 130 may be determined based on scheduling information 116 associated with the set of candidate execution environments 180, 182, 184. For example, the scheduling information 116 may include availability times, pricing schedules, maintenance windows, and the like for one or more of the execution environments 180, 182, 184. In additional or alternative implementations, the recommendation information 130 may be determined based on a cost threshold or an energy efficiency threshold. For example, the workload 110 or associated governance documents may specify a cost threshold (such as a maximum cost), an energy efficiency threshold (such as a maximum energy usage, or a maximum carbon intensity), and the recommendation information 130 may be determined to comply with the identified requirements.) ” . Claim 13 , the combination teaches the claim, wherein Mishra teaches “t he method of claim 11, wherein determining the environmentally-friendly time slots comprises retrieving information from one or more external web services to determine when the computing system is able to generate less than a threshold amount of carbon emissions while performing the computing operation ([0053] The recommendation information 130 may be generated based on multiple workloads that include the workload 110. For example, the computing device 102 may determine a schedule to minimize the overall carbon intensity for multiple workloads that include the workload 110, based on the operating requirements of all of the multiple workloads. In additional or alternative implementations, the recommendation information 130 may be determined based on the set of candidate execution environments 180, 182, 184, such as based on carbon intensities, availability predictions, and the like for the candidate execution environments 180, 182, 184. In additional or alternative implementations, the recommendation information 130 may be determined based on scheduling information 116 associated with the set of candidate execution environments 180, 182, 184. For example, the scheduling information 116 may include availability times, pricing schedules, maintenance windows, and the like for one or more of the execution environments 180, 182, 184. In additional or alternative implementations, the recommendation information 130 may be determined based on a cost threshold or an energy efficiency threshold. For example, the workload 110 or associated governance documents may specify a cost threshold (such as a maximum cost), an energy efficiency threshold (such as a maximum energy usage, or a maximum carbon intensity), and the recommendation information 130 may be determined to comply with the identified requirements.) ” . Claim 14 , the combination teaches the claim, wherein Okamura teaches “t he method of claim 11, wherein determining the environmentally-friendly time slots comprises retrieving energy consumption information from one or more external web services and enriching the energy consumption information by determining additional metrics including one or more of a quality of a power mix for the computing system, information regarding a power grid supplying power to the computing system, or forecast information indicating how a power mix is expected to look in at different periods of time ([Fig. 20] interface [0183] FIG. 20 is a diagram showing an example of the workload transfer information screen 13000. The workload transfer information screen 13000 includes a pre-transfer information display field 13100 in which a value 13101 of the power consumption amount in each time slot is displayed when the IT workload control processing S22 is not executed (when the execution timing (time slot) of the batch job is not changed), a post-transfer information display field 13200 in which an actual value 13102 of the power consumption amount in each time slot after execution of the IT workload control processing S22 is displayed, an effect display field 13300 in which information indicating an effect of the execution of the IT workload control processing S22 is displayed, a schedule change history display field 13400 in which the information of the batch workload whose execution timing (time slot) is changed from the IT workload control processing S22 is displayed, and a roger designation field 13500 in which the workload transfer information screen 13000 is closed. [0184] In each of the pre-transfer information display field 13100 and post-transfer information display field 13200, the actual value 13103 of the power generation amount of the renewable energy in each time slot is displayed as a comparison. [0185] In the effect display field 13300, information such as an increase rate of the utilization rate of the renewable energy and a decrease rate of cost per unit time calculated in the past predetermined period based on the IT workload control processing S22 is displayed. [0186] In the schedule change history display field 13400, information 13401 of the batch workload in which the time slot to be executed in the IT workload control processing S22 is changed and information 13402 of the batch workload in which the slot to be executed in the time slot after the most recent time slot is changed are displayed. ) . Claim 15 , the combination teaches the claim, wherein Okamura teaches “t he method of claim 14, wherein at least a portion of the additional metrics are sent to update the scheduling user interface to present an indication of the additional metrics to the user ([Fig. 20] interface [0183] FIG. 20 is a diagram showing an example of the workload transfer information screen 13000. The workload transfer information screen 13000 includes a pre-transfer information display field 13100 in which a value 13101 of the power consumption amount in each time slot is displayed when the IT workload control processing S22 is not executed (when the execution timing (time slot) of the batch job is not changed), a post-transfer information display field 13200 in which an actual value 13102 of the power consumption amount in each time slot after execution of the IT workload control processing S22 is displayed, an effect display field 13300 in which information indicating an effect of the execution of the IT workload control processing S22 is displayed, a schedule change history display field 13400 in which the information of the batch workload whose execution timing (time slot) is changed from the IT workload control processing S22 is displayed, and a roger designation field 13500 in which the workload transfer information screen 13000 is closed. [0184] In each of the pre-transfer information display field 13100 ( i.e.widget ) and post-transfer information display field 13200, the actual value 13103 of the power generation amount of the renewable energy in each time slot is displayed as a comparison. [0185] In the effect display field 13300, information such as an increase rate of the utilization rate of the renewable energy and a decrease rate of cost per unit time calculated in the past predetermined period based on the IT workload control processing S22 is displayed. [0186] In the schedule change history display field 13400, information 13401 of the batch workload in which the time slot to be executed in the IT workload control processing S22 is changed and information 13402 of the batch workload in which the slot to be executed in the time slot after the most recent time slot is changed are displayed.)” . Rationale to claim 1 is applied here. Claim 16 , the combination teaches the claim, wherein Okamura teaches “t he method of claim 11, wherein determining the environmentally-friendly time slots for the computing system comprises respectively determining different levels of environmental impact for the environmentally-friendly time slots, and wherein sending the update to the scheduling user interface comprises sending an indication of the different levels of environmental impact for the environmentally-friendly time slots to control the user interface to present each of the environmentally-friendly time slots with a visual indication of a corresponding respective level of environmental impact ([Fig. 20] interface [0183] FIG. 20 is a diagram showing an example of the workload transfer information screen 13000. The workload transfer information screen 13000 includes a pre-transfer information display field 13100 in which a value 13101 of the power consumption amount in each time slot is displayed when the IT workload control processing S22 is not executed (when the execution timing (time slot) of the batch job is not changed), a post-transfer information display field 13200 in which an actual value 13102 of the power consumption amount in each time slot after execution of the IT workload control processing S22 is displayed, an effect display field 13300 in which information indicating an effect of the execution of the IT workload control processing S22 is displayed, a schedule change history display field 13400 in which the information of the batch workload whose execution timing (time slot) is changed from the IT workload control processing S22 is displayed, and a roger designation field 13500 in which the workload transfer information screen 13000 is closed. [0184] In each of the pre-transfer information display field 13100 ( i.e.widget ) and post-transfer information display field 13200, the actual value 13103 of the power generation amount of the renewable energy in each time slot is displayed as a comparison. [0185] In the effect display field 13300, information such as an increase rate of the utilization rate of the renewable energy and a decrease rate of cost per unit time calculated in the past predetermined period based on the IT workload control processing S22 is displayed. [0186] In the schedule change history display field 13400, information 13401 of the batch workload in which the time slot to be executed in the IT workload control processing S22 is changed and information 13402 of the batch workload in which the slot to be executed in the time slot after the most recent time slot is changed are displayed.)” . Rationale to claim 1 is applied here. Claim 17 , ”a system, comprising: one or more hardware processors with memory coupled thereto; and computer-readable media storing instructions executable by the one or more hardware processors, the instructions comprising (Mishra [0043] processors and memory) : first instructions to present a scheduling user interface for scheduling a computer operation to be performed by a computing system; second instructions to identify environmentally-friendly time slots for performing the computing operation at the computing system, wherein the environmentally-friendly time slots correspond to times at which an environmental impact of performing the computing operation at the computing system is below a threshold; third instructions to update the user interface to present the environmentally-friendly time slots to a user of the user interface via a scheduling widget that shows the environmentally-friendly time slots as visually differentiated from other time slots (Okamura [Fig. 20] widget as 13200 showcasing different environmentally-friendly time slots) ; fourth instructions to receive a selection of a selected time slot of the environmentally-friendly time slots via the user interface; and fifth instructions to send an indication to control a scheduling service to schedule the computing operation to be performed by the computing system at the selected time slot ” is similar to claim 1 and therefore rejected with the same references and citations . Claim 18 , the combination teaches the claim, wherein Okamura teaches “t he system of claim 17, wherein the environmentally-friendly time slots are visually differentiated from the other time slots by highlighting the environmentally-friendly time slots ([Fig. 20 ] interface of renewable energy resources highlighted)” . Claim 19 , the combination teaches the claim, wherein Okamura teaches “t he system of claim 18, wherein the highlighting for the environmentally-friendly time slots is respectively presented with a color, gradient ([Fig. 20 ] interface of renewable energy resources highlighted )” . , or pattern that is based on a respective level of environmental impact of performing the computing operation at the environmentally-friendly time slots ” . Rationale to claim 1 is applied here. Claim 20 , the combination teaches the claim, wherein Okamura teaches “t he system of claim 17, wherein the environmental impact is determined in terms of a percentage of power provided by renewable energy resources used to perform the computing operation ([0038] Meanwhile, a certain amount of power is required to execute each process in the server device 3000 and the storage device 4000, and the data center 1000 is required to consume power from renewable energy rather than power from the power system at a predetermined ratio. That is, ratio the predetermined (utilization rate under a minimum condition) is referred to as a target value or a target rate of a renewable energy utilization rate in the embodiment. Further, the power generation amount of the renewable energy varies depending on the time period.) or in terms of an amount of carbon emissions generated by performance of the computing operation ” . Rationale to claim 1 is applied here. Claim/s 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mishra , Okamura in further view of Zhu (Pub. No. US 2008/0301120). Claim 6 , the combination may not explicitly teach the claim. Zhu teaches “t he one or more computer-readable media of claim 1, wherein the user interface includes a user interface element selectable to toggle between a first view in which the environmentally-friendly time slots are presented as visually differentiated from other time slots and a second view in which the environmentally-friendly time slots are presented as visually undifferentiated from the other time slots ([0102] In another embodiment, the entity extraction module 110 may be configured to extract multiple categories of entities, such as is shown in FIGS. 16 and 17. In particular, FIG. 16 shows an example of the results of the entity extraction engine displayed on a bar chart, while FIG. 17 shows an example of the results of the entity extraction engine displayed on a pie chart. In either example, the user interface would allow the user to identify specific categories 1710 or entities 1720 from the display, and filter out (i.e., hide) unselected items. For example, the pie chart shown in FIG. 6 may be the result of selecting "locations" in FIG. 16 or 17, and filtering the entity set for view in a pie chart. ” ). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to apply the teachings of Zhu with the teachings of Mishra , Okamura in order to provide a system that teaches a display of certain information . The motivation for applying Zhu teaching with Mishra , Okamura teaching is to provide a system that allows for situational awareness. Mishra, Jackson , Zhu are analogous art directed towards displaying information . Together Mishra, Jackson , Zhu teaches every limitation of the claimed invention. Since the teachings were analogous art known at the filing time of invention, one of ordinary skill could have applied the teachings of Zhu with the teachings of Mishra , Okamura by known methods and gained expected results. Claim/s 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mishra , Okamura in further view of Jackson (Pat. No. US 7,356,770). Claim 8, the combination may not explicitly teach the claim. Jackson teaches “the one or more computer-readable media of claim 7, wherein the second, dashboard view includes one or more user interface elements that are selectable to change a timing of the scheduled computing operations by switching the user interface to the first, scheduling view ([Col. 10, Lines 10-26] FIG. 7 illustrates a visual node calendar 700 which allows administrators to section the compute environment quickly according to space. In the window 700, days are across the top 714 and nodes are along the left 724. Options include date/time selection 702 which enable the user to select days in a month, hours in a week, minutes and an hour, hours in a day, etc. Window 700 shows the jobs and reservations 716 on the nodes 724. In window 700, only jobs are displayed. The user can create new reservation on nodes by highlighted empty space 712. This may be done in any manner, such as via a right click or double click, touch sensitive screen and so forth. Other features include an option to display the selected time frame 704, display data include current time, reservations, jobs and empty space 706. These parameters are user selectable. The user may be able to resize or compact down the calendar 708 and view the current system time 710.)”. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to apply the teachings of Jackson with the teachings of Mishra , Okamura in order to provide a system that teaches a display of job scheduling . The motivation for applying Jackson teaching with Mishra , Okamura teaching is to provide a system that allows for situational awareness. Mishra, Jackson , Jackson are analogous art directed towards displaying information . Together Mishra, Jackson , Jackson teaches every limitation of the claimed invention. Since the teachings were analogous art known at the filing time of invention, one of ordinary skill could have applied the teachings of Jackson with the teachings of Mishra , Okamura by known methods and gained expected results. Claim/s 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mishra , Okamura in further view of McDONAGH (P ub . No. US 2025/0117865 ). Claim 9, the combination may not explicitly teach the claim. McDONAGH teaches “The one or more computer-readable media of claim 1, wherein the environmental impact for the times is respectively determined based on a respective percentage or mix of power sources expected to be used to power a data center at which the computing operation is to be performed ([0046] For performance of such evaluating, orchestrator 110 can iteratively query a plurality of computer environments for return of metrics data including such metrics data as infrastructure utilization parameter values, network utilization parameter values, reliability parameter values, and energy supply profile parameter values. Energy supply profiles parameter values returned from a computer environment can specify, e.g., a current energy supply profile for the computer environment, e.g., an energy supply profile that specifies the percentage of current energy grid power supplying power to the computer environment that is attributable to renewable power generation.) ”. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to apply the teachings of McDONAGH with the teachings of Mishra , Okamura in order to provide a system that teaches details of job scheduling . The motivation for applying McDONAGH teaching with Mishra , Okamura teaching is to provide a system that allows for design choice . Mishra, Jackson , McDONAGH are analogous art directed towards job scheduling . Together Mishra, Jackson , McDONAGH teaches every limitation of the claimed invention. Since the teachings were analogous art known at the filing time of invention, one of ordinary skill could have applied the teachings of McDONAGH with the teachings of Mishra , Okamura by known methods and gained expected results. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT WYNUEL S AQUINO whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)272-7478 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT 9AM-5PM EST M-F . 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, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT Lewis Bullock can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT 571-272-3759 . 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. /WYNUEL S AQUINO/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2199