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
This action is in response to communication filed on 6/4/2026.
Claims 1-10 are pending.
Claims 1 and 10 have been amended.
Claim 11 has been canceled.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s argument(s) filed on 6/4/2026 with respect to claim(s) 1-10 have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection.
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 of this title, 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.
1. Claim(s) 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ewert (US 20220150134 A1) in view of Haddow (US 20210126844 A1) in view of Bashir (US 20230156522 A1) in view of Maltz (US20120019662A1).
With respect to independent claims:
Regarding claim(s) 1, a determination process execution initiation control system,
Ewert teaches comprising one or more processors, the determination process execution initiation control system causing at least one of the one or more processors to execute: (Ewert, [0049], a user device may be any electronic device capable of receiving user input (e.g., via a user interface), communicating with a remote server, and displaying network property data. For example, in embodiments, the user device may include a computer, a tablet, a smartphone. [examiner notes: a computer inherently comprises a processor.])
a monitoring screen display control process of displaying a monitoring screen showing
performance information on each of a plurality of elements included in a communication
system; (Ewert, [0055], network property data includes performance characteristics of a specific wavelength and/or properties associated with a specific wavelength, such as: a network element ID, a map view of the distributed optical network, a global position, a network location, a table describing a usage, a table describing network elements associated with the at least one entity, optical network system trace information of the at least one wavelength, a switch number, a line identification, a port number, a total bandwidth usage, bandwidth limitations, a light level, a number of packets received, a number of packets sent, an alarm status, circuit analysis data, a remaining capacity, bit error rate (BER), throughput, latency, errored seconds, severely errored seconds, unavailable seconds, number of coding violations (errors), forward error corrections, uncorrectable block errors, jitter, and/or any other characteristics describing network performance or an identification property. [0056], at step 210, the user device displays the network property data received in step 208 based on the authenticated and/or validated user credentials. [0105], the map view application includes functionality that allows a user to select or view network element properties of the network nodes.)
Ewert does not teach a monitoring target element selection process of selecting at least one monitoring target element from among a plurality of the elements for which the performance information is shown on the monitoring screen; and a determination process execution initiation process of initiating execution of a determination process to determine whether to execute a given action on the monitoring target element based on a performance index value of the monitoring target element; wherein the monitoring target element selection process includes a process of recognizing how much attention a user using the monitoring screen pays to each of the plurality of elements based on (i) an arrangement within the monitoring screen specified for each of the plurality of elements, (ii) a length of time for which the performance information has been shown on the monitoring screen for each of the plurality of elements for which the performance information is shown on the monitoring screen, or (iii) frequency of action execution instructions for each of the plurality of elements, and wherein selecting the at least one monitoring target element from among the plurality of the elements is based on the recognized attention.
Haddow however in the same field of computer networking teaches a monitoring target element selection process of selecting at least one monitoring target element from among a plurality of the elements for which the performance information is shown on the monitoring screen; (Haddow, [0020] The disclosed techniques for application aware device monitoring include enabling a user to gather information about the devices within their computing/network/application environment(s) (e.g., generally referred to herein as a network computing environment) and selectively monitor devices and interfaces of interest. For example, monitored devices can be periodically queried (e.g., every 5 minutes to 24 hours or some other periodic interval) to extract both interface performance metrics and contextual device and port information to enable correlating these performance metrics (e.g., interface performance metrics and contextual device and port information) with end-to-end application performance, such as further described below. [0100] Let's start by looking at the HTTP server performance metrics. [0101] FIG. 2 illustrates an HTTP Server view in accordance with some embodiments. Referring to FIG. 2, an HTTP Server view 202 shows a periodic drop in availability, such as shown at 204, indicating that something is wrong with the performance of the server. [0102] At this point, we still have not determined if the problem is on the application or the network layer. Next, we can drill down into the Network View. [0103] FIG. 3 illustrates a Network view 302 in accordance with some embodiments. Referring to FIG. 3, an End-to-End Metrics timeline is provided to facilitate diving deeper into the network view. In the End-to-End Metrics timeline, the network quality problem (e.g., high loss/an increase in packet loss) directly correlates to the decrease in application availability, such as shown at 304. As such, this clearly indicates that the problem is on the network layer, but at this point, we still have not determined where and why this network layer problem is occurring on the network. [examiner notes: the HTTP server interprets to be the monitoring target element.])
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the claimed invention to modify Ewert by incorporating the teachings of Haddow. The motivation/suggestion would have been because there is a need to improve the ability of a user (e.g., network/system administrator(s) (admin(s))) to more effectively and efficiently diagnose the underlying cause of application performance concerns to issues in specific network devices and ports (Haddow, [0019]).
Ewert does not teach a determination process execution initiation process of initiating execution of a determination process to determine whether to execute a given action on the monitoring target element based on a performance index value of the monitoring target element; wherein the monitoring target element selection process includes a process of recognizing how much attention a user using the monitoring screen pays to each of the plurality of elements based on (i) an arrangement within the monitoring screen specified for each of the plurality of elements, (ii) a length of time for which the performance information has been shown on the monitoring screen for each of the plurality of elements for which the performance information is shown on the monitoring screen, or (iii) frequency of action execution instructions for each of the plurality of elements, and wherein selecting the at least one monitoring target element from among the plurality of the elements is based on the recognized attention.
Bashir however in the same field of computer networking teaches a determination process execution initiation process of initiating execution of a determination process to determine whether to execute a given action on the monitoring target element based on a performance index value of the monitoring target element; (Bashir, [0026], FIGs.1-2; at 204, the SMF 102 receives a request to anchor on a UPF a PDU session of a new UE newly appearing on the cellular telecommunication network. [0027], a 206, the SMF 102 selects a UPF of the plurality of UPFs on which to anchor the PDU session based on: a location of the new UE; the plurality of current loads for each UPF of the plurality of UPFs; a predicted UE load of the new UE based on network data analytics; and predicted UPF loads of the plurality of UPFs as a function of time considering the predicted UE load based on network data analytics.[examiner notes: anchor on a UPF a PDU session interprets to be the given action.])
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the claimed invention to modify Ewert by incorporating the teachings of Bashir. The motivation/suggestion would have been because there is a need to predict UPF loads of the plurality of UPFs as a function of time considering the predicted UE load based on network data analytics captured or tracked by the NWDAF (Bashir, [0007]).
Ewert does not teach wherein the monitoring target element selection process includes a process of recognizing how much attention a user using the monitoring screen pays to each of the plurality of elements based on (i) an arrangement within the monitoring screen specified for each of the plurality of elements, (ii) a length of time for which the performance information has been shown on the monitoring screen for each of the plurality of elements for which the performance information is shown on the monitoring screen, or (iii) frequency of action execution instructions for each of the plurality of elements, and wherein selecting the at least one monitoring target element from among the plurality of the elements is based on the recognized attention.
Maltz however in the same field of computer networking teaches wherein the monitoring target element selection process includes a process of recognizing how much attention a user using the monitoring screen pays to each of the plurality of elements based on (i) an arrangement within the monitoring screen specified for each of the plurality of elements, (ii) a length of time for which the performance information has been shown on the monitoring screen for each of the plurality of elements for which the performance information is shown on the monitoring screen, or (iii) frequency of action execution instructions for each of the plurality of elements, and (Maltz, [0009], [0055]- [0060], FIG.2-3; Dwell Time: The system registers when a user's gaze remains focused on an area for a time period exceeding a predetermined hovering time interval. Element Arrangement: Visible elements and targets are arranged to minimize eye strain and avoid inadvertent activation, using a grid, cylinder, or virtual window to group actionable items in specific proximity to the gaze. Selection Execution: If the user maintains their eye gaze on the element for the required duration, the system selects that specific UI element.)
wherein selecting the at least one monitoring target element from among the plurality of
the elements is based on the recognized attention. (Maltz, [0009], [0055]- [0060], FIG.2-3; Dwell Time: The system registers when a user's gaze remains focused on an area for a time period exceeding a predetermined hovering time interval. Element Arrangement: Visible elements and targets are arranged to minimize eye strain and avoid inadvertent activation, using a grid, cylinder, or virtual window to group actionable items in specific proximity to the gaze. Selection Execution: If the user maintains their eye gaze on the element for the required duration, the system selects that specific UI element.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the claimed invention to modify Ewert by incorporating the teachings of Maltz. The motivation/suggestion would have been because there is a need to remotely control an assistive device while, at the same time, not struggle with or draw attention to the disability (Maltz, [0007]).
Claim(s) 10 is/are substantially similar to claim 1, and is thus rejected under substantially the same rationale.
With respect to dependent claims:
Regarding claim(s) 2, the determination process execution initiation control system according to claim 1,
Ewert-Haddow-Bashir-Maltz teach wherein the determination process execution initiation control system causes the at least one of the one or more processors (Ewert, [0049], computer.) to execute an arrangement specification reception process of receiving a specification of an arrangement within the monitoring screen of the performance information on each of a plurality of the elements, (Ewert, [0076], task bar 610 may include, for example, buttons or menus that allow user 614 to isolate particular performance data. The buttons and menus may further include options for the user to specify the amount of data, specific types of data, based on a specific job or task. In embodiments, the user-specified format may be modified during a single session and return to a preset and/or default setting at the end of the session. Alternatively, the modified view may be retained for future viewing or until the user further modifies the view. In an embodiment, reports may be customized based on user-specified criteria or based on a preset and/or default configuration based on the user's job function, job title, or any other pre-determined criteria related to the user. [0105], the map view application includes functionality that allows a user to select or view network element properties of the network nodes. [0157], the network proact application provides a customized list (i.e., a watch list) that includes circuits that have been selected by a user or automatically selected by the system based proactive management measures. [examiner notes: the examiner interprets the limitation as “customize the layout of the specified elements in a user interface.”])
wherein, in the monitoring screen display control process, the monitoring screen on which the performance information on each of the plurality of the specified elements is arranged in accordance with the specified arrangement is displayed, and (Ewert, [0080], FIG. 7 shows an exemplary interface 700 illustrating various optical network elements within an optical network chassis. The various optical network elements are represented by graphics with ports and colored indications 704, 706, and 708 indicating whether an issue is detected. For example, the colored indicators may indicate whether particular user-defined conditions are met indicating a deviation from a performance baseline (e.g. reduced light levels).)
wherein, in the monitoring target element selection process, the at least one monitoring target element is selected based on the specified arrangement. (Bashir, [0027], a 206, the SMF 102 selects a UPF of the plurality of UPFs on which to anchor the PDU session based on: a location of the new UE; the plurality of current loads for each UPF of the plurality of UPFs; a predicted UE load of the new UE based on network data analytics; and predicted UPF loads of the plurality of UPFs as a function of time considering the predicted UE load based on network data analytics.)
The same motivation to combine as the independent claim 1 applies here.
Regarding claim(s) 3, the determination process execution initiation control system according to claim 1,
Ewert-Haddow-Bashir-Maltz teach wherein the determination process execution initiation control system causes the at least one of the one or more processors (Ewert, [0049], computer.) to execute an element change instruction reception process of receiving an instruction to change the element for which the performance information is shown on the monitoring screen, (Ewert, [0105], the map view application provides a map view of the network nodes. An embodiment of the map view application is illustrated, for example, in FIGS. 5 and 6A-C. In map view embodiments, the nodes appear on a map based on the node's global position (e.g., GPS data). In embodiments, the map view shows lines drawn between the nodes showing network connections. In embodiments, the map view application includes functionality that allows a user to select or view network element properties of the network nodes.)
wherein, in the monitoring screen display control process, the element for which the performance information is shown on the monitoring screen is changed in accordance with the change instruction, and wherein, in the monitoring target element selection process, the at least one monitoring target element is selected based on a length of time for which the performance information has been shown on the monitoring screen for each of the plurality of the elements for which the performance information is shown on the monitoring screen. (Ewert, [0111], at step 1104, performance information of the plurality of optical elements is collected during runtime at various time periods. The runtime performance information can include any of the network property data described above for a specific wavelength (or wavelengths), including light levels, bit error rate (BER), throughput, latency, and/or jitter for each port and each connection in the optical transport network. [0124], the performance monitoring application provides a report or display that shows historical and real-time data of specific circuits, including one or more network element properties that have been retrieved over a specified period of time.)
Regarding claim(s) 4, the determination process execution initiation control system according to claim 1,
Ewert-Haddow-Bashir-Maltz teach wherein the determination process execution initiation control system causes the at least one of the one or more processors (Ewert, [0049], computer.) to execute: an execution instruction reception process of receiving an instruction to execute the action on the element or which the performance information is shown on the monitoring screen; and (Bashir, Claim1, a processor that executes the computer instructions to perform actions, the actions including: determining a plurality of current loads for each user plane function (UPF) of a plurality of UPFs in a cellular telecommunication network, wherein: the plurality of UPFs serve as anchor points between user equipment (UE) in the cellular telecommunication network and a data network (DN); [0026], at 204, the SMF 102 receives a request to anchor on a UPF a PDU session of a new UE newly appearing on the cellular telecommunication network. [0027], a 206, the SMF 102 selects a UPF of the plurality of UPFs on which to anchor the PDU session based on: a location of the new UE; the plurality of current loads for each UPF of the plurality of UPFs; a predicted UE load of the new UE based on network data analytics; and predicted UPF loads of the plurality of UPFs as a function of time considering the predicted UE load based on network data analytics. [examiner notes: anchor on a UPF a PDU session interprets to be the given action.])
an action execution process of executing, in response to the execution instruction, the action on the element for which the execution instruction is received, and (Bashir, Claim1, a processor that executes the computer instructions to perform actions, the actions including: determining a plurality of current loads for each user plane function (UPF) of a plurality of UPFs in a cellular telecommunication network, wherein: the plurality of UPFs serve as anchor points between user equipment (UE) in the cellular telecommunication network and a data network (DN); [0026], at 204, the SMF 102 receives a request to anchor on a UPF a PDU session of a new UE newly appearing on the cellular telecommunication network. [0027], a 206, the SMF 102 selects a UPF of the plurality of UPFs on which to anchor the PDU session based on: a location of the new UE; the plurality of current loads for each UPF of the plurality of UPFs; a predicted UE load of the new UE based on network data analytics; and predicted UPF loads of the plurality of UPFs as a function of time considering the predicted UE load based on network data analytics. [examiner notes: anchor on a UPF a PDU session interprets to be the given action.])
wherein, in the monitoring target element selection process, the at least one monitoring target element is selected based on a reception status of the execution instruction. (Bashir, Claim1, a processor that executes the computer instructions to perform actions, the actions including: determining a plurality of current loads for each user plane function (UPF) of a plurality of UPFs in a cellular telecommunication network, wherein: the plurality of UPFs serve as anchor points between user equipment (UE) in the cellular telecommunication network and a data network (DN); [0026], at 204, the SMF 102 receives a request to anchor on a UPF a PDU session of a new UE newly appearing on the cellular telecommunication network. [0027], a 206, the SMF 102 selects a UPF of the plurality of UPFs on which to anchor the PDU session based on: a location of the new UE; the plurality of current loads for each UPF of the plurality of UPFs; a predicted UE load of the new UE based on network data analytics; and predicted UPF loads of the plurality of UPFs as a function of time considering the predicted UE load based on network data analytics.)
The same motivation to combine as the independent claim 1 applies here.
Regarding claim(s) 5, the determination process execution initiation control system according to claim 1,
Ewert-Haddow-Bashir-Maltz teach wherein the determination process is a process of determining whether to execute the action based on a current performance index value of the monitoring target element. (Bashir, [0026], at 204, the SMF 102 receives a request to anchor on a UPF a PDU session of a new UE newly appearing on the cellular telecommunication network. [0027], a 206, the SMF 102 selects a UPF of the plurality of UPFs on which to anchor the PDU session based on: a location of the new UE; the plurality of current loads for each UPF of the plurality of UPFs; a predicted UE load of the new UE based on network data analytics; and predicted UPF loads of the plurality of UPFs as a function of time considering the predicted UE load based on network data analytics.[examiner notes: anchor on a UPF a PDU session interprets to be the given action.])
The same motivation to combine as the independent claim 1 applies here.
Regarding claim(s) 6, the determination process execution initiation control system according to claim 1,
Ewert-Haddow-Bashir-Maltz teach wherein the determination process is a process of determining whether to execute the action based on a predicted value of the performance index value of the monitoring target element. (Bashir, [0026], at 204, the SMF 102 receives a request to anchor on a UPF a PDU session of a new UE newly appearing on the cellular telecommunication network. [0027], a 206, the SMF 102 selects a UPF of the plurality of UPFs on which to anchor the PDU session based on: a location of the new UE; the plurality of current loads for each UPF of the plurality of UPFs; a predicted UE load of the new UE based on network data analytics; and predicted UPF loads of the plurality of UPFs as a function of time considering the predicted UE load based on network data analytics.[examiner notes: anchor on a UPF a PDU session interprets to be the given action.])
The same motivation to combine as the independent claim 1 applies here.
2. Claim(s) 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ewert in view of Haddow in view of Bashir in view of Maltz further in view of Lee (US 20220351041 A1).
Regarding claim(s) 7, the determination process execution initiation control system according to claim 6,
Ewert-Haddow-Bashir-Maltz teach wherein the determination process execution initiation control system causes the at least one of the one or more processors (Ewert, [0049], computer.)
Ewert-Haddow-Bashir-Maltz do not teach to execute a machine learning model determination process of determining a machine learning model which outputs the predicted value from among a plurality of trained machine learning models.
Lee however in the same field of computer networking teaches to execute a machine learning model determination process of determining a machine learning model which outputs the predicted value from among a plurality of trained machine learning models. (Lee, [0011], the processor may be further configured to determine the machine learning model matched to the target application, based on at least one or a combination of two or more of a type of input data required in an inference operation of the target application, a format of the input data, an input source, a type of output data, a label list of the output data, and a format of the output data, among the plurality of machine learning models.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the claimed invention to modify Ewert by incorporating the teachings of Lee. The motivation/suggestion would have been because there is a need to mapping a target application to a machine learning model matched to a request of the target application among a plurality of machine learning models (Lee, [0014]).
Regarding claim(s) 8, the determination process execution initiation control system according to claim 7,
Ewert-Haddow-Bashir-Maltz-Lee teach wherein, in the machine learning model determination process, the machine learning model which outputs the predicted value is determined from among the plurality of trained machine learning models based on a type of the performance index value shown on the monitoring screen and a type of a performance index value included in input data to be input to each of the plurality of trained machine learning models. (Lee, [0011], the processor may be further configured to determine the machine learning model matched to the target application, based on at least one or a combination of two or more of a type of input data required in an inference operation of the target application, a format of the input data, an input source, a type of output data, a label list of the output data, and a format of the output data, among the plurality of machine learning models. [0062], a machine learning model may be a pre-trained artificial intelligence model, and may be a model designed to output data in response to input data. [examiner notes: the examiner interprets the limitation as “select a ML model among the plurality of machine learning models based on type of input and output data.])
The same motivation to combine as the dependent claim 7 applies here.
3. Claim(s) 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ewert in view of Bashir in view of Haddow in view of Lee in view of Maltz further in view of FIUMARA (US 20220150132 A1).
Regarding claim(s) 9, the determination process execution initiation control system according to claim 7,
Ewert-Haddow-Bashir-Maltz-Lee do no teach wherein, in the machine learning model determination process, the machine learning model which outputs the predicted value is determined from among the plurality of trained machine learning models based on a prediction accuracy of the predicted value evaluated for each of the plurality of trained machine learning models.
FIUMARA however in the same field of computer networking teaches wherein, in the machine learning model determination process, the machine learning model which outputs the predicted value is determined from among the plurality of trained machine learning models based on a prediction accuracy of the predicted value evaluated for each of the plurality of trained machine learning models. (FIUMARA, [0015], the customer care system may generate accuracy scores for the plurality of trained machine learning models based on training the plurality of machine learning models. The customer care system may select an optimum machine learning model, from the plurality of trained machine learning models, based on the accuracy scores for the plurality of trained machine learning models.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the claimed invention to modify Ewert by incorporating the teachings of FIUMARA. The motivation/suggestion would have been because there is a need to provide the optimum machine learning model to the monitoring device associated with the telecommunications network to cause the monitoring device to implement the optimum machine learning model with the telecommunications network (FIUMARA, [0004]).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WUJI CHEN whose telephone number is (571)270-0365. The examiner can normally be reached on 9am-6pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, VIVEK SRIVASTAVA can be reached on (571) 272-7304. 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.
/WUJI CHEN/
Examiner, Art Unit 2449
/VIVEK SRIVASTAVA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2449
Prosecution Insights