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 .
Detail Action
This office action is in response to the application filed on 3/5/2024.
Claims 1-20 are pending.
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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 3-4, 7-8, 10-11, 13-14, 17-18 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Dreyband et al. (US 2022/0030064 A1)
Per claim 1,
Dreyband discloses
A system, comprising: at least one processor; and a computer readable medium, coupled with the at least one processor and comprising processor readable and executable instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to: (Fig. 1, see a computer)
scan one or more resources associated with a configuration management database (CMDB); ([0105], discovery of configuration items via scanning ; [0095], Configuration items may be represented in CMDB, where configuration items may refer to … any applications…as well as relationships between them. )
access metadata regarding an installed software application from the scanned one or more resources; ([0106], discloses probing IP addresses for open TCP and/or UDP…may indicates a particular application is operating on the device)
create a list of candidate resources from the scanned one or more resources based on a number of attributes used to identify the installed software application from the accessed metadata; ([0106], see above to identify installed applications, see also [0110-0121])
select a candidate resource based on the number of attributes used to identify the installed software application;( [0105], discloses presentence of open ports at IP address may indicate a particular application, IP address, TCP and UDP ports correspond to the number of attributes, see also [0110-0121])
identify the installed software application based on the selected candidate resource; ([0105], discloses presentence of open ports at IP address may indicate a particular application, see also [0110-0121]) and update a Software Application Index (SAI) library with the metadata from the candidate resource. ([0106], discloses configuration items are saved on CMDB, [0111], see snapshot for discovered device and application and configuration details, see also [0110-0121])
Per claim 3, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated.
Dreyband discloses
wherein one of the one or more resources includes a manifest file for the installed software application. ( [0129], disclose CLI commands to read configuration or operational parameters from registry or database…lists of installed software applications, where at least registry corresponds to a manifest file.)
Per claim 4, the rejection of claim 3 is incorporated.
Dreyband discloses
wherein the manifest file includes at least one of a real number, a company name, a file version, a product name, a product version, and a file description for the installed software application. (Dreyband, [0108], discloses LINUX, for WINDOWS 2012 appears to disclose product name or product version)
Per claim 7, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated.
Dreyband discloses
wherein metadata associated with a product version attribute is used to update the SAI library. ([0108], LINUX, WINDOWS 2012…this identification information may be stored as one or more configuration items in CMDB)
Per claim 8, the rejection of claim 7 is incorporated.
Dreyband discloses
wherein the at least one processor is further caused to implement a file version data rule associated with the product version attribute for detecting other installed software applications. ([0108], discloses identifying LINUX with a file version data rule and it appears also detects WINDOWS 2012 corresponding to other installed software application)
Per claim 10, The rejection of claim 1 is incorporated.
Dreyband discloses
wherein the at least one processor is further caused to generate, for display, a graphical relationship between the installed software application and a node on which the installed software application is provided. ([0111], discloses after discovery is complete…collected information is presented to a user in various way including discovers device (node) and application. [0113], discloses a web-based interface displaying dependencies and relationships between configuration items. [0076], discloses server nodes of an enterprise to provides set of web portals, services and applications.)
Per claims 11, 13-14, 17-18, see rejections of claims 1, 3-4, and 7-8.
Per claim 20, see rejection of 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) 2, 5, 6, 12, 15, and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dreyband et al. (US 2022/003006 A1) further in view of Zhang et al. (CN 117668310A)
Per claim 2, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated.
Dreyband does not, however, Zhang discloses
wherein the installed software application is a software application developed using Java programming language and runs on a Java Virtual Machine (JVM). (Pp. 13, disclose class loader for executing on JVM)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the teachings of Zhang into the teachings of Dreyband to include the limitation disclosed by Zhang. The modification would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to want to properly management Java applications in enterprise configuration because JAVA programming language has wide installation base.
Per claim 5, The system according to claim 1,
Dreyband does not, however, Zhang discloses
wherein one of the one or more resources includes a Project Object Model (POM) file associated with the installed software application. (pp. 8, see java classed model dependency relationship POM. Also see claim 3. )
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the teachings of Zhang into the teachings of Dreyband to include the limitation disclosed by Zhang. The modification would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to want to properly management Java applications in enterprise configuration because JAVA programming language has wide installation base.
Per claim 6, The system according to claim 5,
Dreyband does not, however, Zhang discloses
wherein the POM file includes at least one of a real name, a product name, a product version, and a file description associated with the installed software application. (Zhang, pp. 19, see dependency relationship information including version number)
Per claims 12, 15 and 16, see rejections of 2, 5 and 6.
Claim(s) 9 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dreyband et al. (US 2022/003006 A1) further in view of Chen (US 7822714 B2)
Per claim 9, the rejection of claim 8 is incorporated.
Dreyband does not, however, Chen discloses
wherein a size of the SAI library is reduced based on the implemented file version data rule. (C4: 24-60, discloses CMDB size reduction using generic data type using minimal table creation algorithm)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the teachings of Chen into the teachings of Dreybacnd to include the limitation disclosed by Chen. The modification would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to want to produce efficient CMDB via generic data type and size limitation as suggested by Chen (see above)
Per claim 19, see rejection of claim 9.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Philip Wang whose telephone number is 571-272-5934. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday – Friday 8:00AM -4:00PM. Any inquiry of general nature or relating to the status of this application should be directed to the TC2100 Group receptionist: 571-272-2100.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Lewis Bullock, can be reached at 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 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).
/PHILIP WANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2199