DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Notice for all US Patent Applications filed on or after March 16, 2013
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
Status of the Claims
This communication is in response to communications received on 6/12/24. Claim(s) none is/are amended, claim(s) none is/are cancelled, claim(s) none is/are new, and applicant does not provide any information on where support for the amendments can be found in the instant specification as there are no amendments. Therefore, Claims 1-20 is/are pending and have been addressed below.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) (IDS) submitted on 6/12/24 was/were considered by the examiner.
Response to Arguments
There are no arguments.
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.
Claim(s) 1-20 is/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.
The limitation(s) below for representative claim(s) 1, 14, and 20 that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, is directed to case selection for an agent.
Step 1: The claim(s) as drafted, is/are a process (claim(s) 14-19 recites a series of steps) and system (claim(s) 1-13 and 20 recites a series of components).
Step 2A – Prong 1: The claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The claim(s) recite(s) (emphasis added):
Claim 14: receiving a request from a client device, wherein the request is associated with a category type, and wherein the request is assigned to an agent;
obtaining information regarding access rights of the agent;
determining, based on the category type and the access rights, a plurality of sub-case types associated with the request; and
initiating resolution of the request based on a selected sub-case type of the plurality of sub-case types.
Claim 1: same as claim 14.
Claim 1 additionally: a platform configured to host one or more client instances, the one or more client instances comprising:
an agent portal configured to:.
Claim 20: same as claim 14 and 1.
Dependent claims 2-13 and 15-19 recite the same or similar abstract idea(s) as independent claim(s) 1, 14, and 20 with merely a further narrowing of the abstract idea(s): .
The identified limitations of the independent and dependent claims above fall well-within the groupings of subject matter identified by the courts as being abstract concepts of:
a method of organizing human activity (commercial or legal interactions including advertising, marketing or sales activities or behaviors, or business relations) because the invention is directed to business relations as they are associated with employees being able to perform tasks based on user rights and how the system is implemented based on those user rights (claim(s) 1-20).
Step 2A – Prong 2: This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because:
The additional elements encompassed by the abstract idea system hosted by client device (claim(s) 1, 14, and 20), system, platform (claim(s) 1), non-transitory computer-readable storage medium, one or more processors (claim(s) 20), client device (claim(s) 3), agent portal (claim(s) 3-4, 7-9, 11, 16), graphical user interface (claim(s) 4-7, 16).
The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the additional elements as described above with respect to Step 2A Prong 2 fails to describe:
Improvements to the functioning of a computer, or to any other technology or technical field - see MPEP 2106.05(a)
Applying or using a judicial exception to effect a particular treatment or prophylaxis for a disease or medical condition – see Vanda Memo
Applying the judicial exception with, or by use of, a particular machine – see MPEP 2106.05(b)
Effecting a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing - see MPEP 2106.05(c)
Applying or using the judicial exception in some other meaningful way beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment, such that the claim as a whole is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception - see MPEP 2106.05(e) and Vanda Memo.
Thus the additional elements as described above with respect to Step 2A Prong 2 are merely (as additionally noted by instant specification [0023, 0045]) invoked as a tool and/or general purpose computer to apply instructions of an abstract idea in a particular technological environment, and/or mere application of an abstract idea in a particular technological environment and merely limiting the use of an abstract idea to a particular technological field do not integrate an abstract idea into a practical application (MPEP 2106.05(f)&(h)).
Step 2B: The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. Thus the additional elements as described above with respect to Step 2A Prong 2 are merely (as additionally noted by instant specification [0023, 0045]) invoked as a tool and/or a general purpose computer to apply instructions of an abstract idea in a particular technological environment, and/or mere application of an abstract idea in a particular technological environment and merely limiting the use of an abstract idea to a particular technological field do not integrate an abstract idea into a practical application and thus similarly the combination and arrangement of the above identified additional elements when analyzed under Step 2B also fails to necessitate a conclusion that the claims amount to significantly more than the abstract idea for the same reasons as set forth above (MPEP 2106.05(f)&(h)).
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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
It has been held that a prior art reference must either be in the field of applicant’s endeavor or, if not, then be reasonably pertinent to the particular problem with which the applicant was concerned, in order to be relied upon as a basis for rejection of the claimed invention. See In re Oetiker, 977 F.2d 1443, 24 USPQ2d 1443 (Fed. Cir. 1992).
Claim(s) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dwivedi et al. (US 2020/0192686 A1) in view of Prasad et al. (US 2020/0220877 A1).
Regarding claim 1, 14, and 20, Dwivedi teaches a method comprising {a system comprising a platform configured to host one or more client instances, the one or more client instances comprising
an agent portal configured to: - claim 1}
{a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing executable instructions that, when executed by one or more processors, cause operations to be performed comprising: - claim 20} [see at least Fig. 1 and [0007] “In certain implementations, this approach is provided on a single platform, and may allow service matters to be indexed or accessed using a common or shared identifier (e.g., a case or reference number) that facilitates accessing information from all involved technical teams at the agent level as well as allowing the technical teams themselves to readily see activity by other teams.”;
Fig. 1 and [0027] “Turning now to FIG. 1, a schematic diagram of an embodiment of a cloud computing system 10 where embodiments of the present disclosure may operate, is illustrated. The cloud computing system 10 may include a client network 12, a network 14 (e.g., the Internet), and a cloud-based platform 16. In some implementations, the cloud-based platform 16 may be a configuration management database (CMDB) platform.”;
Fig. 10 and [0019, 0068] “a listing of cases as may be presented to a case agent” such as case data including customer account 620; case data including priority, state, and category]:
receiving a request from a client device, wherein the request is associated with a category type, and wherein the request is assigned to an agent;
obtaining information regarding rights of the agent [see at least Fig. 1 and [0027] user devices “Turning now to FIG. 1, a schematic diagram of an embodiment of a cloud computing system 10 where embodiments of the present disclosure may operate, is illustrated. The cloud computing system 10 may include a client network 12, a network 14 (e.g., the Internet), and a cloud-based platform 16. In some implementations, the cloud-based platform 16 may be a configuration management database (CMDB) platform. … As shown in FIG. 1, the client network 12 is able to connect to one or more client devices 20A, 20B, and 20C so that the client devices are able to communicate with each other and/or with the network hosting the platform 16. The client devices 20 may be computing systems and/or other types of computing devices generally referred to as Internet of Things (IoT) devices that access cloud computing services, for example, via a web browser application or via an edge device 22 that may act as a gateway between the client devices 20 and the platform 16.”;
[0042] category type “As used herein, a “request” in the customer service context corresponds to a request by the customer for a feature, device, service, and so forth that the customer wants to add to their existing service and/or is entitled to add. For example, a request as used herein may be for an upgrade or addition to available cloud resources, for an additional hardware device (e.g., a new or additional laptop), for a defined or common service (e.g., a password reset or change). With respect to the present discussion the request for a service, action, or hardware, may be associated with a defined or known process and may be related to a frequently asked for or common item or service. For example, a request may result from a selection by a customer of a service or item from an online catalog of services or items offered to the customer, such as may be made available via customer service management portal.”;
[0043] receive a request from a client “With this in mind, and turning to FIG. 6, a swim lane type view is presented defining steps in a request fulfillment process in accordance with the present approach and how such steps may be characterized in terms of the relevant party, i.e., customer 380, case agent (real or virtual) 382, and technical group, here the request handling team 336. In this example, the customer 320 initially submits (step 390) a request 400, such as via a service portal accessed on a client instance.”;
[0040] based on agent profile determine agent’s rights thus obtain agent rights, assign (thus assignment of) case to agent and technical group where either the agent or group can be the agent of the limitation “In this example, a user 320 at a client site (e.g., a user of a client device 20 or who interacts with a client instance 102) may generate a customer service case 322, such as in response to a question or reported issue or a request. The case may be generated in response to an automated interaction between the user 320 and the customer service platform or by a customer service agent who evaluates the communication from the user 320 and opens a corresponding case 322 if needed. It may also be noted, that the aspects of the present approach discussed herein may afford a customer (e.g., user 320) control over which agents or types of agents (e.g., based on certifications, experience, prior history, and so forth) can perform or open which actions with respect to a case. For example, a customer may stipulate that only agents 322 having so many years of experience or certain certifications may request a change be made to their system. Once the case 322 is opened, one or more technical groups (e.g., an incident response team 330, a problem team 332, a change implementation team 334, a request handling team 336, and so forth) may perform respective actions defined by their roles to resolve the case 322.”];
determining, based on the category type and the rights, a plurality of sub-case types associated with the request [see at least [0026] determine items related to the case based on the case type (category type) and user’s profile including user rights and skills, where user rights include an agent being able to see work done by groups “In certain implementations, this may allow an agent or customer approach to use a single reference (such as a case or matter number) to access information or updates from technical teams that do not typically employ such a number for their own tracking purposes. In this manner, relevant information to a client issue may be accessed from all involved technical teams at the agent level as well as allowing the technical teams themselves to readily see activity by other teams. By way of example, a common interface, such as a customer service management interface used by a customer service agent, may be used to review and access information pertinent to an issue from multiple technical groups of teams that do not typically reference or index their activities using the customer service matter identifier (e.g., matter or case number).”;
[0040] where work done by other groups (one or more technical groups) includes “Once the case 322 is opened, one or more technical groups (e.g., an incident response team 330, a problem team 332, a change implementation team 334, a request handling team 336, and so forth) may perform respective actions defined by their roles to resolve the case 322.”;
Fig. 14 and [0072] “Returning to the case detail screen 650, and turning to FIG. 14, an additional feature described herein is illustrated. In particular, as noted herein, in accordance with the present approach a given case may be associated over its history with more than one problem, incident, request, change, and so forth.”]; and
initiating resolution of the request based on a selected sub-case type of the plurality of sub-case types [see at least [0056] initiate resolution based on a sub-case (problem) selection “Alternatively, as noted above, the change 500 may be initiated by the case agent 382 as part of an ongoing case 322, such as in response to a problem 450 being identified and the change 500 being indicated as a possible solution 474 or workaround.”].
Dwivedi [0026] teaches user rights for performing work but doesn’t/don’t explicitly teach however Prasad discloses
obtaining information regarding access rights of the agent;
determining, based on the first type and the access rights, a plurality of second types [for the limitations above, see at least Fig. 4 and [0047] GUI that presents customized drop down and sub drop down menus in response to user input “the user interface 220 provides navigational menus 234, 236 that may facilitate navigating to the catalog item 222, including a catalog menu 234 that enables selection of a catalog 226 (e.g., the Service Catalog) and a category menu 236 that enables selection of categories 226, 228 (e.g., Hardware and Employee Devices). In particular, to navigate to the catalog item 222, a user may select the Service Catalog 226 using the catalog menu 234, which may populate the category menu 236 with categories belonging to the Service Catalog 226. The user may then select the Hardware category 228, which populates the category menu 236 with sub-categories belonging to the Hardware category 228. The user may select the Employee Devices category 230, which displays the Phone catalog item 222 in a catalog item pane 238 of the user interface 220.”;
Fig. 5 and [0048] GUI that presents customized drop down and sub drop down menus in response to user input “FIG. 5 is the example user interface 220 of the catalog software application displaying the catalog item 222 of FIG. 4 via a second hierarchically categorized path 250, in accordance to an embodiment of the present disclosure.”;
Figs. 6-7 and [0049-0050] “Each catalog entity, which may include categories and catalog items (e.g., the Hardware category 228, the Employee Devices category 230, the New Joinee category 252, the Employee Benefits category 254, and the Phone catalog item 222) may be included on a user-accessible list and a user-inaccessible list. FIG. 6 is an example user interface 270 displaying a user-accessible list 272 for the catalog item 222 of FIG. 4 …
FIG. 7 is an example user interface 290 displaying a user-inaccessible list 292 for the catalog item 222 of FIG. 4, in accordance to an embodiment of the present disclosure.”;
[0005] further define catalog items and introduces access rights; [0010, 0029-0032, 0049-0050, 0052-0055, 0057, 0060, 0065, 0067] further define access rights].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Dwivedi with Prasad to include the limitation(s) above as disclosed by Prasad. Dwivedi teaches user rights for performing work and Prasad would further define Dwivedi by providing clarification on how those user rights are implemented such as access to data in a drop down menu or series of drop down menus [see at least Prasad 0006-0008 ].
Furthermore, all of the claimed elements were known in the prior arts of a) Dwivedi and b) Prasad and c) one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 2, modified Dwivedi teaches the system of claim 1,
and Dwivedi teaches wherein the agent corresponds to a virtual agent, wherein the virtual agent is configured to:
select the selected sub-case type; and
initiate the resolution of the request [for the limitations above, see at least [0043-0044] “the relevant party, i.e., customer 380, case agent (real or virtual) 382, and technical group …
In response to the submission 390 of the request 400, a case 322 is opened, either by a case agent 382 or in an automated manner (e.g., a virtual agent or automated routine) in response to the submission 390.”;
[0056] initiate resolution based on a sub-case (problem) selection “Alternatively, as noted above, the change 500 may be initiated by the case agent 382 as part of an ongoing case 322, such as in response to a problem 450 being identified and the change 500 being indicated as a possible solution 474 or workaround.”].
Regarding claim 3, modified Dwivedi teaches the system of claim 1, as well as the access rights
and Dwivedi teaches wherein the agent portal is configured to:
obtain customer information associated with the client device, wherein the customer information is indicative of one or more previous interactions with the agent portal; and
determine the plurality of sub-case types associated with the request based at least in part on the customer information and the rights [for the limitations above, see at least Fig. 1 and [0027] user devices “Turning now to FIG. 1, a schematic diagram of an embodiment of a cloud computing system 10 where embodiments of the present disclosure may operate, is illustrated. The cloud computing system 10 may include a client network 12, a network 14 (e.g., the Internet), and a cloud-based platform 16. In some implementations, the cloud-based platform 16 may be a configuration management database (CMDB) platform. … As shown in FIG. 1, the client network 12 is able to connect to one or more client devices 20A, 20B, and 20C so that the client devices are able to communicate with each other and/or with the network hosting the platform 16. The client devices 20 may be computing systems and/or other types of computing devices generally referred to as Internet of Things (IoT) devices that access cloud computing services, for example, via a web browser application or via an edge device 22 that may act as a gateway between the client devices 20 and the platform 16.”;
[0043] receive a request from a client “With this in mind, and turning to FIG. 6, a swim lane type view is presented defining steps in a request fulfillment process in accordance with the present approach and how such steps may be characterized in terms of the relevant party, i.e., customer 380, case agent (real or virtual) 382, and technical group, here the request handling team 336. In this example, the customer 320 initially submits (step 390) a request 400, such as via a service portal accessed on a client instance.”;
[0040] based on customer information, gather agent profile to determine agent’s rights thus obtain agent rights, assign (thus assignment of) case to agent and technical group based on customer information, where either the agent or group can be the agent of the limitation “In this example, a user 320 at a client site (e.g., a user of a client device 20 or who interacts with a client instance 102) may generate a customer service case 322, such as in response to a question or reported issue or a request. The case may be generated in response to an automated interaction between the user 320 and the customer service platform or by a customer service agent who evaluates the communication from the user 320 and opens a corresponding case 322 if needed. It may also be noted, that the aspects of the present approach discussed herein may afford a customer (e.g., user 320) control over which agents or types of agents (e.g., based on certifications, experience, prior history, and so forth) can perform or open which actions with respect to a case. For example, a customer may stipulate that only agents 322 having so many years of experience or certain certifications may request a change be made to their system. Once the case 322 is opened, one or more technical groups (e.g., an incident response team 330, a problem team 332, a change implementation team 334, a request handling team 336, and so forth) may perform respective actions defined by their roles to resolve the case 322.”].
Regarding claim 4, modified Dwivedi teaches the system of claim 1,
and Dwivedi teaches wherein the agent portal comprises a graphical user interface (GUI), and wherein the agent selects the selected sub-case type via the GUI [for the limitations above, see at least [0043-0044] “the relevant party, i.e., customer 380, case agent (real or virtual) 382, and technical group …
In response to the submission 390 of the request 400, a case 322 is opened, either by a case agent 382 or in an automated manner (e.g., a virtual agent or automated routine) in response to the submission 390.”;
[0056] initiate resolution based on a sub-case (problem) selection “Alternatively, as noted above, the change 500 may be initiated by the case agent 382 as part of an ongoing case 322, such as in response to a problem 450 being identified and the change 500 being indicated as a possible solution 474 or workaround.”].
Regarding claim 5, modified Dwivedi teaches the system of claim 4, .
Modified Dwivedi (Dwivedi) [0026] teaches user rights for performing work but doesn’t/don’t explicitly teach however Prasad discloses
wherein the GUI is configured to display the first type [see at least Fig. 4 and [0047] GUI that presents customized drop down and sub drop down menus in response to user input “the user interface 220 provides navigational menus 234, 236 that may facilitate navigating to the catalog item 222, including a catalog menu 234 that enables selection of a catalog 226 (e.g., the Service Catalog) and a category menu 236 that enables selection of categories 226, 228 (e.g., Hardware and Employee Devices). In particular, to navigate to the catalog item 222, a user may select the Service Catalog 226 using the catalog menu 234, which may populate the category menu 236 with categories belonging to the Service Catalog 226. The user may then select the Hardware category 228, which populates the category menu 236 with sub-categories belonging to the Hardware category 228. The user may select the Employee Devices category 230, which displays the Phone catalog item 222 in a catalog item pane 238 of the user interface 220.”;
Fig. 5 and [0048] GUI that presents customized drop down and sub drop down menus in response to user input “FIG. 5 is the example user interface 220 of the catalog software application displaying the catalog item 222 of FIG. 4 via a second hierarchically categorized path 250, in accordance to an embodiment of the present disclosure.”].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify modified Dwivedi with Prasad to include the limitation(s) above as disclosed by Prasad. Modified Dwivedi (Dwivedi) teaches user rights for performing work and Prasad would further define Dwivedi by providing clarification on how those user rights are implemented such as access to data in a drop down menu or series of drop down menus [see at least Prasad 0006-0008 ].
Furthermore, all of the claimed elements were known in the prior arts of a) modified Dwivedi and b) Prasad and c) one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 6, modified Dwivedi teaches the system of claim 4,
and Dwivedi teaches wherein the selected sub-case type is associated with one or more related sub-case types, wherein the agent portal is configured to update the GUI to display the one or more related sub-case types based on the selected sub-case type [see at least Fig. 10 and [0019, 0068] selection of a case; Fig. 12-13 and [0071] selection of a sub-case (incident) and related sub-case data (related incidents or child of incident) where information relevant to an incident (child of incident) is presented to user by computer without user requesting thus automatically “turning to Fig. 13 … for the case in question and which may be generated in response to the case agent 382 selecting the create incident option 660 illustrated in FIG. 12. … Information relevant to an incident … may be presented, along with details regarding the priority, state, and category of the incident. Similarly, the presence of, or connections to, child or related incidents is also provided so as to be accessible within the case information.”].
Regarding claim 7, modified Dwivedi teaches the system of claim 1,
and Dwivedi teaches wherein the agent portal comprises a graphical user interface (GUI) configured to display the plurality of sub-case types associated with the request for selection [see at least Fig. 10 and [0019, 0068] selection of a case; Fig. 12-13 and [0071] selection of a sub-case (incident) and related sub-case data (related incidents or child of incident) where information relevant to an incident (child of incident) is presented to user by computer without user requesting thus automatically “for the case in question and which may be generated in response to the case agent 382 selecting the create incident option 660 illustrated in FIG. 12. … Information relevant to an incident … may be presented, along with details regarding the priority, state, and category of the incident. Similarly, the presence of, or connections to, child or related incidents is also provided so as to be accessible within the case information.”].
Regarding claim 8 and 17, modified Dwivedi teaches the method of claim 14,
and Dwivedi teaches wherein the agent portal is configured to initiate the resolution of the request by initiating one or more processes to retrieve additional information associated with the request [see at least [0056] initiate resolution based on a sub-case (problem) selection “Alternatively, as noted above, the change 500 may be initiated by the case agent 382 as part of an ongoing case 322, such as in response to a problem 450 being identified and the change 500 being indicated as a possible solution 474 or workaround.”;
Fig. 10 and [0019, 0068] selection of a case; Fig. 12-13 and [0071] selection of a sub-case (incident) and related sub-case data (related incidents or child of incident) where information relevant to an incident (child of incident) is presented to user by computer without user requesting thus automatically “for the case in question and which may be generated in response to the case agent 382 selecting the create incident option 660 illustrated in FIG. 12. … Information relevant to an incident … may be presented, along with details regarding the priority, state, and category of the incident. Similarly, the presence of, or connections to, child or related incidents is also provided so as to be accessible within the case information.”].
Regarding claim 9 and 18, modified Dwivedi teaches the method of claim 17,
and Dwivedi teaches comprising: generating, in response to receiving the selected sub-case type, one or more additional requests associated with the one or more related sub-case types, wherein each of the one or more additional requests is associated with one or more additional processes; and
populating at least a portion of the one or more additional processes with the additional information associated with the request that is retrieved by the one or more processes [for the limitations above, see at least Fig. 10 and [0019, 0068] selection of a case; Fig. 12-13 and [0071] selection of a sub-case (incident) and related sub-case data (related incidents or child of incident) where information relevant to an incident (child of incident) is presented to user by computer without user requesting thus automatically “turning to Fig. 13 … for the case in question and which may be generated in response to the case agent 382 selecting the create incident option 660 illustrated in FIG. 12. … Information relevant to an incident … may be presented, along with details regarding the priority, state, and category of the incident. Similarly, the presence of, or connections to, child or related incidents is also provided so as to be accessible within the case information.”].
Regarding claim 10, modified Dwivedi teaches the system of claim 9,
and Dwivedi teaches wherein populating each of the one or more additional requests with the additional information comprises actively populating one or more empty fields associated with the one or more additional requests with the additional information [examiner notes the specification [0064, 0066, 0080] does not teach populating one or more empty fields “automatically populating some or all of the information for related sub-case type selections 506” and thus the limitation is interpreted as wherein populating each of the one or more additional requests with the additional information comprises actively populating one or more fields associated with the one or more additional requests with the additional information,
then see at least Fig. 10 and [0019, 0068] selection of a case; Fig. 12-13 and [0071] selection of a sub-case (incident) and related sub-case data (related incidents or child of incident) where information relevant to an incident (child of incident) is presented to user by computer without user requesting thus automatically “turning to Fig. 13 … for the case in question and which may be generated in response to the case agent 382 selecting the create incident option 660 illustrated in FIG. 12. … Information relevant to an incident … may be presented, along with details regarding the priority, state, and category of the incident. Similarly, the presence of, or connections to, child or related incidents is also provided so as to be accessible within the case information.”;
[Fig. 11] item 654 LOADING TIMELINE DATA… and right column AGENT ASSIST which shows how data looks before it is loaded such as LOADING SEARCH RESULTS…, where Fig 11 shows how data is populated in other Figs including 12-14 such as filling in empty spaces as noted in right column AGENT ASSIST until the loading is complete].
Regarding claim 11, modified Dwivedi teaches the system of claim 1,
and Dwivedi teaches wherein the agent portal is configured to:
determine horizontal relationships, vertical relationships, or a combination thereof, between the category type and the plurality of sub-case types [see at least [0071] “turning to FIG. 13 … Similarly, the presence of, or connections to, child or related incidents is also provided so as to be accessible within the case information.”;
[0072] “FIG. 14 depicts how a case detail screen 650 (or other suitable screen) may also display related records 700 related to different technical services. In this example, the depicted case is associated with both an incident and a problem, which may arise in a scenario where an incident is initially created and subsequently determined to be a problem (e.g., requiring a change) or in which a problem is initially created but subsequently determined to be better resolved as an incident (e.g., no change needed to resolve).”]; and
determine one or more field mappings between the category type and the plurality of sub-case types based at least in part on the horizontal relationships, the vertical relationships, or the combination thereof [see at least [0051] determine how cases are linked such as vertical relationships “case agent 382 may perform a search 454, such as based upon a provided error code or other submitted details to attempt to identify the problem in a database of known problems. If the problem 450 is found (block 456) based on the search, the case 322 may be linked to (step 458) or otherwise reference the existing or known problem 450. … With this in mind, one case 322 may be linked to one problem 450, but one problem 450 may be linked to multiple cases 322, such as where a problem 450 affects multiple clients or client instances.”].
Regarding claim 12, modified Dwivedi teaches the system of claim 11,
and Dwivedi teaches wherein the one or more field mappings generate one or more field values from the selected sub-case type to one or more related sub-case types based at least in part on the horizontal relationships [see at least [0051] determine how cases are linked such as vertical relationships “case agent 382 may perform a search 454, such as based upon a provided error code or other submitted details to attempt to identify the problem in a database of known problems. If the problem 450 is found (block 456) based on the search, the case 322 may be linked to (step 458) or otherwise reference the existing or known problem 450. … With this in mind, one case 322 may be linked to one problem 450, but one problem 450 may be linked to multiple cases 322, such as where a problem 450 affects multiple clients or client instances.”;
[0072] “FIG. 14 depicts how a case detail screen 650 (or other suitable screen) may also display related records 700 related to different technical services. In this example, the depicted case is associated with both an incident and a problem, which may arise in a scenario where an incident is initially created and subsequently determined to be a problem (e.g., requiring a change) or in which a problem is initially created but subsequently determined to be better resolved as an incident (e.g., no change needed to resolve).”].
Regarding claim 13 modified Dwivedi teaches the system of claim 11,
and Dwivedi teaches wherein the horizontal relationships, the vertical relationships, or the combination thereof, are dynamically updated based on changes to processes corresponding to the plurality of sub-case types [see at least Fig. 12-13 and [0071] creation of vertical and horizontal connections including an incident or child incident will be determined (“Similarly, the presence of, or connections to, child or related incidents”) and displayed to a user “for the case in question and which may be generated in response to the case agent 382 selecting the create incident option 660 illustrated in FIG. 12. … Information relevant to an incident … may be presented, along with details regarding the priority, state, and category of the incident. Similarly, the presence of, or connections to, child or related incidents is also provided so as to be accessible within the case information.”;
[0026,0046] dynamically updated data: [0026] “Further, the customer service management interface may be updated or synchronized based on the shared matter identifier to reflect all activity by the relevant technical teams or groups. A customer service agent may then use the interface to track progress on a client issue being worked and/or to generate additional action items for a given technical team or group based on the observed progress or status.”; [0046] “In the event of a partial or complete request cancelation, the case 322 may be updated as shown so as to allow the case agent 382 and/or customer 320 to observe the current status of the request 400 and to take any needed corrective action.”].
Regarding claim 15, modified Dwivedi teaches the method of claim 14,
and Dwivedi teaches comprising: determining a skill level associated with the agent; and
updating the plurality of sub-case types based at least in part on the skill level [see at least [0040] based on agent profile determine agent’s skill level, assign (thus assignment of) case to agent and technical group, where either the agent or group can be the agent of the limitation, and where the assignment also dictates what the agent can do to the case such as apply sub-case types “In this example, a user 320 at a client site (e.g., a user of a client device 20 or who interacts with a client instance 102) may generate a customer service case 322, such as in response to a question or reported issue or a request. The case may be generated in response to an automated interaction between the user 320 and the customer service platform or by a customer service agent who evaluates the communication from the user 320 and opens a corresponding case 322 if needed. It may also be noted, that the aspects of the present approach discussed herein may afford a customer (e.g., user 320) control over which agents or types of agents (e.g., based on certifications, experience, prior history, and so forth) can perform or open which actions with respect to a case. For example, a customer may stipulate that only agents 322 having so many years of experience or certain certifications may request a change be made to their system. Once the case 322 is opened, one or more technical groups (e.g., an incident response team 330, a problem team 332, a change implementation team 334, a request handling team 336, and so forth) may perform respective actions defined by their roles to resolve the case 322.”].
Regarding claim 16, modified Dwivedi teaches the method of claim 14,
and Dwivedi teaches comprising: generating a graphical user interface (GUI), via an agent portal, wherein the GUI and one or more category types including the category type;
the category type; and
the category type, the plurality of sub-case types for selection by the agent [for the limitations above, see at least [0042] category type “As used herein, a “request” in the customer service context corresponds to a request by the customer for a feature, device, service, and so forth that the customer wants to add to their existing service and/or is entitled to add. For example, a request as used herein may be for an upgrade or addition to available cloud resources, for an additional hardware device (e.g., a new or additional laptop), for a defined or common service (e.g., a password reset or change). With respect to the present discussion the request for a service, action, or hardware, may be associated with a defined or known process and may be related to a frequently asked for or common item or service. For example, a request may result from a selection by a customer of a service or item from an online catalog of services or items offered to the customer, such as may be made available via customer service management portal.”;
[0040] where work done by other groups (one or more technical groups) is sub-cases “In this example, a user 320 at a client site (e.g., a user of a client device 20 or who interacts with a client instance 102) may generate a customer service case 322, such as in response to a question or reported issue or a request. The case may be generated in response to an automated interaction between the user 320 and the customer service platform or by a customer service agent who evaluates the communication from the user 320 and opens a corresponding case 322 if needed. … Once the case 322 is opened, one or more technical groups (e.g., an incident response team 330, a problem team 332, a change implementation team 334, a request handling team 336, and so forth) may perform respective actions defined by their roles to resolve the case 322.”;
[0070] “Turning to FIG. 12, via the case detail screen 650 of the present example, a case agent 382 may, as discussed in greater detail above, create an incident (option 660), create a change (option 662), create a problem (option 664), or create a request (option 666).”].
Modified Dwivedi (Dwivedi) [0026] teaches user rights for performing work but doesn’t/don’t explicitly teach however Prasad discloses
generating a graphical user interface (GUI), wherein the GUI includes a first drop-down menu having one or more first types including the first types type for selection by the user;
receiving, from the GUI, the first type; and
in response to receiving the first type from the first drop-down menu, unlocking the GUI to include a second drop down menu having a subset of the plurality of second types for selection by the user [see at least Fig. 4 and [0047] GUI that presents customized drop down and sub drop down menus in response to user input “the user interface 220 provides navigational menus 234, 236 that may facilitate navigating to the catalog item 222, including a catalog menu 234 that enables selection of a catalog 226 (e.g., the Service Catalog) and a category menu 236 that enables selection of categories 226, 228 (e.g., Hardware and Employee Devices). In particular, to navigate to the catalog item 222, a user may select the Service Catalog 226 using the catalog menu 234, which may populate the category menu 236 with categories belonging to the Service Catalog 226. The user may then select the Hardware category 228, which populates the category menu 236 with sub-categories belonging to the Hardware category 228. The user may select the Employee Devices category 230, which displays the Phone catalog item 222 in a catalog item pane 238 of the user interface 220.”;
Fig. 5 and [0048] GUI that presents customized drop down and sub drop down menus in response to user input “FIG. 5 is the example user interface 220 of the catalog software application displaying the catalog item 222 of FIG. 4 via a second hierarchically categorized path 250, in accordance to an embodiment of the present disclosure.”;
Figs. 6-7 and [0049-0050] “Each catalog entity, which may include categories and catalog items (e.g., the Hardware category 228, the Employee Devices category 230, the New Joinee category 252, the Employee Benefits category 254, and the Phone catalog item 222) may be included on a user-accessible list and a user-inaccessible list. FIG. 6 is an example user interface 270 displaying a user-accessible list 272 for the catalog item 222 of FIG. 4 …
FIG. 7 is an example user interface 290 displaying a user-inaccessible list 292 for the catalog item 222 of FIG. 4, in accordance to an embodiment of the present disclosure.”;
[0005] further define catalog items and introduces access rights; [0010, 0029-0032, 0049-0050, 0052-0055, 0057, 0060, 0065, 0067] further define access rights].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify modified Dwivedi with Prasad to include the limitation(s) above as disclosed by Prasad. Modified Dwivedi (Dwivedi) teaches user rights for performing work and Prasad would further define Dwivedi by providing clarification on how those user rights are implemented such as access to data in a drop down menu or series of drop down menus [see at least Prasad 0006-0008 ].
Furthermore, all of the claimed elements were known in the prior arts of a) modified Dwivedi and b) Prasad and c) one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 19, modified Dwivedi teaches the method of claim 18,
and Dwivedi teaches wherein a first organization group implements the one or more processes for the selected sub-case type and a second organization group different than the first organization group implements the one or more additional processes for the one or more related sub-case types [see at least Fig. 12-13 and [0071] selection of a sub-case (incident) and related sub-case data (related incidents or child of incident) where information relevant to an incident (child of incident) is presented to user by computer without user requesting thus automatically “turning to Fig. 13 … for the case in question and which may be generated in response to the case agent 382 selecting the create incident option 660 illustrated in FIG. 12. … Information relevant to an incident … may be presented, along with details regarding the priority, state, and category of the incident. Similarly, the presence of, or connections to, child or related incidents is also provided so as to be accessible within the case information.”; [0040] various groups handle various related sub-case data (related incidents or child of incident) “Once the case 322 is opened, one or more technical groups (e.g., an incident response team 330, a problem team 332, a change implementation team 334, a request handling team 336, and so forth) may perform respective actions defined by their roles to resolve the case 322.”].
Conclusion
When responding to the office action, any new claims and/or limitations should be accompanied by a reference as to where the new claims and/or limitations are supported in the original disclosure.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Fisher – WO 2008083345 A2 (relevant because it teaches a similar support system to Dwivedi et al. (US 2020/0192686 A1) ) is included in the IDS dated 6/12/24
Vsoftconsulting, 5 Reasons Why Your Company Should Use ServiceNow (relevant because it teach a similar support system to Dwivedi et al. (US 2020/0192686 A1) ) is included in the IDS dated 6/12/24
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES WEBB whose telephone number is (313)446-6615. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 10-3.
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, Jerry O’Connor can be reached on (571) 272-6787. 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.
/JAMES WEBB/Examiner, Art Unit 3624