DETAILED ACTION
This Action is in response to the Amendment for Application Number 18825732 received on 5/18/2026.
Claims 1, 3-10, and 12-19 are presented for examination.
Claims 2, 11, and 20 have been cancelled.
This application claims foreign priority to 202341060923, filed 9/11/2023.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
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, 3-6, 8, 10, 12-15, 17, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Murti et al. (US 20220229738) in view of Hickey (US 20100115415) and further in view of Kunnathur Ragupathi (US 20160116961).
Regarding claim 1, Murti disclosed a computing system, comprising:
one or more programmable processors (Murti, Fig. 1, [0023], Murti disclosed the invention on a general-purpose computer, [0095], “processor 1010”; see also [0101] ); and
one or more non-transitory computer-readable media comprising instructions executable by the one or more programmable processors (Murti, [0023] “memory”) to cause the computing system to:
obtain visual indicator status information of a network device, wherein the visual indicator status information includes a color or characteristic corresponding to a state of the network device or a state of one or more links associated with the network device (Murti, [0080], “Device and configuration information is obtained for each device”; [0081], Murti disclosed “certain per-device information is obtained for each device and represented in a visually distinguishing manner to allow for quick and easy identification of relevant operational characteristics”; Also in [0081] Murti disclosed utilizing colors or patterns to represent different network device status; See also [0082] in which the obtained information also includes “connectivity characteristic”; See Figure 10, showing Information collected);
generate a graphical user interface that includes a visual representation of the network device and one or more virtual visual indicators indicating the state of the network device or the state of one or more links associated with the network device (Murti, [0081], Murti disclosed “With respect to the GUI mechanisms and display elements, certain per-device information is obtained for each device and represented in a visually distinguishing manner to allow for quick and easy identification of relevant operational characteristics”; Also in [0081] Murti disclosed utilizing colors or patterns to represent different network device status; See also [0082] in which the obtained information also includes “connectivity characteristic” in which “links between devices can be shown with lines of different weights and colors such as thinner or thicker lines to indicate relative transmission speeds or signal quality, and so on”; See Figure 10 showing Use in User Interface); and
output, for display on a display device, the graphical user interface (Murti, [0073] “Embodiments include an efficient visual mapping aspect provided through a GUI to display the topography and backup/protection configuration and status of network devices in a system”).
While Murti disclosed generating and displaying a graphical user interface that includes a visual representation of the network device, Murti did not explicitly disclose wherein the visual representation replicates a physical appearance of the network device and one or more virtual visual indicators representing physical visual indicators of the network device, the one or more virtual visual indicators overlayed on the visual representation of the network device and configured to indicate the color or characteristic corresponding to the state of the network device or the state of the one or more links associated with the network device.
In an analogous art, Hicky disclosed wherein the visual representation replicates a physical appearance of the network device and one or more virtual visual indicators representing physical visual indicators of the network device, the one or more virtual visual indicators overlayed on the visual representation of the network device and configured to indicate the color or characteristic corresponding to the state of the network device or the state of the one or more links associated with the network device (Hicky, [0017], Hicky disclosed website 52 including linked pages 501, 50b, 50c, and “web page 50a can be configured to include a graphical picture of the network switch 26. The graphical picture of the switch 26 can include a representation of the lights or light emitting diodes of the network switch 26 for each port 30. The picture of the switch can include indicia, such as a selected color assigned to the lights, to represent the status of that port where ports of similar status are provided with the same color. For example, a graphical representation of the general status webpage 50a can include a graphical representation of the ports as having one color of lights for when the port is connected and another color of lights for the when the port is not connected.”; [0022], “Graphical window 64 includes status information by port, where lights 66 represent the ports and their status is indicated by the color of the lights. A system administrator 34 can quickly see and interpret the status information. Abnormal states of the port can also be represented with flashing lights to call the attention of the system administrator 34. The graphical nature of the representation of the ports allows the system administrator 34 to see all of the ports in a single web page 54 rather than on multiple pages of text listing. Also, the system administrator can locate ports in a similar state by noticing all ports of a particular color, rather than scanning the text for particular words.”).
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the teachings of Murti and Hicky as they are both directed to displaying the status of devices, and as such, they are within similar environments.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to incorporate Hicky’s graphic representations within the teachings of Murti in order to allow for a network manager to be able to view additional status information of networking devices, such as at the port level in which the graphical nature of the representation of the ports allows the system administrator 34 to see all of the ports in a single view rather than on multiple pages of text listing. Also, the system administrator can locate ports in a similar state by noticing all ports of a particular color, rather than scanning the text for particular words (Hicky, [0022]) thereby facilitating network management as a whole.
Murti and Hicky did not explicitly disclose deactivating the physical visual indicators of the network device.
In an analogous art, Kunnathur Ragupathi disclosed deactivating the physical visual indicators of the network device (Kunnathur Ragupathi, [0030], “During operation of the data center, administrative light manager 46 may remotely manage indicator light illumination at each component of the data center by passing the desired indicator light illumination as a setting. For example, administrative light manager 46 can establish a default setting in which each indicator light of the data center is turned off; See also [0023] Kunnathur Ragupathi disclosed having indicator lights deactivated by default, and only activating indicator lights based upon select conditions, thus reducing power consumption in the data center).
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the teachings of Kunnathur Ragupathi with Murti and Hicky as all teachings provide for ways of remote managing of networked devices, and as such they are within similar environments. Furthermore, the combined teachings of Murti and Hicky suggests network management in relation to a rack of network devices, and Kunnathur Ragupathi provides for specific implementation for devices in racks, and as such one would have been motivated by the references themselves to combine such teachings.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to incorporate Kunnathur Ragupathi’s techniques for controlling indicator lights on networked devices within the combined teachings of Murti and Hicky to provide network managers, who have access to remotely viewing the status of network devices and their components, with an added benefit of controlling illumination lighting of the physical devices and their components, thereby reducing power consumption.
Claim 10 recites a method with limitations that are substantially similar to the limitations of claim 1. Claim 19 recites, “Non-transitory computer-readable media that includes instructions configured to cause processing circuitry to” perform limitations that are substantially similar to the limitations of claim 1.
As shown by the rejection of claim 1 above, Murti, Hicky, and Kunnathur Ragupathi disclosed such limitations. Murti additionally disclosed a non-transitory computer-readable media as claimed (Murti, [0023])
Therefore claims 10 and 19 are rejected under the same rationale applied above.
Regarding claims 3 and 12, Murti, Hicky, and Kunnathur Ragupathi disclosed the computing system of claim 1 and method of claim 11, wherein to generate the graphical user interface, the instructions cause the computing system to:
generate a visual representation of a rack of a plurality of network devices including the network device, wherein a portion of the visual representation corresponding to each network device of the plurality of network devices of the rack includes corresponding one or more virtual visual indicators representing physical visual indicators of the corresponding network device of the plurality of network devices, the corresponding one or more virtual visual indicators configured to indicate a color or characteristic corresponding to a state of the corresponding network device or a state of one or more links associated with the corresponding network device (Murti in view of Hicky and Kunnathur Ragupathi disclosed the limitations; Murti, [0073]-[0074] Murti disclosed generating an efficient visual mapping aspect provided through a GUI to display the topography and backup/protection configuration and status of network devices in a system, in which devices are organized into a table such that columns indicate longitudinal location and rows indicate latitudinal location. FIG. 8 illustrates an example visual mapping template. As shown in a GUI display page a number of latitudes (e.g., 1-3 of n latitudes) is shown along an x-axis (rows) of table 800 and a number of longitudes (e.g., 1-3 of m longitudes) is shown along a y-axis (columns) of table 800. With respect to Fig. 8, Murti disclosed where the longitude may represent devices in a rack; Applying Hicky’s technique, [0017] and [0022], of rendering a graphical picture of each device with overlaid colours/characteristics corresponding to the states of the network device components, for each device in the rack of Murti, arrives at the limitations as claimed ). See motivation to combine above.
Regarding claims 4 and 13, Murti, Hicky, and Kunnathur Ragupathi disclosed the computing system of claim 1 and method of claim 11, wherein the visual indicator status information comprises a first visual indicator status information for a first one or more virtual visual indicators of the network device, wherein the graphical user interface comprises a first graphical user interface (Murti, [0073] Embodiments include an efficient visual mapping aspect provided through a GUI to display the topography and backup/protection configuration and status of network devices in a system…FIG. 8 illustrates an example visual mapping template; [0076] One or more configuration display areas is associated with each device to provide further information with respect to device configuration, connectivity, performance, and so on. Such display areas may be provided using certain GUI techniques, such as pop-up windows, floating overlays, coded sub-windows, and so on.), and wherein the instructions cause the computing system to: obtain second visual indicator status information of the network device, wherein the second visual indicator status information includes a color or characteristic corresponding to a second state of the network device or a second state of one or more links associated with the network device and generate, based on the second visual indicator status information, a second graphical user interface that includes the visual representation of the network device and a second one or more virtual visual indicators indicative representing the physical visual indicators of the network device, the second one or more virtual visual indicators overlayed on the visual representation of the network device and configured to indicate the color or characteristic corresponding to the second state of the network device or the second state of the one or more links associated with the network device; and output, for display on the display device, the second graphical user interface (Murti, See Fig 10 for the different information collected; [0076] One or more configuration display areas is associated with each device to provide further information with respect to device configuration, connectivity, performance, and so on. Such display areas may be provided using certain GUI techniques, such as pop-up windows, floating overlays, coded sub-windows, and so on; Hicky, [0018], Hicky disclosed, “The general status webpage 50a can provide links to other web pages that can provide additional, or more detailed information or features of the ports. For example, the website 52 can include a power-over-Ethernet page 50b to indicate the power-over-Ethernet status of each port. Each port in the example can be represented by a color that indicates the power-over-Ethernet status. One color can be used to represent powered, another color can be used to represent not powered, a third color can be used to indicate power requested but not available, a fourth color can be used to indicate a fault, and so on.”; Hicky therefore generates additional user interfaces with additional visual indicator information as claimed).
Regarding claims 5 and 14, Murti, Hicky, and Kunnathur Ragupathi disclosed the computing system of claim 1 and method of claim 11, wherein to generate the graphical user interface, the instructions cause the computing system to: generate the graphical user interface in response to receiving, from a user device, a request to view one or more virtual visual indicators of the network device (Murti, [0085], Murti disclosed allowing for the clicking on a particular device icon which dynamically reloads the table to show the same view, but for the next level of devices”; Therefore, a user’s clicking amounts to a request to view the clicked device’s particular visual mapping, or next level of devices; It is also noted that in [0085] Murti disclosed the GUI to be web-based implementation and therefore such clicking amounts to browser based requests; Additionally, in [0086] Murti provides the ability to request the information for different points in time; Additionally, Hicky at [0016] disclosed system submitting a request via URL to which the interface is generated).
Regarding claims 6 and 15, Murti, Hicky, and Kunnathur Ragupathi disclosed the computing system of claim 1 and method of claim 11, wherein the visual indicator status information comprises a mapping of a particular color to a particular status of the network device or to a particular status of a corresponding link of the one or more links of the network device (Murti, [0081], Murti disclosed “With respect to the GUI mechanisms and display elements, certain per-device information is obtained for each device and represented in a visually distinguishing manner to allow for quick and easy identification of relevant operational characteristics”; Also in [0081] Murti disclosed utilizing colors or patterns to represent different network device status; See also [0082] in which the obtained information also includes “connectivity characteristic” in which “links between devices can be shown with lines of different weights and colors such as thinner or thicker lines to indicate relative transmission speeds or signal quality, and so on”; See Figure 10 showing Use in User Interface; Hicky, [0017], “The picture of the switch can include indicia, such as a selected color assigned to the lights, to represent the status of that port where ports of similar status are provided with the same color. For example, a graphical representation of the general status webpage 50a can include a graphical representation of the ports as having one color of lights for when the port is connected and another color of lights for the when the port is not connected.”).
Regarding claims 8 and 17, Murti, Hicky, and Kunnathur Ragupathi disclosed the computing system of claim 1 and method of claim 11, wherein the visual indicator status information comprises a color or characteristic corresponding to a status of an interface associated with the network device (Murti, [0082] Connectors from one device to other devices is displayed to reflect the device connectivity characteristic through a visual representation of the connector. This connectivity characteristic can comprise any relevant parameter, such as link speed, maximum transmission unit (MTU) (i.e., the largest packet size that can be sent over the connection), device latency, and device bandwidth; Hicky, [0017], “The graphical picture of the switch 26 can include a representation of the lights or light emitting diodes of the network switch 26 for each port 30. The picture of the switch can include indicia, such as a selected color assigned to the lights, to represent the status of that port where ports of similar status are provided with the same color. For example, a graphical representation of the general status webpage 50a can include a graphical representation of the ports as having one color of lights for when the port is connected and another color of lights for the when the port is not connected”).
Claims 9 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Murti et al. (US 20220229738) in view of Hickey (US 20100115415) and Kunnathur Ragupathi (US 20160116961) and further in view of Pothier et al. (US 7349960).
Regarding claims 9 and 18, Murti, Hicky, and Kunnathur Ragupathi disclosed the computing system of claim 1 and method of claim 11, but did not explicitly disclose wherein the visual representation of the network device includes a representation of a first side of the network device and a representation of a second side of the network device, wherein the first side of the network device comprises a front panel of the network device and wherein the second side of the network device comprises a back panel of the network device.
Pothier disclosed wherein the visual representation of the network device includes a representation of a first side of the network device and a representation of a second side of the network device, wherein the first side of the network device comprises a front panel of the network device and wherein the second side of the network device comprises a back panel of the network device (Pothier, col. 20, line 61 through col. 21, line 15, Pothier disclosed the ability for the GUI to display a representation of a network device including both its front and back view).
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the teachings of Murti, Hicky, and Kunnathur Ragupathi and Pothier as they both disclosed providing network device status information, and as such they are within similar environments.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to incorporate Pothier’s GUI views of network devices within the taechings of Murti, Hicky, and Kunnathur Ragupathi in order to provide administrators of Murti with physical views of the devices being monitored helping them tune the network devices to provide better overall management service (Pothier, col. 12, lines 15-20).
Claims 7 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Murti et al. (US 20220229738) in view of Hickey (US 20100115415) and Kunnathur Ragupathi (US 20160116961) and further in view of Gao et al. (US 20230336400).
Regarding claims 7 and 16, Murti, Hicky, and Kunnathur Ragupathi disclosed the computing system of claim 1 and method of claim 11, wherein the one or more programmable processors are further configured to: output a textual representation of a state of the one or more virtual visual indicators of the network device (Murti, [0084], Murti disclosed, “Each graphical icon can provide a link to further detailed textual information about the visual coding”).
Murti, Hicky, and Kunnathur Ragupathi did not disclose providing such status via a command line interface.
In an analogous art, Gao disclosed the utilization of a Command Line Interface to which network devices provide CLI commands to check the network status or statistics, such as utilizing the “show interface” command in order to shows the interface status, such as input errors (Gao, [0074]).
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the teachings of Murti, Hicky, and Kunnathur Ragupathi and Gao as they both relate to obtaining network status for network connected devices, and as such, they are within similar environments.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to incorporate the feature of using command line interface, as disclosed by Gao, within the teachings of Murti, Hicky, and Kunnathur Ragupathi in order to provide administrators with additional options for obtaining and viewing network device status information, thereby increasing desirability of use by customers.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 3-10, and 12-19 have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground of rejection applied above.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Perry et al. (US 20050198247) [discosure similar to related ref above: Pothier] disclosed in FIGS 4f-4l, graphical representation 896a (i.e., device view, device mimic) in graphic window 896b may include many views of the network device. For example, device mimic 896a is shown in FIG. 4f displaying a front view of the components in the upper portion of network device 540 (FIG. 35) (Perry, [0238]), to which “Device mimic 896a may also indicate the status of components. For example, ports and/or cards may be green for normal operation, red if there are errors and yellow if there are warnings. In one embodiment, a port may be colored, for example, light green or gray if it is available but not yet configured and colored dark green after being configured” (Perry, [0245]).
Roy et al. (US 20200136924) disclosed generating network device snapshots, obtaining logical information about the device, in which, “The state of a network device may include information in both a physical and logical context. The physical context may involve the physical condition of the device, such as which ports have cables plugged into them, what lights may be illuminated on the device, and what color those lights are. The physical context may be significant because, for example, what port a cable is plugged into may determine whether the network device is connected to the correct network. Additionally, lights and their specific colors may indicate whether the network device is operating correctly. Accordingly, having an image of the network device, such as a three-hundred-and-sixty-degree composite may be useful in showing the physical context of the device. The logical context may involve the operational status of the network device. For example, the logical context may describe what network or remote device a particular port is connected to.” (Roy, [0009]). Roy disclosed, “The network device snapshot may combine an image of the network device that provides the physical context, with information describing the logical context overlaid on the image of the device.” (Roy, [0010]). Roy disclosed a viewing device to view the snapshots of the networking device, in which the snapshots that “may include a static or live video capture of the network device 102 and logical information that describes the network device 102 or viewable portions 116 thereof. The viewing device 104 may process inputs that manipulate the network device snapshots 114 in order to view the network device 102 at different angles, or zoom into the viewable portions 116. The viewable portions 116 may include specific portions of the network device 102, such as the status lights and ports of a network router.” (Roy, [0012]). “At block 410, the portion of the captured image for the viewable portion may be augmented with the associated logical information. The associated logical information may include the meaning of the particular colors of lights on the network device 102, such as port power lights.” (Roy, [0027]).
Valentine et al. (GB 2352112 A, published 17.01.2001) disclosed a network supervising system, where an actual image of device and overlay of colors on ports to represent their link state is displayed (Valentine, p5-6, Figs. 1-3, “network manager clicks on a particular device, for example, device 13A in Figure 1”, “there is stored in the memory 17 a set of video signals which provide a proper picture (which may be substantially photographic or otherwise) of the relevant device…provide an enlarged image of the relevant device”, “the video image can be an accurate representation of, for example, the front face of the relevant device. As will be seen the front face of the device includes a number of ports 53”; p6, “the video image may be amended so as to show the status of the ports…by providing the image of each port 53 with a relevant colour code. For example, the different colours may show whether a link is present or not on that port, whether the port is enabled or disabled, and whether the port is partitioned or not. Once again, this port information is readily available to the system already described in interrogating the agent of the relevant device or devices”; Also on p6 “polled”).
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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JERRY B DENNISON whose telephone number is (571)272-3910. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-5:50.
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, Hadi Armouche can be reached at 571-270-3618. 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.
/JERRY B DENNISON/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2409
Prosecution Insights