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
1. This action is in response to the application filed on 10/01/2024.
Claims 10/01/2024 are presently pending for examination.
Information Disclosure Statement
2. The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 10/24/2024 has being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
3. 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.
4. Claim(s) 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rao et al., U. S. Patent Publication No. 2022/0365868 in view of Nolan et al., U. S. Patent Publication No. 2017/0187625.
Regarding claim 1 Rao discloses a system configured for simulating communication loads over a network, the system including: a controller module (see Rao, ¶ [0051] management module for controlling simulated IoT environment is provided); an application module, operationally coupled over the network to the controller module, wherein the system is configured to execute a load test over the network with the application module (see Rao, ¶ [0052] and [0173]; load testing is performed), by: transmitting mock telemetry messages, associated with mock devices, representing internet-of-things (IoT) devices, to the application module, wherein the mock telemetry messages are equivalent to production telemetry messages sent from the IoT devices (see Rao, ¶ [0053], [00210] and [0230]; messages from simulated devices are transmitted).
Although Rao discloses the invention substantially as claimed, it does not explicitly disclose and issuing an alert when the system determines that a result of the load test is indicative of errors above a threshold associated with receipt of the mock telemetry messages by the application module.
Nolan teaches and issuing an alert when the system determines that a result of the load test is indicative of errors above a threshold associated with receipt of the mock telemetry messages by the application module (see Nolan, ¶ [0024]-[0025] and [0027]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to incorporate the teachings of Nolan with that of Rao in order to efficiently identify and corrected the discovered errors.
Regarding claim 2, Rao-Nolan teaches wherein the controller module identifies errors by determining that one or more of the mock telemetry messages failed to reach the application module or that mock telemetry data in one or more of the mock telemetry messages is inaccurate (see Rao, ¶ [0039] and [0110]).
Regarding claim 3, Rao-Nolan teaches wherein: prior to transmitting the mock telemetry messages, the system is configured to generate the mock devices and register the mock devices with the application module; and the controller module is configured to determine the result of the load test is indicative of errors by reviewing reports generated from telemetry metrics, derived from telemetry logs received from the application module, wherein the telemetry logs identify the mock devices and associated ones of the mock telemetry messages received with the mock devices (see Rao, ¶ [0039], [0210] and [0221]).
Regarding claim 11, Rao discloses a method for simulating communication loads over a network, the method including: a controller module executing a load test (see Rao, ¶ [0052] and [0173]; load testing is performed), by: transmitting mock telemetry messages, associated with mock devices, representing internet-of-things (IoT) devices to an application module that is operationally coupled over the network to the controller module, wherein the mock telemetry messages are equivalent to production telemetry messages sent from the IoT devices (see Rao, ¶ [0053], [00210] and [0230]; messages from simulated devices are transmitted).
Although Rao discloses the invention substantially as claimed, it does not explicitly disclose and issuing an alert when the system determines that a result of the load test is indicative of errors above a threshold associated with receipt of the mock telemetry messages by the application module.
Nolan teaches and issuing an alert when the system determines that a result of the load test is indicative of errors above a threshold associated with receipt of the mock telemetry messages by the application module (see Nolan, ¶ [0024]-[0025] and [0027]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to incorporate the teachings of Nolan with that of Rao in order to efficiently identify and corrected the discovered errors.
Regarding claim 12, Rao-Noland teaches comprising identifying, by the system, errors by determining that one or more of the mock telemetry messages failed to reach the application module or that mock telemetry data in one or more of the mock telemetry messages is inaccurate (see Rao, ¶ [0039] and [0110]).
Regarding claim 13, Rao-Noland teaches comprising: prior to transmitting the mock telemetry messages, generating, by the system, the mock devices and registering the mock devices with the application module; and determining the result of the load test is indicative of errors by reviewing reports generated from mock telemetry metrics, derived from telemetry logs received from the application module, wherein the telemetry logs identify the mock devices and associated ones of the mock telemetry messages received with the mock devices (see Rao, ¶ [0039], [0210] and [0221]).
5. Claim(s) 4-10 and 14-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rao in view of Noland as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Pahlke, U. S. Patent Publication No. 2021/0147190.
Regarding claim 4, although Rao-Noland discloses the invention substantially as claimed, they do not explicitly disclose wherein the devices are elevator cars, escalators or movable walkways.
Pahlke teaches wherein the devices are elevator cars, escalators or movable walkways (see Pahlke, ¶ [0002] and [0003]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to incorporate the teachings of Pahlke with that of Rao-Noland in order to limit the simulated test of the communication load to the specific devices.
Regarding claim 5, Rao-Noland-Pahlke teaches wherein, each one of mock telemetry messages contains mock telemetry data that identifies one of the mock devices associated with the one of the mock telemetry messages and a mock operational state of the one of the mock devices (see Rao, ¶ [0227]).
Regarding claim 6, Rao-Noland-Pahlke teaches wherein the system is configured to: receive input that includes load test parameters; and perform the load test from the load test parameters (see Rao, ¶ [0037] and [0176]).
Regarding claim 7, Rao-Noland-Pahlke teaches wherein the load test parameters identifies one or more of: a date and time to start the load test; a duration for executing the load test; a subgroup of the mock devices for generating the load test; and the mock telemetry data to include in the mock telemetry messages (see Rao, ¶ [0039] and [0109]).
Regarding claim 8, Rao-Noland-Pahlke teaches wherein the subgroup of the mock devices is selected based on one or more of a device type and a device location (see Rao, ¶ [0060] and [0063]).
Regarding claim 9, Rao-Noland-Pahlke teaches wherein the system is configured to: periodically retrieve a production telemetry metrics, representing a production load from a predetermined prior timeframe; and perform the load test from the production telemetry metrics (see Rao, ¶ [0173] and Noland, ¶ [0088]).
Regarding claim 10, Rao-Noland-Pahlke teaches wherein the system performs the load test by: generating the mock devices representing the IoT devices that transmitted the production telemetry messages during the prior timeframe; generating the mock telemetry messages representing the production telemetry messages generated by the IoT devices during the prior timeframe; and transmitting the mock telemetry messages to the application module (see Rao, ¶ [0033] and [0120]).
Regarding claim 14, Rao-Noland-Pahlke teaches wherein the IoT devices are elevator cars, escalators or movable walkways (see Pahlke, ¶ [0002] and [0003]).
Regarding claim 15, Rao-Noland-Pahlke teaches comprising generating, by the system, for each one of mock telemetry messages, mock telemetry data that identifies one of the mock devices associated with the one of the mock telemetry messages and a mock operational state of the one of the mock devices (see Rao, ¶ [0227]).
Regarding claim 16, Rao-Noland-Pahlke teaches comprising the system: receiving input that includes load test parameters; and performing the load test from the load test parameters (see Rao, ¶ [0037] and [0176]).
Regarding claim 17, Rao-Noland-Pahlke teaches wherein the load test parameters identifies one or more of: a date and time to start the load test; a duration for executing the load test; a subgroup of the mock devices for the load test; and the mock telemetry data to include in the mock telemetry messages (see Rao, ¶ [0039] and [0109]).
Regarding claim 18, Rao-Noland-Pahlke teaches wherein the subgroup of the devices is selected based on one or more of a device type and a device location (see Rao, ¶ [0060] and [0063]).
Regarding claim 19, Rao-Noland-Pahlke teaches comprising the system: periodically retrieving a production telemetry metrics representing a production load from a predetermined prior timeframe; and performing the load test from the production telemetry metrics (see Rao, ¶ [0173] and Noland, ¶ [0088]).
Regarding claim 20, Rao-Noland-Pahlke teaches comprising the system performing the load test by: generating the mock devices representing the IoT devices that transmitted the production telemetry messages during the prior timeframe; generating the mock telemetry messages representing the production telemetry messages generated by the IoT devices during the prior timeframe; and transmitting the mock telemetry messages to the application module (see Rao, ¶ [0033] and [0120]).
Prior Art of Record
6. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure. Please refer to form PTO-892 (Notice of Reference Cited) for a list of relevant prior art.
a) US 20240171498 A1 is directed to a system for data flows within an in-band telemetry (INT) domain. First aggregated statistical data regarding a flow of INT packets is periodically received from a first aggregating network device. The flow of INT packets flows from an initiator network device via one or more transit network devices to a terminator network device. Second aggregated statistical data regarding the flow of INT packets is periodically received from a second aggregating network device. In response to comparing the first aggregated statistical data and the second aggregated statistical data, one or more dropped INT packets may be implicitly identified. Based on the one or more dropped INT packets in the flow of INT packets, a dropped INT packet notification may be provided.
b) US 20040243338 A1 is directed to network service test system comprising a testee network service is tested using a network service test environment. The network service test environment surrounds the testee network service. The network service test environment comprises at least one mock client that is in data communication with and interacts with the testee network service. The network service test environment also includes at least one mock support network service in data communication with the testee network service. The at least one mock support network service simulates a performance of an actual support network service while a data communication link exists between the actual support network service and the testee network service.
c) US 20140190773 A1 is directed to an elevator system having a control unit and at least one bus node. The bus node has a first microprocessor and a second microprocessor and the control unit and the bus node communicate by a bus. Furthermore, the first microprocessor and the second microprocessor are connected without interruption by a signal line. The test method includes the steps: a specification signal is transmitted by the control unit to the first microprocessor, the first microprocessor transmits the signal to the second microprocessor, and the second microprocessor provides the signal for the control unit. Finally, the control unit verifies whether the provided signal corresponds to a signal expected by the control unit. The elevator system includes a monitoring device for carrying out the test method.
Conclusion
7. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MOHAMED IBRAHIM whose telephone number is (571)270-1132. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday through Friday from 9:30AM to 6:00PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, John Follansbee can be reached on 571-272-3964. 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.
/Mohamed Ibrahim/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2444
Prosecution Insights