DETAILED ACTION
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 § 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 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claim(s) does/do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because the claim is directed to a memory that is not defined as non-transitory.
Claims 1-13, 15-17, 19-22
Claims 1-13, 15-17, 19-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claims fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter. However, the claimed invention is directed to performing a mental process and basic mathematical calculations without significantly more.
The following is an analysis of the claims regarding subject matter eligibility in accordance with the 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance (2019 PEG):
Subject Matter Eligibility Analysis
Step 1: Do the Claims Specify a Statutory Category?
Claims 1-13, 15 describe a method/process, claims 16-17, 19-21 describe an apparatus/system, and claim 22 describes a memory having stored thereon a computer program, therefore satisfying Step 1 of the analysis except for claim 22, see above.
Step 2 Analysis for Claims 1-11
Step 2A – Prong 1: Is a Judicial Exception Recited?
Claim 1 recites presenting/displaying health degree data that was collected in response to a trigger event. The limitations describe processes that, under their broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitations in the human mind but for the recitation of generic computer components (i.e., a generic computer or display). That is, nothing in the claim elements preclude the steps from practically being performed in the mind. The claim merely recites mere data collection and presentation of said data. Such steps can be performed by a human and recites a mental process.
If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers the practical performance of the limitation in the human mind but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas. See the 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance. Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea.
Claims 2-13, 15 recite more types of data being collected and the presentation of such. Some claims (claims 9-13, 15) recite basic data organization or calculations in the determining of further data from the collected data. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, describes the performance of mathematical calculations (even if a formula is not recited in the claim), then it falls within the “Mathematical Concepts” grouping of abstract ideas. See the 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance. Accordingly, claims 2-11 each recite an abstract idea.
Step 2A – Prong 2: Is the Judicial Exception Integrated into a Practical Application?
Claim 1 recites a network system and a display interface. Even if the described methods are implemented on a computer, there is no indication that the combination of elements in the claim solves any particular technological problem other than merely taking advantage of the inherent advantages of using existing computer technology in its ordinary, off-the-shelf capacity to apply the identified judicial exceptions. Simply implementing the abstract idea(s) on a general purpose processor or other generic computer component is not a practical application of the abstract idea(s). The processor cited in the claim is described at a high level of generality such that it represents no more than mere instructions to apply the judicial exception on a computer (see MPEP 2106.05(f)). This limitation can also be viewed as nothing more than an attempt to generally link the judicial exception to the technological environment of a computer (see MPEP 2106.05(h)).
Claim 1 further recites monitoring an object that presents data for display. These limitations describe insignificant extra-solution activity pertaining to mere data gathering, display of data, without providing any details regarding a specific problem being solved or specific remedial actions being taken. As such, these limitations do not integrate the abstract idea(s) into a practical application.
Claims 2-13, 15 describe further data types and presentation and/or statistical/mathematical calculations. These claims contain no additional elements which would integrate the abstract idea(s) into a practical application.
Accordingly, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the identified abstract idea(s).
Step 2B: Do the Claims Provide an Inventive Concept?
When evaluating whether the claims provide an inventive concept, the presence of any additional elements in the claims need to be considered to determine whether they add “significantly more” than the judicial exception.
In the instant case, as detailed in the analysis for Step 2A-Prong 2, claims 1-13, 15 contain additional elements which require evaluation as to whether they provide an inventive concept to the identified abstract idea. The network and display interfaces recited in the claim describe a generic computer processor and/or computer components at a high level and do not represent “significantly more” than the judicial exception.
The limitations pertaining to gathering of object information, display of calculation results describe insignificant extra-solution activity and are written at a high level in a generic manner without providing any details regarding a specific problem being solved or specific remedial actions being taken. Therefore, these limitations recite no additional elements that would amount to significantly more than the abstract ideas defined in the claim.
Step 2 Analysis for Claims 16-17, 19-21
Claims 16-17, 19-21 contain limitations for a system which are similar to the limitations for the methods specified in claims 1-2, 10-12. As such, the analysis under Step 2A – Prong 1, Step 2A – Prong 2, and Step 2B for claims 16-17, 19-21 is similar to that presented above for claims 1-2, 10-12.
In light of the above, the limitations in claims 16-17, 19-21 recite and are directed to an abstract idea and recite no additional elements that would amount to significantly more than the identified abstract ideas(s). Claims 16-17, 19-21 are therefore not patent eligible.
Step 2 Analysis for Claim 22
Claim 22 contains limitations for a system which are similar to the limitations for the methods specified in claim 1. As such, the analysis under Step 2A – Prong 1, Step 2A – Prong 2, and Step 2B for claim 22 is similar to that presented above for claim 1.
In light of the above, the limitations in claim 22 recite and are directed to an abstract idea and recite no additional elements that would amount to significantly more than the identified abstract ideas(s). Claim 22 is therefore not patent eligible.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-13, 15-17, 19-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Richards et al. U.S. Publication Application Publication US2018/0091413A1.
As per claim 1, Richards teaches a method for monitoring a network system including at least one resource cluster, the method comprising: presenting, in response to a health degree presentation trigger event, a health degree of a monitored objection a first display interface, wherein different health degrees correspond to different marks (¶ 0040, 0031, wherein health data is presented upon events/triggers that is shown at different monitoring times), wherein, the monitored object includes at least one of: the network system, one or more resource clusters among the at least one resource cluster, one or more resources included in the network system, or one or more services provided by the network system (abstract, wherein network health is collected).
As per claim 2, Richards teaches the method according to claim1, further comprising: presenting, using different marks and on the first display interface or another display interface, health degrees of respective resources included in a concerned resource cluster of one or more resource clusters among the at least one resource cluster, while presenting health degrees of the one or more resource clusters on the first display interface (¶ 0093, wherein displays can be different from specific device to cluster/end pair overview).
As per claim 3, Richards teaches the method according to claim 2, wherein the concerned resource cluster is a resource cluster whose health degree does not meet a qualification threshold condition among the one or more resource clusters, a resource cluster whose health degree is the lowest among the one or more resource clusters, a resource cluster in which a number of resources whose health degree does not meet the qualification threshold condition exceeds a quantity threshold, or a resource cluster determined in response to a user's selection (¶ 0061-0062, wherein a user selects an end pair).
As per claim 4, Richards teaches the method according to claim 2, wherein the health degree of each monitored object is associated with one or more monitored indicators, and wherein the method further comprises: presenting indicator data values of the one or more monitored indicators for the resources included in the concerned resource cluster at least on the first display interface or on another display interface, while presenting the health degrees of the one or more resource clusters (¶ 0092, wherein both cluster/end pair and individual devices can be viewed).
As per claim 5, Richards teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein the health degree of each monitored object is associated with one or more monitored indicators, the method further comprises: presenting, in response to an indicator data value of a certain monitored indicator of a certain monitored object meeting an alarm trigger condition, alarm details on a second display interface (¶ 0094), wherein, the alarm details include at least: an expression of the alarm trigger condition, the indicator data value meeting the alarm trigger condition and related information of the certain monitored object (¶ 0097, figure 11, wherein the impairment condition indicator shows the degree of impairment and objects affected).
As per claim 6, Richards teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein the at least one resource cluster is obtained by grouping resources included in the network system, and resources included in each resource cluster have a same resource label, belong to a same organization, or have a same operating environment (¶ 0092, wherein the resources can belong to the same container or end point category).
As per claim 7, Richards teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising: presenting, in response to a first interface switching event, a third display interface for a user to input indication information for indicating a desired monitored indicator, a desired monitored object and a desired time period; and presenting, on the third display interface or another display interface and in response to the indication information input by the user, indicator data values of the desired monitored indicator of the desired monitored object within the desired time period (¶ 0099-0100, wherein there are selectable parameters on the UI including monitored objects, times and indicators).
As per claim 8, Richards teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising: presenting, in response to a second interface switching event, a fourth display interface for a user to input indication information for indicating a desired monitored object; and presenting, on the fourth display interface or another display interface and in response to the indication information input by the user, indicator data values of one or more monitored indicators of the desired monitored object (¶ 0099-0100).
As per claim 9, Richards teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising: determining statistical data of the network system, and presenting the statistical data on a fifth display interface, wherein, the statistical data includes statistical data of a number related to the resources of the network system and statistical data of indicator data values of monitored indicators of the monitored object included in the network system (¶ 0102, wherein management displays overall views of the network with statistics).
As per claim 10, Richards teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein the monitored object is the network system, and wherein the method further comprises: acquiring a first group of indicator data values of public-network-portal-related indicators corresponding to a public network to which the network system is connected (¶ 0032), a second group of indicator data values of service-monitoring-related indicators corresponding to the one or more services provided by the network system (¶ 0041-0042), and a third group of indicator data values of server-related indicators corresponding to servers included in the network system (¶ 0033); determining a first health degree of a public network portal based on the first group of indicator data values (¶ 0040), and determining a second health degree of the one or more services based on the second group of indicator data values and the third group of indicator data values (¶ 0041-0042); and determining a system health degree of the network system based on the first health degree and the second health degree (¶ 0046, wherein overall health metrics are based on network and service metrics).
As per claim 11, Richards teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein the monitored object is the at least one resource cluster included in the network system, and wherein the method further comprises: for each resource cluster of the at least one resource cluster, acquiring a group of indicator data values of server-related indicators corresponding to servers providing resources included in the resource cluster; and determining the health degree of the resource cluster based on the group of indicator data values (¶ 0046, wherein overall metrics are also based on server component health, 0041, 0033).
As per claim 12, Richards teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein the monitored object is the one or more services provided by the network system, and wherein the method further comprises: for each service of the one or more services, acquiring a group of indicator data values of service-related indicators corresponding to the service (¶ 0041-0042) and another group of indicator data values of server-related indicators corresponding to a server providing the service and included in the network system (¶ 0040, 0033); and determining the health degree of the service based on the group of indicator data values and the other group of indicator data values (¶ 0046).
As per claim 13, Richards teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein the monitored object is the one or more resources provided by the network system, and wherein the method further comprises: foreach resource in the one or more resources, acquiring a group of indicator data values of server-related indicators corresponding to a server providing the resource (¶ 0033, 0040); and determining the health degree of the server providing the resource based on the group of indicator data values (¶ 0160, 0040).
As per claim 15, Richards teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein the different marks are different colors, and where the method further comprises: determining RGB values based on a current health degree of the monitored object to be presented; and presenting the current health degree with a color corresponding to the determined RGB values (¶ 0058).
As per claim 16, Richards teaches an apparatus for monitoring a network system including at least one resource cluster, the apparatus comprising: a data acquisition module configured to acquire, from the network system and a public network to which the network system is connected, various indicator data related to a health degree of a monitored object (¶ 0040); a monitoring server, comprising: a presentation management module configured to present, in response to a health degree presentation trigger event, the health degree of the monitored object on a first display interface, wherein different health degrees correspond to different marks (¶ 0040), wherein, the monitored object includes at least one of: the network system, one or more resource clusters among the at least one resource cluster, one or more resources included in the network system, or one or more services provided by the network system (abstract).
As per claim 17, Richards teaches the apparatus according to claim 16, wherein the presentation management module is further configured to present, using different marks and on the first display interface or another display interface, health degrees of respective resources included in a concerned resource cluster of one or more resource clusters among the at least one resource cluster, while presenting health degrees of the one or more resource clusters on the first display interface (¶ 0093).
As per claim 19, Richards teaches the apparatus according to claim 16, wherein the monitored object is the network system, and wherein the monitoring server further comprises: a data acquisition module, configured to obtain a first group of indicator data values of public-network-portal-related indicators corresponding to the public network to which the network system is connected, a second group of indicator data values of service-monitoring- related indicators corresponding to the one or more services provided by the network system, and a third group of indicator data values of server-related indicators corresponding to servers included in the network system; and, a determination module, configured to: determine a first health degree of a public network portal based on the first group of indicator data values, and determine a second health degree of the one or more services based on the second group of indicator data values and the third group of indicator data values; and determine a system health degree of the network system based on the first health degree and the second health degree (¶ 0032. 0041-0042, 0033, 0040, 0046, see claim 10).
As per claim 20, Richards teaches the apparatus according to claim 16, wherein the monitored object is the at least one resource cluster included in the network system, and wherein the monitoring server further comprises: a data acquisition module configured to acquire, for each resource cluster of the at least one resource cluster, a group of indicator data values of server-related indicators corresponding to servers providing resources included in the resource cluster; and a determination module configured to determine, for each resource cluster of the at least one resource cluster, the health degree of the resource cluster based on the group of indicator data values (¶ 0046, 0041, 0033, see claim 11).
As per claim 21, Richards teaches the apparatus according to claim 16, wherein the monitored object is the one or more services provided by the network system, and wherein the monitoring server includes: a data acquisition module configured to acquire, for each service of the one or more services, a group of indicator data values of service-related indicators corresponding to the service and another group of indicator data values of server-related indicators corresponding to a server providing the service and included in the network system; and a determination module, configured to determine, for each service of the one or more services, the health degree of the service based on the group of indicator data values and the other group of indicator data values (¶ 0041-0042, 0040, 0033, 0046, see claim 12).
As per claim 22, Richards teaches a computing device comprising: one or more processors, one or more memories having stored thereon a computer program which, when executed by the one or more processors, can cause the one or more processors to implement the steps of the method as claimed in claim 1 (see claim 1).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 2025/0335276A1 to Ballard et al.: HIS health display.
US2022/0391277A1 to Laster et al.: Cluster health reporting and display.
US2025/0258491A1 to Qui et al.: Cloud asset health monitoring.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER S MCCARTHY whose telephone number is (571)272-3651. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30-5:00.
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, Bryce Bonzo can be reached at (571)272-3655. 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.
/CHRISTOPHER S MCCARTHY/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2113