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.
Claims 15-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The term “A computer program product comprising: one or more computer-readable storage media” is not sufficiently defined in the specification to exclude transitory media. It is thus interpreted as such. It is suggested that claim 15 be amended to include “non-transitory” before the words “computer-readable”. Dependent claims inherit rejection.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-4, 8-11, and 15-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Patino Virano (US 2022/0195861 A1).
For claim 1, Patino Virano teaches an apparatus comprising: a memory; and at least one processor that is communicatively coupled to the memory, the at least one processor configured to: ingest data from a plurality of systems through a software application (see figures 2-3, 10, paragraphs [0005] last 10 lines: view blocks 202, 204, 302 as said data ingested to block 206; view hook load, pump, etc. as said systems); divide the data into a plurality of bins based on binning configuration settings that are defined within the software application (see figure 4A, [0032], [0051], [0020], and other locations: view partitioning and/or splitting as said dividing; view buckets as said bins; view partitioning based on states as said configuration); identify a bin of data among the plurality of bins which contains an anomaly at a point in time based on thresholds for the plurality of bins (see [0006], [0080], [0034], and other locations; multiple thresholds and they are adjustable; the point in time is of the time series); identify a different bin of data among the plurality of bins which does not contain the anomaly at the point in time based on the thresholds for the plurality of bins (see [0054] and other locations: view time series with non-anomalous data as said); generate a heat map comprising a plurality of display elements corresponding to the plurality of bins including a display element corresponding to the bin of data with the anomaly with a different visual appearance than a display element corresponding to the different bin which does not contain the anomaly (see [0087] and other locations: view coloring or patterns as said visual appearance); and render the heat map via a graphical user interface (GUI) of the software application (see [0095] and other locations).
For claim 2, Patino Virano teaches the limitations of claim 1 for the reasons above and further teaches the at least one processor is further configured to retrieve historical data from the plurality of systems, extract a rolling window of data from the historical data, and determine a maximum threshold and a minimum threshold for the plurality of bins based on data values included within the rolling window of data (see [0022], [0029], and other locations: parzens window is a rolling window; batch data as opposed to real-time is historical).
For claim 3, Patino Virano teaches the limitations of claim 1 for the reasons above and further teaches the at least one processor is configured to arrange the plurality of display elements in a two-dimensional array in which a first dimension of the two-dimensional array represents the plurality of bins and a second dimension of the two-dimensional array represents different periods of time (see [0062], figures 4A-B: buckets vs time series).
For claim 4, Patino Virano teaches the limitations of claim 1 for the reasons above and further teaches the at least one processor is further configured to generate a table of data values from the bin of data which contains the anomaly at the point in time, determine a cause of the anomaly based on execution of at least one artificial intelligence (AI) model on the table of data, and display the cause of the anomaly via the GUI (see [0032]: view machine learning as said AI: data is in memory addresses; range of addresses is a list ).
For claims 8-11, the claims recite essentially similar limitations as claims 1-4 respectively; claims 8-11 are a method.
For claims 15-18, the claims recite essentially similar limitations as claims 1-4 respectively; claims 15-18 are media.
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.
Claims 5-7, 12-14, and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Patino Virano (US 2022/0195861 A1), and further in view of Aguais (US 2003/0135450 A1).
For claim 5,
Patino Virano teaches the limitations of claim 4 for the reasons above.
Patino Virano does not explicitly teach the at least one processor is further configured to determine a solution to the cause of the anomaly based on execution of the at least one AI model on the cause of the anomaly and the table of data, and display the solution via the GUI
However, Aguais teaches the at least one processor is further configured to determine a solution to the cause of the anomaly based on execution of the at least one AI model on the cause of the anomaly and the table of data, and display the solution via the GUI (see [0046]: view deleting an outlier as said solution to the anomaly)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Patino Virano to include “the at least one processor is further configured to determine … GUI”, as taught by Aguais, because each one of Patino Virano and Aguais teach data binning/bucketing therefore they are analogous arts and because outlier occasionally occur and deleting them improves accuracy (see [0046]).
For claim 6,
The combination of Patino Virano and Aguais teaches the limitations of claim 5 for the reasons above.
Aguais further teaches the at least one processor is further configured to determine whether the solution corrects the anomaly based on a simulation of the solution (see [0042]).
For claim 7,
The combination of Patino Virano and Aguais teaches the limitations of claim 6 for the reasons above.
Patino Virano further teaches and in response to a determination that the solution corrects the anomaly, modify the display element corresponding to the bin of data with the anomaly to have a same visual appearance on the GUI as the display element corresponding to the different bin which does not contain the anomaly (see [0129]: display is updated with changes).
For claims 12-14,
the claims recite essentially similar limitations as claim 5-6 respectively; claim 12-13 are a method.
For claim 19,
the claims recite essentially similar limitations as claim 5; claim 19 is media.
For claim 20,
Patino Virano teaches the limitations of claim 15 for the reasons above.
Patino Virano does not explicitly teach “determining whether the solution corrects the anomaly based on a simulation of the solution”.
However, Aguais teaches determining whether the solution corrects the anomaly based on a simulation of the solution (see rejection to claim 6)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Patino Virano to include “determining whether the solution corrects the anomaly based on a simulation of the solution”, as taught by Aguais, because of the motivational reasons specified in claim 6.
Patino Virano further teaches and in response to a determination that the solution corrects the anomaly, modifying the display element corresponding to the bin of data with the anomaly to have a same visual appearance on the GUI as the display element corresponding to the different bin which does not contain the anomaly (see [0129]: display is updated with changes).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YAIR LEIBOVICH whose telephone number is (571)270-3796. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00am-5:00pm.
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, Ashish Thomas can be reached at 571-272-0631. 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.
/YAIR LEIBOVICH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2114