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 .
Status of Claims
This is a first action on the merits in response to the application filed 27 December 2024. Claims 1-20 are pending and have been examined.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 27 January 2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement has been considered by the examiner.
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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea of managing roles and permissions for project management, without significantly more. Independent claim 1 recites a process, independent claim 17 recites a device, and independent claim 20 recites a product for processing role information in a project management system. Independent claims 1, 17, and 20 recite substantially similar limitations.
Taking independent claim 1 as representative, claim 1 recites the following limitations:
determining, in the project management system, a role person of a first process node from role persons bound to a parent node of the first process node, based on a role person synchronization rule of the first process node in a first project, wherein the role person synchronization rule is used to indicate a rule that the first process node inherits the role person from the parent node of the first process node; and
displaying the role person of the first process node in a project management interface of the project management system.
Under Step 1 of the eligibility analysis independent claims 1, 17, and 20 recite at least one step or act including displaying the role person of the first process node in the project management interface. Thus the claims fall within one of the statutory categories of invention.
Under Step 2A Prong One, the limitations of claim 1 for determining a role person of a first process node form role persons bound to a parent node of the first process node, based on a role person synchronization rule and displaying the role person of the first process node, as drafted, illustrates a process that under its broadest reasonable interpretation covers performance of the limitation in the mind because the steps could be practically performed in the mind or by a human using pen and paper. A project manger could assign roles to team members, create rules for role assignment, establish a project schedule, set data analysis conditions, triggers, and notifications, and manage the status of tasks. Therefore, the limitations fall into the mental processes grouping and accordingly the claims recite an abstract idea. Furthermore, the claims relate to managing human behavior related to role assignments for project team members and fall within the certain methods of organizing human behavior grouping of abstract ideas.
Under Step 2A Prong Two, The judicial exception of claim 1 is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claims only recite a processor and storage device for performing the recited steps. These elements are recited at a high level of generality (i.e., as a generic processor performing a generic computer function) and amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components. See MPEP 2106.05(f). For example, Applicant’s specification at paragraph [0137] states: “the electronic device may include a processing apparatus (for example, a central processor or a graphics processor) 701 that may perform a variety of appropriate actions and processing in accordance with a program.” The Specification does not provide additional details about the computer system/server that would distinguish it from any generic processing devices that communicate with one another in a network environment. Adding generic computer components to perform generic functions, such as data gathering, performing calculations, and outputting a result would not transform the claim into eligible subject matter. See MPEP 2106.05(h). Accordingly, the additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea.
Under Step 2B, the claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to the integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional elements of a processor and storage device amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component which cannot provide an inventive concept. See MPEP 2106.05.
Dependent claims 2-16 and 18-19 include the abstract idea of the independent claims. The limitations of the dependent claims merely narrow the mental process/method of organizing human activity abstract idea by describing data processing rules and related to the data management steps, without significantly more. The limitations of the dependent claims are not integrated into a practical application because none of the additional elements set forth any limitations that meaningfully limit the abstract idea implementation. There are no additional elements that transform the claim into a patent eligible idea by amounting to significantly more. The analysis above applies to all statutory categories of invention. Accordingly independent claims 17 and 20 and the claims that depend therefrom are rejected as ineligible for patenting under 35 U.S.C. 101 based upon the same analysis applied to claim 1 above. Therefore claims 1 - 20 are ineligible under 35 U.S.C. 101.
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.
The factual inquiries 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 non-obviousness.
Claims 1-7 and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Spector et al. (US 2008/0046987) in view of MacGillivray et al. (US 2014/0278639).
Regarding Claim 1, Spector discloses a method for processing role information in a project management system, comprising: determining, in the project management system, a role person of a first process node from role persons bound to a parent node of the first process node, based on a role person synchronization rule of the first process node in a first project, (… a method for configuring a trust management framework for use in a network environment involves providing various graphical user interfaces to a user that prompt the user to define certain aspects of the trust management framework. Spector [para. 0006-0007]. … FIG. 9 depicts an illustrative computer system 70 for practicing embodiments of the configuration tool. The computer system includes an input/output 72, a central processing unit (CPU) 74, data storage 76, and system memory 78. Spector [para. 0087-0090; Fig. 9]. … For each role, the user may define the set of services that are exposed by a node with the corresponding role. Note, that some roles may have no corresponding services because they are either issuer roles or client-only roles. Spector [para. 0036, 0069-0071]. … the Nodes GUI 60 organizes the nodes, service role bindings, and client role bindings in a hierarchical manner using folders and subfolders to graphically represent the relationships between the various nodes and their corresponding role bindings. Spector [para. 0080-0085]);
wherein the role person synchronization rule is used to indicate a rule that the first process node inherits the role person from the parent node of the first process node; (Each client or service binding defines: a) what assertion to use to prove one's role (automatically inherited from the parent role binding) … the trust management engine checks whether each client binding configured under a specific requester node's role binding will be able to invoke corresponding service bindings configured under a given role binding of the responder node, where "being able to invoke" refers to compatibility of credentials configured for each node's bindings with their corresponding trust management policies. Spector [para. 0083]);
Spector fails to explicitly disclose and displaying the role person of the first process node in a project management interface of the project management system. MacGillivray et al. discloses this limitation. (The method may comprise providing by the processing unit a user interface for defining the interface information, the interface responsive to workflow for collaboratively managing the processing of the interface information by a plurality of users. MacGillivray et al. [para. 0004-0006]. … A wizard like workflow can be provided to walk through the steps of importing a file, prompting for data etc. … FIG. 7 shows an example object model 700 for schedule integration. Each import of a schedule 702 is associated with a project 704, a contracting party 706 and a work package (708). … A node in the work breakdown structure. Nodes have a parent/child hierarchy. … An entry in this table associates a WBS node (typically an activity level node) to any other business object (the target). … The IMS (e.g. application 216) provides a user interface to view all import jobs. MacGillivray et al. [para. 0077-0088; Table 004-006; Figure 6-7]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of project and data management before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the steps of Spector to include displaying the role person of the first process node in a project management interface of the project management system as disclosed by MacGillivray et al. to facilitate the interfaces between parties regarding roles and responsibilities, required dates for providing interface information and identification of critical interfaces early in a project. MacGillivray et al. [para. 0036]), in a manner that would have yielded predictable results at the relevant time.
Regarding Claim 2, Spector and MacGillivray et al. combined disclose method, further comprising: displaying a first schedule configuration interface of the first project, wherein the first schedule configuration interface is used to display a work breakdown structure of the first project. MacGillivray et al. discloses this limitation. (Each import of a schedule 702 is associated with a project 704, a contracting party 706 and a work package (708). … Each row in the work schedule (see FIG. 3) represents an Activity ID (imported schedule data field) from the schedule's work breakdown structure (WBS) and is stored in a combination of the WorkBreakdownStructure table 712 and ScheduleActivity table 714. … The IMS (e.g. application 216) provides a user interface to view all import jobs. MacGillivray et al. [para. 0078-0088]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of project and data management before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the steps of Spector to include displaying a first schedule configuration interface of the first project, wherein the first schedule configuration interface is used to display a work breakdown structure of the first project as disclosed by MacGillivray et al. to facilitate the interfaces between parties regarding roles and responsibilities, required dates for providing interface information and identification of critical interfaces early in a project. MacGillivray et al. [para. 0036]), in a manner that would have yielded predictable results at the relevant time.
and configuring the role person synchronization rule of the first process node based on a configuration operation for the first process node displayed in the first schedule configuration interface. (… the Nodes GUI 60 organizes the nodes, service role bindings, and client role bindings in a hierarchical manner … Each client or service binding defines: a) what assertion to use to prove one's role (automatically inherited from the parent role binding) … the trust management engine checks whether each client binding configured under a specific requester node's role binding will be able to invoke corresponding service bindings configured under a given role binding of the responder node. Spector [para. 0080-0085]).
Regarding Claim 3, Spector and MacGillivray et al. combined disclose method, wherein the role person synchronization rule comprises a synchronization condition, wherein the synchronization condition is used to indicate a condition satisfied by the first process node when the first process node inherits the role person. (… the Nodes GUI 60 organizes the nodes, service role bindings, and client role bindings in a hierarchical manner … Each client or service binding defines: a) what assertion to use to prove one's role (automatically inherited from the parent role binding) … the trust management engine checks whether each client binding configured under a specific requester node's role binding will be able to invoke corresponding service bindings configured under a given role binding of the responder node. Spector [para. 0080-0085]).
Regarding Claim 4, Spector and MacGillivray et al. combined disclose method, wherein the synchronization condition comprises: stopping synchronization when the first process node is completed. ( Once the network configuration is completed and the configuration status window indicates that the configuration is valid, the configuration process is complete. Spector [para. 0083-0086]).
Regarding Claim 5, Spector and MacGillivray et al. combined disclose method, wherein the synchronization rule comprises a first role in the first process node and a role in the parent node that corresponds to the first role; and determining the role person of the first process node from the role persons of the parent node of the first process node, and displaying the role person of the first process node comprise: determining the role person in the first role in the first process node based on the role person in the role in the parent node that corresponds to the first role. (Each client or service binding defines: a) what assertion to use to prove one's role (automatically inherited from the parent role binding … The Node Interaction editor at the bottom of the Nodes GUI 60 allows a user to enumerate node role binding pairs that should invoke each other. In one embodiment, the trust management engine checks whether each client binding configured under a specific requester node's role binding will be able to invoke corresponding service bindings configured under a given role binding of the responder node, where "being able to invoke" refers to compatibility of credentials configured for each node's bindings with their corresponding trust management policies. Spector [para. 0083]).
Regarding Claim 6, Spector and MacGillivray et al. combined disclose method, wherein displaying the role person of the first process node in the project management interface of the project management system comprises: initializing the role person in the first process node in response to creating the role person synchronization rule, and displaying the initialized role person in the first process node; modifying the role person in the first process node in response to the role person in the parent node being modified, and displaying the modified role person in the first process node; (… a Roles GUI that prompts a user to define roles is provided. At block 1104, a Services GUI that prompts the user to define services corresponding to the roles is provided. At block 1106, a Principals GUI that prompts the user to define principals, including associating at least one of the roles with a principal is provided. At block 1108, a Nodes GUI that presents role bindings for principals that are designated to function as nodes and that prompts the user to define interactions between nodes … The process of configuring a trust management framework may include the configuration of a new trust management framework or the modification of a previously configured trust management framework. Spector [para. 0090-0091]).
and displaying the role person of the first process node in response to a role of the first process node satisfying a preset visibility condition. (… to ensure self-consistency during configuration, the Principals Credentials table is programmed to only allow the selection of the previously defined roles as a valid attribute assertion. … The assertion "LeafNode-LeafRole" has an issuing principal "RA" and the attribute of the previously defined "Leaf" role. In one embodiment, in the usage field, a user is presented only with the previously defined roles as valid selection options. This feature helps to guide the user to a self-consistent and valid configuration. Spector [para. 0060-0063]).
Regarding Claim 7, Spector and MacGillivray et al. combined disclose method, wherein the parent node is a superior node in a node link where the first process node is located. ( the Services GUI 40 organizes the roles, corresponding services, and corresponding operations in a hierarchical manner using folders and subfolders to graphically represent the relationships between the various roles, the corresponding services, and the corresponding operations. Spector [para. 0043; Fig. 5]).
Regarding Claims 17-19, Claims 17-19 recite substantially similar limitations to those of claims 1, 2, and 6 respectively and are therefore rejected based upon the same prior art combination, reasoning, and rationale. Claims 17-19 are directed to an apparatus for processing role information in a project management system, comprising: at least a processor, and a non-transitory memory with instructions thereon, wherein the instructions upon execution by the processor, which is disclosed by Spector at paragraph [0087-0089]: The computer system includes an input/output 72, a central processing unit (CPU) 74, data storage 76, and system memory 78….The data storage includes, for example, a magnetic disk and/or an optical disk, and/or any other suitable storage means. The data storage may be fixed or removable as is known in the field. The system memory may include, for example, some combination of random access memory (RAM) and read only memory (ROM) for storing information and instructions to be executed or used by the CPU and/or for storing temporary variables or other intermediate information during execution of instructions by the processor.
Regarding Claim 20, Claim 20 recites substantially similar limitations to those of claim 1 and is therefore rejected based upon the same prior art combination, reasoning, and rationale. Claim 20 is directed to a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing instructions that cause at least a processor to execute instructions, that is disclosed by Spector at [para. 0087-0089]: data storage includes, for example, a magnetic disk and/or an optical disk, and/or any other suitable storage means. The data storage may be fixed or removable as is known in the field. The system memory may include, for example, some combination of random access memory (RAM) and read only memory (ROM) for storing information and instructions to be executed or used by the CPU and/or for storing temporary variables or other intermediate information during execution of instructions by the processor; the namespaces module includes executable instructions for implementing the namespaces editor as described above with reference to FIG. 4 and the extended key usages module includes executable instructions for implementing the extended key editor as described above with reference to FIG. 7.
Claims 8-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Spector et al. (US 2008/0046987) in view of MacGillivray et al. (US 2014/0278639), and in further view of Nagar et al. (US 8,738,414).
Regarding Claim 8, Spector and MacGillivray et al. combined fail to explicitly disclose method, further comprising: deleting, for a second process node in a second project in the project management system, a work item bound to the second process node and a work item bound to a child process node of the second process node in response to deleting the second process node; terminating, for the second process node in the second project in the project management system, the work item bound to the second process node and the work item bound to the child process node of the second process node in response to terminating the second process node; and restoring the work item bound to the second process node and the work item bound to the child process node of the second process node in response to restoring the deleted second process node or the terminated second process node. Nagar et al. discloses this limitation. (The inventive system allows the creation of multi-tier hierarchical program structures. The system includes a wizard for user to generate these structures. Nagar et al. [col. 7, lines 25-67; col. 8, lines 35-50; Nagar et al. [col. 13, lines 1-40]. … "Cross-Node Dependency" interlinking, provides support for the functions as listed, but are not limited to: 1. Ability to define a dependency between any two nodes of the tree within the scope of a single program or between nodes from two different programs. The user can select from several types of dependencies, such as pre-requisite, post-requisite, reference, etc. 2. Ability to traverse and graphically display a dependency chain. 3. Ability to click the Dependency field on the List View of a source node, which is involved in a dependency relationship, to directly display the target node. 4. Ability to monitor the effect of dependencies on the time schedule of nodes (projects, activities, and tasks) and proactively issue warnings in case the dependency and the time schedule violate one another. 5. UI functions: 1--List all dependencies of a selected tree node, 2--View summary information of the dependencies, 3--Add a new dependency, 4--Ability to Display/Edit/Delete an existing dependency 5--Ability to select a new node from the program structure tree, 6--Ability to invoke any other assist or feature function from the tree, 7--Ability to invoke function short cuts and hyperlinks. 6. Ability to flip-flop between the linked the paired dependent nodes. 7. Ability to set conditions and thresholds that trigger actions across other functions within the system and external systems. Nagar et al. [col. 15, lines 11-67]. … The system's structure and inbuilt functions enable creation of categories, define conditions and thresholds to notify and/or delete data, provide approval tracking capability, and the ability to restore archived data when requested. Nagar et al. [col. 20, lines 3-16, 35-40]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of project and data management before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the steps of Spector and MacGillivray et al. combined in include the node management functions of Nagar et al. to enable management of a variety of organizational, business, operational, and administrative needs and the flow of information in the hierarchy (Nagar et al. [col. 5, lines 25-35], in a manner that would have yielded predictable results at the relevant time.
Regarding Claim 9, Spector, MacGillivray et al., and Nagar et al. combined disclose the method, wherein deleting, for the second process node in the second project in the project management system, a work item bound to the second process node and a work item bound to a child process node of the second process node in response to deleting the second process node comprises: displaying a second schedule of the second project in the project management interface of the project management system, wherein the second schedule is used to display a work breakdown structure of the second project; deleting the work item bound to the second process node and the work item bound to the child process node of the second process node in response to detecting a delete operation for the second process node in the second schedule; and terminating the work item bound to the second process node and the work item bound to the child process node of the second process node in response to detecting a terminate operation for the second process node in the second schedule. Nagar et al. discloses this limitation. (The inventive system allows the creation of multi-tier hierarchical program structures. The system includes a wizard for user to generate these structures. Nagar et al. [col. 7, lines 25-67; col. 8, lines 35-50] .… the target Dependent Nodes in their own business structure also display identical information of the invoking nodes at their end. The dynamic link creates a pair relation between two or more nodes, and each side is able to access the other node's information 507. The Dependent nodes can be from the same business structure or any other in the tree. Threshold and conditional settings enable triggering of actions, events, workflows and notifications. Nagar et al. [col. 24, lines 10-50]. … FIG. 6 describes a method to create, maintain, display and access a structure for item inventory storing, scheduling against user defined activities against distributed teams or systems, tracking progress of each scheduled item and reporting. This function, referred to as Asset Tracker and Scheduler, can be invoked from every node 601, or any source and the function is totally localized to that invoking node, with all the relevant data available at this node. Nagar et al. [col. 25, lines 4-25]. … The progress of the workflow, warning flags and other summary information displayed on the List View pane 707 of the function that provides interactive updating and enables creation/ modification/deletion and other operational actions. Nagar et al. [col. 26, lines 30-67]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of project and data management before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the steps of Spector and MacGillivray et al. combined in include the node management functions of Nagar et al. to enable management of a variety of organizational, business, operational, and administrative needs and the flow of information in the hierarchy (Nagar et al. [col. 5, lines 25-35], in a manner that would have yielded predictable results at the relevant time.
Regarding Claim 10, Spector, MacGillivray et al., and Nagar et al. combined disclose the method, wherein terminating, for the second process node in the second project in the project management system, the work item bound to the second process node and the work item bound to the child process node of the second process node in response to terminating the second process node comprises: terminating the work item bound to the second process node and the work item bound to the child process node of the second process node in response to detecting a terminate operation for the second process node in a second schedule. (.… the target Dependent Nodes in their own business structure also display identical information of the invoking nodes at their end. The dynamic link creates a pair relation between two or more nodes, and each side is able to access the other node's information 507. The Dependent nodes can be from the same business structure or any other in the tree. Threshold and conditional settings enable triggering of actions, events, workflows and notifications. Nagar et al. [col. 24, lines 10-50]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of project and data management before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the steps of Spector and MacGillivray et al. combined in include the node management functions of Nagar et al. to enable management of a variety of organizational, business, operational, and administrative needs and the flow of information in the hierarchy (Nagar et al. [col. 5, lines 25-35], in a manner that would have yielded predictable results at the relevant time.
Regarding Claim 11, Spector, MacGillivray et al., and Nagar et al. combined disclose the method, wherein restoring the work item bound to the second process node and the work item bound to the child process node of the second process node in response to restoring the deleted second process node or the terminated second process node comprises: restoring the work item bound to the second process node and the work item bound to the child process node of the second process node in response to a restore operation for the second process node in a second schedule. Nagar et al. discloses this limitation. (… The system's structure and inbuilt functions enable creation of categories, define conditions and thresholds to notify and/or delete data, provide approval tracking capability, and the ability to restore archived data when requested. Nagar et al. [col. 20, lines 3-16, 35-40]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of project and data management before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the steps of Spector and MacGillivray et al. combined in include the node management functions of Nagar et al. to enable management of a variety of organizational, business, operational, and administrative needs and the flow of information in the hierarchy (Nagar et al. [col. 5, lines 25-35], in a manner that would have yielded predictable results at the relevant time.
Regarding Claim 12, Spector, MacGillivray et al., and Nagar et al. combined disclose the method, further comprising: displaying a restore control when the schedule comprises an unpublished deleted. (… The system's structure and inbuilt functions enable creation of categories, define conditions and thresholds to notify and/or delete data, provide approval tracking capability, and the ability to restore archived data when requested. Nagar et al. [col. 20, lines 3-16, 35-40]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of project and data management before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the steps of Spector and MacGillivray et al. combined in include the node management functions of Nagar et al. to enable management of a variety of organizational, business, operational, and administrative needs and the flow of information in the hierarchy (Nagar et al. [col. 5, lines 25-35], in a manner that would have yielded predictable results at the relevant time.
Regarding Claim 13, Spector and MacGillivray et al. combined fail to explicitly disclose the method, further comprising: displaying a flowchart of a second project in the project management interface of the project management system; and displaying first reminder information and a first reason input control in response to a delete operation for a third process node in the flowchart. Nagar et al. discloses these limitations. (The inventive system allows the creation of multi-tier hierarchical program structures. The system includes a wizard for user to generate these structures. Nagar et al. [col. 7, lines 25-67; col. 8, lines 35-50; Nagar et al. [col. 13, lines 1-40]. … "Cross-Node Dependency" interlinking, provides support for the functions as listed, but are not limited to: 1. Ability to define a dependency between any two nodes of the tree within the scope of a single program or between nodes from two different programs. Nagar et al. [col. 15, lines 11-67]. Workflows at each item and at the scheduled activity enables actions to be invoked based on the conditions set, and provide its progress, warning indicators and other pertinent information. Each node in the hierarchy can invoke this function and the related data and information is localized to the invoking node for speedy reproduction of the localized data that is relevant to the node. Nagar et al. [col. 5, lines 5-21]. …Workflows that enable interactive collaboration and updates. 4. Ability to associate issues, risks, information from other nodes, interlinking Business Considerations and inter-node dependencies. 5. Ability to display critical status information via flag indicators, warning, notifications, alerts, etc. 6. Ability to add change request and sub-change requests in a nested form; each lower level change request is treated, tracked, managed and reported as an independent risk while interlinked with a master/parent change request. Nagar et al. [col. 13, lines 1-40]. … every node 1001, 1002 or any source point and localizes the information at the invoking node for speedy retrieval and at the source management. Action Items with workflows 1004, 1005 created can be assigned to people, groups, systems 1006 etc., enabling interactive collaboration and management through its entire lifecycle, and the method tracks updates and details, progress, criticality, due dates, warning flags etc. and conditional/ unconditional 1007 settings that trigger other actions. … The method enables children Action Items to be created and managed under a parent Action Item workflow. The List View 1003 provides and updates real time summary, and the warning flag colors intensify as time starts to run out, and enables creation/ modification/ deletion and other operational actions. Nagar et al. [col. 28, lines 30-67; Fig. 10]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of project and data management before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the steps of Spector and MacGillivray et al. combined in include the node management functions of Nagar et al. to enable management of a variety of organizational, business, operational, and administrative needs and the flow of information in the hierarchy (Nagar et al. [col. 5, lines 25-35], in a manner that would have yielded predictable results at the relevant time.
Regarding Claim 14, Spector and MacGillivray et al. combined fail to explicitly disclose the method,, further comprising: displaying a details page of a root work item corresponding to a root node of a second project; and deleting a child work item of the root work item in response to a delete operation for the root work item of the second project. Nagar et al. discloses these limitations. (The inventive system allows the creation of multi-tier hierarchical program structures. The system includes a wizard for user to generate these structures. Nagar et al. [col. 7, lines 25-67; col. 8, lines 35-50; Nagar et al. [col. 13, lines 1-40]. … "Cross-Node Dependency" interlinking, provides support for the functions as listed, but are not limited to: 1. Ability to define a dependency between any two nodes of the tree within the scope of a single program or between nodes from two different programs. Nagar et al. [col. 15, lines 11-67]. … Workflows at each item and at the scheduled activity enables actions to be invoked based on the conditions set, and provide its progress, warning indicators and other pertinent information. Each node in the hierarchy can invoke this function and the related data and information is localized to the invoking node for speedy reproduction of the localized data that is relevant to the node. Nagar et al. [col. 5, lines 5-21]. … The owner/manager of the parent node has the option of overriding some of the information or accepting the accumulated/ aggregated information coming from below through user specified/configurable logic before forwarding it upward. The executive/management can receive real-time a status report at the highest node and can drill down through the hierarchy of the nodes from the highest node to the lowest node of the hierarchy for details. Nagar et al. [col. 10, lines 35-50]. …Workflows that enable interactive collaboration and updates. 4. Ability to associate issues, risks, information from other nodes, interlinking Business Considerations and inter-node dependencies. 5. Ability to display critical status information via flag indicators, warning, notifications, alerts, etc. 6. Ability to add change request and sub-change requests in a nested form; each lower level change request is treated, tracked, managed and reported as an independent risk while interlinked with a master/parent change request. Nagar et al. [col. 13, lines 1-40]. … every node 1001, 1002 or any source point and localizes the information at the invoking node for speedy retrieval and at the source management. Action Items with workflows 1004, 1005 created can be assigned to people, groups, systems 1006 etc., enabling interactive collaboration and management through its entire lifecycle, and the method tracks updates and details, progress, criticality, due dates, warning flags etc. and conditional/ unconditional 1007 settings that trigger other actions. … The method enables children Action Items to be created and managed under a parent Action Item workflow. The List View 1003 provides and updates real time summary, and the warning flag colors intensify as time starts to run out, and enables creation/ modification/ deletion and other operational actions. Nagar et al. [col. 28, lines 30-67; Fig. 10]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of project and data management before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the steps of Spector and MacGillivray et al. combined in include the node management functions of Nagar et al. to enable management of a variety of organizational, business, operational, and administrative needs and the flow of information in the hierarchy (Nagar et al. [col. 5, lines 25-35], in a manner that would have yielded predictable results at the relevant time.
Regarding Claim 15, Spector and MacGillivray et al. combined fail to explicitly disclose the method, further comprising: displaying second prompt information and a first reason input control in response to a terminate operation for a root work item of a second project. Nagar et al. discloses this limitation. (The inventive system allows the creation of multi-tier hierarchical program structures. The system includes a wizard for user to generate these structures. Nagar et al. [col. 7, lines 25-67; col. 8, lines 35-50; Nagar et al. [col. 13, lines 1-40]. … "Cross-Node Dependency" interlinking, provides support for the functions as listed, but are not limited to: 1. Ability to define a dependency between any two nodes of the tree within the scope of a single program or between nodes from two different programs. Nagar et al. [col. 15, lines 11-67]. … Workflows at each item and at the scheduled activity enables actions to be invoked based on the conditions set, and provide its progress, warning indicators and other pertinent information. Each node in the hierarchy can invoke this function and the related data and information is localized to the invoking node for speedy reproduction of the localized data that is relevant to the node. Nagar et al. [col. 5, lines 5-21]. … The owner/manager of the parent node has the option of overriding some of the information or accepting the accumulated/ aggregated information coming from below through user specified/configurable logic before forwarding it upward. The executive/management can receive real-time a status report at the highest node and can drill down through the hierarchy of the nodes from the highest node to the lowest node of the hierarchy for details. Nagar et al. [col. 10, lines 35-50]. …Workflows that enable interactive collaboration and updates. 4. Ability to associate issues, risks, information from other nodes, interlinking Business Considerations and inter-node dependencies. 5. Ability to display critical status information via flag indicators, warning, notifications, alerts, etc. 6. Ability to add change request and sub-change requests in a nested form; each lower level change request is treated, tracked, managed and reported as an independent risk while interlinked with a master/parent change request. Nagar et al. [col. 13, lines 1-40]. … every node 1001, 1002 or any source point and localizes the information at the invoking node for speedy retrieval and at the source management. Action Items with workflows 1004, 1005 created can be assigned to people, groups, systems 1006 etc., enabling interactive collaboration and management through its entire lifecycle, and the method tracks updates and details, progress, criticality, due dates, warning flags etc. and conditional/ unconditional 1007 settings that trigger other actions. Nagar et al. [col. 13, lines 1-40]. … The method enables children Action Items to be created and managed under a parent Action Item workflow. The List View 1003 provides and updates real time summary, and the warning flag colors intensify as time starts to run out, and enables creation/ modification/ deletion and other operational actions. Nagar et al. [col. 28, lines 30-67; Fig. 10]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of project and data management before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the steps of Spector and MacGillivray et al. combined in include the node management functions of Nagar et al. to enable management of a variety of organizational, business, operational, and administrative needs and the flow of information in the hierarchy (Nagar et al. [col. 5, lines 25-35], in a manner that would have yielded predictable results at the relevant time.
Regarding Claim 16, Spector and MacGillivray et al. combined fail to explicitly disclose the method, further comprising: displaying a details page of a target work item bound to a fourth process node, wherein the fourth process node is not a project root node, and the target work item establishes a binding relationship with the fourth process node in a second schedule; displaying third prompt information in response to a delete operation for the target work item in the details page of the target work item, wherein the third prompt information is used to prompt that deleting a work item bound to a child process node in the second schedule is not supported in the details page; and displaying fourth prompt information in response to a terminate operation for the target work item in the details page of the target work item, wherein the fourth prompt information is used to prompt that terminating a work item bound to a child process node in the second schedule is not supported in the details page. Nagar et al. discloses this limitation. (The inventive system allows the creation of multi-tier hierarchical program structures. The system includes a wizard for user to generate these structures. Nagar et al. [col. 7, lines 25-67; col. 8, lines 35-50; Nagar et al. [col. 13, lines 1-40]. … "Cross-Node Dependency" interlinking, provides support for the functions as listed, but are not limited to: 1. Ability to define a dependency between any two nodes of the tree within the scope of a single program or between nodes from two different programs. Nagar et al. [col. 15, lines 11-67]. … Workflows at each item and at the scheduled activity enables actions to be invoked based on the conditions set, and provide its progress, warning indicators and other pertinent information. Each node in the hierarchy can invoke this function and the related data and information is localized to the invoking node for speedy reproduction of the localized data that is relevant to the node. Nagar et al. [col. 5, lines 5-21]. … The owner/manager of the parent node has the option of overriding some of the information or accepting the accumulated/ aggregated information coming from below through user specified/configurable logic before forwarding it upward. The executive/management can receive real-time a status report at the highest node and can drill down through the hierarchy of the nodes from the highest node to the lowest node of the hierarchy for details. Nagar et al. [col. 10, lines 35-50]. …Workflows that enable interactive collaboration and updates. 4. Ability to associate issues, risks, information from other nodes, interlinking Business Considerations and inter-node dependencies. 5. Ability to display critical status information via flag indicators, warning, notifications, alerts, etc. 6. Ability to add change request and sub-change requests in a nested form; each lower level change request is treated, tracked, managed and reported as an independent risk while interlinked with a master/parent change request. Nagar et al. [col. 13, lines 1-40]. … every node 1001, 1002 or any source point and localizes the information at the invoking node for speedy retrieval and at the source management. Action Items with workflows 1004, 1005 created can be assigned to people, groups, systems 1006 etc., enabling interactive collaboration and management through its entire lifecycle, and the method tracks updates and details, progress, criticality, due dates, warning flags etc. and conditional/ unconditional 1007 settings that trigger other actions. Nagar et al. [col. 13, lines 1-40]. … The method enables children Action Items to be created and managed under a parent Action Item workflow. The List View 1003 provides and updates real time summary, and the warning flag colors intensify as time starts to run out, and enables creation/ modification/ deletion and other operational actions. Nagar et al. [col. 28, lines 30-67; Fig. 10]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of project and data management before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the steps of Spector and MacGillivray et al. combined in include the node management functions of Nagar et al. to enable management of a variety of organizational, business, operational, and administrative needs and the flow of information in the hierarchy (Nagar et al. [col. 5, lines 25-35], in a manner that would have yielded predictable results at the relevant time.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Agarwal et al. (US 2014/0297837) – a model used by one or more companies engaged in information technology (IT) consulting and services delivery business to execute a technology project using globally distributed resources. A global service delivery model may address technical skills, process rigor, tools, methodologies, overall structure and strategies for delivering IT-enabled services from global locations. A monitoring system of the present disclosure in one embodiment, e.g., a global delivery monitoring system for continuous improvement for operation and process, may be designed to track social network and traditional metrics, and report whether any deviation is happening in a system being monitored. Continuous monitoring enables early detection and timely correction which ensures continuous improvement.
Grey (US 2008/0163156) – A Project Management solution comprising: methods and best practices in Project management, algorithms, data base technologies; object oriented technologies, software security methods, web technologies, networking (WAN/LAN/ INTRANETS), smart devices and a Project Management knowledge base enabling a common interface for managing a project lifecycle of: initiation, planning, execution, controlling and closing stages. The Project Management solution is a comprehensive solution for Project Management that delivers real time project status, by means of functional layers and their intrinsic technologies.
Pettus et al. (US 2014/0208253) - Methods and apparatus to monitor tasks in a process system enterprise are disclosed. In one example, a method is disclosed that comprises analyzing, using a processor, tasks in an enterprise to determine a criticality of each task and an actionability of each task, ordering, using the processor, the tasks based on the criticality and the actionability of each of the tasks, and rendering, via a display, a first graphic representative of at least a portion of the ordered tasks.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LETORIA G KNIGHT whose telephone number is (571)270-0485. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am-5pm.
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, Rutao WU can be reached at 571-272-6045. 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.
/L.G.K/Examiner, Art Unit 3623 /RUTAO WU/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3623
Prosecution Insights