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
2. Claims 1-20 are pending.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
3. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
4. Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention
5. Claims 1 lines 4-5, recites “one or more windows of least impact” (plural), but lines 7-8 refers to “the window of least impact” (singular). It is unclear which specific window is being referred to. Appropriate correction is requested.
6. Claims 1 recites “windows of least impact” the claim provides no criteria for determining “least impact.” A person of skill in the art cannot determine the boundaries of what constitute “least” as oppose to “moderate” or “high” impact. The phrase lacks a mathematical, percentage or data-driven threshold. Appropriate correction is requested
7. Claim 1 recites “base in part on urgency and user preference” this is highly subjective. The claim fails to define what “urgency” means or what constitutes “user preferences.” A person ordinary skill in the art would not know how these factor are weighted or applied. Appropriate correction is required.
Double Patenting
8. The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); and In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321 © or 1.321 (d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP §§ 706.02(l)(1) -706.02(l)(3) for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.qov/patents/process/file/efs/Quidance/eTD-info-l.isp.
9. Claims 17 and 18, are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. (US 12368640 B2). Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because all elements of instant application 19/250561 claim 1 correspond to elements of claim 1 of the (US 12368640 B2). The above claims of the present application would have been obvious over claim 1 of U.S. Patent No(US 12368640 B2) because each element of the claims of the present application is anticipated by claim 1 of U.S. Patent No(US 12368640 B2).
Instant Application 19/250,561
US Patent No. (US 12368640 B2)
1. A method implemented by a controller of a network, comprising:
receiving, from a device of a network administrator, data corresponding to implementing a change window;
determining, by the controller and based at least in part on the data, one or more windows of least impact, users impacted by each of the windows, and one or more applications impacted by each of the windows; and
in response to selecting, based in part on an urgency and user preferences, a window of least impact of the one or more windows of least impact:
determining the users impacted by the window of least impact; and
sending, to one or more devices associated with the users, a notification of the window of least impact and a service impacted.
1. A method implemented at least in part by a controller of a network, comprising:
receiving, from a device within the network, data input by a network administrator, the data corresponding to implementing a change window and
comprising an urgency associated with the change window and one or more user preferences of the network administrator associated with implementing the change window;
determining, by the controller and based at least in part on the data, one or more windows of least impact;
determining, by the controller and based at least in part on the data, one or more risks associated with implementing the change window during each of the one or more windows of least impact, the one or more risks including one or more applications impacted by each of the one or more windows of least impact and a number of users impacted by each of the one or more windows of least impact; and
sending, to the device, a message for display to the network administrator, the message including the one or more windows of least impact and the one or more risks associated with each window of least impact of the one or more windows of least impact and
enabling the network administrator to provide input selecting a window of least impact.
Claims 2-9 of the instant application are anticipated by claims 10-18 and 19-20 of the patent application
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
10. In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AlA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AlA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis 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.
11. 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 of this title, 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.
12. Claims 1,6-7, 9- 12.15 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Killadi at el. (US 20200028738 A1) hereinafter Killadi and in view of Klinger et al. (US 11159387 B1) hereinafter Klinger.
Regarding claims 1, 10 and 19, Killadi discloses a method implemented at least in part by a controller of a network, (see Fig 1), comprising:
receiving, from a device within the network, data associated with an administrator, the data corresponding to implementing a change window (para. [0040]-[0041] and [0063] At 346, the method 340 may include analyzing data traffic in the network over the series of time windows. Analyzing the data traffic may include monitoring, over a monitoring period, the data traffic at each of a plurality of network controllers making up a cluster of controllers in the network. The monitoring period may be a configurable time period. The monitoring period may be configurable by a network administrator [0026] the upgrade manager 102 may receive a notification that a network upgrade is available for the network 104 and the notification may include characteristics of the upgrade. The upgrade manager 104 may retrieve the upgrade file and perform an analysis of the upgrade and/or associated metadata in order to determine characteristics of the upgrade. [0027] The upgrade manager 102 may utilize the characteristics of the upgrade to identify the upgrade time interval. [0058] The upgrade to the network may be scheduled for the selected future time window. In some examples, scheduling the upgrade may include reporting a suggestion of the future time window and/or alternative future time windows to complete the upgrade to a network administrator).
determining, by the controller and based at least in part on the data, one or more windows of least impact, users impacted by each of the windows, and one or more applications impacted by each of the windows (para. [0021] a client device may engage in an exchange of a particular type of data packets and/or engage in the exchange with a particular type of application. For example, the session may include a video streaming session with a video streaming application or a voice over IP (VOIP) streaming application…[0037] the upgrade manager 102 may identify a particular subset of the series of time windows. The subsets of the series of time windows may be sequential and non-overlapping. The particular subset of the series of time windows may be selected from the series of time windows based on a particular time window from the subset of the series of time windows including a relatively least amount of data traffic and/or a relatively least amount of a type of data traffic as compared to other particular time windows in other subsets of the series of time windows. That is, the series of time windows may be iteratively analyzed to identify which subset of the series of time windows includes a time window or time windows which include a relatively smallest amount of data traffic, a relatively fewest client sessions, and/or a relatively fewest amount of client sessions of a particular session type. [0038] …the upgrade manager may identify a particular subset, such as the third subset including 7:02 AM-8:02 AM, 8:02 AM-9:02 AM, 9:02 AM-10:02 AM, etc. because a particular time window from 8:02 AM-9:02 AM may include a relatively smallest amount of data traffic, a relatively fewest client sessions, and/or a relatively fewest amount of client sessions of a particular session type as compared to the other time windows in the other series of windows);
determining the users impacted by the window of least impact (para. [0016] determining an interval based on an amount of time to upgrade the network, determine a series of time windows based on the interval, analyze data traffic in the network over the series of time windows, identify a subset of the series of time windows that are sequential and non-overlapping, and select a particular time window from the subset of the series of time windows to perform and upgrade of the network based on the analyzed data traffic. [0038] …the upgrade manager may identify a particular subset, such as the third subset including 7:02 AM-8:02 AM, 8:02 AM-9:02 AM, 9:02 AM-10:02 AM, etc. because a particular time window from 8:02 AM-9:02 AM may include a relatively smallest amount of data traffic, a relatively fewest client sessions, and/or a relatively fewest amount of client sessions of a particular session type as compared to the other time windows in the other series of windows); and
sending, to the device, a message for display, the message including the one or more windows of least impact and the one or more service impacted ( para. [0015] network administrators may send a message to clients warning of potential network outages, interruptions, and/or slowdowns during a time period when an upgrade to the network will be applied. While providing such messages may provide clients an opportunity to schedule their session accordingly, the interruption may still be an undesirable happening to the clients. Further, an upgrade to a network may interrupt the activity of network devices for a period of time, such as an hour, which may pose an unacceptable loss of productivity to the clients and/or to an enterprise and/or institution providing data service with the network. Furthermore, interrupting the activity of the network devices during particular time windows of the day may be more impactful than others. [0016] determining an interval based on an amount of time to upgrade the network, determine a series of time windows based on the interval, analyze data traffic in the network over the series of time windows, identify a subset of the series of time windows that are sequential and non-overlapping, and select a particular time window from the subset of the series of time windows to perform and upgrade of the network based on the analyzed data traffic).
Killadi discloses selecting, based in part on an urgency ( para. [0058] The upgrade to the network may be scheduled for the selected future time window. In some examples, scheduling the upgrade may include reporting a suggestion of the future time window and/or alternative future time windows to complete the upgrade to a network administrator. In addition, [0040]-[0041] and [0063] At 346, the method 340 may include analyzing data traffic in the network over the series of time windows. Analyzing the data traffic may include monitoring, over a monitoring period, the data traffic at each of a plurality of network controllers making up a cluster of controllers in the network. The monitoring period may be a configurable time period. The monitoring period may be configurable by a network administrator. [0026] the upgrade manager 102 may determine characteristics of the upgrade in order to inform the upgrade interval of time. For example, the upgrade manager 102 may receive a notification that a network upgrade is available for the network 104 and the notification may include characteristics of the upgrade. The upgrade manager 104 may retrieve the upgrade file and perform an analysis of the upgrade and/or associated metadata in order to determine characteristics of the upgrade. [0027] The upgrade manager 102 may utilize the characteristics of the upgrade to identify the upgrade time interval)
Killadi may not explicitly disclose in response to selecting, based in part on an urgency and user preferences, a window of least impact of the one or more windows of least impact.
However, Klinger discloses in response to selecting, based in part on an urgency and user preferences, a window of least impact of the one or more windows of least impact (col 8 lines 1-41), the change management system 106 comprises a graphical user interface structured to allow a system administrator to select an infrastructure asset and schedule a change activity based on the information received from the network traffic projection environment 100 (i.e. preference) . For example, a change activity may be scheduled when the least amount of disruption is expected to upstream and/or downstream systems (32)… the network traffic projection resource 148b may comprise a string of binary character values for projected network traffic activity, and the network traffic visualization resource 148a may comprise further attributes, such as change management information, infrastructure asset information (e.g., application information), change activity information, disruption factor(s), etc. The additional attributes may be used to determine the extent of the impact of a system outage. In one example use case, although the additional attributes may reveal that a proposed system outage would make an important financial reporting application unavailable during a particular time window, which would increase the impact of the outage, the expected traffic activity for the financial reporting application during a particular hour of the day (e.g., at 6:00 PM) may be a number of times lower than during peak use times (e.g., between 9:00 AM and 6:00 PM), which would mitigate the negative impact of the outage…).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Killadi and include in response to selecting, based in part on an urgency and user preferences, a window of least impact of the one or more windows of least impact using the teaching of Klinger. One would have been motivated to do so in order to minimize disruption to enterprise operations, upstream systems, and downstream systems.
Regarding claims 6 and 15, claim 1 is incorporated. Killadi may not explicitly disclose wherein the one or more windows of least impact are further based at least in part on traffic load data, application traffic, and user data. However, Klinger discloses wherein the one or more windows of least impact are further based at least in part on traffic load data, application traffic, and user data ( col. 2 lines 48-62, receive network traffic data comprising a source host and a destination host, receive change management data comprising at least one of an application associated with one of the source host and the destination host, a planned outage description, and a planned outage duration, generate a neural network comprising a network traffic projection based on the network traffic data, display, via a graphical user interface of a system administrator device, the network traffic projection, receive, via the graphical user interface, a user input indicative of a parameter for the network traffic projection, wherein the parameter includes the change management data, and display, via the graphical user interface, an updated network traffic projection reflective of a subset of network traffic data corresponding to the parameter).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Killadi and include wherein the one or more windows of least impact are further based at least in part on traffic load data, application traffic, and user data using the teaching of Klinger. One would have been motivated to do so in order to minimize disruption to enterprise operations, upstream systems, and downstream systems.
Regarding claims 7 and 11, claim 1 is incorporated. Killadi may not explicitly disclose wherein at least one of the one or more windows of least impact or the one or more risks are determined using one or more machine learning models. However, Klinger discloses wherein at least one of the one or more windows of least impact or the one or more risks are determined using one or more machine learning models ( col. 13 lines 48-65, col. 11 lines 51-57 and col. 12 lines 1-4), the machine learning engine 132 may recommend an optimal change window. The machine learning engine 132 may determine that the first device 102 and the second device 104 are in active communication twice a day, at 5:00 AM and 5:00 PM, for a batch file upload. The processing logic may specify a minimum threshold number of days with substantially similar activity patterns, such as 1 day, 2 days, one week, a certain number of a particular day of the week, a certain number of a particular calendar date, etc. Based on this information, a projection for an upcoming time period (a 4-hour block, a 12-hour block, a 24-hour block, a 48-hour block, etc.) may be generated. In this use case, if operations of the machine learning engine 132 are executed at 1:00 PM on a particular day, the machine learning engine 132 may predict that the two systems will not be in communication until 5:00 PM and therefore a four-hour change management and downtime window is available for updating one or more of the respective systems without impacting their applications or data interchange processes).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Killadi and include wherein at least one of the one or more windows of least impact or the one or more risks are determined using one or more machine learning models using the teaching of Klinger. One would have been motivated to do so in order to minimize disruption to enterprise operations, upstream systems, and downstream systems.
Regarding claims 9, 12 and 20, claim 1 is incorporated. Killadi may not explicitly disclose wherein the data comprises a type of change associated with at least one element within the network, an urgency associated with the change window, and one or more user preferences of the network administrator. However, Klinger discloses wherein the data comprises a type of change associated with at least one element within the network, an urgency associated with the change window, and one or more user preferences of the network administrator (col 8 lines 1-41), the change management system 106 comprises a graphical user interface structured to allow a system administrator to select an infrastructure asset and schedule a change activity based on the information received from the network traffic projection environment 100 (i.e. preference) . For example, a change activity may be scheduled when the least amount of disruption is expected to upstream and/or downstream systems (32)… the network traffic projection resource 148b may comprise a string of binary character values for projected network traffic activity, and the network traffic visualization resource 148a may comprise further attributes, such as change management information, infrastructure asset information (e.g., application information), change activity information, disruption factor(s), etc. The additional attributes may be used to determine the extent of the impact of a system outage. In one example use case, although the additional attributes may reveal that a proposed system outage would make an important financial reporting application unavailable during a particular time window, which would increase the impact of the outage, the expected traffic activity for the financial reporting application during a particular hour of the day (e.g., at 6:00 PM) may be a number of times lower than during peak use times (e.g., between 9:00 AM and 6:00 PM), which would mitigate the negative impact of the outage…).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Killadi and include wherein the data comprises a type of change associated with at least one element within the network, an urgency associated with the change window, and one or more user preferences of the network administrator using the teaching of Klinger. One would have been motivated to do so in order to minimize disruption to enterprise operations, upstream systems, and downstream systems.
13. Claims 2 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Killadi at el. (US 20200028738 A1) hereinafter Killadi and in view of Klinger et al. (US 11159387 B1) hereinafter Klinger and further in view of Hines et al.( US 20020112200 A1) hereinafter Hines.
Regarding claims 2 and 14 claim 1 is incorporated. Killadi in view Klinger may not explicitly disclose monitoring, by the controller, code running on one or more network elements; identifying, by the controller, keywords associated with the code, the keywords indicating one or more bugs that require an upgrade; and sending, to the device, an indication that the upgrade is required. However, Hines discloses monitoring, by the controller, code running on one or more network elements; identifying, by the controller, keywords associated with the code, the keywords indicating one or more bugs that require an upgrade; and sending, to the device, an indication that the upgrade is required (para [0057] the core analysis tool 150 may be configured to use keyword searches to roughly categorize bugs and patches for more effective matching. For example, if a bug description indicates the system "deadlocked" or "hanged", the core analysis tool 150 may be configured to match these phrases with the core dump. Of course, the core analysis tool 150 and system 100 will operate more efficiently with logical and planned indexing of files and information that increase the speed and accuracy of matching bugs and patches. [0055] the core analysis tool 150 can be configured to process all the scores for the patches in the patch search set to determine when the cause of the unexpected interrupt is a new or at least unidentified bug. For example, if there are no patches with a bug description match or only a relatively small number of matches, the core analysis tool 150 may provide this information as a separate line item of patch search report. This information may be used by the operator of the analyst node in determining whether a new bug should be identified and added to the bug files 175. For example, if identified and recommended patches are installed in the system 110 and resolve the problem, a bug may be described and placed in the bug files 175. In this scenario, it would also be useful to update the installed patches to provide a reference in field 236 to the newly indexed bug).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Killadi in view of Klinger and include monitoring, by the controller, code running on one or more network elements; identifying, by the controller, keywords associated with the code, the keywords indicating one or more bugs that require an upgrade; and sending, to the device, an indication that the upgrade is required using the teaching of Hines. One would have been motivated to do so in order to efficiently and accurately identifying appropriate patches to correct bugs, thereby enhancing the operation of the computer system.
14. Claims 3 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Killadi at el. in view of Klinger et al. and further in view of Bonas (US 20120254395 A1) hereinafter Bonas.
Regarding claims 3 and 17 claim 1 is incorporated. Killadi in view Klinger may not explicitly disclose sending, to the device, a message for display to the network administrator, the message including the one or more windows of least impact and one or more risks associated with each window of least impact of the one or more windows of least impact and enabling the network administrator to provide input selecting the window of least impact. However, Bonas discloses sending, to the device, a message for display to the network administrator, the message including the one or more windows of least impact and one or more risks associated with each window of least impact of the one or more windows of least impact and enabling the network administrator to provide input selecting the window of least impact (para. [0023] The downtime scheduler 140 may access monitored user traffic for the data center 120. User traffic may be monitored between clients 130 and the data center 120 at large, for particular resource(s) in the data center 120, or a combination of both. In an example, the downtime scheduler 140 accesses monitored user traffic from monitor(s) that are external to any of the resources in the data center 120. Accessing may include passively receiving and/or actively obtaining. For example, the monitors may intercept (or passively read) user traffic. Accordingly, the monitors can be readily deployed in the data center independently of the resources. That is, the monitors do not need to be installed as agents on the resources (which may result in decreased performance of the resources). [0041] the downtime application 150 may access a proposed downtime for the resource, compare the proposed downtime to the defined downtime, and suggest an alternative downtime based on the defined downtime. The defined downtime may include a plurality of windows for executing a downtime job as multiple jobs. [0059] Further operations may also include rescheduling a suggested downtime based on actual events. For example, if a downtime is suggested for a particular time based on analyzed trends and/or a system administrator's input, but the user traffic for the resource(s) is unexpectedly high during that time, the downtime may be rescheduled for a later time.[0060] operations may include receiving from a system administrator a proposed downtime for the resource, comparing the proposed downtime to the defined downtime, and suggesting an alternative downtime based on the defined downtime.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Killadi in view of Klinger and include sending, to the device, a message for display to the network administrator, the message including the one or more windows of least impact and one or more risks associated with each window of least impact of the one or more windows of least impact and enabling the network administrator to provide input selecting the window of least impact using the teaching of Bonas. One would have been motivated to do so in order to reduce impact of resource downtime in data center.
15. Claims 4 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Killadi at el. (US 20200028738 A1) hereinafter Killadi and in view of Klinger et al. (US 11159387 B1) hereinafter Klinger and further in view of Gupta et al.( US 9262146 B1) hereinafter Gupta.
Regarding claims 4 and 18, claim 1 is incorporated. Killadi in view Klinger discloses receiving, by the controller and from the device, an indication of a selection of a window of least impact of the one or more windows of least impact; and storing, by the controller, the indication in a database associated with a service provider of the network (see Klinger, col. 11 lines 51-57, col. 13 lines 48-65, and col 1 lines 125-29). Killadi in view Klinger may not explicitly disclose the indication being correlated with a user profile of the network administrator.. However Gupta discloses the indication being correlated with a user profile (col. 35 lines 25-35, context information may be transmitted to one or more websites at various points in time Analysis performed at each website to determine relevant software upgrades may make use of the context information as well as other information included in user profile data. When a vendor has a software upgrade, such as in the form of a patch, new software version, or event new software product, and the like, the vendor may use the context information, and more generally information in a user profile).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Killadi in view of Klinger and include the indication being correlated with a user profile of the network administrator. Using the teaching of Gupta. One would have been motivated to do so in order to provide relevant context information to target location of the external environment and facilitating communications between the data storage system and the external environment.
16. Claims 5 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Killadi at el. (US 20200028738 A1) hereinafter Killadi and in view of Klinger et al. (US 11159387 B1) hereinafter Klinger and further in view of Wetherly et al.( US 20060236317 A1) hereinafter Wetherly
Regarding claims 5 and 16, claim 1 is incorporated. Killadi in view Klinger may not explicitly disclose wherein the notification includes an indication of the one or more applications impacted by the window. However, Wetherly discloses wherein the notification includes an indication of the one or more applications impacted by the window. (col. 35 lines 25-35, context information may be transmitted to one or more websites at various points in time Analysis performed at each website to determine relevant software upgrades may make use of the context information as well as other information included in user profile data. When a vendor has a software upgrade, such as in the form of a patch, new software version, or event new software product, and the like, the vendor may use the context information, and more generally information in a user profile).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Killadi in view of Klinger and wherein the notification includes an indication of the one or more applications impacted by the window of Wetherly. One would have been motivated to do so in order to efficiently control installation of software updates.
17. Claim 8 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Killadi at el. (US 20200028738 A1) hereinafter Killadi and in view of Klinger et al. (US 11159387 B1) hereinafter Klinger and further in view of Ahmed et al. (US 20210390187 A1) hereinafter Ahmed.
Regarding claims 8 and 13 claim 1 is incorporated. Killadi in view Klinger may not explicitly disclose determining, based at least in part on the data, one or more risks associated with each of the one or more windows of least impact, the one or more risks identifying an identifier of an application impacted by implementing the change window during the window of least impact of the one or more windows of least impact and a number of users impacted However, Ahmed discloses determining, based at least in part on the data, one or more risks associated with each of the one or more windows of least impact, the one or more risks identifying an identifier of an application impacted by implementing the change window during the window of least impact of the one or more windows of least impact and a number of users impacted (para.[0039] [0040]-[0041] after a patch for a server (e.g., server 152) has been scheduled, the patch management system 120 may automate one or more processes associated with executing the patch (e.g., creating a patch job, notifying users of affected systems/applications of server outages).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Killadi, in view of Klinger and include determining, based at least in part on the data, one or more risks associated with each of the one or more windows of least impact, the one or more risks identifying an identifier of an application impacted by implementing the change window during the window of least impact of the one or more windows of least impact and a number of users impacted using the teaching of Ahmed. One would have been motivated to do so in order to provide effective, efficient, scalable, and convenient technical solutions that address and overcome the technical problems associated with coordinating and executing server patching processes.
Conclusion
18. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Kidest Mendaye whose telephone number is (571)272-2603. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday through Friday 7:00 am-5:00pm EST. 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, Ario Etienne can be reached on (571) 272-4001. 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.
08/03/2021
/KIDEST MENDAYE/Examiner, Art Unit 2457
/ARIO ETIENNE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2457
Prosecution Insights