Obviousness

Under 35 U.S.C. § 103, a patent claim is obvious if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art (PHOSITA). For US Patent 8,266,124, the key aspects of the invention revolve around managing computer-related hardware devices through a centralized, continuously updated database that tracks transition events and uses this information for future management.

The following combination of prior art references would render the claims of US8266124 obvious to a PHOSITA:

Combination of Prior Art References:

1. US20010037333A1 (Toyota Jidosha Kabushiki Kaisha): Titled "Asset information management method, asset information management system, asset information identifier database, and data structure of asset information management identifier." This reference, with a priority date of April 17, 2000, discloses an asset information management system and method that utilizes an "asset information identifier database" (a centralized computerized database) to manage asset information.
2. US6182212B1 (International Business Machines Corporation): Titled "Method and system for automated migration of user settings to a replacement computer system." This patent, with a priority date of December 14, 1998, describes a method for automated migration of user settings to a replacement computer system.
3. US5133075A (Hewlett-Packard Company): Titled "Method of monitoring changes in attribute values of object in an object-oriented database." This patent, with a priority date of December 19, 1988, teaches a method for monitoring changes in attribute values of objects within a database.

Obviousness Analysis for Claim 1 (Method):

Claim 1 of US8266124 describes a method comprising:

1. receiving an indication of an occurrence of at least one transition event performed for at least one of a plurality of computer-related hardware devices, wherein the plurality of computer-related hardware devices include respective processors;
2. recording information from the transition event into a centralized computerized database;
3. monitoring for at least one change to the plurality of computer-related hardware devices and recording information associated with the change into the centralized computerized database; and
4. managing at least one additional transition event for at least one of the plurality of computer related hardware devices using information available in the centralized computerized database.

Analysis:

• "receiving an indication of an occurrence of at least one transition event performed for at least one of a plurality of computer-related hardware devices, wherein the plurality of computer-related hardware devices include respective processors":

  • US6182212B1 explicitly teaches an "automated migration of user settings to a replacement computer system." The act of replacing a computer system inherently constitutes a "transition event" (involving the disposition of an old device and the installation of a new one) performed for a "computer-related hardware device," which includes a processor. The initiation of such a migration implies receiving an indication for the transition event to occur.

• "recording information from the transition event into a centralized computerized database":

  • US6182212B1 teaches the capture and migration of "user settings", which is "information from the transition event." US20010037333A1 discloses an "asset information identifier database" which serves as a "centralized computerized database" for managing asset information. A PHOSITA, seeking to create a comprehensive and useful asset management system, would find it obvious to record the user settings and other relevant information gathered during an asset replacement (as taught by US6182212B1) into the centralized asset database of US20010037333A1. This combination addresses the problem of losing or having to re-gather asset and user configuration data during lifecycle events, which is a key problem identified in the background of US8266124.

• "monitoring for at least one change to the plurality of computer-related hardware devices and recording information associated with the change into the centralized computerized database":

  • US5133075A teaches a method for "monitoring changes in attribute values of object in an object-oriented database." A PHOSITA would readily understand how to apply this known technique to continuously "monitor for at least one change" to the attributes or state of the "computer-related hardware devices" (e.g., software installations, hardware upgrades, network configurations) and to "record information associated with the change" into the centralized asset information database of US20010037333A1. This directly addresses the problem of maintaining up-to-date information and preventing data from becoming stale, as identified in the background of US8266124.

• "managing at least one additional transition event for at least one of the plurality of computer related hardware devices using information available in the centralized computerized database":

  • Given the teachings of US20010037333A1 (a centralized asset database), US6182212B1 (capturing information during transition events), and US5133075A (continuously monitoring changes), the resulting centralized database would contain comprehensive, historical, and current information about the computer-related hardware devices and their previous transition events. It would be an obvious and logical step for a PHOSITA to use this rich, accumulated data to "manage at least one additional transition event" more efficiently. The very purpose of collecting and maintaining such detailed and up-to-date asset information is to facilitate future asset management activities, including subsequent installations, relocations, dispositions, or maintenance tasks. This directly achieves the stated goal of US8266124 for managing future asset transition events.

Obviousness Analysis for Claim 18 (System):

Claim 18, a system claim, recites "means for" performing the steps of Claim 1. The combination above also renders Claim 18 obvious. The references describe functional components or methods that, when implemented, would naturally constitute the "means for" each step:

• "Means for receiving an indication of at least one transition event..." would be implemented by the system described in US6182212B1 for initiating a migration.
• "Means for recording information from the transition event into the centralized computerized database..." would be implemented by the data capture functions of US6182212B1 and the storage capabilities of the database from US20010037333A1.
• "Means for monitoring changes... and recording information associated with the changes..." would be implemented by the change detection mechanisms of US5133075A and the database of US20010037333A1.
• "Means for managing at least one additional transition event... using information available in the centralized computerized database" would be implemented by the overall system leveraging the aggregated and continuously updated data for decision-making and task automation related to future asset transitions.

Motivation to Combine:

A person having ordinary skill in the art (PHOSITA) in asset management, faced with the known challenges of inefficient and costly asset lifecycle management—such as data becoming stale, records being destroyed, and the need to repeatedly gather information for each new asset transition event (as articulated in the background of US8266124)—would have been highly motivated to combine these prior art references.

• The goal of comprehensive asset tracking and management (addressed by US20010037333A1) naturally leads to the desire to keep that asset information current and relevant.
• The known problem of handling asset replacement efficiently and preserving user configurations (addressed by US6182212B1) demands that such event-specific information be integrated into a broader asset management framework.
• The general utility of monitoring changes in data (as taught by US5133075A) would be immediately apparent to a PHOSITA as a solution to prevent asset information from becoming outdated.

Combining these references would provide a synergistic solution: a centralized database for all asset information (US20010037333A1), dynamically updated with continuous monitoring of changes (US5133075A), and enriched with detailed data captured during specific asset lifecycle events like replacements (US6182212B1). This integration would overcome the problems of static and disparate asset information, enabling more informed and efficient management of future asset transition events. The resulting system would achieve the "improved technique for integrated asset management" that US8266124 purports to invent, by addressing known limitations in the prior art in an obvious manner.

Dependent Claims:

The dependent claims of US8266124 specify various types of information (e.g., user, software, site, financial), types of transition events (e.g., relocation, maintenance), types of devices (e.g., desktop, printer), database characteristics (e.g., relational, remote), data handling (e.g., formatting, filtering), monitoring methods (e.g., continuous, real-time), management activities, and reporting functions. These are all common and desirable features in an enterprise IT asset management system by the 2001 priority date. A PHOSITA would find it obvious to incorporate such standard functionalities and data types into the combined system to make it more comprehensive and useful. For example, using a "relational database" (Claim 3/20) for structured asset information was conventional, and "transmitting information... through the Internet" (Claim 7/21) or "secure, encrypted transmission" (Claim 9/23) were standard network communication practices. Similarly, generating "reports" (Claim 14/31) from a database is a fundamental database application.