DETAILED ACTION
This action is responsive to the RCE with amendments/remarks filed December 29, 2025. Claims 9-28 are pending, all examined and rejected.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 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 nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 9-11, 13-23, 27, 28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ueno et al (US 20120060091 A1 thereafter "Ueno"), in view of Lipner et al (US 20070270980 A1 thereafter "Lipner").
As to claim 9, Ueno disclose(s) a operator application system for executing a standard operating procedure (SOP) object, the operator application system comprising: a memory configured to store the SOP object, the SOP object comprising: an SOP instruction display element comprising a plurality of SOP instruction steps when monitoring or controlling a process plant; [Steps and operations are stored, in memory, and displayed for an operator of a plant to monitor and operate a plant [See ¶-12, 33, 35]. The system stores layout information, in memory, of the manual text and display items to be operated (collectively SOP object) shown in Figs 2 and 4 [See ¶-45, 58]. The procedure information (SOP instruction display element) is stored which provides operation and monitoring steps (SOP instruction steps) to be performed by the operator, as shown in Fig 2 [See ¶-33-35]] one or more SOP process function display elements, each SOP process function display element depicting a respective process control function affecting one or more process control elements included in an operating environment of the process plant; [The display elements for the specific step are stored with the layout [See ¶-45]. The display elements include buttons that are operated by the operator to perform the displayed procedure operation steps [See ¶-53-54]] and a layout defining a visual representation of the one or more SOP process function display elements embedded within the SOP instruction display element, wherein at least one of the one or more SOP process function display elements is configured to be displayed adjacent to one of the plurality of SOP instruction steps, and [Figs 3 and 4 show a layout wherein steps from the stored procedure information (SOP instruction display element) are displayed [See ¶-33-35, 50-51]. The displayed layout includes the operation and monitoring steps (SOP instruction steps), e.g. "Open Valve E", "Check Alarm A" 320A-320D [See ¶-60]. The display elements 330A-330D (SOP process function display elements) include the functions to be performed by the process elements, e.g. displaying a value from a sensor, open/close valve [See ¶-36, 41, 62-63]. Fig 4 shows the steps and display elements adjacent to one another. Fig 3 indicates the specific layout coordinates/information (layout defining) [See ¶-50-51]] a display interface application including computer-executable instructions stored in the memory, and the computer-executable instructions causing one or more processors to: receive process control variable information from an on-line process; [The system receives online measurement data for displaying [See ¶-36]] create an operator interface display on a display device that presents the process control variable information in conjunction with process device layout information on a display screen of the display device; [The screen display control section receives the layout information for integration with measurement values and display ("presents the process control variable information in conjunction with process device layout information") [See ¶-55-56]]
enable an operator to select, via the operator interface display, an SOP object related to the process device layout information on the display screen of the display device. See Fig. 1 and [0031], discussing operator makes inputs on the display. Then see [0041], operator makes input operation to output signal 511 which is used for determine the current operation step by operation determination section 130. Then see [0053], discussing that display element selection section 140 selects display elements to display based on results of operation determination section 130.
obtain the selected SOP object from the memory; See [0053], display element selection section 140 gets information from database 220.
execute the selected SOP object so that the SOP instruction display element and the one or more SOP process function display elements are presented ... in a first position on the display screen of the display device according to the layout, … [The layout is displayed to the operator via the input/output equipment 170 on a single screen (single display view) [See ¶-54, 56]] and responsive to selection of one of the one or more SOP process function display elements, cause the respective process control function to be performed by sending a command from the one or more processors to a process control device to perform the respective process control function. [The user may select a button 330C, shown in Fig 4, to open/close a valve ("cause the respective process control function to be performed") [See ¶-60, 63, 68]. The display elements 330A-330D (SOP process function display elements) include the functions to be performed by the process elements, e.g. displaying a value from a sensor, open/close valve [See ¶-36, 41, 62-63]. As noted specifically in ¶-63, the displayed buttons are operated by the operator to perform the action, i.e. open/close valve E. This input is received via the input/output equipment 170 to allow the operator to perform the operations outlined in the displayed manual without leaving the screen [See ¶-34]. Accordingly, a skilled artisan would understand that a command is transmitted ("sending a command") to a device to perform the opening/closing of the valve] However, Ueno do(es) not disclose "presented in a pop-up window in a first position on the display … wherein the pop-up window is superimposed on the operator interface display; responsive to a move command, cause the pop-up window to move to a second position within the operator interface display;" On the other hand, Lipner discloses "presented in a pop-up window in a first position on the display … wherein the pop-up window is superimposed on the operator interface display Lipner discloses a system wherein a user is guided through a facility's operating procedures [See ¶-43-44]. Fig 4 shows the procedures are displayed via client software [See ¶-38, 45]. The user may view a particular operating procedure, shown in Fig 8, and perform operations to view another operating procedure within a pop up window that may be dragged to any desired position, as shown in Fig 9 [See ¶-50]. The broadest reasonable interpretation of the limitations do not preclude displaying the interface taught by Ueno as the operator interface display, and a second operating procedure in an overlaid window taught by Lipner. The process device layout information may be broadly interpreted as process steps to be performed with the devices, and is taught by Ueno [See relevant citations above]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Ueno's plant operation system to incorporate the teachings of Lipner's procedure pop up window. Motivation to do so would be to enable operators to run two or more procedures simultaneously, as taught by Lipner [See ¶-50].
As to claim 10, Ueno, Lipner disclose(s) the operator application system of claim 9, wherein the SOP object further comprises an SOP process control data display element depicting one or more process control parameter values associated with the one or more process control elements included in the operating environment of the process plant, wherein the layout further defines the visual representation to include the SOP process control data display element embedded within the SOP instruction display element, wherein at least one of the one or more process control parameter values is configured to be displayed adjacent to one of the plurality of SOP instruction steps, and wherein the computer-executable instructions that cause the one or more processors to execute the SOP object, further cause the SOP process control data display element to be presented on the display screen of the display device according to the layout. [Ueno, Figs 3 and 4 show a layout wherein steps from the stored procedure information (SOP instruction display element) are displayed [See ¶-33-35, 50-51]. The displayed layout includes the operation and monitoring steps (SOP instruction steps), e.g. "Check Values B, C, and D", "Check Alarm A" 320A-320D [See ¶-60]. The display elements 330A-330D (SOP process control data display element) include the values/information to be displayed from the process elements, e.g. displaying a value from a sensor, alarm status [See ¶-36, 41, 62-63]. Fig 4 shows the steps and display elements adjacent to one another. Fig 3 indicates the specific layout coordinates/information (layout defining) [See ¶-50-51]]
As to claim 11, Ueno, Lipner disclose(s) the operator application system of claim 9, wherein at least one of the one or more process control elements is a field device. [Ueno, The user may select a button 330C, shown in Fig 4, to open/close a valve (field device) [See ¶-60, 63, 68]. The displayed information may be from a plant sensor (field device) [See ¶-36]]
As to claim 13, Ueno, Lipner disclose(s) the operator application system of claim 10, wherein the one or more process control parameter values comprise one or more links to a location within at least one of a data historian, a database, or the one or more process control elements at which the process control parameter values can be obtained. [Ueno, The display elements 330A-330D include the values/information (links to … the one or more process control elements at which the process control parameter values can be obtained) to be displayed from the process elements, e.g. displaying a value from a sensor, alarm status [See ¶-36, 41, 62-63]. Fig 3 shows the identifier for the signal (link) from the corresponding sensor (process control elements) from which the value is obtained [See ¶-41, 50-52]]
As to claim 14, Ueno, Lipner disclose(s) the operator application system of claim 10, wherein the one or more process control parameter values are configured to be generated by at least one of the one or more process control elements. [Ueno, The display elements 330A-330D (SOP process function display elements) include the values/information to be displayed from the sensors/plant elements (process control elements) [See ¶-36, 41, 62-63]]
As to claim 15, Ueno, Lipner disclose(s) the operator application system of claim 10, wherein the one or more process control parameter values comprise at least one of a measurement value, a status value, or a set point value. [Ueno, The display elements 330A-330D (SOP process function display elements) include the values or alarm status to be displayed from the sensors/plant elements (process control elements) [See ¶-36, 41, 62-63]]
As to claim 16, Ueno, Lipner disclose(s) the operator application of claim 9, wherein causing the respective process control function to be performed comprises: causing at least one of the one or more process control elements to be actuated; [Ueno, The display elements 330A-330D (SOP process function display elements) include the values/information to be displayed from the process elements, e.g. displaying a value from a sensor, alarm status [See ¶-36, 41, 62-63]]
As to claim(s) 17, 22, and 27, the claim(s) is/are directed to a computer implemented method analogous to the method performed by the system of claim(s) 9 and is/are thus rejected under similar rationale. A skilled artisan would understand that the method is performed by a computer with memory and a processor.
As to claim(s) 18-19, 21, the claim(s) is/are directed to a system analogous to the system of claim(s) 10, 13, 16 respectively, and is/are thus rejected under similar rationale.
As to claim 20, Ueno, Lipner disclose(s) the configuration system of claim 17, wherein the computer-executable instructions causing the one or more processors to create the one or more SOP process function display elements comprise further computer-executable instructions to configure the one or more SOP process function display elements to, upon selection, send a signal to a function block or control module associated with at least one of the one or more process control elements. [Ueno, The user may select a button 330C, shown in Fig 4, to open/close a valve (control module) [See ¶-60, 63, 68]. The displayed information may be from a plant sensor (control module) [See ¶-36]]
As to claim(s) 23, 28 the claim(s) is/are directed to a computer implemented method analogous to the method performed by the system of claim(s) 10 and is/are thus rejected under similar rationale.
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ueno et al (US 20120060091 A1 thereafter "Ueno"), in view of Lipner et al (US 20070270980 A1 thereafter "Lipner"), in view of Yokota et al (US 20180204165 A1 thereafter "Yokota").
As to claim 12, Ueno, Lipner do(es) not disclose "wherein at least one of the one or more process control elements is a controller. " On the other hand, Yokota discloses "wherein at least one of the one or more process control elements is a controller. " Yokota discloses Fig 6A indicates that the "write value" indicates that the operator is to perform the step of writing data/parameters to the field device represented by the adjacent icon [See ¶-91]. Selection of the element/icon in Fig 6A allows the performing of the indicated step of writing the value to a field device [See ¶-92]. The device (process control elements) is a field device "FI-1001(EJX)" (field device) [See ¶-87]. The field device may be a device that outputs a control signal (controller) [See ¶-32] It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Ueno's plant operation system, Lipner's procedure pop up window to incorporate the teachings of Yokota's controller. Motivation to do so would be to enable operating a field device, as taught by Yokota [See ¶-120]. Additional motivation would be to improve operation efficiency, as taught by Yokota [See ¶-120].
Claim(s) 24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ueno et al (US 20120060091 A1 thereafter "Ueno"), in view of Lipner et al (US 20070270980 A1 thereafter "Lipner"), in view of Stanke et al (US 20190138331 A1 thereafter "Stanke").
As to claim 24, Ueno, Lipner do(es) not disclose "wherein the identifier is associated with a name of the SOP object. " On the other hand, Stanke discloses "wherein the identifier is associated with a name of the SOP object. " Stanke discloses an identifier is used to identify and retrieve help topics (SOP object) by performing a search query on a database using the identifier [See ¶-35, and Claim 1]. The identifier is associated with a help topic such as "Managing your group", and "How do I chat with more than one friend at once?" ("name of the SOP object") [See ¶-35]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Ueno's plant operation system, Lipner's procedure pop up window to incorporate the teachings of Stanke's identifier based help retrieval. Motivation to do so would be to provide the user with the most relevant help content, as taught by Stanke [See ¶-35].
Claim(s) 25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ueno et al (US 20120060091 A1 thereafter "Ueno"), in view of Lipner et al (US 20070270980 A1 thereafter "Lipner"), in view of Neichev et al (US 20150134686 A1 thereafter "Neichev").
As to claim 25, Ueno, Lipner do(es) not disclose "wherein the identifier is associated with a version of the SOP object. " On the other hand, Neichev discloses "wherein the identifier is associated with a version of the SOP object. " Neichev discloses a system that retrieves help content using the version of the help content (SOP object) [See ¶-23]. The version identifier is used to retrieve an updated version of the help content when a newer version is available [See ¶-23]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Ueno's plant operation system, Lipner's procedure pop up window to incorporate the teachings of Neichev's help content versioning. Motivation to do so would be to provide the user with the most up-to-date help content available, as taught by Neichev [See ¶-23].
Claim(s) 26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ueno et al (US 20120060091 A1 thereafter "Ueno"), in view of Lipner et al (US 20070270980 A1 thereafter "Lipner"), in view of Lara et al (US 20150350305 A1 thereafter "Lara").
As to claim 26, Ueno, Stanke, Lipner do(es) not disclose "wherein the identifier is associated with a version of a configuration application used to create the SOP object. " On the other hand, Lara discloses "wherein the identifier is associated with a version of a configuration application …" Lara discloses that a version (identifier) of an application (configuration application) being used is used to determine help information to retrieve and provide to the user [See ¶-38]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Ueno's plant operation system, Lipner's procedure pop up window to incorporate the teachings of Lara's application version identifier. Motivation to do so would be to allow for minimal changes to the help system when the application is updated, as taught by Lara [See ¶-46].
Lara does not explicitly teach "… a version of a configuration application used to create the SOP object". (Emphasis added.) However, it would have been obvious to use the same version of the application to create the help content. Such as generating the instructions/content while viewing and interacting with the same application version.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Lara's help content to generate the help content using the same application. Motivation to do so would be because it is the combining of prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results. A skilled artisan would have expected to yield the predictable result of ensuring that the help content contains the correct instructions/content for the interface of the application version that the user is using, thus improving user efficiency.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the 35 USC 103 rejections have been considered but are not persuasive. First applicant argues that Ueno-Lipner do not teach the super-imposing aspect as previously claimed. Second, applicant argues that Ueno-Lipner do not teach the selecting aspect as newly claimed.
With respect to the “superimposed” limitation, the examiner notes that this is claimed extremely broadly and is read on by a simple pop-up window which is extremely well known in the art, for example as in Lipner. Whether or not Ueno is a “standalone SOP system that is not integrated with any other display system” does not appear relevant here - there’s no requirement in the claims to this effect and such a “standalone” system, if Ueno were to be one, would not prohibit the use of pop-up windows in the manner claimed. The arguments directed towards Lipner’s windows not having the requisite information displayed are not persuasive as (a) they attack references individually – Ueno discloses the required displayed information and Lipner is used to show a pop-up window in an analogous system and (b) Lipner’s windows do display that type of information regardless.
The selection aspect is newly claimed and the examiner finds this aspect is taught by Ueno. Please see the rejection above for more details.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATT ELL whose telephone number is (571)270-3264. The examiner can normally be reached 9-5, M-F.
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, Christyann Pulliam can be reached at 571-270-1007. 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.
/MATTHEW ELL/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2141