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 .
The Amendment filed on 09/11/25 has been received and entered. Application No. 17/207,650 of claims 1-20 are now pending.
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s arguments did not overcome 35 USC § 103 rejections.
Applicant’s response, filed on 02/28/25, with respect to 101 rejections directed to an abstract idea of claims 1-20 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejections are withdrawn.
This action is made final.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to Procedural Impropriety of Newly Cited References, Applicant argues “Applicant respectfully submits that the Examiner's reliance on newly cited prior art in the present Office Action is procedurally improper. No substantive amendments to the claims were submitted in connection with the most recent (second) Request for Continued Examination, filed on February 7, 2025 ("RCE"), which was notably the second RCE filed”.
Examiner respectfully disagrees. Examiner points to MPEP 706.07(h) a request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 02/07/25 has been entered. The RCE filed on 02/07/25 was examined under new grounds of rejection. Therefore, Applicant’s arguments are not persuasive.
Applicant's arguments with respect to 35 USC § 103 rejections of claims 1-20 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant made the following arguments:
Regarding claims 1, 12 and 14, Applicant argues “none of Raleigh, Fulton, or Marino disclose or suggest a sequencing system comprising a set of drivers, where each driver (i) communicates bidirectionally with one of the plurality of PLC controllers, and (ii) translates heterogeneous programmable logic controller (PLC) feedback into a uniform format correlated with and storable in the sequencing system's database as claimed in instant independent claims 1, 12, and 14”.
Examiner respectfully disagrees. Raleigh teaches in paragraph [0391] bidirectional communications between service processor and service controller in which “this control plane communication link provides for a secure ( e.g., encrypted) communications link for providing secure, bidirectional communications between the service processor 115 and the service controller 122. In some embodiments, the service control server link 1638 provides the network side of a system for transmission and reception of service agent to/from network element functions” [0391] while Fulton discloses in Tables VIII, IX, paragraphs [0289] and [0317] process of determining format, translating and conversion data process. The combination of Fulton and Raleigh discloses the claimed limitations. Therefore, Applicant’s arguments are not persuasive.
Regarding claims 1, 12 and 14, Applicant argues “There is no teaching or suggestion in either Raleigh or Fulton to make this leap. As such, the proposed combination relies on impermissible hindsight reconstruction… the cited references are distinctly different from Applicant's claimed systems and methods. This is not a piecemeal analysis; these references simply fall short of disclosing each and every element of Applicant's claims as is required for a proper Section 2143 rejection. One of ordinary skill in the art would not have been motivated, based on the disclosures Raleigh, Fulton and Marino, to arrive at Applicant's claimed systems and methods… Applicant respectfully submits that Raleigh, Fulton and Marino, whether each considered alone or in combination with each other, fail to disclose, teach, or suggest all of the limitations of claims 1-20”.
Examiner respectfully disagrees. In response to Applicant's argument that there is no suggestion to combine the references, the Examiner recognizes that references cannot be arbitrarily combined and that there must be some reason why one skilled in the art would be motivated to make the proposed combination of primary and secondary references. In re Nomiya, 184 USPQ 607 (CCPA 1975). However, there is no requirement that a motivation to make the modification be expressly articulated. The test for combining references is what the combination of disclosures taken as a whole would suggest to one of ordinary skill in the art. In re McLaughlin, 170 USPQ 209 (CCPA 1971). References are evaluated by what they suggest to one versed in the art, rather than by their specific disclosures. In re Bozek, 163 USPQ 545 (CCP A 1969). In this case, Fulton discloses managing communications and Raleigh teaches enabling wireless communication device to communicate over a wireless network, establishing connections between wireless communication devices. Skilled artisan would have been motivated to incorporate the method of establishing connection between communication devices taught by Raleigh in the Fulton system for effectively managing communications. The combination of Fulton and Raleigh discloses the claimed limitations. Therefore, Applicant’s arguments are not persuasive.
In response to Applicant's argument that the Examiner's conclusion of obviousness is based upon improper hindsight reasoning, it must be recognized that any judgement on obviousness is in a sense necessarily a reconstruction based upon hindsight reasoning. But so long as it takes into account only knowledge which was within the level of ordinary skill at the time the claimed invention was made, and does not include knowledge gleaned only from the applicant's disclosure, such a reconstruction is proper. In re McLaughlin, 443 F.2d 1392; 170 USPQ 209 (CCPA 1971). Therefore, Applicant’s arguments are not persuasive.
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 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 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.
Claims 1-4, 6-11, and 14-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fulton et al. (U.S. PGPub 2009/0083589; hereinafter “Fulton”) in view of Raleigh et al. (U.S. PGPub 2017/0078922; hereinafter “Raleigh”).
As per claim 1, Fulton discloses a sequencing system for use with an industrial manufacturing and automation system, the sequencing system comprising:
one or more servers; (See paras. 31, 77, 256, wherein servers are disclosed; as taught by Fulton.)
at least one database having a set schema in communication with the one or more servers; (See paras. 9-10, 22-24, 31, wherein programmable logic controller (PLC), communications channel, communications port are disclosed, also See Table 1, para. 82, wherein communication services are disclosed; as taught by Fulton.)
a plurality of controllers, each of the controllers comprising a protocol hard coded in such controller and in communication with at least one input/output (I/O) device for use in an industrial manufacturing process and the one or more servers, the at least one database, or both over a network, and configured to receive data from the at least one I/O device and transmit instructions to the at least one I/O device and execute the protocol to govern I/O device operation in view of the data received therefrom; (See paras. 9,22-24, 250, 257-262, wherein programmable logic controller (PLC), industrial process controllers, input/output (I/O) device are disclosed, also See Figs. 1, 3, paras. 47, 148-149, 179-181, 187, wherein programmable logic controller hardware, software and firmware and PLC functions are disclosed, also See paras. 189-200, wherein controller functions are disclosed; as taught by Fulton.)
and one or more software applications executable by the one or more servers comprising at least a file service and a data service, the file service in communication with the at least one database configured to populate an active file set based on data from a selected configuration stored in the at least one database, and the data service comprising a set of drivers, each driver configured to: (See Table 1, paras. 24-25, 70-75, 77-78, 117, wherein system services, applications and various features, process of send and receive operations between two communication partners are disclosed, also See Table V, paras. 17-18, 47-48, 83, wherein configurations are disclosed; as taught by Fulton.)
translate feedback data received from the controller into a uniform format that correlates with and is storable within the at least one database, (See Tables VIII, IX, paras. 317, wherein process of determining format of message, translating data between forms are disclosed, also See para. 289, wherein automated conversion of data are disclosed; as taught by Fulton.)
wherein the selected configuration comprises a series of instructions and parameters for executing an industrial automation system program using the plurality of controllers in a manufacturing process. (See Fig. 3, paras. 75, 202, 217, wherein specific instructions are disclosed, also See paras. 158, 187, 300-302, wherein instructions, series of start/end conditions are disclosed; as taught by Fulton.)
However, Fulton fails to disclose bidirectionally communicate with a controller of the plurality of controllers, and translate data from the active file set into the protocol of a relevant controller.
On the other hand, Raleigh teaches bidirectionally communicate with a controller of the plurality of controllers, (See para. 391, wherein bidirectional communications between service processor and service controller are disclosed; as taught by Raleigh.)
and translate data from the active file set into the protocol of a relevant controller. (See Figs. 19B, 30A, 31, paras. 173, 236, 251, wherein service controller, translating data from device to a network are disclosed; as taught by Raleigh.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the computer art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the Raleigh teachings in the Fulton system. Skilled artisan would have been motivated to incorporate the method of establishing connection between communication devices taught by Raleigh in the Fulton system for effectively managing communications. In addition, both of the references (Fulton and Raleigh) teach features that are directed to analogous art and they are directed to the same field of endeavor, such as network communication. This close relation between both of the references highly suggests an expectation of success.
As per claim 2, the rejection of claim 1 is hereby incorporated by reference, the combination of Fulton and Raleigh discloses wherein each controller: comprises a programmable logic controller (PLC); (See paras. 9, 22-24, 250, 257-262, wherein programmable logic controller (PLC), industrial process controllers, input/output (I/O) device are disclosed, also See Figs. 1, 3, paras. 47, 148-149, 179-181, 187, wherein programmable logic controller hardware, software and firmware and PLC functions are disclosed, also See paras. 189-200, wherein controller functions are disclosed; as taught by Fulton.)
and has a hard coded PLC protocol, wherein there are at least two different protocols within the plurality of controllers. (See paras. 20, 22-24, 250, 257-262, wherein programmable logic controller (PLC), industrial process controllers, input/output (I/O) device are disclosed, also See Figs. 1, 3, paras. 47, 148-149, 179-181, 187, wherein programmable logic controller hardware, software and firmware and PLC functions are disclosed, also See Table 1, paras. 31, 189-200, wherein PtP applications, hard-coded parameter values, controller functions are disclosed; as taught by Fulton.)
As per claim 3, the rejection of claim 1 is hereby incorporated by reference, the combination of Fulton and Raleigh discloses an output device or system in communication with the at least one database and configured to read the uniform format. (See Tables VIII, IX, paras. 317, wherein process of determining format of message, translating data between forms are disclosed, also See Table 1, paras. 24-25, 70-75, 77-78, 117, wherein system services, applications and various features, process of send and receive operations between two communication partners are disclosed, also See Table V, paras. 17-18, 47-48, 83, wherein configurations are disclosed; as taught by Fulton.); as taught by Fulton.)
As per claim 4, the rejection of claim 3 is hereby incorporated by reference, the combination of Fulton and Raleigh discloses wherein the output device or system comprises a human machine interface (HMI) and the one or more software applications further comprise a configuration application configured to receive and store, in the at least one database, one or more configurations, each configuration comprising a series of sequences to be performed by one or more controllers associated input/output devices, with each sequence associated with one or more setpoints, conditions, or values. (See Fig. 1, paras. 73, 148, 282, wherein HMI, DCS systems, input/output (I/O) module are disclosed, also See Table 1, paras. 24-25, 70-75, 77-78, 117, wherein system services, applications and various features, process of send and receive operations between two communication partners are disclosed, also See Table V, paras. 17-18, 47-48, 83, wherein configurations are disclosed; as taught by Fulton.)
As per claim 6, the rejection of claim 1 is hereby incorporated by reference, Fulton fails to disclose wherein the uniform format is selected from a group consisting of an XML format, a SCV format, a JSON format, a MDF format, a NDF format, and an LDF format.
On the other hand, Raleigh teaches wherein the uniform format is selected from a group consisting of an XML format, a SCV format, a JSON format, a MDF format, a NDF format, and an LDF format. (See paras. 696, 911, 916, wherein formats are disclosed; as taught by Raleigh.)
See claim 1 for motivation above.
As per claim 7, the rejection of claim 1 is hereby incorporated by reference, the combination of Fulton and Raleigh discloses wherein the controllers are each associated with a piece of industrial equipment and selected from a group consisting of: a programmable logic controller, a remote terminal unit, and a proportional-integral-derivative controller. (See paras. 282, wherein programmable logic controller (PLC), controlled industrial system are disclosed; as taught by Fulton.)
As per claim 8, the rejection of claim 1 is hereby incorporated by reference, the combination of Fulton and Raleigh discloses wherein each protocol comprises disparate high level command structures. (See paras. 57, 249-255, 290, wherein in various information types, such as commands are disclosed; as taught by Fulton.)
As per claim 9, the rejection of claim 1 is hereby incorporated by reference, Fulton fails to disclose wherein the data service is configured to transmit feedback data translated into the uniform format to the at least one database.
On the other hand, Raleigh teaches wherein the data service is configured to transmit feedback data translated into the uniform format to the at least one database. (See paras. 132, 137, wherein feedback and service capabilities are disclosed; as taught by Raleigh.)
See claim 1 for motivation above.
As per claim 10, the rejection of claim 2 is hereby incorporated by reference, the combination of Fulton and Raleigh discloses wherein the at least one database further comprises: at least one table, each table populated with a series of steps for an automation program to be performed by the I/O devices in communication with the plurality of controllers, and each step comprising one or more setpoint values for each I/O device at each step; (See paras. 22-24, 250, 257-262, wherein programmable logic controller (PLC), industrial process controllers, input/output (I/O) device are disclosed, also See paras. 158, 187, 282, 300-302, wherein instructions, series of start/end conditions are disclosed; as taught by Fulton.)
and at least one folder dedicated to each of the plurality of controllers, each folder comprising mapping data of the respective controller and each I/O device in communication therewith and fields for inputting the one or more setpoint values from the at least one table. (See Table I, II, III, VIII, paras. 78-83, wherein parameterization, PtP applications, values are disclosed, also See paras. 24-25, 70-75, 117, wherein system services, applications and various features, process of send and receive operations between two communication partners are disclosed; as taught by Fulton.)
As per claim 11, the rejection of claim 1 is hereby incorporated by reference, the combination of Fulton and Raleigh discloses wherein the output device or system comprises a reporting module, the reporting module configured to generate a report based, at least in part, on the feedback data stored in the at least one database. (See paras. 67, 122, 282, wherein PtP modules, report generation are disclosed; as taught by Fulton.)
As per claim 14, Fulton discloses a method for changing between active configurations in an industrial manufacturing and automation system comprising the steps of: providing a sequencing system for use with an industrial manufacturing and automation system, the sequencing system comprising: (See Table VI, IX, paras. 38-45, 282, wherein sequencing system, automation of controlled industrial system are disclosed; as taught by Fulton.)
one or more servers; (See paras. 31, 77, 256, wherein servers are disclosed; as taught by Fulton.)
at least one database having a set schema in communication with the one or more servers; (See paras. 9-10, 22-24, 31, wherein programmable logic controller (PLC), communications channel, communications port are disclosed, also See Table 1, para. 82, wherein communication services are disclosed; as taught by Fulton.)
one or more configurations saved in the at least one database; (See Table VI, IX, paras. 17-18, 24, 73, wherein configuration are disclosed; as taught by Fulton.)
a plurality of controllers, each of the controllers comprising a protocol hard coded in such controller and in communication with at least one input/output (I/O) device for use in an industrial manufacturing process and the one or more servers, the at least one database, or both over a network, and configured to receive data from the at least one I/O device and transmit instructions to the at least one 1/0 device and execute the protocol to govern I/O device operation in view of the data received therefrom; (See paras. 9,22-24, 250, 257-262, wherein programmable logic controller (PLC), industrial process controllers, input/output (I/O) device are disclosed, also See Figs. 1, 3, paras. 47, 148-149, 179-181, 187, wherein programmable logic controller hardware, software and firmware and PLC functions are disclosed, also See paras. 189-200, wherein controller functions are disclosed; as taught by Fulton.)
and one or more software applications executable by the one or more servers that comprise at least a file service and a data service, the file service in communication with the at least one database and configured to populate an active file set based on data from a selected configuration of the one or more configurations, and the data service comprising a set of drivers, each driver configured to: (See Table 1, paras. 24-25, 70-75, 77-78, 117, wherein system services, applications and various features, process of send and receive operations between two communication partners are disclosed, also See Table V, paras. 17-18, 47-48, 83, wherein configurations are disclosed; as taught by Fulton.)
translate feedback data received from the controller into a uniform format that correlates with and is storable within the at least one database, (See Tables VIII, IX, paras. 317, wherein process of determining format of message, translating data between forms are disclosed, also See para. 289, wherein automated conversion of data are disclosed; as taught by Fulton.)
wherein the one or more configurations each comprises a series of instructions and parameters for executing an industrial automation system program using one or more of the plurality of controllers in a manufacturing process; (See Fig. 3, paras. 75, 202, 217, wherein specific instructions are disclosed, also See paras. 158, 187, 300-302, wherein instructions, series of start/end conditions are disclosed; as taught by Fulton.)
executing a first configuration of the one or more configurations using one or more of the plurality of controllers in communication with the one or more servers, the first configuration associated with a first active file set of defined values stored in the at least one database; (See Table VI, IX, paras. 38-45, 282, wherein sequencing system, automation of controlled industrial system are disclosed, also See Table V, paras. 17-18, 47-48, 83, wherein configurations are disclosed; as taught by Fulton.)
selecting a second configuration of the one or more configurations to execute, the second configuration different from the first configuration and associated with a second active file set of defined values stored in the at least one database; (See Table V, paras. 17-18, 20, 83, 87, wherein series of different start/end conditions, configurations are disclosed; as taught by Fulton.)
executing the second configuration using a set of targeted controllers of the plurality of controllers by: (See Table V, paras. 17-18, 20, 83, 87, wherein series of different start/end conditions, configurations are disclosed, also See paras. 189-200, wherein controller functions are disclosed; as taught by Fulton.)
populating, using the file service, a second active file set in the database with values associated with the second configuration, (See Table VI, paras. 57, 244, 301, wherein active sequences, establishing communication settings process are disclosed;
translating, using the data service, the values of the second active file set into a protocol associated with the set of targeted controllers such that each controller of the targeted set can read the translated values, (See Tables VIII, IX, paras. 317, wherein process of determining format of message, translating data between forms are disclosed, also See para. 289, wherein automated conversion of data are disclosed; as taught by Fulton.)
and transmitting the translated values to each controller of the second set to cause the controllers to achieve synchronous modification of operation of the set of targeted controllers to implement a configuration change. (See paras. 25, 37-46, wherein transmitting process are disclosed, also See paras. 300-302, wherein synchronous, asynchronous information, operations are disclosed; as taught by Fulton.)
However, Fulton fails to disclose bidirectionally communicate with a controller of the plurality of controllers, and translate data from the active file set into the protocol of a relevant controller.
On the other hand, Raleigh teaches bidirectionally communicate with a controller of the plurality of controllers, (See para. 391, wherein bidirectional communications between service processor and service controller are disclosed; as taught by Raleigh.)
and translate data from the active file set into the protocol of a relevant controller. (See Figs. 19B, 30A, 31, paras. 173, 236, 251, wherein service controller, translating data from device to a network are disclosed; as taught by Raleigh.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the computer art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the Raleigh teachings in the Fulton system. Skilled artisan would have been motivated to incorporate the method of establishing connection between communication devices taught by Raleigh in the Fulton system for effectively managing communications. In addition, both of the references (Fulton and Raleigh) teach features that are directed to analogous art and they are directed to the same field of endeavor, such as network communication. This close relation between both of the references highly suggests an expectation of success.
As per claim 15, the rejection of claim 14 is hereby incorporated by reference, Fulton discloses identifying a change in between the first file set and the second file set; (See paras. 20, 230, wherein different conditions, various application definitions, different (i.e. changed, distinct, separate) are disclosed; as taught by Fulton.)
However, Fulton fails to disclose deleting, using the file service, the first active file set from the at least one database.
On the other hand, Raleigh teaches deleting, using the file service, the first active file set from the at least one database. (See paras. 765, 772, wherein deleting process are disclosed; as taught by Raleigh.)
See claim 14 for motivation above.
As per claim 16, the rejection of claim 14 is hereby incorporated by reference, the combination of Fulton and Raleigh discloses notifying an output device or system of a changeover from the first configuration to the second configuration. (See Table X, paras. 92, 116, 120, 282, wherein notification process, report generation process are disclosed; as taught by Fulton.)
As per claim 17, the rejection of claim 16 is hereby incorporated by reference, the combination of Fulton and Raleigh discloses notifying an output device or system of a changeover further comprises providing the output device or system access to the second file set. (See Table X, paras. 92, 116, 120, 282, wherein notification process, report generation process are disclosed; as taught by Fulton.)
As per claim 18, the rejection of claim 14 is hereby incorporated by reference, the combination of Fulton and Raleigh discloses receiving, using the data service, feedback data from at least a portion of the plurality of controllers; (See Tables VIII, IX, paras. 317, wherein process of determining format of message, translating data between forms are disclosed, also See paras. 108, 117, 289, wherein returning current status function, automated conversion of data are disclosed; as taught by Fulton.)
translating, using the controller service, the feedback data into a uniform file format; (See Tables VIII, IX, paras. 317, wherein process of determining format of message, translating data between forms are disclosed, also See para. 289, wherein automated conversion of data are disclosed; as taught by Fulton.)
and saving the feedback data in the uniform file format in the at least one database in accordance with an organization structure that correlates the saved feedback data with each controller from which the feedback data originated. (See paras. 118, 263, 310, wherein storing data process are disclosed; as taught by Futon.)
As per claim 19, the rejection of claim 16 is hereby incorporated by reference, the combination of Fulton and Raleigh discloses wherein the output device or system is configured to interface with the at least one database and read the feedback data and data of the one or more configurations. (See Tables VIII, IX, paras. 317, wherein process of determining format of message, translating data between forms are disclosed, also See Table 1, paras. 24-25, 70-75, 77-78, 117, wherein system services, applications and various features, process of send and receive operations between two communication partners are disclosed, also See Table V, paras. 17-18, 47-48, 83, wherein configurations are disclosed; as taught by Fulton.); as taught by Fulton.)
As per claim 20, the rejection of claim 18 is hereby incorporated by reference, the combination of Fulton and Raleigh discloses wherein the feedback data saved in the database is real-time data. (See paras. 148, 250, 282, wherein real time processing are disclosed; as taught by Fulton.)
Claims 5, 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fulton et al. (U.S. PGPub 2009/0083589; hereinafter “Fulton”) in view of Raleigh et al. (U.S. PGPub 2017/0078922; hereinafter “Raleigh”) and further in view of Marino (U.S. PGPub 2012/0084193).
As per claim 5, the rejection of claim 4 is hereby incorporated by reference, the combination of Fulton and Raleigh fails to disclose wherein the HMI is part of a supervisory control and data acquisition system (SCADA).
On the other hand, Marino teaches wherein the HMI is part of a supervisory control and data acquisition system (SCADA). (See paras. 119, 129, wherein SCADA system provides Human Machine Interface (HMI) are disclosed; as taught by Marino.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the computer art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the Marino teachings in the combination of Fulton and Raleigh system. Skilled artisan would have been motivated to incorporate the method for managing global warming taught by Raleigh in the combination of Fulton and Raleigh system for effectively managing communications. In addition, both of the references (Fulton, Raleigh, and Marino) teach features that are directed to analogous art and they are directed to the same field of endeavor, such as network communication. This close relation between both of the references highly suggests an expectation of success.
As per claim 12, Fulton discloses a sequencing system for use with an industrial manufacturing and automation system, the sequencing system comprising:
one or more servers; (See paras. 31, 77, 256, wherein servers are disclosed; as taught by Fulton.)
at least one database having a set schema in communication with the one or more servers; (See paras. 9-10, 22-24, 31, wherein programmable logic controller (PLC), communications channel, communications port are disclosed, also See Table 1, para. 82, wherein communication services are disclosed; as taught by Fulton.)
a plurality of controllers, each of the controllers comprising a protocol hard coded in such controller and in communication with at least one input/output (I/O) device for use in an industrial manufacturing process and the one or more servers, the at least one database, or both over a network, and configured to receive data from the at least one I/O device and transmit instructions to the at least one I/O device and execute the protocol to govern I/O device operation in view of the data received therefrom; (See paras. 9,22-24, 250, 257-262, wherein programmable logic controller (PLC), industrial process controllers, input/output (I/O) device are disclosed, also See Figs. 1, 3, paras. 47, 148-149, 179-181, 187, wherein programmable logic controller hardware, software and firmware and PLC functions are disclosed, also See paras. 189-200, wherein controller functions are disclosed; as taught by Fulton.)
and one or more software applications executable by the one or more servers that comprise at least a file service and a data service, the file service in communication with the at least one database and configured to populate an active file set based on data from a selected configuration, and the data service comprising a set of drivers, each driver configured to: (See Table 1, paras. 24-25, 70-75, 77-78, 117, wherein system services, applications and various features, process of send and receive operations between two communication partners are disclosed, also See Table V, paras. 17-18, 47-48, 83, wherein configurations are disclosed; as taught by Fulton.)
translate feedback data received from the controller into a uniform format that correlates with and is storable within the at least one database, (See Tables VIII, IX, paras. 317, wherein process of determining format of message, translating data between forms are disclosed, also See para. 289, wherein automated conversion of data are disclosed; as taught by Fulton.)
transmit the translated feedback data to a first database of the at least one database, (See paras. 25, 37-46, wherein transmitting process are disclosed; as taught by Fulton.)
and wherein the selected configuration comprises a series of instructions and parameters for executing an industrial automation system program using the plurality of controllers in a manufacturing process; (See Fig. 3, paras. 75, 202, 217, wherein specific instructions are disclosed, also See paras. 158, 187, 300-302, wherein instructions, series of start/end conditions are disclosed; as taught by Fulton.)
However, Fulton fails to disclose bidirectionally communicate with a controller of the plurality of controllers, translate data from the active file set into the protocol of a relevant controller.
On the other hand, Raleigh teaches bidirectionally communicate with a controller of the plurality of controllers, (See para. 391, wherein bidirectional communications between service processor and service controller are disclosed; as taught by Raleigh.)
translate data from the active file set into the protocol of a relevant controller. (See Figs. 19B, 30A, 31, paras. 173, 236, 251, wherein service controller, translating data from device to a network are disclosed; as taught by Raleigh.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the computer art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the Raleigh teachings in the Fulton system. Skilled artisan would have been motivated to incorporate the method of establishing connection between communication devices taught by Raleigh in the Fulton system for effectively managing communications. In addition, both of the references (Fulton and Raleigh) teach features that are directed to analogous art and they are directed to the same field of endeavor, such as network communication. This close relation between both of the references highly suggests an expectation of success.
However, the combination of Fulton and Raleigh fails to disclose a supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA) system in communication with at least the first database of the at least one database; and a reporting module in communication with the at least one database and the SCADA system, the reporting module configured to generate a report based, at least in part, on the feedback data stored in the at least one database.
On the other hand, Marino teaches a supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA) system in communication with at least the first database of the at least one database; (See paras. 119, 129, wherein SCADA system provides Human Machine Interface (HMI) are disclosed; as taught by Marino.)
and a reporting module in communication with the at least one database and the SCADA system, the reporting module configured to generate a report based, at least in part, on the feedback data stored in the at least one database. (See paras. 119, 129, wherein SCADA system provides Human Machine Interface (HMI) are disclosed, also See Figs. 16A, 16B, 20, paras. 27, 31, 50, wherein reporting process are disclosed; as taught by Marino.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the computer art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the Marino teachings in the combination of Fulton and Raleigh system. Skilled artisan would have been motivated to incorporate the method for managing global warming taught by Raleigh in the combination of Fulton and Raleigh system for effectively managing communications. In addition, both of the references (Fulton, Raleigh, and Marino) teach features that are directed to analogous art and they are directed to the same field of endeavor, such as network communication. This close relation between both of the references highly suggests an expectation of success.
As per claim 13, the rejection of claim 12 is hereby incorporated by reference, the combination of Fulton and Raleigh fails to disclose wherein the SCADA system is further in communication with a second database of the at least one database, wherein the selected configuration is saved in the second database.
On the other hand, Marino teaches wherein the SCADA system is further in communication with a second database of the at least one database, wherein the selected configuration is saved in the second database. (See paras. 119-120, 126-129, wherein system architecture for data communication and transmission using SCADA are disclosed; as taught by Marino.)
See claim 12 for motivation above
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LIN LIN M HTAY whose telephone number is (571)272-7293. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F, 7am-3pm, PST.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Kavita Stanley can be reached on (571)272-8352. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/L. L. H./
Examiner, Art Unit 2153
/KAVITA STANLEY/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2153