DETAILED ACTION
Claims 12 and 14-15 were previously cancelled. Claims 1-11 and 13 remain pending in the application.
Claims 1 and 6 are independent.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
This action is final.
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 .
Response to Amendment and Arguments
Applicant's arguments regarding rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 103 have been fully considered but respectfully found not persuasive.
In In the remarks, applicant argues in substance that Qi teaches a data collection box is embedded installed in the user numerical control machine therefore Qi does not teach an integrity monitoring unit detachably connectable directly to the control device.
While the examiner agrees that Qi teaches a data collection box is embedded installed in the user numerical control machine. However, the examiner respectfully submit that applicant has overlooked the fact that the embedded installed data collection box, by broadest interpretation, is detachably connectable directly to the user numerical control machine, since it is an embedded box installed in user numerical control machine. Installed implies the unit is discrete and separate from the device it is installed in. Even if the unit is installed in the device a more permanent-like manner such as by soldering it for example, it can still be unsoldered and removed. Nothing in the claims are directed towards how detachment must occur. Therefore, the examiner believes Qi teaches a detachable connectable unit as claimed (Fig. 1 page 2 paragraph 5 and page 2 last paragraph to page 3 first paragraph, the data collecting box embedded installed in the user numerical control machine, the data collecting box comprises a main control chip, a power supply module, a storage module and a communication port), as stated in previous office action. Therefore, applicant’s arguments are not persuasive.
The teachings of QI, West, GLOTTMANN Ni, Mixer, Tang and Feuchter as disclosed in the previous office action are hereby incorporated by references to the extent applicable to the amended claims.
Another iteration of claim analysis has been made. Referring to the corresponding sections of the claim analysis below for details.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claims 1-2 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over QI CN 106383494 A in view of GLOTTMANN US 20190116544 A11.
Regarding claim 1, QI teaches an integrity monitoring system for runtime integrity monitoring of a control device connected to sensors and/or actuators (Fig. 1 page 2 last paragraph to page 3 first paragraph, data collection box collecting running parameters real-time from NC system of machine 1 inherently though sensors and/or actuators i.e. “runtime integrity monitoring of a control device connected to sensors and/or actuators”) and comprising an automation device for collecting operating state data of the control device (Fig. 1, page 2 last paragraph to page 3 first paragraph, the NC system of machine 1 i.e. “an automation device for collecting operating state data of the control device”), the system comprising:
an integrity monitoring unit detachably connectable directly to the control device to monitor the integrity status of the control device on the basis of operating state data transferred from the automation device to the integrity monitoring unit during normal runtime of the control device, wherein the integrity monitoring unit does not modify operations of the control device; (Fig. 1 page 2 paragraph 5 and page 2 last paragraph to page 3 first paragraph, the data collecting box embedded installed in the user numerical control machine, the data collecting box comprises a main control chip, a power supply module, a storage module and a communication port. By broadest interpretation, installed implies the unit is discrete and separate from the device it is installed in. Even if the unit is installed in the device a more permanent-like manner such as by soldering it for example, it can still be unsoldered and removed, i.e. “an integrity monitoring unit detachably connectable directly to the control device”. The data collecting box reads running parameters real-time from NC system of machine 1 i.e. “monitor the integrity status of the control device on the basis of operating state data transferred from the automation device to the integrity monitoring unit during normal runtime of the control device, wherein the integrity monitoring unit does not modify operations of the control device”);
QI does not explicitly further teach the operating state data includes payload data and signaling data, the integrity monitoring unit transfers requirements for a type and a scope of the payload data and the signaling data to the control device, and the payload data is transmitted unidirectionally from the control device to the integrity monitoring unit.
GLOTTMANN explicitly teaches in an analogous art that the operating state data includes payload data and signaling data, the integrity monitoring unit transfers requirements for a type and a scope of the payload data and the signaling data to the control device, and the payload data is transmitted unidirectionally from the control device to the integrity monitoring unit ([0030] [0095] [0145] the data transmitted including payload data and control data, the transmitting request including control request at very low data rate and large payload data requested at a required data capacity).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified QI to incorporate the teachings of GLOTTMANN, because they all directed to monitoring control process, to make the system wherein the operating state data includes payload data and signaling data, the integrity monitoring unit transfers requirements for a type and a scope of the payload data and the signaling data to the control device, and the payload data is transmitted unidirectionally from the control device to the integrity monitoring unit. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this modification so that only the large data transfer is permitted to flow between the source node and the destination node, as GLOTTMANN teaches in [0030].
Regarding claim 2, QI further teaches an interface unit connected to the control device and the integrity monitoring unit (Fig. 1, page 2 last paragraph, communication port 24).
Regarding claim 4, QI further teaches the integrity monitoring unit is mechanically interlocked with the control devices (page 2 paragraphs 4 and last paragraph, the data collecting box is embedded installed in the user numerical control machine).
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over QI in view of GLOTTMANN as applied to claims 1-2 and 4 above, further in view of West US 20140074279 A12.
Regarding claim 3, neither QI nor GLOTTMANN explicitly further teach the interface unit comprises: an RS232 interface, a USB interface, an SPI interface, an I2C interface, or a backplane bus.
West explicitly teaches in an analogous art that the interface unit comprises: an RS232 interface, a USB interface (Fig. 2 [0032] universal serial bus link 52), an SPI interface, an I2C interface, or a backplane bus.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified QI and GLOTTMANN to incorporate the teachings of West, because they all directed to monitoring control process, to make the system wherein the interface unit comprises: an RS232 interface, a USB interface, an SPI interface, an I2C interface, or a backplane bus. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this modification so as to facilitate communication between the detachable monitoring device and the machine control system, as West teaches in [0032].
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over QI in view of GLOTTMANN as applied to claims 1-2 and 4 above, further in view of Ni CN 104534449 A3.
Regarding claim 5, neither QI nor GLOTTMANN explicitly further teaches the control device comprises a programmable logic control device.
Ni explicitly teaches in an analogous art that the control device comprises a programmable logic control device (Fig. 1 [0014] PLC controller 4 connected to sensors and actuators).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified QI and GLOTTMANN to incorporate the teachings of Ni, because they all directed to monitoring control process, to make the system wherein the control device comprises a programmable logic control device. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this modification so as to control the system with sensors and actuators, as Ni teaches in [0014].
Claims 6 and 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over QI in view of GLOTTMANN and West.
Regarding claim 6, QI teaches a method for operating an integrity monitoring system, the method comprising:
providing the integrity monitoring system with a control device connected to sensors and/or actuators and comprising an automation device for collecting operating state data of the control device and an integrity monitoring unit detachably connectable directly to the control device to monitor the integrity status of the control device on the basis of operating state data transferred from the automation device to the integrity monitoring unit (Fig. 1 page 2 last paragraph to page 3 first paragraph, the data collection box is embedded installed in the user numerical control machine i.e. “an integrity monitoring unit detachably connectable directly to the control device” to read running parameters real-time from NC system of machine 1 inherently though sensors and/or actuators i.e. “monitor the integrity status of the control device on the basis of operating state data transferred from the automation device to the integrity monitoring unit”);
attaching the integrity monitoring unit to the control device for data transmission (page 2 paragraphs 4 and last paragraph, the data collecting box is embedded installed in the user numerical control machine);
collecting operating state data of the control device in the automation devices during normal runtime of the control device, wherein the integrity monitoring unit does not modify operations of the control device (Fig. 1 page 2 last paragraph to page 3 first paragraph, the data collection box is embedded installed in the user numerical control machine to read running parameters real-time from NC system of machine 1);
transmitting the operating state data from the automation devices of the control devices to the integrity monitoring units (Fig. 1 page 2 last paragraph to page 3 first paragraph, the data collection box is embedded installed in the user numerical control machine to read running parameters real-time from NC system of machine 1 i.e. “transmitting the operating state data from the automation devices of the control devices to the integrity monitoring units”).
QI does not explicitly further teach:
the operating state data includes payload data and signaling data;
evaluating the operating state data in the integrity monitoring unit to check an integrity status of the control device; and
transmitting an integrity status.
GLOTTMANN explicitly teaches in an analogous art that the operating state data includes payload data and signaling data (GLOTTMANN: [0030] [0095] [0145] the data transmitted including payload data and control data);
West explicitly teaches in an analogous art that:
evaluating the operating state data in the integrity monitoring unit to check an integrity status of the control device (Figs. 1-3, [0004] [0016] [0024] portable control system PCS 10 is detachably inserted to port system of machine tool, and [0038] – [0041] the generated feedback data and program status data are provided to PCS, analyzed and displayed to evaluate the performance of the machining control system i.e. “check an integrity status of the control device”); and
transmitting an integrity status ([0041] the comparison information is provided to user interface for the operator to evaluate the performance of the machine tool).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified QI to incorporate the teachings of GLOTTMANN and West, because they all directed to monitoring control process, to make the method wherein the operating state data includes payload data and signaling data; evaluating the operating state data in the integrity monitoring unit to check an integrity status of the control device; and transmitting an integrity status. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this modification so as to make transmission request, as GLOTTMANN teaches in [0145], and to evaluate the performance of the machine tool, as West teaches in [0041].
Regarding claim 8, West further teaches providing running processes ([0038] program status data including current command executed et al.), tasks, memory utilization, processor load, input-output load ([0034] data related to I/O) and/or test values of memory areas.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified QI to incorporate the teachings of West, because they all directed to monitoring control process, to make the method wherein providing running processes, tasks, memory utilization, processor load, input-output load and/or test values of memory areas. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this modification so as to evaluate the performance of the machine tool, as West teaches in [0041].
Regarding claim 9, West further teaches removing the integrity monitoring unit while the control device is in running operation, updating, and reattaching the integrity monitoring unite to the control device ([0042] [0043] PCS is removable while machine tool still operating).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified QI to incorporate the teachings of West, because they all directed to monitoring control process, to make the method wherein removing the integrity monitoring unit while the control device is in running operation, updating, and reattaching the integrity monitoring unite to the control device. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this modification so as to remove the monitoring device without having to stop the operation of the machine tool, as West teaches in [0042].
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over QI in view of GLOTTMANN and West as applied to claims 6 and 8-9 above, further in view of Mixer US 20160359866 A14.
Regarding claim 7, the combination of QI, GLOTTMANN and West does not explicitly further teach the operating state data is transmitted from the control device to the integrity monitoring unit in a cryptographically protected manner.
Mixer explicitly teaches in an analogous art that the operating state data is transmitted from the control device to the integrity monitoring unit in a cryptographically protected manner ([0021] cryptographic algorithm to produce the integrity measurement).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified QI, GLOTTMANN and West to incorporate the teachings of Mixer, because they all directed to monitoring control process, to make the method wherein the operating state data is transmitted from the control device to the integrity monitoring unit in a cryptographically protected manner. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this modification so as to limit the access, as Mixer teaches in [0079].
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over QI in view of GLOTTMANN and West as applied to claims 6 and 8-9 above, further in view of Tang CN 105824738 A5.
Regarding claim 10, the combination of QI, GLOTTMANN and West does not explicitly further teach the operating state data is transmitted from the control device to the integrity monitoring unit in a cryptographically protected manner.
Tang explicitly teaches in an analogous art that the integrity monitoring unit authenticates itself to the control device and/or the control device authenticates the integrity monitoring unit (Figs. 1-2, page 2 last paragraph to page 3 paragraph 2, finger print authentication).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified QI, GLOTTMANN and West to incorporate the teachings of Tang, because they all directed to monitoring control process, to make the method wherein the operating state data is transmitted from the control device to the integrity monitoring unit in a cryptographically protected manner. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this modification so as to improve the protection, as Tang teaches in abstract.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over QI in view of GLOTTMANN and West as applied to claims 6 and 8-9 above, further in view of Feuchter US 20120185145 A16.
Regarding claim 11, the combination of QI, GLOTTMANN and West does not explicitly further teach after the evaluation of the operating state data and detection of an integrity violation as the integrity status, a restart, a safe operating mode, an alarm message.
Feuchter explicitly teaches in an analogous art that after the evaluation of the operating state data and detection of an integrity violation as the integrity status, a restart, a safe operating mode, an alarm message (Fig. 1 [0033] if watchdog detects a malfunction of process 21, generates an error signal) and/or a log entry takes place.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified QI, GLOTTMANN and West to incorporate the teachings of Feuchter, because they all directed to monitoring control process, to make the method wherein after the evaluation of the operating state data and detection of an integrity violation as the integrity status, a restart, a safe operating mode, an alarm message and/or a log entry takes place. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this modification so as to inform the malfunction of the control device, as Feuchter teaches in [0033].
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over QI in view of GLOTTMANN and West as applied to claims 6 and 8-9 above, further in view of NIGG US 20210076328 A1.
Regarding claim 13, the combination of QI, GLOTTMANN and West does not explicitly further teach the requirements represent minimum requirements for the operating state data.
NIGG explicitly teaches in an analogous art that the requirements represent minimum requirements for the operating state data ([0047] the requirement for the data is the minimum data rate).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified QI, GLOTTMANN and West to incorporate the teachings of NIGG, because they all directed to monitoring control process, to make the method wherein the requirements represent minimum requirements for the operating state data. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this modification so as to accommodate the payload of a data packet within the allotted time of the time slot. as NIGG teaches in [0061].
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Michael Tang whose telephone number is (571)272-7437. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-4 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, Kamini Shah can be reached on (571)272-2279. 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.
/M.T./Examiner, Art Unit 2115
/MARK A CONNOLLY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2115 7/29/26
1 QI and GLOTTMANN are the prior arts of record
2 West is the prior arts of record
3 Ni is the prior art of record
4 Mixer is the prior art of record
5 Tang is the prior art of record
6 Feuchter is the prior art of record
Prosecution Insights