DETAILED ACTION
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 § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1 and 3-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Siemens (“SITOP Power Supplies: PSU8600 power supply systems”, of record and hereinafter “Siemens”).
Claim 1: Siemens discloses a rail-mounted device (SITOP PSU8600 with BUF8600 devices, shown together on pg.3 and block diagrams shown on pgs.40-41; see pg.82, which shows the PSU8600 as rail mounted) for an automation system (see pg.113, where the device is designed with “integration and communication … with other open automation components in the Siemens and open environment, for instance IPC, PLC, HMI”), the rail-mounted device comprising:
at least one local bus interface (RJ45 and RST 11, 12, and 14 terminals) to connect the rail-mounted device to a local bus of an automation system (see pg.113, pg.117, and pg.248, which shows the PSU8600 connected with a PLC and is described as “integrated into … automation solutions”); and
a power supply unit (combined PSU8600 and BUF8600) that comprises at least one input to connect the rail- mounted device to an external voltage source (“input terminals” of the block diagram on pg.40, L1-L3 and PE, which are three-phase external voltage supply inputs; see pg.107, last paragraph) and outputs (“Output terminals”) through which the power supply unit is connectable to an input of a power supply unit of a head station (the combined PSU8600 and BUF8600 are connectable to an input of a power supply of a head station via the 24V output bus; see also the figure on pg.248, where the 24V DC buffered output is provided to an HMI or PLC; i.e. the 24V DC power inputs may reasonably be considered “an input of a power supply” for each of those components) to provide a supply voltage thereto (at “output terminals”; see pg.40 and pg.13), the rail-mounted device being a terminal block that is distinct from the head station (see the figure on pg.248, where the combined PSU8600 and BUF8600 are terminal blocks distinct from other rail-mounted automation equipment, e.g. the HMI and PLC),
wherein the power supply unit of the rail-mounted device includes or is connectable to an energy storage device (capacitor in buffer modules shown on pg.41) for storing electrical energy (see pg.41 and pg.16)
wherein the power supply unit of the rail-mounted device detects a voltage drop or a loss of voltage of a voltage provided by the external voltage source at the least one the input of the power supply unit (“power failure”, which is detected in order to engage buffer mode and illuminate a yellow LED; see pg.30; see also the second row of the table shown on pg.196, which discloses the “main power outage alarm” as pertaining to “failure of the power supply voltage”, corresponding to the input terminals receiving the line voltage, thus the failure of the external power supply provided to the inputs is detected; see also image 9-1 on pg. 228, which graphically illustrates the “input voltage” failing and the buffer time initiated by detection of the voltage failure) and provides a supply voltage to at least one of the outputs of the power supply unit over a limited period via the electrical energy stored in the energy storage device (via the switch, diode and capacitor circuit shown on pg.41 and described as buffer time in pg.16 and shown in the figure on pg.228),
wherein the rail-mounted device has at least one signal output to indicate the voltage drop or voltage loss of the voltage provided by the external voltage source detected at the at least one input of the power supply unit (signal contacts 23 and 24, which indicate that a voltage loss has occurred, i.e. power failure, and the system is buffered by the buffer module; see pg.38).
PNG
media_image1.png
462
756
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
343
777
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
441
663
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Claim 3: Siemens discloses wherein the rail-mounted device has a shutoff device that is equipped to interrupt a supply of power to one or more local bus nodes connected to the local bus when the power supply unit of the rail- mounted device detects the voltage drop or the loss of voltage at the input of the power supply unit (following a short amount of time after power loss is detected, Siemens prioritizes output 1 while shutting down other outputs in order to ensure the longest possible buffer time at the prioritized output; see pgs.62 and 248).
Claim 4: the Siemens discloses wherein the shutoff device is equipped to interrupt the supply of power to the downstream local bus nodes of the local bus (e.g. to equipment connected to non-prioritized outputs; see pgs.62, 248 and discussion above, “downstream” of the PLC, which controls the actuators in the automated system described by Siemens).
Claim 5: Siemens discloses wherein the shutoff device is configured such that a communication of process data through the local bus continues to be possible when the voltage drop or the voltage loss is detected (e.g. by providing prioritized buffering of the device connected to output 1, which allows for signaling via the above discussed contacts 23 and 24 of the buffer device or via RJ45 sockets; see pg.38, pg.113, pg.141, and pg.169).
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.
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.
Claims 6-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Siemens.
Claim 6: Siemens discloses a head station for an automation system (an example is shown on pg.248), the head station comprising:
an electronic control unit (e.g. the PLC and/or HMI of pg.248; see also pg.117 and pg.113) that is designed to carry out control tasks of the automation system (being an automation component, thus carrying out control tasks of the automation system; see pgs.113, 117, and 248);
at least one local bus interface to connect the head station to a local bus of the automation system (e.g. RJ45 bus or signaling busses; for an ethernet/PROFINET connection; see pgs.22, 113, and 122); and
a power supply unit (e.g. the input terminals of the PLC receiving 24V from the PSU8600 and any inherent circuitry of the PLC that provides power to internal components from the 24V input) that has at least one input to connect the head station to an output of a voltage-buffered rail-mounted device (the PSU8600 and BUF8600 device) that is distinct from the head station (see the figure shown on pg.228),
wherein the head station has a signal input through which a detected voltage drop or voltage loss of a supply voltage is indicated to the head station (e.g. via ethernet and/or signaling terminals 23 and 24 of the PSU8600, indicating an active buffering mode due to power failure; see pg.38, which corresponds to failure of the power supply voltage provided at the inputs; see the second row of the table shown on pg.196).
Siemens does not explicitly disclose wherein the electronic control unit of the head station executes an emergency program in order to transfer the head station into a safe state in an event of the voltage drop or voltage loss of a voltage provided by the external voltage source to the power supply unit indicated through the signal input. However, Siemens discloses on pg.39 that “critical processes can immediately brought into a safe state, avoiding loss of data and additional damage” from the signaling on terminals 23 and 24, which corresponds to a buffer mode being entered after a failure of the voltages of the input supply at L1-L3 is detected. Although Siemens does not explicitly disclose the head station (e.g. the PLC and/or HMI of Siemens) as the device that executes the above safe state of critical processes in the event of the voltage drop or voltage loss, it is the opinion of the examiner that such a function is implied, as the terminals 23 and 24 are external output terminals provided to other components (shown in the figure on pg.228). See MPEP 2144.01. As Siemens generically discloses the PLC receiving inputs from the power supply and buffer modules, and further discloses using the external pins to provide the safe state functionality, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found providing the outputs of terminals 23 and 24 to the PLC of Siemens in order to avoid loss of data and additional damage of the PLC. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to have provided the output of terminals 23 and 24 of Siemens to the PLC and/or HMI of Siemens in order to have avoided loss of data and additional damage of the PLC and/or HMI during power failures.
Claim 7: Siemens discloses wherein the head station obtains at least some data from local bus nodes connected to the local bus after the indication of the voltage drop or voltage loss (see pgs.38-39, 113, 141, and 169, where data is provided via ethernet and/or signaling nodes to indicate that buffer mode is active).
Claim 8: Siemens discloses an automation system for process automation (an example shown in the Figure on pg.248), the automation system comprising: at least one head station according to claim 6 (discussed above); and at least one rail-mounted device (a PSU8600, which is rail-mounted; see pg.82, which shows the PSU8600 as rail mounted), wherein the head station and the rail-mounted device are connected to a common local bus through their respective local bus interfaces (e.g. RJ45 bus or signaling busses; for an ethernet/PROFINET connection; see pgs.22, 113, and 122), wherein an output of a power supply unit of the rail-mounted device (24V) is connected to the at least one input of the power supply unit of the head station (see the figure on pg.248, where the PSU8600 provides a 24V supply to the PLC), wherein at least one signal output of the power supply unit of the rail-mounted device is connected to the signal input of the head station (e.g. terminals 23, 24, which are connected to other components of the system of pg. 248), so that when the voltage drop or voltage loss of the voltage provided by the external voltage source to the power supply unit of the rail-mounted device (i.e. L1-L3 of the PSU8600) is detected at the input of the power supply unit of the rail-mounted device, the voltage drop or voltage loss is communicated from the rail-mounted device to the head station (see pgs.38-39, 113, 141, and 169, where data is provided via ethernet and/or signaling nodes to indicate that buffer mode is active).
Claim 9: Siemens discloses wherein additional terminal blocks (outputs 2-4 of the PSU 8600 or additional output terminals of the expansion module; see pg.40), which are connected to the common local bus through a respective local bus interface (e.g. 24V bus), are provided downstream of the rail-mounted device starting from the head station (e.g. actuators within the automated system shown on pg.248), and wherein the rail-mounted device is equipped via a shutoff device to interrupt one or more bus nodes connected to the common local bus if the power supply unit of the rail-mounted device detects a voltage drop or a loss of voltage at the at least one input of the power supply unit of the rail-mounted device (e.g. to equipment connected to non-prioritized outputs; see pgs.62, 248 and discussion above).
Claim 10: Siemens discloses wherein the rail-mounted device is equipped via the shutoff device to interrupt the supply of power to all downstream local bus nodes of the common local bus (e.g. to equipment connected to non-prioritized outputs; see pgs.62, 248 and discussion above).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 11, 12, 14, and 15 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior art does not clearly disclose “interrupting, by a shutoff device of the voltage-buffered rail-mounted device, a supply of power to local bus nodes downstream of the voltage-buffered rail-mounted device, while continuing to supply power from the head station to local bus nodes located between the head station and the voltage-buffered rail-mounted device”.
Response to Arguments
In light of the amendments filed 1/28/2026, the previous rejection of claim 11 under 35 U.S.C. 103 has been withdrawn. Claims 11, 12, 14, and 15 are now allowed.
Applicant's arguments filed 1/28/2026 with respect to claims 1 and 11 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant first argues “In contrast to Siemens, the power supply unit of claim 1 has the complete power supply function in both normal operation and when the voltage drops or a loss of voltage occurs (e.g., a buffer mode/power failure mode). Also, as set forth in claim 1, the power supply unit is connected to an external voltage source and provides the supply power at its output to the electronic control unit. The power supply unit monitors the external voltage source to detect a voltage drop or a loss of voltage at the at least one input of the power supply”.
The examiner respectfully disagrees. The combined module of the PSU8600 and BUF8600 provides the recited functionality of detecting a power supply failure of an external voltage source and provides supply power to the 24V bus for the PLC, HMI, and further components. See pg.16: “For brief power failures, the outputs of the power supply system are supplied without interruption using the energy stored in the buffer module.” See pg.30, which discloses yellow LED signaling in “Power failure, buffer mode active” (which demonstrates a detection of the power supply input failing).
Applicant next argues, “Applicant submits that the voltage in Siemens is monitored by the Basic module PSU8600 and signaled via signal contacts 11-14 (see page 37 of Siemens). The Buffer Module BUF8600 is controlled with the control contacts X1-X2. Only for the BUF8600 buffer modules with double-layer capacitors, an additional signaling contact 23-24 is provided to signal normal operation or power failure with the system buffered by the buffer module.”
However, the examiner maintains that Siemens discloses a combined embodiment of both PSU8600 and BUF8600 with double-layered capacitors (see pg.15, which describes the connection of the basic device and adjacent module, corresponding to the double-layered BUF8600 module in pg.17, using an integrated connecting plug).
Applicant next argues, “In claim 1, the voltage drop or voltage loss, that is detected at the at least input of the power supply unit, is indicated at the signal output. On the other hand, in Siemens, it is the BUF8600 that signals the mode that the system is buffered by the buffer module.”
However, the examiner notes that the “power supply unit” is being interpreted as corresponding to both the PSU8600 and BUF8600 of Siemens.
Applicant next argues, “There is no disclosure that BUF8600 of Siemens also monitors an external power source, takes over power supply in normal operation and buffer mode based on an external power source connected at the at least one input, and signals a voltage drop or voltage loss to the electronic control unit, which is supplied with power in normal and buffer mode by the power supply unit. The advantage of the present invention is to provide a fully separate power supply unit for normal and emergency mode where the monitoring and buffer control is centralized in this separate power supply unit, taking over the control to shut the electronic control unit in buffer mode/emergency mode via the signal output. In Siemens, however, the full control, including monitoring power failure, is provided in the Basic module PSU8600, which is the primary power supply system. Thus, not only the controlled switch to the emergency mode is performed by the Basic Module PSU8600, but also its own control of power failure. The present invention, on the other hand, transfers the power supply function to an additional separate module and thus would free the Basic module PSU8600 of Siemens from the power supply and power control functions. This allows faster control and safer switch over into the emergency mode with simple control via the signal output.”
However as noted above, the combined PSU8600 and BUF8600 is considered as corresponding to the recited “rail-mounted device” including a “power supply unit”. As noted above, Siemens clearly discloses providing a buffered 24V power supply during power outages on L1-L3 and indicating at the LEDs and contacts 23 and 24 when a power failure has occurred, thus has the power failure detection functionality.
Applicant next argues, “Applicant traverses the Examiner's assertions. In particular, the assertion that the Siemens' Basic device PSU 8600 power supply combined with the BUF 8600 buffer module is architecturally and functionally equivalent to the claimed invention is incorrect. Applicant's invention is not merely a power supply with a backup; it is a specific architectural arrangement of distinct modules. Siemens discloses a single, primary power supply system (PSU 8600) that can be augmented with a buffer module (BUF 8600). The PSU 8600 is the "brain" and the primary power converter for the entire system. It is powered by an external source. The BUF 8600 is an energy reservoir that connects internally to the DC bus of the PSU 8600.”
However, the examiner maintains that claim 1 is broad enough to read on Siemens while claim 11 is obvious over Siemens, as presented above. The combined PSU8600 and BUF8600 corresponds to the “rail-mounted device for an automation system” of claim 1. In the figure of pg.248, Siemens discloses the context of the power supply unit within an automation system including a PLC and HMI, either of which may be considered as corresponding to the “head station”. The corresponding “distinct modules” argued by Applicant corresponding to the other components of the automation system shown in Fig.248 of Siemens, whereas the “rail-mounted device” that includes the “power supply” correspond to the PSU8600 and BUF8600 combination.
Applicant next argues, “The present invention discloses a three-component architecture comprising an external voltage source, a head station and the claimed voltage buffered rail-mounted device. The external voltage source (e.g., mains power) provides external power as a primary voltage source. The claimed voltage-buffered rail-mounted device is a distinct terminal block connected to the external voltage source and designed to monitor that external voltage source for failure, and to provide buffered power from its own internal energy storage device. The head station has its own power supply control unit. The head station is powered by the output of the claimed voltage-buffered rail-mounted device. The claimed invention acts as a dedicated, intelligent Uninterruptible Power Supply (UPS) that shields the separate head station from failures of the primary external source.”
However, Siemens also discloses a three-component architecture (shown in Fig.248) including an external voltage source (also mains power, provided as L1-L3 to the PSU8600), a head station (HMI and/or PLC), and a voltage-buffered rail-mounted device (the PSU8600 and BUF8600 combination). The voltage-buffered rail-mounted device is also a distinct terminal block (combined via the integrated plug, as discussed above) that monitors the external voltage source for failure (in order to provide the indications of power failure, as discussed above), and provides buffered power from its own internal energy storage device (the capacitor shown in the above figure of the BUF8600 module). The head station of Siemens also has its own power supply (input terminals of HMI and/or the PLC) that receive power from the buffered power supply (24V bus). The examiner notes that the instant specification does not disclose any particular circuitry for the “power supply” of the head station, and the broadest reasonable interpretation of the term in light of the specification includes input terminals and associated circuitry providing the power supply voltage to internal components, which is necessarily present in Siemens.
Applicant next argues, “Amended claim 1 now recites, "the rail-mounted device being a terminal block that is distinct from the head station " and "outputs through which the power supply unit is connectable to an input of a power supply unit of a head station" (see Fig. 3 and paras. [00019] and [00064] of the present Application as originally filed). Such features are not taught by Siemens. In particular, Siemens lacks the claimed architecture. The Siemens PSU 8600 is the primary power supply. It does not feed a separate power supply of a head station. It directly powers the PLC (head station) and other components. The BUF 8600 buffer module is merely an accessory to the PSU8600. It does not have its own input connected to an external voltage source and its own output connected to the input of the PSU 8600. The entire Siemens combination constitutes a single primary power supply, not a distinct buffer device feeding another power supply.
The examiner respectfully disagrees. As noted above, Siemens discloses providing the power supply unit within the context of an automation system including an HMI and PLC, which may reasonably be considered a “head station”. Further, the examiner notes that the language “connectable” only requires that the rail-mounted device be capable of connection to a head station, which Siemens clearly is considering the 24V output to an automation system. Finally, the examiner reiterates that both the PSU8600 and BUF8600 is being interpreted as corresponding to the rail-mounted device.
Applicant next argues, “Siemens also lacks the claimed monitoring and signaling features. Claim 1 requires the device to detect a voltage loss, "at the at least one input of the power supply unit" (i.e., at the input of the claimed device itself) and to generate a signal indicating this specific event.”
This argument is not persuasive, as Siemens clearly discloses detecting power failure and signaling via terminals 23 and 24, as discussed above.
Finally, Applicant argues, “In Siemens, the BUF8600 module does not monitor the external AC voltage source. The PSU 8600 basic device performs this monitoring. The BUF 8600 is a passive energy store that is activated by the PSU 8600. The signal from the BUF8600 (contacts 23-24) indicates that the system is "in buffer mode" (Siemens, pg. 38-39); it does not directly indicate the claimed "voltage drop detected at the input of the power supply unit" of the BUF 8600 itself, because the BUF 8600 has no such input from an external source. The Examiner's attempt to equate "signaling buffer mode" with "indicating a voltage drop at the input" is not reasonable because it ignores the specific architectural location of the monitoring and signaling recited in the claims. The claimed device is a self-contained unit that performs both the monitoring of the external source and the provision of buffered power. Siemens splits these functions across two modules in a different architecture. Therefore, Siemens fails to teach the distinct, intermediary architectural role of the claimed rail-mounted device and its self-contained monitoring and signaling functions in addition to the primary power control function of the head unit supplied by a voltage input.”
Again, this argument is not persuasive, as the PSU8600 and BUF8600 are combined via the integrated plug to form a single unit, the external power supply being received on L1-L3 with indications of loss of power via the LED and contacts 23 and 24.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RYAN JOHNSON whose telephone number is (571)270-1264. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9:00 AM - 5:00 PM.
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, Menna Youssef can be reached at (571)270-3684. 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.
/RYAN JOHNSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2849