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 .
Status of Claims/Response to Amendments
Claims 1-11 and 13-21 are currently pending in this application in response to the amendment and remarks filed on December 15, 2025. Claim 12 is canceled and claim 21 is new. Furthermore, the claim amendments have overcome the 112b rejections as set forth in the Non-Final Office Action mailed on September 29, 2025.
Response to Applicant’s Remarks
With respect to 35 U.S.C. §102 and §103 rejections:
Applicant’s remarks filed 10/19/2020 at p.8-11 have been fully considered but are not persuasive. Applicant argues that Chen fails to teach the following limitations as recited in claim 1:
“a first connection component configured to electrically connect the signal processing module to the at least one field device and the PLC”, “a communication component configured to send information signals to the PLC”, and “wherein the information signals are indicative of the functional scope”.
Applicant further argues:
In Chen, there is no single connector belonging to one module that connects both to the PLC and to the field device…The present application, in contrast, expressly teaches that "[t]he first connection component can be arranged at an edge of the signal processing module. …" As such, in the present application, the first connection component is part of one module. …In light of the description in the present published application (see, e.g., paragraphs [0021], [0030], [0082]), a single multi-pole connector belonging to module 100 provides the electrical connection both towards the PLC and towards the field device. Chen therefore fails to teach (or suggest) Feature (1): "a first connection component configured to electrically connect the signal processing module to the at least one field device and the PLC."
Chen does not disclose a module sending meta-information descriptive of its own capabilities to the PLC. …These "1"/"0" binary signals in Chen are the process signals themselves (e.g., sensor or actuator states). They do not provide information about Chen's module, such as its type or capabilities. … the explicit teaching in claim 1 of the present application that information signals are distinct from the "electrical signals exchanged between the field device and the PLC."… In light of the description in the present published application (see, e.g., paragraphs [0016], [0020], [0054]), the communication component of the present application is not simply any path for I/O signals; rather, it sends meta-information about the module, including its functional scope, to the PLC. Chen therefore fails to teach (or suggest) Feature (2):"a communication component configured to send information signals to the PLC."
Chen does not teach that any data transmitted to the PLC "indicates" or is "indicative of the functional scope" of the control system. … these bits in Chen represent field signal states, not information about the capabilities of Chen's control system. Chen does not indicate that its PLC receives a message saying, for example, "this module provides 48 digital outputs and 96 inputs," or "this module is of type DI." Rather, the function of Chen's control system is fixed and must be known a priori; there is no self-description. … claim 1 of the present application requires that the information signals be indicative of the functional scope. In the description of the present application, this scope is something like DI/DO/AI/AO configuration, module ID, etc. See Remarks at 8-11.
Examiner disagrees. Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification (as highlighted above) are not read into claim 1. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
The first limitation as argued, states “a first connection component configured to electrically connect the signal processing module to the at least one field device and the PLC”. The broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the specification (as not to read the specification into the claim), the first connection component is interpreted as a connection (i.e., I/O) to establish data flow between the signal processing module (disclosed by Applicant as a digital signal processor or a microcontroller, See Specification at [0041]) and the field device (or the PLC as recited in claim 1 as an alternative to the field device). Applicant’s arguments that Chen fails to teach a “single connector belonging to one module that connects both to the PLC and to the field device”, “[t]he first connection component can be arranged at an edge of the signal processing module”, “the first connection component is part of one module”, or “a single multi-pole connector belonging to module 100 provides the electrical connection both towards the PLC and towards the field device” are not persuasive because these points are not at all recited in claim 1. Thus, Chen teaches the first limitation as argued, a first connection component (input/output circuit 301/302 of first control system 300, fig.1 and [0045]) configured to electrically connect the signal processing module to the at least one field device and the PLC (electrically connect to the PLC100 via I/O circuit 301/302, fig.1 and [0045] and to electrically connect to the field device 200 via I/O circuit 401/402, fig.1 and [0051]). As noted, the signal processing module being electrically connected to the field device or the PLC but not both as argued by Applicant nor does claim 1 recite “a single multi-pole connector belonging to module 100 provides the electrical connection both towards the PLC and towards the field device” as further argued by Applicant.
The second limitation as argued, states “a communication component configured to send information signals to the PLC”. The broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the specification (as not to read the specification into the claim), a communication component is interpreted as a pathway to transfer data between the signal processing module (disclosed by Applicant as a digital signal processor or a microcontroller, See Specification at [0041]) and the PLC. Applicant’s arguments that Chen fails to teach “a module sending meta-information descriptive of its own capabilities to the PLC” and “the explicit teaching in claim 1 of the present application that information signals are distinct from the electrical signals exchanged between the field device and the PLC” are not persuasive because these points are not at all recited in claim 1. Thus, Chen teaches the second limitation as argued, a communication component (two cables, [0028], via I/O terminals based on RS485 bus, [0085]) configured to send information signals to the PLC (RS485 bus with two cables for data communication between the PLC100 and the field device 200 to send input/output signals between PLC100 and field device 200, [0028,0083,0085]).
The third limitation as argued, states “wherein the information signals are indicative of the functional scope”. The broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the specification (as not to read the specification into the claim), “functional scope” of a signal is interpreted as a behavior or characteristics of the signal, such as voltage or current changes. Applicant’s arguments that Chen fails to teach “that its PLC receives a message saying, for example, "this module provides 48 digital outputs and 96 inputs," or "this module is of type DI."” Or “that the information signals be indicative of the functional scope…this scope is something like DI/DO/AI/AO configuration, module ID, etc.” are not persuasive because these points are not at all recited in claim 1. Thus, Chen teaches the third limitation as argued, wherein the information signals are indicative of the functional scope (to process the input/output signals between PLC100 and field device 200, fig.1 and [0038,0045]; process the signals under two different control states of “1” and “0” based on the level output signals of the PLC100 and field device 200 is at a high or low level, [0076-0080]). Further note, Examiner disagrees that Chen fails to teach the functional scope of the information signal as DI/DO/AI/AO configurations (presumably that this feature is recited in the claim). As disclosed by Applicant at [0049], the functional scope of the signal processing module can include…a conversion of an electrical signal detected by the at least one field device to a DI of the PLC. As such, Chen teaches: [0048] the first peripheral output circuit 302 are respectively connected with a programmable controller PLC100, a first communication control circuit 303 connection for field device signal 303 output by the first communication control circuit for isolating and completes the field device signal level conversion, and then output to the PLC (in particular of the digital quantity input module in PLC).
For all the reasons above, Examiner will maintain the 102 and 103 rejections as set forth below.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-3, 5-11, and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and/or (a)(2) as being anticipated by Chen et al. (CN-101807071-A, published 2010).
With respect to claim 1, Chen teaches a signal processing module (control 300 and/or 400, fig.1) for processing electrical signals exchanged between at least one field device and a programmable logic controller (processing output signals between PLC100 and field device 200, fig.1 and [0038]), comprising:
a first connection component (input/output circuit 301/302, fig.1 and [0045]) configured to electrically connect the signal processing module to the at least one field device and the PLC (electrically connect to the PLC100 via I/O circuit 301/302, fig.1 and [0045] and to electrically connect to the field device 200 via I/O circuit 401/402, fig.1 and [0051]);
a communication component (two cables, [0028], via I/O terminals based on RS485 bus, [0085]) configured to send information signals to the PLC (RS485 bus with two cables for data communication between the PLC100 and the field device 200 to send input/output signals between PLC100 and field device 200, [0028,0083,0085]); and
a signal processing component (control 300 and/or 400, fig.1) configured to process the electrical signals exchanged between the at least one field device and the PLC of a functional scope of the signal processing module, wherein the information signals are indicative of the functional scope (to process the input/output signals between PLC100 and field device 200, fig.1 and [0038,0045]; process the signals under two different control states of “1” and “0” based on the level output signals of the PLC100 and field device 200 is at a high or low level, [0076-0080]).
With respect to claim 2, Chen teaches wherein the communication component is configured to send the information signals indicative of the functional scope in response to: the electric connection by the first connection component, and/or the electric connection of the signal processing module to the PLC (the connections are based on the control states of “1” and “0” when the level output signals of the PLC100 and field device 200 is at a high or low level, [0076-0080]), and/or a request for the functional scope received from the PLC via the first connection component.
With respect to claim 3, Chen teaches wherein the communication component is configured to send the information signals to the PLC via the first connection component (send output signal to PLC100 via output circuit 302 with RS485 bus, fig.1 and [0085]) and/or a wireless interface.
With respect to claim 5, Chen teaches wherein the signal processing module is configured to process analogue and/or digital electrical signals of the functional scope (collect digital quantity output by the PLC signal, [0045]).
With respect to claim 6, Chen teaches wherein the functional scope of the signal processing module comprises at least one of the following signal processing operations: converting an electrical signal detected by the at least one field device to a digital input (DI) of the PLC electrically connected by the first connection component; converting an electrical signal detected by the first connection component from a digital output (DO) of the PLC to the at least one field device (control systems 300-400 perform signal conversion communicated between field device 200 and PLC100, [0045,0051,0069]); converting an electrical signal detected by the at least one field device to an analogue input (AI) of the PLC electrically connected by the first connection component; converting an electrical signal detected by the first connection component from an analogue output (AO) of the PLC to the at least one field device; providing a digital input (DI) towards the at least one field device, the DI being configured to acquire the electrical signals of the at least one field device; providing a digital output (DO) towards the at least one field device, the DO being configured to output the electrical signals to the at least one field device; providing an analogue input (AI) towards the at least one field device, the AI being configured to acquire the electrical signals of the at least one field device; and providing an analogue output (AO) to the at least one field device, the AO being configured to output the electrical signals to the at least one field device.
With respect to claim 7, Chen teaches wherein the functional scope comprises at least two alternative states of signal processing by the signal processing module (wherein input circuit 301 and 401 of control 300 and 400 have control states of “1” or “0” based on the level output signals of the PLC100 and field device 200 is at a high or low level, [0076-0080]).
With respect to claim 8, Chen teaches wherein the functional scope of the signal processing module is unchangeable1 (input circuit 301 and 401 of control 300 and 400 have control state of “1” or “0” based on the level output signals of the PLC100 and field device 200 is at a high or low level, [0076-0080]).
With respect to claim 9, Chen teaches wherein the information signals comprise at least one of the following identifiers: a signal processing module identifier indicative of the signal processing module; a connection component identifier indicative of the first connection component of the signal processing module; a connection state identifier indicative of a state of the electrical connection between the signal processing module and the PLC (input circuit 301 and 401 of control 300 and 400 have control state of “1” or “0” based on the level output signals of the PLC100 and field device 200 is at a high or low level, [0076-0080]); a functional scope identifier indicative of the functional scope; an operational state identifier indicative of an operational state of processing the electrical signals and/or an operational state of the signal processing module; an application identifier indicative of an application of the electrical signals and/or indicative of a device type of the at least one field device; and a waveform identifier indicative of a waveform of the electrical signals.
With respect to claim 10, Chen teaches wherein, of the functional scope, the first connection component and/or the communication component and/or the signal processing component is configured for unidirectional or bidirectional communication of the electrical signals (input circuits 301 and 401 and output circuits 302 and 402 are unidirectional as shown in fig.1; circuits 301/401 have control state of “1” or “0” based on the level output signals of the PLC100 and field device 200 is at a high or low level, [0076-0080]).
With respect to claim 11, Chen teaches wherein the first connection component (input circuit 301 or output circuit 302) and/or the communication component (I/O terminals based on RS485 bus, [0085]) and/or the signal processing component (control 300 and 400) is configured for serial communication of the electrical signals and/or the information signals with the PLC (RS485 bus, [0085]).
With respect to claim 17, Chen teaches wherein the analogue and/or digital electrical signals of the functional scope comprise logic level electrical signals and/or modulated electrical signals (PLC output signals collected or transmitted to the field device [0038] with connections based on the control states of “1” and “0” when the level output signals of the PLC100 and field device 200 is at a high or low level, [0076-0080]).
With respect to claim 18, Chen teaches wherein the communication component is configured to receive control signals from the PLC via the first connection component, with the control signals specifying a state of the alternative states, and the signal processing component is configured to assume the specified signal processing state (PLC output signals collected or transmitted to the field device [0038] with connections based on the control states of “1” and “0” when the level output signals of the PLC100 and field device 200 is at a high or low level, [0076-0080]).
With respect to claim 19, Chen teaches wherein the information signals (PLC output signals, [0038]) comprise the indication of the functional scope (PLC output signals collected or transmitted to the field device [0038] with connections based on the control states of “1” and “0” when the level output signals of the PLC100 and field device 200 is at a high or low level, [0076-0080]).
With respect to claim 20, wherein, of the functional scope, the first connection component and/or the communication component and/or the signal processing component is configured for unidirectional or bidirectional communication of the electrical signals with the PLC and/or the at least one field device (input circuits 301 and 401 and output circuits 302 and 402 are unidirectional as shown in fig.1; circuits 301/401 have control state of “1” or “0” based on the level output signals of the PLC100 and field device 200 is at a high or low level, [0076-0080]).
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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen et al. (CN-101807071-A, published 2010) in view of Jenkins (US 10,819,721 B1).
With respect to claim 4, Chen teaches wherein the first connection component is arranged at an edge of the signal processing module for electrical connection is mated or configured to mate with the PLC (Chen: I/O circuit 301/302 is arranged at the edge of the control 300 to connect to the PLC100, fig.1 and [0028,0083,0085]). Chen does not appear to teach that the first connection component is for electrical connection to mate with a second connection component of a system comprising the PLC. However, it is known by Jenkins to teach of a first connection component (Jenkins: a computing device 208, fig.2) is for electrical connection to mate with a second connection component of a system comprising the PLC (Jenkins: electrically connected to a backplane 111 of PLC 104, fig.2). Because Jenkins is also directed to a PLC and field device control system (Jenkins: fig.2; Chen: fig.1), it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to incorporate the teaching of a second connection component of a system comprising the PLC as taught by Jenkins with the PLC and field device control system as taught by Chen for the purpose of identifying physical or logical devices that transmit or receive the communications (Jenkins: col.7 lines 50-60).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 21 and 13-16 are allowed.
The primary reason for the allowance of claim 1 is that the prior art of record, taken alone or in combination, fails to disclose or render obvious the subject matter of:
“A system for exchanging electrical signals between at least one field device and a programmable logic controller (PLC), comprising:
at least one signal processing module for processing the electrical signals exchanged between the at least one field device and the PLC, each at least one signal processing module comprising:
a first connection component configured to electrically connect the respective signal processing module to the at least one field device and the PLC,
a communication component configured to send information signals to the PLC, and
a signal processing component configured to process the electrical signals exchanged between the at least one field device and the PLC of a functional scope of the respective signal processing module, the information signals being indicative of the functional scope;
the PLC providing at least one port for exchanging the electrical signals; and
at least two second connection components which are electrically connected to the at least one port of the PLC and which are each configured to electrically connect the PLC to the at least one signal processing module via its first connection component,
wherein the PLC is configured to receive information signals from the at least one signal processing module and to exchange the electrical signals with each respective signal processing module via the at least two second connection components of the functional scope of the respective signal processing module, and
wherein the information signals from each respective signal processing module are indicative of the functional scope of each respective signal processing module.”
Claims 13-16 are allowed due to their dependency on claim 21.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
The additional prior arts made of record and have not been relied upon are considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure as follows: US-20030061274-A1, US-6738441-B1, US-20070112982-A1, US-20090168857-A1, US-20150026381-A1, and US-10198939-B1.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HIEN (CINDY) D KHUU whose telephone number is (571)272-8585. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 8a-8p.
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, Ken Lo can be reached on 571-272-9774. 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.
/HIEN D KHUU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2116 February 9, 2026
1 The broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the specification for the limitation “the functional scope of the signal processing module is unchangeable” is based on the two alternative states, the provision of an input or an output state, such that the functional scope of the signal processing module is unchangeable when switched to input or output state (See Spec at [0051-0053]).