DETAILED ACTION
Notice of 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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 09/08/2023 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the IDSs have been considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claims 6, 7 and 13 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 6 recites “a planned points …”, which appears to be an artifact of Applicant’s editing process. Appropriate correction is required. Examiner suggests amending claim 6 to recite either “a planned point” or simply “planned points”.
Claim 7 recites “wherein validation completion”, while claim 6 recites “wherein validating completion”. Appropriate correction is required. Examiner suggests amending claim 7 to be consistent with claim 7 by reciting “wherein validating completion”.
Claim 13 recites “building design plan comprising”, which appears to be missing the term “plan” between “design” and “comprises”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 U.S.C. § 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, 2, 5, 15 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102 as being anticipated by GUTHRIE et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2019/0384243 A1).
Regarding claim 1, GUTHRIE teaches a method for completing a project to provide a building automation system, comprising: running an automated scan (BMS 400 can be implemented in building 10 to automatically monitor and control various building functions, Para. [0071] of GUTHRIE; See also scan the live BMS system at process block 706, as well as scan an archive at process block 708, which can be used to generate a report, Para. [0107] of GUTHRIE) configured to find points and controllers in the building automation system (site information portion 1002 of report 1000 may provide general status information about the BMS being analyzed, such as number of servers, supervisory devices, controllers, and data points in the scanned BMS, Para. [0105] of GUTHRIE); validating completion of a first subset of planned tasks for providing the building automation system based on the scan (update a previously performed inventory project with updated system information, Para. [0107] of GUTHRIE; See also inventorying process 700 may be used to verify that the BMS systems has been properly installed or commissioned … in some embodiments, the inventorying process 700 is used to verify that any additions to the BMS are properly installed … the inventorying process 700 is used to provide user with multiple reports showing the changes to a system over time, Para. [0111] of GUTHRIE; See also the user 1302 may select the most recently completed project, Para. [0137] of GUTHRIE); identifying a second subset of the planned tasks for providing the building automation system as not yet completed based on the scan (the key tasks portion 1008 may provide information to a user regarding actions that need to be taken to address the identified critical issues, Para. [0105] of GUTHRIE; See also the inventorying process 700 is used to provide user with multiple reports showing the changes to a system over time … these changes may be used to determine what optimizations, improvements, or additional maintenance is needed in the system, Para. [0111] of GUTHRIE); and causing completion of the second subset of the planned tasks (the key tasks portion 1008 may provide information to a user regarding actions that need to be taken to address the identified critical issues, Para. [0105] of GUTHRIE).
Regarding claim 2, GUTHRIE teaches the method of Claim 1, further comprising generating the planned tasks for providing the building automation system based on design data for the building automation system (obtaining performance information regarding the BMS system can be critical in determining if the BMS system is functioning as per its specified design … this information may provide useful insights into the BMS system, such as opportunities for function or performance enhancements … furthermore, as systems change over time, it is important to monitor and understand how the changes to the BMS system over time have affected the BMS system … for example, as additional devices and data points are added to a BMS system, the overall system performance should be monitored to determine the impact of the changes to the BMS system … thus, it would be desirous to have a tool available that could easily and efficiently analyze a BMS system, in part or in whole, to evaluate a number of performance metrics, and provide suggestions relating to the optimization of the BMS system, Para. [0005] of GUTHRIE; See also facility data may include physical plant schematics, riser diagrams, installed components, maintenance records, service contracts, etc., Para. [0100] of GUTHRIE).
Regarding claim 5, GUTHRIE teaches the method of Claim 1, wherein running the scan is executed by a performance verification tool separate from a workflow management tool configured to provide the planned tasks for providing the building automation system (performance assessment tool 500 accurately performs the performance verification processes, Para. [0100] of GUTHRIE).
Regarding claim 15, GUTHRIE teaches one or more non-transitory computer-readable media storing program instructions that, when executed by one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to perform operations (medium which can be used to carry or store desired program code in the form of machine-executable instructions or data structures and which can be accessed by a general purpose or special purpose computer or other machine with a processor … combinations of the above are also included within the scope of machine-readable media … machine-executable instructions include, for example, instructions and data which cause a general purpose computer, special purpose computer, or special purpose processing machines to perform a certain function or group of functions, Para. [0153] of GUTHRIE) comprising: running an automated scan (BMS 400 can be implemented in building 10 to automatically monitor and control various building functions, Para. [0071] of GUTHRIE; See also scan the live BMS system at process block 706, as well as scan an archive at process block 708, which can be used to generate a report, Para. [0107] of GUTHRIE) configured to find points and controllers in the building automation system (site information portion 1002 of report 1000 may provide general status information about the BMS being analyzed, such as number of servers, supervisory devices, controllers, and data points in the scanned BMS, Para. [0105] of GUTHRIE); validating completion of a first subset of planned tasks for providing the building automation system based on the scan (update a previously performed inventory project with updated system information, Para. [0107] of GUTHRIE; See also inventorying process 700 may be used to verify that the BMS systems has been properly installed or commissioned … in some embodiments, the inventorying process 700 is used to verify that any additions to the BMS are properly installed … the inventorying process 700 is used to provide user with multiple reports showing the changes to a system over time, Para. [0111] of GUTHRIE; See also the user 1302 may select the most recently completed project, Para. [0137] of GUTHRIE); identifying a second subset of the planned tasks for providing the building automation system as not yet completed based on the scan (the key tasks portion 1008 may provide information to a user regarding actions that need to be taken to address the identified critical issues, Para. [0105] of GUTHRIE; See also the inventorying process 700 is used to provide user with multiple reports showing the changes to a system over time … these changes may be used to determine what optimizations, improvements, or additional maintenance is needed in the system, Para. [0111] of GUTHRIE); and causing completion of the second subset of the planned tasks (the key tasks portion 1008 may provide information to a user regarding actions that need to be taken to address the identified critical issues, Para. [0105] of GUTHRIE).
Claim 16 has substantially similar limitations as recited in claim 2; therefore, it is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 for the same reasons.
Claims 8 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102 as being unpatentable anticipated by MARQUEZ et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2023/0393443 A1).
Regarding claim 8, MARQUEZ teaches a method, comprising: populating a digital twin of a building (populating into the digital twin is a virtually populating (e.g., as opposed to physically connecting), such as establishing a virtual representation of the one or more devices in the digital twin, Para. [0021] of MARQUEZ) based on a building design plan indicating equipment to be installed at a building (the multi-dimensional (e.g., two- or three-dimensional model of a building (e.g., that is included in the digital twin)) is produced by a computer-aided design software which has a modeling environment for the design and examination of building structures, Para. [0108] of MARQUEZ; See also updating the architectural model according to registration of the real target device, Para. [0016] of MARQUEZ; See also one or more devices may have identifiers, which are unique among devices to be installed in the enclosure region, Para. [0096] of MARQUEZ); collecting actual commissioning data as a technician installs and commissions the equipment at the building (a commissioning method may comprise providing a capturing device in an enclosure region having one or more devices to be commissioned … the one or more devices may have identifiers, which are unique among devices to be installed in the enclosure region. Such identifiers may be accessible for imaging by an image capture device … the ID capture device may capture one or more images of the one or more devices to be commissioned … by using images taken by the image capture device, the locations of the one or more devices in the images of the enclosure region may be determined (e.g., using machine image recognition), Para. [0096] of MARQUEZ); adjusting the digital twin based on the actual commissioning data (an installer might determine that a window opening is too small for the window prescribed by the instructions in the digital twin (e.g., interconnect drawings and/or BIM) and decide to install a smaller window. To correct for the change, the digital twin may need to be updated, Para. [0071] of MARQUEZ; See also the digital twin (e.g., an interconnect drawing) may be updated when commissioning takes place (e.g., in real time) … when the digital twin (e.g., interconnect drawing) of the facility is revised, the corresponding (e.g., linked) network configuration file will be revised as well … such revision may be manual and/or automatic … such revisions may be done in real-time (e.g., during update of the digital twin file, Para. [0172] of MARQUEZ); and influencing operations of the equipment using the digital twin (choice of a particular corner or other feature for specifying in the digital twin (e.g., interconnect drawing) coordinates may be influenced by the placement of an antenna or other location aware component, Para. [0185] of MARQUEZ).
Regarding claim 11, MARQUEZ teaches the method of Claim 8, further comprising adjusting the digital twin based on a scan of a building management system comprising the equipment (digital twin may be operatively coupled to a building management system (BMS), Para. [0014] of MARQUEZ; See also BMS 210 is configured not (e.g., only) to monitor and control, but also to optimize the synergy between various systems, for example, to conserve energy and lower building operation costs, Para. [0134] of MARQUEZ).
Claim Rejections - 35 U.S.C. § 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 3, 4, 6, 7, 14, and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over GUTHRIE et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2019/0384243 A1) in view of MARQUEZ et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2023/0393443 A1.
Regarding claim 3, GUTHRIE teaches the method of Claim 2 (as shown above) but appears to fail to disclose: further comprising: initializing a digital twin of a building served by the building automation system based on the design data; and updating the digital twin based on validation of the completion of the first subset of planned tasks for providing the building automation system.
However, MARQUEZ teaches further comprising: initializing a digital twin of a building served by the building automation system based on the design data (populating into the digital twin is a virtually populating (e.g., as opposed to physically connecting), such as establishing a virtual representation of the one or more devices in the digital twin, Para. [0021] of MARQUEZ; See also the multi-dimensional (e.g., two- or three-dimensional model of a building (e.g., that is included in the digital twin)) is produced by a computer-aided design software which has a modeling environment for the design and examination of building structures, Para. [0108] of MARQUEZ; See also updating the architectural model according to registration of the real target device, Para. [0016] of MARQUEZ; See also one or more devices may have identifiers, which are unique among devices to be installed in the enclosure region, Para. [0096] of MARQUEZ; and updating the digital twin based on validation of the completion of the first subset of planned tasks for providing the building automation system (the digital twin (e.g., an interconnect drawing) may be updated when commissioning takes place (e.g., in real time) … when the digital twin (e.g., interconnect drawing) of the facility is revised, the corresponding (e.g., linked) network configuration file will be revised as well … such revision may be manual and/or automatic … such revisions may be done in real-time (e.g., during update of the digital twin file, Para. [0172] of MARQUEZ).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the building scanning system of GUTHRIE with the digital twin building model of MARQUEZ or the purpose of saving time and avoiding human error (Para. [0007] of MARQUEZ).
Regarding claim 4, GUTHRIE as modified by MARQUEZ teaches the method of Claim 3, further comprising controlling equipment of the building automation system using the digital twin (BMS 210 is configured not (e.g., only) to monitor and control, but also to optimize the synergy between various systems, for example, to conserve energy and lower building operation costs, Para. [0134] of MARQUEZ).
Regarding claim 6, GUTHRIE teaches the method of Claim 1 (as shown above) but appears to fail to explicitly disclose: wherein validating completion of the first subset of the planned tasks comprises comparing points found by the scan to a planned points expected to be provided by completion of the first subset of planned tasks (an installer might determine that a window opening is too small for the window prescribed by the instructions in the digital twin (e.g., interconnect drawings and/or BIM) and decide to install a smaller window. To correct for the change, the digital twin may need to be updated, Para. [0071] of MARQUEZ; See also the digital twin (e.g., an interconnect drawing) may be updated when commissioning takes place (e.g., in real time) … when the digital twin (e.g., interconnect drawing) of the facility is revised, the corresponding (e.g., linked) network configuration file will be revised as well … such revision may be manual and/or automatic … such revisions may be done in real-time (e.g., during update of the digital twin file, Para. [0172] of MARQUEZ).
However, MARQUEZ teaches wherein validating completion of the first subset of the planned tasks comprises comparing points found by the scan to a planned points expected to be provided by completion of the first subset of planned tasks (an installer might determine that a window opening is too small for the window prescribed by the instructions in the digital twin (e.g., interconnect drawings and/or BIM) and decide to install a smaller window. To correct for the change, the digital twin may need to be updated, Para. [0071] of MARQUEZ; See also the digital twin (e.g., an interconnect drawing) may be updated when commissioning takes place (e.g., in real time) … when the digital twin (e.g., interconnect drawing) of the facility is revised, the corresponding (e.g., linked) network configuration file will be revised as well … such revision may be manual and/or automatic … such revisions may be done in real-time (e.g., during update of the digital twin file, Para. [0172] of MARQUEZ).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the building scanning system of GUTHRIE with the digital twin building model of MARQUEZ for the purpose of saving time and avoiding human error (Para. [0007] of MARQUEZ).
Regarding claim 7, GUTHRIE teaches the method of Claim 1 (as shown above) but appears to fail to explicitly disclose: wherein validation completion of the first subset of the planned tasks comprises comparing a point value for a point found by the scan to an expected value for the point indicated by a task in the first subset of planned tasks.
However, MARQUEZ teaches wherein validation completion of the first subset of the planned tasks comprises comparing a point value for a point found by the scan to an expected value for the point indicated by a task in the first subset of planned tasks (an installer might determine that a window opening is too small for the window prescribed by the instructions in the digital twin (e.g., interconnect drawings and/or BIM) and decide to install a smaller window. To correct for the change, the digital twin may need to be updated, Para. [0071] of MARQUEZ; See also the digital twin (e.g., an interconnect drawing) may be updated when commissioning takes place (e.g., in real time) … when the digital twin (e.g., interconnect drawing) of the facility is revised, the corresponding (e.g., linked) network configuration file will be revised as well … such revision may be manual and/or automatic … such revisions may be done in real-time (e.g., during update of the digital twin file, Para. [0172] of MARQUEZ).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the building scanning system of GUTHRIE with the digital twin building model of MARQUEZ for the purpose of saving time and avoiding human error (Para. [0007] of MARQUEZ).
Claim 17 has substantially similar limitations as recited in claim 3; therefore, it is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 for the same reasons.
Claim 18 has substantially similar limitations as recited in claim 4; therefore, it is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 for the same reasons.
Claim 19 has substantially similar limitations as recited in claim 6; therefore, it is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 for the same reasons.
Claim 20 has substantially similar limitations as recited in claim 7; therefore, it is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 for the same reasons.
Claims 9, 10, 12 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over MARQUEZ et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2023/0393443 A1) in view of GUTHRIE et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2019/0384243 A1).
Regarding claim 9, MARQUEZ teaches the method of Claim 8 (as shown above), wherein collecting actual commissioning data as the technician installs and commissions equipment at the building comprises causing completion of tasks by the technician (a commissioning method may comprise providing a capturing device in an enclosure region having one or more devices to be commissioned … the one or more devices may have identifiers, which are unique among devices to be installed in the enclosure region. Such identifiers may be accessible for imaging by an image capture device … the ID capture device may capture one or more images of the one or more devices to be commissioned … by using images taken by the image capture device, the locations of the one or more devices in the images of the enclosure region may be determined (e.g., using machine image recognition), Para. [0096] of MARQUEZ) but appears to fail to explicitly disclose: running an automated scan configured to find points and controllers in the building automation system for the building; validating completion of a first subset of planned tasks for providing the building automation system based on the scan; identifying a second subset of the planned tasks for providing the building automation system as not yet completed based on the scan; and causing completion of the second subset of the planned tasks.
However, GUTHRIE teaches running an automated scan (BMS 400 can be implemented in building 10 to automatically monitor and control various building functions, Para. [0071] of GUTHRIE; See also scan the live BMS system at process block 706, as well as scan an archive at process block 708, which can be used to generate a report, Para. [0107] of GUTHRIE) configured to find points and controllers in the building automation system for the building (site information portion 1002 of report 1000 may provide general status information about the BMS being analyzed, such as number of servers, supervisory devices, controllers, and data points in the scanned BMS, Para. [0105] of GUTHRIE); validating completion of a first subset of planned tasks for providing the building automation system based on the scan (update a previously performed inventory project with updated system information, Para. [0107] of GUTHRIE; See also inventorying process 700 may be used to verify that the BMS systems has been properly installed or commissioned … in some embodiments, the inventorying process 700 is used to verify that any additions to the BMS are properly installed … the inventorying process 700 is used to provide user with multiple reports showing the changes to a system over time, Para. [0111] of GUTHRIE; See also the user 1302 may select the most recently completed project, Para. [0137] of GUTHRIE); identifying a second subset of the planned tasks for providing the building automation system as not yet completed based on the scan (the key tasks portion 1008 may provide information to a user regarding actions that need to be taken to address the identified critical issues, Para. [0105] of GUTHRIE; See also the inventorying process 700 is used to provide user with multiple reports showing the changes to a system over time … these changes may be used to determine what optimizations, improvements, or additional maintenance is needed in the system, Para. [0111] of GUTHRIE); and causing completion of the second subset of the planned tasks (the key tasks portion 1008 may provide information to a user regarding actions that need to be taken to address the identified critical issues, Para. [0105] of GUTHRIE).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the digital twin building model of MARQUEZ with the building scanning/task completion system of GUTHRIE for the purpose of easily and efficiently analyzing a building/BMS system, in part or in whole, to evaluate a number of performance metrics, and provide suggestions relating to the optimization of the BMS system (Para. [0005] of GUTHRIE).
Regarding claim 10, MARQUEZ as modified by GUTHRIE teaches the method of Claim 9, comprising generating the planned tasks based on the building design plan (obtaining performance information regarding the BMS system can be critical in determining if the BMS system is functioning as per its specified design … this information may provide useful insights into the BMS system, such as opportunities for function or performance enhancements … furthermore, as systems change over time, it is important to monitor and understand how the changes to the BMS system over time have affected the BMS system … for example, as additional devices and data points are added to a BMS system, the overall system performance should be monitored to determine the impact of the changes to the BMS system … thus, it would be desirous to have a tool available that could easily and efficiently analyze a BMS system, in part or in whole, to evaluate a number of performance metrics, and provide suggestions relating to the optimization of the BMS system, Para. [0005] of GUTHRIE; See also facility data may include physical plant schematics, riser diagrams, installed components, maintenance records, service contracts, etc., Para. [0100] of GUTHRIE).
Regarding claim 12, MARQUEZ teaches the method of Claim 8, further comprising enhancing the digital twin over time based on data from an entire building life cycle (asset lifecycle management, Para. [0014] of MARQUEZ) but fails to explicitly disclose wherein the data comprises warranty and service data (facility data may include physical plant schematics, riser diagrams, installed components, maintenance records, service contracts, etc., Para. [0100] of GUTHRIE)
Regarding claim 13, MARQUEZ teaches the method of Claim 8, wherein the building design plan comprising ontological data describing the equipment to be installed at the building (one or more devices may have identifiers, which are unique among devices to be installed in the enclosure region, Para. [0096] of MARQUEZ) but appears to fail to explicitly disclose control drawings, point lists, wiring diagrams, and standard equipment models.
However, GUTHRIE teaches control drawings, point lists, wiring diagrams, and standard equipment models (complexity of many conventional electrochromic windows (e.g., wiring, installation, and programming of a controller, etc.) may discourage their use. For example, residential customers are likely to have windows installed by local contractors who may be unfamiliar with electrochromic windows and their installation requirements, Para. [0115] of MARQUEZ; See also facility data may include physical plant schematics, riser diagrams, installed components, maintenance records, service contracts, etc., Para. [0100] of GUTHRIE).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the digital twin building model of MARQUEZ with the building scanning/task completion system of GUTHRIE for the purpose of easily and efficiently analyzing a building/BMS system, in part or in whole, to evaluate a number of performance metrics, and provide suggestions relating to the optimization of the BMS system (Para. [0005] of GUTHRIE).
Regarding claim 14, BENNETT as modified by LIMA teaches the method of Claim 1, wherein the actual commissioning data comprises device location data, test values of point verification, recorded control drawings, recorded point lists, and recorded wiring diagrams.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: OHLSEN et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2022/0299981 A1) teaches a method for completing a project to provide a building automation system, comprising: running an automated scan (information regarding the physical environment can be submitted to the IDE system 202 (as part of design input 512) in the form of 2D or 3D images or video of the plant environment … this environmental information can also be obtained from an existing digital twin of the plant, or by analysis of scanned environmental data, Para. [0070] of OHLSEN) configured to find points and controllers in the building automation system (project generation component 206 can analyze this image, video, or digital twin data to identify physical elements within the installation area (e.g., walls, girders, safety fences, existing machines and devices, etc.) and physical relationships between these elements … this can include ascertaining distances between machines, lengths of piping runs, locations and distances of wiring harnesses or cable trays, etc., Para. [0070] of OHLSEN; [walls, girders, fences and/or locations are interpreted as corresponding to points/locations, and machines and devices are interpreted as corresponding to controllers]).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN P HOCKER whose telephone number is (571)272-0501. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00 AM - 5:00 PM 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, Rehana Perveen can be reached on (571)272-3676. 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.
JOHN P. HOCKER
Examiner
Art Unit 2189
/JOHN P HOCKER/Examiner, Art Unit 2189
/REHANA PERVEEN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2189
Prosecution Insights