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 .
DETAILED ACTION
The action is in response to the Applicant’s communication filed on 08/04/2023.
Claims 1-19 remain pending, where claims 1 and 19 are independent.
This application claims the priority benefit of the international application no. PCT/JP2021/012914 filed on 03/26/2021 incorporated herein.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 08/04/2023 and 10/16/2023 have been filed on/after the filing date of the application. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception an abstract idea without significantly more.
Independent claim(s) recite(s) a judicial exception: The claim(s) recite(s) “divide a target program into fragments according to groups of processing; extract, instruction groups match between fragments, as a fragment group; usage patterns of a variable group match between the fragment groups, and types of variables match between the fragment groups, as a functionalization candidate; and output information on the functionalization candidate”, as explained in detail below.
Claim 1: Ineligible
Step 1: The claim recites a series of steps and, therefore, is a process. Thus, the claim is directed to the same as a process, which is a statutory category of invention (Step 1: Yes).
Next, the claims are analyzed to determine directed to a judicial exception.
Under MPEP § 2106.04(a)(2), whether the claim recites:
any judicial exceptions, including certain groupings of abstract ideas (i.e., mathematical concepts, certain methods of organizing human activity such as a fundamental economic practice, or mental processes) ("Step 2A, Prong One"); and
additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application ("Step 2A, Prong Two").
Step 2A, Prong One: Claim 1 recites a judicial exception with the step of the limitations as explained below in detail.
The limitations “divide a target program into fragments according to groups of processing; extract, instruction groups match between fragments, as a fragment group; usage patterns of a variable group match between the fragment groups, and types of variables match between the fragment groups, as a functionalization candidate; and output information on the functionalization candidate” are observations, and therefore recite a mental process, such as an evaluation and judgement. See MPEP § 2106.04(a)(2), subsection III.
This dividing, extracting and outputting steps, as drafted, is a process that under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers (Mental processes: the concept performed in human such as observation, evaluation, judgement, opinion, etc.) of patent eligibility grouping. The claim, therefore, recites in a group of a mental process.
Therefore, claim 1 is directed to an abstract idea of a judicial exception (Step 2A Prong one: Yes).
Step 2A Prong two: The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the claim recites the additional elements of “dividing and extracting” based on data/information collection and change functions that do not add meaningful limitations sufficient amount to significantly more (“inventive concept”) than the judicial exception, that merely further limiting the scope of abstract ideas or stating merely technical environment of these abstract ideas and the claim is directed to the judicial exception.
This exception is not significant into a practical application of the exception and based on the recited additional elements of the claims (Step 2A Prong two: No).
Next, the claim as a whole is analyzed to determine whether any element, or combination of elements, is sufficient to ensure the claim amounts to significantly more than the abstract idea.
Step 2B: In addition to the steps that describe the abstract idea of dividing, extracting and outputting, the claim recites the additional limitation of obtaining information and sorting or organizing extracted information groupwise. This additional element taken individually represents a general-purpose information or data collection and changing the information as sorting or organizing are not sufficient amount to significantly more (“inventive concept”) than the judicial exception. The claim recites generic computer process of program creation. As such, the claim is directed to a judicial exception. Accordingly, the claim is ineligible for patenting. (Step 2B: No)
As to independent claim 19, reciting substantially similar subject matter as claim 1 for similar reasons as those outlined above, likewise do not amount to significantly more than the above noted abstract idea, which does not rise to a level of significantly more than the abstract idea, and are accordingly not eligible under 35 USC 101. See MPEP 2106. See MPEP 2107.
As to the dependent claims 3-6, 9, 12-14, 11 and 17, reciting similar elements, which does not rise to a level of significantly more than the abstract idea, and are accordingly not eligible under 35 USC 101. See MPEP 2106.
However, the dependent claim 2 and it’s dependent, reciting additional limitations and elements of "determine group, usage patterns, matches between groups, generates sequential arrangement, compare string with predetermine variable" in processing system and analysis, to a level of significantly more than the abstract idea, and are accordingly eligible under 35 USC 101. See MPEP 2106.
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 of this title, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
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.
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
Claims 1, 3-6, 9, 12-14,17 and 19 are rejected under AIA 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iwamura, et al. USPGPub No. 20220171360 A1.
As to claims 1 and 19, Iwamura discloses A program creation assistance system (Iwamura [0001-16] “assisting in creation of a ladder diagram program to be executed by a programmable controller (PLC) or the like”; [abstract] [0036-77] see Fig. 1-17) comprising processing circuitry to:
divide a target program into fragments according to groups of processing; extract, from among sets of fragments, each set in which instruction groups match between fragments, as a fragment group; extract, from among sets of fragment groups, a set in which instruction groups match between fragment groups, usage patterns of a variable group match between the fragment groups, and types of variables match between the fragment groups, as a functionalization candidate; (Iwamura [0001-16] “assisting in creation of a ladder diagram program to be executed by a programmable controller (PLC) or the like - selects a partial circuit including multiple contacts in a ladder diagram program - generates a replacement circuit including a smaller number of contacts than the partial circuit selected by the partial circuit selector - generates an auxiliary circuit that causes the replacement circuit generated by the replacement circuit generator to perform the same action as the partial circuit selected by the partial circuit selector - extract in the ladder diagram program - circuit including multiple contacts and appearing more than a predetermined number of times - display the extracted partial circuit - to select the partial circuit to be replaced with the replacement circuit, or to select the extracted partial circuit as the partial circuit to be automatically replaced with the replacement circuit”; [abstract] [0036-77] see Fig. 1-17, selects partial circuit (divide as target program), generates replacement circuit and auxiliary circuit, perform same action, extract ladder diagram program, multiple contacts in ladder diagram program and appearing more than predetermined number of times obviously provides divide target program into fragments - extract, from among sets of fragments, each set in which instruction groups match between fragments, as a fragment group; extract, from among sets of fragment groups, a set in which instruction groups match between fragment groups, usage patterns of a variable group match between the fragment groups, and types of variables match between the fragment groups, as a functionalization candidate) and
output information on the functionalization candidate (Iwamura [0001-16] “assisting in creation of a ladder diagram program to be executed by a programmable controller (PLC) or the like - selects a partial circuit including multiple contacts in a ladder diagram program - generates a replacement circuit including a smaller number of contacts than the partial circuit selected by the partial circuit selector - generates an auxiliary circuit that causes the replacement circuit generated by the replacement circuit generator to perform the same action as the partial circuit selected by the partial circuit selector - extract in the ladder diagram program - circuit including multiple contacts and appearing more than a predetermined number of times - display the extracted partial circuit - to select the partial circuit to be replaced with the replacement circuit, or to select the extracted partial circuit as the partial circuit to be automatically replaced with the replacement circuit - outputs an auxiliary circuit corresponding to the selected replacement circuit - auxiliary circuit corresponding to the replacement circuit, and the partial circuit”; [abstract] [0036-77] see Fig. 1-17, selects partial circuit, generates replacement circuit and auxiliary circuit, perform same action, extract ladder diagram program, multiple contacts in ladder diagram program and appearing more than predetermined number of times obviously provides output information on the functionalization candidate).
It would be therefore obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention that selects partial circuit to generate replacement circuit and auxiliary circuit of multiple contacts in ladder diagram program appearing plurality predetermined number of times and perform same action, are assumed as output information on the functionalization candidate.
As to claim 3, Iwamura further obviously discloses The program creation assistance system according to claim 1, wherein the processing circuitry compares types of variables between functionalization candidates, and aggregates functionalization candidates between which types of variables match, and for each aggregation of functionalization candidates between which types of variables match, outputs information on the aggregation of functionalization candidates (Iwamura [0001-16] “assisting in creation of a ladder diagram program to be executed by a programmable controller (PLC) or the like - selects a partial circuit including multiple contacts in a ladder diagram program - generates a replacement circuit including a smaller number of contacts than the partial circuit selected by the partial circuit selector - generates an auxiliary circuit that causes the replacement circuit generated by the replacement circuit generator to perform the same action as the partial circuit selected by the partial circuit selector - extract in the ladder diagram program - circuit including multiple contacts and appearing more than a predetermined number of times - display the extracted partial circuit - to select the partial circuit to be replaced with the replacement circuit, or to select the extracted partial circuit as the partial circuit to be automatically replaced with the replacement circuit - outputs an auxiliary circuit corresponding to the selected replacement circuit - auxiliary circuit corresponding to the replacement circuit, and the partial circuit”; [abstract] [0036-77] see Fig. 1-17, selects partial circuit, generates replacement circuit and auxiliary circuit, perform same action, extract ladder diagram program, multiple contacts in ladder diagram program and appearing more than predetermined number of times obviously provides compares types of variables between functionalization candidates, and aggregates functionalization candidates between which types of variables match, and for each aggregation of functionalization candidates between which types of variables match, outputs information on the aggregation of functionalization candidates).
As to claims 4 and 9, Iwamura further obviously discloses The program creation assistance system according to claim 1, wherein the processing circuitry analyzes, for each fragment group, a variable dependency between fragments, extracts, from among sets of fragment groups, each set in which instruction groups match between fragment groups as a fragment group pair, and for each fragment group pair, determines a type of the fragment group pair based on a result of an analysis on each fragment group included in the fragment group pair, and outputs the information including a type of a fragment group pair to be the functionalization candidate (Iwamura [0001-16] “assisting in creation of a ladder diagram program to be executed by a programmable controller (PLC) or the like - selects a partial circuit including multiple contacts in a ladder diagram program - generates a replacement circuit including a smaller number of contacts than the partial circuit selected by the partial circuit selector - generates an auxiliary circuit that causes the replacement circuit generated by the replacement circuit generator to perform the same action as the partial circuit selected by the partial circuit selector - extract in the ladder diagram program - circuit including multiple contacts and appearing more than a predetermined number of times - display the extracted partial circuit - to select the partial circuit to be replaced with the replacement circuit, or to select the extracted partial circuit as the partial circuit to be automatically replaced with the replacement circuit - outputs an auxiliary circuit corresponding to the selected replacement circuit - auxiliary circuit corresponding to the replacement circuit, and the partial circuit”; [abstract] [0036-77] see Fig. 1-17, selects partial circuit, generates replacement circuit and auxiliary circuit, perform same action, extract ladder diagram program, multiple contacts in ladder diagram program and appearing more than predetermined number of times obviously provides extracts, from among sets of fragment groups, each set in which instruction groups match between fragment groups as a fragment group pair, and for each fragment group pair, determines a type of the fragment group pair based on a result of an analysis on each fragment group included in the fragment group pair, and outputs the information including a type of a fragment group pair to be the functionalization candidate).
As to claim 5, Iwamura further obviously discloses The program creation assistance system according to claim 4, wherein the processing circuitry determines, for each fragment group pair, whether the type of the fragment group pair is which one of a type in which sequences of instructions groups match without interchanging fragments, a type in which sequences of instruction groups match when fragments are interchanged and there is no variable dependency problem between the fragments even when the fragments are interchanged, and a type in which sequences of instruction groups match when fragments are interchanged and there is a variable dependency problem between the fragments when the fragments are interchanged (Iwamura [0001-16] “assisting in creation of a ladder diagram program to be executed by a programmable controller (PLC) or the like - selects a partial circuit including multiple contacts in a ladder diagram program - generates a replacement circuit including a smaller number of contacts than the partial circuit selected by the partial circuit selector - generates an auxiliary circuit that causes the replacement circuit generated by the replacement circuit generator to perform the same action as the partial circuit selected by the partial circuit selector - extract in the ladder diagram program - circuit including multiple contacts and appearing more than a predetermined number of times - display the extracted partial circuit - to select the partial circuit to be replaced with the replacement circuit, or to select the extracted partial circuit as the partial circuit to be automatically replaced with the replacement circuit - outputs an auxiliary circuit corresponding to the selected replacement circuit - auxiliary circuit corresponding to the replacement circuit, and the partial circuit”; [abstract] [0036-77] see Fig. 1-17, selects partial circuit, generates replacement circuit and auxiliary circuit, perform same action, extract ladder diagram program, multiple contacts in ladder diagram program and appearing more than predetermined number of times obviously provides determines, for each fragment group pair, whether the type of the fragment group pair is which one of a type in which sequences of instructions groups match without interchanging fragments, a type in which sequences of instruction groups match when fragments are interchanged and there is no variable dependency problem between the fragments even when the fragments are interchanged, and a type in which sequences of instruction groups match when fragments are interchanged and there is a variable dependency problem between the fragments when the fragments are interchanged).
As to claims 6, 12-14 and 17, Iwamura further obviously discloses The program creation assistance system according to claim 1, wherein the processing circuitry refers to a replacement database that indicates one or more replacement rules, and replaces each instruction that is a replacement target among instructions in the target program with a predetermined instruction, and divides the target program after replacement into fragments (Iwamura [0001-16] “assisting in creation of a ladder diagram program to be executed by a programmable controller (PLC) or the like - selects a partial circuit including multiple contacts in a ladder diagram program - generates a replacement circuit including a smaller number of contacts than the partial circuit selected by the partial circuit selector - generates an auxiliary circuit that causes the replacement circuit generated by the replacement circuit generator to perform the same action as the partial circuit selected by the partial circuit selector - extract in the ladder diagram program - circuit including multiple contacts and appearing more than a predetermined number of times - display the extracted partial circuit - to select the partial circuit to be replaced with the replacement circuit, or to select the extracted partial circuit as the partial circuit to be automatically replaced with the replacement circuit - outputs an auxiliary circuit corresponding to the selected replacement circuit - auxiliary circuit corresponding to the replacement circuit, and the partial circuit”; [abstract] [0036-77] see Fig. 1-17, selects partial circuit, generates replacement circuit and auxiliary circuit, perform same action, extract ladder diagram program, multiple contacts in ladder diagram program and appearing more than predetermined number of times obviously provides replaces each instruction that is a replacement target among instructions in the target program with a predetermined instruction, and divides the target program after replacement into fragments).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 2 is objected to as being dependent upon rejected base independent claims. Thereby, the independent claims will be allowable if they are amended by incorporating the objected claim(s) and/or intervening claim(s) to the base independent claims 1 and 19. The dependent claims 7-8, 10-11, 15-16 and 18 are also considered objected as being dependent on the objected dependent claim 2.
Therefore, the independent claims will be allowable if they are amended by incorporating the objected claim(s), make sure no double patent, 112 and 101 issue after incorporating and cancelling the objected claim(s).
The limitations of independent claims should be mirror to each other to avoid the restriction requirement.
Citation of Pertinent Prior Art
It is noted that any citations to specific, pages, columns, lines, or figures in the prior art references and any interpretation of the reference should not be considered to be limiting in any way. A reference is relevant for all it contains and may be relied upon for all that it would have reasonably suggested to one having ordinary skill in the art. See MPEP 2141.02 VI. PRIOR ART MUST BE CONSIDERED IN ITS ENTIRETY, i.e., as a whole and 2123.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The prior art made of record:
Ino, et al. USPGPub No. 2019/0155243 discloses a program comparing device compares programs described by ladder diagrams converting unit configured and rearrange an order of variables of the logical expression, and compare the comparison targets of logical expression of ladder circuit after rearranged, and judge whether or not they match.
Morota, et al. USPGPub No. 2016/0132305 A1 discloses a command code extraction indicated in extraction target code list, sub-control program creation creates a sub-control program including the command code extracted, sub-control parameter graph display part creates data of a sub-control parameter graph and displays the created sub-control parameter graph.
Yamaoka, et al. USPGPub No. 20160034259 A1 discloses a sequence-program-component creation program to perform a searching step of searching overall circuit of a sequence program for a common logic part and extracting a logic pattern that appears in common in a circuit pattern arranged in the common logic part as a common circuit pattern, selected by user from candidates for the program component, and replacing step of replacing the common logic part of the sequence program with the program component.
Ikeda, et al. USPGPub No. 2022/0155746 A1 discloses a program creation device to create program to be executed in a programmable logic controller.
Yamnne, USPGPub No. 2005/0033457 A1 discloses a n simulation aid tool uses a variable extracting part to analyze a ladder program to be tested and extracts variables used in the ladder program for managing part manages a test input sequence generates test input ladder program for verification and programmable controller for executing a test target program which is a ladder program to be tested.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Md Azad whose telephone @(571)272-0553 or email: md.azad@uspto.gov. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Thu 9AM-5PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Mohammad Ali can be reached on (571)272-4105. 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 Patent Center and the Private Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center or Private PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center and Private PAIR for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated- interview-request-air-form.
/Md Azad/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2119