DETAILED ACTION
This action is responsive to the preliminary amendment filed 07/27/2023.
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 .
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
Status of the Claims
Claims 1-2, 6-9, and 12-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1).
Claims 3-5 and 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103.
Claim 15 is cancelled.
Claim Rejections – 35 USC § 102
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
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, 6-9, and 12-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by SPAYD (US 2018/0211447 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, SPAYD teaches a visualisation system for visualising a processing of a chemical product with at least two processing units, the visualisation system comprising: (¶ 95, 98: A visual display system comprising an AR device depicts components of a facility for producing a pharmaceutical product, including production units, such as reactors, for processing the product. ¶ 39: One or more components of the facility are visualized. The components are processing units. For example, Fig. 2 shows two processing units in the view of the user, a pipe and a holding tank. See Table 2 in ¶ 65, which provides a list of other processing units.)
a communication interface configured for communicating with the at least two processing units in order to receive a respective value of processing parameters for processing of the chemical product (¶ 48: The AR device communicates with a control system that controls the function of the components in the facility via a network interface. ¶ 73-74, 77-78, Fig. 3: Communication with the two processing units is performed over the network in order to retrieve and display information concerning processing parameters for processing of the product, such as a current temperature, a current volume, the direction of flow, the flow rate and magnitude, and the amount of turbulence.)
a profiling module configured for providing a reference profile including a respective reference value for each of the processing parameters for a reference chemical product and for providing a profile for the chemical product, the profile including a respective deviation value of the processing parameters for the chemical product determined based on a difference between the respective value of the processing parameters for processing of the chemical product and the respective reference value, (¶ 58-59: An expanded view of information about a material, i.e. a chemical, within the component being viewed includes historical information, such as averages, and reference values, i.e. a reference profile. The profile includes minimum and maximum temperature and pressure values, which are reference values. When a value is detected outside of the range, alarms are issued. A value being outside the range would be a deviation value based on a difference between the value and the minimum or maximum threshold for the value.)
and a user interface configured for visualizing information about processing the chemical product including the profile in a mixed reality view or a virtual reality view. (¶ 42-43, 61, 63-64: The augmented reality display includes a user interface for visualizing information about processing the pharmaceutical product, including the profile information. The UI includes controls for interacting with the indicators next to the components of the process to expand information corresponding to the component and the material inside the component.)
Regarding Claim 2, SPAYD further teaches further configured for controlling the processing of the chemical product by at least one of the at least two processing units via the communication interface based on the profile of the chemical product. (¶ 48: The AR device communicates with the control system that controls the components for processing the chemical product, including enabling, disabling, or modifying their function. ¶ 82: A malfunction during the process, which would be part of the profile of the chemical product, would result in communication with the control room to control the industrial equipment.)
Regarding Claim 6, SPAYD further teaches further configured for determining a location of the chemical product and for associating the profile of the chemical product with the location of the chemical product. (¶ 51, 61, 72: The AR device determines a location of the component in the industrial process and associated profile information to be displayed, including information pertaining to the material, i.e. the chemical product, inside the component. Also see ¶ 78 and Figs. 4 and 6: When the material is inside the pipe, information such as flow rate is determined and displayed. When the material is inside the holding tank, information such as the temperature is displayed.)
Regarding Claim 7, SPAYD further teaches further configured for displaying a representation of the profile of the chemical product at the location of the chemical product in the mixed reality view or the virtual reality view. (¶ 72-74, 76-78, Figs. 4, 6-7: A representation of the profile of the material inside the component, i.e. the chemical product at the location of the chemical product, is displayed in a mixed reality view. For example, in Fig. 4, a window with text information, including temperature data, of the material inside the holding tank is displayed in the AR viewer. In Figs. 6-7: A graphical indicator of the flow rate of the material inside the pipe is displayed, while a graphical indicator of the temperature of the material inside the holding tank is displayed.)
Regarding Claim 8, SPAYD further teaches further configured for marking of the chemical product by a flag based on the deviation value of at least one of the processing parameters. (¶ 77: Graphic data features change appearance if a processing parameter is outside of a defined range. Therefore, the chemical product is marked by a flag based on a deviation value, i.e. a change in graphics.)
Regarding Claim 9, SPAYD further teaches wherein the user interface includes a head-mounted display configured for adapting a visualization of the information about the processing of the chemical product depending on a location of the user and/or an orientation of the user’s head. (¶ 16, 36-37, 51: The AR device is a headset that changes views depending on the location of the user as they walk around the facility or an orientation of the user’s head, as determined by sensors on the device.)
Regarding Claim 12, SPAYD further teaches a method for visualising a processing of a chemical product with at least two processing units, the method comprising: (¶ 95, 98: A visual display system comprising an AR device depicts components of a facility for producing a pharmaceutical product, including production units, such as reactors, for processing the product. ¶ 39: One or more components of the facility are visualized. The components are processing units. For example, Fig. 2 shows two processing units in the view of the user, a pipe and a holding tank. See Table 2 in ¶ 65, which provides a list of other processing units.)
receiving from the at least two processing units a respective value of processing parameters for processing of the chemical product, (¶ 48: The AR device communicates with a control system that controls the function of the components in the facility via a network interface. ¶ 73-74, 77-78, Fig. 3: Communication with the two processing units is performed over the network in order to retrieve and display information concerning processing parameters for processing of the product, such as a current temperature, a current volume, the direction of flow, the flow rate and magnitude, and the amount of turbulence.)
providing a reference profile including a respective reference value for each of the processing parameters for a reference chemical product, providing a profile for the chemical product, the profile including a respective deviation value of the processing parameters for the chemical product determined based on a difference between the respective value of the processing parameters for processing of the chemical product and the respective reference value, (¶ 58-59: An expanded view of information about a material, i.e. a chemical, within the component being viewed includes historical information, such as averages, and reference values, i.e. a reference profile. The profile includes minimum and maximum temperature and pressure values, which are reference values. When a value is detected outside of the range, alarms are issued. A value being outside the range would be a deviation value based on a difference between the value and the minimum or maximum threshold for the value.)
and visualization information about processing the chemical product including the profile in a mixed reality view or a virtual reality view. (¶ 42-43, 61, 63-64: The augmented reality display includes a user interface for visualizing information about processing the pharmaceutical product, including the profile information. The UI includes controls for interacting with the indicators next to the components of the process to expand information corresponding to the component and the material inside the component.)
Regarding Claim 13, SPAYD further teaches further comprising one or more of: (The claim requires only one of the limitations in the list below to be satisfied.)
controlling a processing of the chemical product by at least one of the at least two processing units via a communication interface based on the profile of the chemical product, (¶ 48: The AR device communicates with the control system that controls the components for processing the chemical product, including enabling, disabling, or modifying their function. ¶ 82: A malfunction during the process, which would be part of the profile of the chemical product, would result in communication with the control room to control the industrial equipment.)
receiving inputs from a user for controlling the processing of the chemical product,
displaying a control panel in the mixed reality view or the virtual reality view, controlling the processing of the chemical product by the at least one of the at least two processing units via the control panel,
providing that the profile includes a deviation value for each processing parameter for which the processing of the chemical product has been performed,
determining a location of the chemical product, associating the profile of the chemical product with the location of the chemical product, (¶ 51, 61, 72: The AR device determines a location of the component in the industrial process and associated profile information to be displayed, including information pertaining to the material, i.e. the chemical product, inside the component. Also see ¶ 78 and Figs. 4 and 6: When the material is inside the pipe, information such as flow rate is determined and displayed. When the material is inside the holding tank, information such as the temperature is displayed.)
displaying a representation of the profile of the chemical product at the location of the chemical product in the mixed reality view or the virtual reality view, (¶ 72-74, 76-78, Figs. 4, 6-7: A representation of the profile of the material inside the component, i.e. the chemical product at the location of the chemical product, is displayed in a mixed reality view. For example, in Fig. 4, a window with text information, including temperature data, of the material inside the holding tank is displayed in the AR viewer. In Figs. 6-7: A graphical indicator of the flow rate of the material inside the pipe is displayed, while a graphical indicator of the temperature of the material inside the holding tank is displayed.)
marking of the chemical product by a flag based on the deviation value of at least one of the processing parameters, (¶ 77: Graphic data features change appearance if a processing parameter is outside of a defined range. Therefore, the chemical product is marked by a flag based on a deviation value, i.e. a change in graphics.)
adapting a visualization of the information about the processing of the chemical product depending on a location of the user and/or an orientation of the user’s head, (¶ 16, 36-37, 51: The AR device is a headset that changes views depending on the location of the user as they walk around the facility or an orientation of the user’s head, as determined by sensors on the device.)
and optimizing a quality of the chemical product by optimizing the respective deviation value of the processing parameters.
Regarding Claim 14, SPAYD further teaches a non-transitory computer readable medium for visualising a processing of a chemical product with at least two processing units, wherein the non-transitory computer readable medium has commands stored thereon for causing a processor to carry out the method according to claim 12, when the commands are run on the processor. (¶ 89-90, Fig. 9: processor 910, memory 912)
Claim Rejections – 35 USC § 103
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
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 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over SPAYD (US 2018/0211447 A1) in view of SCHMIRLER (US 2018/0130260 A1).
Regarding Claim 3, SPAYD teaches all the limitations of claim 2, on which claim 4 depends.
While SPAYD teaches a control panel within an AR viewer for receiving user inputs to interact with the industrial environment (¶ 80, Fig. 8), SPAYD does not explicitly teach wherein the user interface is configured for receiving inputs from a user for controlling the processing of the chemical product.
However, SCHMIRLER, which is similarly directed to a mixed reality device for viewing the status of equipment and controlling an industrial process, teaches wherein the user interface is configured for receiving inputs from a user for controlling the processing of the chemical product. (¶ 115, 120-121: User input is received via a selectable list or a control panel for issuing commands to control industrial equipment, which in view of SPAYD would be industrial equipment for processing of a chemical product.)
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one
of ordinary skill in the art to modify the mixed reality user interface for viewing processing parameters pertaining to equipment and materials used in a chemical process and communicating with a control system to control the process taught by SPAYD by including user interface controls for allowing the user to issue commands to control the process as taught by SCHMIRLER. Since the references are similarly directed to AR devices in industrial environments, and SPAYD (¶ 48) at least teaches controlling the process by communicating with a control room, the combination would have yielded predictable results. Such an implementation would have amounted to including user interface controls for controlling a target processing unit, like in SCHMIRLER. As suggested by SCHMIRLER (¶ 121), such an implementation would enable remote control of the industrial equipment, which would be especially advantageous when the user is at a remote location. Providing UI controls for controlling the process as the user is viewing process parameters would have also improved the user experience, providing the operator more flexibility.
Regarding Claim 4, SPAYD teaches all the limitations of claim 2, on which claim 4 depends.
SPAYD further configured for displaying a control panel via the user interface in the mixed reality view or the virtual reality view, (¶ 80, Fig. 8: A control panel is displayed via the user interface of the AR device.)
While SPAYD suggests that the AR device can interact with the control room to control the components of the industrial process, SPAYD does not explicitly teach and for controlling the processing of the chemical product by the at least one of the at least two processing units via the control panel. (¶ 115, 120-121: User input is received via a selectable list or a control panel for issuing commands to control industrial equipment, which in view of SPAYD would be industrial equipment for processing of a chemical product.)
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one
of ordinary skill in the art to modify the mixed reality user interface for viewing processing parameters pertaining to equipment and materials used in a chemical process and communicating with a control system to control the process taught by SPAYD by including user interface controls for allowing the user to issue commands to control the process as taught by SCHMIRLER. Since the references are similarly directed to AR devices in industrial environments, and SPAYD (¶ 48) at least teaches controlling the process by communicating with a control room, the combination would have yielded predictable results. Such an implementation would have amounted to including user interface controls for controlling a target processing unit, like in SCHMIRLER. As suggested by SCHMIRLER (¶ 121), such an implementation would enable remote control of the industrial equipment, which would be especially advantageous when the user is at a remote location. Providing UI controls for controlling the process as the user is viewing process parameters would have also improved the user experience, providing the operator more flexibility.
Claims 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over SPAYD (US 2018/0211447 A1) in view of BLEVINS (US 2010/0318934 A1).
Regarding Claim 5, SPAYD teaches all the limitations of claim 1, on which claim 5 depends.
SPAYD does not teach wherein the profile includes a deviation value for each processing parameter for which the processing of the chemical product has been performed.
However, BLEVINS, which is directed to predicting process quality for a chemical product in a process control system (¶ 39-40), teaches wherein the profile includes a deviation value for each processing parameter for which the processing of the chemical product has been performed. (¶ 6, 44-46, 66-67, 112-113, Fig. 8 element 802: A deviation value is included for each processing parameter for which there is previous batch data, i.e. for which the processing of the chemical product has been performed.)
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one
of ordinary skill in the art to modify the mixed reality display for viewing process parameters related to a chemical product being processed in an industrial facility taught by SPAYD by including profile information for the chemical product that includes deviation values for each processing parameter for which the processing of the chemical product has been performed as taught by BLEVINS. Since the references similarly teach visualizing process control data for a chemical process in order to provide relevant information to an operator, the combination would have yielded predictable results. Furthermore, a person of ordinary skill in the art would have considered incorporating a quality control process such as in BLEVINS into the system taught by SPAYD. As taught by BLEVINS, such an implementation would have provided “an easy graphical display for a process control operator” (¶ 113) and would have assisted an operator “to determine a cause of a process fault by providing an overlay of historical plots with associated variations” (¶ 44).
Claims 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over SPAYD (US 2018/0211447 A1) in view of SCHMELIG (US 2020/0342672 A1).
Regarding Claim 10, SPAYD teaches all the limitations of claim 1, on which claim 10 depends.
SPAYD further teaches the visualisation system according to claim 1, (See the rejection of claim 1).
and at least two processing units for processing chemical products based on a respective value of processing parameters. (¶ 95, 98: A visual display system comprising an AR device depicts components of a facility for producing a pharmaceutical product, including production units, such as reactors, for processing the product. ¶ 39: One or more components of the facility are visualized. The components are processing units. For example, Fig. 2 shows two processing units in the view of the user, a pipe and a holding tank. See Table 2 in ¶ 65, which provides a list of other processing units.)
SPAYD does not teach a processing system for optimizing quality of chemical goods, each including at least two chemical products, the processing system comprising
However, SCHMELIG, which is similarly directed to an AR system for visualizing a production line for processing a chemical product (¶ 129), teaches a processing system for optimizing quality of chemical goods, each including at least two chemical products (¶ 86: A user indicates the substances and the amounts to be used in the process.), the processing system comprising: (¶ 78, 145: A chemical process is optimized using a processing system that simulates the process, which includes selecting multiple substances and parameters associated with the substances during the process.)
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one
of ordinary skill in the art to modify the mixed reality system for viewing the status of a chemical production environment taught by SPAYD by including a processing system for optimizing the quality of the goods, as taught by SCHMELIG. Since the references are similarly directed to using AR devices for viewing information related to a chemical process, the combination would have yielded predictable results. As taught by SCHMELIG (¶ 89), such an implementation would “allow the user to determine one or more priorities according to which the optimization is to be directed”. SCHMELIG also suggests that this would allow a user to produce high-quality products by determining the right configuration of equipment (¶ 3) and reduce cost by determining the configuration and parameters for the chemical process in advance via the simulation (¶ 31).
Regarding Claim 11, SPAYD in view of SCHMELIG further teaches wherein the at least two processing units are connected via a processing line configured for transferring the chemical products through the processing system. (SPAYD, ¶ 65: A processing unit includes a conveyor, which would connect two processing units together.
SCHMELIG, ¶ 53, 141, 145: Processing units, namely containers, are connected by a virtual connection element that simulates the physical connection between the processing units, such as a line, a pipe, or a pump.)
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure.
McGill (US 2020/0387127 A1) teaches an AR interface for locating and correcting a fault in industrial equipment. (Abstract)
Rovaglio (US 2009/0319058 A1) teaches an AR interface for viewing industrial control equipment, including overlaying simulated and actual measurements of a process parameter. (Fig. 4B, ¶ 78)
Michalscheck (US 2021/0201593 A1) teaches presenting a plurality of process control parameters in a AR viewer of a mobile device. (Fig. 11, ¶ 169-170)
Metayer (US 2023/0359165 A1) teaches controlling and optimizing an industrial process using an AR device. (Abstract)
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RAMI RAFAT OKASHA whose telephone number is (571)272-0675. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10-6 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, SCOTT BADERMAN can be reached at (571) 272-3644. 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.
/RAMI R OKASHA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2118