Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 15, 2026
Application No. 18/332,815

Synchronizing Field Device Parameters Between an Asset Management System and Field Devices

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Jun 12, 2023
Examiner
HEDRICK, TYLER DEAN
Art Unit
2115
Tech Center
2100 — Computer Architecture & Software
Assignee
Abb Schweiz AG
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
92%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 0m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 92% — above average
92%
Career Allow Rate
77 granted / 84 resolved
+36.7% vs TC avg
Strong +17% interview lift
Without
With
+16.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 0m
Avg Prosecution
19 currently pending
Career history
103
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
16.4%
-23.6% vs TC avg
§103
59.1%
+19.1% vs TC avg
§102
15.2%
-24.8% vs TC avg
§112
7.5%
-32.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 84 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action: A person shall be entitled to a patent unless – (a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claims 1 and 3-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Toepke et al. (U.S. Publication No. 2018/0027071 A1). Regarding Claim 1: Toepke et al. teaches a computer-implemented method for operating at least one field device that is managed by an asset management system (AMS), comprising: establishing an initial alignment between a set of values of field device parameters maintained by the AMS and values of these parameters on the field device; (Paragraph [0190] and [0196], tool which was previously or currently connected to field device can automatically synchronize field device configurations to the asset management system) checking whether the configuration of the field device has changed since the initial alignment; (Paragraph [0197], sometimes the set of data received needs to be reconciled with existing data in the asset management system) and in response to determining that the configuration of the field device has changed, reestablishing alignment between the set of values of field device parameters maintained by the AMS and the values of these parameters on the field device. (Paragraph [0197], existing data can be overwritten or unique identification may be provided for the new data item) Regarding Claim 3: Toepke et al. additionally teaches the method of claim 1, wherein establishing of the initial alignment comprises downloading at least one value of at least one parameter from the field device to the AMS. (Paragraph [0190] and [0196], tool which was previously or currently connected to field device can automatically synchronize field device configurations to the asset management system) Regarding Claim 4: Toepke et al. additionally teaches the method of claim 1, wherein establishing the initial alignment further comprises receiving, by the AMS, from the field device, a value of a configuration version identifier, and/or a hash value, that identifies the configuration of the field device; and checking whether the configuration of the field device has changed comprises: receiving, by the AMS, from the field device, a new value of the configuration version identifier, and/or a new hash value; and comparing the new value of the configuration version identifier, and/or the new hash value, to the corresponding value obtained at the time of initial alignment. (Paragraph [0197], sometimes the set of data received needs to be reconciled with existing data in the asset management system and a unique identification may be provided for the new data item) Regarding Claim 5: Toepke et al. additionally teaches the method of claim 1, wherein checking whether the configuration of the field device has changed comprises: receiving, by the AMS, from the field device, for each field device parameter maintained by the AMS, a current value; and comparing the current value to the value maintained by the AMS. (Paragraph [0190] and [0196], tool which was previously or currently connected to field device can automatically synchronize field device configurations to the asset management system; Additionally, Paragraph [0197], sometimes the set of data received needs to be reconciled with existing data in the asset management system) Regarding Claim 6: Toepke et al. additionally teaches the method of claim 1, wherein re-establishing the alignment comprises: updating at least one value of a field device parameter maintained by the AMS with a value received from the field device; and/or setting at least one field device parameter on the field device to a value maintained by the AMS. (Paragraph [0190] and [0196], tool which was previously or currently connected to field device can automatically synchronize field device configurations to the asset management system) Regarding Claim 7: Toepke et al. additionally teaches the method of claim 6, further comprising: in response to determining that a value of a field device parameter maintained by the AMS differs from the value of this field device parameter on the field device, determining, based on a ruleset, whether to update the value maintained by the AMS or set the parameter on the field device to the value maintained by the AMS. (Paragraph [0190], user has control over what data and information is automatically synchronized to the asset management system) Regarding Claim 8: Toepke et al. additionally teaches the method of claim 7, wherein, out of a set of field device parameters for which a value is maintained by the AMS, the ruleset designates: at least one subset of field device parameters whose values are to be updated in the AMS, and/or at least one subset of field device parameters that are to be set on the field device to the values maintained by the AMS. (Paragraph [0190], user has control over what data and information is automatically synchronized to the asset management system) Regarding Claim 9: Toepke et al. additionally teaches the method of claim 7, wherein the ruleset stipulates that at least one value of a field device parameter is to be: updated in the AMS when a changed value on the field device is approved by an authorized user, and set on the field device to the value maintained by the AMS when a changed value on the field device is not approved by an authorized user. (Paragraph [0144], tool has copy of permissions for the user on what they are able to access and change) Regarding Claim 10: Toepke et al. additionally teaches the method of claim 6, further comprising logging the updating of a value of a field device parameter maintained by the AMS to an audit trail. (Paragraph [0187] and [0188], tool maintains and synchronizes audit trail of events with a history of the configurations of the field device) Regarding Claim 11: Toepke et al. additionally teaches the method of claim 1, wherein at least one field device parameter is referenced by a semantic identifier in the AMS. (Paragraph [0167], tool accesses a devices device ID which uniquely identifies each device) Regarding Claim 12: Toepke et al. additionally teaches the method of claim 1, wherein a field device that physically interacts with an industrial process for the manufacture of a food, a beverage, or a medicament is chosen. (Paragraph [0003] and [0004], distributed process control systems) 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. Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Toepke et al. (U.S. Publication No. 2018/0027071 A1) as applied to claims 1 and 3-12 above, and further in view of Wagener et al. (U.S. Patent No. 10416640 B2). Regarding Claim 2: Toepke et al. teaches the method of claim 1. Toepke et al. does not teach wherein the establishing of the initial alignment comprises: generating and/or accepting, by the AMS, at least one value of at least one field device parameter of the at least one field device as a value maintained by the AMS; and setting, by the AMS, the at least one field device parameter on the field device to this value. However, Wagener et al. teaches wherein the establishing of the initial alignment comprises: generating and/or accepting, by the AMS, at least one value of at least one field device parameter of the at least one field device as a value maintained by the AMS; and setting, by the AMS, the at least one field device parameter on the field device to this value. (Column 3, lines 45-63, each device type has an information package with configuration for the device which can be sent to each new device that is configured) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Toepke et al.’s synchronizing field devices with an asset management system with Wagener et al.’s automatic configuration of new field devices in order to configure new field devices using saved configurations from the asset management system. One would be motivated to combine these teachings in order to decrease error rate in the configuration of new field devices (Wagener et al. Column 3 lines 60-64). Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Arai et al. (U.S. Patent No. 11405276 B2) discloses updating device information stored in the device information storage based on acquired device information about the field device. Tang (U.S. Publication No. 2021/0173355 A1) discloses updating stored state data of the field device when a deviation in state data is detected. Ochiai (U.S. Patent No. 10409268 B2) discloses updated a parameter of a field device that is stored in a host device to synchronize internal data. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TYLER DEAN HEDRICK whose telephone number is (571)272-5803. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday: 9:00am - 5:00pm. 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, Thomas Lee can be reached at (571) 272-3667. 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. /T.D.H./Examiner, Art Unit 2115 /VINCENT H TRAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2115
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 12, 2023
Application Filed
Jan 10, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Mar 24, 2026
Response Filed

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12580073
METHOD OF IDENTIFYING DENTAL CONSUMABLES EQUIPPED INTO A DENTAL TOOL MACHINE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12556001
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR CONTROLLING A PLURALITY OF POWER GENERATORS
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12547145
HUMAN ACTION RECOGNITION AND ASSISTANCE TO AR DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Patent 12538449
ELECTRONIC APPARATUS, DYNAMIC CONTROL HEAT DISSIPATION METHOD AND DYNAMIC HEAT DISSIPATION CONTROL SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 27, 2026
Patent 12517498
ANALYSIS APPARATUS, ANALYSIS METHOD AND COMPUTER READABLE MEDIUM
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 06, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
92%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+16.7%)
3y 0m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 84 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month