DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-19 are pending.
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
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.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 8-14, and 17-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Frank et al., US Patent No. 6,832,120 (hereinafter Frank).
Regarding claims 1, 8-14, and 17-19, Frank discloses all the claimed limitations, as outlined below.
Claim 1. An industrial process control system comprising: a compute fabric having (i) a first portion operating on-premises at an industrial process plant controlled by the industrial process control system and (ii) a second portion operating remotely from the industrial process plant controlled by the industrial process control system (C4 L20-37 and Fig 1 - -wherein a compute fabric is considered as the overall network of components. Components operated on-premise and remotely via the Web/Internet/Intranet. See Fig1 below:
PNG
media_image1.png
600
796
media_image1.png
Greyscale
It can be noted that a distributed network comprises on-premises and remote components);
one or more transmitters in the process plant measuring or sensing physical parameters in the process plant; one or more physical control elements in the process plant, each physical control element responsive to a respective setpoint parameter (C8 L65-67, C9 L3-8 - - the object-oriented system 100 automates industrial facilities that include transmitters, sensors, and control elements);
a plurality of micro-encapsulated execution environments (MEEEs) instantiated in the compute fabric and each executing at least a portion of a control module that receives data from the one or more transmitters and transmits at least one setpoint parameter to each of the one or more physical control elements to cause the physical control elements to control a process in the industrial process plant (C4 L63-67 - - using Java-based objects).
Claim 8. An industrial process control system according to claim 1, further comprising a managed gateway disposed within the industrial process control plant (C8 L65-67, C9 L3-8 - - the object-oriented system 100 automates industrial facilities and include one or more gateway. In other words, entry/exit point, connecting two different networks that use separate communication protocols, translating data between them so they can communicate).
Claim 9. An industrial process control system according to claim 1, further comprising instantiating, between at least one of the one or more transmitters and a corresponding one of the plurality of MEEEs, a MEEE executing a virtual device corresponding to the respective transmitter, and wherein the virtual device receives data from the corresponding transmitter and transmits the received data to the respective one or more of the plurality of MEEEs (C4 L63-67 - - using Java-based objects).
Claim 10. An industrial process control system according to claim 1, further comprising instantiating, between at least one of the one or more physical control elements and a corresponding one of the plurality of MEEEs, a MEEE executing a virtual device corresponding to the respective physical control element, and wherein the virtual device transmits to the corresponding physical control element data received from the respective one or more of the plurality of MEEEs (C4 L63-67 - - using Java-based objects).
Claim 11. An industrial process control system according to claim 1, wherein at least one of the plurality of MEEEs is redundant to another of the plurality of MEEEs (C4 L63-67 - - using Java-based objects. Wherein the network topology allows for redundancy and backup functions in order to ensure reliable network functionality).
Claim 12. An industrial process control system according to claim 1, further comprising, instantiated in the compute fabric, a second plurality of MEEEs, each executing at least a portion of a second control module that receives data from one or more second transmitters measuring or sensing physical parameters in a second process plant, and transmits to one or more second physical control elements in the second process plant second setpoints to cause the physical control elements in the second process plant to control a second process in the second process plant (C8 L65-67, C9 L3-8 - - the object-oriented system 100 automates industrial facilities that include transmitters, sensors, and control elements).
Claim 13. An industrial process control system according to claim 12, further comprising, instantiated in the compute fabric, a third plurality of MEEEs, the third plurality of MEEEs cooperating to facilitate optimization of the first and second pluralities of MEEEs (C8 L65-67, C9 L3-8 - - the object-oriented system 100 automates industrial facilities that include transmitters, sensors, and control elements).
Claim 14. An industrial process control system according to claim 13, wherein facilitating optimization of the first and second pluralities of MEEEs comprises facilitating optimization of (i) compute fabric processor and/or memory resources, (ii) communication latency, and/or (iii) the process or second process in the process plant or second process plant (C1 L50-65).
Claim 17. A method of performing process control in an industrial process plant producing a physical product, the method comprising: instantiating in a compute fabric (C4 L20-37 and Fig 1 - -wherein a compute fabric is considered as the overall network of components. Components operated on-premise and remotely via the Web/Internet/Intranet. See Fig1 below:
PNG
media_image1.png
600
796
media_image1.png
Greyscale
It can be noted that a distributed network comprises on-premises and remote components);
a plurality of micro-encapsulated execution environments (MEEEs) (C4 L63-67 - - using Java-based objects);
each executing at least a portion of a control module that receives data from one or more transmitters measuring or sensing physical parameters in the process plant and transmits to one or more physical control elements in the process plant setpoints to cause the physical control elements to control a process in the industrial process plant (C8 L65-67, C9 L3-8 - - the object-oriented system 100 automates industrial facilities that include transmitters, sensors, and control elements).
Claim 18. A method of effecting control of a plurality of industrial processes operating in respective industrial process plants at different physical locations to produce respective physical products (C4 L20-37 and Fig 1 - -wherein a compute fabric is considered as the overall network of components. Components operated on-premise and remotely via the Web/Internet/Intranet. See Fig1 below:
PNG
media_image1.png
600
796
media_image1.png
Greyscale
It can be noted that a distributed network comprises on-premises and remote components);
the method comprising: instantiating in a compute fabric a first plurality of micro-encapsulated execution environments (MEEEs), each executing at least a portion of a first control module that receives data from one or more first transmitters measuring or sensing physical parameters in a first process plant and transmits to one or more first physical control elements in the first process plant first setpoints to cause the first physical control elements to control a first process in the first process plant (C8 L65-67, C9 L3-8 - - the java-based object-oriented system 100 automates industrial facilities that include transmitters, sensors, and control elements);
instantiating in the compute fabric a second plurality of MEEEs, each executing at least a portion of a second control module that receives data from one or more second transmitters measuring or sensing physical parameters in a second process plant and transmits to one or more second physical control elements in the second process plant second setpoints to cause the second physical control elements to control a second process in the second process plant; instantiating in the compute fabric a third plurality of MEEEs, the third plurality of MEEEs cooperating to facilitate optimization of the first and second pluralities of MEEEs (C8 L65-67, C9 L3-8 - - the object-oriented system 100 automates industrial facilities that include transmitters, sensors, and control elements).
Claim 19. A process control system comprising: a compute fabric extending to a first process plant, a second process plant remote from the first process plant, and a set of shared computing resources remote from both the first process plant and the second process plant (C4 L20-37 and Fig 1 - -wherein a compute fabric is considered as the overall network of components. Components operated on-premise and remotely via the Web/Internet/Intranet. See Fig1 below:
PNG
media_image1.png
600
796
media_image1.png
Greyscale
It can be noted that a distributed network comprises on-premises and remote components);
a first set of transmitters, disposed within the first process plant, and each operable to measure or sense a respective physical parameter in the first process plant; a second set of transmitters, disposed within the second process plant, and each operable to measure or sense a respective physical parameter in the second process plant; a first set of physical control elements, disposed in the first process plant, and each operable to receive a respective setpoint and to adjust the physical control element according to the setpoint ;a second set of physical control elements, disposed in the second process plant, and each operable to receive a respective setpoint and to adjust the physical control element according to the setpoint; a first plurality of micro-encapsulated execution environments (MEEEs), each executing at least a portion of a first control module that receives data from one or more transmitters of the first set of transmitters and/or transmits to one or more of the first set of physical control elements first setpoints (C8 L65-67, C9 L3-8 - - the java-based object-oriented system 100 automates industrial facilities that include transmitters, sensors, and control elements);
a second plurality of MEEEs, each executing at least a portion of a second control module that receives data from one or more transmitters of the second set of transmitters and/or transmits to one or more of the second set of physical control elements second setpoints; a third plurality of MEEEs, the third plurality of MEEEs cooperating to facilitate optimization of the first and second pluralities of MEEEs (C8 L65-67, C9 L3-8 - - the object-oriented system 100 automates industrial facilities that include transmitters, sensors, and control elements).
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 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.
Claims 2-7 and 15-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Frank et al., US Patent No. 6,832,120 (hereinafter Frank) in view of Curcio et al., US Patent No. 8,997,206 (hereinafter Curcio).
Regarding claim 2, Frank discloses all the limitations of the base claims as outlined above.
Frank further teaches an industrial process control system according to claim 1, wherein each of the plurality of MEEEs is communicatively coupled to at least one other of the plurality of MEEEs by a secured connection (C8 L65-67, C9 L3-8 - - the object-oriented system 100 automates industrial facilities that include transmitters, sensors, and control elements).
Frank fails to clearly specify secured point-to-point (PTP) or peer-to-peer (P2P) connection.
However, Curcio teaches secured point-to-point (PTP) or peer-to-peer (P2P) connection (see C3).
The applied prior art is considered analogous art to the claimed invention because they relate to same field of endeavor. They relate to network topologies for secure communication utilizing diverse protocols.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the above object-oriented compute fabric, as taught by Frank, and incorporating the concept of communication utilizing decentralized time-based connections, as taught by Curcio.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this modification in order to provide autonomous connections and increase the independence of the connections, as suggested by Curcio (see C3 L6-41).
Regarding claim 3, Frank discloses all the limitations of the base claims as outlined above.
Frank further teaches an industrial process control system according to claim 1, wherein each of the one or more transmitters is coupled to at least one of the plurality of MEEEs (C8 L65-67, C9 L3-8 - - the object-oriented system 100 automates industrial facilities that include transmitters, sensors, and control elements).
Frank fails to clearly specify Components coupled by a secured PTP or P2P connection.
However, Curcio teaches components coupled by a secured PTP or P2P connection (see C3).
The applied prior art is considered analogous art to the claimed invention because they relate to same field of endeavor. They relate to network topologies for secure communication utilizing diverse protocols.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the above object-oriented compute fabric, as taught by Frank, and incorporating the concept of communication utilizing decentralized time-based connections, as taught by Curcio.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this modification in order to provide autonomous connections and increase the independence of the connections, as suggested by Curcio (see C3 L6-41).
Regarding claim 4, Frank discloses all the limitations of the base claims as outlined above.
Frank further teaches an industrial process control system according to claim 1, wherein each of the one or more physical control elements is coupled to at least one of the plurality of MEEEs (C8 L65-67, C9 L3-8 - - the object-oriented system 100 automates industrial facilities that include transmitters, sensors, and control elements).
Frank fails to clearly specify components coupled by a secured PTP or P2P connection.
However, Curcio teaches components coupled by a secured PTP or P2P connection (see C3).
The applied prior art is considered analogous art to the claimed invention because they relate to same field of endeavor. They relate to network topologies for secure communication utilizing diverse protocols.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the above object-oriented compute fabric, as taught by Frank, and incorporating the concept of communication utilizing decentralized time-based connections, as taught by Curcio.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this modification in order to provide autonomous connections and increase the independence of the connections, as suggested by Curcio (see C3 L6-41).
Regarding claim 5, Frank discloses all the limitations of the base claims as outlined above.
Frank fails to clearly specify an industrial process control system according to claim 2, wherein the secured PTP or P2P connection is an encrypted connection.
However, Curcio teaches an industrial process control system according to claim 2, wherein a secured PTP or P2P connection is an encrypted connection (see C3).
The applied prior art is considered analogous art to the claimed invention because they relate to same field of endeavor. They relate to network topologies for secure communication utilizing diverse protocols.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the above object-oriented compute fabric, as taught by Frank, and incorporating the concept of communication utilizing decentralized time-based connections, as taught by Curcio.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this modification in order to provide autonomous connections and increase the independence of the connections, as suggested by Curcio (see C3 L6-41).
Regarding claim 6, Frank discloses all the limitations of the base claims as outlined above.
Frank fails to clearly specify an industrial process control system according to claim 2, wherein the secured PTP or P2P connection includes a virtual private network (VPN) and/or a virtual network (VNet).
However, Curcio teaches wherein a secured PTP or P2P connection includes a virtual private network (VPN) and/or a virtual network (VNet) (see C3).
The applied prior art is considered analogous art to the claimed invention because they relate to same field of endeavor. They relate to network topologies for secure communication utilizing diverse protocols.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the above object-oriented compute fabric, as taught by Frank, and incorporating the concept of communication utilizing decentralized time-based connections, as taught by Curcio.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this modification in order to provide autonomous connections and increase the independence of the connections, as suggested by Curcio (see C3 L6-41).
Regarding claims 7, Frank discloses all the limitations of the base claims as outlined above.
Frank further teaches an industrial process control system according to claim 2, wherein: each MEEE, each transmitter, and each physical control element comprises an endpoint, and each pair of communicatively coupled endpoints is communicatively coupled by a respective secured connection (C8 L65-67, C9 L3-8 - - the object-oriented system 100 automates industrial facilities that include transmitters, sensors, and control elements).
Frank fails to clearly specify an endpoint of at least one secured PTP or P2P connection; wherein the secured connection is a secured PTP or P2P connection.
However, Curcio teaches an endpoint of at least one secured PTP or P2P connection; wherein the secured connection is a secured PTP or P2P connection (see C3).
The applied prior art is considered analogous art to the claimed invention because they relate to same field of endeavor. They relate to network topologies for secure communication utilizing diverse protocols.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the above object-oriented compute fabric, as taught by Frank, and incorporating the concept of communication utilizing decentralized time-based connections, as taught by Curcio.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this modification in order to provide autonomous connections and increase the independence of the connections, as suggested by Curcio (see C3 L6-41).
Regarding claim 15, Frank discloses all the limitations of the base claims as outlined above.
Frank further teaches an industrial process control system according to claim 1, further comprising a control module operating on the compute fabric, the operator interface operable to control the process plant (Fig 1).
Frank fails to clearly specify an operator interface API facilitating communication, over a secure PTP or P2P connection, between an operator interface and the control module.
However, Curcio teaches an operator interface API facilitating communication, over a secure PTP or P2P connection, between an operator interface and the control module (see C3).
The applied prior art is considered analogous art to the claimed invention because they relate to same field of endeavor. They relate to network topologies for secure communication utilizing diverse protocols.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the above object-oriented compute fabric, as taught by Frank, and incorporating the concept of communication utilizing decentralized time-based connections, as taught by Curcio.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this modification in order to provide autonomous connections and increase the independence of the connections, as suggested by Curcio (see C3 L6-41).
Regarding claim 16, Frank discloses all the limitations of the base claims as outlined above.
Frank further teaches an industrial process control system according to claim 1, further comprising a management interface API facilitating communication between a management interface and the compute fabric, the management interface operable to monitor the performance of the compute fabric and/or the performance of the process control system (C4 L20-37 and Fig 1 - -wherein a compute fabric is considered as the overall network of components. Components operated on-premise and remotely via the Web/Internet/Intranet).
Frank fails to clearly specify communication over a secure PTP or P2P connection.
However, Curcio teaches communication over a secure PTP or P2P connection (see C3).
The applied prior art is considered analogous art to the claimed invention because they relate to same field of endeavor. They relate to network topologies for secure communication utilizing diverse protocols.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the above object-oriented compute fabric, as taught by Frank, and incorporating the concept of communication utilizing decentralized time-based connections, as taught by Curcio.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this modification in order to provide autonomous connections and increase the independence of the connections, as suggested by Curcio (see C3 L6-41).
Citation of Pertinent Prior Art
The following prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
U.S. Patent No. 6449715 – relates to process control configurations.
Lumpp, Thomas, Gerhard Gruhler, and W. Kuchlin. "Virtual Java devices. Integration of fieldbus based systems in the Internet." IECON'98. Proceedings of the 24th Annual Conference of the IEEE Industrial Electronics Society (Cat. No. 98CH36200). Vol. 1. IEEE, 1998 - relates to encapsulated functions in an industrial environment.
Buhler, D., et al. "The Java Fieldbus Control Framework-object oriented control of fieldbus devices." Fourth IEEE International Symposium on Object-Oriented Real-Time Distributed Computing. ISORC 2001. IEEE, 2001 – relates to encapsulated functions in an industrial environment.
Thomesse, J-P. "Fieldbus technology in industrial automation." Proceedings of the IEEE 93.6 (2005): 1073-1101 – relates to encapsulated functions in an industrial environment.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CARLOS R ORTIZ RODRIGUEZ whose telephone number is (571)272-3766. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Fri 10:00 am- 6:30 pm.
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, 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 the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/CARLOS R ORTIZ RODRIGUEZ/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2119