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 § 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.
Claims 1, 2, 4-11 and 13-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Copass et al., US Patent Application Publication no. 2012/0079461 [Copass], in view of Chillar et al., US Patent Application Publication no. 2023/0266733 [Chillar].
Regarding claims 1, 10 and 19, Copass discloses a system for monitoring and controlling industrial assets, the system comprising one or more memory devices configured to store instructions, that, when executed by the one or more processors [processing unit and system memory, Figure 13 and paragraphs 0076], cause the one or more processors to:
receive data describing an asset from one or more data sources [device specific data of a device to be modeled is obtained, paragraphs 0061, 0062 0070];
generate an asset data model based on the received data [a node that includes at least one module that includes at least one data object, translator or connection is instantiated by a node creator based on the device specific information, paragraphs 0063 and 0070];
receive an extensible data model describing an organizational structure of an enterprise associated with the asset [implementing an extensible framework that includes node structures that represent modeled devices in an industrial system, paragraphs 0029, 0030, 0034, 0041 and 0045];
extend the extensible data model to include the asset data model [new devices are added to the extensible framework by extending mapping descriptions, paragraph 0059];
execute the extensible data model including the asset data model to determine one or more key performance indicators for the asset [logical representations of devices in the extensible framework are used to interact with devices to access real data associated with the devices, paragraphs 0054 and 0067];
Copass discloses a control system that uses an extensible framework that models an industrial system to facilitate communication with system assets. Copass does not disclose that the control system predicts future faults of assets and provides notifications to personnel to take corrective actions to mitigate the predicted faults. Like Copass, Chillar discloses a control system that uses an extensible model to facilitate monitoring and controlling of assets in an industrial system. Chillar further discloses that the control system performs operations to predict a future fault for the asset based on the one or more key performance indicators [analyzing telemetry data to produce scores or metric values, such as key performance indicators, that are used to generate or identify one or more maintenance or repair actions, paragraphs 0044-0045 and 0087], send an informed and prioritized notification to plant personnel regarding the predicted fault [alarms or warnings when an assert is not operating as expected or when maintenance is required, paragraph 0028 and 0044], and take a corrective action to mitigate the predicted fault [user may schedule or perform one or more recommended maintenance or repair actions, paragraph 0044]. Since it was known in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for industrial control systems to predict future faults of assets and provide notifications to personnel to take corrective actions to mitigate the predicted faults, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to apply the Chillar teachings to the Copass industrial control system in order to reduce employee health or safety risks by helping to ensure that assets are properly maintained [Chillar, paragraph 0021].
Regarding claims 2 and 11, Chillar further discloses that the asset data model comprises at least one of a ball mill model, a pump model, a stacker reclaimer model, a conveyor model, or a crusher model [assets may include pumps, paragraph 0023].
Regarding claims 4, 13 and 20, Chillar further discloses that determining the one or more key performance indicators comprises:
determining, by the processing circuit, a target variable for the asset based on downtime historian data [determining a software package for monitoring specific telemetry data that has resulted in a problem, paragraph 0045];
determining, by the processing circuit, a first set of key performance indicators describing a current performance of the asset based on the target variable [variance of expected and actual telemetry data (e.g. vibrations or birational frequency of a fan belt in an asset), paragraph 0045];
determining, by the processing circuit, a second set of key performance indicators describing a predicted performance of the asset based on the first set of key performance indicators [determining whether the variance corresponds to wear and tear or for potential failure, paragraph 0045]; and
determining, by the processing circuit, a third set of key performance indicators based on the second set of key performance indicators [determine whether to send out a warning or maintenance action to change a particular screw or change a belt, paragraph 0045].
Regarding claims 5 and 14, Chillar further discloses that the first set of key performance indicators is at least one of a current risk score, a sensor fault, and a data availability confidence score [variance of expected and actual telemetry data (e.g. vibrations or birational frequency of a fan belt in an asset), paragraph 0045].
Regarding claims 6 and 15, Chillar further discloses that the second set of key performance indicators is at least one of future risk score and a future failure indicator [determining whether the variance corresponds to wear and tear or for potential failure, paragraph 0045].
Regarding claims 7 and 16, Chillar further discloses that the third set of key performance indicators is at least one of an advisory and a remaining useful life [determine whether to send out a warning or maintenance action to change a particular screw or change a belt, paragraph 0045].
Regarding claims 8 and 17, Copass and Chillar further disclose recommending to a user a maintenance or repair action to schedule if there is a potential failure of an asset [paragraphs 0044-0045]. Copass and Chillar do not disclose maintenance or repair action is automatically scheduled. Examiner takes official notice that industrial control systems before the effective filing date of the claimed invention conventionally included functionality for automatically scheduling maintenance or repairs for assets with remaining lives less than a threshold amount. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to automatically schedule maintenance or repairs for assets in Copass and Chillar that are determined to potentially fail before a threshold amount of time in order to prevent situations in which the maintenance or repairs are not scheduled due to human error.
Regarding claims 9 and 18, Chillar further discloses that the corrective action comprises automatically updating at least one of the software or hardware controlling the asset [user may schedule or perform one or more recommended maintenance or repair actions, paragraphs 0044-0045].
Claims 3 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Copass et al., US Patent Application Publication no. 2012/0079461 [Copass] and Chillar et al., US Patent Application Publication no. 2023/0266733 [Chillar], in view of McCormick et al., US Patent no. 11,906,950 [McCormick]1.
Regarding claims 3 and 12, Copass and Chillar do not disclose the asset data model is a graph data structure comprising a plurality of nodes representing entities associated with the asset and a plurality of edges connecting the plurality of nodes and describing relationships between the plurality of nodes. Like Copass and Chillar, McCormick discloses an industrial control system that uses asset data models to facilitate monitoring and control of assets in the system. Specifically, McCormick disclose that the asset data models are graph data structures that include a plurality of nodes representing entities associated with the asset and a plurality of edges connecting the plurality of nodes and describing relationships between the plurality of nodes [each asset data model may contain a directed graph that includes nodes that reference asset artifacts and edges that represent relationships between the artifacts, column 4, lines 58-65]. Since it was known in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for industrial control systems that employ asset data models to implement the models as directed graphs that include nodes that reference asset artifacts and edges that represent relationships between the artifacts, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to model system assets in Copass and Chillar industrial control system using known directed graphs that include nodes that reference asset artifacts and edges that represent relationships between the artifacts.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Sikora et al., US Patent Application Publication no. 2022/0260271 discloses monitoring assets in a system using asset behavior models.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PAUL B YANCHUS III whose telephone number is (571)272-3678. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9am-5pm.
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.
/PAUL B YANCHUS III/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2115 January 8, 2026
1 McCormick was cited in the 12/30/25 IDS.