DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1, 11 and 19 have been amended.
Claims 1 – 20 have been examined and are pending.
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.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1, 3 – 4, 6, 8 – 11, 13 – 14, 16 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Patent Application Publication No. 2022/0019184 to Kan and in view of US Patent Application Publication No. 2021/0373516 to Shivamurthy et al. (hereinafter Shivamurthy).
Regarding Claim 1, Kan discloses (¶8) an integrated intelligent building management system for elevating the configuration procedure of the building to the cloud layer, which further includes:
system comprising: one or more processors of a cloud computing system (Kan discloses (¶Fig. 1) ground data processor 22 of the intelligent building system 2), the one or more processors configured to:
receive a request to configure a target building device (Kan discloses (¶40) intelligent building system 2 or “target building device” sends out the request of importing configuration file to the cloud management system 1 or “cloud computing system”. Upon receiving the request, the cloud management system 1 authenticates the received MAC address and establish an exclusive cloud configuration file F1 for a specific intelligent building system 2 (¶50), and the cloud management system 1 makes the ground configuration platform 21 directly download and import the cloud configuration file F1)
identify based on the target building device (Kan discloses (¶38, ¶40) identifying and authenticating using media access control addresses (MAC addresses) of intelligent building systems 2) a connector template for the target building device the connector template comprising one or more parameters for a connector component configured to execute on the target building device to cause the target building device to communicate with the cloud computing system (Kan discloses (¶46) collecting and compiling equipment parameters, analyzed data and upload for use to the cloud management system. Kan discloses (Figs. 2-3, ¶49-¶50) the use of the connector templates (i.e. Equipment Template Infobase 114 and Building Information Model Database 115) on the cloud management system to provide the cloud configuration file F1 for a specific intelligent building system 2. Kan discloses (¶39) once activated, the intelligent building system 2 establishes connectivity with cloud computing system and performs the configuration procedure of the ground)
Kan does not explicitly disclose to generate the connector component to be deployed to and executed on the target building device based on the one or more parameters, deploy the connector component to the target building device, wherein the connector component executing on the target building device causes data to be communicated between the target building device and the cloud computing system via the connector component. However, in an analogous art, Shivamurthy teaches:
generate the connector component to be deployed to and executed on the target building device based on the one or more parameters (Shivamurthy teaches (¶30) remote or cloud-based server 14 is configured to use the translated metadata to, for example, generate a cloud-based model of the building management system, including intelligent gateway 22 (i.e. connector component) executing on building site 12 (i.e. target building device) to connect and discover the devices on the local network 20, and it functions as an intermediary between the local controllers 18 and the cloud-based server 14, and configured to provide the collected operational data to the cloud-based server 14. Shivamurthy teaches (¶33) intelligent gateway 22 receive configuration information from the remote server, wherein the configuration information is based or derived from at least in part on the translated metadata (i.e. the one or more parameters) communicated to the remote server. The configuration information received by the intelligent gateway include operational instructions to generate the configurations and deploy the intelligent gateway and/or one or more components of the building management system)
deploy the connector component to the target building device, wherein the connector component executing on the target building device causes data to be communicated between the target building device and the cloud computing system via the connector component (Shivamurthy teaches (¶22) the intelligent gateway 22 is deployed to interrogate or identify any devices, to receive local configurations information from the cloud-based server, and to collect operational data regarding operation of the building system components and to provide the collected operational data to cloud-based server via Cloud Connector 40. It functions as an intermediary between the local controllers 18 and the cloud-based server 14)
It would have been obvious as of the effective filing date to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine system comprising: one or more processors of a cloud computing system, the one or more processors configured to: receive a request to configure a target building device, identify based on the target building device a connector template for the target building device the connector template comprising one or more parameters for a connector component configured to execute on the target building device to cause the target building device to communicate with the cloud computing system, as disclosed by Kan, and generate the connector component to be deployed to and executed on the target building device based on the one or more parameters, deploy the connector component to the target building device, wherein the connector component executing on the target building device causes data to be communicated between the target building device and the cloud computing system via the connector component, as taught by Shivamurthy, for the purpose of implementing (¶1) cloud-based building management systems.
Claim 3, Kan in view of Shivamurthy disclose all the elements of claim 1. Further, they disclose:
wherein the one or more processors are further configured to: present one or more graphical user interfaces that present one or more interactive elements corresponding to the one or more parameters and receive, from a user device, the one or more parameters via the one or more interactive elements (Kan discloses ¶66 manager operates the cloud management system 1 through the graphical user interface (GUI) to establish the cloud configuration file F1, or operates the intelligent building system 2 to arrange one or multiple equipment 4 to each building.)
The motivation to combine the references is similar to the reasons in Claim 1.
Claim 4, Kan in view of Shivamurthy disclose all the elements of claim 1. Further, they disclose:
wherein the one or more parameters comprise one or more of a communication direction, one or more server fields, one or more sensor fields, and one or more default values (Kan discloses (¶62, ¶64 and ¶65 and Figs. 4D and 5) the project management module 111 displays an equipment list on the project establishment page 1110 which defines the parameters such brands, models, the specifications, the property, the control command, the communication interface and the data transmitting information.)
The motivation to combine the references is similar to the reasons in Claim 1.
Claim 6, Kan in view of Shivamurthy disclose all the elements of claim 1. Further, they disclose:
wherein the one or more processors are further configured to: receive, from a user device, a request to access data of the target building device and retrieve the data from the target building device using the connector component (Shivamurthy teaches ¶24 the Admin Portal 30 allows a user to gain access to the intelligent gateway 22 such that the user can solicit collection of metadata from individual components of the building management system 28.)
The motivation to combine the references is similar to the reasons in Claim 1.
Claim 10, Kan in view of Shivamurthy disclose all the elements of claim 9. Further, they disclose:
wherein the one or more processors are configured to generate the optimized component further based on processing components of the target building device (Kan teaches (¶8) multiple platforms, systems, equipment, etc., required by the ground are configured priorly on the cloud to save and optimize the configuration procedures that need to be executed on the ground by the manager, and facilitate the repeating usage of required data during practical implementation for the manager.
The motivation to combine the references is similar to the reasons in Claim 9.
Claim 11, do not teach or further define over the limitations in claim 1. Therefore, claim 11 is rejected for the same rationale of rejection as set forth in claim 1.
Claim 13, do not teach or further define over the limitations in claim 3. Therefore, claim 13 is rejected for the same rationale of rejection as set forth in claim 3.
Claim 14, do not teach or further define over the limitations in claim 4. Therefore, claim 14 is rejected for the same rationale of rejection as set forth in claim 4.
Claim 16, do not teach or further define over the limitations in claim 6. Therefore, claim 16 is rejected for the same rationale of rejection as set forth in claim 6.
Claim 19, do not teach or further define over the limitations in claim 1. Therefore, claim 19 is rejected for the same rationale of rejection as set forth in claim 1.
Claim 20, do not teach or further define over the limitations in claim 2. Therefore, claim 20 is rejected for the same rationale of rejection as set forth in claim 2.
Claims 2, 12 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Patent Application Publication No. 2022/0019184 to Kan, in view of US Patent Application Publication No. 2021/0373516 to Shivamurthy and further in view of US Patent Application Publication No. 2011/0071685 to Huneycutt et al. (hereinafter Huneycutt).
Claim 2, Kan in view of Shivamurthy disclose all the elements of claim 1. Kan in view of Shivamurthy does not explicitly disclose wherein the one or more processors are further configured to generate the connector template in response to the request. However, in an analogous art, Huneycutt teaches:
wherein the one or more processors are further configured to generate the connector template in response to the request (Huneycutt teaches (¶31-35) user interface module 144 is configured to prompt a user (e.g., visually, graphically, audibly, etc.) for input request regarding building objects. Huneycutt teaches (¶34) defining a building object template, and (¶35) creating an instance of a building object based on the template.)
It would have been obvious as of the effective filing date to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine system comprising: one or more processors of a cloud computing system, the one or more processors configured to: receive a request to configure a target building device, identify based on the target building device a connector template for the target building device the connector template comprising one or more parameters for a connector component and configured to execute on the target building device to cause the target building device to communicate with the cloud computing system, generate the connector component to be deployed to and executed on the target building device based on the one or more parameters, deploy the connector component to the target building device, wherein the connector component executing on the target building device causes data to be communicated between the target building device and the cloud computing system via the connector component, as disclosed by Kan in view of Shivamurthy, and wherein the one or more processors are further configured to generate the connector template in response to the request the connector component, as taught by Huneycutt, for the purpose of providing (¶5) providing a software defined building object to applications of a building management system.
Claim 12, do not teach or further define over the limitations in claim 2. Therefore, claim 12 is rejected for the same rationale of rejection as set forth in claim 2.
Claim 20, do not teach or further define over the limitations in claim 2. Therefore, claim 20 is rejected for the same rationale of rejection as set forth in claim 2.
Claims 5, 8 – 9, 15 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Patent Application Publication No. 2022/0019184 to Kan in view of US Patent Application Publication No. 2021/0373516 to Shivamurthy and further in view of US Patent Application Publication No. 2017/0284691 to Sinha et al. (hereinafter Sinha).
Claim 5, Kan in view of Shivamurthy disclose all the elements of claim 1. Kan in view of Shivamurthy does not explicitly disclose wherein the connector component comprises a representational state transfer (REST) application programming interface (API). However, in an analogous art, Sinha teaches:
wherein the connector component comprises a representational state transfer (REST) application programming interface (API) (Sinha discloses ¶50 using various Internet-based protocols (e.g., CoAP, XMPP, AMQP, MQTT, etc.) and web-based common data exchange (e.g., HTTP RESTful APIs) to translate communications from a building automation system protocol to an Internet protocol.)
It would have been obvious as of the effective filing date to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine system comprising: one or more processors of a cloud computing system, the one or more processors configured to: receive a request to configure a target building device, identify based on the target building device a connector template for the target building device the connector template comprising one or more parameters for a connector component and configured to execute on the target building device to cause the target building device to communicate with the cloud computing system, generate the connector component to be deployed to and executed on the target building device based on the one or more parameters, deploy the connector component to the target building device, wherein the connector component executing on the target building device causes data to be communicated between the target building device and the cloud computing system via the connector component, as disclosed by Kan in view of Shivamurthy, and wherein the connector component comprises a representational state transfer (REST) application programming interface (API), as taught by Sinha, for the purpose of implementing (¶23) distributed building management system.
Claim 8, Kan in view of Shivamurthy disclose all the elements of claim 1. Kan in view of Shivamurthy does not explicitly disclose wherein the one or more processors are further configured to: receive, from a user device, a second request to update the target building device, and transmit, to the target building device, one or more of application data or an update image to update the target building device according the second request. However, in an analogous art, Sinha teaches:
wherein the one or more processors (Sinha discloses Fig. 18, the processors 1808) are further configured to: receive, from a user device, a second request to update the target building device (Sinha discloses ¶58 MSPR platform 402 creating a continuous feedback loop for the customers to use smart connected HVAC equipment 408, to inform design, engineering and manufacturing decisions and to receive data (¶127) through a user interface (UI) to make the equipment better)
and transmit, to the target building device, one or more of application data or an update image to update the target building device according the second request (Sinha discloses (¶58 and ¶127) MSPR platform uses the User Interface (UI) for software updates to smart connected HVAC equipment, to add features and to improve the performance of the equipment without any physical intervention)
The motivation to combine the references is similar to the reasons in Claim 5.
Claim 9, Kan in view of Shivamurthy disclose all the elements of claim 1. Kan in view of Shivamurthy does not explicitly disclose wherein the one or more processors are further configured to: identify a machine-learning model to be deployed to the target building device, select a runtime for the machine-learning model, and generate an optimized component for the target building device based on the runtime and the machine-learning model. However, in an analogous art, Sinha teaches:
wherein the one or more processors (Sinha discloses Fig. 18, the processors 1808) are further configured to: identify a machine-learning model to be deployed to the target building device, select a runtime for the machine-learning model, and generate an optimized component for the target building device based on the runtime and the machine-learning model (Sinha discloses (¶60, ¶107) machine learning provided by MSPR platform use information provided by smart connected HVAC equipment to develop a comprehensive view of controls in the building environment. The data analytics may further include real-time data analytics and machine learning to detect, classify, and/or predict future outcomes.)
The motivation to combine the references is similar to the reasons in Claim 5.
Claim 15, do not teach or further define over the limitations in claim 5. Therefore, claim 15 is rejected for the same rationale of rejection as set forth in claim 5.
Claim 18, do not teach or further define over the limitations in claim 8. Therefore, claim 18 is rejected for the same rationale of rejection as set forth in claim 8.
Claims 7 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Patent Application Publication No. 2022/0019184 to Kan in view of US Patent Application Publication No. 2021/0373516 to Shivamurthy in view of US Patent Application Publication No. 2017/0284691 to Sinha and in view of US Patent Application Publication No. 2016/0117184 to Sundaresan et al. (hereinafter Sundaresan).
Claim 7, Kan in view of Shivamurthy disclose all the elements of claim 1. Kan in view of Shivamurthy does not explicitly disclose wherein the one or more processors are further configured to: store the connector template. However, in an analogous art, Sinha teaches:
wherein the one or more processors (Sinha discloses Fig. 18, the processors 1808) are further configured to: store the connector template (Sinha discloses ¶154 preexisting stored templates)
The motivation to combine the references is similar to the reasons in Claim 5.
Kan in view of Shivamurthy in view of Sinha does not explicitly disclose receiving a request to generate a second connector component for a second target building device and generate the second connector component for the second target building device using the connector template. However, in an analogous art, Sundaresan teaches:
receive a request to generate a second connector component for a second target building device (Sundaresan teaches ¶Fig. 4A:410 creating a first virtual device, and ¶Fig. 4A:430 creating a second virtual device. Sundaresan teaches ¶67 use of multiple layers or levels of virtual devices enables services and applications to indirectly interface with the physical devices using a common application programming interface (API), even though the physical devices may be different devices from different manufacturers and with different physical attributes)
and generate the second connector component for the second target building device using the connector template (Sundaresan teaches ¶73 processing logic creating a second level virtual device associated with the physical device from device templates. These device templates may include the same, different and/or additional data to the device attributes included in first level device templates.)
It would have been obvious as of the effective filing date to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the one or more processors are further configured to: store the connector template, as disclosed by Sinha, and receiving a request to generate a second connector component for a second target building device and generate the second connector component for the second target building device using the connector template, as taught by Sundaresan, for the purpose of implementing (¶13) a network-connected device platform having an agile templating framework that provides flexible generation and modification of virtual devices that can be used to facilitate the functionality of physical devices.
Claim 17, do not teach or further define over the limitations in claim 7. Therefore, claim 17 is rejected for the same rationale of rejection as set forth in claim 7.
Response to Arguments
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Applicant’s arguments and amendments, filed on 04/03/2026 with respect to the Claims 1 – 20 have been fully considered and they are persuasive. Hence, the 35 USC § 103 rejection is withdrawn. However, based on the claim amendments and the newly introduced limitations, the search is updated and new references, US Patent Application Publication No. 2022/0019184 (Kan), US Patent Application Publication No. 2021/0373516 (Shivamurthy et al.) and US Patent Application Publication No. 2011/0071685 (Huneycutt et al.) have been introduced for the 35 USC § 103 rejection.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HASSAN ABDUR-RAHMAN KHAN whose telephone number is (313)446-6574. The examiner can normally be reached TEAPP - (M-Sa) 9/30/17-9/30/18, 6am-10pm IFP.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Christopher Parry can be reached at (571) 272-8328. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
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.
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.
/H. A. K./
Examiner, Art Unit 2451
/Chris Parry/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2451
Prosecution Insights