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 .
This action is in response to the applicant’s communication filed on 6/22/2026
Claims 1-20 are pending
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 3-5, 7-8, 11-13, 15-16, and 18-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Agarwal et al. USPGPUB 2019/0042819 A1 (hereinafter Agarwal) in view of Bernsen et al. USPGPUB 2025/0068867 A1 (hereinafter Bernsen).
Regarding claim 1, Agarwal teaches a data transfer system for transferring data from one or more instruments to one or more applications (Fig. 6, Par. [0022], “a dynamic QR code 14 can be associated with a field device 12 in a dynamic display arrangement”); Par. [0024], “2D code can be used to encode virtually all required design and functional characteristics of a field device/panel, a mobile device, and so on. The data may be read and consumed directly into the application offline. It does not necessarily require any other machine or server to fetch the data; Par. [0037], “a dynamic QR code can be used to access live process value and other device data on a mobile device 62 or 92 as facilitated by such an app, which enables seamless access to device documentation/help data (e.g., URLs, etc.) on the mobile device.”), the data transfer system comprising a data transfer computing device comprising at least one processor in communication with at least one memory device (Par. [0049] “data-processing system/apparatus 400 that can include, for example, one or more processors such as a processor 341 (e.g., a CPU (Central Processing Unit) and/or other microprocessors), a memory 342 …”), wherein the at least one processor is programmed to:
receive an action of obtaining an optical code corresponding to an application among one or more applications (Par. [0034] “An operator such as the user 46 can scan the dynamic QR 44 with his or her mobile device 48 to obtain data from the multiple devices 52, 54, 56, etc., connected on the line.”; Par. [0038] “a dynamic QR code can be used to access live process value and other device data on a mobile device 62 or 92 as facilitated by such an app, which enables seamless access to device documentation/help data (e.g., URLs, etc.) on the mobile device.” - QR code is interpreted as an optical code);
retrieve, from one or more instruments, data requested by the application, wherein the data include data of the one or more instruments at an instant of the action (Par. [0033] “System 40 includes a central system 50 (e.g., SCADA system) that communicates with a the remote meter 42, which in turn communicates with one or more field devices 52, 54, and 56”; Par. [0034] “The remote meter 44 can be configured to log/read data from multiple field devices 52, 54, 56, etc., on a multi-drop line.”; Fig. 6, Par. [0039] “appropriate or necessary data can be retrieved, as shown at block 212”; Par. [0038] “dynamic QR code can be used to access live process value and other device data.” – The ability to obtain live process values implies data is updated at an instant of the action); and
encode the data into the optical code (Par. [0024] “2D code can be used to encode virtually all required design and functional characteristics of a field device/panel, a mobile device, and so on”; Par. [0062] “QR code can be dynamically generated and displayed via the dynamic display in response to a user input”),
wherein the two or more applications are disconnected from the one or more instruments (Par. [0024] “The data may be read and consumed directly into the application offline. It does not necessarily require any other machine or server to fetch the data” – as the applications are not connected with the application via physical connections or wireless communication except for a unidirectional transfer via optical code, the application is interpreted as disconnected from the one or more instruments).
Agarwal does not explicitly teach the first and second application-specific optical code structure, including receive a first action of obtaining a first optical code corresponding to a first application among the two or more applications;
retrieve first data requested by the first application and encoding the first data into the first optical code;
receive a second action of obtaining a second optical code corresponding to a second application among the two or more applications;
retrieve second data requested by the second application; and
encode the second data into the second optical code,
wherein the first application is different from the second application, and
wherein the first data is different from the second data.
However, Bernsen teaches the first and second application-specific optical code structure, including receive a first action of obtaining a first optical code corresponding to a first application among the two or more applications (Par. [0004], “A product can contain several QR codes for several different applications … Such a product may need a first QR code to get connected to the Wi-Fi network by means of a first commissioning protocol”; Par. [0152], “The camera 1020 of the QR code reader 1015 is used to scan and read the first QR code 1010”);
retrieve first data requested by the first application (Par. [0023], “selecting an application of the plurality of applications as a first commissioning application from the first QR code, retrieving commissioning data related to the selected first commissioning application”; Par. [0057], “A data container can contain the application data of an application”) and encoding the first data into the first optical code (Par. [0008], “collecting the information of the plurality of applications, and encoding the information into encoded data, the encoded data including at least a header and a respective data container per application.”; Par. [0055], “a first QR code, affixed to an object, a product, or a device, is used to store encoded data for a plurality of applications”);
receive a second action of obtaining a second optical code corresponding to a second application among the two or more applications (Par. [0004], “A product can contain several QR codes for several different applications … a second QR code other than the first QR code to enroll by means of a second commissioning protocol in another network”; Par. [0084], “the encoded data can be then stored in a plurality of different QR codes, e.g., the first QR code and a second QR Code”);
retrieve second data requested by the second application (Par. [0023], “selecting another application of the plurality of applications as a second commissioning application from the first QR code, retrieving commissioning data related to the second commissioning application”; Par. [0069], “for each of the N respective applications, application data Di (i.e., the characters in Di) of the respective application OAi are collected.”); and
encode the second data into the second optical code (Par. [0084], “the encoded data can be then stored in a plurality of different QR codes, e.g., the first QR code and a second QR Code”),
wherein the first application is different from the second application (Par. [0004], “A product can contain several QR codes for several different applications … a first QR code to get connected to the Wi-Fi network by means of a first commissioning protocol … and a second QR code other than the first QR code to enroll by means of a second commissioning protocol”), and
wherein the first data is different from the second data (Par. [0074], “D1 and D2 respectively refer to the application data of OA1 and OA2 … a QR code reader only needs to read D1+PB1 if it is interested in the application OA1 or D2+PB2 if it is interested in the application OA2”; Par. [0068], “one application requires very little data storage, and another application much more” – Since Bernsen separately defines D1 as the application data for OA1 and D2 as the application data for OA2, selectively reads D1 or D2 depending on the application of interest, and teaches different storage needs for different applications, Bernsen teaches or suggests that the first data is different from the second data.).
Agarwal and Bernsen are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor and contain functional similarities. They both relate to using QR codes/optical codes to encode and transfer data to a reader or application.
Therefore, at the time of effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the above field device monitoring system, as taught by Agarwal, and incorporate multiple application-specific QR codes and/or application-specific data containers, as taught by Bernsen.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to support multiple applications using QR codes while allowing the respective information for each application to be retrieved individually in a reliable and time-efficient manner, as suggested by Bernsen (Par. [0006]).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Agarwal and Bernsen teaches all the limitations of the base claims as outlined above.
Agarwal further teaches wherein the at least one processor is configured to retrieve the first data and/or the second data from the one or more instruments by:
communicating with the one or more instruments using a supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA) protocol (Par. [0033] “System 40 includes a central system 50 (e.g., SCADA system) that communicates with a the remote meter 42, which in turn communicates with one or more field devices 52, 54, and 56”; Par. [0034], “The remote meter 44 can be configured to log/read data from multiple field devices 52, 54, 56, etc., on a multi-drop line.”).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Agarwal and Bernsen teaches all the limitations of the base claims as outlined above.
Agarwal further teaches wherein the data transfer computing device is remote from the one or more instruments and in a communication network of the one or more instruments (Par. [0033] “System 40 includes a central system 50 (e.g., SCADA system) that communicates with a the remote meter 42, which in turn communicates with one or more field devices 52, 54, and 56”; Par. [0027] “the QR code discussed herein can be used to identify the device/equipment and obtain the device information from a hosted environment such as SCADA/HMI/Cloud where this information is available.”).
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Agarwal and Bernsen teaches all the limitations of the base claims as outlined above.
Agarwal further teaches wherein:
the first optical code comprises a first two-dimensional (2D) visual code (Par. [0008] “QR code”), and the at least one processor is further programmed to:
receive the first action of obtaining the first 2D visual code (Par. [0034] “An operator such as the user 46 can scan the dynamic QR 44 with his or her mobile device 48 to obtain data from the multiple devices 52, 54, 56, etc., connected on the line.”); and
encode the first data into the first 2D visual code (Par. [0024], “multi-dimensional code may be a 2D (two-dimensional) barcode that is a graphical image that stores information both horizontally, as one-dimensional bar codes do, and vertically. One feature may be how the 2D code can be used to encode virtually all required design and functional characteristics of a field device/panel, a mobile device, and so on”);
the second optical code comprises a second 2D visual code (Par. [0008] “QR code”; Par. [0024], “multi-dimensional code may be a 2D (two-dimensional) barcode that is a graphical image that stores information both horizontally, as one-dimensional bar codes do, and vertically.”), and the at least one processor is further programmed to:
receive the second action of obtaining the second 2D visual code (Par. [0034], “An operator such as the user 46 can scan the dynamic QR 44 with his or her mobile device 48 to obtain data from the multiple devices 52, 54, 56, etc., connected on the line.”); and
encode the second data into the second 2D visual code (Par. [0024], “the 2D code can be used to encode virtually all required design and functional characteristics of a field device/panel, a mobile device, and so on”).
Regarding claim 7, Agarwal teaches a computer-implemented method (Par. [0040] “embodiments may in some cases take the form of a computer program product on a computer-usable storage medium having computer-usable program code embodied in the medium.”) for transferring data from one or more instruments to one or more applications (Fig. 6, Par. [0022] “a dynamic QR code 14 can be associated with a field device 12 in a dynamic display arrangement”); Par. [0024] “2D code can be used to encode virtually all required design and functional characteristics of a field device/panel, a mobile device, and so on. The data may be read and consumed directly into the application offline. It does not necessarily require any other machine or server to fetch the data; Par. [0037] “a dynamic QR code can be used to access live process value and other device data on a mobile device 62 or 92 as facilitated by such an app, which enables seamless access to device documentation/help data (e.g., URLs, etc.) on the mobile device.”), the method comprising:
receiving an action of obtaining an optical code corresponding to an application among one or more applications (Par. [0034] “An operator such as the user 46 can scan the dynamic QR 44 with his or her mobile device 48 to obtain data from the multiple devices 52, 54, 56, etc., connected on the line.”; Par. [0038] “a dynamic QR code can be used to access live process value and other device data on a mobile device 62 or 92 as facilitated by such an app, which enables seamless access to device documentation/help data (e.g., URLs, etc.) on the mobile device.” - QR code is interpreted as an optical code);
retrieving data from the one or more instruments, wherein the data include data of the one or more instruments at an instant of the action (Par. [0033] “System 40 includes a central system 50 (e.g., SCADA system) that communicates with a the remote meter 42, which in turn communicates with one or more field devices 52, 54, and 56”; Par. [0034] “The remote meter 44 can be configured to log/read data from multiple field devices 52, 54, 56, etc., on a multi-drop line.”; Fig. 6, Par. [0039] “appropriate or necessary data can be retrieved, as shown at block 212”; Par. [0038] “dynamic QR code can be used to access live process value and other device data.” – The ability to obtain live process values implies data is updated at an instant of the action); and
encoding the data into the optical code (Par. [0024] “2D code can be used to encode virtually all required design and functional characteristics of a field device/panel, a mobile device, and so on”; Par. [0062] “QR code can be dynamically generated and displayed via the dynamic display in response to a user input”),
wherein the two or more applications are disconnected from the two or more instruments (Par. [0024] “The data may be read and consumed directly into the application offline. It does not necessarily require any other machine or server to fetch the data” – as the applications are not connected with the application via physical connections or wireless communication except for a unidirectional transfer via optical code, the application is interpreted as disconnected from the one or more instruments).
Agarwal does not explicitly teach the first and second application-specific optical code structure, including receiving a first action of obtaining a first optical code corresponding to a first application among the two or more applications;
retrieving first data and encoding the first data into the first optical code;
receiving a second action of obtaining a second optical code corresponding to a second application among the two or more applications;
retrieving second data; and
encoding the second data into the second optical code,
wherein the first application is different from the second application, and
wherein the first data is different from the second data.
However, Bernsen teaches the first and second application-specific optical code structure, including receiving a first action of obtaining a first optical code corresponding to a first application among the two or more applications (Par. [0004], “A product can contain several QR codes for several different applications … Such a product may need a first QR code to get connected to the Wi-Fi network by means of a first commissioning protocol”; Par. [0152], “The camera 1020 of the QR code reader 1015 is used to scan and read the first QR code 1010”);
retrieving first data and encoding the first data into the first optical code (Par. [0023], “selecting an application of the plurality of applications as a first commissioning application from the first QR code, retrieving commissioning data related to the selected first commissioning application”; Par. [0008], “collecting the information of the plurality of applications, and encoding the information into encoded data, the encoded data including at least a header and a respective data container per application.”; Par. [0055], “a first QR code, affixed to an object, a product, or a device, is used to store encoded data for a plurality of applications”);
receiving a second action of obtaining a second optical code corresponding to a second application among the two or more applications (Par. [0004], “A product can contain several QR codes for several different applications … a second QR code other than the first QR code to enroll by means of a second commissioning protocol in another network”; Par. [0084], “the encoded data can be then stored in a plurality of different QR codes, e.g., the first QR code and a second QR Code”);
retrieving second data (Par. [0023], “selecting another application of the plurality of applications as a second commissioning application from the first QR code, retrieving commissioning data related to the second commissioning application”; Par. [0069], “for each of the N respective applications, application data Di (i.e., the characters in Di) of the respective application OAi are collected.”); and
encoding the second data into the second optical code (Par. [0084], “the encoded data can be then stored in a plurality of different QR codes, e.g., the first QR code and a second QR Code”),
wherein the first application is different from the second application (Par. [0004], “A product can contain several QR codes for several different applications … a first QR code to get connected to the Wi-Fi network by means of a first commissioning protocol … and a second QR code other than the first QR code to enroll by means of a second commissioning protocol”), and
wherein the first data is different from the second data (Par. [0074], “D1 and D2 respectively refer to the application data of OA1 and OA2 … a QR code reader only needs to read D1+PB1 if it is interested in the application OA1 or D2+PB2 if it is interested in the application OA2”; Par. [0068], “one application requires very little data storage, and another application much more” – Since Bernsen separately defines D1 as the application data for OA1 and D2 as the application data for OA2, selectively reads D1 or D2 depending on the application of interest, and teaches different storage needs for different applications, Bernsen teaches or suggests that the first data is different from the second data.).
Agarwal and Bernsen are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor and contain functional similarities. They both relate to using QR codes/optical codes to encode and transfer data to a reader or application.
Therefore, at the time of effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the above field device monitoring system, as taught by Agarwal, and incorporate multiple application-specific QR codes and/or application-specific data containers, as taught by Bernsen.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to support multiple applications using QR codes while allowing the respective information for each application to be retrieved individually in a reliable and time-efficient manner, as suggested by Bernsen (Par. [0006]).
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Agarwal and Bernsen teaches all the limitations of the base claims as outlined above.
Bernsen further teaches processing, by the first and second applications, the first and second data (Par. [0023], “selecting an application of the plurality of applications as a first commissioning application from the first QR code, retrieving commissioning data related to the selected first commissioning application, starting the first commissioning application, and executing the first commissioning application … selecting another application of the plurality of applications as a second commissioning application from the first QR code, retrieving commissioning data related to the second commissioning application”; Par. [0074], “D1 and D2 respectively refer to the application data of OA1 and OA2 … a QR code reader only needs to read D1+PB1 if it is interested in the application OA1 or D2+PB2 if it is interested in the application OA2,”).
Regarding claim 11, the combination of Agarwal and Bernsen teaches all the limitations of the base claims as outlined above.
The combination of Agarwal and Bernsen further teaches retrieving, from the one or more instruments, the first and second data (Agarwal, Par. [0033] “System 40 includes a central system 50 (e.g., SCADA system) that communicates with a the remote meter 42, which in turn communicates with one or more field devices 52, 54, and 56”; Par. [0034] “The remote meter 44 can be configured to log/read data from multiple field devices 52, 54, 56, etc., on a multi-drop line.”; Fig. 6, Par. [0039] “appropriate or necessary data can be retrieved, as shown at block 212”; Par. [0038], “a dynamic QR code can be used to access live process value and other device data”) requested by the first and second applications (Bernsen, Par. [0023], “selecting an application of the plurality of applications as a first commissioning application from the first QR code, retrieving commissioning data related to the selected first commissioning application … selecting another application of the plurality of applications as a second commissioning application from the first QR code, retrieving commissioning data related to the second commissioning application”; Par. [0074], “D1 and D2 respectively refer to the application data of OA1 and OA2 … a QR code reader only needs to read D1+PB1 if it is interested in the application OA1 or D2+PB2 if it is interested in the application OA2”).
Regarding claim 12, the combination of Agarwal and Bernsen teaches all the limitations of the base claims as outlined above.
Bernsen further teaches packaging the first and second data into a format requested by the first and second applications (Par. [0008], “collecting the information of the plurality of applications, and encoding the information into encoded data, the encoded data including at least a header and a respective data container per application”; Par. [0057], “A data container can contain the application data of an application and refer to those data pixels of the first QR code that are reserved to store the application data.”; Par. [0074], “D1 and D2 respectively refer to the application data of OA1 and OA2 … a QR code reader only needs to read D1+PB1 if it is interested in the application OA1 or D2+PB2 if it is interested in the application OA2” – since Bernsen packages respective application data into respective data containers per application, and a QR code reader reads the data portion for the application of interest, Bernsen teaches or suggests packaging the first and second data into a format requested by the first and second applications.).
Regarding claim 13, the combination of Agarwal and Bernsen teaches all the limitations of the base claims as outlined above.
Agarwal further teaches wherein:
receiving the first action further comprises receiving the first action of obtaining the first optical code including a first two-dimensional (2D) visual code (Par. [0034] “An operator such as the user 46 can scan the dynamic QR 44 with his or her mobile device 48 to obtain data from the multiple devices 52, 54, 56, etc., connected on the line.”);
encoding the first data further comprises encoding the first data into the first 2D visual code (Par. [0024] “multi-dimensional code may be a 2D (two-dimensional) barcode that is a graphical image that stores information both horizontally, as one-dimensional bar codes do, and vertically. One feature may be how the 2D code can be used to encode virtually all required design and functional characteristics of a field device/panel, a mobile device, and so on”);
receiving the second action further comprises receiving the second action of obtaining the second optical code including a second two-dimensional (2D) visual code (Par. [0034] “An operator such as the user 46 can scan the dynamic QR 44 with his or her mobile device 48 to obtain data from the multiple devices 52, 54, 56, etc., connected on the line.”); and
encoding the second data further comprises encoding the second data into the second 2D visual code (Par. [0024] “multi-dimensional code may be a 2D (two-dimensional) barcode that is a graphical image that stores information both horizontally, as one-dimensional bar codes do, and vertically. One feature may be how the 2D code can be used to encode virtually all required design and functional characteristics of a field device/panel, a mobile device, and so on”).
Regarding claim 15, Agarwal teaches one or more non-transitory machine-readable storage media (Claim 14, “non-transitory computer-usable medium embodying computer program code”) for transferring data from one or more instruments to one or more applications (Fig. 6, Par. [0022] “a dynamic QR code 14 can be associated with a field device 12 in a dynamic display arrangement”); Par. [0024] “2D code can be used to encode virtually all required design and functional characteristics of a field device/panel, a mobile device, and so on. The data may be read and consumed directly into the application offline. It does not necessarily require any other machine or server to fetch the data; Par. [0037] “a dynamic QR code can be used to access live process value and other device data on a mobile device 62 or 92 as facilitated by such an app, which enables seamless access to device documentation/help data (e.g., URLs, etc.) on the mobile device.”), comprising a plurality of instructions stored thereon that (Claim 14, “said computer program code comprising instructions executable by said at least one processor and configured for”), in response to being executed, cause a system to:
receive an action of obtaining an optical code corresponding to an application among one or more applications (Par. [0034] “An operator such as the user 46 can scan the dynamic QR 44 with his or her mobile device 48 to obtain data from the multiple devices 52, 54, 56, etc., connected on the line.”; Par. [0038] “a dynamic QR code can be used to access live process value and other device data on a mobile device 62 or 92 as facilitated by such an app, which enables seamless access to device documentation/help data (e.g., URLs, etc.) on the mobile device.” - QR code is interpreted as an optical code);
retrieve data from the one or more instruments, wherein the data include data of the one or more instruments at an instant of the action (Par. [0033] “System 40 includes a central system 50 (e.g., SCADA system) that communicates with a the remote meter 42, which in turn communicates with one or more field devices 52, 54, and 56”; Par. [0034] “The remote meter 44 can be configured to log/read data from multiple field devices 52, 54, 56, etc., on a multi-drop line.”; Fig. 6, Par. [0039] “appropriate or necessary data can be retrieved, as shown at block 212”; Par. [0038] “dynamic QR code can be used to access live process value and other device data.” – The ability to obtain live process values implies data is updated at an instant of the action); and
encode the data into the optical code (Par. [0024] “2D code can be used to encode virtually all required design and functional characteristics of a field device/panel, a mobile device, and so on”; Par. [0062] “QR code can be dynamically generated and displayed via the dynamic display in response to a user input”),
wherein the two or more applications are disconnected from the one or more instruments (Par. [0024] “The data may be read and consumed directly into the application offline. It does not necessarily require any other machine or server to fetch the data” – as the applications are not connected with the application via physical connections or wireless communication except for a unidirectional transfer via optical code, the application is interpreted as disconnected from the one or more instruments).
Agarwal does not explicitly teach the first and second application-specific optical code structure, including receive first action of obtaining first optical code corresponding to a first application among the two or more applications;
retrieve first data and encode the first data into the first optical code;
receive a second action of obtaining a second optical code corresponding to a second application among the two or more applications;
retrieving second data requested by the second application; and
encoding the second data into the second optical code,
wherein the first application is different from the second application, and
wherein the first data is different from the second data.
However, Bernsen teaches the first and second application-specific optical code structure, including receive first action of obtaining first optical code corresponding to a first application among the two or more applications (Par. [0004], “A product can contain several QR codes for several different applications … Such a product may need a first QR code to get connected to the Wi-Fi network by means of a first commissioning protocol”; Par. [0152], “The camera 1020 of the QR code reader 1015 is used to scan and read the first QR code 1010”);
retrieve first data and encode the first data into the first optical code (Par. [0023], “selecting an application of the plurality of applications as a first commissioning application from the first QR code, retrieving commissioning data related to the selected first commissioning application”; Par. [0008], “collecting the information of the plurality of applications, and encoding the information into encoded data, the encoded data including at least a header and a respective data container per application.”; Par. [0055], “a first QR code, affixed to an object, a product, or a device, is used to store encoded data for a plurality of applications”);
receive a second action of obtaining a second optical code corresponding to a second application among the two or more applications (Par. [0004], “A product can contain several QR codes for several different applications … a second QR code other than the first QR code to enroll by means of a second commissioning protocol in another network”; Par. [0084], “the encoded data can be then stored in a plurality of different QR codes, e.g., the first QR code and a second QR Code”);
retrieving second data requested by the second application (Par. [0023], “selecting another application of the plurality of applications as a second commissioning application from the first QR code, retrieving commissioning data related to the second commissioning application”; Par. [0069], “for each of the N respective applications, application data Di (i.e., the characters in Di) of the respective application OAi are collected.”); and
encoding the second data into the second optical code (Par. [0084], “the encoded data can be then stored in a plurality of different QR codes, e.g., the first QR code and a second QR Code”),
wherein the first application is different from the second application (Par. [0004], “A product can contain several QR codes for several different applications … a first QR code to get connected to the Wi-Fi network by means of a first commissioning protocol … and a second QR code other than the first QR code to enroll by means of a second commissioning protocol”), and
wherein the first data is different from the second data (Par. [0074], “D1 and D2 respectively refer to the application data of OA1 and OA2 … a QR code reader only needs to read D1+PB1 if it is interested in the application OA1 or D2+PB2 if it is interested in the application OA2”; Par. [0068], “one application requires very little data storage, and another application much more” – Since Bernsen separately defines D1 as the application data for OA1 and D2 as the application data for OA2, selectively reads D1 or D2 depending on the application of interest, and teaches different storage needs for different applications, Bernsen teaches or suggests that the first data is different from the second data.).
Agarwal and Bernsen are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor and contain functional similarities. They both relate to using QR codes/optical codes to encode and transfer data to a reader or application.
Therefore, at the time of effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the above field device monitoring system, as taught by Agarwal, and incorporate multiple application-specific QR codes and/or application-specific data containers, as taught by Bernsen.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to support multiple applications using QR codes while allowing the respective information for each application to be retrieved individually in a reliable and time-efficient manner, as suggested by Bernsen (Par. [0006]).
Regarding claim 16, the combination of Agarwal and Bernsen teaches all the limitations of the base claims as outlined above.
The combination of Agarwal and Bernsen further teaches wherein the plurality of instructions further cause the system to:
retrieve, from the one or more instruments, the first and second data (Agarwal, Par. [0033] “System 40 includes a central system 50 (e.g., SCADA system) that communicates with a the remote meter 42, which in turn communicates with one or more field devices 52, 54, and 56”; Par. [0034] “The remote meter 44 can be configured to log/read data from multiple field devices 52, 54, 56, etc., on a multi-drop line.”; Par. [0038], “a dynamic QR code can be used to access live process value and other device data; Fig. 6, Par. [0039] “appropriate or necessary data can be retrieved, as shown at block 212”) requested by the first and second applications (Bernsen, Par. [0023], “selecting an application of the plurality of applications as a first commissioning application from the first QR code, retrieving commissioning data related to the selected first commissioning application … selecting another application of the plurality of applications as a second commissioning application from the first QR code, retrieving commissioning data related to the second commissioning application”; Par. [0074], “D1 and D2 respectively refer to the application data of OA1 and OA2 … a QR code reader only needs to read D1+PB1 if it is interested in the application OA1 or D2+PB2 if it is interested in the application OA2”).
Regarding claim 18, the combination of Agarwal and Bernsen teaches all the limitations of the base claims as outlined above.
Agarwal further teaches wherein the plurality of instructions further cause the system to:
retrieve the first and/or second data from the one or more instruments by:
communicating with the one or more instruments using a supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA) protocol (Par. [0033] “System 40 includes a central system 50 (e.g., SCADA system) that communicates with a the remote meter 42, which in turn communicates with one or more field devices 52, 54, and 56”; Par. [0034] “The remote meter 44 can be configured to log/read data from multiple field devices 52, 54, 56, etc., on a multi-drop line.”; Fig. 6, Par. [0039], “appropriate or necessary data can be retrieved, as shown at block 212).
Regarding claim 19, the combination of Agarwal and Bernsen teaches all the limitations of the base claims as outlined above.
Agarwal further teaches wherein the plurality of instructions further cause the system to display access to the one or more instruments on a webpage on a data transfer computing device (Par. [0023] “QR code can be used in advertisements to encode a company's web link.”; Par. [0052] “The data-processing system/apparatus 400 can receive user commands and data through the interface 453; these inputs may then be acted upon by the data-processing system/apparatus 400 in accordance with instructions from operating system 451 and/or software application 454. The interface 453 in some embodiments can serve to display results, whereupon a user may supply additional inputs or terminate a session” – The interface displays information retrieved from the instruments, which may include device information accessible through a web interface.) remote from the one or more instruments and in a communication network of the one or more instruments (Par. [0033] “System 40 includes a central system 50 (e.g., SCADA system) that communicates with a the remote meter 42, which in turn communicates with one or more field devices 52, 54, and 56”; Par. [0027] “the QR code discussed herein can be used to identify the device/equipment and obtain the device information from a hosted environment such as SCADA/HMI/Cloud where this information is available.”).
Claim(s) 2, 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Agarwal et al. USPGPUB 2019/0042819 A1 (hereinafter Agarwal) in view of Bernsen et al. USPGPUB 2025/0068867 A1 (hereinafter Bernsen), and further in view of Kamath US 2020/0183665 A1 (hereinafter Kamath).
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Agarwal and Bernsen teaches all the limitations of the base claims as outlined above.
Agarwal does not explicitly teach wherein the at least one processor is configured to execute computer-executable instructions programmed in a device driver of the one or more instruments.
However, Kamath teaches wherein the at least one processor is configured to execute computer-executable instructions programmed in a device driver of the one or more instruments (Par. [0024] “The field device driver 108 may be implemented as instructions executed by a processor 110 in the host device 106 to enable communication with the field device 104”).
Agarwal, Bernsen, and Kamath are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor and contain functional similarities. They all relate to communication with field devices.
Therefore, at the time of effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the above field device monitoring system, as taught by Agarwal and Bernsen, and incorporate using device drivers, as taught by Kamath.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to enable obtaining process variable parameters, diagnostic data from self-diagnosis and process diagnosis, and identification parameters of the field device as suggested by Kamath (Par. [0024]).
Regarding claim 17, the combination of Agarwal and Bernsen teaches all the limitations of the base claims as outlined above.
Agarwal does not explicitly teach wherein the plurality of instructions are programmed in a device driver of the one or more instruments.
However, Kamath teaches wherein the plurality of instructions are programmed in a device driver of the one or more instruments (Par. [0024] “The field device driver 108 may be implemented as instructions executed by a processor 110 in the host device 106 to enable communication with the field device 104”).
Agarwal, Bernsen, and Kamath are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor and contain functional similarities. They all relate to communication with field devices.
Therefore, at the time of effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the above field device monitoring system, as taught by Agarwal and Bernsen, and incorporate using device drivers, as taught by Kamath.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to enable obtaining process variable parameters, diagnostic data from self-diagnosis and process diagnosis, and identification parameters of the field device as suggested by Kamath (Par. [0024]).
Claim(s) 6, 14, 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Agarwal et al. USPGPUB 2019/0042819 A1 (hereinafter Agarwal) in view of Bernsen et al. USPGPUB 2025/0068867 A1 (hereinafter Bernsen), and further in view of Kim US 8,418,922 B1 (hereinafter Kim).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Agarwal and Bernsen teaches all the limitations of the base claims as outlined above.
Agarwal and Bernsen do not explicitly teach wherein the first optical code comprises a first movie of 2D visual codes, and the at least one processor is further programmed to:
receive the first action of obtaining the first movie of 2D visual codes; and
encode the first data into the first movie of 2D visual codes
the second optical code comprises a second movie of 2D visual codes, and the at least one processor is further programmed to:
receive the second action of obtaining the second movie of 2D visual codes; and
encode the second data into the second movie of 2D visual codes.
However, Kim teaches wherein the first optical code comprises a first movie of 2D visual codes (Fig. 4, Col. 4, “Whole information is divided by a group of packets (step S1). Each packet is encoded into a barcode image (step S2) … Each barcode image is displayed sequentially with varying display times (step S3).”), and the at least one processor is further programmed to:
receive the first action of obtaining the first movie of 2D visual codes (Fig. 4, Col. 4, “The reader periodically samples the display and completes scanning when the whole sequence is read and decoded (step S4)”); and
encode the first data into the first movie of 2D visual codes (Fig. 4, Col. 4, lines 53-59, “Whole information is divided by a group of packets (step S1). Each packet is 55 encoded into a barcode image (step S2). Each barcode image is displayed sequentially with varying display times (step S3)”)
the second optical code comprises a second movie of 2D visual codes (Fig. 4, Col. 4, “Whole information is divided by a group of packets (step S1). Each packet is encoded into a barcode image (step S2) … Each barcode image is displayed sequentially with varying display times (step S3).”), and the at least one processor is further programmed to:
receive the second action of obtaining the second movie of 2D visual codes (Fig. 4, Col. 4, “The reader periodically samples the display and completes scanning when the whole sequence is read and decoded (step S4)”); and
encode the second data into the second movie of 2D visual codes (Fig. 4, Col. 4, “Whole information is divided by a group of packets (step S1). Each packet is encoded into a barcode image (step S2) … Each barcode image is displayed sequentially with varying display times (step S3).”).
Agarwal, Bernsen, and Kim are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor and contain functional similarities. They all relate to using visual codes to encode and transfer data to a reader or application.
Therefore, at the time of effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the above field device monitoring system, as taught by Agarwal and Bernsen, and incorporate encoding the first and second application-specific data into first and second movies of 2D visual codes, as taught by Kim.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to reduce complexity of packets generating images for data transfer, allowing images generated from each packet to be readable by a lower resolution readers as suggested by Kim (Col. 4).
Regarding claim 14, the combination of Agarwal and Bernsen teaches all the limitations of the base claims as outlined above.
Agarwal and Bernsen do not explicitly teach wherein:
receiving the first action further comprises receiving the first action of obtaining the first optical code including a first movie of first 2D visual codes;
encoding the first data further comprises encoding the first data into the first movie of the first 2D visual codes;
receiving the second action further comprises receiving the second action of obtaining the second optical code including a second movie of second 2D visual codes; and
encoding the second data further comprises encoding the second data into the second movie of the second 2D visual codes.
However, Kim teaches wherein:
receiving the first action further comprises receiving the first action of obtaining the first optical code including a first movie of first 2D visual codes (Fig. 4, Col. 4, “Whole information is divided by a group of packets (step S1). Each packet is encoded into a barcode image (step S2) … Each barcode image is displayed sequentially with varying display times (step S3) … The reader periodically samples the display and completes scanning when the whole sequence is read and decoded (step S4)” – scanning the sequence of optical codes is interpreted as receiving the action of obtaining the optical code); and
encoding the first data further comprises encoding the first data into the first movie of the first 2D visual codes (Fig. 4, Col. 4, lines 53-59, “Whole information is divided by a group of packets (step S1). Each packet is 55 encoded into a barcode image (step S2). Each barcode image is displayed sequentially with varying display times (step S3)”);
receiving the second action further comprises receiving the second action of obtaining the second optical code including a second movie of second 2D visual codes (Fig. 4, Col. 4, “The reader periodically samples the display and completes scanning when the whole sequence is read and decoded (step S4)”; and
encoding the second data further comprises encoding the second data into the second movie of the second 2D visual codes (Fig. 4, Col. 4, “Whole information is divided by a group of packets (step S1). Each packet is encoded into a barcode image (step S2) … Each barcode image is displayed sequentially with varying display times (step S3).”).
Agarwal, Bernsen, and Kim are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor and contain functional similarities. They all relate to using visual codes to encode and transfer data to a reader or application.
Therefore, at the time of effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the above field device monitoring system, as taught by Agarwal and Bernsen, and incorporate encoding the first and second application-specific data into first and second movies of 2D visual codes, as taught by Kim.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to reduce complexity of packets generating images for data transfer, allowing images generated from each packet to be readable by a lower resolution readers as suggested by Kim (Col. 4).
Regarding claim 20, the combination of Agarwal and Bernsen teaches all the limitations of the base claims as outlined above.
Agarwal and Bernsen do not explicitly teach wherein the plurality of instructions further cause the system to:
receive the first action of obtaining the first optical code including a first movie of first two-dimensional (2D) visual codes;
encode the first data into the first movie of first 2D visual codes
receive the second action of obtaining the second optical code including a second movie of second 2D visual codes; and
encode the second data into the second movie of second 2D visual codes.
However, Kim teaches wherein the plurality of instructions further cause the system to:
receive the first action of obtaining the first optical code including a first movie of first two-dimensional (2D) visual codes (Fig. 4, Col. 4, “Whole information is divided by a group of packets (step S1). Each packet is encoded into a barcode image (step S2) … Each barcode image is displayed sequentially with varying display times (step S3) … The reader periodically samples the display and completes scanning when the whole sequence is read and decoded (step S4)”;
encode the first data into the first movie of first 2D visual codes (Fig. 4, Col. 4, lines 53-59, “Whole information is divided by a group of packets (step S1). Each packet is 55 encoded into a barcode image (step S2). Each barcode image is displayed sequentially with varying display times (step S3)”)
receive the second action of obtaining the second optical code including a second movie of second 2D visual codes (Fig. 4, Col. 4, “Whole information is divided by a group of packets (step S1). Each packet is encoded into a barcode image (step S2) … Each barcode image is displayed sequentially with varying display times (step S3) … The reader periodically samples the display and completes scanning when the whole sequence is read and decoded (step S4)”; and
encode the second data into the second movie of second 2D visual codes (Fig. 4, Col. 4, “Whole information is divided by a group of packets (step S1). Each packet is encoded into a barcode image (step S2) … Each barcode image is displayed sequentially with varying display times (step S3).”).
Agarwal, Bernsen, and Kim are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor and contain functional similarities. They all relate to using visual codes to encode and transfer data to a reader or application.
Therefore, at the time of effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the above field device monitoring system, as taught by Agarwal and Bernsen, and incorporate encoding the first and second application-specific data into first and second movies of 2D visual codes, as taught by Kim.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to reduce complexity of packets generating images for data transfer, allowing images generated from each packet to be readable by a lower resolution readers as suggested by Kim (Col. 4).
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Agarwal et al. USPGPUB 2019/0042819 A1 (hereinafter Agarwal) in view of Bernsen et al. USPGPUB 2025/0068867 A1 (hereinafter Bernsen), and further in view of Sun et al. US 2013/0278622 A1 (hereinafter Sun).
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Agarwal and Bernsen teaches all the limitations of the base claims as outlined above.
Agarwal and Bernsen do not explicitly teach relaying, by the first and/or the second application, the first and/or second data to another application; and
processing, by the another application, the first and/or second data.
However, Sun teaches relaying, by the first and/or second application, the first and/or second data to another application; and
processing, by the another application, the first and/or second data (Par. [0118] “User installed base application but uses another scanner app to scan the barcode. The scanner app will typically launch a web browser and open the URL (e.g., http://flashme.com/p/dl3ldd02c5e6eec4693d9a0698aff95c). The web server can then launch the base application to handle scanned information by feeding a web page that encodes proper URI-schemed links to start executing the installed base application.”).
Agarwal, Bernsen, and Sun are analogous art because they contain functional similarities. They all relate to using QR codes to transfer encoded data to a reader or application.
Therefore, at the time of effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the above field device monitoring system, as taught by Agarwal and Bernsen, and incorporate relaying the first and/or second data from the first and/or second application to another application, as taught by Sun.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to improve user experience when scanning QR codes as suggested by Sun (Par. [0113]).
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Agarwal et al. USPGPUB 2019/0042819 A1 (hereinafter Agarwal) in view of Bernsen et al. USPGPUB 2025/0068867 A1 (hereinafter Bernsen), and further in view of Mu et al. US 2009/0108057 A1 (hereinafter Mu).
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Agarwal and Bernsen teaches all the limitations of the base claims as outlined above.
Agarwal and Bernsen do not explicitly teach providing feedback based on processing of the first and/or second data.
However, Mu teaches providing feedback based on processing of the first and/or second data (Par. [0020] “server is configured to evaluate the QR code or QR code data from each of the clients, and in response to transmit a respective feedback response to each of the clients, for access by the client user”; Par. [0032] “QR code processing thread is configured to accept QR code data packets from a client, decode the QR code, and transmit a response, or appropriate feedback, to the client, to be provided to the user”).
Since Agarwal in view of Bernsen teaches the first and second data encoded into first and second QR/optical codes as discussed above, Mu’s feedback based on evaluating/processing QR code data teaches or suggests providing feedback based on processing of the first and second data.
Agarwal, Bernsen, and Mu are analogous art because they contain functional similarities. They all relate to using QR codes to transfer encoded data to a reader or application.
Therefore, at the time of effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the above field device monitoring system, as taught by Agarwal, and incorporate providing feedback based on processing of the data, as taught by Mu.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to improve value-added services when scanning a QR code as suggested by Mu (Par. [0003]).
Citation of Pertinent Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
ABB Technology AG [DE 202015103788 U1] teaches generating visual 2D codes for data transfer in an industrial setting.
Graham et al. [US 8,868,907 B2] teaches the use of a SCADA protocol for communications for operation of industrial control system field devices.
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 PETER XU whose telephone number is (571)272-0792. 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, Mohammad Ali can be reached at (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 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.
/PETER XU/ Examiner, Art Unit 2119
/MOHAMMAD ALI/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2119
Prosecution Insights