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 .
Response to Arguments
I. Applicant's arguments filed 10/24/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
II. Applicant argues that "nothing in Jensen et al. shows performing low priority tasks only when a power status output indicates there is sufficient power." Examiner respectfully disagrees.
Jensen teaches that the power supply may be in one of multiple states (see Jensen par. 103-105, detailing ENERGY_STATE_HIGH, ENERGY_STATE_MEDIUM, and ENERGY_STATE_LOW power states) and may be associated with tasks that can be completed before shutdown due to lack of power (Jensen par. 102) and that if the power state is too low (e.g., ENERGY_STATE_LOW), the BLE bridge 104 enters a sleep mode or a standby mode and therefore does not execute tasks, in order to prevent a brown out (Jensen par. 105). Therefore, the tasks are only executed where there is sufficient power, as indicated by a power status being in the medium or high state.
III. Applicant also argues that Jensen does not show “performing high priority task
asynchronously using a pre-budgeted amount of power from an energy storage device.” Examiner respectfully disagrees.
Jensen teaches the high priority tasks are performed asynchronously (Jensen par. 198, discloses tasks with priorities 5 [high priority] to 2 [lowest priority]; and Jensen par. 198, the one-shot event 1402 has a first highest priority; and FIG. 14, one-shot event is not performed synchronously with other tasks). Jensen also teaches that the one-shot event can correspond to an energy commitment by the power supply 355 to provide a quantity of energy [i.e., a pre-budgeted amount] to the BLE bridge 104 to execute a computation task associated with the one-shot event [i.e., the high priority task] (Jensen par. 103). Therefore, the high-priority task is performed using a pre-budgeted amount of energy from the energy storage device (Jensen FIG. 3, energy storage device 356; and FIG. 3, power supply 355 contains energy storage device).
IV. Applicant’s remaining arguments with respect to claims 1 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.
Claims 1 and 12-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jensen et. al. (US 2019/0246353 A1) [previously cited] in view of applicant admitted prior art (AAPA) and Bodas et. al. (US 2016/0054780 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Jensen discloses a field device for use in an industrial process (Jensen FIG. 1 and 3, field device 102), comprising:
a [unit] (Jensen FIG. 3, field device MCU 350 of field device 102) configured to couple to the industrial process and control or monitor a process variable of the industrial process (Jensen par. 75, field device MCU 350 includes one or more processors used to execute one or more computation tasks on an external device, see also par. 66-67);
primary communication circuitry (Jensen FIG. 3, BLE connection 370) configured to communicate information with a remote location related to the process variable (Jensen par. 74-75, field device 102 communicates with remote device 360 via BLE connection; and par. 77, process data is obtained from the remote device 360);
a wireless communication module (Jensen FIG. 3, BLE bridge 104) comprising:
an energy storage device (Jensen FIG. 3, energy storage device 356);
power monitoring electronics coupled to the energy storage device (Jensen FIG. 3, comparators 358a-b) and having a power output and a power status output (Jensen par. 99 and 100, comparators generate a signal [i.e., power status output] when the energy in energy storage device satisfies a threshold); and
wireless communication circuitry configured to communicate wirelessly (Jensen FIG. 3, platform manager 320; and par. 74 and 123, BLE connection is wireless [see FIG. 3, connection 370]) and perform a plurality of high priority tasks and a plurality of low priority tasks (Jensen par. 198, discloses tasks with priorities 5 [high priority] to 2 [lowest priority]), wherein the high priority tasks are performed asynchronously using a pre-budgeted amount of energy from the energy storage device (Jensen par. 198, the one-shot event 1402 has a first highest priority; and FIG. 14, one-shot event is not performed synchronously with other tasks; and Jensen par. 103, the one-shot event can correspond to an energy commitment by the power supply 355 to provide a quantity of energy [i.e., a pre-budgeted amount] to the BLE bridge 104 to execute a computation task associated with the one-shot event; and FIG. 3, power supply 355 contains energy storage device) and the plurality of low priority task are only performed if the power status output indicates there is sufficient power (Jensen par. 102, power supply may be in one of multiple states [see par. 103-105, detailing ENERGY_STATE_HIGH, ENERGY_STATE_MEDIUM, and ENERGY_STATE_LOW power states] and state may be associated with tasks that can be completed before shutdown due to lack of power; and par. 105, if power state is too low, BLE bridge 104 enters a sleep mode or a standby mode and therefore does not execute tasks in order to prevent a brown out [therefore, the tasks are only executed where there is sufficient power, as indicated by a power status being in the medium or high state]), wherein the energy storage device recovers [an] amount of power […] (Jensen FIG. 19 and par. 231, at the fifth time 1912 the energy storage device 356 has a fifth voltage greater than the fourth voltage at the fourth time 1910 because power manager 326 may have put the BLE bridge 104 in a sleep mode, idled one or more processing threads, etc., to reduce energy consumed by the BLE bridge [i.e., recovered power used]; and par. 205, adding makeup energy from the field device MCU 350).
Jensen does not explicitly teach:
a transducer configured to couple to the industrial process and control or monitor a process variable of the industrial process; and
wherein the energy storage device recovers the pre-budgeted amount of power following performance of a high priority task.
Applicant admits in prior disclosure that field devices are known to include a transducer (Instant app. par. 4). Furthermore, Jensen discusses protocols that use transducers such as Highway Addressable Remote Transducer (HART) for use by the field device (par. 3 and par. 50, and par. 56, the field device is communicatively coupled to the one or more other field devices via a wired or wireless industrial communication protocol such as a HART communication protocol, or a WirelessHART (WiHART) communication protocol).
Therefore, it would have been obvious of one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Jensen and AAPA before him, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine Jensen’s field device utilizing HART communication protocol with AAPA acknowledging that it is well known to utilize a transducer in field devices, the motivation being to utilize a transducer in the field device in order to make use of the HART protocol format, or another protocol used by Jensen that required the use of transducers.
Jensen in view of AAPA does not explicitly disclose:
wherein the energy storage device recovers the pre-budgeted amount of power following performance of a high priority task.
In the analogous art of power management of tasks in a device, Bodas teaches a device for use in an industrial process (Bodas FIG. 1 and par. 49, system 100 containing data processing system 101; and par. 53-54, the compute nodes provide the bulk of the processing and computational power for users):
wireless communication circuitry configured to communicate wirelessly (Bodas par. 314, communications chip 1908 enables wireless communications for the transfer of data to and from the data processing system) and perform a plurality of high priority tasks and a plurality of low priority tasks (Bodas par. 115, power is allocated for a job based on a job priority; also see par. 112, e.g., the power aware job scheduler picks a job at the lowest priority from a list of jobs that can be suspended in the case there is not enough power; also see par. 140, on determining high vs. low priority jobs [e.g., the job having a predetermined frequency (e.g., a lowest frequency, a highest frequency comparing with other jobs, or other predetermined frequency) can have a highest priority]), wherein the high priority tasks are performed […] using a pre-budgeted amount of energy from the energy storage [budget] (Bodas FIG. 1 and par. 55, Psys [i.e., provisioned power] is used to run one or more of the jobs requested by one or more users; and Bodas par. 87-88, a power-aware scheduler is used to distribute PSYS among various jobs, power available for distribution depends upon pre-allocated power and monitoring) and the plurality of low priority task are only performed if the power status output indicates there is sufficient power (Bodas par. 112, e.g., the power aware job scheduler picks a job at the lowest priority from a list of jobs that can be suspended in the case there is not enough power), wherein the energy storage [budget] (Bodas FIG. 1 and par. 55, Psys [i.e., provisioned power, budget] is used to run one or more of the jobs requested by one or more users) recovers the pre-budgeted amount of power following performance of a high priority task (Bodas par. 87-88, a power-aware scheduler is used to distribute PSYS among various jobs, power available for distribution depends upon pre-allocated power and monitoring, available power=(PSYS−allocated power) [i.e., when a job completes, the power for that job is no longer allocated i.e., recovered, also see par. 98, when power is allocated to a job, it is unavailable for other jobs]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious of one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Jensen, AAPA, and Bodas before him, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine Jensen and AAPA’s field device allocating power to tasks of various priorities with Bodas’s method of power provisioning using a system power budget, the motivation being to dynamically change the job's power cap based on facility power limit and reduce stranded power (Bodas par. 6-7).
Regarding Claim 12, Jensen in view of AAPA and Bodas discloses the field device of claim 1, including a field device microcontroller (Jensen FIG. 3, field device MCU 350) and wherein the wireless communication circuitry includes a microcontroller (Jensen FIG. 3, command processor 322 inside BLE MCU 104 (see par. 64)) and the high priority tasks include interprocessor communication between the microcontroller and the field device microcontroller (Jensen par. 210, interprocessor communications have the third highest priority).
Regarding Claim 13, Jensen in view of AAPA and Bodas discloses the field device of claim 12, wherein interprocessor communication is performed if energy stored in the energy storage device is above an upper trip point level (Jensen par. 99 and 103, energy storage device sets a high signal when a high-voltage threshold [i.e., high trip point] is met; and task performed may be a radiofrequency operation [i.e., interprocessor communication via BLE, see par. 4]).
Regarding Claim 14, Jensen in view of AAPA and Bodas discloses the field device of claim 13, wherein a subsequent interprocessor communication is performed if energy from prior interprocessor communication is recovered (Jensen par. 201-202, execution may pause due to the limited power budget and resume after two control cycles [which are used to increase energy in energy storage device]).
Regarding Claim 15, Jensen in view of AAPA and Bodas discloses the field device of claim 1,
[…], and the field device is powered with power received from [external power] (Jensen par. 98, supply current to the energy storage device 356; power to charge energy storage must come from external [i.e., auxiliary] power).
Jensen in view of AAPA and Bodas does not explicitly disclose:
wherein the primary communication circuitry couples to a two-wire process control loop and the field device is powered with power received from the two-wire process control loop.
However, applicant admits that two-wire process control current loops are traditionally used to power analog field devices (Instant app. par. 6).
Therefore, it would have been obvious of one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to utilize two-wire process control current loops as the traditional means of powering the field device, as disclosed in Jensen.
Regarding Claim 16, Jensen in view of AAPA and Bodas discloses the field device of claim 1, including a connection to an auxiliary power source and wherein the field device is powered with power from the auxiliary power source (Jensen par. 98, supply current to the energy storage device 356; power to charge energy storage must come from external [i.e., auxiliary] power).
Regarding Claim 17, Jensen in view of AAPA and Bodas discloses the field device of claim 16, wherein an upper trip point level is set to a high condition (Jensen par. 100, comparator can be set to a high-voltage threshold (e.g., 1.8 V, 2 V, etc.) that corresponds and/or otherwise translates to a high-energy threshold).
Regarding Claim 18, Jensen in view of AAPA and Bodas discloses the field device of claim 1, wherein the energy storage device comprises a capacitor (Jensen par. 97, the energy storage device 356 is a capacitor (e.g., a storage capacitor)).
Regarding Claim 19, Jensen in view of AAPA and Bodas discloses the field device of claim 1, wherein the power status output of the power monitoring electronics comprises an upper trip point output and a lower trip point output (Jensen par. 99 and 100, comparators generate a signal [i.e., power status output] when the energy in energy storage device satisfies a threshold (e.g., a high-energy threshold, a low-energy threshold, etc.)).
Regarding Claim 20, Jensen in view of AAPA and Bodas discloses the field device of claim 1, wherein the power status output of the power monitoring electronics is determined based upon voltage of the energy storage device (Jensen par. 99, comparators 358 a-b determine the voltage across the energy storage device 356 and output based on result).
Claims 2-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jensen in view of AAPA and Bodas and further in view of de Lind van Wijngaarden et. al. (henceforth referred to as Wijngaarden) (US 2012/0210325 A1) [previously cited].
Regarding Claim 2, Jensen in view of AAPA and Bodas discloses the field device of claim 1,
wherein the low priority tasks are performed synchronously in a […] schedule (Jensen par. 304, BLE bridge 104 identifies computation task(s) in task queue(s) to process, e.g., a first set of one or more computation tasks in a first task queue associated with a first priority and/or a second set of one or more computation tasks in a second task queue associated with a second priority, where the second priority is lower than the first priority; and par. 307, e.g., BLE bridge 104 executes computation task(s) by launching a thread [i.e., synchronously] for the fifth computational task [note, fifth task is lower priority, see par. 306]; or Bodas par. 7, HPC distribute computational work across synchronized nodes [i.e., execute tasks synchronously], and Bodas par. 47, a job power cap is set dynamically based on at least one of a facility power capability and a suspended job priority [i.e., jobs have priority, e.g., based on the number of nodes being used to run the job, see par. 140]).
Jensen in view of AAPA and Bodas does not explicitly disclose:
wherein the low priority tasks are performed synchronously in a round-robin schedule.
In the analogous art of saving power through monitoring and scheduling tasks, Wijngaarden teaches:
wherein the low priority tasks are performed synchronously in a round-robin schedule (Wijngaarden par. 178, commonly used scheduling algorithms include round robin, and priority-based; and an OS may employ a combination of these algorithms; and Wijngaarden par. 115, respective priority levels of applications can also be specified in the application profile by defining priority classes, and par. 153, when the battery is low but not critically low, high-priority applications may be scheduled, while lower-priority applications may be rejected [i.e., scheduling algorithm used may be priority-based round-robin, and scheduling is responsible for high and low priority tasks]; and par. 129-130, power consumption of active tasks [implying multiple tasks running synchronously] used by power-aware task monitor as scheduling criteria).
Therefore, it would have been obvious of one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Jensen, AAPA, Bodas, and Wijngaarden before them, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine Jensen’s scheduling of tasks in a field device with Wijngaarden's power-aware task scheduling using algorithms known in the art, the motivation being to employ a scheduling algorithm to efficiently allocate processor time to tasks that are in the ready queue (Wijngaarden par. 175).
Regarding Claim 3, Jensen in view of AAPA and Bodas, further in view of Wijngaarden discloses the field device of claim 2, wherein the wireless communication circuitry includes a microcontroller (Jensen FIG. 3, command processor 322) and the low priority tasks include compute tasks performed by the microcontroller (Jensen par. 199, priority for the command processor may be set to the lowest level [therefore its tasks are also low level])
Regarding Claim 4, Jensen in view of AAPA and Bodas, further in view of Wijngaarden discloses the field device of claim 3, wherein the compute tasks are performed synchronously based on an amount of energy stored in the energy storage device (Jensen par. 105, if power state is too low, BLE bridge 104 enters a sleep mode or a standby mode [i.e., compute tasks are performed or not based on the amount of energy stored in the energy storage device]; or Wijngaarden par. 21, condition of the battery [i.e., energy storage device] is used for scheduling criteria [also see par. 73 and 74]; and par. 129-130, power consumption of active tasks [implying multiple tasks running synchronously] used by power-aware task monitor as scheduling criteria).
Regarding Claim 5, Jensen in view of AAPA and Bodas, further in view of Wijngaarden discloses the field device of claim 2, wherein the wireless communication circuitry includes a radio and low priority tasks include radio events performed by the radio (Jensen par. 203 and 205, tasks may be radiofrequency operations [disclosed tasks would require a radio]; and Jensen par. 199, all modules except power manager are set to low).
Regarding Claim 6, Jensen in view of AAPA and Bodas, further in view of Wijngaarden discloses the field device of claim 5, wherein radio events include an advertising event (Jensen par. 205, radiofrequency task may be a radio advertising task).
Regarding Claim 7, Jensen in view of AAPA and Bodas, further in view of Wijngaarden discloses the field device of claim 6, wherein the wireless communication circuitry includes a microcontroller (Jensen FIG. 3, command processor 322) and
the low priority tasks include compute tasks performed by the microcontroller (Jensen par. 199, priority for the command processor may be set to the lowest level) and a compute task is performed if there is sufficient energy stored in the energy storage device to complete the compute task (Jensen par. 102-103, in the first energy state, the power supply has enough energy to perform the tasks detailed in par. 103; or Wijngaarden par. 79, power-aware task scheduler determines that there will be sufficient power, and the task can be scheduled) and an amount of time required to complete the compute task and an amount of time for the energy storage device to recover energy used by the compute task is less than an amount of time until a next advertising event (Wijngaarden par. 189, scheduling is based on identified by the application type [which may be a communication event, see par. 147-148], its execution time, and the amount of power needed to complete the task; and par. 144, task may not be scheduled if the remaining battery power is expected to fall below a threshold [i.e., not enough energy is recovered]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious of one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Jensen, AAPA, and Bodas before him, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine Jensen and AAPA’s field device allocating power to tasks of various priorities with Wijngaarden’s method of power provisioning using a system power budget, the motivation being to help reduce energy consumption in the mobile terminal when power levels are very low (Wijngaarden par. 17-18).
Regarding Claim 8, Jensen in view of AAPA and Bodas, further in view of Wijngaarden discloses the field device of claim 6. Jensen in view of Wijngaarden further disclose wherein the wireless communication circuitry includes a microcontroller (Jensen FIG. 3, command processor 322) and
the low priority tasks include compute tasks performed by the microcontroller (Jensen par. 199, priority for the command processor may be set to the lowest level [therefore its tasks are also low level]) and
a compute task is performed if there is sufficient energy stored in the energy storage device to complete both the compute task and a next advertising event and the compute task will complete before the next advertising event (Jensen FIG. 15 and par. 205-206, computational tasks are performed before each advertising event and power manager 326 can determine that the power budget has sufficient energy from which the security manager 332 can consume to execute the first security task 1504 without causing the voltage associated with the power supply 355 of FIG. 3 to fall below the low-voltage threshold; or Wijngaarden par. 189, scheduling is based on identified by the application type [which may be a communication event, see par. 147-148], its execution time, and the amount of power needed to complete the task).
Regarding Claim 9, Jensen in view of AAPA and Bodas, further in view of Wijngaarden discloses the field device of claim 5, wherein radio events include a connection radio event (Jensen par. 115, task may be a connection establishment task or a radiofrequency task).
Regarding Claim 10, Jensen in view of AAPA and Bodas, further in view of Wijngaarden discloses the field device of claim 9, wherein the wireless communication circuitry includes a microcontroller (Jensen FIG. 3, command processor 322) and the low priority tasks include compute tasks performed by the microcontroller (Jensen par. 199, priority for the command processor may be set to the lowest level [therefore its tasks are also low level]) and a connection radio event is not performed until all of the compute tasks are complete (Jensen par. 205, BLE MCU 104 enters the idle mode 1404 after the advertising events [implying it does not run while preparing the advertising events], and par. ) and there is sufficient energy stored in the energy storage device is above an upper trip point level (Jensen par. 99 and 103, energy storage device sets a high signal when a high-voltage threshold [i.e., high trip point] is met).
Regarding Claim 11, Jensen as modified discloses the field device of claim 5. Jensen further discloses wherein the wireless communication circuitry includes a microcontroller (Jensen FIG. 3, command processor 322) and the low priority tasks include compute tasks performed by the microcontroller (Jensen par. 199, priority for the command processor may be set to the lowest level), and wherein the radio is disabled while compute tasks are performed (Jensen par. 213, BLE MCU 104 of FIGS. 1-3 in a radio disabled mode, a radiofrequency disabled mode, etc., and par. 214, compute tasks are executed; and par. 205, BLE MCU 104 enters the idle mode 1404 after the first advertising event and before preparing the next advertising event [implying it does not run while preparing the advertising events]).
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 COLE JIAWEI WENTZEL whose telephone number is (703) 756-4762. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30am-5:30pm ET (Mon-Fri).
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, Andrew Jung can be reached on (571) 270-3779. 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.
/C.J.W./Examiner, Art Unit 2175
/ANDREW J JUNG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2175