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 .
The application of Rud et al. for a “modular industrial transmitter architecture and interface” filed on October 20, 2023 has been examined.
This application claims priority to U.S. provisional application number 63/418,111, which is filed on October 21, 2022.
Applicant’s election with traverse of Group I, including claims 1-19, in the reply filed on April 16, 2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 1-31 are pending.
Claim Objections
Claim 9 is objected to because of the following informalities: “the wireless communication” should be “the wireless communication protocol”. An appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-2, 7-9 and 12-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Keyes, IV et al. (US# 8,538,732).
Referring to Claim 1, Keyes, IV et al. disclose an industrial communication module (10) (i.e. an appendable device) (column 4 lines 11 to 56; see Figures 1 to 4) comprising:
a controller (16) ( i.e. a processor) (column 6 lines 15 to 21; see Figure 1);
a common interface (20) coupled to the controller (16), the common interface (20) being configured to couple to a plurality of different types of sensor modules (26 to 32) (i.e. the appendable device 10 includes a housing 12 in which a transceiver 14, a processor 16, a memory 18 and an input/output (I/O) interface 20 are disposed. The appendable device 10 may also include an internal power source 22, an antenna 24, one or more internal sensors 26 and 28 and one or more external sensors 30 and 32. Additionally, one or more sensors 34 and 36 and/or other devices may be field wired or otherwise electrically coupled to the appendable device 10 via a connection or termination portion 38) (column 6 lines 18 to 49; see Figure 1); and
protocol/output circuitry (14) coupled to the controller (16) and configured to provide an output to a remote device (304 or 308) (i.e. the antenna 24 enables the device 10 to perform wireless communication activities with other appendable devices similar or identical to the device 10, other controllers, workstations, etc., or any other wireless communication devices such as cellular phones, pagers, hand-held computers e.g., personal data assistants), lap-top computers, etc.) (column 10 lines 48 to 56; column 11 lines 3 to 12; see Figures 1 to 3).
Referring to Claim 2, Keyes, IV et al. disclose the industrial communication module of claim 1, wherein the common interface (20) includes a plurality of connections to convey signals between the industrial communication module (10) and a sensor module (26 or 30) to allow for a variety of combinations of communication protocols and sensor tasks (i.e. sensors that sense particular parameters may be mounted internally (e.g. the sensors 26 and 28) and other sensors, which may sense other parameters, may be externally connected to the appendable device 10 either through the termination portion 38 or directly via wires, for example, as shown in the case of the external sensors 30 and 32. For example, in some applications it may be advantageous to mount an acceleration or vibration sensor within the device 10 to eliminate the need to mount both the device 10 and a separate sensor to the piece of equipment) (column 7 lines 21 to 41; column 10 lines 33 to 47; column 13 lines 10 to 21; see Figures 1 to 3).
Referring to Claim 7, Keyes, IV et al. disclose the industrial communication module of claim 1, wherein the controller is configured to cause the industrial communication module to participate in a wireless network as a standalone repeater when operated without a sensor module (i.e. by enabling the appendable devices described herein to function as repeaters, relay stations, etc. appendable devices that are physically very remote from one another can communicate indirectly with each other through other appendable devices, which reduces the amount of power required by each of the appendable devices for transmitting information) (column 18 lines 33 to 59).
Referring to Claim 8, Keyes, IV et al. disclose the industrial communication module of claim 1, wherein the protocol/output circuitry (14) is configured to communicate in accordance with a wireless communication protocol (column 10 lines 48 to 56; column 12 lines 49 to 62).
Referring to Claim 9, Keyes, IV et al. disclose the industrial communication module of claim 8, wherein the wireless communication (protocol) is selected from the group consisting of: Wireless HART, Cellular (NB-IoT, LTE-M), Wi-Fi, LoRaWAN, and Bluetooth Low Energy (column 1 lines 57 to 64).
Referring to Claim 12, Keyes, IV et al. disclose the industrial communication module of claim 1, further comprising a GPS module coupled to the controller and configured to provide an indication of geographic location of the communication module to the controller (i.e. a plurality of appendable devices having internal location detectors (e.g., global positioning units) may be attached to cows or horses within a herd or multiple herds and may monitor or track the movements of the herd for a rancher. The rancher may use such herd location information to develop a maintenance plan for grazing areas, determine the fastest route to the herd, etc.) (column 17 lines 29 to 36).
Referring to Claim 13, Keyes, IV et al. disclose the industrial communication module of claim 1, wherein the plurality of different types of sensor modules include: a temperature sensor module, a discrete input/output module, a level module, a corrosion sensor module, a pressure sensor module, and a gas detection module (i.e. a group or combination of sensors may sense one or more parameters such as vibration, acceleration, temperature, humidity, acidity, turbidity, the presence and/or concentration of one or more chemicals and gasses, flow, altitude, geographic location, direction or heading, thickness, corrosion rate, color, level, angular velocity, speed, pressure, pulse rate, or any other desired parameter) (column 6 lines 64 to column 7 line 20; see Figure 1).
Referring to Claim 14, Keyes, IV et al. disclose the industrial communication module of claim 1, wherein power (22) is provided by the industrial communication module (10) via at least one of an internal battery, power scavenging, and an externally connected power source (column 9 lines 31 to 51; see Figure 1).
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 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 3-4, 6, 10-11, 15-16 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Keyes, IV et al. (US# 8,538,732) as applied to claim 1, and in view of Nixon et al. (US# 11,824,650).
Referring to Claim 3, Keyes, IV et al. disclose the industrial communication module of claim 1, however, Keyes, IV et al. did not explicitly disclose wherein the common interface includes at least one power connection configured to provide power to a sensor module.
In the same field of endeavor of a field device, Nixon et al. teach that the common interface (18) includes at least one power connection configured to provide power to a sensor module (12) (i.e. the power supply 22 is preferably coupled to the communication interface 20 and, more particularly, to the physical layer of the bus or wired network to which the field device 10 connects, receives power in the form of current (e.g., DC current) from the physical layer, and converts that current into a power signal (typically one or more voltage signals) which are provided to the various other components of the device 10 to power these devices as needed. The power supply 22 is able to provide enough power to the processor 14 as described herein to enable the operation of the processor 14. Still further, the power supply 22 may power the memory 16, the interface 18 and one or more of the field device hardware components 12) (column 13 lines 48 to 60; see Figure 1).
At the time of the effective filing date of the current application, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to recognize the need for have the power supply to provide power to the sensor through the interface taught by Nixon et al. in the power source that supply power to the circuitry of the appendable device of Keyes, IV et al. because having the power supply to provide power to the sensor through the interface would provide an alternative way to supply power to the sensor.
Referring to Claim 4, Keyes, IV et al. in view of Nixon et al. disclose the industrial communication module of claim 3, Nixon et al. disclose wherein at least one power connection is configured to provide power directly to the sensor module (i.e. the power supply 22 may power the memory 16, the interface 18 and one or more of the field device hardware components 12) (column 13 lines 48 to 60; see Figure 1).
Referring to Claim 6, Keyes, IV et al. in view of Nixon et al. disclose the industrial communication module of claim 1, Nixon et al. disclose wherein the common interface supports the exchange of duty cycle and task timing information (i.e. regarding the timing requirements of various data that will be transmitted over the communication network 80. In embodiments, some of the network scheduling information 806 is acquired directly from configuration files that program the controllers 140 (e.g., from control loop timing requirements specified in the configuration files) (column 51 lines 55 to column 52 line 6).
Referring to Claim 10, Keyes, IV et al. disclose the industrial communication module of claim 1, Nixon et al. disclose wherein the protocol/output circuitry (20) is configured to communicate in accordance with a wired communication protocol (column 14 lines 3 to 12).
Referring to Claim 11, Keyes, IV et al. disclose the industrial communication module of claim 10, Nixon et al. disclose wherein the wired communication protocol is selected from the group consisting of: HART, 4-20mA, Foundation Fieldbus, Profibus, Modbus, Ethernet, and Ethernet-APL (column 14 lines 13 to 40).
Referring to Claim 15, Keyes, IV et al. disclose the industrial communication module of claim 1, Nixon et al. disclose further comprising a maintenance port (20) configured to couple to a handheld communicator to configure at least one of the industrial communication module and a sensor module (i.e. the highly versatile field device 10 may store and execute different modules, applications or routines that enable the device 10 to communicate with different client devices and/or applications via the communication interface 20, to thereby support multiple different uses and to enable multiple different client systems, such as control systems, maintenance systems, monitoring systems, etc., to have access to the same or different field device information (e.g., information from or about the field device hardware devices 12) within the device 10) (column 14 line 41 to column 15 line 27, column 42 lines 48 to 58).
Referring to Claim 16, Keyes, IV et al. disclose the industrial communication module of claim 1, Nixon et al. disclose further comprising a maintenance port configured to couple to a handheld communicator to calibrate at least one of the industrial communication module and a sensor module (i.e. applications associated with PAM systems may enable authorized user to view device data and to change device configuration settings, to run other applications on the device (such as calibration applications, testing applications, etc.) Other systems, such as monitoring systems, may have more limited access to the device hardware 12 or to the device data stored in the memory 16) (column 14 line 41 to column 16 line 4, column 42 lines 48 to 58; column 47 lines 46 to 53).
Referring to Claim 19, Keyes, IV et al. disclose the industrial communication module of claim 1, Nixon et al. disclose wherein the controller is configured to authenticate a sensor module to recognize an approved combination (i.e. the process of establishing this trust is called attestation, and the root of trust 302 of the field device is the point where attestation and authentication start. This root of trust, once established, extends through and provides the basis for each layer of trust. Thus, a root of trust component 302 is an important building block in the highly versatile field device 10 because the root of trust component 302 provides the basis for securing the device and all communications with the device.) (column 26 lines 18 to 51; column 39 line 64 to column 40 line 5).
Claims 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Keyes, IV et al. (US# 8,538,732) as applied to claim 1, and in view of Nixon et al. (US# 11,824,650).
Referring to Claim 17, Keyes, IV et al. disclose the industrial communication module of claim 1, however, Keyes, IV et al. did not explicitly disclose further comprising a local status indication.
In the same field of endeavor of a field device, Skow et al. teach that further comprising a local status indication (64) (i.e. the battery 50 is inserted in the correct direction and green LED indicator 64 illuminates. After correctly inserting the battery 50 into the module 12 and closing the cap 76, the operator can press the reset indicator 90 back into the body 74 as illustrated in FIG. 4E thereby disconnecting the LEDs 64 and 68 from the battery 50 to reduce battery drain) (column 4 lines 48 to 65; see Figures 4A-4E).
At the time of the effective filing date of the current application, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to recognize the need for incorporating the correct direction and green LED indicator to illuminates in the wireless field device taught by Skow et al. in the power source that supply power to the circuitry of the appendable device of Keyes, IV et al. because having the correct direction and green LED indicator to illuminates in the wireless field device would help the user operating the wireless field device.
Referring to Claim 18, Keyes, IV et al. in view of Skow et al. disclose the industrial communication module of claim 17, Skow et al. disclose wherein the status indication (64) comprises a plurality of LEDs (column 4 lines 48 to 65; see Figures 4A-4E).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 5 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Referring to claim 5, the following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior art fail to suggest limitations wherein the common interface includes at least one timing/control connection that is configured to provide clock sharing and time syncing capability between the industrial communication module and a sensor module for critical timed operations.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Refer to the enclosed PTO-892 for details.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NAM V NGUYEN whose telephone number is 571-272-3061. Fax number is (571) 273-3061. The examiner can normally be reached on 8:00AM-5:00PM Monday to Friday.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Quan-Zhen Wang can be reached on 571-272-3114. The fax phone numbers for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned are 571-273-8300 for regular communications.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/NAM V NGUYEN/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2685
Prosecution Insights