DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-8, 11, 15-20, 23, 25-33 and 36 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Walter et al., US Patent Application Publication no. 2016/0321061 [Walter], in view of Lai et al., US Patent Application Publication no. 2005/0222889 [Lai].
Regarding claims 1, 15 and 26, Walter discloses a local controller configured to control one or more load control devices in an area of a building in which a load control system is installed [one or more site controllers manages, controls and monitors one or more networks of field devices, paragraphs 0017-0019 and 0029], the local controller comprising:
a communication circuit [a site controller communicates with an enterprise controller and the field devices, paragraphs 0016-0019]; and
at least one control circuit configured to:
receive, via the communication circuit from a cloud maintenance supervisor operating at a cloud server, an indication of a maintenance task to be performed on the one or more load control devices [the site controller receives a field device firmware file from the enterprise controller, paragraphs 0016-0017];
perform the maintenance task on the one or more load control devices configured to be controlled by the local controller [the field device receives the firmware file from the site controller and replaces the current firmware with the firmware filed received from the site controller, paragraphs 0011 and 0018];
determine results of the maintenance task performed on the one or more load control devices configured to be controlled by the local controller [the site controller receives field device firmware file transfer progress/status updates from the field devices, paragraph 0018]; and
send the results of the maintenance task to the cloud maintenance supervisor operating at the cloud server [the enterprise controller receives field device firmware file transfer progress/status updates from the site controller, paragraphs 0016 and 0023].
Walter does not disclose checking for a provided trigger condition before performing a firmware update at the field devices. Like Walter, Lai discloses a building facility in which building management field devices are subject to maintenance operations. Lai recognizes that it would be advantageous to avoid performing maintenance on building field devices, such as heating and air conditioning equipment, at times where areas associated with the building field devices are occupied [paragraph 0105]. Specifically, Lai discloses receiving notifications of planned events to avoid conflicts with scheduled maintenance activities with planned events and postponing the maintenance activities that were scheduled to occur during the planned event [paragraph 0105]. Since it was known in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to postpone maintenance activities for building field devices when areas associated with the field devices are occupied, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to apply the Lai teachings to the Walter system by specifying triggering conditions for installing firmware on the field devices that are based on occupancy in order to avoid conflicts in which maintenance would be performed while an area associated with a field device is occupied [Lai, paragraph 0105].
Regarding claims 2, 16 and 27, Walter, as described above, discloses that a site may have one or more site controllers which control one or more networks of field devices [paragraph 0019]. Walter and Lai do not specifically disclose that the different site controllers control field devices that are located in different rooms of a site. Examiner takes official notice that conventional building management systems before the effective filing date of the claimed invention were intuitively organized such that different intermediate controllers were assigned to control respective groups of field devices that were located in different rooms of the buildings (i.e. a first intermediate controller controls field devices located in a first room or set of rooms and a second intermediate controller controls field devices located in a second room or set of rooms). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to apply the Walter and Lai field device firmware updating teachings to conventional building management systems that include different intermediate controllers assigned to control respective groups of field devices located in different rooms of the buildings in order to facilitate updating the firmware of the field devices while avoiding the occurrence of firmware updates in field devices in occupied rooms [Walter, paragraph 0015 and Lai, paragraph 0105].
Regarding claims 3, 25 and 28, Walter and Lai further disclose that the local controller is a first local controller, wherein the local maintenance supervisor is a first local maintenance supervisor, the method further comprising: receiving the maintenance task at a second local controller of the plurality of local controllers configured to control a second one or more of the plurality of load control devices in a second area of the building; identifying, at a second local maintenance supervisor of the second local controller, the one or more triggering criteria of the at least one rule for triggering the performance of the maintenance task on the second one or more load control devices configured to be controlled by the second local controller; determining, at the second local maintenance supervisor of the second local controller, that the one or more triggering criteria of the at least one rule are met; performing the maintenance task on the second one or more load control devices configured to be controlled by the second local controller; determining results of the maintenance task performed on the second one or more load control devices; and sending the results of the maintenance task performed on the second one or more load control devices configured to be controlled by the second local controller to the cloud maintenance supervisor [one or more site controllers manages, controls and monitors one or more networks of field devices, Walter, paragraphs 0017-0019 and 0029. Each of the one or more site controllers performs the field device firmware updating functions recited above in the rejection of claim 1].
Regarding claims 4 and 29, Walter further discloses determining, at the cloud maintenance supervisor, that a maintenance event has been scheduled in response to input from a user device, wherein the maintenance event comprises the maintenance task and the one or more triggering criteria; and transmitting the maintenance task and the one or more triggering criteria from the cloud maintenance supervisor to the local maintenance supervisor on the local controller [the firmware update is scheduled in response to input from an enterprise manager to a user interface of the enterprise controller and the site controller receives a field device firmware file from the enterprise controller, paragraphs 0016-0017 and 0034].
Regarding claims 5, 17 and 30, Walter further discloses that the maintenance task comprises at least one of a programming update, a firmware update, testing to verify system performance, or a recalibration procedure [the field device receives the firmware file from the site controller and replaces the current firmware with the firmware filed received from the site controller, paragraphs 0011 and 0018].
Regarding claims 6, 18 and 31 Lai further discloses that the one or more triggering criteria comprise one or more of a checked-in status, an occupancy status, a time of day, a period of time since last occupancy, a period of time since a change in the checked-in status, a period of time since last performance of the maintenance task, an indication of an override, a daylight intensity value, a temperature of a room, a temperature outside of the room/building, a lighting intensity value, a status of a load control device, a status of an electrical load, or a status of an occupant [maintenance is postponed when a space is occupied such that it is subsequently performed when a space is not occupied, paragraph 0105].
Regarding claims 7, 19 and 32, Lai further discloses that the one or more triggering criteria comprise an occupancy status of the first area of the building, and wherein the one or more triggering criteria are determined to be met when the first area of the building is determined to be unoccupied in response to data received from an occupancy sensor [maintenance is postponed when a space is determined to be occupied (an event is determined to be scheduled) such that it is subsequently performed when a space is not occupied (no event is scheduled), paragraph 0105].
Regarding claims 8, 20 and 33, Lai further discloses that the one or more triggering criteria comprise a checked-in status of the areas of the building, and wherein the triggering criteria are determined to be met when the checked-in status of the areas of the building indicate that the areas are checked out [maintenance is postponed when an event is determined to be scheduled for a space in the building such that it is subsequently performed when no event is scheduled for the space, paragraph 0105].
Regarding claims 11, 23 and 36, Walter and Lai further disclose that the maintenance task comprises a programming update or a firmware update [the field device receives the firmware file from the site controller and replaces the current firmware with the firmware filed received from the site controller, Walter paragraphs 0011 and 0018], and wherein the one or more triggering criteria comprise at least one of a checked- in status or an occupancy status [maintenance is postponed when a space is determined to be occupied (an event is determined to be scheduled) such that it is subsequently performed when a space is not occupied (no event is scheduled), Lai, paragraph 0105].
Claims 9, 10, 21, 22, 34 and 35 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Walter et al., US Patent Application Publication no. 2016/0321061 [Walter] and Lai et al., US Patent Application Publication no. 2005/0222889 [Lai], in view of Nelson et al., US Patent Application Publication no. 2018/0095142 [Nelson].
Regarding claims 9, 21 and 34, Walter and Lai do not specifically disclose that the maintenance task comprises testing to verify system performance, and wherein each load control device of the plurality of load control devices comprise a lighting device installed in an emergency lighting fixture. Like Walter and Lai, Nelson discloses a system which determines appropriate times to perform maintenance tasks to reduce inconvenience to an occupant. Specifically, Nelson recognizes that testing of emergency lighting may cause disruption to occupants of a space that is affected by the emergency lighting [paragraphs 0003 and 0009]. Nelson further discloses functionality for scheduling a time to perform emergency lighting testing to prevent disruption [paragraph 0010]. Since emergency lighting systems with test scheduling functionality were known in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to apply the Walter and Lai field teachings to known emergency lighting systems in order to ensure a room is not occupied while the emergency lighting is tested [Lai, paragraph 0105].
Regarding claims 10, 22 and 35, Lai further discloses that the one or more triggering criteria comprise at least one of a checked-in status, an occupancy status, or a period of time since last performance of the maintenance task [maintenance is postponed when a space is determined to be occupied (an event is determined to be scheduled) such that it is subsequently performed when a space is not occupied (no event is scheduled), Lai, paragraph 0105].
Claims 12, 13, 38 and 39 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Walter et al., US Patent Application Publication no. 2016/0321061 [Walter] and Lai et al., US Patent Application Publication no. 2005/0222889 [Lai], in view of Huang et al., US Patent Application Publication no. 2009/0177601 [Huang].
Regarding claims 12 and 38, Walter and Lai, as described above, disclose that the one or more triggering criteria comprise occupancy status. Walter and Lai do not disclose that the occupancy status is determined using an occupancy sensor located in the first area. Like Walter and Lai, Huang discloses a system for postponing installation of a software update when it is determined that a user is present. Specifically, Huang discloses using an occupancy sensor to determine the occupancy status [presence/attention detection mechanism, paragraph 0030]. Since it was known in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use occupancy sensors to determine occupancy status for a space, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate an occupancy sensor into the Walter and Lai system to determine occupancy of a space in order to provide a more accurate determination of whether users are present in the space when determining the occupancy status to control installation of the firmware updates [Huang, paragraphs 0004 and 0030].
Regarding claims 13 and 39, Huang further discloses that the one or more triggering criteria comprise a predefined time of day, the method further comprising: determining, at the local maintenance supervisor of the local controller, a current time of day; wherein, when the current time of day is within the predefined time of day and the occupancy status indicates that the first area is unoccupied, the maintenance task is performed on the first one or more load control devices configured to be controlled by the local controller; and wherein, when the current time of day is outside of the predefined time of day or the occupancy status indicates that the first area is occupied, the maintenance task is performed on the first one or more load control devices configured to be controlled by the local controller at a later time when the current time of day is within the predefined time of day and the first area is determined to be unoccupied [time of day may also be a factor, e.g. updates may be postponed until a user is not only not present, but it also not likely to resume working, such as midnight, paragraph 0030].
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 14, 24 and 37 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.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
The prior art of record does not teach or suggest the subject matter of claims 1, 15 and 26, in combination with identifying, at the local maintenance supervisor operating at the local controller, the one or more second triggering criteria for triggering a performance of the maintenance task on the one or more load control devices of the plurality of load control devices in the area of the building configured to be controlled by the local controller, determining, based on the one or more first triggering criteria and the one or more second triggering criteria, a conflict in performance of the first maintenance task and the second maintenance task on the one or more load control devices of the plurality of load control devices configured to be controlled by the local controller, and prioritizing performance of the first maintenance task and the second maintenance task on the one or more load control devices of the plurality of load control devices configured to be controlled by the local controller.
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.
Fuchs et al., US Patent Application Publication no. 2024/0126529 discloses determining an appropriate time to apply a firmware update to a household appliance based on occupancy data.
Atchison et al., US Patent Application Publication no. 2018/0267794 discloses performing software updates to HVAC zone controllers when no call for heating or cooling is active.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PAUL B YANCHUS III whose telephone number is (571)272-3678. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9am-5pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Kamini Shah can be reached at (571) 272-2279. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/PAUL B YANCHUS III/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2115 March 6, 2026