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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on a German application DE 1020-22132391.9 filed on December 6, 2022.
DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1 – 9 and 28 – 39 are pending in the application.
Claims 1, 28, and 36, are independent.
Claims 10 – 27 are cancelled pursuant to an election/restriction requirement.
Claims 28 – 39 are new.
This action is Non-final office action.
Claim Objections
The claims are objected to because the amendment to the claims filed on 08/11/2026 does not comply with the requirements of 37 CFR 1.121(c) because the claims are labelled as (Previously Presented); however, at least some of the claims have been amended and should be labelled as: (Currently Amended). There are also new claims that are incorrectly labelled as “Previously Presented.” Amendments to the claims filed on or after July 30, 2003 must comply with 37 CFR 1.121(c) which states:
(c) Claims. Amendments to a claim must be made by rewriting the entire claim with all changes (e.g., additions and deletions) as indicated in this subsection, except when the claim is being canceled. Each amendment document that includes a change to an existing claim, cancellation of an existing claim or addition of a new claim, must include a complete listing of all claims ever presented, including the text of all pending and withdrawn claims, in the application. The claim listing, including the text of the claims, in the amendment document will serve to replace all prior versions of the claims, in the application. In the claim listing, the status of every claim must be indicated after its claim number by using one of the following identifiers in a parenthetical expression: (Original), (Currently amended), (Canceled), (Withdrawn), (Previously presented), (New), and (Not entered).
(1) Claim listing. All of the claims presented in a claim listing shall be presented in ascending numerical order. Consecutive claims having the same status of “canceled” or “not entered” may be aggregated into one statement (e.g., Claims 1–5 (canceled)). The claim listing shall commence on a separate sheet of the amendment document and the sheet(s) that contain the text of any part of the claims shall not contain any other part of the amendment.
(2) When claim text with markings is required. All claims being currently amended in an amendment paper shall be presented in the claim listing, indicate a status of “currently amended,” and be submitted with markings to indicate the changes that have been made relative to the immediate prior version of the claims. The text of any added subject matter must be shown by underlining the added text. The text of any deleted matter must be shown by strike-through except that double brackets placed before and after the deleted characters may be used to show deletion of five or fewer consecutive characters. The text of any deleted subject matter must be shown by being placed within double brackets if strike-through cannot be easily perceived. Only claims having the status of “currently amended,” or “withdrawn” if also being amended, shall include markings. If a withdrawn claim is currently amended, its status in the claim listing may be identified as “withdrawn—currently amended.”
(3) When claim text in clean version is required. The text of all pending claims not being currently amended shall be presented in the claim listing in clean version, i.e., without any markings in the presentation of text. The presentation of a clean version of any claim having the status of “original,” “withdrawn” or “previously presented” will constitute an assertion that it has not been changed relative to the immediate prior version, except to omit markings that may have been present in the immediate prior version of the claims of the status of “withdrawn” or “previously presented.” Any claim added by amendment must be indicated with the status of “new” and presented in clean version, i.e., without any underlining.
(4) When claim text shall not be presented; canceling a claim.
(i) No claim text shall be presented for any claim in the claim listing with the status of “canceled” or “not entered.”
(ii) Cancellation of a claim shall be effected by an instruction to cancel a particular claim number. Identifying the status of a claim in the claim listing as “canceled” will constitute an instruction to cancel the claim.
(5) Reinstatement of previously canceled claim. A claim which was previously canceled may be reinstated only by adding the claim as a “new” claim with a new claim number.
Claim Objections
Claims 30 and 31 are objected to because of the following informalities: Claims 30 and 31 depend on claim 1, but are nearly identical to claims 3 and 4 and should depend on claim 28. Appropriate correction is required.
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 and 6 – 9, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Allgaier et al. (US PG Pub. No. 20230259089), herein “Allgaier,” in view of Nelson et al. (PG Pub. No. 20060148410), herein “Nelson.”
Regarding claim 1,
Allgaier teaches a transmission unit (radio module) for use in a field device housing, the transmission unit comprising: (Par. 0007: “The energy and/or signal transmission between the field device and higher-level units is frequently carried out in accordance with the known 4 mA to 20 mA standard, in which a 4 mA to 20 mA current loop or a two-wire line is formed between the field device and the higher-level unit. In addition to the analog transmission of signals, there is the option of the measuring devices transmitting further information to the higher-level unit...” Par. 0035: “A radio module according to the present application is to be understood to be a unit consisting of a radio transmitter and a radio receiver, which is configured, on the one hand, for radio communication with a higher-level unit…”)
an evaluation unit (operating module) including: at least one sensor connection, (Par. 0056: “A modular field device system for building field devices is also in accordance with the invention, wherein the modular field device system comprises a plurality of housings, a plurality of sensors, a plurality of electronics modules that can be connected to the sensors, and a plurality of display and/or operating units…”)
an electronic circuit with at least one logic module, (Par. 0058: “…the electronics module may include, in particular, circuit components for measurement value processing, i.e. in particular computing units, such as Application Specific Integrated Circuits (ASIC), controllers or processors, filters or the like, as well as, optionally, one or more memory units.”)
wherein the at least one logic module processes sensor signals, at least one signal output, and at least one display interface; (Par. 0058: “…the electronics module may include, in particular, circuit components for measurement value processing…”)
and a display unit including: a display and an electronics unit including at least one other logic module, wherein the display unit is detachably connected with the evaluation unit, and (Par. 0049: “In a further development, the radio module may be integrated into a display and/or operating module. Field devices often have a removable and replaceable display and/or operating module which can be used, for example, for displaying measurement values and parameters on-site and/or for the input into and parameterization of the field device.” Examiner’s note – Paragraph 0049 teaches that the display may be removable but the operating module may not be removable and thus the display is removable from the main unit or the evaluation unit.)
Allgaier may implicitly teach but does not explicitly teach a trigger for diagnostics. However, Nelson teaches and wherein the display unit and/or the evaluation unit (diagnostic function 34 and/or controller 58) triggers at least one diagnostic measurement, including at least one test of a functionality of the evaluation unit. (Par. 0018: “In the configuration of FIG. 3, the diagnostic function 34 illustrated in FIG. 2 can be implemented, for example, within controller 58…” Par. 0019: “FIG. 4 is a simplified block diagram showing steps in accordance with the diagnostic algorithm of the present invention. FIG. 4 illustrates block diagram 100 which is initiated at start block 102. At block 104, the diagnostic test or algorithm is initiated as described below in more detail. Subsequent processing of the diagnostic result can be performed at block 106, as desired. An output, or other step, is performed at block 108 based upon the result of the diagnostic test. If desired, the diagnostic test can be repeated at block 110. For example, the diagnostic test can repeat at periodic or other desired intervals, or upon initiation from the detection of an event sensed in the process, or upon receipt of a command, or other cause to initiate diagnostics. The diagnostic processing optionally stops at block 112. The steps illustrated in FIG. 4 can be implemented, for example, by controller 58 based upon a program stored in memory 60.” Par. 0015: “In one specific example, the field device can include a supervisory digital control capability that can be used to manage the power by causing the wireless communication circuitry ( and the process variable generator) to enter a sleep mode when not active. The same circuitry can be used to execute algorithms for use in diagnosing components of the device, including the components used to provide the wireless capabilities of the device.” See figure 3 that shows the controller, that initiates the diagnostic function is part of the field device. See also Figure 4 that shows the start and initiation of the diagnostic test of the field device and its components (Par. 0015: “diagnosing components”) by controller 58 (Par. 0019). See also Par. 0014 that teaches the field device comprises a transmission unit for the field device. See also Par. 0013.)
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the field device that comprises a radio module and an evaluation unit (operating module) wherein the display is detachable from the field device and thus the operating module as in Allgaier with a field device that has a transmission unit as a wireless communication circuitry wherein the controller that runs diagnosis for the field device initiates (triggers) the start of the diagnosis as in Nelson in order to have a field device that has wireless capabilities and that can perform its own diagnostics eliminating the need for long wire runs and process installations.
Regarding claim 6,
The previously cited reference(s) teach the limitations of claim 1 which claim 6 depends. Nelson also teaches wherein triggering the at least one diagnostic measurement initiates a test cycle (Figure 4), and wherein the at least one diagnostic measurement, upon request via the display unit, is triggered or ended via the evaluation unit. (Par. 0019: “The diagnostic processing optionally stops at block 112. The steps illustrated in FIG. 4 can be implemented, for example, by controller 58 based upon a program stored in memory 60.”)
Regarding claim 7,
The previously cited reference(s) teach the limitations of claim 6 which claim 7 depends. Nelson also teaches wherein the evaluation unit and/or the display unit include at least one control unit, and wherein the at least one control unit performs the test cycle. (Par. 0019: “The diagnostic processing optionally stops at block 112. The steps illustrated in FIG. 4 can be implemented, for example, by controller 58 based upon a program stored in memory 60.”)
Regarding claim 8,
The previously cited reference(s) teach the limitations of claim 1 which claim 8 depends. Allgaier and Nelson also teaches that the evaluation unit and/or the display unit include at least one wireless communication interface, and wherein the wireless communication interface communicates with a mobile terminal and/or communicates data to an external memory. (Allgaier Par. 0052: “The field device further has an independent communication channel that enables a reading access at least to diagnostic data of the field device. The independent communication channel may be configured to be wireless or cable-based. For example, the independent communication channel may be the first radio channel, or a cable-based communication channel that enables a writing access to the diagnostic data.” Nelson: Par. 0014: “FIG. 1 is a simplified diagram showing an example process control or monitoring system 10 which includes a control room or control system 12 coupling to field devices 14 and 16. Field device 14 is shown coupled to process piping 18 and field device 16 is shown coupled to storage tank 20. Devices 14 and 16 include antennas 22 and 24, respectively, for transmitting and/or receiving information from antenna 26 associated with process control circuitry 13 of process control room 12. Devices 14 and 16 communicate using wireless radio frequency (RF) communication links 28 and 32 with circuitry 13 in control room 12. Field devices 14 and 16 include components to provide local power to the devices without requiring running additional wires. For example, device 14 and 16 can include solar cells and/or batteries for local power as illustrated below in greater detail.” See also Nelson figures 2 and 3.)
Regarding claim 9,
The previously cited reference(s) teach the limitations of claim 1 which claim 9 depends. Allgaier also teaches that the display unit is a mobile terminal wirelessly and/or directly coupled with the evaluation unit. (Par. 0021: “In another preferred embodiment, the automation technology field device (1) as described herein, characterized in that the radio module (9) is integrated into a display and/or operating module (7).” Par. 0077: “The block circuit diagram essentially shows the electronics module 6, the display and/or operating module 7 with the radio module 9, and a higher-level unit with a radio interface 100.” Par. 0036: “In particular, any communication standard for near distance communication and/or long-distance communication may be used. For example, the radio module may be a WLAN (Wireless Local Area Network), a GPRS (General Packet Radio Service), a mobile telephony…” See also figure 1. See also Hengstler cited below that teaches a removable display wherein the display has wireless capability with other (Par. 0059 and 0054).)
Claims 2 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Allgaier in view of Nelson in further view of Kondo et al. (PG Pub. No. 20220128617), herein “Kondo.”
Regarding claim 2,
The previously cited reference(s) teach the limitations of claim 1 which claim 2 depends. They do not teach a reference resistor. However, Kondo teaches wherein the display unit includes: at least one electronics unit with at least one microcontroller, wherein the at least one microcontroller controls the at least one diagnostic measurement, at least one reference resistor connected to an electronic circuit of the evaluation unit, and/or at least one reference sensor connection, wherein the at least one reference sensor connection connects a sensor with the electronic circuit of the evaluation unit; and at least one display. (Par. 0013: “The diagnostic device according to one or more embodiments is further provided with an electrical resistor between the generation circuit and the piezoelectric element, wherein based on a diagnostic reference voltage, an output signal of the piezoelectric element with respect to the diagnostic reference voltage, and a resistance value of the resistor when the diagnostic reference value is applied to the piezoelectric element via the resistor from the generation circuit, the control part calculates an insulation resistance value of the piezoelectric element and determines the health of the piezoelectric element based on the insulation resistance value. Therefore, it is possible to diagnose the health of the piezoelectric element regarding insulation resistance.” Par. 0024: “The diagnostic device relating to the comparative example applies an alternating current signal to a piezoelectric sensor at at least two different frequencies, and measures a response signal from the piezoelectric sensor generated in response to the applied alternating current signal. Furthermore, the diagnostic device relating to the comparative example diagnoses the state of the piezoelectric sensor as a function of the measurement output.” Examiner’s Note Allgaier also teaches sensors.)
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the field device that comprises a radio module and an evaluation unit (operating module) wherein the display is detachable from the field device and thus the operating module as in Allgaier with a field device that has a transmission unit as a wireless communication circuitry wherein the controller that runs diagnosis for the field device initiates (triggers) the start of the diagnosis as in Nelson with a field device that has diagnostic capability and has a reference resistor and sensors as in Kondo in order to have an inspection signal generation circuit via the electrical resistor and determine an resistance value of the piezoelectric element 90 from the output voltage. (Par. 0046)
Regarding claim 4,
The previously cited reference(s) teach the limitations of claim 1 which claim 4 depends. They do not teach the elements of claim 4. However, Kondo teaches
wherein the evaluation unit includes: a reference resistor connected via a switching device of the display unit to an electronic circuit of the evaluation unit; and/or a reference sensor (piezoelectric element 90) connected via a switching device of the display unit to an electronic circuit of the evaluation unit. (Par. 0059: “The field device 200 outputs the generated inspection signal to the piezoelectric element A90a and the piezoelectric element B90b via the electrical resistor 17. When the inspection signal is output to the piezoelectric element A90a and the piezoelectric element B90b, it is necessary to distinguish the response signal from the piezoelectric element A90a from the response signal from the piezoelectric element B90b. Therefore, a switch is provided between the electrical resistor 17 and the piezoelectric element A90a and the piezoelectric element B90b, and the microcontroller 11 may apply an inspection signal to one piezoelectric element by switching the switch in conjunction with the output of the inspection signal from the inspection signal generation circuit 16. Alternatively, the microcontroller 11 may control the inspection signal generation circuit 16, select a piezoelectric element 90 to be an output destination of the inspection signal, and control the inspection signal generation circuit 16 so as to output the inspection signal to the selected piezoelectric element 90.” See also Par. 0060. See also other paragraphs that teach a piezoelectric element connected according to claim 4.)
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Allgaier in view of Nelson in further view of Fehrenbach et al. (DE 102020102142 B3), herein “Fehrenbach.”
Regarding claim 3,
The previously cited reference(s) teach the limitations of claim 1 which claim 3 depends. They do not teach a status light of the diagnostic measure. However, Fehrenbach teaches that the display unit includes: at least one switching device, wherein the switching device activates and deactivates the at least one diagnostic measurement; at least one status light to output a status of the at least one diagnostic measurement; and/or at least one progress bar to display progress of the at least one diagnostic measurement. (Abstract: “The invention relates to a display and / or control unit 1, comprising a display device 2 for the optical display of an operating state of a field device and a transparent display device 3 for the optical display of at least one piece of status information, the display and / or control unit 1 at least one infrared radiation source 7 , 8, the transparent display device 3 optically displaying the at least one item of status information when the transparent display device 3…” Page 2, Par. 4: “The electronics unit of such a field device generally has different status displays, in particular status lights, which are generally designed as LEDs. The status displays provide information about e.g. B. a supply of the device, a device failure, a device status, or binary switching states are output. The NAMUR recommendation NE 107 "Self-monitoring and diagnosis of field devices" as of April 10, 2017 regulates the uniform use of such status lights.”)
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the field device that comprises a radio module and an evaluation unit (operating module) wherein the display is detachable from the field device and thus the operating module as in Allgaier with a field device that has a transmission unit as a wireless communication circuitry wherein the controller that runs diagnosis for the field device initiates (triggers) the start of the diagnosis as in Nelson with a field device that has a self-monitoring and diagnosis and a status indicator light as in Fehrenbach in order to clearly visibly display information on the operating state of field devices from a great distance. (Page 2, Par. 6 and 7)
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Allgaier in view of Nelson in further view of Plank et al. (US PG Pub. No. 20200371572), herein “Plank.”
Regarding claim 5,
The previously cited reference(s) teach the limitations of claim 1 which claim 5 depends. They do not teach a faceplate adapter or as amended: an electrical or mechanical connection. However, Plank teaches that the transmission unit includes: an electrical or mechanical connection of the display unit with the evaluation unit. (Par. 0010: “In some another embodiments, the building controller is housed within an enclosure having an enclosure faceplate and an enclosure body. The enclosure faceplate is configured to be detachably coupled to the enclosure body, and the PoE adapter is positioned within the enclosure faceplate.” See also Par. 0011, 0012, 0108, and 0109; and figures 16 and 17 showing the mechanical and electrical connection.)
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the field device that comprises a radio module and an evaluation unit (operating module) wherein the display is detachable from the field device and thus the operating module as in Allgaier with a field device that has a transmission unit as a wireless communication circuitry wherein the controller that runs diagnosis for the field device initiates (triggers) the start of the diagnosis as in Nelson with a field device that has a detachable faceplate with mechanical and electrical connections as in Plank in order to alleviate the drawback(s) of conventional multiple wiring schemes. (Par. 0005)
Claims 28 and 32 - 35 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Allgaier in view of Nelson in further view of Hengstler et al. (PG Pub. No. 20240031859), herein “Hengstler.”
Regarding claim 28,
The previously cited reference(s) teach the limitations of claim 1 which parallel those element of claim 28. Even though Allgaier may implicitly teach that the display includes the electronics and logic module; Hengstler explicitly teaches the element that display unit including: a display and an electronics unit including the at least one logic module, (Par. 0010: “Moreover, field devices with a modular configuration are known from the prior art in which a selection may be made from amongst a plurality of combinable sensors, housings, electronics units and operating and/or display units, and a corresponding field device may be composed therefrom. Such a modular field device design is being offered by Vega Grieshaber KG, for example. Generally, a sensor, a corresponding electronics module providing for measurement value processing as well as an interface with a control unit and optionally with a utilized fieldbus, and various display and/or operating units can be combined.”)
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the field device that comprises a radio module and an evaluation unit (operating module) wherein the display is detachable from the field device and thus the operating module as in Allgaier with a field device that has a transmission unit as a wireless communication circuitry wherein the controller that runs diagnosis for the field device initiates (triggers) the start of the diagnosis as in Nelson with a field device that has a display that can be combined with other electronics including a control unit and other operating units or as separate units as in Hengstler in order to have a field device with a modular configuration wherein it can be utilized with a more flexible configuration(s). (Par. 0015 and 0016)
Regarding claim 32 - 35,
The previously cited reference(s) teach the limitations of claim 28 which claims 32 – 35 depend. Claims 32 – 25 parallel those element of claims 6 -9, respectively. Allgaier and Nelson teach the elements of claims 6 – 9. Therefore, claims 32 – 35 are taught by Allgaier, Nelson, and Hengstler.
Claims 29 and 31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Allgaier in view of Nelson in further view of Hengstler in further view of Kondo.
Regarding claim 29,
The previously cited reference(s) teach the limitations of claim 28 which claim 29 depends. They do not teach a reference resistor. However, Kondo teaches wherein the display unit includes: at least one microcontroller, wherein the at least one microcontroller controls the diagnostic measurement, at least one reference resistor connected to an electronic circuit of the evaluation unit, and/or at least one reference sensor connection, wherein the at least one reference sensor connection connects a sensor with the electronic circuit of the evaluation unit. (Par. 0013: “The diagnostic device according to one or more embodiments is further provided with an electrical resistor between the generation circuit and the piezoelectric element, wherein based on a diagnostic reference voltage, an output signal of the piezoelectric element with respect to the diagnostic reference voltage, and a resistance value of the resistor when the diagnostic reference value is applied to the piezoelectric element via the resistor from the generation circuit, the control part calculates an insulation resistance value of the piezoelectric element and determines the health of the piezoelectric element based on the insulation resistance value. Therefore, it is possible to diagnose the health of the piezoelectric element regarding insulation resistance.” Par. 0024: “The diagnostic device relating to the comparative example applies an alternating current signal to a piezoelectric sensor at at least two different frequencies, and measures a response signal from the piezoelectric sensor generated in response to the applied alternating current signal. Furthermore, the diagnostic device relating to the comparative example diagnoses the state of the piezoelectric sensor as a function of the measurement output.” Examiner’s Note Allgaier also teaches sensors.)
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the field device that comprises a radio module and an evaluation unit (operating module) wherein the display is detachable from the field device and thus the operating module as in Allgaier with a field device that has a transmission unit as a wireless communication circuitry wherein the controller that runs diagnosis for the field device initiates (triggers) the start of the diagnosis as in Nelson with a field device that has a display that can be combined with other electronics including a control unit and other operating units or as separate units as in Hengstler with a field device that has diagnostic capability and has a reference resistor and sensors as in Kondo in order to have an inspection signal generation circuit via the electrical resistor and determine an resistance value of the piezoelectric element 90 from the output voltage. (Par. 0046)
Regarding claim 31,
The previously cited reference(s) teach the limitations of claim [28] which claim 31 depends. They do not teach the elements of claim 31. However, Kondo teaches
wherein the evaluation unit includes: a reference resistor connected via a switching device of the display unit to an electronic circuit of the evaluation unit; and/or a reference sensor (piezoelectric element 90) connected via a switching device of the display unit to an electronic circuit of the evaluation unit. (Par. 0059: “The field device 200 outputs the generated inspection signal to the piezoelectric element A90a and the piezoelectric element B90b via the electrical resistor 17. When the inspection signal is output to the piezoelectric element A90a and the piezoelectric element B90b, it is necessary to distinguish the response signal from the piezoelectric element A90a from the response signal from the piezoelectric element B90b. Therefore, a switch is provided between the electrical resistor 17 and the piezoelectric element A90a and the piezoelectric element B90b, and the microcontroller 11 may apply an inspection signal to one piezoelectric element by switching the switch in conjunction with the output of the inspection signal from the inspection signal generation circuit 16. Alternatively, the microcontroller 11 may control the inspection signal generation circuit 16, select a piezoelectric element 90 to be an output destination of the inspection signal, and control the inspection signal generation circuit 16 so as to output the inspection signal to the selected piezoelectric element 90.” See also Par. 0060. See also other paragraphs that teach a piezoelectric element connected according to claim 4.)
Claim 30 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Allgaier in view of Nelson in further view of Hengstler in further view of Fehrenbach.
Regarding claim 30,
The previously cited reference(s) teach the limitations of claim 1 which claim 3 depends. They do not teach a status light of the diagnostic measure. However, Fehrenbach teaches that wherein the display unit includes: at least one switching device, wherein the switching device activates and deactivates the diagnostic measurement; at least one status light to output a status of the diagnostic measurement; and/or at least one progress bar to display progress of the diagnostic measurement. (Abstract: “The invention relates to a display and / or control unit 1, comprising a display device 2 for the optical display of an operating state of a field device and a transparent display device 3 for the optical display of at least one piece of status information, the display and / or control unit 1 at least one infrared radiation source 7 , 8, the transparent display device 3 optically displaying the at least one item of status information when the transparent display device 3…” Page 2, Par. 4: “The electronics unit of such a field device generally has different status displays, in particular status lights, which are generally designed as LEDs. The status displays provide information about e.g. B. a supply of the device, a device failure, a device status, or binary switching states are output. The NAMUR recommendation NE 107 "Self-monitoring and diagnosis of field devices" as of April 10, 2017 regulates the uniform use of such status lights.”)
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the field device that comprises a radio module and an evaluation unit (operating module) wherein the display is detachable from the field device and thus the operating module as in Allgaier with a field device that has a transmission unit as a wireless communication circuitry wherein the controller that runs diagnosis for the field device initiates (triggers) the start of the diagnosis as in Nelson with a field device that has a display that can be combined with other electronics including a control unit and other operating units or as separate units as in Hengstler with a field device that has a self-monitoring and diagnosis and a status indicator light as in Fehrenbach in order to clearly visibly display information on the operating state of field devices from a great distance. (Page 2, Par. 6 and 7)
Claims 36 - 39 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Allgaier in view of Nelson in further view of Balentine et al. (PG Pub. No. 20100211197), herein “Balentine.”
Regarding claims 36 – 39, they are directed to a method of steps to implement the system or apparatuses set forth in claim 1 with the additional limitation of transmitting the result to a device. Allgaier and Nelson teach the claimed system or apparatuses in claim 1, but do not teach sending the diagnostic result to a device. However, Balentine teaches transmitting the result to a device. Par. 0037: “FIG. 4 illustrates an example schema 400 that may be used to graphically represent the example process control system 100 of FIG. 1. As shown in FIG. 4, the example process control system 100 includes the example workstation 120 and the example process controller 110 of FIG. 1. The example controller 110 of FIG. 4 has a set of attributes 405 that includes, among other things, a name 406 and a description 407. The example controller 110 of FIG. 4 also has a set of capabilities 410, which are defined and/or specified as a set of attributes 415, and any number and/or type(s) of additional properties 420. For example, the controller 110 may include: (a) one or more interface cards 425 that allow the controller 110 to communicate with other components of the example process control system 100 (for example, any of the example field devices 130-134 and/or the example I/O gateway 140 of FIG. 1), (b) commands 430 that define and/or permit the execution of operations, such as calibration, self-diagnosis, etc., and/or (c) menus 435 may be used to implement a first-level interface structure without having to use a specialized programming language. The example commands 430 of FIG. 4 could be defined such that the commands are automatically inserted into the menu structure 435 of the corresponding component. The example menus 435 of FIG. 4 may be used to allow a user to access basic operations of the corresponding element, such as configuration, run-time operation and/or diagnostics. Examiner’s Note – See also Shingo Seki cited in the conclusion section. Therefore, Allgaier, Nelson, and Balentine teach the method of steps in claim 36.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the field device that comprises a radio module and an evaluation unit (operating module) wherein the display is detachable from the field device and thus the operating module as in Allgaier with a field device that has a transmission unit as a wireless communication circuitry wherein the controller that runs diagnosis for the field device initiates (triggers) the start of the diagnosis as in Nelson with a field device that does self-diagnosis and sends the information to other components including a user as in Balentine in order to allow a user to view and access basic operations such as diagnostics. (Par. 0037).
Regarding claim 37,
The previously cited reference(s) teach the limitations of claim 36 which claim 37 depends. Nelson also teaches wherein the triggering input is received from the device or another device. (Par. 0018: “In the configuration of FIG. 3, the diagnostic function 34 illustrated in FIG. 2 can be implemented, for example, within controller 58…” Par. 0019: “FIG. 4 is a simplified block diagram showing steps in accordance with the diagnostic algorithm of the present invention. FIG. 4 illustrates block diagram 100 which is initiated at start block 102. At block 104, the diagnostic test or algorithm is initiated as described below in more detail. Subsequent processing of the diagnostic result can be performed at block 106, as desired. An output, or other step, is performed at block 108 based upon the result of the diagnostic test. If desired, the diagnostic test can be repeated at block 110. For example, the diagnostic test can repeat at periodic or other desired intervals, or upon initiation from the detection of an event sensed in the process, or upon receipt of a command, or other cause to initiate diagnostics. The diagnostic processing optionally stops at block 112. The steps illustrated in FIG. 4 can be implemented, for example, by controller 58 based upon a program stored in memory 60.” Par. 0015: “In one specific example, the field device can include a supervisory digital control capability that can be used to manage the power by causing the wireless communication circuitry ( and the process variable generator) to enter a sleep mode when not active. The same circuitry can be used to execute algorithms for use in diagnosing components of the device, including the components used to provide the wireless capabilities of the device.” See figure 3 that shows the controller, that initiates the diagnostic function is part of the field device. See also Figure 4 that shows the start and initiation of the diagnostic test of the field device and its components (Par. 0015: “diagnosing components”) by controller 58 (Par. 0019). See also Par. 0014 that teaches the field device comprises a transmission unit for the field device. See also Par. 0013.)
Regarding claim 38,
The previously cited reference(s) teach the limitations of claim 36 which claim 38 depends. Balentine also teaches wherein the device is a remote device. (Par. 0020, 0021, and figure 1.)
Regarding claim 39,
The previously cited reference(s) teach the limitations of claim 36 which claim 39 depends. Balentine also teaches rendering, at the device and based on transmitting the result to the device, the result. (Par. 0037. Examiner’s Note - See also Shingo Seki cited in the conclusion section.)
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Anderson (US PG Pub. No. 20180113446) is related to the instant application and teaches a transmission unit for use in a field device housing, the transmission unit comprising: (Par. 0005: “The field devices, which may be, for example, valves, valve positioners, switches, and transmitters (e.g., temperature, pressure, level and flow rate sensors), are located within the process environment and generally perform physical or process control functions such as opening or closing valves, measuring process parameters, etc.”) Anderson also teaches a diagnostic module (247).
KIESBAUER et al. (WO 2018046556 A1) may also teach a field device field control and regulating electronics that performs a diagnostic function wherein the control electronics trigger the diagnostic start command. (Page 14, Par. 1, lines 12 – 15).
Shingo Seki (JP 6971428 B1) may also teach the last element of claim 9 on page 6, Par. 2: “The environment monitoring unit 44 of the server machine 40 acquires the transmission level waveform STL, that is, the level waveform SL for each level waveform period TL, and sequentially stores the contents in the digital signal storage unit 46. Further, the environment monitoring unit 44 performs an abnormality sign diagnosis based on the stored level waveform SL, and transmits the diagnosis result to the information display unit 54 of the user terminal 50. The information display unit 54 displays the received diagnosis result. As a result, the user can confirm the diagnosis result of the abnormality sign diagnosis based on the display content of the information display unit 54. Further, the user can display the details of the diagnosis result on the information display unit 54 by operating the input unit 58 of the user terminal 50.”
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHAD G ERDMAN whose telephone number is (571)270-0177. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 7am - 3pm or 4pm EST..
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, Kenneth Lo can be reached at (571) 272-9774. 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.
/CHAD G ERDMAN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2116
