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
The action is in response to the Applicant’s communication filed on 10/12/2023.
Claims 1-20 are pending, where claims 1, 8 and 15 are independent.
This application claims the priority benefit of the international application no. PCT/US2021/029865 filed on 04/29/2021 incorporated herein.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 10/12/2023 has been filed on the filing date of the application. The submission is in-compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Specification objections (Title)
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
The following title is suggested: SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR CONFIGURABLE MESSAGE PROCESSING OF PRODUCT MANIFACTURING EXECUTION FACILITY. MPEP 606.01
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-3, 8-10 and 15-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which applicant regards as the invention.
Claims 1-3, 8-10 and 15-17 recite the limitation “different message”. The term “different” renders the claim indefinite because the claim(s) include(s) elements not actually disclosed or clearly defined in the specification and it is a broad term, thereby rendering the scope of the claim(s) unascertainable. See MPEP § 2173.05.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1,8 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception an abstract idea without significantly more.
Independent claim(s) recite(s) a judicial exception: The claim(s) recite(s) “receiving, from physical devices of a manufacturing facility, update messages for product manufacture processes, parsing the update messages to determine a value of a promoted attribute, grouping the update messages into different message groups and sequentially processing update messages grouped into a particular message group for a particular value of the promoted attribute”, as explained in detail below.
Claim 1: Ineligible
Step 1: The claim recites a series of steps and, therefore, is a process. Thus, the claim is directed to the same as a process, which is a statutory category of invention (Step 1: Yes).
Next, the claims are analyzed to determine directed to a judicial exception.
Under MPEP § 2106.04(a)(2), whether the claim recites:
any judicial exceptions, including certain groupings of abstract ideas (i.e., mathematical concepts, certain methods of organizing human activity such as a fundamental economic practice, or mental processes) ("Step 2A, Prong One"); and
additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application ("Step 2A, Prong Two").
Step 2A, Prong One: Claim 1 recites a judicial exception with the step of “receiving, from physical devices of a manufacturing facility, update messages for product manufacture processes, parsing the update messages to determine a value of a promoted attribute, grouping the update messages into different message groups and sequentially processing update messages grouped into a particular message group for a particular value of the promoted attribute”, as explained in detail below.
The limitations “receiving, from physical devices of a manufacturing facility, update messages for product manufacture processes, parsing the update messages to determine a value of a promoted attribute, grouping the update messages into different message groups and sequentially processing update messages grouped into a particular message group for a particular value of the promoted attribute” are observations, and therefore recite a mental process, such as an evaluation and judgement. See MPEP § 2106.04(a)(2), subsection III.
This limitation steps, as drafted, is a process that under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers (Mental processes” the concept performed in human such as observation, evaluation, judgement, opinion, etc.). Therefore, the claim is directed to an abstract idea of a judicial exception (Step 2A Prong one: Yes).
Step 2A Prong two: The additional elements “receiving, parsing the update messages, grouping the update messages into different message groups and sequentially processing update messages grouped into a particular message group” do not integrate the recited judicial exception into a practical application. The limitations are not structured (incomplete story) to any specific goal and utility of the invention, thereby the claims set forth inoperative and/or “lack of utility” for the claimed invention (i.e., why it would be useful and what is the specific goal). See MPEP 2107.
Further, the limitations that do not add meaningful limitations sufficient amount to significantly more (“inventive concept”) than the judicial exception, that merely further limiting the scope of abstract ideas or stating merely technical environment of these abstract ideas. The additional elements do not integrate the recited judicial exception into a practical application and the claim is directed to the judicial exception.
Therefore, this exception is not integrated into a practical application of the exception and based on the recited additional elements of the claims (Step 2A Prong two: No).
Next, the claim as a whole is analyzed to determine whether any element, or combination of elements, is sufficient to ensure the claim amounts to significantly more than the abstract idea.
Step 2B: In addition to the steps that describe the abstract idea of receiving, from physical devices of a manufacturing facility, update messages for product manufacture processes, parsing the update messages to determine a value of a promoted attribute, grouping the update messages into different message groups and sequentially processing update messages grouped into a particular message group for a particular value of the promoted attribute”, the claim recites the additional limitation of “receiving from physical devices and parsing for message reordering and update”. This additional element taken individually represents a general-purpose data collection and reordering, as evidence discussed in the background [paragraph 0001] “computer systems used to create, use, and manage data for products and other items - used to aid in the design, analysis, simulation, or manufacture of products - manufacturing operations management (MOM) systems, product data management (PDM) systems, product lifecycle management (PLM) systems, and more - management of product structures and product manufacturing” The elements receiving from physical devices and parsing for message reordering and update mainly based on data/information collection and change that are not sufficient amount to significantly more (“inventive concept”) than the judicial exception. As such, the claim is directed to a judicial exception. Accordingly, the claim is ineligible for patenting. (Step 2B: No)
As to independent Claims 8 and 15, reciting substantially similar subject matter as claim 1 for similar reasons as those outlined above, likewise do not amount to significantly more than the above noted abstract idea.
As to the dependent claims, reciting the similar elements of "messages collection, arrange, sequential process", which does not rise to a level of significantly more than the abstract idea, and are accordingly not eligible under 35 USC 101. See MPEP 2106.
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 of this title, 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
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 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.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under AIA 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cooper, et al. USP No. 9,588,503 B2.
As to claims 1, 8 and 15, Cooper discloses A method comprising: by a computing system: receiving, from physical devices of a manufacturing facility, update messages for product manufacture processes performed through the manufacturing facility (Cooper [col 1-2] “received ERP messages to one or more MES applications - manufacturing services bus - provide a platform by which business-level requests, - transformed and routed to selected MES applications (or other enterprise applications subscribed to the bus) to facilitate execution of the request at the control level - receive and analyze the ERP request in view of current control contexts reported by the respective MES applications - optimization algorithm considers the contents of the ERP request together with the current control statuses reported by the MES applications (e.g., machine or facility statuses, energy or material constraints, work schedules, etc.), and determines a preferred set of one or more MES applications to which the ERP message is to be routed to best achieve the desired result given a specified set of decision criteria” [col 3-20] “computer and servers, clients, programmable logic controllers (PLCs), communications modules, mobile computers, wireless components, control components - include one or more processors - include functionality shared across multiple components, systems, and/or networks - communicate and cooperate with various network devices across the network - any type of control, communications module, computer, Input/Output (I/O) device, sensor, actuator, and human machine interface - control various other devices such as I/O modules including analog, digital, programmed/intelligent I/O modules, other programmable controllers, communications modules, sensors, actuators, output devices, and the like” [claim 1] [abstract] see Fig. 1-11, computer and server, ERP, MES, gateway components, sensor, receive message, analyze ERP request, specifying production objective obviously provides computing system: receiving, from physical devices of a manufacturing facility, update messages for product manufacture processes performed through the manufacturing facility);
parsing the update messages to determine a value of a promoted attribute for each of the update messages; grouping the update messages into different message groups according to the determined value of the promoted attribute; and sequentially processing update messages grouped into a particular message group for a particular value of the promoted attribute (Cooper [claim 1] “MES applications - gateway component to receive a message specifying a production objective - constraint on performance of the production objective - parsing component configured to identify the production objective - optimization component to select an MES application from a plurality of available MES applications according to a defined selection criterion based on the production objective - route the message to the MES application” [col 1-2] “optimization algorithm considers the contents of the ERP request together with the current control statuses reported by the MES applications (e.g., machine or facility statuses, energy or material constraints, work schedules, etc.), and determines a preferred set of one or more MES applications to which the ERP message is to be routed to best achieve the desired result given a specified set of decision criteria” [col 3-20] “servers, clients, PLCs, communications modules, mobile computers, wireless components, control components - include functionality shared across multiple components, systems, and/or networks - any type of control” [abstract] see Fig. 1-11, ERP, MES, receive message, analyze ERP request, specifying and parsing to identify production objective, select from plurality of applications according to defined selection criterion, route message to MES application obviously provides parsing the update messages to determine a value of a promoted attribute for each of the update messages; grouping the update messages into different message groups according to the determined value of the promoted attribute; and sequentially processing update messages grouped into a particular message group for a particular value of the promoted attribute).
It would be therefore obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention that computer, server, ERP, MES, receive message from gateway components, sensors are assumed as receiving from physical devices of manufacturing facility.
As to claim 2, 9 and 16, Cooper further discloses The method of claim 1, wherein the promoted attribute is a manufacturing line attribute included in the update messages, and wherein grouping the updates messages comprises grouping the updates messages into the different message groups based on a manufacturing line of the manufacturing facility that the update messages are sent from (Cooper [claim 1] “MES applications - gateway component to receive a message specifying a production objective - constraint on performance of the production objective - parsing component configured to identify the production objective - optimization component to select an MES application from a plurality of available MES applications according to a defined selection criterion based on the production objective - route the message to the MES application” [col 1-2] “optimization algorithm considers the contents of the ERP request together with the current control statuses reported by the MES applications (e.g., machine or facility statuses, energy or material constraints, work schedules, etc.), and determines a preferred set of one or more MES applications to which the ERP message is to be routed to best achieve the desired result given a specified set of decision criteria” [col 3-20] “control systems 108-112 operate - production areas 1061-106N - batch control systems 1081-N (e.g., mixing systems), continuous control systems 1101-N (e.g., PID control systems), or discrete control systems 1121-N - include one or more industrial controllers facilitate monitoring and control of their respective processes - exchange data with the field devices - receives any combination of digital or analog signals from the field devices indicating a current state of the devices and their associated processes - executes a user-defined control program - different segments of a given manufacturing process, different products, etc. - monitor and manage multiple control systems - servers, clients, PLCs, communications modules, mobile computers, wireless components, control components - include functionality shared across multiple components, systems, and/or networks - any type of control” [abstract] see Fig. 1-11, plurality of control systems, production areas, batch control systems, continuous control systems, discrete control systems, plurality of industrial controllers, facilitate monitoring and control of respective processes, server, ERP, MES, receive message, analyze ERP request, specifying and parsing to identify production objective, select from plurality of applications according to defined selection criterion, route message to MES application according to defined selection criterion obviously provides manufacturing line attribute included in the update messages, and wherein grouping the updates messages comprises grouping the updates messages into the different message groups based on a manufacturing line of the manufacturing facility that the update messages are sent from).
As to claim 3, 10 and 17, Cooper further discloses The method of claim 1, further comprising processing update messages grouped into a different message group from the particular message group in parallel with the sequential processing of the update messages grouped into the particular message group (Cooper [claim 1] “MES applications - gateway component to receive a message specifying a production objective - constraint on performance of the production objective - parsing component configured to identify the production objective - optimization component to select an MES application from a plurality of available MES applications according to a defined selection criterion based on the production objective - route the message to the MES application” [col 1-2] “optimization algorithm considers the contents of the ERP request together with the current control statuses reported by the MES applications (e.g., machine or facility statuses, energy or material constraints, work schedules, etc.), and determines a preferred set of one or more MES applications to which the ERP message is to be routed to best achieve the desired result given a specified set of decision criteria” [col 3-20] “servers, clients, PLCs, communications modules, mobile computers, wireless components, control components - include functionality shared across multiple components, systems, and/or networks - any type of control” [abstract] see Fig. 1-11, server, ERP, MES, receive message, analyze ERP request, specifying and parsing to identify production objective, select from plurality of applications according to defined selection criterion, route message to MES application according to defined selection criterion obviously provides processing update messages grouped into a different message group from the particular message group in parallel with the sequential processing of the update messages grouped into the particular message group).
As to claim 4, 11 and 18, Cooper further discloses The method of claim 1, further comprising: maintaining a correlation state for the particular message group; and updating the correlation state as part of the sequential processing of the update messages grouped into the particular message group (Cooper [claim 1] “MES applications - gateway component to receive a message specifying a production objective - constraint on performance of the production objective - parsing component configured to identify the production objective - optimization component to select an MES application from a plurality of available MES applications according to a defined selection criterion based on the production objective - route the message to the MES application” [col 1-2] “optimization algorithm considers the contents of the ERP request together with the current control statuses reported by the MES applications (e.g., machine or facility statuses, energy or material constraints, work schedules, etc.), and determines a preferred set of one or more MES applications to which the ERP message is to be routed to best achieve the desired result given a specified set of decision criteria” [col 3-20] “servers, clients, PLCs, communications modules, mobile computers, wireless components, control components - include functionality shared across multiple components, systems, and/or networks - any type of control” [abstract] see Fig. 1-11, receive message, analyze ERP request, specify and identify production objective, select from plurality of applications according to defined selection criterion, route message to MES application according to defined selection criterion obviously provides maintaining a correlation state for the particular message group; and updating the correlation state as part of the sequential processing of the update messages grouped into the particular message group).
As to claim 5, 12 and 19, Cooper further discloses The method of claim 4, further comprising deleting the correlation state in response to determining that a product manufacture process for the particular message group has completed (Cooper [claim 1] “MES applications - gateway component to receive a message specifying a production objective - constraint on performance of the production objective - parsing component configured to identify the production objective - optimization component to select an MES application from a plurality of available MES applications according to a defined selection criterion based on the production objective - route the message to the MES application” [col 1-2] “optimization algorithm considers the contents of the ERP request together with the current control statuses reported by the MES applications (e.g., machine or facility statuses, energy or material constraints, work schedules, etc.), and determines a preferred set of one or more MES applications to which the ERP message is to be routed to best achieve the desired result given a specified set of decision criteria” [col 3-20] “servers, clients, PLCs, communications modules, mobile computers, wireless components, control components - include functionality shared across multiple components, systems, and/or networks - any type of control” [abstract] see Fig. 1-11, receive message, analyze ERP request, specify and identify production objective, select from plurality of applications according to defined selection criterion, route message to MES application according to defined selection criterion obviously provides deleting the correlation state in response to determining that a product manufacture process for the particular message group has completed).
As to claim 6, 13 and 20, Cooper further discloses The method of claim 4, further comprising sending a state notification to manufacturing scheduling system responsive to a determination that the correlation state has reach a certain state, wherein the manufacturing scheduling system is configured to control execution schedules for the physical devices of the manufacturing facility (Cooper [col 1-2] “optimization algorithm considers the contents of the ERP request together with the current control statuses reported by the MES applications (e.g., machine or facility statuses, energy or material constraints, work schedules, etc.), and determines a preferred set of one or more MES applications to which the ERP message is to be routed to best achieve the desired result given a specified set of decision criteria” [claim 1] “MES applications - gateway component to receive a message specifying a production objective - constraint on performance of the production objective - parsing component configured to identify the production objective - optimization component to select an MES application from a plurality of available MES applications according to a defined selection criterion based on the production objective - route the message to the MES application” [col 3-20] “control systems 108-112 operate - production areas 1061-106N - batch control systems 1081-N (e.g., mixing systems), continuous control systems 1101-N (e.g., PID control systems), or discrete control systems 1121-N - include one or more industrial controllers facilitate monitoring and control of their respective processes - exchange data with the field devices - receives any combination of digital or analog signals from the field devices indicating a current state of the devices and their associated processes - executes a user-defined control program - different segments of a given manufacturing process, different products, etc. - monitor and manage multiple control systems - servers, clients, PLCs, communications modules, mobile computers, wireless components, control components - include functionality shared across multiple components, systems, and/or networks - any type of control” [abstract] see Fig. 1-11, server, ERP, MES, receive message, analyze ERP request, select from plurality of applications according to defined selection criterion, request with current control statuses reported by MES applications (machine or facility statuses, energy or material constraints, work schedules), facilitate monitoring and control processes, route message to MES application according to defined selection criterion obviously provides sending a state notification to manufacturing scheduling system responsive to a determination that the correlation state has reach a certain state, wherein the manufacturing scheduling system is configured to control execution schedules for the physical devices of the manufacturing facility).
As to claim 7 and 14, Cooper further discloses The method of claim 1, further comprising setting a given attribute included in the update messages as the promoted attribute based on a user specification, a system configuration, or a predetermined default attribute (Cooper [claim 1] “MES applications - gateway component to receive a message specifying a production objective - constraint on performance of the production objective - parsing component configured to identify the production objective - optimization component to select an MES application from a plurality of available MES applications according to a defined selection criterion based on the production objective - route the message to the MES application” [col 1-2] “optimization algorithm considers the contents of the ERP request together with the current control statuses reported by the MES applications (e.g., machine or facility statuses, energy or material constraints, work schedules, etc.), and determines a preferred set of one or more MES applications to which the ERP message is to be routed to best achieve the desired result given a specified set of decision criteria” [col 3-20] “servers, clients, PLCs, communications modules, mobile computers, wireless components, control components - include functionality shared across multiple components, systems, and/or networks - any type of control” [abstract] see Fig. 1-11, receive message, analyze ERP request, specify and identify production objective, select from plurality of applications according to defined selection criterion, route message to MES application obviously provides setting a given attribute included in the update messages as the promoted attribute based on a user specification, a system configuration, or a predetermined default attribute).
Citation of Pertinent Prior Art
It is noted that any citations to specific, pages, columns, lines, or figures in the prior art references and any interpretation of the reference should not be considered to be limiting in any way. A reference is relevant for all it contains and may be relied upon for all that it would have reasonably suggested to one having ordinary skill in the art. See MPEP 2141.02 VI. PRIOR ART MUST BE CONSIDERED IN ITS ENTIRETY, i.e., as a whole and 2123.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The prior art made of record:
Lai, USP No. 8,108,470 B2 discloses a message management system includes dispatch rule, role table, and dispatch engine receives plurality of messages from a plurality of systems and transmits the messages to corresponding recipients based on dispatch rule, the role table, and content.
Rosenbaum, et al. USPGPub No. 2007/0179650 A1 discloses a monitoring equipment in fabricating semiconductor devices for processing different types of semiconductor devices with different process recipes.
Dorgelo, et al. USPGPub No. 2007/0076555 A1 discloses an industrial automation system for providing unified data access for disparate data servers associated with manufacturing process data.
McCondochie, et al. USPGPub No. 20180113979 A1 discloses a facility for processing data update messages establishes a plurality of units of execution each for executing data update message processing code and received data update message to a unit of execution without regard for which sending device it was received from.
Yang, et al. USP No. 9942145 B2 discloses a method for preparing BGP update messages for transmission and processing received update messages based on grouping path attributes to plurality of IP address identified with respective set identifiers and referring to certain set of path attributes provided BGP update message when sending subsequent update messages.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Md Azad whose telephone @(571)272-0553 or email: md.azad@uspto.gov. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Thu 9AM-5PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Mohammad Ali can be reached on (571)272-4105. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from Patent Center and the Private Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center or Private PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center and Private PAIR for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated- interview-request-air-form.
/Md Azad/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2119