DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks, filed 4/6/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of the claim(s) under 35 U.S.C. 102 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Wouhaybi et al. U.S. PGPub 2020/0310394.
Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks, filed 4/6/2026, with respect to the 35 U.S.C. 112 rejection have been fully considered and are persuasive. The 35 U.S.C. 112 rejection of claims 6 and 11 has been withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments filed 4/6/2026 in regards to the 35 U.S.C. 101 rejection have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Regarding claim 1, the Examiner asserts that the “safety network… comprising a safety controller implemented on at least one hardware processor” is still directed toward non-statutory subject matter since the claim is directed toward the “safety controller” and not the “hardware processor”, which can still be interpreted as software. The Examiner recommends stating that the safety network comprises a hardware processor and a memory that implements/executes a safety controller. Regarding claim 20, Examiner asserts that the claimed “safety representative implemented on at least one hardware processor” is still directed toward non-statutory subject matter since the “safety representative” still could be interpreted as software. The Examiner recommends stating a hardware processor and a memory that implement/execute a safety representative.
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 1-18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claim(s) does/do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because the safety network of claim 1 comprises a safety controller, which could be interpreted as software, which is non-statutory subject matter. Regarding claim 20, the “safety representative” could be interpreted as software, which is non-statutory subject matter.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-4, 9 and 15-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wouhaybi et al. U.S. PGPub 2020/0310394 (hereinafter “Wouhaybi”).
Regarding claims 1, 19 and 20, Wouhaybi discloses a safety network for supporting one or more devices in intermittent use (wherein sensors/actuators are used intermittently), the safety network being susceptible of verification and/or validation as a safety loop and comprising a safety controller implemented on at least one hardware processor and configured to: assess the integrity (via quality/safety assessment of the safety network (e.g. ¶290 and 410-424), and monitor safety sensors and cause safety actuators to respond to any detected safety events in accordance with safety rules (e.g. ¶73, 280, 292 and 666), wherein the safety network implements one or more safety representatives, each configured to maintain a virtual representation (e.g. data model of sensor/actuator) of an associated device in intermittent use, the virtual representation including at least one virtual safety sensor and/or virtual safety actuator (e.g. ¶290 and 410-424), make the virtual representation available for integrity assessment (via quality/safety assessment) and monitoring by the safety controller (e.g. ¶73, 280, 292 and 666), and perform wireless (e.g. ¶505-511) data synchronization between the virtual representation and the associated device (e.g. ¶376-391, 410-424 and 557-568), wherein the virtual representation further includes an at least two-valued activation indicator (e.g. pass/fail score), which determines a safety rule (e.g. constraint boundaries) for the safety controller's monitoring and/or for the safety representative's data synchronization (e.g. ¶376-391, 410-424 and 557-568).
Regarding claim 2, Wouhaybi discloses the safety network of claim 1, wherein the safety controller is configured to assign a value to the activation indicator of the virtual representation on the basis of data related to the associated device from the safety sensors (e.g. ¶376-391, 410-424 and 557-568).
Regarding claim 3, Wouhaybi discloses the safety network of claim 1, wherein the associated device is configured to assign a value to the activation indicator of the virtual representation (e.g. ¶376-391, 410-424 and 557-568).
Regarding claim 4, Wouhaybi discloses the safety network of claim 1, wherein a supervisory system associated with the device in intermittent use is configured to assign a value to the activation indicator of the virtual representation (e.g. ¶376-391, 410-424 and 557-568).
Regarding claim 9, Wouhaybi discloses the safety network of claim 1, wherein a positive value of the activation indicator determines a safety rule stipulating that the safety representative shall perform data synchronization between the virtual representation and the associated device (e.g. ¶376-391, 410-424 and 557-568).
Regarding claim 15, Wouhaybi discloses the safety network of claim 1, which implements multiple safety representatives configured to maintain respective virtual representations of a single associated device in intermittent use or of a group of such devices (e.g. ¶73 and 127).
Regarding claim 16, Wouhaybi discloses the safety network of claim 1, wherein the safety network is operable to implement at least one validation interface to facilitate verification and/or validation of a safety function in an associated device in intermittent use, each validation interface configured to apply test signals in the associated device and monitor status or measurement signals (e.g. ¶290 and 410-424).
Regarding claim 17, Wouhaybi discloses the safety network of claim 1, wherein the associated device comprises a local safety controller configured to execute at least part of the safety controller's monitoring in accordance with the safety rules (e.g. ¶290 and 410-424).
Regarding claim 18, Wouhaybi discloses the safety network of claim 1, further comprising: a plurality of safety sensors and safety actuators (e.g. ¶73, 280, 292 and 666; Fig. 1A-1B).
Regarding claim 19, Wouhaybi discloses a method of operating a safety network for supporting one or more devices in intermittent use, the method comprising: repeatedly assessing the integrity of the safety network (e.g. ¶290 and 410-424); repeatedly monitoring a plurality of safety sensors to detect safety events (e.g. ¶73, 280, 292 and 666); responding to any detected safety events using a plurality of safety actuators and in accordance with safety rules; and making the safety network available for verification and/or validation as a safety loop (e.g. ¶290 and 410-424), the method characterized by maintaining a virtual representation of an associated one of said devices in intermittent use, the virtual representation including at least one virtual safety sensor and/or at least one virtual safety actuator (e.g. ¶73, 280, 292 and 666); making the virtual representation available for said integrity assessment and monitoring (e.g. ¶290 and 410-424); and performing wireless (e.g. ¶505-511) data synchronization between the virtual representation and the associated device, wherein the virtual representation further includes an at least two-valued activation indicator, which determines a safety rule for said monitoring and/or said data synchronization (e.g. ¶376-391, 410-424 and 557-568).
Regarding claim 20, Wouhaybi discloses a safety representative implemented on at least one hardware processor in a safety network for supporting one or more devices in intermittent use, the safety representative comprising: a virtual representation of an associated one of said devices in intermittent use, the virtual representation including at least one virtual safety sensor and/or virtual safety actuator (e.g. ¶73, 280, 292 and 666), the virtual representation available for integrity assessment and monitoring by a safety controller of the safety network (e.g. ¶290 and 410-424), and wireless (e.g. ¶505-511) data synchronization between the virtual representation and the associated device (e.g. ¶376-391, 410-424 and 557-568), wherein the safety representative is further configured to maintain, in the virtual representation, and at least two-valued activation indicator, which determines a safety rule the for the safety representative's data synchronization (e.g. ¶376-391, 410-424 and 557-568).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5-8 and 10-14 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 101, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHARLES R KASENGE whose telephone number is (571)272-3743. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7:30am to 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.
CK
June 11, 2026
/CHARLES R KASENGE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2116
Prosecution Insights