Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application 18/594,969, filed on 3/4/2024 (or after March 16, 2013), is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA (First Inventor to File).
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.
This application is a CON of 17/363,662 filed on 06/30/2021 is now US PAT 11,9280,81
DETAILED ACTION
Response to Amendment
Claims 1-20 are pending in this application.
Examiner acknowledges applicant’s amendment filed on 8/6/2025
Drawings
The Drawings filed on 6/30/2021 are acceptable for examination purpose.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on 8/6/2025 with respect to claims 1-20 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive, for examiner’s remarks, see discussion below:
Double Patenting
In view of terminal disclaimer approved on 8/6/2025, the double patent rejection is hereby withdrawn
35 USC § 101
In view of applicant’s remarks, amendment, the rejection udner35 USC § 101 as set forth in the previous office action is hereby withdrawn.
At page 8-9, claim 1, applicant argues:
Here, Golov is not analogous art per this guidance provided in MPEP 2141.01(a). The teachings in Golov pertain to autonomous vehicle data collection, and are neither from the same field of endeavor as the invention recited in Applicant’s claims nor reasonably pertinent to the problem solved by the invention recited in Applicant’s claims.
The problem solved by the invention recited in Applicant’s claims is highly specific to the specific context of flow control devices due to the limited availability of memory on flow control devices………………
The autonomous vehicle black box data recorder as described in Golov is not subject to the same computing resource constraints as a flow control device. The skilled person understands that autonomous vehicle systems, such as described in Golov, often have large quantities of available memory. Therefore, the skilled person would not have looked to Golov for motivation regarding how to solve the problem of premature loss of event log information that can occur on flow control devices due to the limited available memory contained on flow control devices. As such, the teachings pertaining to the autonomous vehicle black box data recorder as described in Golov are not reasonably pertinent to the problem solved by the invention recited in Applicant’s claims. Therefore, the skilled person would not have looked to Golov for motivation regarding the problem of premature loss of event log information………
Examiner’s response:
As set forth or detailed in KSR v. Teleflex,
The first error of the Court of Appeals in this case was to foreclose this reasoning by holding that courts and patent examiners should look only to the problem the patentee was trying to solve. 119 Fed. Appx. at 288. The Court of Appeals failed to recognize that the problem motivating the patentee may be only one of many addressed by the patent's subject matter. The question is not whether the combination was obvious to the patentee but whether the combination was obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art. Under the correct analysis, any need or problem known in the field of endeavor at the time of invention and addressed by the patent can provide a reason for combining the elements in the manner claimed. KSR v. Teleflex, 550 U.S. at 419-420.
“Under the correct analysis, any need or problem known in the field of endeavor at the time of the invention and addressed by the patent [or application at issue] can provide a reason for combining the elements in the manner claimed. ” KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 420, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1397 (2007). This does not require that the reference be from the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention, in light of the Supreme Court's instruction that "[w]hen a work is available in one field of endeavor, design incentives and other market forces can prompt variations of it, either in the same field or a different one." Id. at 417, 82 USPQ2d 1396. Rather, a reference is analogous art to the claimed invention if: (1) the reference is from the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention (even if it addresses a different problem); or (2) the reference is reasonably pertinent to the problem faced by the inventor (even if it is not in the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention). See Bigio, 381 F.3d at 1325, 72 USPQ2d at 1212. See MPEP 2141.II..
In this case, , the prior art of Golov teaches blackbox data recorder for autonomous driving vehicle, particularly this autonous driving vehicle having sensor data on a volatile memory, while second cyclic buffer records the same vehile sensor data (Golov: Abstract). Examiner relied on Golov’s prior art fig 2, plurality of cyclic buffer volatile memory element 206, 208, in receiving and storing sensor data, where first cyclic buffer maintains raw sensor data, while second cyclic buffer element 208 provides compression data , the first and second cyclic buffer also refers as circular buffer (Golov: 0015-0017), prior art of Golov’s cycle buffers or circular buffers are identical to instant specification circular buffers (spec: 0008-0009) .
Therefore, combination of references allows one of ordinary skill in the art to determine suitable ways to use availability of prior art of Golov’s fig 2, “cyclic buffer volatile memory element 206, cyclic buffer NVM element 208, bringing advantage of efficient use of memory , avoiding overflow errors, and better memory usage
PNG
media_image1.png
265
139
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Examiner applies above arguments to claims 11,17, claims 2-10,12-16, 18-20 depend from claims 1,11,17.
Note: Examiner supplied additional rejection
Claims 1,11,17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Walker et al., (hereafter Walker), US Pub.No. 2020/0081410 published Mar,2020 in view of Kraenzlein et al, (hereafter Kraenzlein) US Pub. No. 2009/0222180 published Sep, 2009 published Sep, 2019
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Walker et al., (hereafter Walker), US Pub.No. 2020/0081410 published Mar,2020 in view of Golov, US Pub. No. 2019/0287319 published Sep, 2019
As to claim 1,11,17, Walker teaches a system which including “A control system for a flow control device, the control system comprising: a processor device” (Walker: Abstract, fig 1, 0024 – Walker teaches process control for example process plat including various components such as valve 14, particularly selectively position[ed] control the flow of process material, actuator 16 receiving command signals);
PNG
media_image2.png
310
463
media_image2.png
Greyscale
a first memory in communication with the processor device and comprising a buffer (Walker: fig 1, element 19, 0042); and
“wherein the processor device is configured to execute instructions to” (Walker: Abstract, 0009-0010, fig 1 – Walker teaches processor coupled to the sensor, memory device storing computer-executable instructions):
“receive signals corresponding to events associated with the flow control device” (Walker: fig 1, 0032-0033 – Walker teaches user process control interface element 38 or GUI and receives data from the process controller element 32 ie., process controller execute instruction to generate a value position control signal to adjust the position of a value element 14 corresponds to event(s) associated with the valve position(s);
“over a first time interval, determine a first quantity of the events that are associated with a first event type based on the received signals” (Walker: fig 2C, 0021, 0042-0043, 0047 – Walker teaches monitoring force values at an actuator particularly monitoring partial and full stroke tests and are periodically execute to generate event associated with the valve activity generate curves, further Walker teaches force/position event data captured and in a continuous time intervals and values are stored with respect to time, further the prior art of Walker teaches capturing events associated with the actuator, value over a period of time and recorded data in the memory structure as such event types may corresponds to opening and closing force during a stroke test);
PNG
media_image3.png
496
268
media_image3.png
Greyscale
“a first count indicative of the first quantity of the events that are associated with the first event type over the first time interval” (Walker: 0026-0027 – Walker teaches actuator including force sensor that monitors a value of the force or records the value that including measured parameters such as current, speed, displacement, pressure, force and like associated with the quantity of event and respective counts); and
“after the first time interval, store in the first memory a first record based on the first count that is indicative of the first quantity of the events that are associated with the first event type over the first time interval” (Walker fig 2A-2C, 0051-0053 – Walker teaches captures position value and/data with respect to timestamps stored in a memory data structure and the data position records data and time or time stamp to each force/position data may corresponds to type of event relevant to the process controller); and
“control operation of the flow control device based on the first record” (Walker: 0003,009 – Walker teaches diagnostic used for valves in the process control system by collecting, analyz[ed] or compared to previously recorded data, further it is noted that these routines includes retrieving data from a memory device coupled to the processor, a previous force value measured at the current position and comparing the current force values with the previous value, thereby the routine replaces the previous force value for the current position in memory in a process environment)
It is however, noted that Walker does not disclose “a second memory in communication with the processor device”, “flush, from the second memory to the buffer in the first memory”, although Walker suggests the process control may include one or more volatile computer memories for example RAM and/or one or more non-volatile computer memories such as ROM,PROM,EPROM, EEPROM, and like (Walker: 0028, fig 1) . On the other hand, Golov disclosed “a second memory in communication with the processor device” (Golov: fig 2-3, 0016, 0022 – Golov teaches second buffer element 208 is a non-volatile memory or NVM of the device. Golov disclosed flush, from the second memory to the buffer in the first memory” (Golov: 0013-0014, 0018, 0021 – Golov teaches cyclic buffer element 206 implemented as dynamic RAM or DRAM, the second cyclic buffer element 208 non-volatile memory supports storage “flushing” data into NV storage element 214)
PNG
media_image4.png
282
597
media_image4.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention black box data recorder using two cyclic buffers to record sensor data of Golov into monitoring forces, position parameters of valve, retrieved from the memory of the process control devices of Walker et al., because both Walker, Golov supports collection and storing sensor data (Walker: Abstract; Golov: Abstract) . Because both Walker, Golov teaches storing sensor data, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art to substitute and/or modify one method for the other particularly storing sequence of event records in cyclic buffer volatile memory that allows significantly accelerate the data transfer in a real time in a autonomous driving vehicle environment, where vehicle sensor data from multiple vehicle sensors are stored in a black box using lossless compression of the data (Golov: 0015-0016), thus improves overall quality and reliability of the system
As to claim 2, the combination of Walker, Golov disclosed “wherein the first memory comprises a nonvolatile memory and the second memory comprises a volatile memory” (Walker: fig 1, element 19; Golov: 0013-0014, 0022 SSD or flash memory non-volatile memory); .
As to claim 3, the combination of Walker, Golov disclosed “wherein the buffer comprises a circular buffer” (Golov: fig 2).
PNG
media_image4.png
282
597
media_image4.png
Greyscale
As to claim 4,13,19, the combination of Walker, Golov disclosed “wherein the first record is indicative of a magnitude of the first quantity of the events that are associated with the first event type over the first time interval” (Walker: 0053-0054) .
As to claim 5, the combination of Walker , Golov disclosed “wherein the first record is indicative of whether the first quantity of the events that are associated with the first event type over the first time interval exceeds a threshold” (Walker: 0071-0072, 0077, 0089).
As to claim 6,12, the combination of Walker , Golov disclosed “wherein the first event type is associated with a loss of communication between the control system and a sensor associated with the flow control device” (Walker : fig 1, element 17-18, 0028-0030)
As to claim 7, the combination of Walker , Golov disclosed “wherein the control system is installed locally relative to the flow control device” (Walker : 0024-0025, fig 1)
As to claim 8,15, the combination of Walker , Golov disclosed :
the first quantity of the events that are associated with the first event type over the first time interval (Walker: fig 4A-4B, 0054-0056); and
“a second quantity of the events that are associated with the first event type over a second time interval” (Walker: fig 4A-4C, 0054-0056,0058).
As to claim 9,16, the combination of Walker , Golov disclosed
“over a third time interval, determine a third quantity of the events that are associated with a second event type based on the received signals” (Walker: fig 1-2, 0034,0071 – Walker teaches automated process controls generating events periodically including configuration of alerts, alarms and reports based on the events as detailed in 0071);
”a second count indicative of the third quantity of the events that are associated with the second event type over the third time interval (Walker: fig 1, 0025,0027,0030); and
“after the third time interval, store in the first memory a second record based on the second count indicative of the third quantity of the events that are associated with the second event type over the third time interval” (Walker fig 2A-2C, 0047,0051-0053).
On the other hand, Golov disclosed “flush, from the second memory to a second buffer in the first memory” (Golov: 0013-0014, 0018, 0021).
As to claim 10, the combination of Walker , Golov disclosed
“wherein the processor device is configured to execute instructions to control operation of the flow control device based on the first record” (Walker : 0031-0033)
As to claim 14, the combination of Walker , Golov disclosed :
the first memory comprises a nonvolatile memory (Walker :fig 1, element 19; Golov: 0013-0014, 0022 ;
the second memory comprises a volatile memory (Golov: fig 2);; and
the buffer comprises a circular buffer” (Golov: 0017 – Golov teaches circular buffer or ring buffers that include a data structure).
As to claim 18, the combination of Walker , Golov disclosed :
the first memory comprises a nonvolatile memory (Walker :fig 1, element 19; Golov: 0013-0014, 0022;
the second memory comprises a volatile memory (Golov: fig 2);
the buffer comprises a circular buffer (Golov: fig 2 circular buffer)
“the first event type is associated with a loss of communication between the processing device and a sensor associated with the flow control device” (Walker: 0030-0033) and
“the record is indicative of:
the first quantity of the events that are associated with the first event type over the first time interval” (Walker: fig 4A-4B, 0054-0056) and
“a second quantity of the events that are associated with the first event type over a second time interval” (Walker fig 2A-2C, 0047,0051-0053).
As to claim 20, the combination of Walker , Golov disclosed :
“controlling operation of the flow control device based on the record” (Walker : 0024-0025,0031)
Claims 1,11,17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Walker et al., (hereafter Walker), US Pub.No. 2020/0081410 published Mar,2020 in view of Kraenzlein et al, (hereafter Kraenzlein) US Pub. No. 2009/0222180 published Sep, 2009 published Sep, 2019
As to claim 1,11,17, Walker teaches a system which including “A control system for a flow control device, the control system comprising: a processor device” (Walker: Abstract, fig 1, 0024 – Walker teaches process control for example process plat including various components such as valve 14, particularly selectively position[ed] control the flow of process material, actuator 16 receiving command signals);
PNG
media_image2.png
310
463
media_image2.png
Greyscale
a first memory in communication with the processor device and comprising a buffer (Walker: fig 1, element 19, 0042); and
“wherein the processor device is configured to execute instructions to” (Walker: Abstract, 0009-0010, fig 1 – Walker teaches processor coupled to the sensor, memory device storing computer-executable instructions):
“receive signals corresponding to events associated with the flow control device” (Walker: fig 1, 0032-0033 – Walker teaches user process control interface element 38 or GUI and receives data from the process controller element 32 ie., process controller execute instruction to generate a value position control signal to adjust the position of a value element 14 corresponds to event(s) associated with the valve position(s);
“over a first time interval, determine a first quantity of the events that are associated with a first event type based on the received signals” (Walker: fig 2C, 0021, 0042-0043, 0047 – Walker teaches monitoring force values at an actuator particularly monitoring partial and full stroke tests and are periodically execute to generate event associated with the valve activity generate curves, further Walker teaches force/position event data captured and in a continuous time intervals and values are stored with respect to time, further the prior art of Walker teaches capturing events associated with the actuator, value over a period of time and recorded data in the memory structure as such event types may corresponds to opening and closing force during a stroke test);
PNG
media_image3.png
496
268
media_image3.png
Greyscale
“a first count indicative of the first quantity of the events that are associated with the first event type over the first time interval” (Walker: 0026-0027 – Walker teaches actuator including force sensor that monitors a value of the force or records the value that including measured parameters such as current, speed, displacement, pressure, force and like associated with the quantity of event and respective counts); and
“after the first time interval, store in the first memory a first record based on the first count that is indicative of the first quantity of the events that are associated with the first event type over the first time interval” (Walker fig 2A-2C, 0051-0053 – Walker teaches captures position value and/data with respect to timestamps stored in a memory data structure and the data position records data and time or time stamp to each force/position data may corresponds to type of event relevant to the process controller); and
“control operation of the flow control device based on the first record” (Walker: 0003,009 – Walker teaches diagnostic used for valves in the process control system by collecting, analyz[ed] or compared to previously recorded data, further it is noted that these routines includes retrieving data from a memory device coupled to the processor, a previous force value measured at the current position and comparing the current force values with the previous value, thereby the routine replaces the previous force value for the current position in memory in a process environment)
It is however, noted that Walker does not disclose “a second memory in communication with the processor device”, “flush, from the second memory to the buffer in the first memory”, although Walker suggests the process control may include one or more volatile computer memories for example RAM and/or one or more non-volatile computer memories such as ROM,PROM,EPROM, EEPROM, and like (Walker: 0028, fig 1) . On the other hand, Kraenzlein disclosed “a second memory in communication with the processor device” (Kraenzlein: Abstract, fig 1, fig 4 – Kraenzlein teaches control system having a solenoid operated fluid value, measuring pressure control points with respect to input signal, using plurality of circular buffers each configured to store observed operating points, second memory in communication with the processor device corresponds to Kraenzlein’s control system having plurality of circular buffers), “flush, from the second memory to the buffer in the first memory”, (Kraenzlein: Abstract, fig 1, fig 4-5,0036, 0039-0041,0043 – Kraenzlein teaches Realtime adjustment of computing resources and/or memory particularly using plurality of circular buffers where each circular buffer representing “ranges” of solenoid’s transfer characteristic allow adjustment of selected control points)
PNG
media_image5.png
327
209
media_image5.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention real-time learning of actuator transfer characteristics particularly in pressure control system of Kraenzlein et al., into monitoring forces, position parameters of valve, retrieved from the memory of the process control devices of Walker et al., because both Walker, Kraenzlein supports collection and storing data ((Walker: Abstract; Kraenzlein: Abstract) . Because both Walker, Kraenzlein teaches process control system, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art to substitute and/or modify one method for the other particularly measuring fluid valve data in a dynamic learning configuration that including not only measuring observed value and/or operating points , but also appropriately adjust control points using plurality of circular buffers in order to improve the accuracy of input-versus-output transfer characteristics, while reducing output error(s), thereby improve the effectiveness of any closed loop controller(s) (Kraenzlein: 0007-0008)
Conclusion
The prior art made of record
a. US Pub. No. 2020/0081410
b. US Pub. No. 2019/0287319
c. US Pub. No. 2009/0222180
Examiner's Note: Examiner has cited particular columns and line numbers in the references applied to the claims above for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings of the art and are applied to specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested from the applicant in preparing responses, to fully consider the references in entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the Examiner.
SEE MPEP 2141.02 [R-5] VI. PRIOR ART MUST BE CONSIDERED IN ITS ENTIRETY, INCLUDING DISCLOSURES THAT TEACH AWAY FROM THE CLAIMS: A prior art reference must be considered in its entirety, i.e., as a whole, including portions that would lead away from the claimed invention. W.L. Gore & Associates, Inc. v. Garlock, Inc., 721 F.2d 1540, 220 USPQ 303 (Fed. Cir. 1983), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 851 (1984) In re Fulton, 391 F.3d 1195, 1201,73 USPQ2d 1141, 1146 (Fed. Cir. 2004). >See also MPEP §2123.
In the case of amending the Claimed invention, Applicant is respectfully requested to indicate the portion(s) of the specification which dictate(s) the structure relied on for proper interpretation and also to verify and ascertain the metes and bounds of the claimed invention.
The prior art made of record, listed on form PTO-892, and not relied upon, if any, is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure
Authorization for Internet Communications
The examiner encourages Applicant to submit an authorization to communicate with the examiner via the Internet by making the following statement (from MPEP 502.03):
“Recognizing that Internet communications are not secure, I hereby authorize the USPTO to communicate with the undersigned and practitioners in accordance with 37 CFR 1.33 and 37 CFR 1.34 concerning any subject matter of this application by video conferencing, instant messaging, or electronic mail. I understand that a copy of these communications will be made of record in the application file.”
Please note that the above statement can only be submitted via Central Fax (not Examiner's Fax), Regular postal mail, or EFS Web using PTO/SB/439.
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 Srirama Channavajjala whose telephone number is 571-272-4108. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday from 8:00 AM to 5:30 PM Eastern Time.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Gorney, Boris, can be reached on (571) 270- 5626. The fax phone numbers for the organization where the application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300 Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free)
/Srirama Channavajjala/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2154