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 .
This Action is in response to application filed 03/22/2024.
Claims 1-20 are pending and presented for examination.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 03/22/2024 and 04/13/2026 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 6, 10-11, 13-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hwu et al. (hereinafter Hwu, US 6,968,242 B1) in view of Nixon et al. (hereinafter Nixon, US 12,627,736 B2) and further in view of Ayyasamy et al. (hereinafter Ayyasamy, US 2013/0155875 A1).
As per claim 1, Hwu discloses a redundant distributed control node (DCN) system (FIG. 2) comprising:
one or more shared output channels (col. 6 L13-16: remote network 23, fig. 1 network #23);
a private network that is at least logically separated from a process automation network (col. 3 L55-58, col. 4 L13-16: Fiber-optic line 17, fig. 2, col. 4 L60-65);
a primary DCN data feeds (col. 3 L49-65, col. 2 L40-67: share communications, col. 6 L13-16: exchanging IO data over the remote network 23); and
one or more backup DCNs that are communicatively coupled with the primary DCN via the private network (col. 2 L40-67, col. 4 L13-16, fig. 2),
wherein col. 2 L40-67, col. 3 L15-21: automation network, fig. 2, col. 6 L1-28: swap IP addresses), and
wherein the primary DCN is to transmit, to one or more of the backup DCNs via the private network, the col. 4 L27-45, col. 5 L22-53: sharing the states, col. 6 L56-67: transfer of state RAM),
a keep alive process to determine whether the primary DCN has become unavailable (col. 2 L40-67, col. 5 L54 to col. 6 L67: based on health communication message, fault or error or faulty primary is determined), and in response to determining that the primary DCN has become unavailable, trigger reassignment of one or more of the backup DCNs as a new primary DCN (col. 5 L22-44, col. 5 L54 to col. 6 L29),
wherein reassignment as the new primary DCN includes transferring the col. 6 L14-29: swap IP address).
However, Hwu does not teach primary DCN to subscribe to one or more remote data feeds based on subscription data, wherein the primary DCN is to transmit, to one or more of the backup DCNs via the private network, subscription data of the primary DCN, wherein subscription data is operable to subscribe one or more of the backup DCNS to one or more of the remote data feeds and to enable the new primary DCN subscribe to one or more of the remote data feeds based on the subscription data to drive one or more of the shared output channels; and wherein a virtual IP address is used by the DCN system.
Nixon, from the same field of endeavor, discloses publish-subscribe communication architecture for field devices in control and automation systems (Abstract). Nixon further teaches a control node subscribing to one or more remote data feeds based on subscription data (fig. 18, col. 57L35 to col. 58 L60, col. 62 L41 to col. 63 L30), wherein subscription data is operable to subscribe one or more of the backup DCNS to one or more of the remote data feeds (fig. 18, col. 57L35 to col. 58 L60, col. 62 L41 to col. 63 L30).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hwu in view of Nixon in order to have primary control node subscribe to one or more remote data feeds based on subscription data and transmit or share the subscription data (state) to one or more backup control node, wherein the subscription data is operable to subscribe one or more backup DCNs nodes to one or more of the remote data feeds and drive one or more of the shared output channels.
(Note: Hwu explicitly teaches sharing state information with the backup controller, wherein the backup controller after taking over the role of the primary node, establishes a connection with a remote device for IO data, e.g. see col. 6 L13-67. As such, when the backup is shared with state RAM or subscription data, the backup node will subscribe using the shared state information with the remote node for remote feeds. See also col. 6 L55-67: For the redundant control system to function properly, the primary and secondary controllers MUST BE SOLVING an identical logic program, which is updated on every scan by a data transfer of state RAM between two controllers).
One of ordinary skilled in the art would have been motivated in order to support a wide range of use cases including monitoring and control, plant asset management, condition monitoring, data logging, secure plant metering, environmental monitoring, etc. in control and automation networks which provides highly available or failover system (Nixon: col. 57 L35-67; Hwu: col. 1 L54 to col. 2 L25).
However, Hwu-Nixon does not teach wherein a virtual IP address is used by the DCN system.
Ayyasamy teaches a system wherein the primary and secondary servers share the same virtual IP address, wherein at the time of failover, the virtual IP address gets re-assigned to secondary server ([0315]: At the time of failover, this virtual IP address gets re-assigned to the secondary server).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hwu-Nixon in view of Ayyasamy in order to use virtual IP address in redundant systems.
One of ordinary skilled in the art would have been motivated because this ensures seamless communication from the client point of view – it always uses the virtual IP address to reach the server (Ayyasamy: [0315]).
As per claim 2, Hwu-Nixon-Ayyasamy discloses the redundant DCN system of claim 1, wherein the keep alive process is hosted on one or more of the backup DCNs (col. 5 L54 to col. 6 L29, fig. 2).
As per claim 3, Hwu-Nixon-Ayyasamy discloses the redundant DCN system of claim 1, wherein the keep alive process is hosted on each DCN of the one or more backup DCNs (col. 5 L54 to col. 6 L29, fig. 2).
As per claim 6, Hwu-Nixon-Ayyasamy discloses the redundant DCN system of claim 1, wherein the primary DCN is configured to transmit the subscription data periodically (Hwu: col. 6 L56-67: data is updated on every scan that occurs periodically; Nixon: fig. 18, col. 57L35 to col. 58 L60, col. 62 L41 to col. 63 L30). Same rationale as in claim 1 applies.
As per claim 10, Hwu-Nixon-Ayyasamy discloses the redundant DCN system of claim 1, wherein the new primary DCN loads the subscription data responsive to a determination that the primary DCN has become unavailable (Hwu: col. 6 L1-29: When primary controller exits primary state, the secondary controller will automatically transition to the primary state, col. 6 L56-67: data transfer of state RAM between two controllers; Nixon: fig. 18, col. 57L35 to col. 58 L60, col. 62 L41 to col. 63 L30). Same rationale as in claim 1 applies.
As per claim 11, Hwu-Nixon-Ayyasamy discloses the redundant DCN system of claim 10, wherein the new primary DCN, responsive to loading the subscription data, subscribes to one or more of the remote data feeds, and drives one or more of the shared output channels based on one or more of the remote data feeds (Hwu: col. 6 L13-28, L39-55: establish remote connection after transitioning to primary state by secondary controller; Nixon: fig. 18, col. 57L35 to col. 58 L60, col. 62 L41 to col. 63 L30). Same rationale as in claim 1 applies.
As per claim 13, Hwu-Nixon-Ayyasamy discloses the redundant DCN system of claim 1, wherein the private network is implemented using one or more of ethernet, serial, or bus communication technology (Hwu: fig. 2, col. 3 L40 to col. 4 L69, col. 5 L21-44).
As per claim 14, Hwu-Nixon-Ayyasamy discloses the redundant DCN system of claim 1, wherein the primary DCN or the new primary DCN, share the virtual IP address with another DCN (Hwu: col. 6 L14-29; Ayyasamy: ([0315]: At the time of failover, this virtual IP address gets re-assigned to the secondary server).
As per claim 15, Hwu-Nixon-Ayyasamy discloses the redundant DCN system of claim 1, wherein the keep alive process determines a status of the primary DCN periodically (Hwu: col. 5 L54 to col. 6 L29).
As per claim 16, Hwu-Nixon-Ayyasamy discloses the redundant DCN system of claim 1, wherein the keep alive process determines a status of the primary DCN in response to a triggering event (Hwu: col. 5 L54 to col. 6 L29).
As per claims 17-20, they do not teach or further define over the limitations in claim 1-3, 6, 10-11, 13-16. Therefore, claims 17-20 are rejected for the same reasons as set forth in claims 1-3, 6, 10-11, 13-16.
Claim(s) 4-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hwu et al. (hereinafter Hwu, US 6,968,242 B1) in view of Nixon et al. (hereinafter Nixon, US 12,627,736 B2) in view of Ayyasamy et al. (hereinafter Ayyasamy, US 2013/0155875 A1), further in view of Khosravi (US 7,197,664 B2).
As per claim 4, Hwu-Nixon-Ayyasamy discloses the redundant DCN system of claim 1, as set forth above.
However, Hwu-Nixon-Ayyasamy does not teach wherein the keep alive process is hosted on a processing node, separate from the one or more backup DCNs.
Khosravi teaches stateless redundancy in a network device wherein the keep alive process is hosted on a processing node, separate from the one or more backup DCNs (col. 5 L7-20, col. 4 L52-67: FTM module can be implemented anywhere).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hwu-Nixon in view of Ayyasamy in order to implement keep-alive process on a processing node that is separate from the one or more backup DCNs.
One of ordinary skilled in the art would have been motivated because it is well known and obvious in the art to implement or move a functionality from one node to another.
As per claim 5, Hwu-Nixon-Ayyasamy discloses the redundant DCN system of claim 4, wherein the processing node is integral with the redundant DCN system (Khosravi: (col. 5 L7-20, col. 4 L52-67: FTM module can be implemented anywhere). Same rationale as in claim 4 applies.
Claim(s) 7-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hwu et al. (hereinafter Hwu, US 6,968,242 B1) in view of Nixon et al. (hereinafter Nixon, US 12,627,736 B2) in view of Ayyasamy et al. (hereinafter Ayyasamy, US 2013/0155875 A1), further in view of Yochai et al. (hereinafter Yochai, US 10,067,843 B1).
As per claim 7, Hwu-Nixon-Ayyasamy discloses the redundant DCN system of claim 1, as set forth above.
However, Hwu-Nixon-Ayyasamy does not teach wherein the primary DCN is configured to transmit the subscription data whenever the subscription data of the primary DCN is altered.
Yochai from the same field of endeavor teaches synchronizing between a primary control node and a secondary control node, wherein the primary node transmits the updated data whenever there is an update to the data (fig. 4 step #470, 480, col. 8 L30-42, col. 11 L1-67).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hwu-Nixon-Ayyasamy in view of Yochai in order to update the subscription data when the subscription data is updated.
One of ordinary skilled in the art would have been motivated in order to synchronize the data and/or state information between primary control node and secondary control node for a successful failover system (Yochai: col. 11 L3-9, col. 1 L25-28).
As per claim 8, Hwu-Nixon-Ayyasamy discloses the redundant DCN system of claim 7, wherein the subscription data of the primary DCN is altered responsive to the primary DCN subscribing to a new node (Nixon: [0200-202], [0196-0197]: every time client subscribes to publish lists, the server sends metadata to the client; Yochai: col. 11 L3-9, col. 1 L25-28). Same rationale as in claim 7 applies.
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hwu et al. (hereinafter Hwu, US 6,968,242 B1) in view of Nixon et al. (hereinafter Nixon, US 12,627,736 B2) in view of Ayyasamy et al. (hereinafter Ayyasamy, US 2013/0155875 A1), further in view of Yochai et al. (hereinafter Yochai, US 10,067,843 B1) and further in view of Cakulev et al. (US 11,792,689 B2).
As per claim 9, Hwu-Nixon-Ayyasamy-Yochai discloses the redundant DCN system of claim 7, as set forth above.
Yochai teaches updating data whenever control metadata is updated and performing synchronization between primary node and secondary node ((fig. 4 step #470, 480, col. 8 L30-42, col. 11 L1-67).
However, Hwu-Nixon-Ayyasamy-Yochai does not teach wherein the subscription data of the primacy DCN is altered responsive to the primary DCN modifying an existing subscription.
Cakulev teaches the process wherein the existing subscription can be modified by a client device thus altering the subscription data (col. 8 L61 to col. 9 L23).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filign date of the claimed invention to modify Hwu-Nixon-Ayyasamy-Yochai in view of Cakulev in order to update the subscription data responsive to primary DCN Modifying existing subscription.
One of ordinary skilled in the art would have been motivated in order to synchronize the data and/or state information between primary control node and secondary control node whenever there is a change or update in state or data for a successful failover system (Yochai: col. 11 L3-9, col. 1 L25-28).
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hwu et al. (hereinafter Hwu, US 6,968,242 B1) in view of Nixon et al. (hereinafter Nixon, US 12,627,736 B2) in view of Ayyasamy et al. (hereinafter Ayyasamy, US 2013/0155875 A1), further in view of Ichikawa et al. (US 2008/0301777 A1).
As per claim 12, Hwu-Nixon-Ayyasamy discloses the redundant DCN system of claim 1, as set forth above, wherein subsequent to reassignment of one or more of the backup DCNs as the new primary DCN, (Hwu: col. 5 L22-44, col. 5 L54 to col. 6 L37).
However, Hwu-Nixon-Ayyasamy does not teach responsive to the primary DCN being made available again, the primary DCN is assigned as another backup DCN, of the one or more backup DCNs.
Ichikawa discloses responsive to the primary DCN being made available again, the primary DCN is assigned as another backup DCN, of the one or more backup DCNs ([0096-0097]: When the primary server in which fault occurred, is repaired from the fault, the server is put into standby state).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skilled in the art to art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hwu-Nixon-Ayyasamy in view of Ichikawa in order to repair the fault in primary and put the primary node in backup or standby state.
One of ordinary skilled in the art would have been motivated in order to scale backup nodes and provide additional back up nodes to the primary nodes.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Gruener et al. US 12,619,505 B2: System of Aggregating servers.
Tanzman et al. US 7,032,029: Active Standby control system on a network
Allen et al. US 2007/0180302 A1: System and Method for Failover
Madnani et al. US 2007/0283186 A1: Virtual Array Failover.
Buchstaller US 2020/0145494 A1: Method for operating an automation network.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KAMAL B DIVECHA whose telephone number is 571-272-5863. The examiner can normally be reached IFP Normal Hours M-F: 8am-4.30pm 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, Colleen Fauz can be reached at 5712721667. 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.
KAMAL B. DIVECHA
Primary Patent Examiner
Art Unit 2453
/KAMAL B DIVECHA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2453
Prosecution Insights