DETAILED ACTION
This Office action responds to papers filed on May 23, 2024.
Claims 1-8 are pending and presented for examination.
Applicant's submission of references on form PTO-1449, filed on May 24, 2024, and November 14, 2024, has been considered. A signed copy of each form is attached.
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 .
Specification
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because the abstract as presented is a mere reiteration of the claim language. A proper abstract with a synopsis of the instant invention should be included. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
The term “exclusively” in claim 3 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “exclusively” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. The claim states “the management unit exclusively controls …..” (emphasis added); however, the management unit is stated as being used for other features of the instant invention as claimed in claims 1, 2, and 5-8. So, the exclusiveness of the management control is not fully understood, nor has it been specifically explained.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(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.
Claims 1-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US Patent Publication No. US 2019/0101101 A1 to Dharmadhikari et al..
The published invention of the prior art to Dharmadhikari et al. (herein after “Dharmadhikari”) teaches of contingency autonomous control for wind turbines. In doing, the elements of the instant invention are taught as follows.
Regarding independent claims 1 and 8, a plant control system and plant control method performed by a controller and an input/output device, respectively, comprising:
a controller – (taught in paragraph [0042] as “the turbine controller 26”); and
an input/output device, both of which are operated in cooperation with each other – (taught in paragraph [0041] as “the control system 100 includes the main wind turbine controller 26 and a plurality of distributed input and output (I/O) modules 104, 106, 108 for individual control of one or more wind turbine components”, wherein
the controller includes a main control unit that generates first output data based on reception data received from a first instrument – (taught in paragraph [0038] as “… configure the controller 26 to perform various different functions, such as receiving, transmitting and/or executing wind turbine control signals … the controller 26 may include one or more processor(s) 58 and associated memory device(s) 60 configured to perform a variety of computer-implemented functions (e.g., performing the methods, steps, calculations and the like disclosed herein)”,
the input/output device – (taught in paragraph [0042] explains use of a I/O module that provide I/O to the turbine controller so as to control the assembly) includes
an auxiliary control unit that generates second output data based on the reception data received from the first instrument – (taught in paragraph [0047] as “a separate controller 79 configured to evaluate the forces locally and compare with one or more driving command(s), which eliminates the dependency on the turbine controller 26”),
an input/output unit that relays communication between both the main control unit and the auxiliary control unit and both the first instrument and a second instrument – (taught in paragraph [0042] where “…the turbine controller 26 is configured to receive information from the input modules and send information to output modules. The inputs and outputs can be either analog signals which are continuously changing or discrete signals. More specifically, in certain embodiments, the top box distributed I/O module 104 is configured to provide I/O to the turbine controller 26 to control uptower components of the wind turbine 10, e.g. the yaw drive mechanisms 40. Similarly, the downtower distributed I/O module 106 is configured to provide I/O to the turbine controller 26 so as to control the downtower electrical assembly, e.g. transformers, etc. The tower distributed I/O module 108 is configured to provide I/O to the tower components as described herein. In addition, the control system 100 may include more or less distributed I/O modules than those depicted in FIG. 4 depending on the specific components of the wind turbine 10” is explained), and
a management unit that controls, when the cooperation has been impaired, the input/output unit such that the second output data is transmitted to the second instrument – (taught in paragraph [0047] as “the yaw system 70 may also include one or more controllers 79 configured to implement a protective control strategy for the yaw system 70”).
As per claim 2, the plant control system according to claim 1, wherein, when the cooperation is maintained, the management unit controls the input/output unit such that the first output data generated by the main control unit is transmitted to the second instrument is cited. To this Dharmadhikari teaches the management unit controlling the input/output unit as claimed in paragraph [0038] and in Fig. 3, where the controller is configured to perform various functions etc.
In claim 3 the plant control system according to claim 2, wherein the management unit exclusively controls transmission of the first output data to the second instrument and
transmission of the second output data to the second instrument is stated. The prior art teaches this feature in paragraph [0047].
As per claim 4, the plant control system according to claim 1 cites wherein
the main control unit receives, as an input, the reception data that has been sent out from the first instrument by way of the input/output unit, and outputs the first output data that has been generated based on the reception data to the second instrument by way of the input/output unit, and the auxiliary control unit receives, as an input, the reception data that has been sent out from the first instrument by way of the input/output unit, and outputs the second output data that has been generated based on the reception data to the second instrument by way of the input/output unit. Paragraph [0042] explains the aspect of the instant invention as “the turbine controller 26 is configured to receive information from the input modules and send information to output modules. The inputs and outputs can be either analog signals which are continuously changing or discrete signals. More specifically, in certain embodiments, the top box distributed I/O module 104 is configured to provide I/O to the turbine controller 26 so as to control uptower components of the wind turbine 10, e.g. the yaw drive mechanisms 40. Similarly, the downtower distributed I/O module 106 is configured to provide I/O to the turbine controller 26 so as to control the downtower electrical assembly, e.g. transformers, etc. The tower distributed I/O module 108 is configured to provide I/O to the tower components as described herein. In addition, the control system 100 may include more or less distributed I/O modules than those depicted in FIG. 4 depending on the specific components of the wind turbine 10.”
Regarding claims 5-7 the plant control system according to claim 1, wherein,
in claim 5, when the cooperation has been impaired, the management unit instructs the input/output unit to output the second output data to the second instrument, and, when the management unit checks a return of the cooperation, the management unit provides feedback about the second output data output from the input/output unit to the main control unit and instructs the input/output unit to output the first output data to the second instrument, the auxiliary control unit calculates the second output data to be output next time based on the reception data and the second output data that has been output from the input/output unit until the return of the cooperation is checked by the management unit, and, when the return of the cooperation has been checked by the management unit, the main control unit calculates the first output data to be output next time based on the reception data and the second output data that has been fed back from the management unit and that has been output from the input/output unit;
in claim 6, when the cooperation is maintained, the management unit instructs the input/output unit to output the first output data to the second instrument, and provides feedback about the first output data output from the input/output unit to the auxiliary control unit, the main control unit calculates the first output data to be output next time based on the reception data and the first output data that has been output from the
input/output unit, and the auxiliary control unit calculates the second output data to be output next time based on the reception data and the first output data that has been fed back from the management unit and that has been output from the input/output unit; and
in claim 7, the management unit determines that the cooperation has been impaired when the management unit determines that the main control unit is in an abnormal state based on state information that indicates a state of a plant acquired from the main control unit, or, the management unit receives a notification of a plan stop from the main control unit is claimed. Dharmadhikari teaches this aspect of the instant invention in paragraphs [0057]-[0059] where a method for monitoring the system for failures and if a is detected a method for repair to overcome the failure is presented.
For the reasons stated above, the limitations of the instant invention are taught and/or fairly suggested by the prior arts of record; thereby, rendering the instant claims unpatentable.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US Patent Publication No. US 2018/008544 A1 Sangi
relates to a secure architecture for a platform independent executing of process control operation and applications
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Sheela Rao whose telephone number is (571) 272- 3751. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Wednesday from 7:00 am to 1:00 pm.
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, Mohammad Ali, can be reached on (571) 272-4105. The fax number for the organization where this application or any proceeding papers has been 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. It should be noted that 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 any questions arise regarding access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Sheela Rao/Examiner, Art Unit 2119
July 14, 2026
/MOHAMMAD ALI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2119
Prosecution Insights