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 .
Claim Objections
Claim 10 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 10 recites the claim limitation “…to apply frame replication and elimination for reliability, FRER, and/or IP tunneling…” The claim limitation is presented in an alternative manner where the claim limitation “frame replication and elimination for reliability” and the claim limitation “FRER” may be mistakenly understood as two separate claim limitations/terms. Applicant is advised to revise the claim limitation to show “…to apply frame replication and elimination for reliability(FRER) and/or IP tunneling…”
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim(s) 1-9 and 12-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Miklos et al. (US 2019/0280926; hereinafter Miklos).
Regarding claim 1, Miklos shows a control network (Figure 3 shows a network for supporting multiple industry automation apparatuses which operate in radio coverage of at least one radio access network.) for supporting multiple industrial automation devices which operate in radio coverage of at least one radio access network, the control network comprising:
a processor configured to execute one or more software applications (Figures 3 and 5; Par. 0080-0081; network controller includes program code stored in memory and executed by one or more processors.);
at least two wireless network interfaces, each configured to communicate with said automation devices (Figures 3 and 5; Par. 0082; network controller includes first connection module and second connecting module for communicating with one or more industry automation apparatuses.); and
a traffic controller configured to provide a logical connection from an executing software application to one of the automation devices by maintaining at least two contemporaneous physical connections to said one of the automation devices using respective wireless network interfaces and said at least one radio access network (Figures 3 and 5; Par. 0082-0083; The configuration module 336 is configured to dynamically configure the first network entity set and the second network entity set. As an example, the configuration module 336 may dynamically reduce the redundancy by connecting the first radio interface 210 and the second radio interface 220 via the same entity from either the first network entity set or the second network entity set to the other apparatus 20 and in parallel to the first radio interface 210, to the other apparatus 20. Redundancy is based on received grouping parameters.),
wherein the control network is further configured to repeatedly adapt a physical redundancy of the logical connection (Par. 0082-0083; The configuration module 336 is configured to dynamically configure the first network entity set and the second network entity set. It should be noted that the first network entity set and the second network entity set may still each include one or more further entities not shared between the first radio interface 210 and the second radio interface 220. In this manner at least a certain degree of redundancy can be maintained.).
Regarding claim 2, Miklos shows the control network of claim 1, which is configured to determine a level of independence between the contemporaneous physical connections on the basis of measurements, and to adapt the physical redundancy accordingly (Figures 13-14; Par. 0032, 0126-0127, 0132-0134; As an optimization, the handover controller 400 may take into account the cell redundancy groups A, B when configuring the radio interfaces 210, 220 for handover measurements.).
Regarding claim 3, Miklos shows the control network of claim 2, which is configured to:
monitor, for at least two of the contemporaneous physical connections, a time series of at least one of the following: quality of service, latency, reliability, throughput, jitter, packet loss (Figure 14; Par. 0131, 0140; In step 1420 the radio interface 210, 220 measures the link quality towards a new cell and determines the cell reliability group A, B. In step 1430 it is decided if the particular cell belongs to the same reliability group A, B as the measuring radio interface 210, 220. Should this be the case, the measured cell is identified as a possible candidate for re-selection and the method loops back to step 1420 for measuring link quality to another cell. If all available cells have been measured, the method proceeds from step 1430 to step 1450, where it is determined if the link quality of the best cell in the same reliability group A, B of the radio interface 210, 220 is below a threshold. If this is the case, the method proceeds to step 1460, where the measured cell is identified as a possible candidate for re-selection.); and
determine the level of independence by comparing the respective time series (Figure 14; Par. 0131, 0140; In step 1420 the radio interface 210, 220 measures the link quality towards a new cell and determines the cell reliability group A, B. In step 1430 it is decided if the particular cell belongs to the same reliability group A, B as the measuring radio interface 210, 220. Should this be the case, the measured cell is identified as a possible candidate for re-selection and the method loops back to step 1420 for measuring link quality to another cell. If all available cells have been measured, the method proceeds from step 1430 to step 1450, where it is determined if the link quality of the best cell in the same reliability group A, B of the radio interface 210, 220 is below a threshold. If this is the case, the method proceeds to step 1460, where the measured cell is identified as a possible candidate for re-selection.).
Regarding claim 4, Miklos shows the control network of claim 3, which is configured to determine the level of independence by computing a cross-correlation (Figure 14; Par. 0131, 0140; In step 1420 the radio interface 210, 220 measures the link quality towards a new cell and determines the cell reliability group A, B. In step 1430 it is decided if the particular cell belongs to the same reliability group A, B as the measuring radio interface 210, 220. Should this be the case, the measured cell is identified as a possible candidate for re-selection and the method loops back to step 1420 for measuring link quality to another cell. If all available cells have been measured, the method proceeds from step 1430 to step 1450, where it is determined if the link quality of the best cell in the same reliability group A, B of the radio interface 210, 220 is below a threshold. If this is the case, the method proceeds to step 1460, where the measured cell is identified as a possible candidate for re-selection.), a coherence (Figure 14; Par. 0131, 0140; In step 1420 the radio interface 210, 220 measures the link quality towards a new cell and determines the cell reliability group A, B. In step 1430 it is decided if the particular cell belongs to the same reliability group A, B as the measuring radio interface 210, 220. Should this be the case, the measured cell is identified as a possible candidate for re-selection and the method loops back to step 1420 for measuring link quality to another cell. If all available cells have been measured, the method proceeds from step 1430 to step 1450, where it is determined if the link quality of the best cell in the same reliability group A, B of the radio interface 210, 220 is below a threshold. If this is the case, the method proceeds to step 1460, where the measured cell is identified as a possible candidate for re-selection.) or a cross-covariance between the time series.
Regarding claim 5, Miklos shows the control network of claim 2, wherein the processor is responsible for determining the level of independence between the contemporaneous physical connections and to order the traffic controller to adapt the physical redundancy (Figures 13-14; Par. 0032, 0126-0127, 0132-0134; As an optimization, the handover controller 400 may take into account the cell redundancy groups A, B when configuring the radio interfaces 210, 220 for handover measurements.).
Regarding claim 6, Miklos shows Miklos shows the control network of claim 1, which is adapted for supporting automation devices operating in radio coverage of at least one radio access network, wherein at least two of the contemporaneous physical connections use different cells of the cellular radio access network (Figures 3 and 5; Par. 0082-0083, 0093; The configuration module 336 is configured to dynamically configure the first network entity set and the second network entity set. As an example, the configuration module 336 may dynamically reduce the redundancy by connecting the first radio interface 210 and the second radio interface 220 via the same entity from either the first network entity set or the second network entity set to the other apparatus 20 and in parallel to the first radio interface 210, to the other apparatus 20.).
Regarding claim 7, Miklos shows the control network of claim 1, which is adapted for supporting automation devices operating in radio coverage of at least two radio access networks, wherein at least two of the contemporaneous physical connections use different radio access networks (Par. 0098; it is possible in an industry automation network that the CN entities are contained in the same node as the BS 100, and selecting separate BS entities would then also correspond to selecting separate CN entities. Alternatively, it is possible that the CN entities are directly connected to the BS 100. As yet another alternative, redundancy for the CN entities may be provided by their underlying platforms. Terminal-based and network-based solutions, respectively, for setting up redundant CN entities for the two duplicate paths may be used.).
Regarding claim 8, Miklos shows the control network of claim 1, wherein the processor is configured to:
define a setpoint redundancy level for each executing application (Par. 0073, 0124; The redundancy group of a radio interface 210, 220 can be sent as a new information element (i.e., a grouping parameter) from the CN network 200 (e.g., the MME) to the RAN (e.g., the eNB) as illustrated by dashed arrows in FIG. 12; alternatively this information can also be expressed as special values of other parameters. One possible parameter is the RFSP (RAT/Frequency Selection Priority, also known as Subscriber Profile ID for RAT/Frequency Priority).);
determine configuration data (CONF) in accordance with the setpoint redundancy level (Par. 0124-0128; One possible parameter is the RFSP (RAT/Frequency Selection Priority, also known as Subscriber Profile ID for RAT/Frequency Priority). This is an already existing parameter that is used for UE specific radio resource management setting. Separate values can be defined for each redundancy group A, B. If the RFSP is used for other purposes as well in RAN, then each existing RFSP value can be split up for different values for each redundancy group A, B. Hence, a new information element may be preferred from the CN network 200 to the RAN (see FIG. 12) to convey the redundancy group information for a radio interface 210, 220.); and
feed the configuration data to the traffic controller (Figures 3 and 5; Par. 0082-0083, 0124-0128; The configuration module 336 is configured to dynamically configure the first network entity set and the second network entity set. As an example, the configuration module 336 may dynamically reduce the redundancy by connecting the first radio interface 210 and the second radio interface 220 via the same entity from either the first network entity set or the second network entity set to the other apparatus 20 and in parallel to the first radio interface 210, to the other apparatus 20. Redundancy is based on received grouping parameters.).
Regarding claim 9, Miklos shows the control network of claim 8, wherein the traffic controller is configured to determine a routing plan on the basis of the configuration data (CONF) (Par. 0124-0128; the handover controller 400 in a BS 100 may down-prioritize cells which are in a different redundancy group A, B than the radio interface 210, 220 (e.g., using a configurable threshold). Normally, a radio interface 210, 220 is handed over only to cells in the same redundancy group A, B; only when the cells in the same redundancy group A, B have a link quality (or other parameter) below a given threshold, the radio interface 210, 220 would be handed over by the respective handover controller 400 to a cell in another redundancy group.).
Regarding claim 12, Miklos shows the control network of claim1, which is an automation backbone (Par. 0015; the network controller may belong to a radio access network part, a transport network part, or a core network part of the communication network.).
Regarding claim 13, Miklos shows a traffic controller for use in a control network
wherein the traffic controller has at its disposal at least two wireless network interfaces (Figures 3 and 5; Par. 0082; network controller includes first connection module and second connecting module for communicating with one or more industry automation apparatuses.) and is configured to provide a logical connection from a software application, which executes in the control network, to one of the automation devices by maintaining at least two contemporaneous physical connections to said one of the automation devices using the wireless network interfaces (Figures 3 and 5; Par. 0082-0083; The configuration module 336 is configured to dynamically configure the first network entity set and the second network entity set. As an example, the configuration module 336 may dynamically reduce the redundancy by connecting the first radio interface 210 and the second radio interface 220 via the same entity from either the first network entity set or the second network entity set to the other apparatus 20 and in parallel to the first radio interface 210, to the other apparatus 20. Redundancy is based on received grouping parameters.).
Regarding claim 14, Miklos shows a method of establishing a logical connection with physical redundancy between a control network and an industrial automation device operating in radio coverage of at least one radio access network(Figure 3 shows a network controller for supporting multiple industry automation apparatuses which operate in radio coverage of at least one radio access network. Network controller performing in part the disclosed method of Figure 13-14.), the method comprising:
establishing at least two physical connections between the control network and the automation device (Figures 3 and 5; Par. 0082; network controller includes first connection module and second connecting module for communicating with one or more industry automation apparatuses.);
establishing the logical connection using a higher-layer communication protocol (Figures 3 and 5; Par. 0082-0083; The configuration module 336 is configured to dynamically configure the first network entity set and the second network entity set. As an example, the configuration module 336 may dynamically reduce the redundancy by connecting the first radio interface 210 and the second radio interface 220 via the same entity from either the first network entity set or the second network entity set to the other apparatus 20 and in parallel to the first radio interface 210, to the other apparatus 20. Redundancy is based on received grouping parameters.); and
repeatedly adapting a physical redundancy of the logical connection (Par. 0082-0083; The configuration module 336 is configured to dynamically configure the first network entity set and the second network entity set. It should be noted that the first network entity set and the second network entity set may still each include one or more further entities not shared between the first radio interface 210 and the second radio interface 220. In this manner at least a certain degree of redundancy can be maintained.).
Regarding claim 15, Miklos shows determining a level of independence between the contemporaneous physical connections on the basis of measurements (Figures 13-14; Par. 0032, 0126-0127, 0132-0134; As an optimization, the handover controller 400 may take into account the cell redundancy groups A, B when configuring the radio interfaces 210, 220 for handover measurements.), wherein said adapting is performed on the basis of the determined level of independence (Par. 0082-0083; The configuration module 336 is configured to dynamically configure the first network entity set and the second network entity set. It should be noted that the first network entity set and the second network entity set may still each include one or more further entities not shared between the first radio interface 210 and the second radio interface 220. In this manner at least a certain degree of redundancy can be maintained.).
Regarding claims 16, 17, 18, 19 and 20, these claims are rejected based on the same reasoning as presented in the rejection of claims 3, 6, 7 8 and 3, respectively.
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.
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) 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Miklos in view of Carley (US 2009/0150977; hereinafter Carley).
Regarding claim 10, Miklos shows all of the elements except wherein the traffic controller is configured to apply frame replication and elimination for reliability, FRER, and/or IP tunneling in respect of selected ones of the executing software applications.
However, the above-mentioned claim limitations are well-established in the art as evidenced by Carley. Specifically, Carley shows wherein the traffic controller is configured to apply frame replication and elimination for reliability, FRER, and/or IP tunneling in respect of selected ones of the executing software applications (Par. 0040, 0165, 0181; The SRMA can access the network services via a connection to the backbone network (or an operations support network) or via a tunnel through the out-of-band network to the backbone network.).
In view of the above, having the system of Miklos, then given the well-established teaching of Carley, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Miklos as taught by Carley, in order to provide motivation to allow for remote management of devices or elements in a secure manner (Par. 0002 of Carley).
Claim(s) 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Miklos in view of Emerson et al. (US 2022/0353185; hereinafter Emerson).
Regarding claim 11, Miklos shows all of the elements except wherein the traffic controller includes a managed network switch, such as a time-sensitive networking, TSN, switch.
However, the above-mentioned claim limitations are well-established in the art as evidenced by Emerson. Specifically, Emerson shows wherein the traffic controller includes a managed network switch, such as a time-sensitive networking, TSN, switch (Figure 1; Par. 0043, 0068; diversion module 103 and/or other components may selectively divert network traffic to out-of-band communication channel 109 based on detected or predicted network congestion and/or disruption. Network congestion and/or disruption, whether detected/predicted by diversion module 103 or by other process automation nodes (e.g., any of DCNs 110.sub.1-3), may be detected or predicted in various ways, such as a percentage of total bandwidth used, a number or percentage of dropped packets, a detected latency meeting or exceeding some temporal threshold, detection of time-sensitive networking errors, etc.).
In view of the above, having the system of Miklos, then given the well-established teaching of Emerson, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Miklos as taught by Emerson, in order to provide motivation to efficiently divert traffic from process automation network, thereby alleviating the bottleneck (Par. 0045 of Emerson).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 11579597 B2 - generally to systems and methods for providing a control and monitoring system within an industrial automation system. More particularly, embodiments of the present disclosure are directed toward systems to provide a self-healing, peer-to-peer communication network within the industrial automation system.
US 20220350311 A1 - relates to the field of industrial automation and, in particular, to an industrial controller, a system, a computer program and corresponding methods for communicating with multi-cloud solutions.
US 20210302923 A1 - relates generally to industrial automation, and, more particularly, to backing up an industrial automation plant in the cloud.
US 10534662 B2 - relates generally to computers and distributed processing, and more particularly to distributed parallel processing for determining equipment failure in industrial process.
US 20190098072 A1 - generally relates to a management system for a plant facility and a method for managing the plant facility.
US 20180150061 A1 - generally to industrial process control and automation systems. More specifically, this disclosure relates to a system and method for using BLUETOOTH communication in industrial process control and automation systems.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to REDENTOR M PASIA whose telephone number is (571)272-9745. The examiner can normally be reached Mondays-Thursdays - 5am-245pm and Fridays 5am-330pm.
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, Un Cho can be reached at (571)272-7919. 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.
/REDENTOR PASIA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2413
Prosecution Insights