DETAILED ACTION
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 non-final and is in response to the claims filed June 11, 2024. Claims 1-28 are currently pending, of which claims 1-11 are currently rejected. Claims 12-28 are allowed.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1 recites “the host system further including;” and this appears to be a typographical error, as there is a list of three (3) components of the host system. Due to the list nature, this should be a colon (“:”) not a semi-colon (“;”). Hence, the claim should read “further including[[;]]:” Furthermore, the claim recites a wherein clause. Wherein clauses are preceded by commas (“,”), not semi-colons, as they further limit a prior limitation.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-11 are 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.
Claim 1 recites “a user interface engine stored in the computer readable medium…” and it is unclear how this is possible when the UI engine is part of the host system and the computer readable medium is part of the device package, separate from the host system. It is therefore further unclear if this is a simple antecedent basis issue, and structure issue of the device integration system itself, or a typographical issue where the UI engine is meant to be stored on the one or more computer readable memories.
Claims 2-11 are rejected based on their dependency from the above-rejected claim 1.
Allowable Subject Matter
Regarding independent claims 1, 12, and 21, there are no prior art rejections, as the prior art does not explicitly teach the combination and order of claim language, including the offline engine operations. Regarding 35 U.S.C. §101, while the claim language involves some high-level modeling that is arguably a mental process and/or method of organizing human activity at Step 2A, Prong 1, the language regarding the various engines and systems sufficiently integrates the claims into a practical application at Step 2A, Prong 2, and/or amounts to significantly more than any potential judicial exception at Step 2B.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Sayyarrodsari et al. (U.S. 2014/0128996) discloses a graphical modeling tool that is configured to represent relationships between components, as well as offline modification of models;
Billi-Duran et al. (U.S. 2018/0052451) discloses collecting offline data about industrial devices, stored separately from the devices themselves, and also discloses a device interface component that allows the user/client to remotely monitor and interact with an industrial automation site.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Nicholas Klicos whose telephone number is (571)270-5889. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9:00 AM-5:00 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, Scott Baderman can be reached at (571) 272-3644. 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.
/NICHOLAS KLICOS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2118
Prosecution Insights