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 office action is a response to an amendment/arguments filed on 10/7/2025 which was in response to the office action mailed on 7/14/2025 (hereinafter the prior office action).
Claim(s) 21-40 is/are pending.
Claim(s) 21, 28 and 35 is/are amended.
Claim(s) 1-20 is/are cancelled.
Claim(s) 21, 28 and 35 is/are independent.
Applicant has not overcome prior rejection(s) based on Double Patenting.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed on 10/7/2025, have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant states in Pg. 8 in “Remarks” that Applicant is not submitting a Terminal Disclaimer because the Office has not indicated that the claims will be allowable if a Terminal Disclaimer were to be submitted and that the Double Patenting rejection is premature.
Examiner respectfully disagrees because filing a Terminal Disclaimer is not what makes an application allowable. Overcoming all rejections in an Office action is what makes an application allowable. As indicated in the prior and current office action, the Double Patenting rejection is not the only rejection. There is also a 103 rejection. The Double Patenting rejection still needs to be maintained (in order to outline all rejections thereby compacting prosecution) if the current form of the claims is such that their scope is covered by the prior patent as indicated in the Double Patenting rejection. In fact, the newly amended limitation recites the same limitation from the patent with which the Double Patenting rejection has been made. When the claims have been amended to sufficiently differ from the scope of the prior patent or when a Terminal Disclaimer is filed, the Double Patenting rejection would be overcome due to the amendments or due to the Terminal Disclaimer. Thus, the current Double Patenting rejection is not premature.
Applicant further states in Pg. 9 in “Remarks” regarding claim 21 that the prior art of Wengrovitz does not teach Applicant’s newly amended limitation of subsequent to reception, by the actuating function, of the indication of the action, determine, by the actuating function, whether the action is supported for the equipment. Applicant elaborates that Wengrovitz’ Para. 72 does not teach the limitation because Wengrovitz does not mention any function that receives an indication of an action and then determines whether the received action is supported for the equipment. Applicant adds in Pg. 9-10 that the secondary art of Kloos does not remedy Wengrovitz’ deficiency in teaching the above limitation.
Examiner respectfully disagrees because Wengrovitz teaches Applicant’s newly amended limitation of subsequent to reception, by the actuating function, of the indication of the action, determine, by the actuating function, whether the action is supported for the equipment. This is because Para. 72 of Wengrovitz discloses that equipment carries out the actuating function that is supported by the equipment in response to transmitted messages, i.e. the system transmits the message that triggers the appropriate response specific to the supported actions of the equipment. Para. 72 of Wengrovitz describes Fig. 6 where instructions are verified, i.e. after receiving indication of the action, it is determined whether the action is supported for the equipment. Otherwise the verification would fail. Thus, Wengrovitz teaches that subsequent to reception, by the actuating function, of the indication of the action, determine, by the actuating function, whether the action is supported for the equipment as per Applicant’s newly amended claim limitation.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the claims at issue are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); and In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on a nonstatutory double patenting ground provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with this application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The USPTO internet Web site contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit http://www.uspto.gov/forms/. The filing date of the application will determine what form should be used.
A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to http://www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp. Applicant is encouraged to utilize the EFS-Web eTerminal Disclaimer in order to expedite processing of the terminal disclaimer.
Claim(s) 21-40 is/are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,045,032. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both systems comprise substantially the same elements.
Claims 21-40 of the present application are mapped to claims 1-3, 5-11 and 15-18 of U.S. Patent No. 12,045,032 in the following table:
Present Application
(claims/limitations listed in order)
U.S. Patent No. 12,045,032
(claims/limitations not listed in order)
21. (New) A system, comprising: one or more processors; and one or more memories, wherein the one or more memories have stored thereon instructions, which when executed by the one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to implement an IoT service, wherein the IoT service is configured to:
1. A system, comprising: one or more processors; and one or more memories, wherein the one or more memories have stored thereon instructions, which when executed by the one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to implement an IoT service for a plurality of clients, wherein the IoT service is configured to,
generate a sensing function, wherein the sensing function is configured to: obtain data from equipment at a remote network of a client;
1. for a given client: provide an interface configured to: receive, from the client, a specification of a sensing function associated with equipment at a remote network of the client, wherein the specification of the sensing function indicates at least one condition associated with the equipment and one or more actions associated with the condition; and receive, from the client, a specification of an actuating function for the equipment, wherein the specification of the actuating function indicates one or more supported actions for the equipment; generate the sensing function, wherein the sensing function is configured to:
obtain data from the equipment;
determine, based on the data, whether a condition has been met;
1. determine, based on the data, whether the condition has been met;
and in response to a determination that the condition has been met, provide, to an actuating function, an indication of an action;
1. and in response to a determination that the condition has been met, provide, to the actuating function, an indication of one of the actions;
generate the actuating function, wherein the actuating function is configured to: receive the indication of the action;
1. generate the actuating function, wherein the actuating function is configured to: receive the indication of the action;
subsequent to reception, by the actuating function, of the indication of the action, determine, by the actuating function, whether the action is supported for the equipment;
1. subsequent to the reception, by the actuating function, of the indication of the action provided by the sensing function, determine, by the actuating function, whether the indicated action is one of the supported actions for the equipment;
and in response to a determination that the indicated action is supported for the equipment, cause the equipment to perform the action;
1. and in response to a determination that the indicated action is one of the supported actions for the equipment, cause the equipment to perform the action;
and deploy the sensing function and the actuating function to the remote network of the client.
1. and deploy the sensing function and the actuating function to the remote network of the client.
22. (New) The system of claim 21, wherein the actuating function is further configured to: receive an indication of another action;
2. The system of claim 1, wherein the actuating function is further configured to:
receive an indication of another action;
determine whether the other action is supported for the equipment;
2. determine whether the other action is one of the supported actions for the equipment;
and in response to a determination that the other action is not supported for the equipment, perform one or more of: ignore the indication of the other action, or provide, to a destination, an indication that the other action is not a supported action for the equipment.
2. and in response to a determination that the other action is not one of the supported actions for the equipment, perform one or more of:
ignore the indication of the other action, or
provide, to a destination, an indication that the other action is not a supported action for the equipment.
23. (New) The system of claim 21, wherein to generate the sensing function, the IoT service is configured to assign, to the sensing function, read only access to the equipment according to a communication protocol of the equipment.
3. The system of claim 1, wherein to generate the sensing function, the IoT service is configured to assign, to the sensing function, read only access to the equipment according to a communication protocol of the equipment,
24. (New) The system of claim 21, wherein to generate the actuating function, the IoT service is configured to assign, to the actuating function, write only access to the equipment according to a communication protocol of the equipment.
3. and wherein to generate the actuating function, the IoT service is configured to assign, to the actuating function, write only access to the equipment according to the communication protocol of the equipment.
25. (New) The system of claim 21, wherein the IoT service is further configured to: deploy an update for the actuating function to the remote network of the client,
5. The system of claim 1, wherein the IoT service is further configured to: receive, from the client, a specification of another action associated with the condition; and
receive, from the client, a specification of another actuating function for another equipment, wherein the specification of the other actuating function indicates one or more supported actions for the other equipment;
generate an update for the sensing function, wherein the update is configured to update the sensing function to:
in response to the determination that the condition has been met, provide, to the other actuating function, an indication of the other action;
generate the actuating function, wherein the actuating function is configured to:
receive the indication of the other action;
determine whether the other action is one of the supported actions for the other equipment; and
in response to a determination that the other action is one of the supported actions for the other equipment, cause the other equipment to perform the other action; and
deploy the update and the actuating function to the remote network of the client.
wherein the update indicates one or more additional actions for the equipment.
18. wherein the update indicates one or more additional actions for the equipment;
26. (New) The system of claim 21, wherein the condition comprises one or more values of the data exceeding a predetermined threshold value,
10. wherein the condition comprises one or more values of the data exceeding a predetermined threshold value,
and wherein to determine that the condition has been met, the sensing function is configured to: determine that the one more values of the data exceed the predetermined threshold value.
10. and wherein determining, by the sensing function, that the condition has been met comprises: determining, by the sensing function, that the one or more values of the data exceed the predetermined threshold value.
27. (New) The system of claim 26, wherein the IoT service is further configured to: deploy an update for the sensing function to the remote network of the client,
5. wherein the IoT service is further configured to: receive, from the client, a specification of another action associated with the condition; and receive, from the client, a specification of another actuating function for another equipment, wherein the specification of the other actuating function indicates one or more supported actions for the other equipment;
generate an update for the sensing function, wherein the update is configured to update the sensing function to:
in response to the determination that the condition has been met, provide, to the other actuating function, an indication of the other action;
generate the actuating function, wherein the actuating function is configured to:
receive the indication of the other action;
determine whether the other action is one of the supported actions for the other equipment; and
in response to a determination that the other action is one of the supported actions for the other equipment, cause the other equipment to perform the other action; and
deploy the update and the actuating function to the remote network of the client.
wherein the update indicates a different value for the predetermined threshold value.
11. wherein the update indicates a new predetermined threshold value;
28. (New) A method, comprising: performing, by one or more computing devices: generating a sensing function,
6. A method, comprising:
performing, by one or more computing devices: provisioning a sensing function to read data from equipment according to a communication protocol of the equipment;
provisioning an actuating function to write commands to the equipment according to the communication protocol;
wherein the sensing function is configured to: obtain data from equipment
6. obtaining, by the sensing function, data from the equipment according to the communication protocol;
at a remote network of a client;
1. at a remote network of the client
determine, based on the data, whether a condition has been met;
6. based on the data, determining, by the sensing function, whether a condition has been met;
and in response to a determination that the condition has been met, provide, to an actuating function, an indication of an action;
6. in response to determining, by the sensing function, that the condition has been met, providing, to the actuating function, an indication of an action for the equipment;
generating the actuating function, wherein the actuating function is configured to: receive the indication of the action;
6. receiving, by the actuating function, the indication of the action for the equipment;
subsequent to reception, by the actuating function, of the indication of the action, determine, by the actuating function, whether the action is supported for the equipment;
subsequent to receiving, by the actuating function, the indication of the action provided by the sensing function, determining, by the actuating function, whether the indicated action is a supported action for the equipment;
and in response to a determination that the indicated action is supported for the equipment, cause the equipment to perform the action;
and in response to determining that the indicated action is a supported action for the equipment, causing the equipment to perform the action by writing a command to the equipment according to the communication protocol.
and deploying the sensing function and the actuating function to the remote network of the client.
1. and deploy the sensing function and the actuating function to the remote network of the client.
29. (New) The method as recited in claim 28, wherein the actuating function is further configured to: receive an indication of another action;
7. The method as recited in claim 6, further comprising: receiving, by the actuating function, an indication of another action;
determine whether the other action is supported for the equipment;
7. determining whether the other action is a supported action for the equipment;
and in response to a determination that the other action is not supported for the equipment,
7. and in response to determining that the other action is not a supported action for the equipment,
perform one or more of: ignore the indication of the other action, or provide, to a destination, an indication that the other action is not a supported action for the equipment.
7. performing one or more of: ignoring the indication of the other action, or providing, to a destination, an indication that the other action is not a supported action for the equipment.
30. (New) The method as recited in claim 28, wherein generating the sensing function comprises assigning, to the sensing function, read only access to the equipment
8. The method as recited in claim 6, wherein provisioning the sensing function comprises assigning, to the sensing function, read only access to the equipment,
according to a communication protocol of the equipment.
6. read data from equipment according to a communication protocol of the equipment;
31. (New) The method as recited in claim 28, wherein generating the actuating function comprises assigning, to the actuating function, write only access to the equipment
8. and wherein provisioning the actuating function comprises assigning, to the actuating function, write only access to the equipment.
according to a communication protocol of the equipment.
6. writing a command to the equipment according to the communication protocol.
32. (New) The method as recited in claim 28, further comprising: deploying an update for the actuating function
9. The method as recited in claim 6, further comprising:
obtaining an update for the actuating function, wherein the update indicates one or more additional actions for the equipment; and
updating the actuating function based on the obtained update,
to the remote network of the client,
5. deploy the update and the actuating function to the remote network of the client.
wherein the update indicates one or more additional actions for the equipment.
9. wherein the one or more additional actions for the equipment are supported by the updated actuating function.
33. (New) The method as recited in claim 28, wherein the condition comprises one or more values of the data exceeding a predetermined threshold value,
10. The method as recited in claim 6, wherein the condition comprises one or more values of the data exceeding a predetermined threshold value,
and wherein to determine that the condition has been met, the sensing function is configured to: determine that the one more values of the data exceed the predetermined threshold value.
10. and wherein determining, by the sensing function, that the condition has been met comprises: determining, by the sensing function, that the one or more values of the data exceed the predetermined threshold value.
34. (New) The method as recited in claim 33, further comprising: deploying an update for the sensing function
11. The method as recited in claim 10, further comprising: obtaining an update for the sensing function,
to the remote network of the client,
5. deploy the update and the actuating function to the remote network of the client.
wherein the update indicates a different value for the predetermined threshold value.
11. wherein the update indicates a new predetermined threshold value;
35. (New) One or more non-transitory computer-accessible storage media storing program instructions that when executed on or across one or more processors cause the one or more processors
15. One or more non-transitory computer-accessible storage media storing program instructions that when executed on or across one or more processors of a computing device cause the one or more processors
to: generate a sensing function,
15. to: provision a sensing function,
wherein the sensing function is configured to: obtain data from equipment
15. wherein the sensing function is provisioned to: obtain data from equipment;
at a remote network of a client;
1. deploy the sensing function and the actuating function to the remote network of the client.
determine, based on the data, whether a condition has been met;
15. determine, based on the data, whether a condition has been met;
and in response to a determination that the condition has been met, provide, to an actuating function, an indication of an action;
15. and in response to a determination that the condition has been met, provide, to a topic, an indication of an action;
generate the actuating function, wherein the actuating function is configured to: receive the indication of the action; subsequent to reception, by the actuating function, of the indication of the action, determine, by the actuating function, whether the action is supported for the equipment;
15. provision the actuating function, received from the IoT service, wherein the actuating function is provisioned to, subsequent to invocation of the actuating function in response to the indication of the action provided to the topic: determine, based on the providing of the indication of the action to the topic, the indicated action; subsequent to the determination, by the actuating function, of the indicated action based on the providing of the indication of the action by the sensing function, determine, by the actuating function, whether the determined indicated action is a supported action for the equipment;
and in response to a determination that the indicated action is supported for the equipment, cause the equipment to perform the action;
15. and in response to a determination that the indicated action is a supported action for the equipment, cause the equipment to perform the action.
and deploy the sensing function and the actuating function to the remote network of the client.
1. and deploy the sensing function and the actuating function to the remote network of the client.
36. (New) The one or more storage media as recited in claim 35, wherein the actuating function is further configured to: receive an indication of another action; determine whether the other action is supported for the equipment;
16. The one or more storage media as recited in claim 15, further comprising program instructions that when executed on or across the one or more processors further cause the one or more processors to provision the actuating function to, subsequent to invocation of the actuating function in response to an indication of another action provided to the topic: determine, based on the topic, the other indicated action; determine whether the other action is a supported action for the equipment;
and in response to a determination that the other action is not supported for the equipment,
16. and in response to a determination that the other action is not a supported action for the equipment,
perform one or more of: ignore the indication of the other action, or provide, to a destination, an indication that the other action is not a supported action for the equipment.
perform one or more of: ignore the indication of the other action, or provide, to a destination, an indication that the other action is not a supported action for the equipment.
37. (New) The one or more storage media as recited in claim 35, wherein to generate the sensing function, the program instructions when executed on or across the one or more processors further cause the one or more processors to: assign, to the sensing function, read only access to the equipment
17. The one or more storage media as recited in claim 15, wherein the sensing function is provisioned for read only access to the equipment,
according to a communication protocol of the equipment.
6. read data from equipment according to a communication protocol of the equipment;
38. (New) The one or more storage media as recited in claim 35, wherein to generate the actuating function, the program instructions when executed on or across the one or more processors further cause the one or more processors to: assign, to the actuating function, write only access to the equipment
17. and wherein the actuating function is provisioned for write only access to the equipment.
according to a communication protocol of the equipment.
6. writing a command to the equipment according to the communication protocol.
39. (New) The one or more storage media as recited in claim 35, wherein the program instructions when executed on or across the one or more processors further cause the one or more processors to: deploy an update for the actuating function to the remote network of the client, wherein the update indicates one or more additional actions for the equipment.
18. The one or more storage media as recited in claim 15, further comprising program instructions that when executed on or across the one or more processors further cause the one or more processors to: receive, from the IoT service, an update for the actuating function, wherein the update indicates one or more additional actions for the equipment; and update the actuating function based on the received update, wherein the one or more additional actions for the equipment are supported by the updated actuating function.
40. (New) The one or more storage media as recited in claim 35, wherein the condition comprises one or more values of the data exceeding a predetermined threshold value,
10. wherein the condition comprises one or more values of the data exceeding a predetermined threshold value,
and wherein to determine that the condition has been met, the sensing function is configured to: determine that the one more values of the data exceed the predetermined threshold value.
10. and wherein determining, by the sensing function, that the condition has been met comprises: determining, by the sensing function, that the one or more values of the data exceed the predetermined threshold value.
As the above table shows, the two claims are identical except for the extra limitations bolded in U.S. Patent No. 12,045,032. By removing the extra limitations from the U.S. Pat. No. 12,045,032, the inventions become the same.
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 of this title, 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
Claim(s) 1-4, 6-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wengrovitz et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2022/0084692) (hereinafter “Wengrovitz”) in view of Kloos et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2009/0225879) (hereinafter “Kloos”).
Regarding claim 21, Wengrovitz teaches a system, comprising: one or more processors; and one or more memories, wherein the one or more memories have stored thereon instructions, which when executed by the one or more processors, cause the one or more processors (Fig. 2 - - processor executes instructions stored on memory)
to implement an IoT service, wherein the IoT service is configured (Para. 26 - - IoT service is implemented for multiple clients)
to: generate a sensing function, wherein the sensing function is configured to: obtain data from equipment at a remote network of a client; (Para. 29 - - sensor equipment associated with client is used)
determine, based on the data, whether a condition has been met; and in response to a determination that the condition has been met, provide, to an actuating function, an indication of an action; (Para. 29 - - state/event/condition are sensed, and based on the sensed condition, actions are performed)
generate the actuating function, wherein the actuating function is configured to: receive the indication of the action; subsequent to reception, by the actuating function, of the indication of the action, determine, by the actuating function, whether the action is supported for the equipment; and…cause the equipment to perform the action; (Para. 72 - - equipment carries out the actuating function that is supported by the equipment in response to transmitted messages, i.e. the system transmits the message that triggers the appropriate response specific to the supported actions of the equipment)
and deploy the sensing function and the actuating function to the remote network of the client. (Para. 29 - - state/event/condition are sensed, and based on the sensed condition, actions are performed)
But Wengrovitz does not explicitly teach in response to a determination that the indicated action is supported for the equipment,
However, Kloos teaches in response to a determination that the indicated action is supported for the equipment, (Claim 6, 11 - - instruction is given in response to a determination that an action is supported by the equipment)
Wengrovitz and Kloos are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor and contain overlapping structural and/or functional similarities. They both contain communication systems used to control equipment.
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ), it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the above limitation(s) as taught by Wengrovitz, by incorporating the above limitation(s) as taught by Kloos.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this modification in order to provide improved quality of communication, as suggested by Kloos (Para. 9).
Regarding claim 22, the combination of Wengrovitz and Kloos teaches all the limitations of the base claim(s).
Wengrovitz further teaches wherein the actuating function is further configured to: receive an indication of another action; (Fig. 1, Para. 35 - - messages, i.e. indications of action, are received)
determine whether the other action is supported for the equipment; (Fig. 1, Para. 35 - - messages are determined to be authorized or not because the client is not a member of an incident, i.e. the received indication of an action is determined to be not supported by the equipment)
and in response to a determination that the other action is not supported for the equipment, perform one or more of: ignore the indication of the other action, or provide, to a destination, an indication that the other action is not a supported action for the equipment. (Fig. 1, Para. 35 - - messages are not accepted, i.e. ignored, when they are not authorized because the client is not a member of an incident, i.e. the received indication of an action is determined to be not supported by the equipment, and in response, the indication/message is ignored)
Regarding claim 23, the combination of Wengrovitz and Kloos teaches all the limitations of the base claim(s).
Wengrovitz further teaches wherein to generate the sensing function, the IoT service is configured to assign, to the sensing function, read only access to the equipment according to a communication protocol of the equipment. (Para. 30 - - IoT broker/service policies for giving permission to publish; Para. 69 - - some devices can only-publish; Para. 72 - - publishing can be reading equipment data, such as read only access to a sensor)
Regarding claim 24, the combination of Wengrovitz and Kloos teaches all the limitations of the base claim(s).
Wengrovitz further teaches wherein to generate the actuating function, the IoT service is configured to assign, to the actuating function, write only access to the equipment according to a communication protocol of the equipment. (Para. 30 - - IoT broker/service policies for giving permission to publish; Para. 69 - - some devices can only-subscribe; Para. 74 - - subscribing can be taking control of an equipment, i.e. writing data)
Regarding claim 25, the combination of Wengrovitz and Kloos teaches all the limitations of the base claim(s).
Wengrovitz further teaches wherein the IoT service is further configured to: deploy an update for the actuating function to the remote network of the client, wherein the update indicates one or more additional actions for the equipment. (Para. 74-75 - - multiple, i.e. additional, actions of an equipment can be performed by controlling client; Para. 30 - - system can dynamically change, i.e. update, policies related to clients)
Regarding claim 26, the combination of Wengrovitz and Kloos teaches all the limitations of the base claim(s).
Wengrovitz further teaches wherein the condition comprises one or more values of the data exceeding a predetermined threshold value, and wherein to determine that the condition has been met, the sensing function is configured to: determine that the one more values of the data exceed the predetermined threshold value. (Para. 42, 44 - - sensor can detect smoke, and based on the detection and/or temperature reading cause a fire alarm, i.e. sensor determines a predetermined threshold value of smoke/temperature that causes the condition of a fire alarm to be met)
Regarding claim 27, the combination of Wengrovitz and Kloos teaches all the limitations of the base claim(s).
Wengrovitz further teaches wherein the IoT service is further configured to: deploy an update for the sensing function to the remote network of the client, wherein the update indicates a different value for the predetermined threshold value. (Para. 30 - - system can dynamically change, i.e. update, policies related to clients; Para. 29 - - clients can include various equipment with their respective action)
Regarding claim 28, Wengrovitz teaches a method, comprising: performing, by one or more computing devices: (Fig. 2 - - processor executes instructions stored on memory)
generating a sensing function, wherein the sensing function is configured to: obtain data from equipment at a remote network of a client; (Para. 29 - - sensor equipment associated with client is used)
determine, based on the data, whether a condition has been met; (Para. 29 - - state/event/condition are sensed)
and in response to a determination that the condition has been met, provide, to an actuating function, an indication of an action; (Para. 29 - - based on the sensed condition, actions are performed)
generating the actuating function, wherein the actuating function is configured to: receive the indication of the action; (Para. 72 - system transmits the message that triggers the appropriate response, i.e. actuation, in response to transmitted messages)
subsequent to reception, by the actuating function, of the indication of the action, determine, by the actuating function, whether the action is supported for the equipment; (Para. 72 - - equipment carries out the actuating function that is supported by the equipment)
and…cause the equipment to perform the action; (Para. 72 - - equipment carries out the actuating function)
and deploying the sensing function and the actuating function to the remote network of the client. (Para. 29 - - state/event/condition are sensed, and based on the sensed condition, actions are performed)
But Wengrovitz does not explicitly teach in response to a determination that the indicated action is supported for the equipment,
However, Kloos teaches in response to a determination that the indicated action is supported for the equipment, (Claim 6, 11 - - instruction is given in response to a determination that an action is supported by the equipment)
Wengrovitz and Kloos are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor and contain overlapping structural and/or functional similarities. They both contain communication systems used to control equipment.
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ), it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the above limitation(s) as taught by Wengrovitz, by incorporating the above limitation(s) as taught by Kloos.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this modification in order to provide improved quality of communication, as suggested by Kloos (Para. 9).
Regarding claim 29, the combination of Wengrovitz and Kloos teaches all the limitations of the base claim(s).
Wengrovitz further teaches wherein the actuating function is further configured to: receive an indication of another action; (Fig. 1, Para. 35 - - messages, i.e. indications of action, are received)
determine whether the other action is supported for the equipment; (Fig. 1, Para. 35 - - messages are determined to be authorized or not because the client is not a member of an incident, i.e. the received indication of an action is determined to be not supported by the equipment)
and in response to a determination that the other action is not supported for the equipment, perform one or more of: ignore the indication of the other action, or provide, to a destination, an indication that the other action is not a supported action for the equipment. (Fig. 1, Para. 35 - - messages are not accepted, i.e. ignored, when they are not authorized because the client is not a member of an incident, i.e. the received indication of an action is determined to be not supported by the equipment, and in response, the indication/message is ignored)
Regarding claim 30, the combination of Wengrovitz and Kloos teaches all the limitations of the base claim(s).
Wengrovitz further teaches wherein generating the sensing function comprises assigning, to the sensing function, read only access to the equipment according to a communication protocol of the equipment. (Para. 30 - - IoT broker/service policies for giving permission to publish; Para. 69 - - some devices can only-publish; Para. 72 - - publishing can be reading equipment data, such as read only access to a sensor)
Regarding claim 31, the combination of Wengrovitz and Kloos teaches all the limitations of the base claim(s).
Wengrovitz further teaches wherein generating the actuating function comprises assigning, to the actuating function, write only access to the equipment according to a communication protocol of the equipment. (Para. 30 - - IoT broker/service policies for giving permission to publish; Para. 69 - - some devices can only-subscribe; Para. 74 - - subscribing can be taking control of an equipment, i.e. writing data)
Regarding claim 32, the combination of Wengrovitz and Kloos teaches all the limitations of the base claim(s).
Wengrovitz further teaches deploying an update for the actuating function to the remote network of the client, wherein the update indicates one or more additional actions for the equipment. (Para. 74-75 - - multiple, i.e. additional, actions of an equipment can be performed by controlling client; Para. 30 - - system can dynamically change, i.e. update, policies related to clients)
Regarding claim 33, the combination of Wengrovitz and Kloos teaches all the limitations of the base claim(s).
Wengrovitz further teaches wherein the condition comprises one or more values of the data exceeding a predetermined threshold value, (Para. 42, 44 - - sensor can detect smoke, i.e. sensor determines a predetermined threshold value of smoke/temperature that causes the condition of a fire alarm to be met)
and wherein to determine that the condition has been met, the sensing function is configured to: determine that the one more values of the data exceed the predetermined threshold value. (Para. 42, 44 - - based on the detection and/or temperature reading, sensor causes a fire alarm, i.e. sensor determines a predetermined threshold value of smoke/temperature that causes the condition of a fire alarm to be met)
Regarding claim 34, the combination of Wengrovitz and Kloos teaches all the limitations of the base claim(s).
Wengrovitz further teaches deploying an update for the sensing function to the remote network of the client, wherein the update indicates a different value for the predetermined threshold value. (Para. 30 - - system can dynamically change, i.e. update, policies related to clients; Para. 29 - - clients can include various equipment with their respective action)
Regarding claim 35, Wengrovitz teaches one or more non-transitory computer-accessible storage media storing program instructions that when executed on or across one or more processors cause the one or more processors (Fig. 2 - - processor executes instructions stored on memory)
to: generate a sensing function, wherein the sensing function is configured to: obtain data from equipment at a remote network of a client; (Para. 29 - - sensor equipment associated with client is used, and communication is performed via network)
determine, based on the data, whether a condition has been met; and in response to a determination that the condition has been met, provide, to an actuating function, an indication of an action; (Para. 29 - - state/event/condition are sensed, and based on the sensed condition, actions are performed; Para. 31 - - system can listen to a multicast channel to detect an incident, i.e. event listener; Para. 30 - - incident is related to a topic)
generate the actuating function, wherein the actuating function is configured to: receive the indication of the action; (Para. 72 - - equipment carries out the action in response to transmitted messages, i.e. the system transmits the message that triggers the appropriate response)
subsequent to reception, by the actuating function, of the indication of the action, determine, by the actuating function, whether the action is supported for the equipment; (Para. 72 - - the actuating function that is supported by the equipment in response to transmitted messages is to be carried out, i.e. the system transmits the message that triggers the appropriate response specific to the supported actions of the equipment)
and…cause the equipment to perform the action; (Para. 72 - - equipment carries out the actuating function)
and deploy the sensing function and the actuating function to the remote network of the client. (Para. 29 - - state/event/condition are sensed, and based on the sensed condition, actions are performed)
But Wengrovitz does not explicitly teach in response to a determination that the indicated action is supported for the equipment,
However, Kloos teaches in response to a determination that the indicated action is supported for the equipment, (Claim 6, 11 - - instruction is given in response to a determination that an action is supported by the equipment)
Wengrovitz and Kloos are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor and contain overlapping structural and/or functional similarities. They both contain communication systems used to control equipment.
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ), it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the above limitation(s) as taught by Wengrovitz, by incorporating the above limitation(s) as taught by Kloos.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this modification in order to provide improved quality of communication, as suggested by Kloos (Para. 9).
Regarding claim 36, the combination of Wengrovitz and Kloos teaches all the limitations of the base claim(s).
Wengrovitz further teaches wherein the actuating function is further configured to: receive an indication of another action; (Fig. 1, Para. 35 - - messages, i.e. indications of action, are received)
determine whether the other action is supported for the equipment; (Fig. 1, Para. 35 - - messages are determined to be authorized or not because the client is not a member of an incident, i.e. the received indication of an action is determined to be not supported by the equipment)
and in response to a determination that the other action is not supported for the equipment, perform one or more of: ignore the indication of the other action, or provide, to a destination, an indication that the other action is not a supported action for the equipment. (Fig. 1, Para. 35 - - messages are not accepted, i.e. ignored, when they are not authorized because the client is not a member of an incident, i.e. the received indication of an action is determined to be not supported by the equipment, and in response, the indication/message is ignored)
Regarding claim 37, the combination of Wengrovitz and Kloos teaches all the limitations of the base claim(s).
Wengrovitz further teaches wherein to generate the sensing function, the program instructions when executed on or across the one or more processors further cause the one or more processors to: assign, to the sensing function, read only access to the equipment according to a communication protocol of the equipment. (Para. 30 - - IoT broker/service policies for giving permission to publish; Para. 69 - - some devices can only-publish; Para. 72 - - publishing can be reading equipment data, such as read only access to a sensor)
Regarding claim 38, the combination of Wengrovitz and Kloos teaches all the limitations of the base claim(s).
Wengrovitz further teaches wherein to generate the actuating function, the program instructions when executed on or across the one or more processors further cause the one or more processors to: assign, to the actuating function, write only access to the equipment according to a communication protocol of the equipment. (Para. 30 - - IoT broker/service policies for giving permission to publish; Para. 69 - - some devices can only-subscribe; Para. 74 - - subscribing can be taking control of an equipment, i.e. writing data)
Regarding claim 39, the combination of Wengrovitz and Kloos teaches all the limitations of the base claim(s).
Wengrovitz further teaches wherein the program instructions when executed on or across the one or more processors further cause the one or more processors to: deploy an update for the actuating function to the remote network of the client, wherein the update indicates one or more additional actions for the equipment. (Para. 74-75 - - multiple, i.e. additional, actions of an equipment can be performed by controlling client; Para. 30 - - system can dynamically change, i.e. update, policies related to clients)
Regarding claim 40, the combination of Wengrovitz and Kloos teaches all the limitations of the base claim(s).
Wengrovitz further teaches wherein the condition comprises one or more values of the data exceeding a predetermined threshold value, (Para. 42, 44 - - sensor can detect smoke, i.e. sensor determines a predetermined threshold value of smoke/temperature that causes the condition of a fire alarm to be met)
and wherein to determine that the condition has been met, the sensing function is configured to: determine that the one more values of the data exceed the predetermined threshold value. (Para. 42, 44 - - based on the detection and/or temperature reading, sensor causes a fire alarm, i.e. sensor determines a predetermined threshold value of smoke/temperature that causes the condition of a fire alarm to be met)
It is noted that any citations to specific, pages, columns, lines, or figures in the prior art references and any interpretation of the reference should not be considered to be limiting in any way. A reference is relevant for all it contains and may be relied upon for all that it would have reasonably suggested to one having ordinary skill in the art. See MPEP 2123.
Citation of Pertinent Prior Art
The following prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
U.S. Pat. No. 8,843,241 by Saberi et al., which discloses remote monitoring and control of equipment (Title/Abstract).
Conclusion
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 extension fee 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 Saad M. Kabir whose telephone number is 571-270-0608 (direct fax number is 571-270-9933). The examiner can normally be reached on Mondays to Fridays 9am to 5pm EST.
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 phone number for the organization where this 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). 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.
/SAAD M KABIR/
Examiner, Art Unit 2119
/MOHAMMAD ALI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2119
Prosecution Insights