DETAILED ACTION
This is a Non-Final Office Action in response to the application filed 06/26/224.
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 .
Status of Claims
Claims 1-20 are currently pending in the application and have been examined.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted by Applicant are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claim(s) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-patentable subject matter. The claims are directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
With respect to claims 1-20, the independent claims (claims 1, 13 and 19) are directed, in part, to a system, a method and a non-transitory computer readable medium for industrial maintenance planning. Step 1 – First pursuant to step 1 in the January 2019 Guidance, claims 1-10 are directed to a system which falls under the statutory category of a machine, claims 13-18 are directed to a method comprising a series of steps which falls under the statutory category of a process and claims 19-20 are directed to a non-transitory computer-readable medium which falls under the statutory category of an article of manufacture. However, these claim elements are considered to be abstract ideas because they are directed to a mental process which includes observations or evaluations.
As per Step 2A - Prong 1 of the subject matter eligibility analysis, the claims are directed, in part, to storing, by a system comprising a processor, work orders for maintenance tasks performed on industrial assets within an industrial facility; for a work order of the work orders, monitoring, by the system, a duration of time spent by a technician to execute a maintenance task defined by the work order; recording, by the system, the amount of time in association with the work order as part of the work order data; generating, by the system, maintenance statistic data based on analysis of the work order data; and rendering, by the system on a client device, an interface that displays the maintenance statistic data in a graphical format. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation covers an observation or evaluation, then it falls under the “mental process” grouping of abstract ideas. Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea.
As per Step 2A - Prong 2 of the subject matter eligibility analysis, this judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, independent claim 1 recites additional elements system, memory, processor, executable component, monitoring component, analysis component, user interface component, client device, interface; independent claim 13 recites additional elements system, processor, client device, interface; independent claim 19 recites additional elements non-transitory computer-readable medium, system, processor, client device, interface. These additional elements are recited at a high-level of generality (i.e., as a generic device performing a generic computer function of receiving and storing data) such that these elements amount no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Examiner looks to Applicant’s specification in at least figures 1 and 2 and related text and [0041-0043] to understand that the invention may be implemented in a generic environment that “Aspects of the systems, apparatuses, or processes explained in this disclosure can constitute machine-executable components embodied within machine(s), e.g., embodied in one or more computer-readable mediums (or media) associated with one or more machines. Such components, when executed by one or more machines, e.g., computer(s), computing device(s), automation device(s), virtual machine(s), etc., can cause the machine(s) to perform the operations described. Work order tracking system 202 can include a user interface component 204, a work order generation component 206, a device interface component 208, a monitoring component 210, an analysis component 212, an MES interface component 214, a training component 216 one or more processors 220, and memory 224. In various embodiments, one or more of the user interface component 204, work order generation component 206, device interface component 208, monitoring component 210, analysis component 212, MES interface component 214, training component 216, the one or more processors 220, and memory 224 can be electrically and/or communicatively coupled to one another to perform one or more of the functions of the work order tracking system 202. In some embodiments, components 204, 206, 208, 210, 212, and 214, can comprise software instructions stored on memory 224 and executed by processor(s) 218. Work order tracking system 202 may also interact with other hardware and/or software components not depicted in FIG. 2. For example, processor(s) 220 may interact with one or more external user interface devices, such as a keyboard, a mouse, a display monitor, a touchscreen, or other such interface devices. User interface component 204 can be configured to generate user interface displays that receive user input and render output to the user in any suitable format (e.g., visual, audio, tactile, etc.). In some embodiments, user interface component 204 can render these interface displays on a client device (e.g., a laptop computer, tablet computer, smart phone, etc.) that is communicatively connected to the work order tracking system 202 (e.g., via a hardwired or wireless connection). Input data that can be received via user interface component 204 can include, but is not limited to, work order data (e.g., work order data field entries), user interface navigation input, or other such input data.”
Accordingly, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they are mere instructions to implement the abstract idea on a computer.
As per Step 2B of the subject matter eligibility analysis, the claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. The additional elements are mere instructions to apply the abstract idea on a computer. When considered individually, these claim elements only contribute generic recitations of technical elements to the claims. It is readily apparent, for example, that the claim is not directed to any specific improvements of these elements and the invention is not directed to a technical improvement. When the claims are considered individually and as a whole, the additional elements noted above, appear to merely apply the abstract concept to a technical environment in a very general sense – i.e. a generic computer receives information from another generic computer, processes the information and then sends information back. In addition, when taken as an ordered combination, the ordered combination adds nothing that is not already present as when the elements are taken individually. Their collective functions merely provide generic computer implementation. Therefore, when viewed as a whole, these additional claim elements do not provide meaningful limitations to transform the abstract idea into a practical application of the abstract idea or that amount to significantly more than the abstract idea itself. The most significant elements of the claims, that is the elements that really outline the inventive elements of the claims, are set forth in the elements identified as an abstract idea. The fact that the generic computing devices are facilitating the abstract concept is not enough to confer statutory subject matter eligibility.
The dependent claims further refine the abstract idea. These claims do not provide a meaningful linking to the judicial exception. Rather, these claims offer further descriptive limitations of elements found in the independent claims and addressed above – such as by describing the nature and content of the data that is received/sent. While these descriptive elements may provide further helpful context for the claimed invention these elements do not serve to confer subject matter eligibility to the invention since their individual and combined significance is still not significantly more than the abstract concepts at the core of the claimed invention.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Pub. No. 2023/0385324 (hereinafter; Buk) in view of US Pub. No. 2020/0193341 (hereinafter; Barak).
Regarding claims 1/13/19, Buk discloses:
A system; A method; A non-transitory computer-readable medium, comprising: a memory that stores executable components and work order data defining work orders for maintenance tasks performed on industrial assets within an industrial facility; (Buk [0018] discloses embodiments of the disclosure include systems and methods for an intelligent maintenance management system …to determine a maintenance trend, a cost of repair, and a work order of maintenance services for a maintenance scheduling system of interest; [0028] discloses The intelligent maintenance system (200) may be used in conjunction with any industrial or non-industrial operation.)
and to generate maintenance statistic data for the industrial assets based on analysis of the work order data from the work orders; (Buk [0032]; [0040] disclose maintenance statistic data.)
and a user interface component configured to render, on a client device, an interface that displays the maintenance statistic data in a graphical format. (Buk discloses a graphical user interface that display statistical values in at least [0026]; [0029].)
Although Buk discloses methods and systems for maintenance services in an industrial operation, Buk does not specifically disclose monitoring duration or time spent by technicians in a maintenance task. However, Barak discloses the following limitations:
and a processor, operatively coupled to the memory, that executes the executable components, the executable components comprising: a monitoring component configured to, for a work order of the work orders, monitor a duration of time spent by a technician to execute a maintenance task defined by the work order; (Barak [0022-0023] disclose Embodiments of the present disclosure further include determining at least one characteristic of the task… the characteristic of the task may be associated with the amount of resources (financial, equipment, manpower, materials and tools) required to complete the task, the amount of man-hours required to complete the task, the expected length of the task, or the purpose and value of the task. In one embodiment, the characteristic of the task may include at least one of the following: estimated start time of the task, identity of employees expected to participate in the task, expected duration of the task…)
an analysis component configured to record the amount of time in association with the work order as part of the work order data, (Barak [0022] discloses […]the characteristic of the task may include at least one of the following: estimated start time of the task, identity of employees expected to participate in the task, expected duration of the task[…])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the system for intelligent maintenance services of Buk with the system for improving process safety of Barak in order to determine risk of tasks to manage hazards associated with process safety within an industrial environment (Barak abstract) because the references are analogous since they both fall within Applicant's field of endeavor and are reasonably pertinent to the problem with which Applicant is concerned.
Regarding claim 2, Although Buk discloses methods and systems for maintenance services in an industrial operation, Buk does not specifically disclose operational status of the assets. However, Barak discloses the following limitations:
The system of claim 1, wherein the monitoring component is further configured to monitor industrial asset data generated by the industrial assets, the industrial asset data comprising operational and status information for the industrial assets, (Barak [0042] discloses […]database 120 includes machine data 238 (e.g., indications of the operational statuses of machines in in the industrial environment, such as scheduled repairs, maintenance requirements, and more[…])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the system for intelligent maintenance services of Buk with the system for improving process safety of Barak in order to determine risk of tasks to manage hazards associated with process safety within an industrial environment (Barak abstract) because the references are analogous since they both fall within Applicant's field of endeavor and are reasonably pertinent to the problem with which Applicant is concerned.
the executable components further comprise a training component configured to train a predictive model using the industrial asset data, and the analysis component is configured to generate, as part of the maintenance statistic data, predicted maintenance statistics for the industrial assets based on execution of the predictive model. (Buk [0024] discloses the modeling phase (108) includes functionality to train one or more topic models using a machine learning model to predict various behaviors and a work order of maintenance services based on the cleaned text data of maintenance tickets.)
Regarding claim 3, Buk discloses:
The system of claim 2, wherein the analysis component is configured to execute the predictive model according to an execution cycle that coincides with a maintenance reporting interval of the system. (Buk [0024] discloses the modeling phase (108) includes functionality to train one or more topic models using a machine learning model to predict various behaviors and a work order of maintenance services based on the cleaned text data of maintenance tickets.)
Regarding claim 4, Although Buk discloses methods and systems for maintenance services in an industrial operation, Buk does not specifically disclose operational status of the assets. However, Barak discloses the following limitations:
The system of claim 1, wherein the monitoring component is further configured to monitor industrial asset data generated by the industrial assets, the industrial asset data comprising operational and status information for the industrial assets, (Barak [0042] discloses […]database 120 includes machine data 238 (e.g., indications of the operational statuses of machines in in the industrial environment, such as scheduled repairs, maintenance requirements, and more[…]) the analysis component is configured to, in response to determining that the industrial asset data satisfies a defined criterion indicative of a performance issue with an industrial asset of the industrial assets: assign a maintenance priority to the industrial assets based on the performance issue, and modify one or more maintenance schedules for the industrial assets based on the maintenance priority. (Barak [0077] discloses priority levels.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the system for intelligent maintenance services of Buk with the system for improving process safety of Barak in order to determine risk of tasks to manage hazards associated with process safety within an industrial environment (Barak abstract) because the references are analogous since they both fall within Applicant's field of endeavor and are reasonably pertinent to the problem with which Applicant is concerned.
Regarding claims 5/14/20, Buk discloses:
The system of claim 1; The method of claim 13; The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 19, wherein the maintenance statistic data comprises at least one of overall maintenance efficiency, a number of work orders performed on respective different industrial assets, a number of maintenance hours spent on the respective different industrial assets, a cost of labor spent on the maintenance tasks, a cost of parts spent on the maintenance tasks, a number of steps performed to complete the maintenance tasks, or a number of technicians required to perform the maintenance tasks. (Buk [0026] discloses Various statistical values may further be determined: 1) cost per topic per location which is a maintenance cost at each location and broken down by topic; 2) frequency of topic per location which is the number of tickets that are submitted from each location and broke down by topic; 3) frequency of tickets submitted per topic for each week of the year which is the number of tickets submitted under that topic for each week.)
Regarding claim 6, Although Buk discloses methods and systems for maintenance services in an industrial operation, Buk does not specifically disclose monitoring duration or time spent by technicians in a maintenance task. However, Barak discloses the following limitations:
The system of claim 1, wherein the monitoring component is configured to monitor a location of the technician over time, identify, based on the location over time, durations of time that the technician spends on activities other than the maintenance task, and omit the durations of time from the amount of time recorded in association with the work order. (Barak [0032] discloses location-based messages to output units 125 of employees located in proximity to a real-time hazard; [0042] discloses employee and location data.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the system for intelligent maintenance services of Buk with the system for improving process safety of Barak in order to determine risk of tasks to manage hazards associated with process safety within an industrial environment (Barak abstract) because the references are analogous since they both fall within Applicant's field of endeavor and are reasonably pertinent to the problem with which Applicant is concerned.
Regarding claim 7, Although Buk discloses methods and systems for maintenance services in an industrial operation, Buk does not specifically disclose monitoring duration or time spent by technicians in a maintenance task. However, Barak discloses the following limitations:
The system of claim 1, wherein the analysis component is further configured to formulate, based on information about the maintenance task defined in the work order and plant layout data defining identities and locations of industrial assets within the industrial facility, a recommended route through the industrial facility to be traversed by the technician that satisfies an optimization criterion, and the user interface component is configured to render the route on the client device. (Barak [0026] discloses Examples of remedial actions, include transmitting location-based warning messages to employees, displaying the detected hazards on a personalized map, performing an automatic shutdown, and creating customized inspection tour based on the detected locations of the plurality of hazards; [0042] discloses employee data, location data and infrastructure blueprints.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the system for intelligent maintenance services of Buk with the system for improving process safety of Barak in order to determine risk of tasks to manage hazards associated with process safety within an industrial environment (Barak abstract) because the references are analogous since they both fall within Applicant's field of endeavor and are reasonably pertinent to the problem with which Applicant is concerned.
Regarding claims 8/17, Buk discloses
The system of claim 1; The method of claim 13, wherein the monitoring component is further configured to monitor industrial asset data generated by the industrial assets, wherein the industrial asset data comprises operational and status information for the industrial assets, the analysis component is configured to, in response to determining that a subset of the industrial asset data satisfies a condition indicative of a current or predicted risk to an industrial asset of the industrial assets, formulate one or more maintenance tasks predicted to mitigate the current or predicted risk, and the executable components further comprise a work order generation component configured to, in response to the determination by the analysis component that the subset of the industrial data satisfies the condition, generate a work order prescribing the one or more maintenance tasks. (See at least Buk [0018-0019]; The determined clusters of topics may be used to generate a maintenance trend and a work order of maintenance services[…]; [0024] discloses the modeling phase (108) includes functionality to train one or more topic models using a machine learning model to predict various behaviors and a work order of maintenance services based on the cleaned text data of maintenance tickets.)
Regarding claims 9/18, Buk discloses
The system of claim 8; The method of claim 17, wherein the analysis component is further configured to determine an order of execution of the maintenance tasks that satisfies an optimization criterion, and the user interface component is configured to render the order of execution on the interface. (Buk [0035] discloses a sequence of steps for maintenance tickets; Fig. 3 describes order execution of the intelligent maintenance system.)
Regarding claim 10, Although Buk discloses methods and systems for maintenance services in an industrial operation, Buk does not specifically disclose monitoring duration or time spent by technicians in a maintenance task. However, Barak discloses the following limitations:
The system of claim 1, wherein the monitoring component is further configured to monitor a location of the technician over time, and the analysis component is configured to, in response to determining, based on the location, that the technician has been within a defined distance of an industrial asset for a duration of time that exceeds a defined duration, instruct the user interface component to render a prompt on the client device requesting confirmation that the technician is engaged in a maintenance activity on the industrial asset. (See at least Barak [0026]; [0032]; [0042].)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the system for intelligent maintenance services of Buk with the system for improving process safety of Barak in order to determine risk of tasks to manage hazards associated with process safety within an industrial environment (Barak abstract) because the references are analogous since they both fall within Applicant's field of endeavor and are reasonably pertinent to the problem with which Applicant is concerned.
Regarding claim 11, Although Buk discloses methods and systems for maintenance services in an industrial operation, Buk does not specifically disclose monitoring duration or time spent by technicians in a maintenance task. However, Barak discloses the following limitations:
The system of claim 8, wherein the executable components further comprise a work order generation component configured to, in response to receipt of a response to the prompt confirming that the technician is engaged in the maintenance activity, generate and schedule a work order for the maintenance activity. (Barak discloses scheduling tasks in at least [0008-0009]; See also [0042].)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the system for intelligent maintenance services of Buk with the system for improving process safety of Barak in order to determine risk of tasks to manage hazards associated with process safety within an industrial environment (Barak abstract) because the references are analogous since they both fall within Applicant's field of endeavor and are reasonably pertinent to the problem with which Applicant is concerned.
Regarding claim 12, Although Buk discloses methods and systems for maintenance services in an industrial operation, Buk does not specifically disclose monitoring duration or time spent by technicians in a maintenance task. However, Barak discloses the following limitations:
The system of claim 9, wherein the analysis component is further configured to add, to a tracked amount of time spent performing the maintenance activity recorded in the work order, a duration of time equal to or based on an amount of time for which the technician was within the defined distance of the industrial asset prior to receipt of the response to the prompt. (See at least Barak [0022-0023]; [0042].)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the system for intelligent maintenance services of Buk with the system for improving process safety of Barak in order to determine risk of tasks to manage hazards associated with process safety within an industrial environment (Barak abstract) because the references are analogous since they both fall within Applicant's field of endeavor and are reasonably pertinent to the problem with which Applicant is concerned.
Regarding claim 15, Although Buk discloses methods and systems for maintenance services in an industrial operation, Buk does not specifically disclose monitoring duration or time spent by technicians in a maintenance task. However, Barak discloses the following limitations:
The method of claim 13, wherein the recording of the amount of time comprises: monitoring a location of the technician over time, identifying, based on the location over time, durations of time that the technician spends on activities other than the maintenance task, and omitting the durations of time from the amount of time recorded in association with the work order. (Barak [0032] discloses location-based messages to output units 125 of employees located in proximity to a real-time hazard; [0042] discloses employee and location data.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the system for intelligent maintenance services of Buk with the system for improving process safety of Barak in order to determine risk of tasks to manage hazards associated with process safety within an industrial environment (Barak abstract) because the references are analogous since they both fall within Applicant's field of endeavor and are reasonably pertinent to the problem with which Applicant is concerned.
Regarding claim 16, Although Buk discloses methods and systems for maintenance services in an industrial operation, Buk does not specifically disclose monitoring duration or time spent by technicians in a maintenance task. However, Barak discloses the following limitations:
The method of claim 13, further comprising: formulating, by the system based on information about the maintenance task defined in the work order and plant layout data defining identities and locations of industrial assets within the industrial facility, a route through the industrial facility to be traversed by the technician that satisfies an optimization criterion, and rendering, by the system, the route on the interface. (Barak [0026] discloses Examples of remedial actions, include transmitting location-based warning messages to employees, displaying the detected hazards on a personalized map, performing an automatic shutdown, and creating customized inspection tour based on the detected locations of the plurality of hazards; [0042] discloses employee data, location data and infrastructure blueprints.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the system for intelligent maintenance services of Buk with the system for improving process safety of Barak in order to determine risk of tasks to manage hazards associated with process safety within an industrial environment (Barak abstract) because the references are analogous since they both fall within Applicant's field of endeavor and are reasonably pertinent to the problem with which Applicant is concerned.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FRANCIS Z SANTIAGO-MERCED whose telephone number is (571)270-5562. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7am-4:30pm EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, BRIAN EPSTEIN can be reached at 571-270-5389. 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.
/FRANCIS Z. SANTIAGO MERCED/Examiner, Art Unit 3625
Prosecution Insights