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 .
Status of Claims
Claims 1-20 are pending.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) (IDS) submitted on 04/14/2026 and 06/08/2026 is/are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement(s) has/have been 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.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Step 1
Step 1 of the eligibility analysis asks is the claim to a process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter (See MPEP § 2106.03, subsections I and II). Claims 1-9 are directed to a computer-implemented system (i.e., machine, and manufacture). Claims 10-18 are directed to a computer-implemented method (i.e., process). Claims 19-20 are directed to a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium (i.e., manufacture). Therefore, these claims fall within the four statutory categories of invention.
Step 2A, Prong One
Prong One asks does the claim recite an abstract idea, law of nature, or natural phenomenon (MPEP § 2106.04(II)(A)(1)). Claims 1, 10 and 19 under a broadest reasonable interpretation recite an abstract idea because the claims describe determining and applying edits based on received design input, grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas (MPEP § 2106.04(a)(2), subsection II). The claim limitations reciting the abstract idea are grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas because the limitations describe fundamental economic principles or practices, including mitigating risk, describe commercial or legal interactions, including advertising, marketing or sales activities or behaviors, and describe managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people, including following rules or instructions. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea.
Claim 1:
A system, comprising:
a memory that stores executable components; and
a processor, operatively coupled to the memory, that executes the executable components, the executable components comprising:
a user interface component configured to render a human-machine interface (HMI) development interface and to receive, via interaction with the HMI development interface, natural language design input that describes a functional requirement of an HMI project being developed using the system, wherein the HMI project defines display screens, layouts of graphical objects on the display screens, and communication links between the graphical objects and corresponding sources of data generated by an industrial automation system;
a generative artificial intelligence (AI) component configured to, in response to receipt of the natural language design input, determine an edit to be applied to the HMI project based on analysis of the natural language design input and content of one or more custom models trained with training data; and
an HMI generation component configured to apply the edit to the HMI project,
wherein the HMI project is configured to, in response to execution on an HMI terminal device, read data from the sources of data and visualize the data via the graphical objects defined by the HMI project.
Claim 10:
A method, comprising:
rendering, by a system comprising a processor, a human-machine interface (HMI) development interface on a client device;
receiving, by the system via interaction with the HMI development interface, natural language design input that describes a functional requirement of an HMI project being developed using the system, wherein the HMI project defines display screens, layouts of graphical objects on the display screens, and communication links between the graphical objects and corresponding sources of data generated by an industrial automation system; and
in response to the receiving of the natural language design input,
formulating, by the system, an edit to be applied to the HMI project based on analysis of the natural language design input and one or more custom models trained with training data; and
applying, by the system, the edit to the HMI project,
wherein the HMI project is configured to, in response to execution on an HMI terminal device, read data from the sources of data and visualize the data via the graphical objects defined by the HMI project.
Claim 19:
A non-transitory computer-readable medium having stored thereon instructions that, in response to execution, cause a human-machine interface (HMI) development system comprising a processor to perform operations, the operations comprising:
rendering an HMI development interface on a client device;
receiving, via interaction with the HMI development interface, natural language design input that describes a functional requirement of an HMI project being developed using the system, wherein the HMI project defines display screens, layouts of graphical objects on the display screens, and communication links between the graphical objects and corresponding sources of data generated by an industrial automation system;
in response to the receiving of the natural language design input,
determining an edit to be applied to the HMI project based on analysis of the natural language design input and one or more custom models trained with training data; and
modifying the HMI project in accordance with the edit,
wherein the HMI project is configured to, in response to execution on an HMI terminal device, read data from the sources of data and visualize the data via the graphical objects defined by the HMI project.
Step 2A, Prong Two
Prong Two asks does the claim recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application (MPEP § 2106.04(II)(A)(2)). Examiners evaluate integration into a practical application by: (1) identifying whether there are any additional elements recited in the claim beyond the judicial exception(s); and (2) evaluating those additional elements individually and in combination to determine whether they integrate the exception into a practical application, using one or more of the considerations discussed in more detail in MPEP §§ 2106.04(d)(1), 2106.04(d)(2), 2106.05(a) through (c) and 2106.05(e) through (h). Here, the non-underlined claim limitations above recite additional elements. The additional elements do not improve the functioning of computers, another technology, or a technical field (MPEP §§ 2106.04(d)(1) and 2106.05(a)). The Specification does not assert that the invention improves upon conventional functioning of a computer, or upon conventional technology or technological processes. The claim does not purport to improve computer capabilities, but rather invokes computers merely as a tool by adding general purpose computers post-hoc to an abstract idea. A commonplace business method being applied on a general-purpose computer is not sufficient to show an improvement to technology. The claim must include more than mere instructions to perform the method on a generic component or machinery to qualify as an improvement to an existing technology. The Specification and the claim language provide evidence that the focus of the claim is on a scheme. An improvement in the abstract idea itself is not an improvement in technology. Even if the Specification describes technical improvements, they are not claimed. The additional elements do not apply the abstract idea to effect a particular treatment or prophylaxis for a disease or medical condition (MPEP § 2106.04(d)(2)). The additional elements do not implement the abstract idea with a particular machine or manufacture that is integral to the claim (MPEP § 2106.05(b)). A general-purpose computer that applies a judicial exception, such as an abstract idea, by use of conventional computer functions does not qualify as a particular machine. The additional elements do not transform or reduce a particular article to a different state or thing (MPEP § 2106.05(c)). The claim does not recite any transformation of an article where the article changes to a different state or thing. Nor do the additional elements apply the abstract idea in a meaningful way or impose a meaningful limit on it beyond linking its use to a particular technological environment, such that the claim as a whole is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception (MPEP § 2106.05(e)). The additional elements generally link the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment. A wholly generic computer implementation is not generally the sort of additional feature that provides any practical assurance that the process is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the abstract idea itself. The additional elements individually and in combination, merely serve as a tool to perform the abstract idea (MPEP § 2106.05(f)). Implementing an abstract idea on a generic computer, does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application, similar to how the recitation of the computer in the claim in Alice amounted to mere instructions to apply the abstract idea of intermediated settlement on a generic computer. Use of a computer or other machinery in its ordinary capacity for economic or other tasks or simply adding a general-purpose computer or computer components after the fact to an abstract idea does not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application. The additional elements are being used in their ordinary capacity. The additional elements do no more than merely invoke computers or machinery as a tool to perform an existing process. The additional elements generally link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use (MPEP § 2106.05(h)). Limitations that amount to merely indicating a field of use or technological environment in which to apply a judicial exception cannot integrate a judicial exception into a practical application. Thus, the additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. Accordingly, the claims are directed to the abstract idea identified above.
Step 2B
Step 2B determines whether the claim as a whole amount to significantly more than the abstract idea itself (MPEP § 2106.05). In Step 2B examiners carry over their identification of the additional element(s) in the claim from Step 2A Prong Two; carry over their conclusions from Step 2A Prong Two on the considerations discussed in MPEP §§ 2106.05(a)-(c), (e), (f) and (h); re-evaluate any additional element or combination of elements that was considered to be insignificant extra-solution activity per MPEP § 2106.05(g), because if such re-evaluation finds that the element is unconventional or otherwise more than what is well-understood, routine, conventional activity in the field, this finding may indicate that the additional element is no longer considered to be insignificant; and evaluate whether any additional element or combination of elements are other than what is well-understood, routine, conventional activity in the field, or simply append well-understood, routine, conventional activities previously known to the industry, specified at a high level of generality, to the judicial exception, per MPEP § 2106.05(d). The additional elements individually and in combination, merely serve as a tool to perform the abstract idea (MPEP § 2106.05(f)). The additional elements generally link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use (MPEP § 2106.05(h)). Individually, the additional elements do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea. Here, the additional elements simply append well-understood, routine, conventional activities previously known to the industry, specified at a high level of generality, to the judicial exception, e.g., a claim to an abstract idea requiring no more than a generic computer to perform generic computer functions that are well-understood, routine and conventional activities previously known to the industry. A factual determination is required to support a conclusion that an additional element (or combination of additional elements) is well-understood, routine, conventional activity. Here, the specification of the application indicates that additional elements are well-known or conventional (See Spec. 0001, 0022, 0027-0033, 0036-0048, 0066, 0070, 0077, 0098-0122). There is nothing in the specification to indicate that the operations recited in the claims require any specialized hardware or inventive computer components or that the claimed invention is implemented using other than generic computer components to perform generic computer functions. The ordered combination recites no more than the individual elements do. Thus, the additional elements are not significantly more than the abstract idea. Accordingly, the claims are directed to the abstract idea identified above without significantly more. The claims are not eligible, warranting a rejection for lack of subject matter eligibility and concluding the eligibility analysis.
Dependent Claims
Claim 2 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes determining and applying edits based on received design input, grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application and are not significantly more than the abstract idea because the additional elements individually and in combination, merely serve as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use. The additional elements, individually and in combination, are well-understood, routine, conventional activity (See Spec. 0001, 0022, 0027-0033, 0036-0048, 0066, 0070, 0077, 0098-0122). Therefore, the claim is not eligible.
wherein the edit comprises at least one of creating the HMI project, creating a display screen of the display screens, setting a color scheme of the display screen, adding a graphical object to the display screen, setting a location or an orientation of the graphical object on the display screen, defining a communication link between an animation property of the graphical object and a data tag of an industrial controller, resizing the graphical object, defining an alarm condition that is to trigger rendering of an alarm, defining alarm text for the alarm, adding a graphical control to the display screen, defining a navigation scheme for navigating between the display screens, adding a definition of an industrial controller with which the HMI project will exchange data values, or generating a script to be executed in response to a condition specified by the natural language design input.
Claim 3 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes determining and applying edits based on received design input, grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application and are not significantly more than the abstract idea because the additional elements individually and in combination, merely serve as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use. The additional elements, individually and in combination, are well-understood, routine, conventional activity (See Spec. 0001, 0022, 0027-0033, 0036-0048, 0066, 0070, 0077, 0098-0122). Therefore, the claim is not eligible.
wherein the training data comprises at least one of information defining industrial standards, technical specifics for respective types of industrial control applications, knowledge of different industrial verticals, information describing industrial best practices, technical specifications for different types of industrial devices or machines, control design rules, sample HMI display layouts for respective types of control applications, or customer-specific training data describing in-house HMI design preferences.
Claim 4 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes determining and applying edits based on received design input, grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application and are not significantly more than the abstract idea because the additional elements individually and in combination, merely serve as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use. The additional elements, individually and in combination, are well-understood, routine, conventional activity (See Spec. 0001, 0022, 0027-0033, 0036-0048, 0066, 0070, 0077, 0098-0122). Therefore, the claim is not eligible.
wherein the natural language design input describes at least one of a visualization layout to be implemented by the display screens, a screen navigation requirement, industrial assets included in the industrial automation system, a type of manufacturing application performed by the industrial automation system, an alarm requirement, or a source of data that is to control an animation property of one of the graphical objects.
Claim 5 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes determining and applying edits based on received design input, grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application and are not significantly more than the abstract idea because the additional elements individually and in combination, merely serve as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use. The additional elements, individually and in combination, are well-understood, routine, conventional activity (See Spec. 0001, 0022, 0027-0033, 0036-0048, 0066, 0070, 0077, 0098-0122). Therefore, the claim is not eligible.
wherein the generative AI component is further configured to, in response to receipt of the natural language design input, formulate a prompt, directed to a generative AI model, designed to obtain a response from the generative AI model comprising information used by the generative AI component to determine the edit to be applied to the HMI project, wherein the prompt is generated based on analysis of the natural language design input and the content of one or more custom models.
Claim 6 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes determining and applying edits based on received design input, grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application and are not significantly more than the abstract idea because the additional elements individually and in combination, merely serve as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use. The additional elements, individually and in combination, are well-understood, routine, conventional activity (See Spec. 0001, 0022, 0027-0033, 0036-0048, 0066, 0070, 0077, 0098-0122). Therefore, the claim is not eligible.
wherein the generative AI component is further configured to, in response to determining, based on analysis of the natural language design input, that additional information will allow the generative AI component to determine an edit to the HMI project having a probability of satisfying the functional requirement that exceeds a threshold,
generate a natural language response that prompts for the additional information,
render the natural language response via the user interface component, and
determine the edit to be applied to the HMI project based on analysis of the natural language design input, the content of the one or more custom models, and the additional information.
Claim 7 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes determining and applying edits based on received design input, grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application and are not significantly more than the abstract idea because the additional elements individually and in combination, merely serve as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use. The additional elements, individually and in combination, are well-understood, routine, conventional activity (See Spec. 0001, 0022, 0027-0033, 0036-0048, 0066, 0070, 0077, 0098-0122). Therefore, the claim is not eligible.
wherein the generative AI component is further configured to, in response to receiving, via interaction with a runtime version of the HMI project that executes on the HMI terminal, of a natural language request to modify the runtime version of the HMI project in accordance with a criterion specified by the natural language request, determine a modification to the runtime version of the HMI project that satisfies the criterion, and
the HMI generation component is configured to implement the modification on the runtime version of the HMI project to yield a modified runtime version.
Claim 8 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes determining and applying edits based on received design input, grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application and are not significantly more than the abstract idea because the additional elements individually and in combination, merely serve as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use. The additional elements, individually and in combination, are well-understood, routine, conventional activity (See Spec. 0001, 0022, 0027-0033, 0036-0048, 0066, 0070, 0077, 0098-0122). Therefore, the claim is not eligible.
wherein the natural language request comprises at least one of a request to adapt the display screens of the HMI project for improved visibility in an environmental context described by the natural language request, a request to adapt the display screens for a visual impairment described by the natural language request, a request to aggregate graphical objects from two or more of the display screens onto a single display screen, or a request to relocate or resize a graphical object specified by the natural language description.
Claim 9 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes determining and applying edits based on received design input, grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application and are not significantly more than the abstract idea because the additional elements individually and in combination, merely serve as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use. The additional elements, individually and in combination, are well-understood, routine, conventional activity (See Spec. 0001, 0022, 0027-0033, 0036-0048, 0066, 0070, 0077, 0098-0122). Therefore, the claim is not eligible.
wherein the HMI generation component is further configured to
save the modified runtime version as an HMI template, and
in response to subsequent invocation of the HMI template, deploy the modified runtime version to the HMI terminal or another HMI terminal.
Claim 11 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes determining and applying edits based on received design input, grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application and are not significantly more than the abstract idea because the additional elements individually and in combination, merely serve as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use. The additional elements, individually and in combination, are well-understood, routine, conventional activity (See Spec. 0001, 0022, 0027-0033, 0036-0048, 0066, 0070, 0077, 0098-0122). Therefore, the claim is not eligible.
wherein the applying of the edit comprises at least one of creating the HMI project, creating a display screen of the display screens, setting a color scheme of the display screen, adding a graphical object to the display screen, setting a location or an orientation of the graphical object on the display screen, defining a communication link between an animation property of the graphical object and a data tag of an industrial controller, resizing the graphical object, defining an alarm condition that is to trigger rendering of an alarm, defining alarm text for the alarm, adding a graphical control to the display screen, defining a navigation scheme for navigating between the display screens, adding a definition of an industrial controller with which the HMI project will exchange data values, or generating a script to be executed in response to a condition specified by the natural language design input.
Claim 12 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes determining and applying edits based on received design input, grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application and are not significantly more than the abstract idea because the additional elements individually and in combination, merely serve as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use. The additional elements, individually and in combination, are well-understood, routine, conventional activity (See Spec. 0001, 0022, 0027-0033, 0036-0048, 0066, 0070, 0077, 0098-0122). Therefore, the claim is not eligible.
wherein the training data comprises at least one of information defining industrial standards, technical specifics for different types of industrial control applications, knowledge of different industrial verticals, information describing industrial best practices, technical specifications for different types of industrial devices or machines, control design rules, sample HMI display layouts for respective types of control applications, or customer-specific training data describing in-house HMI design preferences.
Claim 13 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes determining and applying edits based on received design input, grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application and are not significantly more than the abstract idea because the additional elements individually and in combination, merely serve as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use. The additional elements, individually and in combination, are well-understood, routine, conventional activity (See Spec. 0001, 0022, 0027-0033, 0036-0048, 0066, 0070, 0077, 0098-0122). Therefore, the claim is not eligible.
wherein the natural language design input describes at least one of a visualization layout to be implemented by the display screens, a screen navigation requirement, industrial assets included in the industrial automation system, a type of manufacturing application performed by the industrial automation system, an alarm requirement, or a source of data that is to control an animation property of one of the graphical objects.
Claim 14 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes determining and applying edits based on received design input, grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application and are not significantly more than the abstract idea because the additional elements individually and in combination, merely serve as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use. The additional elements, individually and in combination, are well-understood, routine, conventional activity (See Spec. 0001, 0022, 0027-0033, 0036-0048, 0066, 0070, 0077, 0098-0122). Therefore, the claim is not eligible.
wherein the formulating of the edit comprises generating a prompt, directed to a generative AI model, designed to obtain a response from the generative AI model comprising information used by the system to formulate the edit, and
the generating of the prompt comprises generating the prompts based on analysis of the natural language design and the one or more custom models.
Claim 15 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes determining and applying edits based on received design input, grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application and are not significantly more than the abstract idea because the additional elements individually and in combination, merely serve as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use. The additional elements, individually and in combination, are well-understood, routine, conventional activity (See Spec. 0001, 0022, 0027-0033, 0036-0048, 0066, 0070, 0077, 0098-0122). Therefore, the claim is not eligible.
in response to determining, based on analysis of the natural language design input, that additional information will allow the system to determine an edit to the HMI project having a probability of satisfying the functional requirement that exceeds a threshold,
generating, by the system, a natural language response that prompts for the additional information, and
rendering, by the system, the natural language response on the client device,
wherein the formulating of the edit comprises formulating the edit based on analysis of the natural language design input, the one or more custom models, and the additional information.
Claim 16 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes determining and applying edits based on received design input, grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application and are not significantly more than the abstract idea because the additional elements individually and in combination, merely serve as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use. The additional elements, individually and in combination, are well-understood, routine, conventional activity (See Spec. 0001, 0022, 0027-0033, 0036-0048, 0066, 0070, 0077, 0098-0122). Therefore, the claim is not eligible.
in response to receiving, via interaction with a runtime version of the HMI project that executes on the HMI terminal, a natural language request to modify the runtime version of the HMI project in accordance with a criterion specified by the natural language request, determining, by the system, a modification to the runtime version of the HMI project that satisfies the criterion, and
implementing, by the system, the modification on the runtime version of the HMI project to yield a modified runtime version.
Claim 17 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes determining and applying edits based on received design input, grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application and are not significantly more than the abstract idea because the additional elements individually and in combination, merely serve as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use. The additional elements, individually and in combination, are well-understood, routine, conventional activity (See Spec. 0001, 0022, 0027-0033, 0036-0048, 0066, 0070, 0077, 0098-0122). Therefore, the claim is not eligible.
wherein the natural language request comprises at least one of a request to adapt the display screens of the HMI project for improved visibility in an environmental context described by the natural language request, a request to adapt the display screens for a visual impairment described by the natural language request, a request to aggregate graphical objects from two or more of the display screens onto a single display screen, or a request to relocate or resize a graphical object specified by the natural language description.
Claim 18 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes determining and applying edits based on received design input, grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application and are not significantly more than the abstract idea because the additional elements individually and in combination, merely serve as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use. The additional elements, individually and in combination, are well-understood, routine, conventional activity (See Spec. 0001, 0022, 0027-0033, 0036-0048, 0066, 0070, 0077, 0098-0122). Therefore, the claim is not eligible.
saving, by the system, the modified runtime version as an HMI template, and
in response to subsequent invocation of the HMI template, deploying, by the system, the modified runtime version to the HMI terminal or another HMI terminal.
Claim 20 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes determining and applying edits based on received design input, grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application and are not significantly more than the abstract idea because the additional elements individually and in combination, merely serve as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use. The additional elements, individually and in combination, are well-understood, routine, conventional activity (See Spec. 0001, 0022, 0027-0033, 0036-0048, 0066, 0070, 0077, 0098-0122). Therefore, the claim is not eligible.
wherein the applying of the edit comprises at least one of creating the HMI project, creating a display screen of the display screens, setting a color scheme of the display screen, adding a graphical object to the display screen, setting a location or an orientation of the graphical object on the display screen, defining a communication link between an animation property of the graphical object and a data tag of an industrial controller, resizing the graphical object, defining an alarm condition that is to trigger rendering of an alarm, defining alarm text for the alarm, adding a graphical control to the display screen, defining a navigation scheme for navigating between the display screens, adding a definition of an industrial controller with which the HMI project will exchange data values, or generating a script to be executed in response to a condition specified by the natural language design input.
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.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2021/0096827 A1 (“Stump”) in view of US 10,515,121 B1 (“Setlur”).
Claims 1, 10 and 19:
Stump discloses:
a memory that stores executable components; and a processor, operatively coupled to the memory, that executes the executable components, the executable components comprising: [A non-transitory computer-readable medium having stored thereon instructions that, in response to execution, cause a human-machine interface (HMI) development system comprising a processor to perform operations, the operations comprising] (0129-0143)
rendering, by a system comprising a processor, a human-machine interface (HMI) development interface on a client device; [a user interface component configured to render a human-machine interface (HMI) development interface] (0045-0046, 0052, 0057, 0083-0084)
receiving, by the system via interaction with the HMI development interface, … design input that describes a functional requirement of an HMI project being developed using the system [and to receive, via interaction with the HMI development interface, … design input that describes a functional requirement of an HMI project being developed using the system] (0046, 0057, 0061, 0063, 0094, 0108), wherein the HMI project defines display screens (0033, 0036, 0054, 0059 0078), layouts of graphical objects on the display screens (0033, 0056, 0059, 0092), and communication links between the graphical objects and corresponding sources of data generated by an industrial automation system (0033-0034, 0036, 0074, 0078-0079)
in response to the receiving of the … design input, formulating, by the system, an edit to be applied to the HMI project based on analysis of the … design input and one or more custom models trained with training data; and [a generative artificial intelligence (AI) component configured to, in response to receipt of the … design input, determine an edit to be applied to the HMI project based on analysis of the … design input and content of one or more custom models trained with training data] (0047, 0073, 0085, 0088, 0090-0094, 0108-0109)
applying, by the system, the edit to the HMI project, [an HMI generation component configured to apply the edit to the HMI project] (0047, 0058-0059, 0092-0093, 0109)
wherein the HMI project is configured to, in response to execution on an HMI terminal device, read data from the sources of data and visualize the data via the graphical objects defined by the HMI project [wherein the HMI project is configured to, in response to execution on an HMI terminal device, read data from the sources of data and visualize the data via the graphical objects defined by the HMI project] (0033, 0076, 0078-0079, 0111)
Stump does not disclose:
natural language design input
Setlur, an analogous art of data visualization and processing, discloses:
natural language design input (6:52-55, 7:5-20, 22:23-40; claim 1)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Stump to include natural language design input, as disclosed in Setlur. One or ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so in order to improve efficiency and usability (See Setlur, 1:19-48).
Claims 2, 11 and 20:
The combination of Stump in view of Setlur discloses all limitations of claims 1, 11 and 19. Stump further discloses:
wherein the edit [wherein the applying of the edit] comprises at least one of creating the HMI project (0047, 0054, 0058-0059, 0078)
creating a display screen of the display screens (0033, 0059, 0078, 0092)
setting a color scheme of the display screen (0033, 0059)
adding a graphical object to the display screen (0059, 0092-0093)
setting a location or an orientation of the graphical object on the display screen (0070-0071)
defining a communication link between an animation property of the graphical object and a data tag of an industrial controller (0033, 0074, 0077-0078)
resizing the graphical object (0059)
defining an alarm condition that is to trigger rendering of an alarm (0033, 0056, 0098)
defining alarm text for the alarm (0033, 0056, 0098)
adding a graphical control to the display screen (0033)
defining a navigation scheme for navigating between the display screens (0036, 0059)
adding a definition of an industrial controller with which the HMI project will exchange data values (0033, 0077-0078, 0080)
or generating a script to be executed in response to a condition specified by the … design input (0047, 0057, 0060, 0091, 0109)
Setlur further discloses:
natural language design input (6:52-55, 7:5-20, 22:23-40; claim 1)
Claims 3 and 12:
The combination of Stump in view of Setlur discloses all limitations of claims 1 and 10. Stump further discloses:
wherein the training data comprises at least one of information defining industrial standards (0064-0066)
technical specifics for respective types of industrial control applications (0057, 0065, 0067, 0069, 0091)
knowledge of different industrial verticals (0041, 0059, 0065, 0067, 0091)
information describing industrial best practices (0065)
technical specifications for different types of industrial devices or machines (0055-0056, 0067, 0069, 0086)
control design rules (0057, 0064-0065, 0070)
sample HMI display layouts for respective types of control applications (0059, 0092-0093)
or customer-specific training data describing in-house HMI design preferences (0063-0066, 0088, 0092, 0104)
Claims 4 and 13:
The combination of Stump in view of Setlur discloses all limitations of claims 1 and 10. Stump further discloses:
wherein the … design input describes at least one of a visualization layout to be implemented by the display screens (0046, 0057, 0059, 0092)
a screen navigation requirement (0036, 0059)
industrial assets included in the industrial automation system (0055-0056, 0058, 0069, 0093)
a type of manufacturing application performed by the industrial automation system (0061, 0065, 0067, 0069, 0091)
an alarm requirement (0033, 0056, 0098)
or a source of data that is to control an animation property of one of the graphical objects (0033, 0074, 0078)
Setlur further discloses:
natural language design input (6:52-55, 7:5-20, 22:23-40; claim 1)
Claims 5 and 14:
The combination of Stump in view of Setlur discloses all limitations of claims 1 and 10. Stump further discloses:
wherein the generative AI component is further configured to, in response to receipt of the … design input, formulate a prompt, directed to a generative AI model, designed to obtain a response from the generative AI model comprising information used by the generative AI component to determine the edit to be applied to the HMI project, wherein the prompt is generated based on analysis of the … design input and the content of one or more custom models (0073, 0088, 0090-0091, 0109)
Setlur further discloses:
natural language design input (6:52-55, 7:5-20, 22:23-40; claim 1)
Claims 6 and 15:
The combination of Stump in view of Setlur discloses all limitations of claims 1 and 10. Stump further discloses:
wherein the generative AI component is further configured to, in response to determining, based on analysis of the … design input, that additional information will allow the generative AI component to determine an edit to the HMI project having a probability of satisfying the functional requirement that exceeds a threshold, (0026, 0047, 0063, 0073, 0090)
generate a … response that prompts for the additional information, (0047, 0065, 0069, 0108)
render the … response via the user interface component, and (0046-0047, 0057, 0065)
determine the edit to be applied to the HMI project based on analysis of the … design input, the content of the one or more custom models, and the additional information (0047, 0091-0093, 0109)
Setlur further discloses:
natural language design input (6:52-55, 7:5-20, 22:23-40; claim 1)
natural language response (17:18-45, 18:33-50)
Claims 7 and 16:
The combination of Stump in view of Setlur discloses all limitations of claims 1 and 10. Stump further discloses:
wherein the generative AI component is further configured to, in response to receiving, via interaction with a runtime version of the HMI project that executes on the HMI terminal, of a … request to modify the runtime version of the HMI project in accordance with a criterion specified by the … request, (0033, 0078, 0106)
determine a modification to the runtime version of the HMI project that satisfies the criterion, and (0026, 0073, 0106)
the HMI generation component is configured to implement the modification on the runtime version of the HMI project to yield a modified runtime version (0106)
Setlur further discloses:
natural language request (7:5-20, 7:45-65)
Claims 8 and 17:
The combination of Stump in view of Setlur discloses all limitations of claims 7 and 16. Stump further discloses:
wherein the … request comprises at least one of a request to adapt the display screens of the HMI project for improved isibility in an environmental context described by the … request, a request to adapt the display screens for a visual impairment described by the … request, a request to aggregate graphical objects from two or more of the display screens onto a single display screen (0059), or a request to relocate or resize a graphical object specified by the … description (0059)
Setlur further discloses:
natural language request (7:5-20, 7:45-65)
Claims 9 and 18:
The combination of Stump in view of Setlur discloses all limitations of claims 8 and 16. Stump further discloses:
saving, by the system, the modified runtime version as an HMI template, and (0041, 0059, 0064, 0091)
in response to subsequent invocation of the HMI template, deploying, by the system, the modified runtime version to the HMI terminal or another HMI terminal (0076, 0078-0079, 0081)
Conclusion
The following prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 2022/0188990 A1 (“Rao”) discloses: A computer-implemented method and arrangements for generating human machine interface, HMI, graphics associated with an industrial automation system implementing machine learning include receiving migrated HMI graphics. The migrated HMI graphics are obtained from a legacy HMI graphics and comprise a plurality of industrial objects. Further, the method comprises identifying a missing industrial object in said migrated HMI graphics using a historical labelled dataset comprising a plurality of labelled HMI graphics of the industrial object that comprises a graphical object and a data object. Once, the missing industrial object is identified the migrated HMI graphics is therefore corrected to include the identified missing industrial object and a corrected HMI graphics is generated. Furthermore, the method comprises transmitting a notification indicating the corrected HMI graphics to a computing device
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Ari Shahabi whose telephone number is (571)272-2565. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 8:00-5:00.
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, John W Hayes can be reached at 571-272-6708. 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.
/ARI SHAHABI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3697
Prosecution Insights