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 .
Detailed Action
This action is responsive to the application 18/858,948 filed on October 22, 2024. Claims 1-19 are pending.
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 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter.
The claim 18 recites “a computer program product comprising computer program code…such that the field device performs the method of claim 10”. Thus, applying the broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the specification, there is no structural element(s) to store the computer program product. Therefore, the claim is directed to program/software per se which does/do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because program/software per se is not a useful process, a machine, a manufacture, or a composition of matter.
Therefore, claim 18 is directed towards non-statutory subject matter.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 5-7, 9-10, 14-16, 18-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by van Roermund et al. (US 2013/0198813) hereinafter “van Roermund”.
Claim 1
van Roermund teaches a field device of a heating, ventilation and air conditioning system [i.e. a system comprising sensors, actuators, controllers to control HVAC] (van Roermund, 0004), the field device comprising:
a microcontroller configured to control the field device [i.e. a host device 100 comprises a host processor 110. The host processor comprises a host memory 112, a host controller 114] (van Roermund, fig. 1; 0035); and
a near field communication system which is connected to the microcontroller and which comprises a near field communication chip and an antenna, the near field communication system being configured for a near field communication with a near field communication device [i.e. a RFID tag 102 is coupled to the host device 100, in particular to the host controller 114, via a host connection 118 which is a wired data connection. Sine the RFID tag 102 has such a wired data connection to the host controller 114 it is referred to as a connected tag. The RFID tag 102 comprises a memory 104, a tag controller 108, an RFID interface 106 for establishing a RFID connection 122 with authorized configuration device 124] (van Roermund, 0035);
wherein the near field communication system is configured to control the near field communication in response to receiving a control signal from the microcontroller or the near field communication device [i.e. authorized configuration device comprises an NFC interface device or an active RFID device 126 for establishing said RFID connection 122, a controller 128 and a memory 130; and the authorized configuration device 124 receives a control signal from the host device 100] (van Roermund, 0035, 0083), and
wherein the near field communication system is configured to disable the near field communication in response to discerning in the control signal a disablement signal [i.e. the authorized configuration device 124 disables the host device’s RFID tag 102 completely by writing to the tag itself or by sending a control message to the host device 100], or wherein the near field communication system is configured to enable the near field communication in response to discerning in the control signal an enablement signal [i.e. re-enabling the tag at a later point in time could only be done through the host device’s control system, (e.g. note that the field device cannot receives an enablement signal from the near filed communication device)] (van Roermund, 0083).
Claim 5
van Roermund teaches the field device according to claim 1, wherein the near field communication system is configured to permanently disable the near field communication in response to discerning in the control signal a permanent disablement signal [i.e. the confidential configuration data on the RFID tag 102 can be precluded by disabling the RFID tag 102 completely] (van Roermund, 0082-0083).
Claim 6
van Roermund teaches the field device according to claim 5, wherein the microcontroller is configured to detect a configuration of the field device by the near field communication device via the near field communication system; and the near field communication system is configured to permanently disable the near field communication only after detection of the configuration of the field device [i.e. the confidential configuration data on the RFID tag 102 can be precluded by disabling the RFID tag 102 completely after the parameters have been exchanged between the authorized configuration device and the RFID tag and a corresponding configuration operation has been performed; and the authorized configuration device disables the RFID tag completely by writing to the tag itself or by sending a control message to the host device] (van Roermund, 0082-0083).
Claim 7
van Roermund teaches the field device according to claim 1, wherein the near field communication system further comprises: a switching element configured to control the near field communication of the field device using the control signal, wherein controlling by the switching element comprises interrupting or closing an internal connection of the near field communication chip or a connection between the near field communication chip and the microcontroller or the antenna [i.e. the control system could instruct the RFID tag 102 to switch off, the authorized configuration device could disable the connected tag directly and re-enabling the tag at a later point in time could be done through the host device’s control system] (van Roermund, 0083).
Claim 10
van Roermund teaches a method for controlling a near field communication via a near field communication system of a field device of a heating, ventilation and air conditioning system, the method comprising:
receiving, by the near field communication system, a control signal sent from a microcontroller of the field device or sent from a near field communication device [i.e. authorized configuration device comprises an NFC interface device or an active RFID device 126 for establishing said RFID connection 122, a controller 128 and a memory 130; and the authorized configuration device 124 receives a control signal from the host device 100] (van Roermund, 0035, 0083);
controlling, by the near field communication system, the near field communication in response to the received control signal [i.e. the authorized configuration device 124 controls (e.g. disabling, re-enabling) RFID tag and RFID connection by sending a control message to the host device 100] (van Roermund, 0035, 0083), wherein controlling comprises:
disabling, by the near field communication system, the near field communication in response to discerning in the control signal a disablement signal [i.e. the authorized configuration device 124 disables the host device’s RFID tag 102 completely by writing to the tag itself or by sending a control message to the host device 100] (van Roermund, 0083), and/or
enabling, by the near field communication system, the near field communication in response to discerning in the control signal an enablement signal [i.e. re-enabling the tag at a later point in time could only be done through the host device’s control system, (e.g. note that the field device cannot receives an enablement signal from the near filed communication device)] (van Roermund, 0083).
Claim 9 does not teach or define any new limitation other than above claim 1. Therefore, claim 9 is rejected for similar reasons.
Claims 14-16 do not teach or define any new limitation other than above claims 5-7. Therefore, claims 14-16 are rejected for similar reasons.
Claim 18 does not teach or define any new limitation other than above claim 10. Therefore, claim 18 is rejected for similar reasons.
Claim 19 does not teach or define any new limitation other than above claim 10. Therefore, claim 19 is rejected for similar reasons.
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 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 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.
Claim(s) 2-4, 11-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over van Roermund as applied to claims 1, 10 above, and further in view of Sinha et al. (US 11,867,420) hereinafter “Sinha”
Claim 2
van Roermund teaches the field device according to claim 1.
van Roermund fails to teach a power supply terminal configured to supply electrical energy to the field device; and the microcontroller is configured to determine a missing electrical energy supply on the power supply terminal, and to send the control signal comprising the disablement signal to the near field communication system, upon detection of missing electrical energy supply.
However, in an analogous art, Sinha teaches a power supply terminal configured to supply electrical energy to the field device [i.e. the BMS that serves building 10 includes HVAC system which includes HVAC devices; the HVAC system includes airside system 130 that supplies airflow to the building 10] (Sinha, col. 9, lines 45-57; col. 10, lines 21-41); and the microcontroller is configured to determine a missing electrical energy supply on the power supply terminal, and to send the control signal comprising the disablement signal to the near field communication system, upon detection of missing electrical energy supply [i.e. a significant amount of power may be consumed by the headless thermostat 700, this can realize a lower energy usage; the HVAC unit 2910 includes a controller 2940 which include logic to operate the A/C unit based on the sensor/signal information and the setpoint information; the operation of the components of the HVAC may include a stop time, a power state (e.g. includes disablement/enablement) and/or any other operational state of the HVAC unit] (Sinha, col. 24, lines 19-31; col. 42, line 55-col. 43, line 5).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of van Roermund to include the teachings of Sinha of a power supply terminal supplies electrical energy to the field device; and the microcontroller determines a missing electrical energy supply on the power supply terminal, and to send the control signal comprising the disablement signal to the near field communication system, upon detection of missing electrical energy supply. One ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to provide a backup control for HVAC system with headless thermostat (Sinha, abstract).
Claim 3
van Roermund in combination with Sinha teach the field device according to claim 2, wherein the microcontroller comprises:
an energy buffer configured to supply electrical energy to the microcontroller [i.e. the BMS that serves building 10 includes HVAC system which includes HVAC devices, thermal energy storage that provides energy, heating, cooling] (Sinha, col. 9, lines 45-57; col. 10, lines 21-41); and wherein the microcontroller is configured to send the control signal to the near field communication system using energy from the energy buffer [i.e. the HVAC unit 2910 includes a controller 2940 which include logic to control and operate the A/C unit based on the sensor/signal information and the setpoint information; the operation of the components of the HVAC may include a power state (e.g. includes disablement/enablement which is considered as control signal) of the HVAC unit, and then the controller can control one or more functions of the components of the HVAC unit comprising: controlling the energy/heating/colling level, speed level…] (Sinha, col. 24, lines 19-31; col. 42, line 55-col. 43, line 32).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of van Roermund to include the teachings of Sinha of an energy buffer supplies electrical energy to the microcontroller; and the microcontroller sends the control signal to the near field communication system using energy from the energy buffer. One ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to provide a backup control for HVAC system with headless thermostat (Sinha, abstract).
Claim 4
van Roermund teaches the field device according to claim 1, wherein the field device is configured to transmit the near field communication to the near field communication device, and the near field communication system is configured to receive from the near field communication device the control signal comprising the disablement signal, responsive to discerning [i.e. authorized configuration device comprises an NFC interface device or an active RFID device 126 for establishing said RFID connection 122, a controller 128 and a memory 130; and the authorized configuration device 124 receives a control signal from the host device 100] (van Roermund, 0035, 0083).
van Roermund fails to teach power supply and the power supply information indicating missing electrical energy supply.
However, in an analogous art, Sinha teaches power supply and the power supply information indicating missing electrical energy supply [i.e. thermal energy storage that provides energy, heating, cooling… to the HVAC device; and the HVAC unit 2910 includes a controller 2940 which include logic to control and operate the A/C unit based on the sensor/signal information (e.g. the lower energy consumption), and the setpoint information, e.g. a stop time, a power state and/or any other operational state of the HVAC unit] (Sinha, col. 24, lines 19-31; col. 42, line 55-col. 43, line 5).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of van Roermund to include the teachings of Sinha of power supply and the power supply information indicating missing electrical energy supply. One ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to provide a backup control for HVAC system with headless thermostat (Sinha, abstract).
Claims 11-13 do not teach or define any new limitation other than above claims 2-4. Therefore, claims 11-13 are rejected for similar reasons.
Claim(s) 8, 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over van Roermund as applied to claims 1, 10 above, and further in view of Sarkar et al. (US 2016/0255459) hereinafter “Sarkar”
Claim 8
van Roermund teaches the field device according to claim 1.
van Roermund fails to teach wherein the microcontroller is configured to determine a current geographical position of the field device, to compare the current geographical position of the field device with a predefined geographical region, and to send the control signal comprising the disablement signal to the near field communication system, upon detection that the current geographical position of the field device is outside the predefined geographical region.
However, in an analogous art, Sarkar teaches the microcontroller determines a current geographical position of the field device, to compare the current geographical position of the field device with a predefined geographical region, and to send the control signal comprising the disablement signal to the near field communication system, upon detection that the current geographical position of the field device is outside the predefined geographical region [i.e. the communication control module determines the enabling or disabling devices or device functionalities based on location information is a common solution for access control, where an NFC communication is enabled (e.g. NFC safe/NFC enabled) or disabled (e.g. NFC unsafe/NFC disabled) based on a location information whether it is in a range of safety datasets] (Sarkar, 0024-0025, 0028-0033).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of van Roermund to include the teachings of Sarkar of determine a current geographical position of the field device, to compare the current geographical position of the field device with a predefined geographical region, and to send the control signal comprising the disablement signal to the near field communication system, upon detection that the current geographical position of the field device is outside the predefined geographical region. One ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to improve the security of user device by controlling whether response information is sent by near field communication interface in dependence of at least a communication safety parameter (Sarkar, abstract).
Claim 17
van Roermund teaches the method according to claim 10.
van Roermund fails to teach determining, by the microcontroller a current geographical position of the field device, comparing, by the microcontroller the current geographical position with a predefined geographical region; and sending, by the microcontroller the control signal comprising the disablement signal to the near field communication system, upon detection that the current geographical position of the field device is outside the predefined geographical region; or receiving, by the near field communication system, from the near field communication device the control signal comprising the disablement signal, responsive to a current geographical position of the near field communication device being outside of the predefined geographical region.
However, in an analogous art, Sarkar teaches determining, by the microcontroller a current geographical position of the field device, comparing, by the microcontroller the current geographical position with a predefined geographical region; and sending, by the microcontroller the control signal comprising the disablement signal to the near field communication system, upon detection that the current geographical position of the field device is outside the predefined geographical region; or receiving, by the near field communication system, from the near field communication device the control signal comprising the disablement signal, responsive to a current geographical position of the near field communication device being outside of the predefined geographical region [i.e. the communication control module determines the enabling or disabling devices or device functionalities based on location information is a common solution for access control, where an NFC communication is enabled (e.g. NFC safe/NFC enabled) or disabled (e.g. NFC unsafe/NFC disabled) based on a location information whether it is in a range of safety datasets] (Sarkar, 0024-0025, 0028-0033).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of van Roermund to include the teachings of Sarkar of determining, by the microcontroller a current geographical position of the field device, comparing, by the microcontroller the current geographical position with a predefined geographical region; and sending, by the microcontroller the control signal comprising the disablement signal to the near field communication system, upon detection that the current geographical position of the field device is outside the predefined geographical region; or receiving, by the near field communication system, from the near field communication device the control signal comprising the disablement signal, responsive to a current geographical position of the near field communication device being outside of the predefined geographical region. One ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to improve the security of user device by controlling whether response information is sent by near field communication interface in dependence of at least a communication safety parameter (Sarkar, abstract).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure (see PTO-892).
US 2018/0376313 issued to Horton et al., teaches accessing data and/or controlling different installations of smart home devices (e.g. controlling temperature setting on a smart thermostat...) via one or more application programming interfaces.
US 11,835,932 issued to Magnavacca, teaches configuring a room device in a residential and/or building comprises a plurality of actuators such as actuators to control HVAC, by using near field communication.
Correspondence Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MINH CHAU N NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-4242. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 8am-4pm.
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, TONIA DOLLINGER can be reached on (571)272-4170. 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 https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. 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.
/MINH CHAU NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2459