DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 2nd
The following is a quotation of the second paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the relative positions" in line 10. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
The term "preferably" in claims 3-8 and 10-19, is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term "preferably" is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree of preference, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. How are preference measured and how much of measured preference would be qualified as ‘preferably’? For the purpose examination, the term preferably will be construed as an optional language; i.e. one may prefer none, some and/or all.
Applicant is required to review the claim and correct all language which does not comply with 35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph.
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.
Claims 1-3, 6, 9-11 and 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schwalbe (U.S. Publication 2009/0319062), hereinafter Schwalbe in view of Non-Patent Literature/Publication, “Foundation Fieldbus Device addressing”, hereinafter Foundation further in view of Von Hoyningen-Huene et al. (U.S. Publication 2020/0396308), hereinafter Von.
Referring to claim 1, Schwalbe teaches, as claimed, a method for automatically assigning identifiers to controlled nodes (control structures… field devices, see Paragraph 25; Note, the field devices are controlled by superordinated units or control structures therefor any of the field devices are “controlled” nodes) of a fieldbus network (communicates with field devices via a fieldbus protocol, see Paragraph 11), the controlled nodes comprising a plurality of electric motor drive systems, IO devices and/or feedback sensors (field devices F1, F2, F3, F4 are sensors and/or actuators), see Paragraphs 25-26), wherein the method comprises the steps of
- setting the fieldbus network into a service mode (servicing and monitoring field devices, see Paragraph 25);
- scanning (scan the topology of the field devices, see Paragraph 9; and monitoring of field devices, see Paragraph 25) the fieldbus network;
- scanning (scan the topology of the field devices, see Paragraph 9) each linear branch (fieldbus segment SM1, see Paragraph 26; Note, the term segment is synonymous with the term branch. Both terms refer to a single limb or spur off the main trunk of a fieldbus segment.); and
- assigning
Schwalbe does not disclose expressly unique node numbers.
Foundation does disclose unique (unique identifier, unique devices, see Page 3, Line 7 and Line 12) node (devices also called nodes, see Page 1, Line 1) numbers (eight-bit binary number, see Page 1, Line 1).
At the time of the invention it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate Foundation’s unique identifier to each device (Note, so that would be many identifiers that are different each other).
The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been to utilized well tested and proven addressing protocols withing Foundation Fieldbus protocol.
Still, Schwalbe/Foundation does not disclose expressly decomposing the fieldbus network into linear branches and switches
Von does disclose decomposing the fieldbus (fieldbus architecture, see Paragraph 31) network (network infrastructure, see Paragraph 31) into linear branches (branches, linear section, see Paragraph 64) and switches (switch, switches, see Paragraphs 64 and 65; and see Fig. 4; Note, branches and switches are arranged separated (decomposed) from each other).
At the time of the invention it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate Von into Schwalbe/Foundation.
The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been to use the network resource more efficiently (see Von, Paragraph 5).
As to claim 2, the modification teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein at least one of the steps is performed automatically and/or that a step of the method comprises manually setting the identified of a specific controlled node (configured automatically, see Page 1, Line 8; Note, a specific controlled node is a Fieldbus device) selected through a positional index (see Page 1, Table of Address Range and Allocation; Note, each address range are indexed, i.e. F8 through FB).
As to claim 3, the modification teaches the method according to any of the previous claims, claim 1, wherein at least some of the steps are performed by a software application (suitable software, see Paragraph 28) running on a computer (service unit SU via the fieldbus, Paragraphs 25 and 28; and see Fig. 1, SU) connected to the fieldbus network, wherein preferably (Note, following limitations are optional) some or all controlled nodes are assigned a unique identifier (unique identifier, unique devices, see Foundation Page 3, Line 7 and Line 12) as an incremental or decremental value (Note, address ranges are inherently incremental and/or decremental values to each other) starting from a selected node number (248 see Foundation Page 1, Table of Address Range and Allocation; Note, selected node number is 248 and next incremental node number would be 249).
As to claim 6, the modification teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein setting the fieldbus network into a service mode comprises setting into service mode (servicing and monitoring field devices, see Schwalbe Paragraph 25) at least some or preferably (Note, optional) all of the controlled nodes automatically (automation, see Schwalbe Paragraph 25).
As to claim 9, the modification teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein a controlled node is set to operational mode (operating or servicing, see Schwalbe Paragraph 3) after being assigned its unique identifier.
As to claim 10, the modification teaches a fieldbus network comprising a plurality of controlled nodes, preferably electric motor drive systems, wherein the fieldbus network is provided for performing the method according to claim 1 (see rejections to claim 1).
As to claim 11, the modification teaches the method according to claim 2, wherein at least some of the steps are performed by a software application (suitable software, see Schwalbe Paragraph 28) running on a computer (SU, see Schwalbe Paragraph 28) connected to the fieldbus network, wherein preferably (Note, following limitations are optional) some or all controlled nodes are assigned a unique identifier as an incremental or decremental value starting from a selected node number.
As to claim 17, the modification teaches the method according to claim 2, wherein setting the fieldbus network into a service mode (operating or servicing, see Schwalbe Paragraph 3) comprises setting into service mode at least some or (Note, following limitations are optional) preferably all of the controlled nodes automatically.
As to claim 18, the modification teaches the method according to claim 3, wherein setting the fieldbus network into a service mode (operating or servicing, see Schwalbe Paragraph 3) comprises setting into service mode at least some or preferably (Note, following limitations are optional) all of the controlled nodes automatically.
Claims 4-5, 12-16, and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schwalbe in view of Foundation further in view of Von further in view of Non-Patent Literature/Publication, “VLT Decentral FCD 300 Design Guide” hereinafter VLT.
As to claim 4, the modification teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein preferably (Note, following limitations are optional) some or all controlled nodes are assigned a unique identifier (unique identifier, unique devices, see Foundation Page 3, Line 7 and Line 12) as an incremental or decremental value (Note, address ranges are inherently incremental and/or decremental values to each other) starting from a selected node number (248 see Foundation Page 1, Table of Address Range and Allocation; Note, selected node number is 248 and next incremental node number would be 249).
Schwalbe/Foundation/Von modification does not disclose expressly at least some of the steps are performed by at least one power supply module (PSM) and/or at least one decentral access module (DAM) triggered by a local control panel (LCP).
VLT does disclose at least some of the steps are performed by at least one power supply module (PSM) and/or at least one decentral access module (DAM) (FCD 300, see Title and Page 6, Section Title – The Decentral Concept) triggered by a local control panel (LCP) (LCP control panel, see Page 18, Section 1.4.9 Display Unit) .
At the time of the invention it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate VLT into Schwalbe/Foundation/Von.
The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been to utilize well proven off-the-shelf designs.
As to claim 5, the modification (Note, similar reason/motivation for obviousness in claim 4) teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein at least some of the steps are performed by a decentral access module (DAM) (FCD 300, see VLT Title and Page 6, Section Title – The Decentral Concept) triggered by a programmable local controller (PLC) (LCP control panel, see VLT Page 18, Section 1.4.9 Display Unit), wherein preferably (Note, following limitations are optional) some or all controlled nodes are assigned a unique identifier (unique identifier, unique devices, see Foundation Page 3, Line 7 and Line 12) as an incremental or decremental value (Note, address ranges are inherently incremental and/or decremental values to each other) starting from a selected node number (248 see Foundation Page 1, Table of Address Range and Allocation; Note, selected node number is 248 and next incremental node number would be 249) and wherein the assigned controlled nodes are connected to the same hybrid cable (hybrid cable, see VLT Page 30, Section 1.7.1) of the decentral access module (DAM).
As to claim 12, the modification teaches the method according to claim 2, wherein at least some of the steps are performed by at least one power supply module (PSM) and/or at least one decentral access module (DAM) (FCD 300, see VLT Title and Page 6, Section Title – The Decentral Concept) triggered by a local control panel (LCP) (LCP control panel, see VLT Page 18, Section 1.4.9 Display Unit), wherein preferably (Note, following limitations are optional) some or all controlled nodes are assigned a unique identifier as an incremental or decremental value starting from a selected node number.
As to claim 13, the modification teaches the method according to claim 3, wherein at least some of the steps are performed by at least one power supply module (PSM) and/or at least one decentral access module (DAM) (FCD 300, see VLT Title and Page 6, Section Title – The Decentral Concept) triggered by a local control panel (LCP) (LCP control panel, see VLT Page 18, Section 1.4.9 Display Unit), wherein preferably (Note, following limitations are optional) some or all controlled nodes are assigned a unique identifier as an incremental or decremental value starting from a selected node number.
As to claim 14, the modification teaches the method according to claim 2, wherein at least some of the steps are performed by a decentral access module (DAM) (FCD 300, see VLT Title and Page 6, Section Title – The Decentral Concept) triggered by a programmable local controller (PLC) (LCP control panel, see VLT Page 18, Section 1.4.9 Display Unit), wherein preferably (Note, following limitations are optional) some or all controlled nodes are assigned a unique identifier as an incremental or decremental value starting from a selected node number and wherein the assigned controlled nodes are connected to the same hybrid cable (hybrid cable, see VLT Page 30, Section 1.7.1) of the decentral access module (DAM) (FCD 300, see VLT Title and Page 6, Section Title – The Decentral Concept).
As to claim 15, the modification teaches the The method according to claim 3, wherein at least some of the steps are performed by a decentral access module (DAM) (FCD 300, see VLT Title and Page 6, Section Title – The Decentral Concept) triggered by a programmable local controller (PLC) (LCP control panel, see VLT Page 18, Section 1.4.9 Display Unit), wherein preferably (Note, following limitations are optional) some or all controlled nodes are assigned a unique identifier as an incremental or decremental value starting from a selected node number and wherein the assigned controlled nodes are connected to the same hybrid cable (hybrid cable, see VLT Page 30, Section 1.7.1)of the decentral access module (DAM) (FCD 300, see VLT Title and Page 6, Section Title – The Decentral Concept).
As to claim 16, the modification teaches the method according to claim 4, wherein at least some of the steps are performed by a decentral access module (DAM) (FCD 300, see VLT Title and Page 6, Section Title – The Decentral Concept) triggered by a programmable local controller (PLC) (LCP control panel, see VLT Page 18, Section 1.4.9 Display Unit), wherein preferably (Note, following limitations are optional) some or all controlled nodes are assigned a unique identifier as an incremental or decremental value starting from a selected node number and wherein the assigned controlled nodes are connected to the same hybrid cable (hybrid cable, see VLT Page 30, Section 1.7.1) of the decentral access module (DAM) (FCD 300, see VLT Title and Page 6, Section Title – The Decentral Concept).
As to claim 19, the modification teaches the according to claim 4, wherein setting the fieldbus network into a service mode comprises setting into service mode at least some or preferably (Note, following limitations are optional) all of the controlled nodes automatically.
As to claim 20, the modification teaches the method according to claim 5, wherein setting the fieldbus network into a service mode comprises setting into service mode at least some or preferably (Note, following limitations are optional) all of the controlled nodes automatically.
Claims 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schwalbe in view of Foundation further in view of Von further in view of Non-Patent Literature/Publication of Krah et al., “Lean Safe Drive Architecture with Fully Integrated Multi-Axis Safety-related Fieldbus Interface” hereinafter Krah.
As to claim 7, the modification teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein the controlled nodes comprise at least one multiaxis servo drive system (MSD), preferably (Note, following limitations are optional) one or more integrated servo drive (ISD) and/or decentral servo drive (DSD), and/or that the fieldbus network is an Ethernet powerlink fieldbus Ethernet.
The Schwalbe/Foundation/Von modification does not expressly disclose controlled nodes comprise at least one multiaxis servo drive system (MSD).
Krah does disclose controlled nodes comprise at least one multiaxis servo drive system (MSD) (see multi-axis application… e.g. robots, see Abstract).
At the time of the invention it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate Krah into Schwalbe/Foundation/Von.
The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been to utilize safety proven off-the-shelf designs while adding additional automation.
As to claim 8, the modification teaches the method according to claim 4, wherein the controlled nodes comprise at least one multiaxis servo drive system (MSD) (see multi-axis application… e.g. robots, see Krah Abstract), preferably (Note, following limitations are optional) one or more integrated servo drive (ISD) and/or decentral servo drive (DSD), and/or that the fieldbus network is an Ethernet powerlink fieldbusEthernet, wherein the multiaxis servo drive system (MSD) comprises the power supply module (PSM) together with the decentral access module (DAM), and/or one or more auxiliary capacitor module (ACM) and/or one or more servo drive module (SDM).
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Hyun Nam whose telephone number is (571) 270-1725 and fax number is (571) 270-2725. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday through Friday 8:30 AM to 5:00 PM EST. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Dr. Henry Tsai can be reached on (571) 272-4176. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/HYUN NAM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2183