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 .
Priority
Applicant’s claim for the benefit of a prior-filed application under 35 U.S.C. 365 is acknowledged.
Status of Claims
The following is a Non-Final Office Action.
Claims 1-18 are being considered in this Office Action. Claims 1-18 are currently pending.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 11/12/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-patentable subject matter. The claims are directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Claims 1-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. The eligibility analysis in support of these findings is provided below, in accordance with the “Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance” (MPEP 2106).
With respect to Step 1 of the eligibility inquiry (as explained in MPEP 2106), it is first noted that the system (claims 1-16), method (claim 17), and non-transitory computer readable medium (claim 18) are directed to an eligible category of subject matter (i.e., process, machine, and article of manufacture). Thus, Step 1 is satisfied.
With respect to Step 2, and in particular Step 2A Prong One of MPEP 2106, it is next noted that the claims recite an abstract idea of estimating work maintenance and providing recommendation to worker by reciting concepts performed in the human mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion), which falls into the “mental process” group within the enumerated groupings of abstract ideas set forth in the MPEP 2106.04 wherein the courts consider a mental process (thinking) that "can be performed in the human mind, or by a human using a pen and paper” to be an abstract idea. (See MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)). The limitations reciting the abstract idea are highlighted in italics and the limitation directed to additional elements highlighted in bold, as set forth in exemplary claim 1, are: A maintenance support system to support maintenance work to be carried out by a maintenance worker for an installation, the maintenance support system comprising: processing circuitry to acquire installation configuration elements that are configuration elements of the installation, to acquire an element unit inference model for estimation of a maintenance work content in units of the installation configuration elements, and to set the acquired element unit inference model as initial values of a maintenance work inference model for estimation of the maintenance work content for the installation, to estimate the maintenance work content to be presented to the maintenance worker by applying the maintenance work inference model to a feature quantity of an abnormality extracted from sensor data for the installation, to iteratively evaluate whether the presented maintenance work content has been effective or not for cancellation of the abnormality, based on an evaluation of effectiveness of the presented maintenance work content, to learn an effective maintenance work content concerning the feature quantity of the abnormality, and to update the maintenance work inference model, and to store the element unit inference model for each of classifications of said installations, classifications of sites configuring the installations, and classifications of components configuring the sites, wherein the installation configuration elements include the classifications of the installations, the classifications of the sites, and the classifications of components. Claims 17 and 18 recite substantially the same limitations as claim 1, and therefore subject to the same rationale.
With respect to Step 2A Prong Two of the MPEP 2106, the judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. The additional elements are directed to maintenance support system to support maintenance work to be carried out by a maintenance worker for an installation, the maintenance support system comprising: processing circuitry, inference model, store the element unit inference model for each of classifications of said installations, classifications of sites configuring the installations, and classifications of components configuring the sites(recited at high level of generality), and non-transitory computer readable medium. However, these elements fail to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they fail to provide an improvement to the functioning of a computer or to any other technology or technical field, fail to apply the exception with a particular machine, fail to effect a transformation of a particular article to a different state or thing, and fail to apply/use the abstract idea in a meaningful way beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment. Furthermore, these elements have been fully considered, however they are directed to the use of generic computing elements (Applicant’s Specification paragraphs [0015] describe high level general purpose computer) to perform the abstract idea, which is not sufficient to amount to a practical application and is tantamount to simply saying “apply it” using a general purpose computer, which merely serves to tie the abstract idea to a particular technological environment (computer based operating environment) by using the computer as a tool to perform the abstract idea, which is not sufficient to amount to particular application. Claims do recite a mental process when they contain limitations that can practically be performed in the human mind, including for example, observations, evaluations, judgments, and opinions. Examples of claims that recite mental processes include: a claim to “collecting information, analyzing it, and displaying certain results of the collection and analysis,” where the data analysis steps are recited at a high level of generality such that they could practically be performed in the human mind, Electric Power Group v. Alstom, S.A., 830 F.3d 1350, 1353-54, 119 USPQ2d 1739, 1741-42 (Fed. Cir. 2016). The courts have recognized the following computer functions as well‐understood, routine, and conventional functions when they are claimed in a merely generic manner (e.g., at a high level of generality) or as insignificant extra-solution activity. i. Receiving or transmitting data over a network, e.g., using the Internet to gather data, Symantec, 838 F.3d at 1321, 120 USPQ2d at 1362 (utilizing an intermediary computer to forward information); TLI Communications LLC v. AV Auto. LLC, 823 F.3d 607, 610, 118 USPQ2d 1744, 1745 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (using a telephone for image transmission); OIP Techs., Inc., v. Amazon.com, Inc., 788 F.3d 1359, 1363, 115 USPQ2d 1090, 1093 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (sending messages over a network); buySAFE, Inc. v. Google, Inc., 765 F.3d 1350, 1355, 112 USPQ2d 1093, 1096 (Fed. Cir. 2014) (computer receives and sends information over a network); but see DDR Holdings, LLC v. Hotels.com, L.P., 773 F.3d 1245, 1258, 113 USPQ2d 1097, 1106 (Fed. Cir. 2014) (“Unlike the claims in Ultramercial, the claims at issue here specify how interactions with the Internet are manipulated to yield a desired result‐‐a result that overrides the routine and conventional sequence of events ordinarily triggered by the click of a hyperlink.” (emphasis added));ii. Performing repetitive calculations, Flook, 437 U.S. at 594, 198 USPQ2d at 199 (recomputing or readjusting alarm limit values); Bancorp Services v. Sun Life, 687 F.3d 1266, 1278, 103 USPQ2d 1425, 1433 (Fed. Cir. 2012) (“The computer required by some of Bancorp’s claims is employed only for its most basic function, the performance of repetitive calculations, and as such does not impose meaningful limits on the scope of those claims.”); iv. Storing and retrieving information in memory, Versata Dev. Group, Inc. v. SAP Am., Inc., 793 F.3d 1306, 1334, 115 USPQ2d 1681, 1701 (Fed. Cir. 2015); OIP Techs., 788 F.3d at 1363, 115 USPQ2d at 1092-93.
Accordingly, because the Step 2A Prong One and Prong Two analysis resulted in the conclusion that the claims are directed to an abstract idea, additional analysis under Step 2B of the eligibility inquiry must be conducted in order to determine whether any claim element or combination of elements amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
With respect to Step 2B of the eligibility inquiry, it has been determined that the claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. The additional limitations are directed to: to maintenance support system to support maintenance work to be carried out by a maintenance worker for an installation, the maintenance support system comprising: processing circuitry, inference model, store the element unit inference model for each of classifications of said installations, classifications of sites configuring the installations, and classifications of components configuring the sites(recited at high level of generality), and non-transitory computer readable medium to implement the abstract idea. These elements have been considered, but merely serve to tie the invention to a particular operating environment (i.e., computer-based implementation), though at a very high level of generality and without imposing meaningful limitation on the scope of the claim. In addition, Applicant’s Specification (Applicant’s Specification paragraphs [0015] describe high-level general-purpose computer) describes generic off-the-shelf computer-based elements for implementing the claimed invention, and which does not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea, which is not enough to transform an abstract idea into eligible subject matter. Such generic, high-level, and nominal involvement of a computer or computer-based elements for carrying out the invention merely serves to tie the abstract idea to a particular technological environment, which is not enough to render the claims patent-eligible, as noted at pg. 74624 of Federal Register/Vol. 79, No. 241, citing Alice, which in turn cites Mayo. The courts have recognized the following computer functions as well‐understood, routine, and conventional functions when they are claimed in a merely generic manner (e.g., at a high level of generality) or as insignificant extra-solution activity. i. Receiving or transmitting data over a network, e.g., using the Internet to gather data, Symantec, 838 F.3d at 1321, 120 USPQ2d at 1362 (utilizing an intermediary computer to forward information); TLI Communications LLC v. AV Auto. LLC, 823 F.3d 607, 610, 118 USPQ2d 1744, 1745 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (using a telephone for image transmission); OIP Techs., Inc., v. Amazon.com, Inc., 788 F.3d 1359, 1363, 115 USPQ2d 1090, 1093 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (sending messages over a network); buySAFE, Inc. v. Google, Inc., 765 F.3d 1350, 1355, 112 USPQ2d 1093, 1096 (Fed. Cir. 2014) (computer receives and sends information over a network); but see DDR Holdings, LLC v. Hotels.com, L.P., 773 F.3d 1245, 1258, 113 USPQ2d 1097, 1106 (Fed. Cir. 2014) (“Unlike the claims in Ultramercial, the claims at issue here specify how interactions with the Internet are manipulated to yield a desired result‐‐a result that overrides the routine and conventional sequence of events ordinarily triggered by the click of a hyperlink.” (emphasis added));ii. Performing repetitive calculations, Flook, 437 U.S. at 594, 198 USPQ2d at 199 (recomputing or readjusting alarm limit values); Bancorp Services v. Sun Life, 687 F.3d 1266, 1278, 103 USPQ2d 1425, 1433 (Fed. Cir. 2012) (“The computer required by some of Bancorp’s claims is employed only for its most basic function, the performance of repetitive calculations, and as such does not impose meaningful limits on the scope of those claims.”); iv. Storing and retrieving information in memory, Versata Dev. Group, Inc. v. SAP Am., Inc., 793 F.3d 1306, 1334, 115 USPQ2d 1681, 1701 (Fed. Cir. 2015); OIP Techs., 788 F.3d at 1363, 115 USPQ2d at 1092-93.
In addition, when taken as an ordered combination, the ordered combination adds nothing that is not already present as when the elements are taken individually. There is no indication that the combination of elements integrates the abstract idea into a practical application. Their collective functions merely provide conventional computer implementation. Therefore, when viewed as a whole, these additional claim elements do not provide meaningful limitations to transform the abstract idea into a practical application of the abstract idea or that the ordered combination amounts to significantly more than the abstract idea itself.
The dependent claims recite the following additional elements: claims 3 and 4 recite the processing circuitry presents the maintenance work content estimated to the maintenance worker, 5-8 recite inference model (recited at high level of generality), and claims 9-16 recite the processing circuitry requests the maintenance worker to input an evaluation on the effectiveness concerning whether the presented maintenance work content has been effective or not for cancellation of the abnormality. These elements have been considered, but merely serve to tie the invention to a particular operating environment (i.e., computer-based implementation), though at a very high level of generality and without imposing meaningful limitation on the scope of the claim. In addition, Applicant’s Specification (Applicant’s Specification paragraphs [0015] describe high-level general-purpose computer) describes generic off-the-shelf computer-based elements for implementing the claimed invention, and which does not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea, which is not enough to transform an abstract idea into eligible subject matter. Such generic, high-level, and nominal involvement of a computer or computer-based elements for carrying out the invention merely serves to tie the abstract idea to a particular technological environment, which is not enough to render the claims patent-eligible, as noted at pg. 74624 of Federal Register/Vol. 79, No. 241, citing Alice, which in turn cites Mayo. With respect to Step 2B of the eligibility inquiry, it has been determined that the claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. These elements have been considered, but merely serve to tie the invention to a particular operating environment (i.e., computer-based implementation), though at a very high level of generality and without imposing meaningful limitation on the scope of the claim. In addition, Applicant’s Specification (Applicant’s Specification paragraphs [0015] describe high-level general-purpose computer) describes generic off-the-shelf computer-based elements for implementing the claimed invention, and which does not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea, which is not enough to transform an abstract idea into eligible subject matter. Such generic, high-level, and nominal involvement of a computer or computer-based elements for carrying out the invention merely serves to tie the abstract idea to a particular technological environment, which is not enough to render the claims patent-eligible, as noted at pg. 74624 of Federal Register/Vol. 79, No. 241, citing Alice, which in turn cites Mayo. . The courts have recognized the following computer functions as well‐understood, routine, and conventional functions when they are claimed in a merely generic manner (e.g., at a high level of generality) or as insignificant extra-solution activity. i. Receiving or transmitting data over a network, e.g., using the Internet to gather data, Symantec, 838 F.3d at 1321, 120 USPQ2d at 1362 (utilizing an intermediary computer to forward information); TLI Communications LLC v. AV Auto. LLC, 823 F.3d 607, 610, 118 USPQ2d 1744, 1745 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (using a telephone for image transmission); OIP Techs., Inc., v. Amazon.com, Inc., 788 F.3d 1359, 1363, 115 USPQ2d 1090, 1093 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (sending messages over a network); buySAFE, Inc. v. Google, Inc., 765 F.3d 1350, 1355, 112 USPQ2d 1093, 1096 (Fed. Cir. 2014) (computer receives and sends information over a network); but see DDR Holdings, LLC v. Hotels.com, L.P., 773 F.3d 1245, 1258, 113 USPQ2d 1097, 1106 (Fed. Cir. 2014) (“Unlike the claims in Ultramercial, the claims at issue here specify how interactions with the Internet are manipulated to yield a desired result‐‐a result that overrides the routine and conventional sequence of events ordinarily triggered by the click of a hyperlink.” (emphasis added));ii. Performing repetitive calculations, Flook, 437 U.S. at 594, 198 USPQ2d at 199 (recomputing or readjusting alarm limit values); Bancorp Services v. Sun Life, 687 F.3d 1266, 1278, 103 USPQ2d 1425, 1433 (Fed. Cir. 2012) (“The computer required by some of Bancorp’s claims is employed only for its most basic function, the performance of repetitive calculations, and as such does not impose meaningful limits on the scope of those claims.”); iv. Storing and retrieving information in memory, Versata Dev. Group, Inc. v. SAP Am., Inc., 793 F.3d 1306, 1334, 115 USPQ2d 1681, 1701 (Fed. Cir. 2015); OIP Techs., 788 F.3d at 1363, 115 USPQ2d at 1092-93.
The dependent claims have been fully considered as well, however, similar to the finding for claims above, these claims are similarly directed to the abstract idea of a mental process, without integrating it into a practical application and with, at most, a general-purpose computer that serves to tie the idea to a particular technological environment, which does not add significantly more to the claims. The ordered combination of elements in the dependent claims (including the limitations inherited from the parent claim(s)) add nothing that is not already present as when the elements are taken individually. There is no indication that the combination of elements improves the functioning of a computer or improves any other technology. Their collective functions merely provide conventional computer implementation. Accordingly, the subject matter encompassed by the dependent claims fails to amount to significantly more than the abstract idea.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-8 and 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Steven Thomas Zyglowicz (US 2014/0365191 A1, hereinafter “Zyglowicz”) in view of Himagiri Mukkamala (US 2017/0192414 A1, hereinafter “Mukkamala”) in view of Sujeet Chand (US 2020/0326684 A1, hereinafter “Chand”).
Claim 1/17/18
Zyglowiez teaches:
A maintenance support system to support maintenance work to be carried out by a maintenance worker for an installation, the maintenance support system comprising: processing circuitry ([0008] computer readable medium; [0112] processor),
to acquire an element unit inference model for estimation of a maintenance work content in units of the installation configuration elements ([0029] using the model to make predictions and/or maintenance recommendations for a prediction period based upon data acquired during one or more assessment periods. [0035] the first model may be selected based upon the criteria used to divide industrial assets into subsets.),
and to set the acquired element unit inference model as initial values of a maintenance work inference model for estimation of the maintenance work content for the installation ([0036] the first model is used to generate a first health profile for a first industrial asset of the first subset. The first health profile describes the expected health of the first industrial asset during a prediction period),
to estimate the maintenance work content to be presented to the maintenance worker by applying the maintenance work inference model to a feature quantity of an abnormality extracted from sensor data for the installation([0068] When the example model 600 is executed or started at 602, the data referenced by the first set of model parameters 604 and/or the second set of model parameters 606 may be retrieved from the first data store 608 and/or the second data store 610 (e.g., referenced by the second set of model parameters 606) and analyzed according to model logic of the example model 600. [0069] If a decision is made at 610 that the dissolved hydrogen concentration is likely to increase at a rate greater than 1 ppm/month during at least a portion of the prediction period, the age of the transformer may be evaluated at 612 to determine a recommended maintenance plan. the model 600 may generate a health profile comprising a maintenance plan that includes reducing that workload of the transformer by 25% immediately and degassing the transformer within the next 2 months as indicated by 614. The system also comprises a model update component configured to update the model (e.g., based upon a comparison of the health profile with data generated during the prediction period and indicative of the industrial asset). [0061] Figure 7 and a health profile of the industrial asset is generated indicative of an expected health of the industrial asset during the prediction period(s)),
to iteratively evaluate whether the presented maintenance work content has been effective or not for cancellation of the abnormality, based on an evaluation of effectiveness of the presented maintenance work content, to learn an effective maintenance work content concerning the feature quantity of the abnormality([0078] A model or models used to generate the health profile 700 and/or other health profiles may be periodically and/or intermittently updated (e.g., programmatically and/or by subject matter experts) based upon data acquired during the prediction period. [0083] By way of example, the data acquired at 804 may be analyzed to determine whether or when a recommended maintenance action(s) was performed during the prediction period, the impact of performing or not performing the maintenance action(s) (e.g., did the health of the industrial asset degrade as expected if the maintenance action was not performed, did the industrial asset's operational performance change as expected when the maintenance action was performed, etc.) [0079] the rate at which the dissolved hydrogen concentration increases may not be a good predictor of degraded insulation (e.g., and/or the need to degas the transformer) and the data may be reanalyzed to identify other types of data that are better predictors),
and to update the maintenance work inference model ([0007] a model update component configured to update the model (e.g., based upon a comparison of the health profile with data generated during the prediction period and indicative of the industrial asset)),
While Zyglowiez teaches [0008] generating, using a model, a health profile of an industrial asset based upon data generated during an assessment period and indicative of the industrial asset. The health profile comprises at least one maintenance plan providing one or more maintenance actions that are recommended to be performed with respect to the industrial asset during a prediction period. Zyglowiez does not explicitly teach the following, however, analogues reference in the field of managing industrial assets, Mukkamala teaches:
acquire installation configuration elements that are configuration elements of the installation ([0053] information from the industrial asset 102, such as data about the asset itself, can be communicated from the asset to the data module 108C. In an example embodiment, an external sensor can be used to sense information about a function of an asset, or to sense information about an environment condition at or near the industrial asset 102. The external sensor can be configured for data communication with a gateway and the data module 108C, and the IIoT cloud 106 can be configured to use the sensor information in its analysis of one or more assets, such as using the analytics module 108B. [0062] In an example embodiment, the IIoT cloud 106 can coordinate various modules to enhance asset value or function. For example, the IIoT system 100 can use the IIoT cloud 106 to retrieve an operational model for the industrial asset 102 from the asset module 108A. [0065] An asset model can represent information that application developers store about assets, and can include information about how one or more assets are configured or organized, or how they are related).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the claimed invention was filed to combine the teaching of Zyglowiez with Mukkamala, because the references are analogous and compatible since they are both directed to managing industrial assets, to include acquiring installation configuration elements that are configuration elements of the installation as part of the data gathered used by analytic system taught by Zyglowiez. Doing so will aid in identifying or mitigating issues at a particular asset or asset type and to effectively and efficiently improve performance of designated assets. ([0054]).
While Zyglowiez teaches [0008] generating, using a model, a health profile of an industrial asset based upon data generated during an assessment period and indicative of the industrial asset. The health profile comprises at least one maintenance plan providing one or more maintenance actions that are recommended to be performed with respect to the industrial asset during a prediction period. Zyglowiez does not explicitly teach the following, however, analogues reference in the field of managing industrial assets, Chand teaches:
and to store the element unit inference model for each of classifications of said installations, classifications of sites configuring the installations, and classifications of components configuring the sites, wherein the installation configuration elements include the classifications of the installations, the classifications of the sites, and the classifications of components([0053] smart gateway platform 402 can store a library of model templates 420 that are each associated with a corresponding business objective or outcome. [0054] FIG. 6 is a diagram illustrating an example model classification schema for storage of model templates 420 in the smart gateway platform's library. [0078] Data modeling component 408 also organizes and aggregates the transformed data to yield structured and contextualized data 704. Data modeling component 408 can model the data to reflect an industrial enterprise hierarchy within which the data sources reside. For example, since many industrial systems are modular and hierarchical, batch processing systems may be represented by a hierarchy comprising layers representing (from highest to lowest) the industrial enterprise, the plant site, the production area within the site, the cell within the production area, the unit within the cell, and the equipment or machine within the unit. [0082] Some asset types can be described hierarchically. FIG. 10 is an example asset type hierarchy 1002 for industrial pumps. Pumps can be categorized according to two different types of pumps—dynamic and positive displacement. By utilizing such a hierarchical asset model, data associated with each pump (e.g., pressure, flow rate, liquid volume, energy loss, pump efficiency, etc.) is inherited by all child nodes in the hierarchical path for a given pump (e.g., a flow rate for a given axial flow pump is applied to the pump itself, as well as to the axial flow, centrifugal, dynamic, and pump hierarchical classifications)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the claimed invention was filed to combine the teaching of Zyglowiez and Mukkamala with Chand, because the references are analogous and compatible since they are both directed to managing industrial assets, to include to store the element unit inference model for each of classifications of said installations, classifications of sites configuring the installations, and classifications of components configuring the sites, wherein the installation configuration elements include the classifications of the installations, the classifications of the sites, and the classifications of components as part of the system taught by Zyglowiez. Doing so will aid in identifying or mitigating issues at a particular asset or asset type and to effectively and efficiently improve performance of designated assets. ([0088]).
Claim 2
While Zyglowiez teaches [0008] generating, using a model, a health profile of an industrial asset based upon data generated during an assessment period and indicative of the industrial asset. The health profile comprises at least one maintenance plan providing one or more maintenance actions that are recommended to be performed with respect to the industrial asset during a prediction period. Zyglowiez does not explicitly teach the following, however, analogues reference in the field of managing industrial assets, Mukkamala teaches:
The maintenance support system according to claim 1, wherein the processing circuitry acquires the element unit inference model for each of the classifications of the installations, the classifications of the sites, and the classifications of the components in the installations ([0063] and [0138] The asset services 821 can provide tools to create, store, or query asset models, properties, and the relationships between assets and other modeled elements. [0139] an asset model can represent information about how assets are organized or related Assets can be organized by a classification and by any number of custom modeling objects. For example, an organization can use a Location object to store data about where its pumps are manufactured, and then use a Manufacturer object to store data about specific pump suppliers. It can also use several classifications of Pumps to define pump types, assign attributes (e.g., material type) to each classification, and associate multiple meters or sensors (e.g., flow, pressure, etc.) to each classification).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the claimed invention was filed to combine the teaching of Zyglowiez with Mukkamala to include acquiring the element unit inference model for each of the classifications of the installations, the classifications of the sites, and the classifications of the components in the installations as part of the data gathered used by analytic system taught by Zyglowiez. Doing so will aid in identifying or mitigating issues at a particular asset or asset type and to effectively and efficiently improve performance of designated assets. ([0054]).
Claim 3
Zyglowicz teaches:
The maintenance support system according to claim 1, wherein the processing circuitry presents the maintenance work content estimated […]([0061] a health profile of the industrial asset is generated indicative of an expected health of the industrial asset during the prediction period(s). As further described with respect to FIG. 7, such a health profile may include, among other things, a current health of the industrial asset and at least one maintenance plan (e.g., including one or more recommended maintenance actions and/or an expected health of the industrial asset during the prediction period(s) and/or at the end of the prediction period(s) if the maintenance plan is followed, and/or an expected health of the industrial asset during the prediction period(s) and/or at the end of the prediction period if the maintenance plan (e.g., or one or more actions listed therein) is not followed)).
While Zyglowiez teaches [0008] generating, using a model, a health profile of an industrial asset based upon data generated during an assessment period and indicative of the industrial asset. The health profile comprises at least one maintenance plan providing one or more maintenance actions that are recommended to be performed with respect to the industrial asset during a prediction period. Zyglowiez does not explicitly teach the following, however, analogues reference in the field of managing industrial assets, Mukkamala teaches:
Present information to the maintenance worker ([0046] information about the industrial asset 102 is presented to an operator at the interface device 140. The information about the industrial asset 102 can include information from the IIoT machine 104, or the information can include information from the IIoT cloud 106. In an example embodiment, the information from the IoT cloud 106 includes information about the industrial asset 102 in the context of multiple other similar or dissimilar assets (e.g., co-located assets or assets that are not co-located), and the interface device 140 can include options for optimizing one or more members of an asset community to which the industrial asset 102 belongs, such as based on analytics performed at the IIoT cloud 106 or performed locally by the IIoT machine 104).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the claimed invention was filed to combine the teaching of Zyglowiez with Mukkamala to include presenting information to the maintenance worker as part of analytic system taught by Zyglowiez. Doing so will aid in identifying or mitigating issues at a particular asset or asset type and to effectively and efficiently improve performance of designated assets. ([0054]).
Claim 4
Zyglowicz teaches:
The maintenance support system according to claim 2, wherein the processing circuitry presents the maintenance work content estimated […]([0061] a health profile of the industrial asset is generated indicative of an expected health of the industrial asset during the prediction period(s). As further described with respect to FIG. 7, such a health profile may include, among other things, a current health of the industrial asset and at least one maintenance plan (e.g., including one or more recommended maintenance actions and/or an expected health of the industrial asset during the prediction period(s) and/or at the end of the prediction period(s) if the maintenance plan is followed, and/or an expected health of the industrial asset during the prediction period(s) and/or at the end of the prediction period if the maintenance plan (e.g., or one or more actions listed therein) is not followed)).
While Zyglowiez teaches [0008] generating, using a model, a health profile of an industrial asset based upon data generated during an assessment period and indicative of the industrial asset. The health profile comprises at least one maintenance plan providing one or more maintenance actions that are recommended to be performed with respect to the industrial asset during a prediction period. Zyglowiez does not explicitly teach the following, however, analogues reference in the field of managing industrial assets, Mukkamala teaches:
Present information to the maintenance worker ([0046] information about the industrial asset 102 is presented to an operator at the interface device 140. The information about the industrial asset 102 can include information from the IIoT machine 104, or the information can include information from the IIoT cloud 106. In an example embodiment, the information from the IoT cloud 106 includes information about the industrial asset 102 in the context of multiple other similar or dissimilar assets (e.g., co-located assets or assets that are not co-located), and the interface device 140 can include options for optimizing one or more members of an asset community to which the industrial asset 102 belongs, such as based on analytics performed at the IIoT cloud 106 or performed locally by the IIoT machine 104).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the claimed invention was filed to combine the teaching of Zyglowiez with Mukkamala to include presenting information to the maintenance worker as part of analytic system taught by Zyglowiez. Doing so will aid in identifying or mitigating issues at a particular asset or asset type and to effectively and efficiently improve performance of designated assets. ([0054]).
Claim 5
While Zyglowiez teaches [0008] generating, using a model, a health profile of an industrial asset based upon data generated during an assessment period and indicative of the industrial asset. The health profile comprises at least one maintenance plan providing one or more maintenance actions that are recommended to be performed with respect to the industrial asset during a prediction period. Zyglowiez does not explicitly teach the following, however, analogues reference in the field of managing industrial assets, Mukkamala teaches:
The maintenance support system according to claim 1, wherein the processing circuitry ties the maintenance work inference model updated to the installation configuration elements and records the maintenance work inference model in the element unit inference model ([0039] Updated analytical models can be pushed back to one or more of the assets that the models represent, and performance of the one or more assets can be correspondingly improved. [0141] the asset services 821 includes an API layer, a query engine and a graph database. The API layer can include REST APIs that enable application developers to create and store asset models that define asset properties, relationships between different assets, or other modeling elements. Application developers can leverage the asset services 821 to store asset-instance data).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the claimed invention was filed to combine the teaching of Zyglowiez with Mukkamala to include tying the maintenance work inference model updated to the installation configuration elements and records the maintenance work inference model in the element unit inference model as part of analytic system taught by Zyglowiez. Doing so will aid in identifying or mitigating issues at a particular asset or asset type and to effectively and efficiently improve performance of designated assets. ([0054]).
Claim 6
While Zyglowiez teaches [0008] generating, using a model, a health profile of an industrial asset based upon data generated during an assessment period and indicative of the industrial asset. The health profile comprises at least one maintenance plan providing one or more maintenance actions that are recommended to be performed with respect to the industrial asset during a prediction period. Zyglowiez does not explicitly teach the following, however, analogues reference in the field of managing industrial assets, Mukkamala teaches:
The maintenance support system according to claim 2, wherein the processing circuitry ties the maintenance work inference model updated to the installation configuration elements and records the maintenance work inference model in the element unit inference model([0039] Updated analytical models can be pushed back to one or more of the assets that the models represent, and performance of the one or more assets can be correspondingly improved. [0141] the asset services 821 includes an API layer, a query engine and a graph database. The API layer can include REST APIs that enable application developers to create and store asset models that define asset properties, relationships between different assets, or other modeling elements. Application developers can leverage the asset services 821 to store asset-instance data).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the claimed invention was filed to combine the teaching of Zyglowiez with Mukkamala to include tying the maintenance work inference model updated to the installation configuration elements and records the maintenance work inference model in the element unit inference model as part of analytic system taught by Zyglowiez. Doing so will aid in identifying or mitigating issues at a particular asset or asset type and to effectively and efficiently improve performance of designated assets. ([0054]).
Claim 7
While Zyglowiez teaches [0008] generating, using a model, a health profile of an industrial asset based upon data generated during an assessment period and indicative of the industrial asset. The health profile comprises at least one maintenance plan providing one or more maintenance actions that are recommended to be performed with respect to the industrial asset during a prediction period. Zyglowiez does not explicitly teach the following, however, analogues reference in the field of managing industrial assets, Mukkamala teaches:
The maintenance support system according to claim 3, wherein the processing circuitry ties the maintenance work inference model updated to the installation configuration elements and records the maintenance work inference model in the element unit inference model([0039] Updated analytical models can be pushed back to one or more of the assets that the models represent, and performance of the one or more assets can be correspondingly improved. [0141] the asset services 821 includes an API layer, a query engine and a graph database. The API layer can include REST APIs that enable application developers to create and store asset models that define asset properties, relationships between different assets, or other modeling elements. Application developers can leverage the asset services 821 to store asset-instance data).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the claimed invention was filed to combine the teaching of Zyglowiez with Mukkamala to include tying the maintenance work inference model updated to the installation configuration elements and records the maintenance work inference model in the element unit inference model as part of analytic system taught by Zyglowiez. Doing so will aid in identifying or mitigating issues at a particular asset or asset type and to effectively and efficiently improve performance of designated assets. ([0054]).
Claim 8
While Zyglowiez teaches [0008] generating, using a model, a health profile of an industrial asset based upon data generated during an assessment period and indicative of the industrial asset. The health profile comprises at least one maintenance plan providing one or more maintenance actions that are recommended to be performed with respect to the industrial asset during a prediction period. Zyglowiez does not explicitly teach the following, however, analogues reference in the field of managing industrial assets, Mukkamala teaches:
The maintenance support system according to claim 4, wherein the processing circuitry ties the maintenance work inference model updated to the installation configuration elements and records the maintenance work inference model in the element unit inference model([0039] Updated analytical models can be pushed back to one or more of the assets that the models represent, and performance of the one or more assets can be correspondingly improved. [0141] the asset services 821 includes an API layer, a query engine and a graph database. The API layer can include REST APIs that enable application developers to create and store asset models that define asset properties, relationships between different assets, or other modeling elements. Application developers can leverage the asset services 821 to store asset-instance data).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the claimed invention was filed to combine the teaching of Zyglowiez with Mukkamala to include tying the maintenance work inference model updated to the installation configuration elements and records the maintenance work inference model in the element unit inference model as part of analytic system taught by Zyglowiez. Doing so will aid in identifying or mitigating issues at a particular asset or asset type and to effectively and efficiently improve performance of designated assets. ([0054]).
Claims 9-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zyglowicz in view of Mukkamala in view of Chand, as applied in claims 1-8, and further in view of Neeraj Madan (US 2021/0224265 A1, hereinafter “Madan”)
Claim 9
While Zyglowiez teaches [0008] generating, using a model, a health profile of an industrial asset based upon data generated during an assessment period and indicative of the industrial asset. The health profile comprises at least one maintenance plan providing one or more maintenance actions that are recommended to be performed with respect to the industrial asset during a prediction period. Zyglowiez does not explicitly teach the following, however, analogues reference in the field of managing industrial assets, Madan teaches:
The maintenance support system according to claim 1, wherein the processing circuitry requests the maintenance worker to input an evaluation on the effectiveness concerning whether the presented maintenance work content has been effective or not for cancellation of the abnormality ([0049] a user may provide feedback via the GUI 400 regarding the proposed test repair actions that are presented to the user. The feedback is used to gather information from the user regarding whether a repair action that was displayed in the priority list was successful or unsuccessful).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the claimed invention was filed to combine the teaching of Zyglowiez, Mukkamala, and Chand with Madan, because the references are analogous and compatible since they are both directed to managing industrial assets, to include requesting the maintenance worker to input an evaluation on the effectiveness concerning whether the presented maintenance work content has been effective or not for cancellation of the abnormality as part of the system taught by Zyglowiez. Doing so will aid in identifying or mitigating issues at a particular asset or asset type and to effectively and efficiently improve performance of designated assets. ([0088]).
Claim 10
While Zyglowiez teaches [0008] generating, using a model, a health profile of an industrial asset based upon data generated during an assessment period and indicative of the industrial asset. The health profile comprises at least one maintenance plan providing one or more maintenance actions that are recommended to be performed with respect to the industrial asset during a prediction period. Zyglowiez does not explicitly teach the following, however, analogues reference in the field of managing industrial assets, Madan teaches:
The maintenance support system according to claim 2, wherein the processing circuitry requests the maintenance worker to input an evaluation on the effectiveness concerning whether the presented maintenance work content has been effective or not for cancellation of the abnormality ([0049] a user may provide feedback via the GUI 400 regarding the proposed test repair actions that are presented to the user. The feedback is used to gather information from the user regarding whether a repair action that was displayed in the priority list was successful or unsuccessful).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the claimed invention was filed to combine the teaching of Zyglowiez, Mukkamala, and Chand with Madan, because the references are analogous and compatible since they are both directed to managing industrial assets, to include requesting the maintenance worker to input an evaluation on the effectiveness concerning whether the presented maintenance work content has been effective or not for cancellation of the abnormality as part of the system taught by Zyglowiez. Doing so will aid in identifying or mitigating issues at a particular asset or asset type and to effectively and efficiently improve performance of designated assets. ([0088]).
Claim 11
While Zyglowiez teaches [0008] generating, using a model, a health profile of an industrial asset based upon data generated during an assessment period and indicative of the industrial asset. The health profile comprises at least one maintenance plan providing one or more maintenance actions that are recommended to be performed with respect to the industrial asset during a prediction period. Zyglowiez does not explicitly teach the following, however, analogues reference in the field of managing industrial assets, Madan teaches:
The maintenance support system according to claim 3, wherein the processing circuitry requests the maintenance worker to input an evaluation on the effectiveness concerning whether the presented maintenance work content has been effective or not for cancellation of the abnormality ([0049] a user may provide feedback via the GUI 400 regarding the proposed test repair actions that are presented to the user. The feedback is used to gather information from the user regarding whether a repair action that was displayed in the priority list was successful or unsuccessful).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the claimed invention was filed to combine the teaching of Zyglowiez, Mukkamala, and Chand with Madan, because the references are analogous and compatible since they are both directed to managing industrial assets, to include requesting the maintenance worker to input an evaluation on the effectiveness concerning whether the presented maintenance work content has been effective or not for cancellation of the abnormality as part of the system taught by Zyglowiez. Doing so will aid in identifying or mitigating issues at a particular asset or asset type and to effectively and efficiently improve performance of designated assets. ([0088]).
Claim 12
While Zyglowiez teaches [0008] generating, using a model, a health profile of an industrial asset based upon data generated during an assessment period and indicative of the industrial asset. The health profile comprises at least one maintenance plan providing one or more maintenance actions that are recommended to be performed with respect to the industrial asset during a prediction period. Zyglowiez does not explicitly teach the following, however, analogues reference in the field of managing industrial assets, Madan teaches:
The maintenance support system according to claim 4, wherein the processing circuitry requests the maintenance worker to input an evaluation on the effectiveness concerning whether the presented maintenance work content has been effective or not for cancellation of the abnormality([0049] a user may provide feedback via the GUI 400 regarding the proposed test repair actions that are presented to the user. The feedback is used to gather information from the user regarding whether a repair action that was displayed in the priority list was successful or unsuccessful).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the claimed invention was filed to combine the teaching of Zyglowiez, Mukkamala, and Chand with Madan, because the references are analogous and compatible since they are both directed to managing industrial assets, to include requesting the maintenance worker to input an evaluation on the effectiveness concerning whether the presented maintenance work content has been effective or not for cancellation of the abnormality as part of the system taught by Zyglowiez. Doing so will aid in identifying or mitigating issues at a particular asset or asset type and to effectively and efficiently improve performance of designated assets. ([0088]).
Claim 13
While Zyglowiez teaches [0008] generating, using a model, a health profile of an industrial asset based upon data generated during an assessment period and indicative of the industrial asset. The health profile comprises at least one maintenance plan providing one or more maintenance actions that are recommended to be performed with respect to the industrial asset during a prediction period. Zyglowiez does not explicitly teach the following, however, analogues reference in the field of managing industrial assets, Madan teaches:
The maintenance support system according to claim 5, wherein the processing circuitry requests the maintenance worker to input an evaluation on the effectiveness concerning whether the presented maintenance work content has been effective or not for cancellation of the abnormality([0049] a user may provide feedback via the GUI 400 regarding the proposed test repair actions that are presented to the user. The feedback is used to gather information from the user regarding whether a repair action that was displayed in the priority list was successful or unsuccessful).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the claimed invention was filed to combine the teaching of Zyglowiez, Mukkamala, and Chand with Madan, because the references are analogous and compatible since they are both directed to managing industrial assets, to include requesting the maintenance worker to input an evaluation on the effectiveness concerning whether the presented maintenance work content has been effective or not for cancellation of the abnormality as part of the system taught by Zyglowiez. Doing so will aid in identifying or mitigating issues at a particular asset or asset type and to effectively and efficiently improve performance of designated assets. ([0088]).
Claim 14
While Zyglowiez teaches [0008] generating, using a model, a health profile of an industrial asset based upon data generated during an assessment period and indicative of the industrial asset. The health profile comprises at least one maintenance plan providing one or more maintenance actions that are recommended to be performed with respect to the industrial asset during a prediction period. Zyglowiez does not explicitly teach the following, however, analogues reference in the field of managing industrial assets, Madan teaches:
The maintenance support system according to claim 6, wherein the processing circuitry requests the maintenance worker to input an evaluation on the effectiveness concerning whether the presented maintenance work content has been effective or not for cancellation of the abnormality ([0049] a user may provide feedback via the GUI 400 regarding the proposed test repair actions that are presented to the user. The feedback is used to gather information from the user regarding whether a repair action that was displayed in the priority list was successful or unsuccessful).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the claimed invention was filed to combine the teaching of Zyglowiez, Mukkamala, and Chand with Madan, because the references are analogous and compatible since they are both directed to managing industrial assets, to include requesting the maintenance worker to input an evaluation on the effectiveness concerning whether the presented maintenance work content has been effective or not for cancellation of the abnormality as part of the system taught by Zyglowiez. Doing so will aid in identifying or mitigating issues at a particular asset or asset type and to effectively and efficiently improve performance of designated assets. ([0088]).
Claim 15
While Zyglowiez teaches [0008] generating, using a model, a health profile of an industrial asset based upon data generated during an assessment period and indicative of the industrial asset. The health profile comprises at least one maintenance plan providing one or more maintenance actions that are recommended to be performed with respect to the industrial asset during a prediction period. Zyglowiez does not explicitly teach the following, however, analogues reference in the field of managing industrial assets, Madan teaches:
The maintenance support system according to claim 7, wherein the processing circuitry requests the maintenance worker to input an evaluation on the effectiveness concerning whether the presented maintenance work content has been effective or not for cancellation of the abnormality([0049] a user may provide feedback via the GUI 400 regarding the proposed test repair actions that are presented to the user. The feedback is used to gather information from the user regarding whether a repair action that was displayed in the priority list was successful or unsuccessful).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the claimed invention was filed to combine the teaching of Zyglowiez, Mukkamala, and Chand with Madan, because the references are analogous and compatible since they are both directed to managing industrial assets, to include requesting the maintenance worker to input an evaluation on the effectiveness concerning whether the presented maintenance work content has been effective or not for cancellation of the abnormality as part of the system taught by Zyglowiez. Doing so will aid in identifying or mitigating issues at a particular asset or asset type and to effectively and efficiently improve performance of designated assets. ([0088]).
Claim 16
While Zyglowiez teaches [0008] generating, using a model, a health profile of an industrial asset based upon data generated during an assessment period and indicative of the industrial asset. The health profile comprises at least one maintenance plan providing one or more maintenance actions that are recommended to be performed with respect to the industrial asset during a prediction period. Zyglowiez does not explicitly teach the following, however, analogues reference in the field of managing industrial assets, Madan teaches:
The maintenance support system according to claim 8, wherein the processing circuitry requests the maintenance worker to input an evaluation on the effectiveness concerning whether the presented maintenance work content has been effective or not for cancellation of the abnormality([0049] a user may provide feedback via the GUI 400 regarding the proposed test repair actions that are presented to the user. The feedback is used to gather information from the user regarding whether a repair action that was displayed in the priority list was successful or unsuccessful).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the claimed invention was filed to combine the teaching of Zyglowiez, Mukkamala, and Chand with Madan, because the references are analogous and compatible since they are both directed to managing industrial assets, to include requesting the maintenance worker to input an evaluation on the effectiveness concerning whether the presented maintenance work content has been effective or not for cancellation of the abnormality as part of the system taught by Zyglowiez. Doing so will aid in identifying or mitigating issues at a particular asset or asset type and to effectively and efficiently improve performance of designated assets. ([0088]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
US 20210055719 A1
SYSTEM FOR PREDICTIVE MAINTENANCE USING GENERATIVE ADVERSARIAL NETWORKS FOR FAILURE PREDICTION
ZHENG; Shuai et al.
US 20200103886 A1
Computer System and Method for Evaluating an Event Prediction Model
Gandenberger; Greg
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to REHAM K ABOUZAHRA whose telephone number is (571)272-0419. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:00 AM to 5:00 PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Brian Epstein can be reached at (571)-270-5389. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/REHAM K ABOUZAHRA/Examiner, Art Unit 3625