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 .
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “primary hardware entity” and “hardware assigning unit” in claim 1.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
“primary hardware entity” - spec. para 0040 computing infrastructure
“hardware assigning unit” - spec. para 0040 computing infrastructure.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Objections
Claim 5 is objected to because of the following informalities: missing period. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nixon et al. US 2020/0387145 A1 in view of Furrer et al. US 2013/0029580 A1.
Nixon teaches:
1. (Currently Amended) A process control system comprising:
an automation device; [Fig. 1 42a….42c]
an automation function environment [Fig. 1 virtual plant environment and physical plant environment] comprising
a process control function, [process controllers 110]
a first hardware assigning unit [Fig. 5 virtualization management node 300] and hardware [devices controlled by physical nodes] for functions of the automation function environment,
where the process control function
controls the automation device using control signals sent in a control signal path through a wireless network [Fig. 3 wireless field devices 140-146 and para. 0045, “The virtual communication network 45 may be implemented by one or more physical communications and/or data links and/or networks, which may include wired and/or wireless networks, and which may be implemented using any suitable technology, such as Ethernet, optical, IP, another type other packet network, etc. Data is communicated between nodes of the via the virtual communication network 45 via publication and subscription, and any or more suitable communication protocols that support publication and subscription may be utilized within the virtual communication network 45 for the delivery of data. “] and
employing hardware in the automation function environment that has been assigned to the process control function by the first hardware assigning unit; [para. 0054, “The tag or other identifier may uniquely identify data, a node, a device, or a component of the MPDSC platform 10, for example. In an embodiment, the tags and/or identifiers may be assigned during configuration and/or commissioning.”]
a group of safety field devices [para. 0035, “safety controllers”] including at least one safety actuator and at least one safety sensor placed together in the automation function environment and/or in a control signal path environment in the wireless network; [para. 0003, “The field devices, which may be, for example, valves, valve positioners, switches and transmitters (e.g., temperature, pressure, level and flow rate sensors), are located within the process environment and generally perform physical or process control functions such as opening or closing valves, measuring process parameters, etc., to control one or more processes executing within the process plant or system.“] and
Nixon does not teach the following limitations, however, Furrer teaches:
a primary hardware entity [actuating drive 2.1, 2.2, 2.3] implementing a safety control function [para. 0074, “moves flap to the safe position”], said safety control function being configured to
obtain safety data from the at least one safety sensor about the safety of the corresponding environment [para. 0044, “Preferably, at least one sensor is provided for detection of chemical and/or physical measured values, with the sensor in particular being a gas sensor, a smoke sensor, a temperature sensor, an air pressure sensor and/or a flow sensor, in order to determine the actuating parameter and/or to select the safety mode on the basis of its sensor signal.”]
determine the safety of the corresponding environment based on the obtained safety data [para. 0046, “The determination module is preferably designed to dynamically determine the actuating parameter, in particular after a definable time interval has elapsed or on the basis of detected sensor signals. In the event of an electrical power failure, an actuating parameter is therefore determined which corresponds optimally to the current situation in a building, thus minimizing damage to people or buildings.”] and
perform a safety activity using the at least one safety actuator in case the safety of the corresponding environment is found to be insufficient. [para. 0048, “The actuating parameter can be defined when the safety mode is initiated. This ensures that the flap is set on the basis of a current danger situation.”]
Furrer teaches:
2. (Currently Amended) The process control system according to claim 1, wherein the at least one safety sensor comprises a first safety sensor in the automation function environment and the at least one safety actuator comprises includes a first safety actuator in the automation function environment. [para. 0036-0046]
Furrer teaches:
3. (Currently Amended) The process control system according to claim 2, wherein a first secondary hardware entity is provided in the automation function environment for sensor handling functionality of the first safety sensor. [para. 0035 “controller and/or a central computer”]
Nixon teaches:
4. (Currently Amended) The process control system according to claim 2, wherein a second secondary hardware entity is provided in the automation function environment for actuator functionality of the first safety actuator. [Fig. 1 30a-30p Virtual nodes for controlling PNs]
Nixon teaches:
5. (Currently Amended) The process control system according to claim 4, wherein each secondary hardware entity has been assigned to the sensor handling functionality or the actuator functionality by the first hardware assigning unit [para. 0054, virtual nodes can subscribe to data from physical sensors]
Nixon teaches:
6. (Currently Amended) The process control system according to claim 1 the at least one safety sensor comprising a second safety sensor placed in the control signal path environment and the at least one safety actuator comprising including a second safety actuator placed together with the second safety sensor in the control signal path environment. [para. 0065, “Process controllers, field devices, and I/O devices may be wired or wireless, and any number and combination of wired and wireless process controllers, field devices, and/or I/O devices may be included in the process plant environment or platform 100.”]
Nixon teaches:
7. (Currently Amended) The process control system according to claim 6, wherein a first tertiary hardware entity is provided in the control signal path environment for sensor handling functionality of the second safety sensor. [Fig. 1 VN 30a-30p]
Nixon teaches:
8. (Currently Amended) The process control system according to claim 6, wherein a second tertiary hardware entity is provided in the control signal path environment for actuator functionality of the second safety actuator. [Fig. 1 VN 30a-30p]
Nixon teaches:
9. (Currently Amended) The process control system according to claim 1, further comprising a wired safety network. [para. 0065, “Process controllers, field devices, and I/O devices may be wired or wireless, and any number and combination of wired and wireless process controllers, field devices, and/or I/O devices may be included in the process plant environment or platform 100.”]
Nixon teaches:
10. (Currently Amended) The process control system according to claim 9, wherein at least one further safety field device in the group of safety field devices is a wired safety field device connected to the wired safety network. [para. 0065, “Process controllers, field devices, and I/O devices may be wired or wireless, and any number and combination of wired and wireless process controllers, field devices, and/or I/O devices may be included in the process plant environment or platform 100.”]
Nixon teaches:
11. (Currently Amended) The process control system according to claim 1, wherein at least one further safety field device in the group of safety field devices is a wireless safety field device. [para. 0065, “Process controllers, field devices, and I/O devices may be wired or wireless, and any number and combination of wired and wireless process controllers, field devices, and/or I/O devices may be included in the process plant environment or platform 100.”]
Nixon teaches:
12. (Currently Amended) The process control system according to claim 1, further comprising a safety controller comprising including the primary hardware entity implementing the safety function. [para. 0035, VNs or PNs can be safety controllers]
Nixon teaches:
13. (Currently Amended) The process control system according to claim 1, wherein the primary hardware entity is provided in the automation function environment. [Fig. 1 hardware entities all in 10]
Nixon teaches:
14. (Currently Amended) The process control system according to claim 13, wherein the primary hardware entity has been assigned to the safety function by the first hardware assigning unit. [para. 0083, mapping and configuration of field devices assigned or unassigned]
Regarding method claim 15, this method recites the steps for executing the functions of apparatus claim 1 above and is rejected on the same grounds and rationale as claim 1 above.
Nixon teaches:
16. (New) The process control system according to claim 3, wherein a second secondary hardware entity is provided in the automation function environment for actuator functionality of the first safety actuator. [Fig. 1 30a-30p can be assigned for field devices PN 40a-40c]
Nixon teaches:
17. (New) The process control system according to claim 2, the at least one safety sensor comprising a second safety sensor placed in the control signal path environment and the at least one safety actuator including a second safety actuator placed together with the second safety sensor in the control signal path environment. [para. 0018, “As discussed above, the physical or plant environment includes a front-end portion in which physical or hardware components of the MPDSC system such as field devices, sensors, transmitters, switches, positioners, tanks, heaters, etc. are disposed and operate on physical materials to produce physical products.”]
Nixon teaches:
18. (New) The process control system according to claim 7, wherein a second tertiary hardware entity is provided in the control signal path environment for actuator functionality of the second safety actuator. [Fig. 1 VNs 30a-30p]
Nixon teaches:
19. (New) The process control system according to claim 2, further comprising a wired safety network. [para. 0004, “The data highway utilized by the hardware devices, controllers and field devices may include a wired communication path, a wireless communication path, or a combination of wired and wireless communication paths.”]
Nixon teaches:
20. (New) The process control system according to claim 2, wherein at least one further safety field device in the group of safety field devices is a wireless safety field device. [para. 0045, “The virtual communication network 45 may be implemented by one or more physical communications and/or data links and/or networks, which may include wired and/or wireless networks, and which may be implemented using any suitable technology, such as Ethernet, optical, IP, another type other packet network, etc.”]
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GARY COLLINS whose telephone number is (571)270-0473. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 1-930PM EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Kamini Shah can be reached at (571) 272-2279. 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.
/GARY COLLINS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2115
