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 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, 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 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, 2, 6, 9, 10, 12, 13, 16,17, and 18, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over to DE102020134409 sited in IDS.
It has been noted that, a claimed invention is unpatentable if the differences between it and the prior art are "such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art." 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) (2000); KSRInt'lr. Teleflex Inc., 127 S.Ct. 1727, 1734 (2007); Graham v.John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 13-14 (1966).
In Graham, the Court held that that the obviousness analysis is bottomed on several basic factual inquiries: "[(1)] the scope and content of the prior art are to be determined; [(2)] differences between the prior art and the claims at issue are to be ascertained; and [(3)] the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art resolved." 383 U.S. at 17. See also KSR, 127 S.Ct. at 1734. "The combination of familiar elements according to known methods is likely to be obvious when it does no more; than yield predictable results." KSR, at 1739.
"When a work is available in one field of endeavor, design incentives and other market forces can prompt variations of it, either in the same field or in a different one. If a person of ordinary skill in the art can implement a predictable variation, § 103 likely bars its patentability." Id. at 1740.
"For the same reason, if a technique has been used to improve one device, and a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that it would improve similar devices in the same way, using the technique is obvious unless its actual application is beyond his or her skill." Id.
"Under the correct analysis, any need or problem known in the field of endeavor at the time of invention and addressed by the patent can provide a reason for combining the elements in the manner claimed." Id. 11742.
As per claim 1, DE102020134409 teaches connector, comprising:- a master unit (industrial communication interface, 7, Fig. 1), and a device unit (6, SPI via IO-link, Fig. 1, [0033]) connected to the master unit and being configured to be connected to an IO-Link master (“special IO-Link interface,” 7, [0033]), Fig. 1), the connector being configured to: be connected to an IO-Link device (field device, 5, Fig. 1) and to receive first operating data (when undervoltage occurs the field device 5 enters a sleep mode, [0035]) from the IO-Link device , the first operating data being IO-Link compliant ([0035] – based on “a generic IO-Link receiver is required that understands IO-Link communication,” [0035]), be connected to a capture unit ([0037]) and to receive second operating data from the capture unit (“..highly schematic master and power supply unit 6 is part of a higher-level PLC controller,” [0037]), and output the received first operating data enriched with the received second operating data (The new mode allow for IO-Link receiver longer cycle intervals without triggering error message, [0035, 0037]), as third operating data (“..trigger a measurement cycle on demand and thus also represents an operating element for the filed device 5,” [0039]) via the device unit to the IO-Link master.
DE102020134409 discloses a communication system in a sensor environment that teaches connecting field devices to a higher-order control device (i.e. IO-Link master referenced by the “special IO-Link interface,” 7, [0033]), Fig. 1), for the use of improving the flexibly in the event of a power failure to the connected field devices. DE102020134409 discloses wherein the IO-Link master behaves like a “normal” interface that confirms to the IEC 61131-9 standard. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date that the ‘normal’ interface taught by DE102020134409 must confirm to the IEC 61131-9 standard in order to use an IO-Link protocol devices. The purpose of utilizing this widely known standard of communication would ensure consistent compatibility amongst field devices with a connection device and high order control devices.
As per claim 2, DE102020134409 teaches wherein the connector is configured to receive an operating data request from the IO-Link master at the device unit and to forward the received request via the master unit to the IO-Link device. ([0037-0039])
As per claim 3, DE102020134409 teaches a memory (part of 4, Fig. 1), wherein the memory is configured to store the received second data operating data, and a control unit, wherein the control unit (“..highly schematic master and power supply unit 6 is part of a higher-level PLC controller,” [0037]), is configured to output the stored second operating data via the device unit to the IO-Link master ([0038-0040]) when the second operating was received by the master unit.
As per claim 5, DE102020134409 wherein the control unit is configured to combine the first and the second operating data into one data frame ([0038-0040]) in order to generate the third operating data.
As per claim 6, DE102020134409 wherein the generated third operating data (“..trigger a measurement cycle on demand and thus also represents an operating element for the filed device 5,” [0039]) are IO-Link compliant. ([0035])
As per claim 8, DE102020134409 teaches a cable connecting the master unit to the device unit. (“special IO-Link interface,” 7, [0033]), Fig. 1)
As per claim 9, DE102020134409 teaches wherein the cable comprises at least two power supply lines (Field device and “..highly schematic master and power supply unit 6 is part of a higher-level PLC controller,” [0037]) and a communication line (Fig.1).
As per claims 10 and 11, DE102020134409 teaches wherein the master unit (Fig. 1, [0033]) or device unit (field device, 5) comprising: a housing (enclosed), and a socket (2 or 3, Fig. 1) configured to receive at least three-pins (see connection for 2 for field device and connection 3 for SPS), wherein two of the at least three-pins are for power supply lines and a third one of the at least three-pins is for a communication line.
As per claim 12, DE102020134409 teaches wherein the capture unit is a sensor and/or an actuator. (“..trigger a measurement cycle on demand and thus also represents an operating element for the filed device 5,” [0039])
As per claim 13, DE102020134409 teaches wherein the capture unit (“..highly schematic master and power supply unit 6 is part of a higher-level PLC controller,” [0037]), is a sensor and the second operating data to (received first operating data - when undervoltage occurs the field device 5 enters a sleep mode, [0035]) from the IO-Link device being captured by the sensor.
As per claim 15, DE102020134409 wherein the capture unit is an integral part of the connector. Field device and “..highly schematic master and power supply unit 6 is part of a higher-level PLC controller,” [0037]) and a communication line (Fig.1).
As per claim 16, DE102020134409 teaches wherein the IO-Link device is a sensor and/or an actuator. (obviously part of the various ways of configuring the sensor “..trigger a measurement cycle on demand and thus also represents an operating element for the filed device 5,” [0039])
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4, 7, and 14 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
RELEVENT ART CITED BY THE EXAMINER
The following prior art made of record and relied upon is citied to establish the level of skill in the applicant's art and those arts considered reasonably pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See MPEP 707.05(c). 3. BUESCHING (US 12,001,371) teaches a first operating mode (normal mode), in which the I/O module receives an output datum from the fieldbus that connects to at least one actuator and a second operating mode (control mode), col. 7, lines 46-col. 8, lines 1-52, and SCHWAGMANN ET AL., (US 12,430,082) teaches a connection element for producing a wired connection between a first unit and a second unit, the connection element comprising a diagnostic module. (ABSTRACT, FIG. 2)
Conclusion
The examiner requests, in response to this office action, support be shown for language added to any original claims on amendment and any new claims. That is, indicate support for newly added claim language by specifically pointing to page(s) and line number(s) in the specification and/or drawing figure(s). This will assist the examiner in prosecuting the application. When responding to this office action, applicant is advised to clearly point out the patentable novelty which he or she thinks the claims present, in view of the state of art disclosed by the references cited or the objections made. He or she must also show how the amendments avoid such references or objections. See 37 C.F.R.I .Hi(c). In amending in reply to a rejection of claims in an application or patent under reexamination, the applicant or patent owner must clearly point out the patentable novelty which he or she thinks the claims present in view the state of the art disclosed by the references cited or the objections made. The applicant or patent owner must also show how the amendments avoid such references or objections. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TAMMARA R PEYTON whose telephone number is (571)272-4157. The examiner can normally be reached on 9am-5pm, EST M-F. 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, 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.
/TAMMARA R PEYTON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2184 March 7, 2026