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 § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 8, & 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Zingsheim et al., US20230100648 (hereinafter referred to as Zingsheim).
In regards to claim 1, Zingsheim teaches an electrical circuit (field device 102; [Fig. 2]), comprising: circuitry (Controller 108 & COM Circuit 115; [Fig. 2]) connected to a dry contact switch (switch 120; [Fig. 2]) (implicit, coupled to switch 120 through switch monitor 140; [Fig. 2]) and configured to: translate (setting delivered; [0040]) an open or closed state (a current state (i.e., open or closed); [0040]) of the dry contact switch to a current loop current (process control loop 107; [Fig. 2]) having one of multiple current levels (4-20milliamp; [0024]), wherein the multiple current levels comprise a first non-zero current level (20milliamp, representing the one of the two state levels; [0024] & [0039]) and a second non-zero current level (4milliamp, representing the other of the two state levels; [0024] & [0039]) that is different than the first non-zero current level, and send the current loop current (a process variable may be represented by a level of a loop current I; [0024]), at the one of the multiple current levels, via a current loop (4-20milliamp process control loop; [0024]) connected to the electrical circuit.
In regards to claim 8, Zingsheim teaches a system (field device 102; [Fig. 2]), comprising: a current loop (4-20milliamp process control loop; [0024]); and circuitry having an input (terminal 153 connected to power supply 124; [Fig. 2]) connectable to a dry contact switch (switch 120; [Fig. 2]) and an output (upper two terminals of terminal block 116; [Fig. 2]) connectable to the current loop, wherein the circuitry is configured to translate (setting delivered; [0040]) an open or closed state (a current state (i.e., open or closed); [0040]) of the dry contact switch to a current loop current (current loop current I; [Fig. 2]) having one of multiple current levels (4-20milliamp; [0024]) for transmission via the current loop and wherein the multiple current levels comprises a first non-zero current level (20milliamp, representing the one of the two state levels; [0024] & [0039]) or a second non-zero current level that is different than the first non-zero current level (4milliamp, representing the other of the two state levels; [0024] & [0039]).
In regards to claim 16, a method, comprising: receiving, by current loop transmitter circuitry (4-20milliamp process control loop; [0024]), an input (bottom nodes of switch 120; [Fig. 2]) from a dry contact switch (switch 120; [Fig. 2]); translating (setting delivered; [0040]), by the current loop transmitter circuitry, an open or closed state of the dry contact switch (a current state (i.e., open or closed) to one of multiple current levels (4-20milliamp; [0024]), wherein the multiple current levels comprise a first non-zero current level (20milliamp, representing the one of the two state levels; [0024] & [0039]) and a second non-zero current level (4milliamp, representing the other of the two state levels; [0024] & [0039]) that is different than the first current level; and sending (a process variable may be represented by a level of a loop current I; [0024]), by the current loop transmitter circuitry, a current loop current (current loop current I; [Fig. 2]) at the one of the multiple current levels via a current loop (process control loop; [0024]).
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 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.
Claim(s) 6, 9, & 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zingsheim et al., US20230100648 (hereinafter referred to as Zingsheim).
In regards to claim 6, Zingsheim teaches wherein the second non-zero current level comprises a lower current level than the first non-zero current level (4milliamps < 20milliamps) and wherein the circuitry, when translating the open or closed state of the dry contact switch, is further configured to: translate the open state of the dry contact switch to the first non-zero current level (lower state level; [0039-0040]), and translate the closed state of the dry contact switch to the second non-zero current level (upper state level; [0039-0040]) (Examiner’s Note: It would be a matter of engineering design choice to assign the open state to a 4milliamp level or a 20milliamp level).
In regards to claim 9, Zingsheim teaches wherein, when translating the open or closed state of the dry contact switch to the current loop current having the one of multiple current levels, the circuitry is configured to: translate the open state of the dry contact switch to the first non-zero current level (lower state level; [0039-0040]), and translate the closed state of the dry contact switch to the second non-zero current level (upper state level; [0039-0040]) (Examiner’s Note: It would be a matter of engineering design choice to assign the open state to a 4milliamp level or a 20milliamp level), wherein the second non-zero current level comprises a lower current than the first non-zero current level (4milliamps < 20milliamps).
In regards to claim 19, Zingsheim teaches wherein the second non-zero current level of the multiple current levels comprises a lower current level than the first non-zero current level (4milliamps < 20milliamps), and wherein determining the open or closed state of the dry contact switch further comprises: determining the open state of the dry contact switch when the identified one of the multiple current levels comprises the first non-zero current level (lower state level; [0039-0040]); and determining the closed state of the dry contact switch when the identified one of the multiple current levels comprises the second non-zero current level (upper state level; [0039-0040]) (Examiner’s Note: It would be a matter of engineering design choice to assign the open state to a 4milliamp level or a 20milliamp level).
Claim(s) 2-4, 12-13, 15, & 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zingsheim et al., US20230100648 (hereinafter referred to as Zingsheim), in view of Benson et al., US20180024538 (hereinafter referred to as Benson).
In regards to claim 2, Zingsheim does not teach wherein, when translating the open or closed state of the dry contact switch, the circuitry is further configured to: adjust an effective internal resistance of the circuitry, based on the open or closed state of the dry contact switch, to modify the current loop current.
Benson teaches wherein, when translating the open or closed state of the dry contact switch (Examiner’s Note: Benson teaches in [0086] the circuitry changes internal resistance based on the mode configuration and would be capable of changing the internal resistance based on a switch being open or closed as taught by Zingsheim.), the circuitry (tool 100; [Fig. 6]) (Controller 108 and COM Circuit 115, Zingsheim) is further configured to: adjust (activate or adjust; [0086]) an effective internal resistance (resistor network 618; [0086]) of the circuitry, based on the open or closed state of the dry contact switch, to modify the current loop current (loop-power mode; [0086]) (process control loop 107, Zingsheim).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Zingsheim in order to incorporate wherein, when translating the open or closed state of the dry contact switch, the circuitry is further configured to: adjust an effective internal resistance of the circuitry, based on the open or closed state of the dry contact switch, to modify the current loop current as taught by Benson. The motivation for doing so would be to apply a known current loop communicator as taught by Benson to the COM Circuit 115 as taught by Zingsheim.
In regards to claim 3, Zingsheim does not teach wherein the circuitry comprises: a resistive network that connects to the dry contact switch; circuit components that connect in series with the current loop to send the current loop current via the current loop; and active circuitry that, in conjunction with the resistive network and the circuit components, translates the open or closed state of the dry contact switch to the one of the multiple current levels.
Benson teaches wherein the circuitry comprises: a resistive network (resistor network 618; [0086]) that connects to the dry contact switch (connects through connection at terminals 631 & 632, Zingsheim’s Controller, & Zingsheim’s Switch Monitor); circuit components (voltage monitor 616 & fuse 642; [Fig. 6]) that connect in series (implicit; [Fig. 6]) with the current loop to send the current loop current via the current loop; and active circuitry (active communicator 600; [Fig. 6]) that, in conjunction with the resistive network and the circuit components, translates the open or closed state of the dry contact switch to the one of the multiple current levels (Examiner’s Note: Benson teaches in [0086] the circuitry changes internal resistance based on the mode configuration and would be capable of changing the internal resistance based on a switch being open or closed as taught by Zingsheim.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Zingsheim in order to incorporate wherein the circuitry comprises: a resistive network that connects to the dry contact switch; circuit components that connect in series with the current loop to send the current loop current via the current loop; and active circuitry that, in conjunction with the resistive network and the circuit components, translates the open or closed state of the dry contact switch to the one of the multiple current levels as taught by Benson. The motivation for doing so would be to apply a known current loop communicator as taught by Benson to the COM Circuit 115 as taught by Zingsheim.
In regards to claim 4, Zingsheim does not teach wherein the active circuitry comprises an Integrated Circuit (IC).
Benson teaches wherein the active circuitry comprises an Integrated Circuit (IC) (FM Modem 612) (Examiner’s Note: It is well-known in the art that FM modems have at least one IC.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Zingsheim in order to incorporate wherein the active circuitry comprises an Integrated Circuit (IC) as taught by Benson. The motivation for doing so would be to apply a known current loop communicator as taught by Benson to the COM Circuit 115 as taught by Zingsheim.
In regards to claim 12, Zingsheim does not teach wherein the circuitry comprises: a resistive network, connected to the circuitry input, that receives an input from the dry contact switch; and circuitry components that connect, via the output, in series with the current loop to transmit the current loop current via the current loop.
Benson teaches wherein the circuitry comprises: a resistive network (resistor network 618; [0086]), connected to the circuitry input (implicit; [Fig. 2]), that receives an input from the dry contact switch (connects through connection at terminals 631 & 632, Zingsheim’s Controller, & Zingsheim’s Switch Monitor); and circuitry components that connect (voltage monitor 616 & fuse 642; [Fig. 6]), via the output, in series with the current loop (implicit; [Fig. 6]) to transmit the current loop current via the current loop (loop-power mode; [0086]) (process control loop 107, Zingsheim).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Zingsheim in order to incorporate wherein the circuitry comprises: a resistive network, connected to the circuitry input, that receives an input from the dry contact switch; and circuitry components that connect, via the output, in series with the current loop to transmit the current loop current via the current loop as taught by Benson. The motivation for doing so would be to apply a known current loop communicator as taught by Benson to the COM Circuit 115 as taught by Zingsheim.
In regards to claim 13, Zingsheim does not teach wherein the circuitry further comprises: active circuitry that, in conjunction with the resistive network and the circuitry components, translates the open or closed state of the dry contact switch to the one of the multiple current levels for transmission via the current loop.
Benson teaches wherein the circuitry further comprises: active circuitry (active communicator 600; [Fig. 6]) that, in conjunction with the resistive network and the circuitry components, translates the open or closed state of the dry contact switch to the one of the multiple current levels for transmission via the current loop (Examiner’s Note: Benson teaches in [0086] the circuitry changes internal resistance based on the mode configuration and would be capable of changing the internal resistance based on a switch being open or closed as taught by Zingsheim.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Zingsheim in order to incorporate wherein the circuitry further comprises: active circuitry that, in conjunction with the resistive network and the circuitry components, translates the open or closed state of the dry contact switch to the one of the multiple current levels for transmission via the current loop as taught by Benson. The motivation for doing so would be to apply a known current loop communicator as taught by Benson to the COM Circuit 115 as taught by Zingsheim.
In regards to claim 15, Zingsheim does not teach wherein, when translating the open or closed state of the dry contact switch, the circuitry is configured to: adjust an effective internal resistance of the circuitry, based on the open or closed state of the dry contact switch, to modify the current loop current transmitted via the current loop.
Benson teaches wherein, when translating the open or closed state of the dry contact switch (Examiner’s Note: Benson teaches in [0086] the circuitry changes internal resistance based on the mode configuration and would be capable of changing the internal resistance based on a switch being open or closed as taught by Zingsheim.), the circuitry (tool 100; [Fig. 6]) (Controller 108 and COM Circuit 115, Zingsheim) is configured to: adjust (activate or adjust; [0086]) an effective internal resistance (resistor network 618; [0086]) of the circuitry, based on the open or closed state of the dry contact switch, to modify the current loop current transmitted via the current loop (loop-power mode; [0086]) (process control loop 107, Zingsheim).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Zingsheim in order to incorporate wherein, when translating the open or closed state of the dry contact switch, the circuitry is configured to: adjust an effective internal resistance of the circuitry, based on the open or closed state of the dry contact switch, to modify the current loop current transmitted via the current loop as taught by Benson. The motivation for doing so would be to apply a known current loop communicator as taught by Benson to the COM Circuit 115 as taught by Zingsheim.
In regards to claim 17, Zingsheim does not teach wherein translating the open or closed state of the dry contact switch to the one of multiple current levels comprises: adjusting an effective internal resistance of the current loop transmitter circuitry, based on the open or closed state of the dry contact switch, to modify the current loop current.
Benson teaches wherein translating the open or closed state of the dry contact switch to the one of multiple current levels (Examiner’s Note: Benson teaches in [0086] the circuitry changes internal resistance based on the mode configuration and would be capable of changing the internal resistance based on a switch being open or closed as taught by Zingsheim.) comprises: adjusting (activate or adjust; [0086]) an effective internal resistance (resistor network 618; [0086]) of the current loop transmitter circuitry, based on the open or closed state of the dry contact switch, to modify the current loop current (loop-power mode; [0086]) (process control loop 107, Zingsheim).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Zingsheim in order to incorporate wherein translating the open or closed state of the dry contact switch to the one of multiple current levels comprises: adjusting an effective internal resistance of the current loop transmitter circuitry, based on the open or closed state of the dry contact switch, to modify the current loop current as taught by Benson. The motivation for doing so would be to apply a known current loop communicator as taught by Benson to the COM Circuit 115 as taught by Zingsheim.
Claim(s) 5 & 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zingsheim et al., US20230100648 (hereinafter referred to as Zingsheim), in view of Benson et al., US20180024538 (hereinafter referred to as Benson), and in further view of Monticelli et al., US4459699 (hereinafter referred to as Monticelli).
In regards to claim 5, Zingsheim & Benson do not teach wherein the IC comprises a current transmitter IC.
Monticelli teaches wherein the IC (modems; [Col. 1, Ln. 6-18]) (FM modem 612, Benson) comprises a current transmitter IC (current transmitters; [Col. 1, Ln. 6-18]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Zingsheim & Benson in order to incorporate wherein the IC comprises a current transmitter IC as taught by Monticelli. The motivation for doing so would be to apply a known modem configuration as taught by Monticelli to the FM modem as taught by Benson.
In regards to claim 14, Zingsheim & Benson do not teach wherein the active circuitry comprises current transmitter circuitry.
Monticelli teaches wherein the active circuitry (modems; [Col. 1, Ln. 6-18]) (active communicator 600, Benson) comprises current transmitter circuitry (current transmitters; [Col. 1, Ln. 6-18]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Zingsheim & Benson in order to incorporate wherein the active circuitry comprises current transmitter circuitry as taught by Monticelli. The motivation for doing so would be to apply a known modem configuration as taught by Monticelli to the FM modem as taught by Benson.
Claim(s) 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zingsheim et al., US20230100648 (hereinafter referred to as Zingsheim), in view of Scharg et al., US20110136451 (hereinafter referred to as Schrag).
In regards to claim 18, Zingsheim does not teach the method of claim 16, further comprising: measuring, by a current measuring unit, the current loop current flowing in the current loop to identify the one of the multiple current levels; and determining, by the current measuring unit, the open or closed state of the dry contact switch based on the identified one of the multiple current levels.
Schrag teaches the method of claim 16, further comprising: measuring, by a current measuring unit (current sensor unit 7; [0044] & [Fig. 2]), the current loop current flowing in the current loop to identify the one of the multiple current levels (measuring the instantaneous loop current in the current loop; [0044]); and determining, by the current measuring unit, the open or closed state of the dry contact switch based on the identified one of the multiple current levels (Examiner’s Note: Zingsheim teaches the switch module determining the open or closed state of the dry contact switch.).
Therefore, Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Zingsheim in order to incorporate the method of claim 16, further comprising: measuring, by a current measuring unit, the current loop current flowing in the current loop to identify the one of the multiple current levels; and determining, by the current measuring unit, the open or closed state of the dry contact switch based on the identified one of the multiple current levels as taught by Schrag. The motivation for doing so would be to measure the instantaneous loop current.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zingsheim et al., US20230100648 (hereinafter referred to as Zingsheim), in view of Benson et al., US20180024538 (hereinafter referred to as Benson), and in further view of Scharg et al., US20110136451 (hereinafter referred to as Schrag).
In regards to claim 10, Zingsheim & Benson do not teach the system of claim 8, further comprising: a current measuring unit connected in series with the current loop and configured to measure the one of the multiple current levels of the current loop current sent via the current loop and determine the open or closed state of the dry contact switch based on the measured one of the multiple current levels.
Schrag teaches the system of claim 8, further comprising: a current measuring unit (current sensor unit 7; [0044] & [Fig. 2]) connected in series with the current loop (implicit; [Fig. 2]) and configured to measure the one of the multiple current levels of the current loop current (measuring the instantaneous loop current in the current loop; [0044]) sent via the current loop and determine the open or closed state of the dry contact switch based on the measured one of the multiple current levels.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Zingsheim & Benson in order to incorporate the system of claim 8, further comprising: a current measuring unit connected in series with the current loop and configured to measure the one of the multiple current levels of the current loop current sent via the current loop and determine the open or closed state of the dry contact switch based on the measured one of the multiple current levels as taught by Schrag. The motivation for doing so would be to measure the instantaneous loop current.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 7 is 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. Claim 7 is indicated containing allowable subject matter because prior art fails to teach or suggest, either alone or in combination all of the limitations of claims 1 & 7, especially “wherein the multiple current levels further comprise a third current level that is a zero current level and wherein the circuitry is further configured to: translate a fault state of the dry contact switch to the zero current level.”
Claim 11 is 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. Claim 11 is indicated containing allowable subject matter because prior art fails to teach or suggest, either alone or in combination all of the limitations of claims 8, 10, & 11, especially “wherein the multiple current levels further comprise a third current level that is a zero current level, and wherein the circuitry is further configured to translate a fault state of the dry contact switch to the zero current level, and wherein the second non-zero current level comprises a lower current level than the first non-zero current level, and wherein, when determining the open or closed state of the dry contact switch, the current measuring unit is configured to: determine that the dry contact switch is in the open state when the one of the multiple current levels is measured as the first non-zero current level, and determine that the dry contact switch is in the closed state when the one of the multiple current levels is measured as the second non-zero current level, and wherein the current measuring unit is further configured to: determine that the dry contact switch is in the fault state when the one of the multiple current levels is measured as the zero current level.”
Claim 20 is 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. Claim 20 is indicated containing allowable subject matter because prior art fails to teach or suggest, either alone or in combination all of the limitations of claims 16, 18, 19, & 20, especially “wherein the multiple current levels further comprise a third current level that is a zero current level and further comprising: translating, by the current loop transmitter circuitry, a fault state of the dry contact switch to the third current level; and determining, by the current measuring unit, the fault state of the dry contact switch when the identified one of the multiple current levels comprises the zero current level.”
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SAMANTHA L FAUBERT whose telephone number is (703)756-1311. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8AM - 5PM.
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, Crystal Hammond can be reached at 5712701682. 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.
SAMANTHA LYNETTE FAUBERT
Examiner
Art Unit 2836
/CRYSTAL L HAMMOND/Supervisory Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2838
Prosecution Insights