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 .
Claims 1-15 are pending for examination in instant application.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 04/09/2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. The phrase “processing layer” is functional and not structurally defined. Is the “processing layer” a hardware, software or a logical layer? What distinguishes one processing layer from another? And how does a processing layer “add a transfer tag”?
The term “secure network” is indefinite. “Secure” is a relative term without objective boundaries e.g. what level of security is required, encryption, authentication or physical isolation? Therefore, how does one of ordinary skilled in the art will determine whether a network is “secure”?
The term “transfer tag” is indefinite because the term is not a standard term in the art. Examiner is not sure what structure does “transfer tag” referring to or is it a metadata, a header or a digital signature?
The term “external processing layer” has the same issue as “processing layer”, e.g., what make the processing layer external? External to what? The plant, the secure network or the system itself?
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. It is unclear as what to understood by the phrase, “on generation or on entry point into the system”.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. It is unclear as what to understood by the phrase, “third-party transfer setting signifying internal data ingestion”.
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.
Claim(s) 1-4, 6, 9, 10, 11, 13, 14 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maturana et al. (Pub. No.: US 2014/0047107 A1), hereinafter “Mat”. In view of Andreas et al. “WO 2019/138120 A1”, hereinafter “Andreas”.
As to claim 1. Mat discloses, a system for monitoring and/or controlling at least one processing layer (Mat, fig.1, [0002], “monitoring services for an industrial automation system over a cloud infrastructure”), wherein the at least one processing layer is associated with a secure network (Mat, [0059], firewall settings that allow cloud agent 306 to communicate with the cloud platform) and communicatively coupled to an interface for providing process or asset specific data or process applications to an external processing layer (Mat, [0054], Cloud agent 208 acts as a [...] gateway to collect data items from the [...] assets on plant network [...] and packages the collected data [...] to move the on-premise data to a cloud platform), wherein the at least one processing layer is configured to add a transfer tag to the process or asset specific data or to the process application (Mat, [0062], "contextualizing the data within the industrial environment) and to provide the process or asset specific data or the process application based on the transfer tag (Mat, [0066], "user can define, for each queue, an upload frequency, a priority level [...] which cloud partitions or databases data from the respective queues should be placed in").
Mat however is silent disclosing “one or more chemical plant”.
Andreas in the same field of endeavor discloses, (Andreas, abstract, The invention relates to a method for improving a chemical production process, wherein a derivative chemical product is produced through a derivative chemical production process based on at least some derivative process parameters at a chemical production facility.
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the instant application it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skilled in the art to incorporate the teachings of “Andreas” into those of “Mat” in to provide a method that characterizes in that the process model is transmitted to a computing module for performing numerical analysis, which computing module is within the facility intranet from the process model management computer system in a chemical production system.
As to claim 15 corresponds to the apparatus of claim 1 discussed above and therefore is rejected for same rationale.
As to claim 2. Mat and Andreas disclose the invention substantially including, wherein the system includes a first processing layer and a second processing layer associated with the secure network (Mat, fig.1, [0059]) and optionally an external processing layer (Mat, [0045], such as a system contained in a truck or other service vehicle.), wherein the external processing layer is configured to add a transfer tag to the process or asset specific data or to the process application and to provide the process or asset specific data or the process application based on the transfer tag (Mat, [0049], Cloud services 112 can include, but are not limited to, data storage, data analysis, control applications (e.g., applications that can generate and deliver control instructions to industrial devices 108 and 110 based on analysis of real-time system data or other factors), visualization applications such as the cloud-based operator interface system described herein, reporting applications, Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) applications, notification services, or other such applications.).
PNG
media_image1.png
475
732
media_image1.png
Greyscale
As to claim 3, Mat and Andreas disclose the invention substantially including, wherein the first processing layer is configured to contextualize the process (Mat [0062], "contextualizing the data within the industrial environment") or asset specific data by adding the transfer tag, wherein the second processing layer or the external processing layer are configured to contextualize process applications by adding the transfer tag (Mat, [0094], "agents 1202 can be deployed by analysis application"; deployment (transfer) of the agents necessarily involves tagging with a transfer tag in the form of a destination address).
As to claim 4. Mat and Andreas disclose the invention substantially including, wherein the processing layer is configured to add a transfer tag to the process or asset specific data or the process application on generation or on entry point into the system or the processing layer (Mat, [0062], "contextualizing the data within the industrial environment").
As to claim 6. Mat and Andreas disclose the invention substantially including, wherein the processing layer or the external processing layer is configured to provide contextualized process and asset data or process applications to a third-party system based on the transfer tag (Mat, [0062], "contextualizing the data within the industrial environment").
As to claim 9, Mat and Andreas disclose the invention substantially including, wherein the processing layer or the external processing layer is configured to receive external data or external applications (Mat, [0088], "application 1204 can then be deployed").
As to claim 10. Mat and Andreas disclose the invention substantially including, wherein the processing layer or the external processing layer is configured to contextualize external data or external applications by adding the transfer tag (Mat, [0088], "application 1204 can then be deployed").
As to claim 11. Mat and Andreas disclose the invention substantially including, wherein the processing layer or the external processing layer is configured to deploy external applications depending on third-party transfer setting signifying internal data ingestion (Mat, fig.11, [0079]-[0080], For example, if industrial data 1110 indicates that a process parameter has exceeded a setpoint value, notification component 1104 can identify the list of personnel to receive the notification based on the area or workcell to which the process parameter relates.).
As to claim 13. Mat and Andreas disclose the invention substantially including, wherein the processing layer or the external processing layer is configured to deploy internal applications depending on the third-party transfer setting of the external data ingestion (Mat, fig.11, [0079]-[0080], For example, if industrial data 1110 indicates that a process parameter has exceeded a setpoint value, notification component 1104 can identify the list of personnel to receive the notification based on the area or work cell to which the process parameter relates.).
As to claim 14. Mat and Andreas disclose the invention substantially including, wherein the processing layer or the external processing layer is configured to initiate, prevent or control the process of providing process or asset specific data or process applications according to the transfer tag [0066], "user can define, for each queue, an upload frequency, a priority level [...] which cloud partitions or databases data from the respective queues should be placed in").
Claim(s) 5, 7, 8 and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maturana et al. (Pub. No.: US 2014/0047107 A1), hereinafter “Mat” in view of Bradshaw et al. “A scalable Approach to Deploying and Managing Appliances”, hereinafter “Brad”.
As to claim 5. Mat discloses the invention as in parent claims above. Mat however is silent on disclosing explicitly, wherein the transfer tag includes at least two transfer settings, wherein the at least two transfer settings relate to confidentiality settings and/or third-party transfer settings.
Brad discloses a similar concept in the same field of endeavor, wherein the transfer tag includes at least two transfer settings, wherein the at least two transfer settings relate to confidentiality settings and/or third-party transfer settings (Brad, page. 4, left column, last paragraph, "contextualization agent [...] inside the appliance").
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the instant application it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skilled in the art to incorporate the teachings of Brad into those of Mat to provide a system in virtualization in Grid computing. The system has been expanded on developing the capabilities of Virtual Machine Monitors (VMMs) and associated tools and services by investigating the requirements underlying the scalable production, deployment, and management of VM images.
As to claim 7. The combined system of Mat and Brad discloses the invention as applied above including, wherein the processing layer or the external processing layer (30) is configured to perform a third-party compliance check before transfer to a third-party system (Brad, page. 4, left column, first paragraph, "host certificate").
As to claim 8. The combined system of Mat and Brad discloses the invention as applied above including wherein the processing layer or the external processing layer is configured to access a third-party compliance database and to determine transfer compliance based on the third-party transfer setting including a third-party identifier and at least one information category (Brad, page. 4, left column, first paragraph, "host certificate").
As to claim 12. The combined system of Mat and Brad discloses the invention as applied above including wherein the processing layer or the external processing layer is configured to contextualize internal applications by adding the third-party transfer setting signifying external data ingestion (Brad, page. 4, left column, last paragraph, "contextualization agent [...] inside the appliance").
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-15 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-15 of U.S. Patent No. 12298743 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because see the table below:
Instant Application: 19/173,987 U.S. Patent No.: 12298743 B2
1. A system for monitoring and/or controlling one or more chemical plant(s) including at least one processing layer, wherein the at least one processing layer is associated with a secure network and communicatively coupled to an interface for providing process or asset specific data or process applications to an external processing layer,
wherein the at least one processing layer is configured to add a transfer tag to the process or asset specific data or to the process application and to provide the process or asset specific data or the process application based on the transfer tag.
1. A system configured to monitor and/or control one or more chemical plant(s) including at least one processing layer, wherein the at least one processing layer includes a first processing layer and a second processing layer, wherein the at least one processing layer is associated with a secure network and communicatively coupled to an interface for providing process or asset specific data to an external processing layer, wherein the at least one processing layer is configured to add a transfer tag to the process or asset specific data and to provide the process or asset specific data based on the transfer tag,
wherein the second processing layer includes an intermediate processing system and a process management system, the intermediate processing system is configured to collect process or asset specific data provided by the first processing layer, the process management system is configured to provide plant specific data of one or more chemical plant(s) to the interface, process or asset specific data refers to data relating to a specific asset or process and contextualized with respect to such specific asset or process, the contextualization of the process or asset specific data relates to context available on the first processing layer, plant specific data refers to process or asset specific data that is contextualized with respect to one or more plant(s), the contextualization of the plant specific data relates to context available on the second processing layer, plant specific data refers to contextualized process or asset specific data.
15. A method for monitoring and/or controlling one or more chemical plant(s)plants including at least one processing layer,
wherein the at least one processing layer is associated with a secure network and communicatively coupled to an interface for providing process or asset specific data or process applications to an external processing layer,
wherein the method comprises the steps of:
adding a transfer tag, via the at least one processing layer, to the process or asset specific data or to the process application and providing the process or asset specific data or the process application, via the at least one processing layer, based on the transfer tag.
15. A method for monitoring and/or controlling one or more chemical plants including at least one processing layer,
wherein the at least one processing layer includes a first processing layer and a second processing layer, wherein the at least one processing layer is associated with a secure network and communicatively coupled to an interface for providing process or asset specific data to an external processing layer, wherein the method comprises:
adding a transfer tag, via the at least one processing layer, to the process or asset specific data and providing the process or asset specific data, via the at least one processing layer, based on the transfer tag,
wherein the second processing layer includes an intermediate processing system and a process management system, and collecting, by the intermediate processing system, process or asset specific data provided by the first processing layer, providing, by the process management system, plant specific data of one or more chemical plant(s) to the interface, and wherein process or asset specific data refers to data relating to a specific asset or process and contextualized with respect to such specific asset or process, the contextualization of the process or asset specific data relates to context available on the first processing layer, plant specific data refers to process or asset specific data that is contextualized with respect to one or more plant(s), the contextualization of the plant specific data relates to context available on the second processing layer, plant specific data refers to contextualized process or asset specific data.
The instant claims merely broaden the scope of the conflicting claims. It is well settled that broadening the scope of claims would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in view of the narrower issued claims. In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982) and In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993). The dependent claim carries the deficiencies from the base claim.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Please see attached PTO-892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TAUQIR HUSSAIN whose telephone number is (571)270-1247. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:00 - 8:00 with IFP.
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, Vivek Srivastava can be reached on 571 272-7304. 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.
/Tauqir Hussain/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2446
Prosecution Insights