The Innovation

This patent application concerns a method for connecting a control system for a machine to a higher-level IT system, such as a SCADA system. It proposes an integration layer between the control system and the IT system, where the data representing the current state of the control system and the corresponding data of the control system image on the integration layer are based on parameters.

Technical Contribution

In its decision, the board discussed several aspects of the claimed invention:

1. Integration Layer and Control System Image: The application introduces an integration layer between the control system and the IT system. It generates an image of the control system on this layer, where the data corresponds to the current state of the control system. However, this feature is seen as non-technical because it only involves the presentation of information to the IT system without any technical effect or interaction with the actual control system (Reasons no. 3.4).
2. Data Collection by Control System: The control system autonomously collects necessary data and transfers it to the integration layer to create the system image. The board considered this feature as an obvious implementation choice, hence not contributing to the technical character of the invention (Reasons no. 3.7).
3. Non-Direct Access of IT System to Control System: The application specifies that the IT system accesses only the control system image and not the control system directly. This feature was found to be lacking in technical effect as it did not involve any control or regulatory interaction with the actual control system (Reasons no. 3.4).
4. Implementation Details: The application lacks precise details about the control system or the nature of the provided information, leading to the conclusion that the presentation of this data does not have a technical effect (Reasons no. 3.4).
5. Additional Features in Auxiliary Requests: The additional features in the auxiliary requests, such as the definition of parameters and the use of a configuration file, were considered either unclear or standard programming measures, thus not contributing to the inventive step (Reasons nos. 4.1 to 4.6).

Overall, the board found that the subject matter of Claim 1 of the main request and auxiliary requests 1 to 6 did not involve an inventive step. The late-filed auxiliary requests 7 to 10 were not admitted into the proceedings due to their inability to overcome the objections raised (Reasons nos. 4.7 and 5).

Key Findings

• Integration layer between control system and IT system – non-technical
• Control system image on integration layer – non-technical
• Data collection by control system – non-technical
• Non-direct access of IT system to control system – non-technical
• Implementation details and nature of provided information – non-technical
• Additional features in auxiliary requests – non-technical

Read the full decision here: T 2024/19 Decision​​.