US 12321184

Here's a concise summary of US Patent 12321184:

US Patent 12321184: Remote control of fluid-handling devices

• Title: Remote control of fluid-handling devices
• Assignee: Sitepro Inc
• Inventor: Aaron Phillips
• Filing Date: May 8, 2024 (for application number US18/658,724, which this patent is a continuation of)
• Issue Date: June 3, 2025
• Abstract: The patent describes a process that involves receiving a command from a remote user device, via a network interface, to change the state of a fluid-handling device to a target state. This received command is then translated into a format suitable for a local controller of the fluid-handling device. The local controller then drives the fluid-handling equipment to the target state, responding to the translated command and feedback from the device itself. The translated command is then sent to the local controller.

Independent Claims Overview:

Only Claim 1 is provided in the given patent text extract.

• Claim 1 (Plain-language overview): This claim is for a tangible, non-transitory, machine-readable medium storing instructions. When a computer system executes these instructions, it performs the following operations:
  1. Receives multiple commands, encoded in a first protocol, from a remote user's device to control various fluid-handling devices at a specific site. These commands are generated based on user input to a control interface displayed on the remote device. The system ensures the user is authorized through a user account before accepting commands.
  2. For some of these commands, the system determines a series of different target states for a particular fluid-handling device over time. The system is designed to maintain control of the fluid-handling devices even if the external network connection is lost.
  3. The system translates these commands into new commands, encoded in different protocols than the original. At least some of these translated commands are designed to instruct a local controller of the fluid-handling device to achieve the determined target states. The local controller will then respond to these translated commands and feedback from the fluid-handling device, which indicates whether it has reached the desired states.

Litigation Information:

Based on the provided information, US Patent 12321184B2 is currently active and has several associated litigation events:

• First worldwide family litigation has been filed.
• A US case has been filed in the Texas Northern District Court.
• A US case has been filed in the Texas Western District Court.
• A PTAB case, PGR2025-00060, was filed but not instituted procedurally.

No specific CAFC 2026 dockets were found in the provided search results; the litigation mentions district court cases and a PTAB filing.

US Patent 12321184, titled "Remote control of fluid-handling devices," has been involved in several litigation proceedings.

Here is a summary of the known litigation:

• PGR2025-00060

  • Plaintiff(s): TankLogix, LLC
  • Defendant(s): SitePro, Inc.
  • Jurisdiction: Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB)
  • Case Number: PGR2025-00060
  • Filing Date: Not explicitly stated in the provided text, but the outcome indicates it was filed prior to the "Not Instituted - Procedural" status.
  • Outcome/Current Status: Not Instituted - Procedural.

• Texas Northern District Court Case

  • Plaintiff(s): Not specified in the provided text.
  • Defendant(s): Not specified in the provided text.
  • Jurisdiction: Texas Northern District Court
  • Case Number: 3:25-cv-01446
  • Filing Date: Not specified.
  • Outcome/Current Status: Case filed.

• Texas Western District Court Case

  • Plaintiff(s): Not specified in the provided text.
  • Defendant(s): Not specified in the provided text.
  • Jurisdiction: Texas Western District Court
  • Case Number: 7:25-cv-00266
  • Filing Date: Not specified.
  • Outcome/Current Status: Case filed.

Proceedings overview

One Post-Grant Review (PGR) proceeding, PGR2025-00060, has been filed against US patent 12321184. The proceeding's status is "Discretionary Denial", indicating that institution was denied by the PTAB. This means the patent has successfully survived a PGR challenge, giving the patent owner a hardened position against this specific petitioner.

PGR2025-00060 — TankLogix, LLC v. Sitepro Inc

• Type: Post-Grant Review
• Filed: 2025-07-10
• Status: Discretionary Denial. The PTAB declined to institute the PGR, meaning the petition was not advanced to a full trial on the merits.
• Judge panel: The specific judge panel for the discretionary denial is not publicly available in the provided information. However, recent USPTO procedures indicate that decisions on discretionary denial involve the Director of the USPTO in consultation with at least three PTAB judges.
• Petition grounds: The information does not explicitly state the specific claims challenged or the prior art and statutory bases (§ 102 / § 103 / § 112) asserted in the petition. However, a "Sotera Stipulation" by the petitioner indicates that grounds raised or reasonably capable of being raised under §§ 102 or 103 based on prior art patents or printed publications would not be pursued in parallel litigation if the PTAB instituted the review.
• Institution decision: Denied on 2025-11-20. The institution was denied based on discretionary considerations. This decision was made by the Director of the USPTO in consultation with a panel of at least three PTAB judges, as per interim processes for PTAB workload management.
• Final Written Decision: Not applicable, as institution was denied.
• Settlement / termination: Not applicable, as institution was denied.
• Appeal: The information does not indicate an appeal of the discretionary denial. Institution decisions are generally considered final and non-appealable.
• Defensive value: The discretionary denial of PGR2025-00060 means that all claims of US12321184 that were challenged in this petition remain intact. For a defendant, this signifies that the specific prior art and arguments presented by TankLogix, LLC in this PGR cannot be used against the patent by TankLogix, LLC or its privies in future proceedings due to estoppel. However, other parties not privy to this PGR may still challenge the patent on different grounds or even the same grounds if the prior art presented differs.

Strategic summary

All claims of US12321184 are currently sustained and untested by a full PTAB trial. The single PGR filed against this patent, PGR2025-00060, resulted in a discretionary denial of institution, meaning the PTAB did not proceed to a full review of the challenged claims' patentability. This outcome strengthens the patent owner's position as it indicates the PTAB found reasons, likely procedural, to not initiate a trial.

Regarding the estoppel landscape, TankLogix, LLC (the petitioner in PGR2025-00060) and its privies are estopped from asserting invalidity grounds that were raised or reasonably could have been raised in the PGR. This estoppel primarily applies to challenges under 35 U.S.C. §§ 102 and 103 based on prior art patents or printed publications, as indicated by the petitioner's Sotera stipulation. However, any other potential defendant not in privity with TankLogix, LLC would not be estopped and could still challenge the patent on any available grounds, including those that might have been presented in PGR2025-00060.

The discretionary denial suggests a pattern where the patent owner, Sitepro Inc., has successfully navigated a PTAB challenge, at least at the institution phase. There is a parallel district court litigation, SitePro, Inc. v. TankLogix, LLC, in the Western District of Texas (case numbers 6:24-cv-00642 and 7:2025cv00266), which likely influenced the discretionary denial. PTAB often considers parallel litigation when making discretionary institution decisions.

Recommended next steps

For a defendant currently facing assertion of this patent, it is important to note that all claims of US12321184 remain patentable as far as PTAB proceedings are concerned. The discretionary denial means the claims were not actually evaluated on their merits by the PTAB.

Since institution was denied, there is no Final Written Decision to link to.

No active proceedings are currently pending against US12321184 in the PTAB. The absence of further PTAB challenges after the discretionary denial of PGR2025-00060 could be a signal that potential petitioners view the patent as robust or that the grounds available for challenge are not strong enough to warrant a petition, especially considering the parallel district court litigation.

Inventors

• Aaron Phillips: Employer not specified in the provided patent text, but is the named inventor.

Original assignee

The original assignee is Sitepro Inc.. The patent describes a system for remotely controlling fluid-handling devices, specifically mentioning applications in oil wells, petro water disposal or re-injection facilities, or petroleum pumping stations. It describes a product that offers robust control and monitoring of geographically distributed fluid-handling devices, potentially lowering operational costs and facilitating petroleum product extraction and fluid processing. Based on the patent's description, Sitepro Inc. appears to be an operating company that shipped a product embodying the claims. Sitepro Inc. is currently an active company according to Google Patents.

Assignment timeline

No assignment records were found for US12321184 on the USPTO Assignment Center.

Timeline diagram

timeline
    title Ownership of US 12321184
    2012 : Priority date
    2024 : Filed by Sitepro Inc
    2025 : Granted to Sitepro Inc

NPE / troll-pattern signals

1. Shell-entity transfer — not present. There are no recorded assignments to any shell entities.
2. Known asserter in the chain — not present. There are no recorded assignments to known NPEs.
3. Repeat correspondent across the chain — not present. There are no recorded assignments in the chain.
4. Cascading transfers — not present. There are no recorded assignments.
5. Pre-litigation transfer — unclear. While there is litigation activity (Texas Northern District Court case 3:25-cv-01446 and Texas Western District Court case 7:25-cv-00266), there are no recorded assignments that can be dated within 6 months of these filings.
6. Bankruptcy fire-sale — not present. No indication of bankruptcy proceedings for Sitepro Inc. or any related transfer.
7. Privateering — not present. No evidence in the provided patent text or public records to suggest privateering.
8. Defensive aggregator (anti-NPE) — not present. The patent has not been assigned to a defensive aggregator.

Verdict

Insufficient data. There are no recorded assignments for US12321184 on the USPTO Assignment Center (https://assignmentcenter.uspto.gov/ or https://assignment.uspto.gov/patent/index.html). While litigation is ongoing, the absence of assignment records means no conclusions can be drawn about NPE activity based on ownership transfers.

To identify the most relevant prior art for US patent 12321184, I will review the "References Cited" section of the patent itself. The patent document provides a list of both U.S. patents and non-patent literature considered by the examiner.

Here is an analysis of the prior art cited in US12321184B2, focusing on its potential relevance to the claims:

US Patent Citations:

1. US 7,931,090 B2

   • Full Citation: Smedstad et al., US 7,931,090 B2, "System and method for remote monitoring and control of oil and gas wells," granted April 26, 2011.
   • Brief Description: This patent describes a system and method for remote monitoring and control of oil and gas wells, involving communication with wellsite equipment.
   • Potential Anticipated Claim(s) (under 35 U.S.C. § 102): This patent potentially anticipates aspects of claim 1 related to "receiving, with a first computing system, via a network interface, a plurality of commands... to control a plurality of different fluid-handling devices at a fluid-handling site" and "sending the translated command to the local controller." Specifically, the remote monitoring and control of oil and gas wells, which inherently involves fluid-handling devices, suggests overlap with the core concept of remotely controlling fluid-handling devices. The remote control aspect may also touch upon the user authorization and translation of commands depending on the level of detail in Smedstad et al.'s disclosure regarding different device protocols.

2. US 7,950,464 B2

   • Full Citation: Atencio et al., US 7,950,464 B2, "Distributed control system with improved fault tolerance and security," granted May 31, 2011.
   • Brief Description: This patent details a distributed control system with features for improved fault tolerance and security.
   • Potential Anticipated Claim(s) (under 35 U.S.C. § 102): While broader than just fluid-handling, the "distributed control system" aspect could potentially anticipate the architecture of a "first computing system" receiving commands and communicating with local controllers. The emphasis on "fault tolerance" might be relevant to the robustness of control even in the absence of an external network connection, as mentioned in the description of US12321184B2, though this is a functional characteristic.

3. US 7,958,938 B2

   • Full Citation: Crossley et al., US 7,958,938 B2, "Fluid monitoring and control system," granted June 14, 2011.
   • Brief Description: This patent describes a system specifically for fluid monitoring and control.
   • Potential Anticipated Claim(s) (under 35 U.S.C. § 102): This reference directly addresses "fluid monitoring and control," making it highly relevant to claim 1. Aspects like controlling fluid-handling devices, receiving commands, and potentially using local controllers and feedback could be anticipated. The breadth of "fluid monitoring and control" would likely encompass the general concept of remotely changing the state of fluid-handling devices.

4. US 7,967,066 B2

   • Full Citation: McStay, US 7,967,066 B2, "Control system for a well site," granted June 28, 2011.
   • Brief Description: This patent covers a control system specifically designed for a well site, which would inherently involve fluid-handling devices in the oil and gas industry.
   • Potential Anticipated Claim(s) (under 35 U.S.C. § 102): Given its focus on "well site" control, this patent is highly relevant to the context of US12321184B2, particularly the application to oil wells. It likely addresses the remote control of fluid-handling devices at such sites, potentially anticipating the receiving and translating of commands to local controllers for target states.

5. US 8,131,510 B2

   • Full Citation: Wingky et al., US 8,131,510 B2, "System and method for intelligent process control," granted March 6, 2012.
   • Brief Description: This patent describes a system and method for intelligent process control, which may involve various types of industrial processes, including those with fluid handling.
   • Potential Anticipated Claim(s) (under 35 U.S.C. § 102): The "intelligent process control" could anticipate aspects of translating commands and controlling local devices, especially if it involves adapting commands to different protocols or executing sequences of operations. The "local controller being responsive to the command and feedback" is a common element in intelligent process control systems.

6. US 8,176,979 B2

   • Full Citation: Ollre, US 8,176,979 B2, "Remote monitoring and control of industrial equipment," granted May 15, 2012.
   • Brief Description: This patent focuses on the remote monitoring and control of industrial equipment generally.
   • Potential Anticipated Claim(s) (under 35 U.S.C. § 102): This is a broad but relevant reference. If "industrial equipment" includes fluid-handling devices, then the remote monitoring and control aspects could anticipate the core inventive concept of US12321184B2. The generic nature means specific details of protocol translation or multi-state control might not be explicitly covered, but the overall system architecture for remote control could be.

7. US 8,179,279 B2

   • Full Citation: Voss, US 8,179,279 B2, "System and method for managing distributed assets," granted May 15, 2012.
   • Brief Description: This patent describes a system and method for managing distributed assets, which could include geographically distributed fluid-handling sites.
   • Potential Anticipated Claim(s) (under 35 U.S.C. § 102): The management of "distributed assets" aligns with the geographically distributed nature of fluid-handling sites mentioned in US12321184B2. If the management includes remote control capabilities, then elements of claim 1 relating to receiving and translating commands could be implicated.

8. US 8,204,692 B2

   • Full Citation: Arango et al., US 8,204,692 B2, "Supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA) system with enhanced data processing," granted June 19, 2012.
   • Brief Description: This patent explicitly refers to a SCADA system, which is a common technology for remote control and monitoring in industrial applications, including fluid handling.
   • Potential Anticipated Claim(s) (under 35 U.S.C. § 102): As SCADA systems are a known prior art explicitly discussed in US12321184B2's background, this patent is highly relevant. It could anticipate many elements of claim 1, especially concerning remote control, data acquisition, and communication with field devices. The "enhanced data processing" might also touch upon the translation of commands or logic for determining target states.

9. US 8,208,478 B2

   • Full Citation: Robinson, US 8,208,478 B2, "Methods and apparatus for communication in industrial control systems," granted June 26, 2012.
   • Brief Description: This patent focuses on communication methods and apparatus within industrial control systems.
   • Potential Anticipated Claim(s) (under 35 U.S.C. § 102): The communication within "industrial control systems" would directly relate to the network interface, protocols, and sending translated commands to local controllers as described in claim 1. It could anticipate the mechanisms for translating commands into various device-specific protocols for communication over different buses.

10. US 8,290,737 B2

    • Full Citation: Davis, US 8,290,737 B2, "Remote monitoring and control system for fluid handling equipment," granted October 16, 2012.
    • Brief Description: This patent is specifically directed to a remote monitoring and control system for fluid handling equipment.
    • Potential Anticipated Claim(s) (under 35 U.S.C. § 102): This patent is exceptionally relevant due to its direct focus on "fluid handling equipment." It likely anticipates most, if not all, elements of claim 1, including receiving commands, translating them, and sending them to local controllers to achieve target states, along with feedback mechanisms.

11. US 8,301,386 B1

    • Full Citation: Redmond et al., US 8,301,386 B1, "System and method for intelligent well control," granted October 30, 2012.
    • Brief Description: This patent describes a system and method for intelligent well control, which is highly pertinent to oil and gas applications involving fluid handling.
    • Potential Anticipated Claim(s) (under 35 U.S.C. § 102): Similar to McStay (US 7,967,066 B2), this patent's focus on "intelligent well control" makes it very relevant to the application of US12321184B2 to oil wells. It likely covers the remote issuance of commands, their translation, and the control of fluid-handling devices at a well site to achieve desired states over time, potentially anticipating claim 1.

12. US 10,677,022 B2

    • Full Citation: Fleming et al., US 10,677,022 B2, granted June 9, 2020.
    • Brief Description: The Google Patents entry for US12321184B2 only lists the patent number and grant date for this reference, without a description in the snippet. A full review of the patent would be needed.
    • Potential Anticipated Claim(s) (under 35 U.S.C. § 102): Without a description, it's difficult to assess specific anticipation. However, given its later grant date (2020) compared to the priority date of US12321184B2 (2012-12-07), it would likely only be relevant as prior art if it originated from an earlier application with an earlier effective filing date, or if it relates to a common assignee and represents a related development.

13. US 10,868,867 B2

    • Full Citation: Binder et al., US 10,868,867 B2, granted December 15, 2020.
    • Brief Description: Similar to US 10,677,022 B2, the Google Patents entry only lists the patent number and grant date. A full review would be needed.
    • Potential Anticipated Claim(s) (under 35 U.S.C. § 102): Like Fleming et al., its later grant date (2020) suggests it would only be relevant as prior art if it originated from an earlier application with an earlier effective filing date, or if it relates to a common assignee and represents a related development.

14. US 6,061,603 A

    • Full Citation: Papadopoulos et al., US 6,061,603 A, granted May 9, 2000.
    • Brief Description: The Google Patents entry only lists the patent number and grant date.
    • Potential Anticipated Claim(s) (under 35 U.S.C. § 102): Given its early grant date (2000), this patent could potentially be highly relevant to fundamental aspects of remote control systems, network communication, or control of mechanical devices, depending on its specific content. A detailed review would be necessary.

15. US 6,192,980 B1

    • Full Citation: Tube! et al., US 6,192,980 B1, granted February 20, 2001.
    • Brief Description: The Google Patents entry only lists the patent number and grant date.
    • Potential Anticipated Claim(s) (under 35 U.S.C. § 102): Similar to Papadopoulos et al., this early patent could be foundational prior art for various control system elements, network interfaces, or data handling, depending on its specific claims and disclosure.

16. US 6,665,568 B1

    • Full Citation: Hott, US 6,665,568 B1, granted December 16, 2003.
    • Brief Description: The Google Patents entry lists the classification G05B 19/4183, which relates to program control systems, specifically for numerically controlled machines.
    • Potential Anticipated Claim(s) (under 35 U.S.C. § 102): The classification suggests this patent deals with automated control systems. It could potentially anticipate the "translating the received command into a translated command" and the general concept of controlling devices based on commands in an automated fashion, particularly if it involves different device protocols.

17. US 6,795,798 B2

    • Full Citation: Eryurek et al., US 6,795,798 B2, granted September 21, 2004.
    • Brief Description: The Google Patents entry provides the classification 340/854.6, which relates to telemetry, specifically for pipeline monitoring.
    • Potential Anticipated Claim(s) (under 35 U.S.C. § 102): The classification in "telemetry" and "pipeline monitoring" makes this highly relevant to fluid-handling devices, especially in the context of oil and gas. It likely anticipates aspects of remotely monitoring and potentially controlling fluid flow or pipeline equipment, which could include receiving data, sending commands, and responding to feedback to achieve target states.

18. US 6,985,831 B2

    • Full Citation: Ito et al., US 6,985,831 B2, granted January 10, 2006.
    • Brief Description: The Google Patents entry only lists the patent number and grant date.
    • Potential Anticipated Claim(s) (under 35 U.S.C. § 102): Without a description, it's difficult to ascertain specific anticipation.

19. US 7,146,231 B2

    • Full Citation: Schleiss et al., US 7,146,231 B2, granted December 5, 2006.
    • Brief Description: The Google Patents entry only lists the patent number and grant date.
    • Potential Anticipated Claim(s) (under 35 U.S.C. § 102): Without a description, it's difficult to ascertain specific anticipation.

US Published Patent Application Citations:

1. US 2002/0169645 A1

   • Full Citation: Aronstam et al., US 2002/0169645 A1, "System and method for remote diagnosis and control of industrial processes," published November 14, 2002.
   • Brief Description: This application describes a system and method for remote diagnosis and control of industrial processes.
   • Potential Anticipated Claim(s) (under 35 U.S.C. § 102): The "remote diagnosis and control of industrial processes" is highly relevant and could anticipate the broad concept of remotely controlling fluid-handling devices. Depending on the details, it might cover receiving commands, translating them, and sending them to local controllers, especially in an industrial context.

2. US 2003/0004624 A1

   • Full Citation: Wilson et al., US 2003/0004624 A1, "Remote control system for distributed industrial equipment," published January 2, 2003.
   • Brief Description: This application describes a remote control system specifically for distributed industrial equipment.
   • Potential Anticipated Claim(s) (under 35 U.S.C. § 102): This reference is very strong prior art as it directly addresses "remote control system for distributed industrial equipment." This strongly overlaps with the claims of US12321184B2, particularly the aspects of receiving commands for devices at a fluid-handling site (which are distributed industrial equipment) and sending translated commands to local controllers.

3. US 2004/0088115 A1

   • Full Citation: Guggari et al., US 2004/0088115 A1, "System and method for remote monitoring and control of process parameters," published May 6, 2004.
   • Brief Description: This application focuses on remote monitoring and control of process parameters.
   • Potential Anticipated Claim(s) (under 35 U.S.C. § 102): Controlling "process parameters" often involves adjusting fluid-handling devices. Thus, this could anticipate elements of remotely sending commands to achieve target states for fluid-handling devices based on monitored parameters.

4. US 2004/0262008 A1

   • Full Citation: Deans et al., US 2004/0262008 A1, "Method and apparatus for remotely controlling a system," published December 30, 2004.
   • Brief Description: This application broadly describes a method and apparatus for remotely controlling a system.
   • Potential Anticipated Claim(s) (under 35 U.S.C. § 102): The broad nature of "remotely controlling a system" means it could anticipate the fundamental concept of remote command reception and execution. Its relevance would depend on the specific details disclosed regarding the type of system, command translation, and local control.

5. US 2005/0096846 A1

   • Full Citation: Koithan et al., US 2005/0096846 A1, "Distributed control system with internet connectivity," published May 5, 2005.
   • Brief Description: This application describes a distributed control system with Internet connectivity.
   • Potential Anticipated Claim(s) (under 35 U.S.C. § 102): The "distributed control system with internet connectivity" is highly relevant to the architecture described in claim 1, particularly the "receiving, with a first computing system, via a network interface, a plurality of commands... from a remote user computing device." The use of Internet connectivity for remote control is a core aspect.

6. US 2005/0108504 A1

   • Full Citation: Cowin et al., US 2005/0108504 A1, "Remote control system for industrial automation," published May 19, 2005.
   • Brief Description: This application describes a remote control system for industrial automation.
   • Potential Anticipated Claim(s) (under 35 U.S.C. § 102): Similar to other "industrial control" references, this is highly relevant. "Industrial automation" frequently involves fluid-handling devices, and the remote control aspect would anticipate the reception, translation, and sending of commands to achieve target states.

7. US 2006/0240818 A1

   • Full Citation: McCoy et al., US 2006/0240818 A1, "System and method for remote monitoring and control of an oil well," published October 26, 2006.
   • Brief Description: This application specifically details a system and method for remote monitoring and control of an oil well.
   • Potential Anticipated Claim(s) (under 35 U.S.C. § 102): This is extremely relevant prior art, directly addressing "remote monitoring and control of an oil well." It strongly anticipates claim 1, especially given the explicit mention in US12321184B2 of its application to oil wells. It likely covers the entire process of receiving commands, translating them for various fluid-handling devices at a well site, and sending them to local controllers.

Non-Patent Literature (NPL) Citations:

1. "Oilfield Water-Oil-Solids Separation," Ball, Bill, High-Tech Consultants, Sep. 19, 2005, pp. 1-17, HTC, Inc. Bixby, OK, US.

   • Brief Description: This document focuses on the technical process of oilfield water-oil-solids separation.
   • Potential Anticipated Claim(s) (under 35 U.S.C. § 102): This NPL is likely cited for its technical background on the specific fluid-handling processes (oil/water separation) to which the patent applies. It wouldn't anticipate the remote control system itself, but rather the environment or type of fluid-handling device that the patented system is designed to control. Thus, it primarily provides context for the "fluid-handling device" element of claim 1.

2. "Configuring and Managing Remote Access for Industrial Control Systems," CPNI: Center for the Protection of National Infrastructure, Nov. 2010, 66 pages.

   • Brief Description: This document provides guidance on configuring and managing remote access for industrial control systems.
   • Potential Anticipated Claim(s) (under 35 U.S.C. § 102): This NPL is highly relevant to the general concept of remote control in industrial settings. It likely discusses mechanisms for remote access, security, and potentially the interaction with field devices. It could anticipate aspects of receiving commands from a remote user device and the general system architecture, but likely not the specific "translating into a translated command encoded in a plurality of protocols" unless it goes into deep technical detail on protocol mediation.

3. "Implementing TCP-IP in SCADA Systems," McHugh, Denis, Aug. 2003, 91 pages.

   • Brief Description: This document focuses on the implementation of TCP-IP in SCADA systems.
   • Potential Anticipated Claim(s) (under 35 U.S.C. § 102): As SCADA systems are acknowledged prior art, and TCP-IP is a fundamental network protocol, this document is very relevant to the networking aspects of claim 1. It could anticipate the use of network interfaces for receiving commands via a network and the general communication infrastructure.

4. "SCADA: Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition, 4th Edition," Boyer, Stuart A., 2010, 236 pages.

   • Brief Description: This is a textbook on SCADA systems.
   • Potential Anticipated Claim(s) (under 35 U.S.C. § 102): Similar to the McHugh reference and Arango et al. patent, this textbook provides comprehensive background on SCADA systems, which inherently involve remote control of industrial processes and fluid-handling devices. It would likely anticipate broad elements of claim 1 related to supervisory control, data acquisition, remote command issuance, and control loops with feedback.

5. "A cyber-physical experimentation environment for the security analysis of networked industrial control systems," Genge, Bela, Jul. 21, 2012, 16 pages.

   • Brief Description: This paper discusses a cyber-physical experimentation environment for security analysis of networked industrial control systems.
   • Potential Anticipated Claim(s) (under 35 U.S.C. § 102): This NPL focuses on the security of networked industrial control systems, which includes aspects of remote interaction and command transmission. While not directly about the functional control, the existence of such a system for "networked industrial control systems" implies the underlying remote control mechanisms could be known.

6. "A reference software architecture for the development of industrial automation high-level applications in the petroleum industry," Urdaneta, Guido, Aug. 7, 2006, 11 pages.

   • Brief Description: This paper describes a software architecture for industrial automation applications in the petroleum industry.
   • Potential Anticipated Claim(s) (under 35 U.S.C. § 102): This is highly relevant as it describes software architecture for industrial automation in the petroleum industry, directly aligning with the target application of US12321184B2. It would likely anticipate the structural and functional elements of a computing system controlling fluid-handling devices, potentially including command reception, processing, and output to local controllers, and how different protocols might be handled.

7. "Contents" from Ignition User Manual build 7.4.0.878, Inductive Automation, 2012, 28 pages.

   • Brief Description: This is a user manual for Ignition, a SCADA software platform.
   • Potential Anticipated Claim(s) (under 35 U.S.C. § 102): As a SCADA user manual, it would detail how users interact with the system to control and monitor industrial equipment, including fluid-handling devices. This would anticipate the "command interface presented on a remote user computing device," the issuance of commands, and the general functionality of a SCADA system for remote control.

8. "Contents" from Ignition User Manual build 7.5.0.1079, Inductive Automation, 2012, 31 pages.

   • Brief Description: Another user manual for the Ignition SCADA platform, likely an updated version.
   • Potential Anticipated Claim(s) (under 35 U.S.C. § 102): Same relevance as the previous Ignition manual, providing further evidence of a known SCADA system with remote control capabilities.

9. "Modicon Modbus Protocol Reference Guide," Modicon, Inc., Jun. 1996, 121 pages.

   • Brief Description: This is a reference guide for the Modbus RTU protocol.
   • Potential Anticipated Claim(s) (under 35 U.S.C. § 102): The Modbus RTU protocol is explicitly mentioned in US12321184B2 as one of the protocols used. This reference would establish the well-known nature of the Modbus protocol for communicating with industrial devices. It would anticipate the technical means for "translating the received command into a translated command encoded in a plurality of protocols different from the first protocol" where one of those protocols is Modbus.

10. "MOTT Version 3.1 Protocol Specification," International Business Machines Corporation (IBM) Eurotech, 1999-2010, 41 pages.

    • Brief Description: This is a protocol specification for MOTT (MQTT, likely a typo in the OCR for "MOTT"), a publish-subscribe messaging protocol.
    • Potential Anticipated Claim(s) (under 35 U.S.C. § 102): If this refers to MQTT (Message Queuing Telemetry Transport), it is highly relevant for networked communication in remote systems, especially for transmitting sensor data and commands. It would anticipate aspects of the network interface and the communication protocols used for transmitting commands and receiving feedback.

11. Web Archive of Inductive Automation.com/scada-software, Jul. 22, 2012, https://web.archive.org/web/20120722103649/http:/www.InductiveAutomation.com/scada-software.

    • Brief Description: This is an archived webpage for Inductive Automation's SCADA software.
    • Potential Anticipated Claim(s) (under 35 U.S.C. § 102): Similar to the Ignition user manuals, this webpage provides evidence of commercially available SCADA software with remote control capabilities prior to the priority date. It would likely describe features relevant to receiving commands from remote devices and controlling industrial equipment.

12. "SCADALynx-the ultimate solution for oil and gas production intelligence," eLynx Technologies, LLC, 2011, <www.eLynxTech.com,> 2011, p. 1, US.

    • Brief Description: This is marketing material for SCADALynx, a SCADA solution for oil and gas production.
    • Potential Anticipated Claim(s) (under 35 U.S.C. § 102): This directly advertises a SCADA solution for oil and gas production, making it highly relevant to the application of US12321184B2. It would anticipate the overall concept of providing remote control and monitoring for fluid-handling devices in this industry.

13. "iSCADA Gas Well Support," <www.vipondcontrols.ca/index+com_content&view+article&id~142:iscada-gas-well-support,> Sep. 2, 2012, pp. 1-2, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.

    • Brief Description: This webpage describes "iSCADA Gas Well Support."
    • Potential Anticipated Claim(s) (under 35 U.S.C. § 102): This document specifically details SCADA support for gas wells, further reinforcing the known art of applying SCADA to fluid-handling in the oil and gas sector. It would anticipate the remote control of fluid-handling devices at such well sites.

14. "Field Data Capture for Oil and Gas," Merrick-Oil & Gas Technology Solutions, <www.merricksystems.com/oil-and-gas-software/field-operations-managemenl/evin.html?

    • Brief Description: This webpage discusses field data capture for oil and gas operations.
    • Potential Anticipated Claim(s) (under 35 U.S.C. § 102): While focusing on data capture, remote data collection is a prerequisite for remote control. This NPL provides context for the remote monitoring aspect and the information flow from fluid-handling sites.

The analysis of obviousness for US patent 12321184 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 requires identifying combinations of prior art references and explaining the motivation for such combinations.

Prior Art Information from Google Patents Page:
The "Prior art" section of the Google Patents page for US12321184B2 provides the following:

• Prior art keywords: fluid, computing system, handling, commands, command
• Prior art date: 2012-12-07

Absence of Specific Prior Art References:
The provided "Prior art section" of the Google Patents page for US12321184B2, as instructed, does not list specific patent documents or other publications as prior art references. Instead, it provides keywords and a priority date. Therefore, a direct analysis combining named prior art references cannot be performed based solely on the provided information.

General State of the Art (as described in the patent's "Background of the Invention"):
The patent's "Background of the Invention" section itself describes the general state of the art at the priority date (December 7, 2012) as including Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) systems for remote monitoring of fluid-handling devices. The patent explicitly identifies several deficiencies in these existing SCADA systems:

1. Network dependency: Many SCADA systems "fail when a network connection is lost," leading to remote logic ceasing control when disconnected.
2. Software burden: Some SCADA systems "require the installation of special-purpose software on a computing device in order to exercise control remotely," which deters users due to configuration burdens.

The claimed invention, therefore, seeks to overcome these known problems in SCADA systems.

Obviousness Analysis based on General Knowledge of a PHOSITA:

Despite the lack of specific references, a person having ordinary skill in the art (PHOSITA) in 2012 would have been generally aware of these existing SCADA systems and their limitations, as outlined in the patent's background. The "prior art keywords" (fluid, computing system, handling, commands, command) further reinforce the idea that systems for remote control of fluid-handling devices using computing systems and commands were well-known.

The claims of US12321184 generally describe:

• A first computing system (site master-controller) receiving commands (encoded in a first protocol) from a remote user computing device.
• The commands are based on user inputs to a command interface (e.g., web-based).
• User authorization is determined based on an account.
• The first computing system determines target states over time for fluid-handling devices.
• The first computing system translates these commands into device-specific protocols (a plurality of protocols different from the first protocol).
• These translated commands cause a local controller of the fluid-handling device to reach the target state, with feedback.
• A key feature is that the first computing system is "operative to maintain control of the fluid handling devices in an absence of an external network connection" (Claim 1).

Motivation to Combine Known Elements:

A PHOSITA, aware of the deficiencies in existing SCADA systems (as described in the Background of the Invention), would have been motivated to combine known technological elements to improve upon them.

1. Addressing Network Dependency (Local Autonomy):

   • Known Element: SCADA RTUs or PLCs were already capable of executing local control logic and storing programs. The concept of local control, even without continuous communication with a central server, was well-established in industrial automation.
   • Motivation: The explicit problem of SCADA systems failing upon network loss would strongly motivate a PHOSITA to design the remote site controller (the "first computing system" or site master-controller) to operate autonomously or to complete initiated commands even if the network connection to the central server is interrupted. This would involve programming the local controller to store sequences of commands or control logic (e.g., "determine a plurality of different target states over time") and execute them independently, relying on local feedback, rather than continuous commands from the central server.

2. Addressing Protocol Diversity (Protocol Translation):

   • Known Element: Fluid-handling devices often use various proprietary or standard industrial protocols (e.g., Modbus, Ethernet/IP, HART, 4-20mA analog signals), as mentioned in the patent's detailed description (e.g., Modbus RTU, binary/analog signals, Ethernet protocol for control buses 66, 64, 62). Protocol converters and gateways were common in industrial automation to allow different systems to communicate.
   • Motivation: Given the variety of fluid-handling devices and their differing communication protocols, a PHOSITA would be motivated to introduce a translation layer (the "command translators 74") in the site master-controller to convert generic commands from a central system into specific protocols understood by the various local devices. This would simplify the central control interface and allow for greater flexibility in integrating diverse equipment. The patent itself states, "Translating commands may abstract the details of the site-specific implementations away from those implementing the command-center server 14, facilitating relatively rapid deployment of new features or sites."

3. Addressing Software Burden (Web-based Interface):

   • Known Element: Web servers and web-based interfaces for remote access and control were widely known and implemented in various fields by 2012. Many enterprise systems were moving towards web-based access to reduce client-side software installation.
   • Motivation: The problem of requiring "special-purpose software" would provide a strong motivation for a PHOSITA to implement a web-based command interface (as facilitated by the "web server 32" on the "command-center server 14") that could be accessed via a standard web browser on a remote user device. This would eliminate the need for cumbersome software installations and updates, making remote control more accessible and user-friendly.

4. User Authorization:

   • Known Element: User authentication and authorization systems, often tied to user accounts stored in a data store, were standard practice for any remote access system by 2012, particularly in industrial contexts where security and access control are critical.
   • Motivation: To ensure secure and controlled access to sensitive industrial equipment, a PHOSITA would routinely implement an authorization mechanism (e.g., using "account records" in "data store 34") to verify that a user is permitted to issue commands to specific fluid-handling devices, especially when moving to a more accessible web-based interface.

In summary, the core elements of the claimed invention, when viewed through the lens of a PHOSITA in 2012, appear to be logical improvements to known SCADA systems, driven by the explicit problems identified in the patent's own background. The motivation would stem from a desire to create a more robust (network-independent), versatile (protocol-agnostic), and user-friendly (web-based, no special software) remote control system for geographically distributed fluid-handling devices.