BAILII is celebrating 24 years of free online access to the law! Would you consider making a contribution?

No donation is too small. If every visitor before 31 December gives just £1, it will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing free access to the law.
Thank you very much for your support!



BAILII [Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]

United Kingdom Intellectual Property Office Decisions


You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> United Kingdom Intellectual Property Office Decisions >> Fisher-Rosemount Systems, Inc. (Patent) [2013] UKIntelP o03513 (23 January 2013)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKIntelP/2013/o03513.html
Cite as: [2013] UKIntelP o03513, [2013] UKIntelP o3513

[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]


Fisher-Rosemount Systems, Inc. (Patent) [2013] UKIntelP o03513 (23 January 2013)

Patent decision

BL number
O/035/13
Concerning rights in
GB0900941.6
Hearing Officer
Dr J E Porter
Decision date
23 January 2013
Person(s) or Company(s) involved
Fisher-Rosemount Systems, Inc.
Provisions discussed
Patents Act 1977 section 1(2)
Keywords
Excluded fields (refused)
Related Decisions
None

Summary

The invention is concerned with the configuration, monitoring and control of complex process plants, and with allowing a process plant operator to create or configure process plant displays and interfaces in order to monitor and control the plant. The operator conducts a search (e.g. a keyword search) of interface modules, and so identifies and then selects those which he wishes to incorporate into the existing process plant interfaces or displays. Once the desired interface modules are incorporated, the relevant pieces of the process plant equipment are controlled or configured accordingly.

The hearing officer followed the steps set out in Aerotel in order to determine whether the invention was excluded from patentability. He concluded that the alleged contribution made by the invention lay in providing an improved way of creating a process plant operator interface, and did not extend to providing an improved process plant control system. He found that this contribution fell solely within excluded matter, as it was no more than a program for a computer.


A HTML version of this file is not available see below or click here to view the pdf version : o03513


BAILII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Donate to BAILII
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKIntelP/2013/o03513.html