DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . This office action is in response to applicant's communication of June 26, 2025. The rejections are stated below. Claims 1-14 and 21-30 are pending and have been examined.
Response to Amendment/Arguments
2. Applicant’s arguments concerning claims 1-14 and 21-26 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) have been considered but are not persuasive. For the claim to satisfy the enablement requirement under § 112, it must provide enough detail so that a person skilled in the relevant field can understand how to implement the claimed invention. In this case, the claim does not explain how forwarding the virtual price leads to the associated asset actually dispatching electrical power. The claim does not specify the mechanism or protocol by which the instructions are communicated between asset manager devices. The claim does not elucidate the operational mechanism that translates the forwarded virtual price into actionable control over the asset. The claim states that the asset manager device will cause its associated asset to dispatch electrical power "as a function of the virtual price." However, if there is no clear explanation of what it means for the power dispatch to be a "function of the virtual price," it raises questions about the causal relationship. Applicant’s specification does not adequately describe how the virtual price influences the decision-making or operational actions of the asset manager device.
3. Applicant’s arguments concerning 35 U.S.C. 101 have been considered but are not persuasive. The core of the claim involves transaction processing, which is a fundamental economic activity. Courts have often ruled that such activities, when not tied to a specific technological implementation, constitute abstract ideas. The claim describes a method for managing power output in a distributed energy resources (DERs) system. While this is a technical context, the steps outlined are primarily about data handling and decision-making processes rather than a novel technological implementation. The steps in the claim—receiving objectives, determining parameters, calculating prices, and forwarding instructions—can be perceived as insignificant extra-solution activity. The claim must demonstrate that these improvement is not just a result of linking the exception to a particular environment. The described methods do not result in a specific technological advancement or improvement.
Claim Interpretation
4. In the interest of compact prosecution, Applicant should be aware that there is claim language that does not serve to differentiate the claims from the prior art and/or or provide an additional element that can be a consideration for eligibility[1]. See MPEP 2103(c).
5. Intended use language is generally not given patentable weight. See MPEP 2114(II) ("A claim containing a 'recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus’ if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1987).”); see also MPEP 2103(C). Examples of claim limitations that are often found to precede intended use include “adapted to,” “capable of,” “sufficient to,” “whereby,” and “for.”
The following limitations include intended use:
… “the remote operation includes at least one of an actuator operation for controlling movement of the mobile body or a movement control task of the mobile body” (Claim 8).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
6. 35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
7. Claims 1-14 and 21-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea of providing a service or calculating a price without significantly more.
8. Claim 1 recites “a method of … in an … ("…"), the … comprising a plurality of … and an …, method as implemented by the … comprising:
receiving a power objective for the … each asset storing …, each asset having an … that controls the … dispatched from the asset;
determining a physical parameter related to the power objective at a point of … for the assets;
setting one or more … as an …, wherein the … is … to … to calculate a …price as a function of the determined physical parameter and the power objective; and
forwarding … including the … price from the one or … to another one of the … so that the another one of the … causes its associated asset to dispatch … as a function of the … price”.
9. These limitations describe an abstract idea of calculating a price as a function of a physical parameter and a power objective and corresponds to Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity (sales activities and managing interactions or following rules or instructions). Accordingly, the claim 1 recites an abstract idea (Step 2A: Prong 1: YES).
10. This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. The claim recites additional elements of “distributed energy resource system”, “electricity grid control system”, “storing electrical power”, “asset manager device”, “electrical power dispatched from the asset”, “point of common coupling for the assets”, “authority is configured to execute a set of instructions”, “virtual”, “dispatch electrical power” which do no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or provide a particular technological environment. “Specifically, with respect to ‘DERs system comprising a plurality of assets and an electricity grid control system”, “each asset storing electrical power”, “each asset having an asset manager device that controls the electrical power dispatched from the asset”, “assets”, “wherein the authority is configured to execute a set of instructions to…” this merely describes the particular technological environment where the abstract idea of… takes place and/or field of use. With respect to “setting one or more asset manager devices an authority”, the claim limitation lacks details regarding what “setting” comprises therefore the limitation is no more than “apply it” (MPEP 2106.05(f)(1)). Same holds for “so that the another one of the asset manager devices causes its associated asset to dispatch electrical power as a function of the virtual price”. In other words, Applicant does not technologically specify how mere “forwarding instructions including the virtual price from the one or more asset manager devices” produces the result of “so that the another one of the asset manager device causes its associated asset to dispatch electrical power as a function of the virtual price. Therefore, as the claim does not provide for how the result is accomplished, it too is mere “apply it” ((MPEP 2106.05(f)(1)). Therefore, claim 1 is directed to an abstract idea without a practical application (Step 2A - Prong 2: NO).
11. Further, as the additional elements of claim 1 do no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or provide a particular technological environment, they do not improve computer functionality or improve another technology or technical field. Thus, claim 1 is not patent eligible (Step 2B: NO).
12. Claim 22 also recites the abstract idea of providing a service or calculating a price which is grouped under Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity (sales activities and managing interactions or following rules or instructions). Claim 22 includes the additional elements of “an aggregated distributed energy resource system”, “generating electric power”, “asset manager device”, “authority”, “configured”, “execute a set of instructions”, “virtual”, “asset manager devices comprising a control circuity configured”, and “electric power dispatched”. The additional elements do no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or link the abstract idea a particular technological environment. Therefore, as they do no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or provide a particular technological environment, they do not improve computer functionality or improve another technology or technical field.
13. Claim 2 recites “the method as defined by claim 1, further comprising setting a … as the … at a first time and setting a … as the … at a second time” which further define the abstract idea. The claim includes “setting a first asset manager device as the authority at a first time… and setting a second asset manager device as the authority…” as additional elements. The additional elements do no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or link the abstract idea a particular technological environment. Therefore, as they do no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or provide a particular technological environment, they do not improve computer functionality or improve another technology or technical field.
14. Claim 3 recites “the method as defined by claim 2, wherein the … and the … are selected randomly” which further define the abstract idea. The claim includes “the first manager device and the second asset manager device” as additional elements. The additional elements do no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or link the abstract idea a particular technological environment. Therefore, as they do no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or provide a particular technological environment, they do not improve computer functionality or improve another technology or technical field.
15. Claim 4 recites “the method as defined by claim 2, wherein the … and the … are selected as the … based on a pre-determined order” which further define the abstract idea. The claim includes “the first manager device and the second asset manager device are selected as the authority” as additional elements. The additional elements do no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or link the abstract idea a particular technological environment. Therefore, as they do no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or provide a particular technological environment, they do not improve computer functionality or improve another technology or technical field.
16. Claim 5 recites “the method as defined by claim 1, wherein the …forwards the price by broadcasting the price to the …” which further define the abstract idea. The claim includes “authority” and “other asset manager devices” as additional elements. The additional elements do no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or link the abstract idea a particular technological environment. Therefore, as they do no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or provide a particular technological environment, they do not improve computer functionality or improve another technology or technical field.
17. Claim 6 recites “the method as defined by claim 1, further comprising: wherein the … price represents the energy transactions between different … that maintain the … substantially at an optimal operating point as defined by a cost function” which further define the abstract idea. The claim includes “virtual”, “different assets”, and “DERs system” as additional elements. The additional elements do no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or link the abstract idea a particular technological environment. Therefore, as they do no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or provide a particular technological environment, they do not improve computer functionality or improve another technology or technical field.
18. Claim 7 recites “the method as defined by claim 1, further comprising:
transacting … at each of the one or more of the … on the basis of the … price” which further define the abstract idea. The claim includes “virtual”, “power and/or energy” and “one or more of the asset manager devices” as additional elements. The additional elements do no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or link the abstract idea a particular technological environment. Therefore, as they do no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or provide a particular technological environment, they do not improve computer functionality or improve another technology or technical field.
19. Claim 8 recites “the method as defined by claim 7, further comprising:
performing a settlement step, where the result of all the … transactions are converted into economic exchange” which further define the abstract idea.
20. Claim 9 recites “the method as defined by claim 1, …, calculates the price and broadcasts the calculated price to the other … ” which further define the abstract idea. The claim includes “asset manager devices, from a plurality of the asset manager devices” and “other asset manager devices” as additional elements. The additional elements do no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or link the abstract idea a particular technological environment. Therefore, as they do no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or provide a particular technological environment, they do not improve computer functionality or improve another technology or technical field.
21. Claim 10 recites “the method as defined by claim 9, wherein the broadcasted prices are preliminary prices, and wherein a system level price is determined as a function of the broadcast preliminary prices” which further define the abstract idea.
22. Claim 11 recites “the method as defined by claim 1, further comprising:
… calculating the … price; sending the … price to other …; and the … replying to the authority with a bid” which further define the abstract idea. The claim includes “virtual”, “authority” and “other asset manager devices” as additional elements. The additional elements do no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or link the abstract idea a particular technological environment. Therefore, as they do no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or provide a particular technological environment, they do not improve computer functionality or improve another technology or technical field.
23. Claim 12 recites “the method as defined by claim 11,
wherein each … has a bid pair with each of a …, wherein the pair includes: (i) the bid of how much its own asset is willing to give to another asset, and (ii) what another asset is willing to give back, the method further comprising transforming bid pairs to a list of peer-to-peer transactions, wherein the difference between the bids is the actual transaction” which further define the abstract idea. The additional elements do no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or link the abstract idea a particular technological environment. Therefore, as they do no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or provide a particular technological environment, they do not improve computer functionality or improve another technology or technical field.
24. Claim 13 recites “the method as defined by claim 1, further comprising:
creating a …;
using the … to keep track of a list of power or energy transactions between the …” which further define the abstract idea. The claim includes “public blockchain ledger”, “ledger”, and “system” as additional elements. The additional elements do no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or link the abstract idea a particular technological environment. Therefore, as they do no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or provide a particular technological environment, they do not improve computer functionality or improve another technology or technical field.
25. Claim 14 recites the additional elements of “the method as defined by claim 1, wherein the point of common coupling is a virtual point of common coupling” as additional elements. The additional elements do no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or link the abstract idea a particular technological environment. Therefore, as they do no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or provide a particular technological environment, they do not improve computer functionality or improve another technology or technical field.
26. Claim 21 recites “wherein … from the one or more assets controlled by the another one or more of the asset manager devices as a function of the … price comprises at least one of: … from one or more of said assets as a function of the …price; or … from one or more of said assets as a function of the …price” which further defines the abstract idea. The claim includes “outputting power”, “asset manager devices”, “virtual”, “increasing output power”, “decreasing output power” as additional elements. The additional elements do no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or link the abstract idea a particular technological environment. Therefore, as they do no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or provide a particular technological environment, they do not improve computer functionality or improve another technology or technical field. With respect to “wherein outputting power from the one or more assets controlled by the another one or more of the asset manager devices as a function of the virtual price comprises at least one of: increasing output power from one or more of said assets as a function of the virtual price; or decreasing output power from one or more of said assets as a function of the virtual price”, Applicant does not technologically specify how mere “forwarding instructions including the virtual price from the one or more asset manager devices” produces the result of “so that the another one of the asset manager device causes its associated asset to increase or decrease electrical power as a function of the virtual price. Therefore, as the claim does not provide for how the result is accomplished, it too is mere “apply it” ((MPEP 2106.05(f)(1)).
27. Claim 22 recites the abstract idea of enabling a policyholder of an insurance policy to identify a repair facility and corresponds to Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity commercial or legal interactions (including sales activities or business relations). Claim 22 includes the additional elements of “an aggregated distributed energy resources system, plurality of assets having a point of common coupling for the assets, each of the assets generating electrical power and having an asset manager device, one or more of the asset managers devices are set as an authority”. The additional elements do no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or link the abstract idea a particular technological environment. Therefore, as they do no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or provide a particular technological environment, they do not improve computer functionality or improve another technology or technical field.
28. Claim 23 recites “…as defined by claim 22, … forwards the price by broadcasting the price to the …” which further define the abstract idea.
29. Claim 24 recites “system as defined by claim 22, wherein the price represents the energy transactions between different assets that maintain the … substantially at an optimal operating point as defined by a cost function” which further define the abstract idea.
30. Claim 25 recites the additional elements of “the system as defined by claim 22, wherein the point of common coupling is a virtual point of common coupling” as additional elements. The additional elements do no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or link the abstract idea a particular technological environment. Therefore, as they do no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or provide a particular technological environment, they do not improve computer functionality or improve another technology or technical field.
31. Claim 26 recites the additional elements of “the system as defined by claim 22, wherein the another one or more of the … are … to control … by at least one of increasing or decreasing … from one or more of said assets as a function of the …price” which further describe the abstract idea. The claims include “asset managers devices are configured”, “output power”, and “virtual” as additional elements. The additional elements do no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or link the abstract idea a particular technological environment. Therefore, as they do no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or provide a particular technological environment, they do not improve computer functionality or improve another technology or technical field. With respect to “wherein outputting power from the one or more assets controlled by the another one or more of the asset manager devices as a function of the virtual price comprises at least one of: increasing output power from one or more of said assets as a function of the virtual price; or decreasing output power from one or more of said assets as a function of the virtual price”, Applicant does not technologically specify how mere “forwarding instructions including the virtual price from the one or more asset manager devices” produces the result of “so that the another one of the asset manager device causes its associated asset to increase or decrease electrical power as a function of the virtual price. Therefore, as the claim does not provide for how the result is accomplished, it too is mere “apply it” ((MPEP 2106.05(f)(1)).
32. Claim 27 recites “wherein the another one of the asset manager … causes its associated asset to … as a function of the …price by modifying an internal operating state of the asset” which further describe the abstract idea. The claim includes “virtual”, “devices” and “dispatch electrical power”, as additional elements. The additional elements do no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or link the abstract idea a particular technological environment. Therefore, as they do no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or provide a particular technological environment, they do not improve computer functionality or improve another technology or technical field.
33. Claim 28 recites “wherein the asset is selected form the group comprising a battery, a generator, a turbine, and a solar panel” which further define the abstract idea.
34. Claim 29 recites “wherein the … is …to control the … from the one or more assets controlled by the another one or more of the asset manager … as a function of the … price by modifying an internal operating state of the one or more assets” which further describe the abstract idea. The claim includes “control circuit is configured”, “devices”, “virtual”, and “dispatch electrical power”, as additional elements. The additional elements do no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or link the abstract idea a particular technological environment. Therefore, as they do no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or provide a particular technological environment, they do not improve computer functionality or improve another technology or technical field.
35. Claim 30 recites “wherein the one or more assets are selected from the group comprising a battery, a generator, a turbine, and a solar panel” which further define the abstract idea.
Claim Rejections – 35 USC §112
36. The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
37. Claims 1-14 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Lack of Algorithm
38. Claim 1 recites “forwarding instructions including the virtual price from the one or more asset manager devices to another one of the asset manager devices so that the another one of the asset manager devices causes its associated asset to dispatch electrical power as a function of the virtual price”. Paragraph 0057 recites “The authority also relays the price to the other asset managers 16 so as to control the output power of the assets 14 in the system 100. T”. The cited portion of Applicant’s specification does not disclose how the computer performs the limitation of “forwarding instructions including the virtual price from the one or more asset manager devices to another one of the asset manager deices so that the another one of the asset manager devices causes its associated asset to dispatch electrical power as a function of the virtual price”. In other words, has not provide steps/procedure in such detail such that one of ordinary skill would understand how Applicant intended the function of “forwarding instructions including the virtual price from the one or more asset manager devices to another one of the asset manager deices so that the another one of the asset manager devices causes its associated asset to dispatch electrical power as a function of the virtual price” is to be performed. MPEP 2161.01 I.
39. Claims 2-14 and 21 are rejected as each depends on claim 1.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEVIN T POE whose telephone number is (571)272-9789. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 9:30am through 6pm EST.
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, Calvin Hewitt can be reached on 571-272-6709. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/K.T.P/Examiner, Art Unit 3692 /KEVIN T POE/
/CALVIN L HEWITT II/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3692
[1][1] See MPEP 2106.04(d)(2) (“Examiners should keep in mind that in order to qualify as a "treatment" or "prophylaxis" limitation for purposes of this consideration, the claim limitation in question must affirmatively recite an action that effects a particular treatment or prophylaxis for a disease or medical condition. An example of such a limitation is a step of "administering amazonic acid to a patient" or a step of "administering a course of plasmapheresis to a patient." If the limitation does not actually provide a treatment or prophylaxis, e.g., it is merely an intended use of the claimed invention or a field of use limitation, then it cannot integrate a judicial exception under the "treatment or prophylaxis" consideration. For example, a step of "prescribing a topical steroid to a patient with eczema" is not a positive limitation because it does not require that the steroid actually be used by or on the patient, and a recitation that a claimed product is a "pharmaceutical composition" or that a "feed dispenser is operable to dispense a mineral supplement" are not affirmative limitations because they are merely indicating how the claimed invention might be used.”)
Prosecution Insights