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 .
Response to Amendment
This office action has been issued in response to the amendment filed on May 11, 2026.
Claims 1-20 are pending.
Applicant’s arguments have been carefully and respectfully considered. Rejections have been maintained where arguments were not persuasive. Also, new rejections based on the amended claims have been set forth. Accordingly, claims 1- 20 are rejected, and this action is made FINAL, as necessitated by amendment.
Response to Arguments
Applicant argues none of the cited references, taken alone or in combination, teach a structural disconnect disposed between a smart pole and the power grid and a processor configured to island the smart pole from the power grid using the disconnect in response to an actual or predicted loss of electricity within the circuit as claimed.
Newly relied upon for prior art Lam (US 2018/0034271) discloses a system for providing a resilient bidirectional charging infrastructure (Fig.3) comprising: a disconnect (30) disposed between at least one charging station (18) and a power grid (12) (Par.33); and island, by the disconnect (30), the at least one charging station (18) from the power grid (12) in response to an actual loss of electricity (Par.33).
Applicant argues none of the cited references, taken alone or in combination, teach "providing a signal requesting a replacement electric vehicle based on the monitoring the state of charge and on a predetermined state of charge threshold" as claimed. Furthermore, none of the cited references, taken alone or in combination, teach "after providing the signal, stopping discharging the electric vehicle in response to the state of charge falling below the predetermined threshold as claimed.
Lam teaches monitoring a state of charge of an electric vehicle (16) (Fig.1) during the discharging electricity (Par.37); providing a signal requesting a replacement electric vehicle based on the monitoring the state of charge and on a predetermined state of charge threshold (Par.38; Replace the electric vehicle with an additional electric vehicle by instructing to switch to another.); and after providing the signal, stopping discharging the electric vehicle (16) in response to the state of charge falling below the predetermined threshold (minimum power level) (Par.38).
Applicant argues none of the cited references, taken alone or in combination, teach "in response to analyzing the data, stopping discharging electricity from the electric vehicle into the at least one of the plurality of smart poles if the discharging will be detrimental to the health of a battery of the electric vehicle" as claimed, particularly taken together with "request a replacement electric vehicle to be dispatched to discharge electricity into the at least one of the plurality of smart poles to continue providing power during the actual or predicted loss of electricity.
Newly relied upon prior art Naito et al. (US 2023/0191941 discloses analyzing data related to an electric vehicle (3A) (Fig.16) (Par.237); in response to analyzing the data, stopping discharging electricity from the electric vehicle (3A) into at least one charging station (104) if the discharging will be detrimental to the health of a battery (31) of the electric vehicle (3A) (Par.237 and 240); request a replacement electric vehicle (3B) to discharge electricity into the at least one charging station (104) to continue providing power during the actual or predicted loss of electricity (Par.241-242).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
Claims 1-2, 4-5 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Salter et al. (US 2022/0379770) in view of Toyora (US 2022/0297566), Lam (US 2018/0034271), Sambaraju (US 2020/0207228) and Mokrushin et al. (US 2022/0007213).
Claim 1: Salter teaches a system for providing a resilient bidirectional charging infrastructure (Figs.1-2) comprising:
at least one charging station (22) comprises:
a first port comprising an interface (24) (Fig.1, The charging station (22) inherently encompasses a port to which the interface (24/charge cable) is coupled to.) for connecting an electric vehicle (12) to a bidirectional charger (28) (Par.37-38) in order to conduct charging (Fig.1) / discharging (Fig.2) operations when the electric vehicle (12) is connected to the first port (Par.41-42); and
a processor (46, 80 or 82) configured to cause the at least one charging station (22) (Par.64-65) to:
determine whether the electric vehicle (12) is connected to the first port (Fig.5, 110-Yes) (Par.68);
discharge electricity to the electric vehicle (12) (Fig.5, 120) when the electric vehicle (12) is connected to the first port (Fig.5, 110-Yes) and there is not an actual or predicted loss of electricity (Fig.5, 114-No) (Par.69), and
receive electricity from the electric vehicle (12) (Fig.5, 116) when the electric vehicle (12) is connected to the first port (Fig.5, 110-Yes) (Par.68) and there is an actual or predicted loss of electricity (Fig.5, 114-Yes) (Par.68).
Salter does not explicitly teach a plurality of smart poles connected in a circuit, wherein the plurality of smart poles are configured to provide at least part of a powered network; at least one of the plurality of smart poles comprises: a first port comprising an interface for receiving electricity and wherein a second port comprises a wireless communication interface for connecting the plurality of smart poles to a communication network.
Toyora teaches system (100) for bidirectional charging (Fig.1) comprising:
a plurality of charging stations/smart poles (6) connected in a circuit (Fig.1), wherein the plurality of charging stations/smart poles (6) are configured to provide at least part of a powered network (Par.25), wherein the powered network provides access to a communications network (12 and 14) (Par.25); at least one of the plurality of charging stations/smart poles (6) comprises:
a first port comprising an interface for connecting to an electric vehicle (8) (Par.24) (Fig.1) to a bidirectional charger in order to conduct charging/discharging operations when the electric vehicle (8) is connected to the first port (Par.24), and
a second port (coupled to 14) comprising a wireless communication interface for connecting the plurality of smart poles (6) to the communications network (12 and 14) (Par.25) (Fig.1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have had a plurality of smart poles as part of a powered network providing access to a communication network in the system of Salter to have had simultaneously electrically connected to and allowed charging/discharging from/to a plurality of power stations (Par.24); and managed the system for appropriate operation based on information and control signals being transmitted via the communication network (Par.4 and 25) as taught in Toyora.
The combination of Salter in view of Toyora does not explicitly teach a disconnect disposed between at least one of the plurality of smart poles and a power grid; island, by the disconnect, at least one of the plurality of smart poles from the power grid in response to an actual or predicted loss of electricity.
Lam teaches a system for providing a resilient bidirectional charging infrastructure (Fig.3) comprising:
a disconnect (30) disposed between at least one charging station (18) and a power grid (12) (Par.33); and
island, by the disconnect (30), the at least one charging station (18) from the power grid (12) in response to an actual loss of electricity (Par.33).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have had the teachings of Lam in the combination of Salter in view of Toyora to have had isolated the vehicle and a home from a downed power grid (Par.33) thereby protecting electric components from a power surge when the power grid becomes available again.
The combination of Salter in view of Toyora does not explicitly teach each of the plurality of smart poles comprising an antenna; and wherein the powered network provides access to a communications network via the antenna to users to communicate via the communications network.
Sambaraju teaches each of a plurality of smart poles (300) (Fig.1) (Par.15) comprising an antenna (352) (Par.20; The cellular base station inherently includes an antenna capable of communicating with additional antennas 354.); and wherein a powered network provides access to a communications network (cellular network) via the antenna (352) to users to communicate via the communications network (cellular network) (Par.4-6 and 19-20).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have had the teachings of Sambaraju in the combination of Salter in view of Toyora to have had a vehicle charging station supporting wireless network functionalities and access (Par.1) to have had benefited from the charging station robust structures and distributed locations (Par.16 and 21).
In addition, the combination of Salter in view of Toyora does not explicitly teach wherein the at least one of the plurality of smart poles is configured to continue receiving electricity from the electric vehicle during the actual or predicted loss of electricity and to use the electricity from the electric vehicle to continue providing access to the communications network during the actual or predicted loss of electricity.
Mokrushin teaches continue receiving electricity from an electric vehicle (UAV) (Fig.1) during an actual or predicted loss of electricity and to use the electricity from the electric vehicle (UAV) to continue providing access to a communications network during the actual or predicted loss of electricity (Par.25).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have had the teachings of Mokrushin in the combination of Salter and Toyora to have had delayed or prevented interruptions to communications caused by power failure (Par.6 and 25).
Claim 2: Salter in view of Toyora, Lam, Sambaraju and Mokrushin teach the limitations of claim 1 as disclosed above. Salter teaches wherein the processor (46, 80 or 82) (Par.64-65) is further configured to:
in response to determining that the electric vehicle (12) is not connected (Fig.5, 110-No), initiate a message requesting that the electric vehicle (12) be connected to the first port of the charging station (22) (Par.68) (Fig.5,112).
Salter does not explicitly teach a plurality of smart poles.
Toyora teaches a plurality of charging stations/smart poles (6) connecting to electric vehicles (8) (Par.24) and providing a powered network that provides access to a communications network (12 and 14) (Par.25) (Fig.1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have had a plurality of smart poles in the system of Salter to have had simultaneously electrically connected to and allowed charging/discharging from/to a plurality of power stations (Par.24); and have had allowed using a plurality of vehicles as energy sources (Par.23) as taught in Toyora, thereby increasing the amount of available energy during a period of electricity loss.
Claim 4: Salter in view of Toyora, Lam, Sambaraju and Mokrushin teach the limitations of claim 1 as disclosed above. Salter teaches wherein the processor (46, 80 or 82) (Par.64-65) is further configured to: analyze weather forecast data for one or more geographic areas at which smart pole (22) is located (Par.46); and identify an anticipated weather event from the weather forecast data (Par.46).
Salter does not explicitly teach a plurality of smart poles.
Toyora teaches a plurality of charging stations/smart poles (6) connected in a circuit (Par.24) providing a powered network that provides access to a communications network (12 and 14) (Par.25) (Fig.1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have had a plurality of smart poles in the system of Salter to have had simultaneously electrically connected to and allowed charging/discharging from/to a plurality of power stations (Par.24); and have had allowed using a plurality of vehicles as energy sources (Par.23) as taught in Toyora, thereby increasing the amount of available energy during a period of electricity loss.
Claim 5: Salter in view of Toyora, Lam, Sambaraju and Mokrushin teach the limitations of claim 4 as disclosed above. Salter teaches wherein the processor (46, 80 or 82) (Par.64-65) is further configured to: analyze historic weather data to identify comparable historic weather events to the anticipated weather event (Par.46); and analyze historic data to identify loss of power statistics for the comparable historic weather events (Par.55).
Claim 11: Salter teaches a method for providing a resilient bidirectional charging infrastructure (Figs.1-2) comprising:
in response to an identification of an actual or predicted loss of electricity within a smart pole (22) (Par.66) (Fig.5, 104), determine whether an electric vehicle (12) is connected via a bidirectional charger (38) (Par.37-38) to the smart pole (22) (Par.68) (Fig.5,110-Yes); and wherein the smart pole (22) comprises a first port comprising an interface (24) for connecting the electric vehicle (12) to the bidirectional charger (28) in order to conduct charging (Fig.1)/discharging (Fig.2) operations when the electric vehicle (12) is connected to the firs port (via 24) (Par.41-42); and
in response to determining that the electric vehicle (2) is connected (Fig.5, 110-Yes), discharging electricity from the electric vehicle (12) to the smart pole (22) (Fig.5, 116) during the actual or predicted loss of electricity (Fig.5, 114-Yes) (Par.68);
Salter does not explicitly teach a plurality of smart poles connected in a circuit, wherein the plurality of smart poles are configured to provide at least part of a powered network, wherein the powered network provides access to a communications network; at least one of the plurality of smart poles comprises: a first port and a second port comprising a wireless communication interface for connecting the plurality of smart poles to the communication network.
Toyora teaches a plurality of smart poles (6) connected in a circuit (Fig.1), wherein the plurality of smart poles (6) are configured to provide at least part of a powered network (Par.24), wherein the powered network provides access to a communications network (12 and 14) (Par.25);
at least one of the plurality of smart poles (6) comprises: a first port comprising an interface for connecting to an electric vehicle (8) (Par.24) (Fig.1) to a bidirectional charger in order to conduct charging/discharging operations when the electric vehicle (8) is connected to the first port (Par.24), and
wherein a second port (coupled to 14) comprising a wireless communication interface for connecting the plurality of smart poles (6) to the communication network (12 and 14) (Par.25) (Fig.1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have had a plurality of smart poles as part of a powered network providing access to a communication network in the system of Salter to have had simultaneously electrically connected to and allowed charging/discharging from/to a plurality of power stations (Par.24); and managed the system for appropriate operation based on information and control signals being transmitted via the communication network (Par.4 and 25) as taught in Toyora.
The combination of Salter in view of Toyora does not explicitly teach monitoring a state of charge of the electric vehicle during the discharging electricity; providing a signal requesting a replacement electric vehicle based on the monitoring the state of charge and on a predetermined state of charge threshold; after providing the signal, stopping discharging the electric vehicle in response to the state of charge falling below the predetermined threshold.
Lam teaches monitoring a state of charge of an electric vehicle (16) (Fig.1) during the discharging electricity (Par.37);
providing a signal requesting a replacement electric vehicle based on the monitoring the state of charge and on a predetermined state of charge threshold (Par.38; Replace the electric vehicle with an additional electric vehicle by instructing to switch to another.);
after providing the signal, stopping discharging the electric vehicle (16) in response to the state of charge falling below the predetermined threshold (minimum power level) (Par.38).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have had the teachings of Lam in the combination of Salter in view of Toyora to have had continued providing power during an outage without draining excessive power from an electric vehicle (Par.38) thereby ensuring the electric vehicle is able to travel (Par.49).
The combination of Salter in view of Toyora does not explicitly teach each of the plurality of smart poles comprising an antenna; and wherein the powered network provides access to a communications network via the antenna to users to communicate via the communication network.
Sambaraju teaches each of a plurality of smart poles (300) (Fig.1) (Par.15) comprising an antenna (352) (Par.20; The cellular base station inherently includes an antenna capable of communicating with additional antennas 354.); and wherein a powered network provides access to a communications network (cellular network) via the antenna (352) to users to communicate via the communications network (cellular network) (Par.4-6 and 19-20).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have had the teachings of Sambaraju in the combination of Salter in view of Toyora to have had a vehicle charging station supporting wireless network functionalities and access (Par.1) to have had benefited from the charging station robust structures and distributed locations (Par.16 and 21).
In addition, the combination of Salter in view of Toyora does not explicitly teach discharging electricity from the electric vehicle into the at least one of the plurality of smart poles during the actual or predicted loss of electricity and using the electricity from the electric vehicle to continue providing access to the communications network.
Mokrushin teaches continue receiving electricity from an electric vehicle (UAV) during an actual or predicted loss of electricity and using the electricity from the electric vehicle (UAV) to continue providing access to a communications network (Par.25).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have had the teachings of Mokrushin in the combination of Salter and Toyora to have had delayed or prevented interruptions to communications caused by power failure (Par.6 and 25).
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Salter et al. (US 2022/0379770) in view of Toyora (US 2022/0297566) , Lam (US 2018/0034271), Sambaraju (US 2020/0207228) and Mokrushin et al. (US 2022/0007213) as applied to claims 1, 5 and 11 above, and further in view of Uyeki et al. (US 2016/0280089).
Claim 3: Salter in view of Toyora, Lam, Sambaraju and Mokrushin teach the limitations of claim 1 as disclosed above. Salter does not explicitly teach wherein the processor is further configured to: analyze the results of discharging the at least one electric vehicle into the smart pole via the bidirectional charger to improve ability to respond to future losses of power.
Uyeki discloses a processor (of 44 and/or 46) configured to: analyze the results of discharging dispatched electric vehicles (36) into at least one smart pole (38 or 40) via a bidirectional charger (Par.22) (Par.33; Analyzing data including: vehicle to grid history and number of discharge cycles.). The examiner notes “to improve ability to response to future losses of power” is interpreted as intended use. A recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have had the teachings of Uyeki in the system of Salter to have had analyzed data of previous discharges by an electric vehicle to determine electric vehicles that meet criteria to qualify for present discharge to prevent battery degradation (Par.8 and 33).
Claims 6 and 12-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Salter et al. (US 2022/0379770) in view of Toyora (US 2022/0297566) , Lam (US 2018/0034271), Sambaraju (US 2020/0207228) and Mokrushin et al. (US 2022/0007213) as applied to claims 1, 5 and 11 above, and further in view of Yu et al. (US 2022/0080852).
Claim 6: Salter in view of Toyora, Lam, Sambaraju and Mokrushin teach the limitations of claim 5 as disclosed above. Salter does not explicitly teach wherein the processor is further configured to: estimate a duration of a predicted loss of power to the smart pole from the anticipated weather event from the loss of power statistics; and calculate an amount of power that would be used by the smart pole during the duration of the predicted loss of power.
Yu teaches a processor (212) configured to: estimate a duration of a predicted loss of power to a charging station (138) from an anticipated weather event from loss of power statistics (Par.26); and calculate an amount of power that would be used by the charging station (138) during the duration of the predicted loss of power (Par.27) (Fig.3,308).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have had the teachings of Yu in the system of Salter to have had provided an estimation for backup power supply planning in advance (Par.27, Lines 13-15); thereby ensuring maintained operation of essential electric consuming devices during the duration of the power loss (Par.27, Lines 30-43).
The combination of Salter in view of Yu does not explicitly teach the charging station being a smart pole.
Toyora teaches a plurality of charging stations/smart poles (6) configured to provide at least part of a powered network that provides access to a communications network (12 and 14) (Par.25); and connecting to an electric vehicle (8) (Par.24) (Fig.1)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have had the teachings of Toyora in the combination of Salter and Yu to have had allowed charging/discharging from/to an electric vehicle (Par.24); and have had managed the system for appropriate operation based on information and control signals being transmitted via the communication network (Par.4 and 25).
Claim 12: Salter in view of Toyora, Lam, Sambaraju and Mokrushin teach the limitations of claim 11 as disclosed above. Salter teaches further comprising: in response to determining that the electric vehicle (12) is not connected (off-plug) to the at least one charging station (22) (Par.60);
analyzing whether to deploy at least one electric vehicle (12) to the charging station (22) (Par.54, 57-58 and 66) (Fig.5,106);
initiating a dispatch signal requesting to dispatch the at least one electric vehicle (12) to the charging station (22) (Par.12; and 60);
initiating a discharge signal requesting to begin to discharge the at least one electric vehicle (12) into the charging station (22) via the bidirectional charger (28) (Pars.61-63, The vehicle acts as a backup power source for powering the structure when a power outage condition is in effect.) (Fig.5, 116).
Salter does not explicitly teach the charging station being a smart pole.
Toyora teaches a plurality of charging stations/smart poles (6) configured to provide at least part of a powered network that provides access to a communications network (12 and 14) (Par.25); and connecting to an electric vehicle (8) (Par.24) (Fig.1)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have had the teachings of Toyora in the system of Salter to have had simultaneously electrically connected to and allowed charging/discharging from/to a plurality of power stations (Par.24), thereby increasing the amount of electric vehicles that can be charged/discharged; and have had managed the system for appropriate operation based on information and control signals being transmitted via the communication network (Par.4 and 25).
Claim 13: Salter in view of Toyora, Lam, Sambaraju, Mokrushin and Yu teach the limitations of claim 11 as disclosed above. Salter teaches further comprising: analyzing weather forecast data for one or more geographic areas at which the smart pole (22) is located (Par.46); and identifying an anticipated weather event from the weather forecast data (Par.46).
Salter does not explicitly teach a plurality of smart poles.
Toyora teaches a plurality of smart poles (6) connected in a circuit (Par.24) (Fig.1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have had a plurality of smart poles in the system of Salter to have had simultaneously electrically connected to and allowed charging/discharging from/to a plurality of power stations (Par.24) and have had allowed using a plurality of vehicles as energy sources (Par.23) as taught in Toyora, thereby increasing the amount of available energy during a period of electricity loss.
Claim 14: Salter in view of Toyora, Lam, Sambaraju, Mokrushin and Yu teach the limitations of claim 13 as disclosed above. Salter teaches further comprising: analyzing historic weather data to identify comparable historic weather events to the anticipated weather event (Par.46); and analyzing historic data to identify loss of power statistics for the comparable historic weather events (Par.55).
Claim 15: Salter in view of Toyora, Lam, Sambaraju, Mokrushin and Yu teach the limitations of claim 14 as disclosed above. Salter does not explicitly teach further comprising: estimating a duration of a predicted loss of power to the smart pole from the anticipated weather event from the loss of power statistics; and calculating an amount of power that would be used by the smart pole during the duration of the predicted loss of power.
Yu teaches estimating a duration of a predicted loss of power to a charging station (138) from an anticipated weather event from loss of power statistics (Par.26, Lines 5-19; and 27, Line 5); and calculating an amount of power that would be used by the charging station (138) during the duration of the predicted loss of power (Par.27) (Fig.3,308).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have had the teachings of Yu in the system of Salter to have had provided an estimation for backup power supply planning in advance (Par.27, Lines 13-15); thereby maintaining operation of essential electric consuming devices during the duration of the power loss (Par.27, Lines 30-43).
The combination of Salter in view of Yu does not explicitly teach the charging station being a smart pole.
Toyora teaches a plurality of charging stations/smart poles (6) configured to provide at least part of a powered network that provides access to a communications network (12 and 14) (Par.25); and connecting to an electric vehicle (8) (Par.24) (Fig.1)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have had the teachings of Toyora in the combination of Salter and Yu to have had allowed charging/discharging from/to an electric vehicle (Par.24); and have had managed the system for appropriate operation based on information and control signals being transmitted via the communication network (Par.4 and 25).
Claims 7-9 and 16-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Salter et al. (US 2022/0379770), Lam (US 2018/0034271), Toyora (US 2022/0297566), Sambaraju (US 2020/0207228), Mokrushin et al. (US 2022/0007213) and Yu et al. (US 2022/0080852) as applied to claims 6 and 15 above, and further in view of Ogawa (US 2021/0300202).
Claim 7: Salter in view of Toyora, Lam, Sambaraju, Mokrushin and Yu teach the limitations of claim 6 as disclosed above. Salter teaches initiate a message requesting that the electric vehicle (12) be dispatched to the one or more geographic areas at which the charging station (22) is located before the anticipated weather event begins (Par.60).
The combination of Salter and Yu does not explicitly teach wherein the processor is further configured to: determine a number of electric vehicles required to provide the calculated amount of power for the estimated duration of the predicted loss of power.
Ogawa teaches a processor (201) configured to: determine a number of electric vehicles (EV1-EVn) required to provide a calculated amount of power (demand-side demand) for the duration of a loss of power (blackout state) (Par.68); initiate a message requesting that the determined number of electric vehicles (EV1-EVn) be dispatched to the one or more geographic areas at which the plurality of smart poles (101-104, n) are located (Par.70).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have had the teachings of Ogawa in the combination to have had allocated electric vehicles to make the demand power and the supply power equal (Par.79) thereby preventing interruption in operation due to insufficient power backup during power loss.
Claim 8: Salter in view of Toyora, Lam, Sambaraju, Mokrushin, Yu and Ogawa teach the limitations of claim 7 as disclosed above. Salter teaches wherein the processor (46, 80 or 82) (Par.64-65) is further configured to: in response to an identification of an actual loss of electricity within the circuit (Par.68) (Fig.5,114-Yes), initiate a message requesting that the dispatched electric vehicles (12) be discharged into at least one charging station (22) (Par.68) (Fig.5,116).
Claim 9: Salter in view of Toyora, Lam, Sambaraju, Mokrushin, Yu and Ogawa teach the limitations of claim 8 as disclosed above. Salter does not explicitly teach wherein the processor is further configured to: analyze the results of discharging the dispatched electric vehicles into least one of the plurality of smart poles via a bidirectional charger to improve ability to predict future losses of power.
Yu discloses the processor (212) is further configured to: analyze the results of discharging the dispatched electric vehicles (112) into least one smart pole (138) via a bidirectional charger to improve ability to predict future losses of power (Par.20, Electric power is drawn from an electric vehicle (112) during a power outage.) (Par.27, Analyzing data received during previous operations.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have had the teachings of Yu in the system of Salter to have had effectively predicted the occurrence and length of a power outage to have had provided adequate backup power supply (Par.26-27).
Claim 16: Salter in view of Toyora, Lam, Sambaraju, Mokrushin and Yu teach the limitations of claim 15 as disclosed above. Salter teaches initiating a message requesting that the electric vehicle (12) be dispatched to the one or more geographic areas at which the smart pole (22) is located before the anticipated weather event begins (Par.60).
The combination of Salter and Yu does not explicitly teach determining a number of electric vehicles required to provide the calculated amount of power for the estimated duration of the predicted loss of power.
Ogawa teaches determining a number of electric vehicles (EV1-EVn) required to provide a calculated amount of power (demand-side demand) for the duration of a loss of power (blackout state) (Par.68); and initiating a message requesting that the determined number of electric vehicles (EV1-EVn) be dispatched to the one or more geographic areas at which the plurality of smart poles (101-104, n) are located (Par.70).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have had the teachings of Ogawa in the combination to have had allocated electric vehicles to make the demand power and the supply power equal (Par.79) thereby preventing interruption in operation due to power loss.
Claim 17: Salter in view of Toyora, Lam, Sambaraju, Mokrushin, Yu and Ogawa teach the limitations of claim 16 as disclosed above. Salter teaches further comprising: in response to an identification of an actual loss of electricity within the circuit (Par.68) (Fig.5,114), initiating a message requesting that the dispatched electric vehicle (12) be discharged into the charging station (22) (Par.68) (Fig.5,116).
Claim 18: Salter in view of Toyora, Lam, Sambaraju, Mokrushin, Yu and Ogawa teach the limitations of claim 17 as disclosed above. Salter does not explicitly teach further comprising: analyzing the results of discharging the electric vehicle or the dispatched electric vehicles into least one of the plurality of smart poles via a bidirectional charger to improve ability to predict future losses of power.
Yu discloses analyzing the results of discharging the dispatched electric vehicles (112) into least one smart pole (138) via a bidirectional charger to improve ability to predict future losses of power (Par.20, Electric power is drawn from an electric vehicle (112) during a power outage.) (Par.27, Analyzing data received during previous operations.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have had the teachings of Yu in the system of Salter to have had effectively predicted the occurrence and length of a power outage to have had provided adequate backup power supply (Par.26-27).
Claim 19: Salter in view of Toyora, Lam, Sambaraju, Mokrushin, Yu and Ogawa teach the limitations of claim 18 as disclosed above. Salter teaches wherein connected comprises directly plugged in to the smart pole (22) (Par.36) (Fig.2).
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Salter et al. (US 2022/0379770), Toyora (US 2022/0297566), Lam (US 2018/0034271), Sambaraju (US 2020/0207228) and Mokrushin et al. (US 2022/0007213) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Anthony Paulino et al. (US 2022/0309917).
Claim 10: Salter in view of Toyora, Lam, Sambaraju and Mokrushin teach the limitations of claim 1 as disclosed above. The combination of Salter in view of Toyora does not explicitly teach when the electric vehicle is configured to discharge electricity unto the at least one of the plurality of smart poles during the actual or predicted loss of electricity to continue providing access to the communications network.
Mokrushin teaches an electric vehicle (UAV) configured to discharge electricity during an actual or predicted loss of electricity to continue providing access to a communications network in order to minimize disruption (Par.25).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have had the teachings of Mokrushin in the combination of Salter and Toyora to have had delayed or prevented interruptions to communications caused by power failure (Par.6 and 25).
The combination of Salter, Toyora and Mokrushin do not explicitly teach at least one application requires near constant access to the communications network; and continue receiving electricity in order to minimize disruption to the at least one application.
Anthony Paulino teaches at least one application that requires near constant access to a communications network (Par.14); and continue receiving electricity in order to minimize disruption to the at least one application (Par.14).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have had the teachings of Anthony Paulino in the combination to have had avoided complete shutdown of a system requiring communications during a power outage (Par.14).
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Salter et al. (US 2022/0379770) in view of Toyora (US 2022/0297566), Naito et al. (US 2023/0191941; Foreign filing date 8/31/2020), Sambaraju (US 2020/0207228) and Mokrushin et al. (US 2022/0007213).
Claim 20: Salter teaches a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium having instructions stored thereon that are executable by a computing system (Par.52), comprising:
in response to an identification of an actual or predicted loss of electricity within a smart pole (22) (Par.66) (Fig.5, 104), determine whether an electric vehicle (12) is connected via a bidirectional charger (38) (Par.37-38) to the smart pole (22) (Par.68) (Fig.5,110-Yes); and wherein the smart pole (22) comprises a first port comprising an interface (24) for connecting the electric vehicle (12) to the bidirectional charger (28) in order to conduct charging (Fig.1) / discharging (Fig.2) operations when the electric vehicle (12) is connected to the firs port (via interface 24) (Par.41-42);
in response to determining that the electric vehicle (2) is connected (Fig.5, 110-Yes), initiating a message instructing the bidirectional charger (28) (Par.63) to begin discharging electricity from the electric vehicle (12) into the smart pole (22) (Fig.5, 116) during the actual or predicted loss of electricity (Fig.5, 114-Yes) (Par.68); and
in response to determining that the electric vehicle (12) is not electrically connected to the smart pole (22) (Fig.5,110-No), initiate a message requesting that the electric vehicle (12) be connected to the first port (via interface 24) (Fig.5, 112) (Par.68).
Salter does not explicitly teach a plurality of smart poles connected in a circuit, wherein the plurality of smart poles are configured to provide at least part of a powered network, wherein the powered network provides access to a communications network; at least one of the plurality of smart poles comprises: a first port and a second port comprising a wireless communication interface for connecting the plurality of smart poles to the communication network.
Toyora teaches a plurality of smart poles (6) connected in a circuit (Fig.1), wherein the plurality of smart poles (6) are configured to provide at least part of a powered network (Par.24), wherein the powered network provides access to a communications network (12 and 14) (Par.25);
at least one of the plurality of smart poles (6) comprises: a first port comprising an interface for connecting to an electric vehicle (8) (Par.24) (Fig.1) to a bidirectional charger in order to conduct charging/discharging operations when the electric vehicle (8) is connected to the first port (Par.24), and
wherein a second port (coupled to 14) comprising a wireless communication interface for connecting the plurality of smart poles (6) to the communication network (12 and 14) (Par.25) (Fig.1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have had a plurality of smart poles as part of a powered network and a communication network in the system of Salter to have had simultaneously electrically connected to and allowed charging/discharging from/to a plurality of power stations (Par.24); and managed the system based on information of the plurality of power stations (Par.25) as taught in Toyora.
The combination of Salter in view of Toyora does not explicitly teach analyze data related to the electric vehicle; in response to analyzing the data, stopping discharging electricity from the electric vehicle into the at least one of the plurality of smart poles if the discharging will be detrimental to the health of a battery of the electric vehicle; request a replacement electric vehicle to be dispatched to discharge electricity into the at least one of the plurality of smart poles to continue providing power during the actual or predicted loss of electricity.
Naito teaches analyzing data related to an electric vehicle (3A) (Fig.16) (Par.237);
in response to analyzing the data, stopping discharging electricity from the electric vehicle (3A) into at least one charging station (104) if the discharging will be detrimental to the health of a battery (31) of the electric vehicle (3A) (Par.237 and 240; Time available for the electric vehicle (3A) to supply electric power before based on a remaining amount of power on the battery (31). Therefore, the discharging of the first electric vehicle is stopped when the battery is depleted.);
request a replacement electric vehicle (3B) to discharge electricity into the at least one charging station (104) to continue providing power during the actual or predicted loss of electricity (Par.241-242).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have had the teachings of Naito in the combination of Salter in view of Toyora to have had continuous operation of loads during a power outage (Par.242 and 275).
The combination of Salter in view of Toyora does not explicitly teach each of the plurality of smart poles comprising an antenna; and wherein the powered network provides access to a communications network via the antenna to users to communicate via the communication network.
Sambaraju teaches each of a plurality of smart poles (300) (Fig.1) (Par.15) comprising an antenna (352) (Par.20; The cellular base station inherently includes an antenna capable of communicating with additional antennas 354.); and wherein a powered network provides access to a communications network (cellular network) via the antenna (352) to users to communicate via the communications network (cellular network) (Par.4-6 and 19-20).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have had the teachings of Sambaraju in the combination of Salter in view of Toyora to have had a vehicle charging station supporting wireless network functionalities and access (Par.1) to have had benefited from the charging station robust structures and distributed locations (Par.16 and 21).
In addition, the combination of Salter in view of Toyora does not explicitly teach discharging electricity from the electric vehicle into the at least one of the plurality of smart poles during the actual or predicted loss of electricity and using the electricity from the electric vehicle to continue providing access to the communications network.
Mokrushin teaches continue receiving electricity from an electric vehicle (UAV) during an actual or predicted loss of electricity and using the electricity from the electric vehicle (UAV) to continue providing access to a communications network (Par.25).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have had the teachings of Mokrushin in the combination of Salter and Toyora to have had delayed or prevented interruptions to communications caused by power failure (Par.6 and 25).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Bayges (US 2020/0118054) discloses a smart pole (501) (Fig.5) configured to couple to an electric vehicle for power transfer (Par.99) and comprising an antenna providing access to a communications network (Par.78 and 92-93).
Urban et al. (US 2020/0084831) discloses a smart pole (10) (Fig.7) comprising an antenna (7) providing access to a communication network (Par.93); and an interface (27) for connecting an electric vehicle (25) to a charger (60) (Par.37-38) in order to conduct charging operations when the electric vehicle (25) is connected (Par.95).
Kubota (US 2022/0239106) discloses analyzing past behavior of an electric vehicle when it was used as an energy resource (Par.6 and 30).
Mori et al. (US 2022/0396173) teaches least one smart pole is configured to continue receiving electricity from an electric vehicle (10) during an actual or predicted loss of electricity to continue providing access to a communications network (NW) (Par.44) (Fig.1).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 JOHALI ALEJANDRA TORRES RUIZ whose telephone number is (571)270-1262. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10:00am-6:00pm.
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, Julian D Huffman can be reached at 571-272-2147. 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.
/JOHALI A TORRES RUIZ/Examiner, Art Unit 2859
/JULIAN D HUFFMAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2859
Prosecution Insights