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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in Korea on March 18th 2022. It is noted, however, that applicant has not filed a certified copy of the KR 10-2022-0034033 application as required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 3/2/2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed 3/2/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-17 under 35 U.S.C 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of 35 U.S.C 103.
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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1-4, 9-10, and 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maeda et al. (US 20230045214 A1) in view of Yamaguchi et al. (US 20160028253 A1) further in view of Kim et al. (US 20200055419 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Maeda teaches a scheduling method for reservation-based charging from a grid for an urban air mobility (EV 102, ¶[23] “An “electric vehicle” (EV), as used herein, refers to any moving vehicle that is capable of carrying one or more human occupants and is powered entirely or partially by one or more electric motors powered by an electric battery. The term “vehicle” includes, but is not limited to: cars, trucks, vans, minivans, SUVs, motorcycles, scooters, boats, personal watercraft, and aircraft”) comprising a battery (106),
a grid charging device (112) configure to charge the battery with electric power from the grid (¶[35] “The charging stations 112 may replenish the battery 106 using a charging energy source type that indicates the type of energy the charging stations 112 provides. Non-renewable energy may include electricity from a grid source, and in the case of hybrid vehicles, fossil fuels.”),
and at least one renewal-energy generator (¶[35] “Energy may include clean renewable energy and non-renewable energy. Clean renewable energy may include, solar energy, hydro energy, biomass energy, wind energy, among others”), the method comprising:
checking, through a telematics unit (TMU) (202, ¶[42] “the EV 102 may include a vehicle computing device 202 (e.g., a telematics unit… with provisions for processing, communicating and interacting with various components of the EV 102 and other components of the system 100”), for information on a low-price time zone between the first and second set time points (see ¶[40-41]).
determining a schedule of charging according a low price time zone (¶[39] “charging rates that may be applied to the user 122 of the EV 102 based on one or more compensation offers (e.g., incentives, discounts, credits, etc.) that may be provided to the user 122”).
Maeda does not explicitly teach acquiring, through a battery management system (BMS) and an audio video navigation (AVN), a target state of charge (SOC) required for the urban air mobility to travel to a destination and a remaining SOC of the battery;
calculating a required amount of electricity charge according to the target SOC and the remaining SOC of the battery,
collecting real-time weather information for a time zone from a first set time point to a second set time point,
and determining a schedule of charging, from a first set time point to a second set time point, by the grid charging device according to the required amount of electricity charge and an amount of electricity generated by the at least one renewal- energy generator;
and charging the urban air mobility based on the schedule of charging.
Yamaguchi teaches collecting real-time weather information for a time zone from a first set time point to a second set time point (¶[25] “The predicting apparatus 4 acquires information about weather forecast),
calculating a required amount of electricity charge according to a target SOC and a remaining SOC of the battery (¶[28] “The charge control apparatus 1 calculates an amount of charge with which the EV 9 can run over the scheduled running distance. The charge control apparatus 1 acquires a remaining battery level from the EV 9”),
and determining a schedule of charging, from a first set time point to a second set time point, by the grid charging device according to the required amount of electricity charge and an amount of electricity generated by the at least one renewal- energy generator (¶[29] “The charge control apparatus 1 uses the acquired information and calculated information to set the charge start time and end time of the EV 9. Specifically, the charge control apparatus 1 uses the predicted power generation amount with the renewable energy and the future predicted power amount obtained from the power-system monitor system 6 to determine the charge period such that charge is performed in a time frame in which more renewable energy can be used”)
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Maeda to incorporate the teachings of Yamaguchi to provide calculating a required amount of electricity charge according to a target SOC and a remaining SOC of the battery and determining a schedule of charging, from a first set time point to a second set time point, by the grid charging device according to the required amount of electricity charge and an amount of electricity generated by the at least one renewal- energy in order to make sure the EV will be charged enough for its intended use and also take advantage of renewable energy to reduce costs to the user as well as environmental impact.
The combination of Maeda and Yamaguchi teaches charging the urban air mobility based on the schedule of charging (Yamaguchi ¶[30] “The charge stand 8 includes a charger 81 and starts or ends charge of the EV 9 at the time indicated by the start/end control apparatus 7”).
The combination of Maeda and Yamaguchi does not explicitly teach acquiring, through a battery management system (BMS) and an audio video navigation (AVN), a target state of charge (SOC) required for the urban air mobility to travel to a destination and a remaining SOC of the battery.
Kim teaches acquiring, through a battery management system (BMS) (130, ¶[43] “the battery controller 130 may be configured to detect the battery state in the charger 140, and transmit the SOC information based on the battery state to the vehicle controller 110”) and an audio video navigation (AVN) (120, ¶[42] “The communication controller 120 may be integrally composed of an audio-video-navigation (AVN), a telematics unit (TMU), etc”), a target state of charge (SOC) required for the urban air mobility to travel to a destination and a remaining SOC of the battery (see ¶[43] quoted above and ¶[40] “The communication controller 120 may be configured to receive charging reservation setting information and/or power rate information to transmit the information to the vehicle controller 110. The charging reservation setting information may be generated by the user 10, and the charging reservation setting information may include a target charging amount”);
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Maeda in view of Yamaguchi to incorporate the teachings of Kim to provide acquiring, through a battery management system (BMS) and an audio video navigation (AVN), a target state of charge (SOC) required for the urban air mobility to travel to a destination and a remaining SOC of the battery in order to allow input from the user as suggested by Kim (¶[42]).
Regarding Claim 2, Maeda in view of Yamaguchi further in view of Kim teaches the method of claim 1.
Maeda further teaches wherein the determining of the schedule comprises:
determining an initial schedule for charging by the grid charging device according to the required amount of electricity charge (602-604 in Fig. 6, ¶[83] “method 600 includes the reservation module 402 identifying an initial reservation 504 for the EV 102 to receive a charge from a charging entity 120 at a first place at a first time”);
and determining a final schedule by changing the initial schedule (606-608) according to the amount of electricity generated by the at least one renewal-energy generator (606, ¶[85] “At block 606, the method 600 includes detecting a grid event that changes the first cost for the charging entity 120”; a possible grid event can be that a renewable energy stops working, thereby forcing the charging station to purchase energy and raising the cost of the charging session.)
Regarding Claim 3, Maeda in view of Yamaguchi further in view of Kim teaches the method of claim 2.
Yamaguchi further teaches (Fig. 4) wherein the initial schedule comprises, for a time period from a start time (start of chargeable time frame) to an end time (end of chargeable time frame) for the charging by the grid charging device,
a first charging obtaining a first charging amount of electricity during a first time period,
a second charging obtaining a second charging amount of electricity during a second time period,
and a third charging obtaining a third charging amount of electricity during a third time period (see an example of 3 separate charging blocks in Fig. 4.3, ¶[41] “This is a case where the overload time frame appears in a chargeable time frame. In this case, the charge control apparatus 1 performs scheduling such that the EV 9 is charged in the overload time frame with a higher priority”, the charging period may also be split into 3 blocks by non-chargeable time blocks (see Fig. 4.2)).
Regarding Claim 4, Maeda in view of Yamaguchi further in view of Kim teaches the method of claim 3.
Maeda further teaches wherein a grid fee per unit power for the first time period (702 in Fig. 7) is lower than those for the second and third time periods (704 in Fig. 7) (¶[94] “At block 704, the method 700 includes estimating a grid event cost that the charging entity 120 will incur to provide the charge to the EV 102 from electrical infrastructure in response to detecting the grid event. The grid event may cause the first cost to increase to the grid event cost for the charging entity 120”)
Regarding Claim 9, Maeda in view of Yamaguchi further in view of Kim teaches the method of claim 1.
Maeda as modified does not teach wherein the schedule is determined such that the charging by the grid charging device is terminated before a departure time which is determined by a user's selection.
Yamaguchi teaches wherein the schedule is determined such that the charging by the grid charging device is terminated before a departure time which is determined by a user's selection (¶[26] “The user inputs information about a use schedule period of the EV 9 (scheduled time of use start and scheduled time of use end) and information about a scheduled running distance of the EV 9 to the input terminal apparatus 5”).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Maeda in view of Yamaguchi further in view of Kim to further incorporate the teachings of Yamaguchi to provide the schedule is determined such that the charging by the grid charging device is terminated before a departure time which is determined by a user's selection in order to make sure the vehicle is able to be charged enough by the time the user is ready to leave.
Regarding Claim 10, Maeda in view of Yamaguchi further in view of Kim teaches the method of claim 9.
Yamaguchi further teaches wherein the second set time point is set to be the departure time (see Fig. 4, end of the chargeable time frame), and the first set time point is determined according to information on a time point when the at least one renewal-energy generator is available to generate electricity (first or second chargeable time frames in Fig. 4.2 or overload time frames in Fig. 4.3, ¶[36] “The charge control apparatus 1 performs scheduling such that the EV 9 is charged in a time frame in which the threshold value is exceeded (hereinafter referred to as an overload time frame) wherever possible”).
Regarding Claim 15, Maeda teaches a charging control system (Fig. 1) configured to control reservation-based charging from a grid for an urban air mobility (EV 102, ¶[23] “An “electric vehicle” (EV), as used herein, refers to any moving vehicle that is capable of carrying one or more human occupants and is powered entirely or partially by one or more electric motors powered by an electric battery. The term “vehicle” includes, but is not limited to: cars, trucks, vans, minivans, SUVs, motorcycles, scooters, boats, personal watercraft, and aircraft”) comprising
a battery (106),
a grid charging device (112) configure to charge the battery with electric power from the grid (¶[35] “The charging stations 112 may replenish the battery 106 using a charging energy source type that indicates the type of energy the charging stations 112 provides. Non-renewable energy may include electricity from a grid source, and in the case of hybrid vehicles, fossil fuels.”),
and at least one renewal-energy generator (¶[35] “Energy may include clean renewable energy and non-renewable energy. Clean renewable energy may include, solar energy, hydro energy, biomass energy, wind energy, among others”),
the charging control system comprising:
an input/output device (308, ¶[49] “the communication interface 308 may provide software, firmware and/or hardware to facilitate data input and output between the components of the computing device 302 and other components, networks and data sources”),
a memory (304),
and at least one microprocessor (302), wherein the at least one microprocessor executes a program for the method of claim 1 (as taught by Maeda in view of Yamaguchi further in view of Kim above).
Regarding Claim 16, Maeda in view of Yamaguchi further in view of Kim teaches the charging control system of claim 15.
Yamaguchi further teaches wherein the amount of electricity generated by the at least one renewal-energy generator (2) is obtained by using weather information from the first set time point to the second set time point (¶[25] “The predicting apparatus 4 acquires information about weather forecast, prediction of water power amount, and prediction of wind power amount from outside. The predicting apparatus 4 calculates a future power supply amount with the renewable energy in hours from the acquired”)
Claim(s) 5-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maeda et al. (US 20230045214 A1) in view of Yamaguchi et al. (US 20160028253 A1) and Kim et al. (US 20200055419 A1) and further in view of Gage (US 20220348088 A1).
Regarding Claim 5, Maeda in view of Yamaguchi further in view of Kim teaches the method of claim 3.
Maeda as modified does not teach wherein, in case where the amount of electricity generated by the at least one renewal-energy generator is equal to or below the second charging amount of electricity,
the final schedule is determined by changing the end time such that the second time period is shortened and the second charging amount of electricity is reduced by the amount of electricity generated by the at least one renewal-energy generator.
Gage teaches wherein, in case where the amount of electricity generated by the at least one renewal-energy generator (wind turbine 14 or solar panel 12) is equal to or below the second charging amount of electricity,
the final schedule is determined by changing the end time such that the second time period is shortened and the second charging amount of electricity is reduced by the amount of electricity generated by the at least one renewal-energy generator (¶[28] “two kilowatts maybe saved by the solar panels 12 which would result in approximately twelve kilowatts required for a full charge, wherein the time needed for a full charge would be reduced from approximately thirteen hours to eleven hours”).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Maeda in view of Yamaguchi further in view of Kim to incorporate the teachings of Gage to provide wherein, in case where the amount of electricity generated by the at least one renewal-energy generator is equal to or below the second charging amount of electricity, the final schedule is determined by changing the end time such that the second time period is shortened and the second charging amount of electricity is reduced by the amount of electricity generated by the at least one renewal-energy generator in order to fully charge the vehicle while reducing the cost by using as much renewable energy as possible.
Regarding Claim 6, Maeda in view of Yamaguchi further in view of Kim teaches the method of claim 3.
Maeda as modified does not teach wherein, in case where the amount of electricity generated by the at least one renewal-energy generator is over the second charging amount of electricity and equal to or below a sum of the second and third charging amounts of electricity,
the final schedule is determined by changing the end time such that the second charging is excluded and changing the start time such that the third time period is shortened and the third charging amount of electricity is reduced by an amount obtained by subtracting the second charging amount of electricity from the amount of electricity generated by the at least one renewal-energy generator.
Gage teaches wherein, in case where the amount of electricity generated by the at least one renewal-energy generator (windmill 14) is over the second charging amount of electricity and equal to or below a sum of the second and third charging amounts of electricity,
the final schedule is determined by changing the end time such that the second charging is excluded and changing the start time such that the third time period is shortened and the third charging amount of electricity is reduced by an amount obtained by subtracting the second charging amount of electricity from the amount of electricity generated by the at least one renewal-energy generator (¶[30] “The windmill 14 only version would reduce the charging time from a Chevy Volt to approximately five hours, thus also reducing the amount of time necessary for the vehicle 10 to be plugged into the electric grid, thus reducing stress on such electric grids”, see also ¶[28] “In this example the Chevy Volt has fourteen usable kilowatt hours when fully charged and a full charge takes approximately thirteen hours”).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Maeda in view of Yamaguchi further in view of Kim to incorporate the teachings of Gage to provide wherein, in case where the amount of electricity generated by the at least one renewal-energy generator is over the second charging amount of electricity and equal to or below a sum of the second and third charging amounts of electricity, the final schedule is determined by changing the end time such that the second charging is excluded and changing the start time such that the third time period is shortened and the third charging amount of electricity is reduced by an amount obtained by subtracting the second charging amount of electricity from the amount of electricity generated by the at least one renewal-energy generator in order to fully charge the vehicle while reducing the cost by using as much renewable energy as possible.
Regarding Claim 7, Maeda in view of Yamaguchi further in view of Kim teaches the method of claim 3.
Maeda as modified does not teach wherein, in case where the amount of electricity generated by the at least one renewal-energy generator is over a sum of the second and third charging amounts of electricity and equal to or below the required amount of electricity charge,
the final schedule is determined by changing the start time such that the third charging is excluded and changing the end time such that the first time period is shortened and the first charging amount of electricity is reduced by an amount obtained by subtracting a sum of the second and third charging amounts of electricity from the amount of electricity generated by the at least one renewal-energy generator.
Gage teaches wherein, in case where the amount of electricity generated by the at least one renewal-energy generator (solar panels 12 and wind turbines 14) is over a sum of the second and third charging amounts of electricity and equal to or below the required amount of electricity charge,
the final schedule is determined by changing the start time such that the third charging is excluded and changing the end time such that the first time period is shortened and the first charging amount of electricity is reduced by an amount obtained by subtracting a sum of the second and third charging amounts of electricity from the amount of electricity generated by the at least one renewal-energy generator (¶[30] “if the Chevy Volt in this example used both the solar panels 12 and the wind turbine 14 thereon, in one scenario, may only require approximately four kilowatts and approximately 3.7 hours from the grid to fully charge”, see also ¶[28] “In this example the Chevy Volt has fourteen usable kilowatt hours when fully charged and a full charge takes approximately thirteen hours”).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Maeda in view of Yamaguchi further in view of Kim to incorporate the teachings of Gage to provide wherein, in case where the amount of electricity generated by the at least one renewal-energy generator is over a sum of the second and third charging amounts of electricity and equal to or below the required amount of electricity charge, the final schedule is determined by changing the start time such that the third charging is excluded and changing the end time such that the first time period is shortened and the first charging amount of electricity is reduced by an amount obtained by subtracting a sum of the second and third charging amounts of electricity from the amount of electricity generated by the at least one renewal-energy generator in order to fully charge the vehicle while reducing the cost by using as much renewable energy as possible.
Regarding Claim 8, Maeda in view of Yamaguchi further in view of Kim teaches the method of claim 1.
Yamaguchi further teaches wherein, in case where a preset time zone is only allowed for the charging by the grid charging device, the determining of the schedule comprises setting a start time and an end time within the preset time zone (chargeable time frame in Fig. 4.1)
Maeda in view of Yamaguchi further in view of Kim does not explicitly teach according to a time period in which an amount of charging for the time period by the grid charging device is equal to an amount obtained by subtracting the amount of electricity generated by the at least one renewal-energy generator from the required amount of electricity charge.
Gage teaches a time period in which an amount of charging for the time period by the grid charging device is equal to an amount obtained by subtracting the amount of electricity generated by the at least one renewal-energy generator from the required amount of electricity charge (¶[30] “if the Chevy Volt in this example used both the solar panels 12 and the wind turbine 14 thereon, in one scenario, may only require approximately four kilowatts and approximately 3.7 hours from the grid to fully charge”, see also ¶[28] “In this example the Chevy Volt has fourteen usable kilowatt hours when fully charged and a full charge takes approximately thirteen hours”).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Maeda in view of Yamaguchi further in view of Kim to incorporate the teachings of Gage to provide according to a time period in which an amount of charging for the time period by the grid charging device is equal to an amount obtained by subtracting the amount of electricity generated by the at least one renewal-energy generator from the required amount of electricity charge in order to fully charge the vehicle while reducing the cost by using as much renewable energy as possible.
Claim(s) 11 and 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maeda et al. (US 20230045214 A1) in view of Yamaguchi et al. (US 20160028253 A1) further in view of Kim et al. (US 20200055419 A1) and further in view of Jorgensen et al. (US 20110049903 A1).
Regarding Claim 11, Maeda in view of Yamaguchi further in view of Kim teaches the method of claim 1.
Maeda in view of Yamaguchi further in view of Kim does not teach wherein the at least one renewal-energy generator comprises at least one propeller and a regenerative motor connected to the at least one propeller,
wherein the amount of electricity generated by the at least one renewal-energy generator is calculated by an equation of
∑
k
=
1
n
ƞ
∫
t
n
t
d
1
2
ρ
A
e
f
f
V
e
f
f
(
t
)
3
d
t
where n indicates a number of the at least one propeller, tn the first set time point, td the second set time point,
ρ
air density, Aeff effective area of the at least one propeller, Veff effective wind velocity,
ƞ
efficiency of electric generation;
Jorgensen teaches wherein the at least one renewal-energy generator comprises at least one propeller (10) and a regenerative motor (245) connected to the at least one propeller.
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Maeda in view of Yamaguchi to incorporate the teachings of Jorgensen to provide wherein the at least one renewal-energy generator comprises at least one propeller and a regenerative motor connected to the at least one propeller in order to charge the battery using renewable wind power.
Jorgensen does not explicitly teach wherein the amount of electricity generated by the at least one renewal-energy generator is calculated by an equation of
∑
k
=
1
n
ƞ
∫
t
n
t
d
1
2
ρ
A
e
f
f
V
e
f
f
(
t
)
3
d
t
where n indicates a number of the at least one propeller, tn the first set time point, td the second set time point,
ρ
air density, Aeff effective area of the at least one propeller, Veff effective wind velocity,
ƞ
efficiency of electric generation; however, Jorgensen teaches the power captured by a wind turbine is equal to
P
=
ƞ
ρ
2
π
R
2
c
p
v
3
[Eq. 1].
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to make the following substitutions
Convert
π
R
2
(area of a circle) to Aeff
Convert
c
p
v
3
( fraction of power extracted from the wind, wind velocity in meters/second) to Veff as a function of time.
Integrate the equation to find the power generated over a time period
Sum the power of all the propellers to get the total power
to arrive at the claimed equation in order to track the amount of power generated during a time period.
Regarding Claim 13, Maeda in view of Yamaguchi further in view of Kim and further in view of Jorgensen teaches the method of claim 11.
Jorgensen further teaches wherein the efficiency of electric generation
ƞ
is adjusted according to a ratio of an actual amount of generated electricity to the amount of electricity generated by the at least one renewal-energy generator (¶[23] “where η is an efficiency factor, dependent upon the efficiency of the generator, gearbox, etc.”).
Regarding Claim 14, Maeda in view of Yamaguchi further in view of Kim and further in view of Jorgensen teaches the method of claim 13.
Jorgensen does not explicitly teach wherein the adjustment of the efficiency of electric generation
ƞ
is suspended when the ratio is out of a range in-between upper and lower limits; however, this would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in order to avoid skewing the equation in the case where the power generated by the turbine suddenly becomes very high or very low.
Claim(s) 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maeda et al. (US 20230045214 A1) in view of Yamaguchi et al. (US 20160028253 A1), further in view of Kim and further in view of Jorgensen et al. (US 20110049903 A1), and further in view of Gage (US 20220348088 A1).
Regarding Claim 12, The combination of Maeda, Yamaguchi, Kim and Jorgensen teaches the method of claim 11.
Yamaguchi further teaches wherein the effective wind velocity Veff is determined according to information on wind direction.
The combination does not explicitly teach wherein the effective wind velocity Veff is determined according to a parked angle of the mobility.
Gage teaches that the effective wind velocity Veff is determined according to a parked angle of the mobility (due to the wind turbine being mounted on the vehicle as seen on Fig. 1)
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the combination of Maeda, Yamaguchi, Kim and Jorgensen to incorporate the teachings of Gage to provide the effective wind velocity Veff is determined according to a parked angle of the mobility in order to get the most accurate estimation of the power generated by the turbine.
Claim(s) 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maeda et al. (US 20230045214 A1) in view of Yamaguchi et al. (US 20160028253 A1) further in view of Kim et al. (US 20200055419 A1) and further in view of Rashid et al. ("An RES-based Grid Connected Electric Vehicle Charging Station for Bangladesh")
Regarding Claim 17, Maeda in view of Yamaguchi further in view of Kim teaches the charging control system of claim 15.
Maeda in view of Yamaguchi further in view of Kim does not teach wherein, in case where a sum of the amount of electricity generated by the at least one renewal-energy generator and an amount of charging by the grid charging device is over the required amount of electric charge, a superfluous amount from the electricity generated by the at least one renewal-energy generator is supplied to outside via the grid charging device
Rashid teaches wherein, in case where a sum of the amount of electricity generated by the at least one renewal-energy generator and an amount of charging by the grid charging device is over the required amount of electric charge ([Page 2 Col 1] “In Fig. 1, the car’s battery is charging from the grid as well as renewable sources”), a superfluous amount from the electricity generated by the at least one renewal-energy generator is supplied to outside via the grid charging device ([Page 2 Col 1] “The battery is storing excess electricity generated by the solar PV and wind turbine which can later be sold to the grid or used to reduce grid purchase. Electric vehicles can be used as a substitute for meeting the grid’s energy demand by extracting power during off peak time and delivering power back to the grid at peak demand time. During Vehicle-to-Grid mode, the stored energy in the battery can be given back to the grid”).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Maeda in view of Yamaguchi further in view of Kim to incorporate the teachings of Rashid to provide wherein, in case where a sum of the amount of electricity generated by the at least one renewal-energy generator and an amount of charging by the grid charging device is over the required amount of electric charge, a superfluous amount from the electricity generated by the at least one renewal-energy generator is supplied to outside via the grid charging device in order to gain some financial benefit by selling extra energy to the grid.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AIMAN BICKIYA whose telephone number is (571)270-0555. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30 - 6 PM 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, Julian 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.
/A.B./Examiner, Art Unit 2859
/JULIAN D HUFFMAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2859