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 .
Status of Claims
This action is in reply to the argument filed on 09/13/2025.
Claims 1-10 and 13-17 were previously cancelled.
Claims 11-12, and 18-20 are currently pending and have been examined.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 09/13/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Appellant argues that the claims amendments overcome the 101 rejections.
First, applicant points to a typo in the 101 rejections, under step 2A prong 2 the term “banknote suspension and reinstatement” is mentions when the abstract idea from step 2A prong 1 of “reservation for an energy transaction” should have been stated. This has been corrected.
Second applicant argues that the claims “the claim is directed to an improvement of charging devices allowing "optimal capacity utilization." The person of ordinary skill in the art would have understood that like all charging devices, motor. Vehicle charging devices consume energy even when not supplying energy to a motor vehicle. Thus, any time that a charging device is not charging a motor vehicle, it is wasting energy. Accordingly, the claimed method optimizes the capacity of a motor vehicle charging device, thereby reducing energy waste, and in turn improving the operation of the charging device.”
Examiner respectfully disagrees, the argued improvements appears to be not present in the claims and amounts to using the same technology, but improving the schedule of use, examiner asserts is similar to certain methods or organizing human activity, specifically "managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people" include social activities, teaching, and following rules or instructions. (See MPEP 2106.04 (a)(2)(II.)(C)).
For at least the reasons stated above applicant’s arguments regarding 35 U.S.C. § 101 are not percussive.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
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.
Claims 11-12, 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more.
In the instant case, claims 11 are directed to a method, s
Claim 11 recites “reservation for an energy transaction” which is a grouped under “Certain methods of organizing human activity — fundamental economic practices” in prong one of step 2A (MPEP 2106.04(a)). Abstract ideas are in bold below, and represents a “reservation for an energy transaction”
receiving, by a navigation device of the motor vehicle, a start and destination input respectively corresponding to a start and destination of a journey of the vehicle;
determining, by the navigation device, a route between the start and destination of the journey;
determining, by the navigation device, an amount of energy consumed by the vehicle between the start and destination of the journey;
identifying, by the navigation device based on the amount of energy consumed by the vehicle between the start and destination of the journey and an amount of energy currently stored by an energy storage device of the motor vehicle, a charging stop;
reserving, by the navigation device, a charging device at the charging stop by providing, by the motor vehicle to the charging device using a wireless transmission, an identifier identifying a billing account associated with the motor vehicle is provided to the charging device and a required amount of energy for the energy storage device of the motor vehicle or an estimated charging time for the energy storage device of the motor vehicle;
transmitting, by the navigation device to the charging device, updated estimated times of arrival at the charging device several times and at regular intervals along the route as updated reservations;
allowing or preventing further motor vehicles from charging using the charging device based on a most recent updated estimated time of arrival so that one or more of the further motor vehicles are allowed to charge using the charging device until a time of the most recent updated estimated time of arrival and the one or more further motor vehicles are prevented from charging using the charging device after the time of the most recent updated estimated time of arrival;
filling, during a time period of the updated reservation, the energy storage device of the vehicle by the charging device; and
automatically debiting the billing account based on the filling, wherein a defined amount of electrical energy is received from the charging device by the energy storage device and the billing account is automatically debited with a sum representing the transferred amount of electrical energy, and wherein the sum is automatically debited from the billing account identified by the identifier.
The additional elements of claim 1 such as “…by a navigation device of the motor vehicle …”, “…the vehicle …”, “…energy storage device …”, “…a charging stop …”, “…by the navigation device, a charging device at the charging stop by providing, by the motor vehicle to the charging device using a wireless transmission…” represent the use of a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea and/or does no more than generally link the abstract idea to a particular field of use. Therefore, the additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application as they do no more than represent a computer performing functions that correspond to (i.e., automate) the acts of reservation for an energy transaction.
And, as the additional element does no more than provide a tool to perform an abstract idea and/or does no more than generally link the abstract idea to a particular field of use, it does computer functionality or improve another technology or technical field.
Hence, claim 11 is not patent eligible.
Claim 12 recites “billing account is debited in accordance with the transferred amount of electrical energy.” However, this does no more than describe the abstract idea. The additional elements of “wherein the energy storage device is a battery of the motor vehicle, wherein the battery is loaded by the charging device with a defined amount of electrical energy” does no more than use a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea and do no more than generally link the abstract idea to a particular field of use. Therefore, as it is no more than apply it does not improve the functioning of a computer, or improve other technology or technical field.
Claim 18 recites “identifying an availability of the …”, “clearing access to the … depending on the identified availability.” However, this does no more than describe the abstract idea. The additional elements of “…charging device”, “charging device for the motor vehicle” does no more than use a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea and do no more than generally link the abstract idea to a particular field of use. Therefore, as it is no more than apply it does not improve the functioning of a computer, or improve other technology or technical field.
Claim 19 recites “wherein the availability is checked relative to existing reservations of the ….” However, this does no more than describe the abstract idea. The additional elements of “…charging device…”, does no more than use a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea and do no more than generally link the abstract idea to a particular field of use. Therefore, as it is no more than apply it does not improve the functioning of a computer, or improve other technology or technical field.
Claim 20 recites “wherein the … receives a reservation for …, a match between the … associated with the reservation and the … associated with the identifier is identified when receiving the wirelessly transmitted identifier, and when the match is submitted, access to the … is cleared for the ….” However, this does no more than describe the abstract idea. The additional elements of “…charging device…”, and “…motor vehicle…” does no more than use a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea and do no more than generally link the abstract idea to a particular field of use. Therefore, as it is no more than apply it does not improve the functioning of a computer, or improve other technology or technical field.
The claims as a whole do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea itself. This is because the claims do not affect an improvement to another technology or technical field, the claims do not amount to an improvement to the functioning of a computer system itself, and the claims do not move beyond a general link of the use of an abstract idea to a particular technological environment.
Accordingly, there are no meaningful limitations in the claims that transform the judicial exception into a patent eligible application such that the claims amount to significantly more than the judicial exception itself.
Prior Art of Record Not Currently Relied Upon
Ahmed (US 2018/0105053 A1) Teaches: method for wireless charging access point identification.
Jung (US 2020/0072627 A1) Method for route planning for an electric vehicle.
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 GREGORY MARK JAMES whose telephone number is (571)272-5155. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30am - 5:00pm 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, Ryan Donlon can be reached at 571-270-3602. 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.
/GREGORY M JAMES/Examiner, Art Unit 3692
/RYAN D DONLON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3692