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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The IDS filed 4/4/23 has been considered and placed of record. The initialed copy is attached herewith.
Specification
A substitute specification including an amended abstract filed in a pre-amendment on 4/4/23 has been made of record.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because Figure 1 is blurry and contains undescriptive boxes (i.e. just having English alphabet letter labels). Although the boxes in the figures are labeled with the alphabet letters which allow a correlation to each box as one reads the specification, the letters by themselves do not allow one to quickly ascertain the concept of the invention.
Figures 7, 9 and 10 use black shadings (e.g. too dark) which made the figures difficult to decipher. In addition, ALL figures are too light and blurry. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 16-33 and 35 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by EP document EP2768693B1 [Note the document is same as WO2013/056990A2. All paragraph references are found in both the EP and WO documents but only the EP document has paragraph numberings. The WO document shows drawing figures].
Re claim 16, the document discloses method for controlling charging with a charging infrastructure charging vehicles (para 1), each vehicle being equipped with at least one rechargeable battery (mid para 4), the charging infrastructure having at least one charging station connected to an electric distribution network (para 39), at least two parking spaces for the vehicles and at least one electric connection of the at least one charging station to at least one vehicle parked in one of the at least two parking spaces (para 39; fig1), and a number of the charging stations being smaller than a number of parking spaces (para 25, end of p7 to top of p8: “if a greater number of electric vehicles than a number of electric vehicle supply equipment…”), the method comprising: using a set of parameters of the electric vehicles selected from among an initial charge level of at least one battery, a required charge level at an end of charging of the at least one battery, and model of the at least one battery (end of para 43: “charging information include state of charge and/or charging profile…”), a set of parameters of the infrastructure selected from a waiting time in a queue of parked vehicles to be charged, electric characteristics of the at least one charging station, at least one of maximum power and efficiency of the charging station, a connection time of the at least one connection being connected to a vehicle (para 43: “for example, minimized waiting time and/or minimized charging time…EVSE”), and electrical parameters selected from an electric capacity of the electric distribution network, available local electrical power, a selling price for electricity from the electrical distribution network supplied from the at least one charging station to the electrical distribution network and a purchase price for supplying electricity from the electrical network to the charging station (para 43: “furthermore a cost function for determining the associated costs when charging”); and charging at least one vehicle according to a charging sequence comprising at of charging at least one vehicle with a charging sequence for the at least one vehicle with a cost being minimized by at least one element of the sets of parameters (para 43: “the permutation corresponding to a highest value of optimization…” and para 59). See entire paragraph 43 and 59.
Re claim 17, the document further discloses a controlled source of electricity is solar or wind power (2a in figure 1 and para 38).
Re claims 18 and 19, the document further discloses the battery model is expressed as an open-circuit voltage of the battery, an internal resistance of the battery, and charge of charging the battery model is performed (claim 18) or how charging the battery model if performed (claim 19). Para 43: “charging information include state-of-charge and/or charging profile…is assigned for charging.” It is inherent state-of-charge is performed using at least voltage including OC voltage, current and/or resistance of the batteries.
Re claims 20-22, the document further discloses infrastructure comprises automatic recognition of at least one vehicle arriving at one of the parking spaces (para 29-31).
Re claims 23-26, the document further discloses the infrastructure comprises remote communication with the at least one vehicle to be charged (para 31).
Re claim 27, the document further discloses at least one of the at least one connection to a vehicle is made automatically (para 34).
Re claim 28, the document further discloses the sequence of charging is determined upon identification of a new vehicle to be charged on arrival of a vehicle in one of the parking spaces or prior to arrival by remote connection or a predetermined schedule (para 33-34).
Re claim 29, the reference further discloses steps of upon identification of a new vehicle to be charged upon departure of a charged vehicle: a. determining at least one of the elements of the set of parameters of the infrastructure (para 60); b. determining at least one of the elements of the set of parameters of the electrical energy (para 43); and c. for each at least one vehicle comprising steps of: i. determining at least one element of the set of parameters of the vehicle to be charged; ii. determining at least one control parameter for each step of charging, the control parameter comprising at least one of duration and electrical power value for charging the at least one electric vehicle to be charged, and the electrical power can be either charging or discharging; and d. charging each of the at least one vehicle by successively connecting each at least one vehicle parked in one of the parking spaces to a charging station (para 50-59).
Re claim 30, the document further discloses optimizing charging according to profiles, cost of purchase, and sale of the electrical energy from the network (para 43).
Re claim 31, the document further discloses adjusted charging according to at least one of traffic conditions and a schedule (para 33-34).
Re claim 32, the document further discloses adjusting charges according to at least one of statistical and stochastic profiles of at least one of the set of parameters (para 43 and 62).
Re claim 33, the document further discloses charging is adjusted according to machine learning logic (para 60).
Re claim 35, the document further discloses a device for controlling charging vehicles, using the claimed methods (para 2).
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
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.
Claim 34 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over EP document EP2768693B1 [Note the document is same as WO2013/056990A2. All paragraph references are found in both the EP and WO documents but only the EP document has paragraph numberings. The WO document shows drawing figures].
The document does not disclose the minimization step is performed by a cost function using a tree exploration method. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have selected any appropriate cost function method, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known materiale on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Art made of record exemplified state of the art of EV charging and selection at charging station infrastructure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication should be directed to the Examiner at the below-listed number. The Examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Thu from 7:00am-5:00pm.
The Examiner’s SPE is Taelor Kim and he can be reached at 571.270.7166. The fax number for the organization where this application is assigned is 571.273.8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866.217.9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800.786.9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571.272.1000.
/EDWARD TSO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2859 571.272.2087