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
The Amendment filed 07/10/2025 has been entered. Claim 2 has been canceled. Claims 1 and 3-20 are presented for examination.
Claim Interpretations - 35 USC § 112(f)
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function; (B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as "configured to" or "so that"; and (C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “triggering condition determination module,” “a recommendation module,” "a geofence feature" and a “device manager” in claim 11; “a data gathering module” in claim 12; a “user interface module” in claims 15 and 16.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections – 35 USC § 103
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 of this title, 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, 4-8, 11-13, 15, 16 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dupree (US 2020/0379548) in view of Roshen (US 2013/0184876).
Regarding claim 1, Dupree teaches a method of operating an energy management system comprising:
obtaining energy usage data of a plurality of devices connected to an electrical circuit of a premises ([0090-0091], the system gathers information regarding power consumed by each device in real time; this information can be presented to a user; based on the information, aspects of a backup power consumption plan can be set, e.g., each device can be set as critical, non-critical or have particular power up-times; any of these aspects or information can be understood as energy usage data; [0070], the devices receive power through a power delivery channel i.e., a circuit; [0036], network devices may be at a particular premises, such as a library, shopping center etc.);
storing the energy usage data in a database of the energy management system ([0090-0091], naturally the above data is stored in a data store if it is collected and presented as discussed in Dupree; see also Fig. 6, [0099, 0101-0102], which describes a computing device e.g., the power management system, storing data in a storage device/memory);
storing a user preference in the database ([0091], the user can provide input to set policies/priorities for energy usage of devices during an outage and usage of backup power);
detecting an energy issue in the premises (Abstract, [0096], the system detects an event e.g., that there is an interruption of power delivery over a main power delivery channel; see below for details on how the combination of Dupree and Roshen teaches the claim term, "energy issue");
retrieving the energy usage data and the user preference from the database upon detecting the energy issue ([0092, 0097], in response, the system controls power consumption by devices on a per device basis based on the above backup power consumption plan; naturally, the content of that plan must be retrieved e.g., the entire plan, settings for each device set based on energy usage data etc.);
determining prioritization information of the plurality devices based on the energy usage data and the user preference ([0091, 0092], based on the backup power consumption plan, the system prioritizes devices i.e., determines devices to be critical or non-critical, or to have limited up times); and
controlling a power usage of the plurality of devices using the prioritization information ([0092], the system causes the devices to consume backup power in accordance with the backup power consumption plan; see also [0082-0087], for example, during backup power operation, critical devices might be kept on; non-critical devices might be shut off; other devices may be allowed to be powered during a limited up time period).
However, Dupree does not expressly disclose detecting that a user is in the premises and, based on the detection that the user is in the premises, performing the following steps:.
In the same field of endeavor, Roshen teaches detecting that a user is in the premises and, based on the detection that the user is in the premises, performing the following steps: (Fig. 2, [0006, 0013, 0014, 0025-0028, 0036], Roshen teaches detecting presence of users using motion detectors or by monitoring the usage of devices; based on the detecting of presence of users, the system engages in a power consumption plan for devices i.e., in accordance with a reduced power consumption state or a user-present power consumption state; it would be obvious to modify Dupree to incorporate these features into its power consumption backup plans; put another way, Dupree may be modified such that when it detects an energy issue e.g., that a power outage has occurred while people are present, a power consumption backup plan is implemented that takes into account the presence of people, as suggested in Roshen).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have incorporated detecting that a user is in the premises and, based on the detection that the user is in the premises, performing the following steps: as suggested in Roshen into Dupree because Dupree and Roshen pertain to analogous fields of technology. Dupree pertains to a system that detects an event e.g., a power outage, and that implements a backup power consumption plan, which prioritizes the power consumption of various devices. Roshen also pertains to a system that detects an event e.g., a presence of users, and then implements a power consumption plan, which prioritizes and regulates the power consumption of various devices. It would be obvious to modify Dupree to incorporate the features of Roshen i.e., to modify Dupree such that when the system detects that there is a power outage and that people are present or not present, the system implements a backup power plan, with adjustments based on the detected presence or absence of people. It would be desirable to incorporate this feature into Dupree so that the power consumption of devices could be made more efficient e.g., see Roshen [0004-0005, 0006, 0013, 0014, 0025-0028, 0036].
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Dupree and Roshen teaches the invention as claimed in claim 1. The combination of Dupree and Roshen also teaches receiving measured energy usage of at least one of the devices of the plurality of devices from an energy meter connected to the energy management system (Dupree [0090], the UPS functions as a meter i.e., it monitors and collects information on the power consumed by each device and delivered power between the UPS and devices, in real time; this information is provided to the system).
Regarding claim 5, The combination of Dupree and Roshen teaches the invention as claimed in claim 1. The combination of Dupree and Roshen also teaches wherein the user preference includes a priority ranking for each of two to more of the plurality of devices, and wherein the step of executing the prioritization includes communicating a control signal to a first device with a low priority causing the first device to turn off while a second device with a high priority is not turned off (Dupree [0085-0086, 0091-0092, 0097, 0075], based on user input, the backup power consumption plan can identify devices as critical or non-critical; the system will instruct a critical device to consume power while backup power is provided; the system will instruct a non-critical device to be powered off when backup power is provided).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Dupree and Roshen teaches the invention as claimed in claim 1. The combination of Dupree and Roshen also teaches wherein the user preference includes a priority ranking for each of two to more of the plurality of devices, and wherein the step of executing the prioritization includes controlling a first circuit to cut power to a first device with a low priority while a second circuit powering a second device with a high priority continues to provide power the second device (Dupree [0085-0086, 0091-0092, 0097, 0075, 0078], based on user input, the backup power consumption plan can identify devices as critical or non-critical; the system will instruct a critical device to consume power while backup power is provided; the system will instruct a non-critical device to be powered off when backup power is provided; for example, as noted in Dupree [0078], power delivery over a switch and port leading to a device can be shut off).
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Dupree and Roshen teaches the invention as claimed in claim 1. The combination of Dupree and Roshen also teaches wherein the step of determining the prioritization information for controlling the devices power usage based on the energy usage data and the user preference comprises maintaining a total load of the plurality of devices to less than a continuous power supply of a backup power system by selecting ones of the plurality of devices enabled to draw a load from the backup power system using the energy usage data of the plurality of devices (Dupree [0077], the system can cause devices to go into a low power mode, to consume less power when backup power is being used; Dupree [0082-0087, 0090-0092], based on power analytics/device power consumption data and user input, a backup power consumption plan can be created, which defines how much power each device draws in the event that backup power is used; Dupree [0070], a backup power source e.g., UPS, can provide sufficient power to all devices, which means that the total of devices is less than the power supply of that source; (Dupree [0085-0086, 0091-0092, 0097, 0075], based on user input, the backup power consumption plan can identify/select devices as critical or non-critical; the system will instruct a critical device to consume power while backup power is provided; the system will instruct a non-critical device to be powered off when backup power is provided).
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Dupree and Roshen teaches the invention as claimed in claim 7. The combination of Dupree and Roshen also teaches
detecting a change in the continuous power supply (Dupree Abstract, [0096], the system detects that there is an interruption of power delivery over a main power delivery channel); and
adapting the total load to the change in the continuous power supply (Dupree [0092], the system causes the devices to consume backup power in accordance with the backup power consumption plan; see also Dupree [0082-0087], for example, during backup power operation, critical devices might be kept on; non-critical devices might be shut off; other devices may be allowed to be powered during a limited up time period).
Regarding claim 11, Dupree teaches an energy management system comprising:
a communication interface connecting the energy management system to a plurality of devices configured to draw power from an electrical circuit of a premises including a backup power system (Dupree Fig. 4, [0067-0070] describes a system including a power management system connected via a network to UPS e.g., possible backup power source, and devices; see Dupree Fig. 7, [0103-0104], devices can be connected via interfaces; Dupree [0070], the devices receive power through a power delivery channel i.e., a circuit; Dupree [0036], network devices may be at a particular premises, such as a library, shopping center etc.)
a database connected to the backup power system by the electrical circuit and storing energy usage data of the plurality of devices and a user preference associated with the plurality of devices (Dupree [0090-0091], the system gathers information regarding power consumed by each device in real time; this information can be presented to a user; based on the information, aspects of a backup power consumption plan can be set, e.g., each device can be set as critical, non-critical or have particular power up-times; any of these aspects or information can be understood as energy usage data; (Dupree [0090-0091], naturally the above data is stored in a data store if it is collected and presented as discussed in Dupree; see also Dupree Fig. 6, [0099, 0101-0102], which describes a computing device e.g., the power management system, storing data in a storage device/memory);
a triggering condition determination module configured to detect an energy issue at the premises (Dupree Abstract, [0096], the system detects an event e.g., that there is an interruption of power delivery over a main power delivery channel; Dupree [0073], the UPS can detect that a main power channel has failed; see below for details regarding how the combination of Dupree and Roshen read on the claim term, "energy issue")
a recommendation module configured to retrieve the energy usage data and the user preference upon detecting the energy issue and determine prioritization information of the plurality devices based on the energy usage data and the user preference (Dupree [0092, 0097], in response, the system controls power consumption by devices on a per device basis based on the above backup power consumption plan; naturally, the content of that plan must be retrieved e.g., the entire plan, settings for each device set based on energy usage data etc.; (Dupree [0091, 0092], based on the backup power consumption plan, the system prioritizes devices i.e., determines devices to be critical or non-critical, or to have limited up times; inherently, the above functions are performed by a processor e.g., see Dupree Fig. 6, [0099-0102]); and
a device manager configured to control a power usage of the plurality of devices using the prioritization information based on the detected energy issue (Dupree [0092], the system causes the devices to consume backup power in accordance with the backup power consumption plan; see also Dupree [0082-0087], for example, during backup power operation, critical devices might be kept on; non-critical devices might be shut off; other devices may be allowed to be powered during a limited up time period; inherently, the above operations are performed by a memory e.g., see Dupree Fig. 6, [0099-0102]).
However, Dupree does not expressly disclose a geofence feature or motion detector configured to detect that a user is in the premises; the detecting the energy issue if the user is detected to be in the premises.
In the same field of endeavor, Roshen teaches
a geofence feature or motion detector configured to detect that a user is in the premises (Fig. 2, [0013, 0014, 0025, 0036], the system may use motion detectors to determine whether people are on the premises);
the detecting the energy issue if the user is detected to be in the premises (Fig. 2, [0006, 0013, 0014, 0025-0028, 0036], Roshen teaches detecting presence of users using motion detectors or by monitoring the usage of devices; based on the detecting of presence of users, the system engages in a power consumption plan for devices i.e., in accordance with a reduced power consumption state or a user-present power consumption state; it would be obvious to modify Dupree to incorporate these features into its power consumption backup plans; put another way, Dupree may be modified such that when it detects an energy issue e.g., that a power outage has occurred while people are present, a power consumption backup plan is implemented that takes into account the presence of people, as suggested in Roshen).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have incorporated a geofence feature or motion detector configured to detect that a user is in the premises; the detecting the energy issue if the user is detected to be in the premises as suggested in Roshen into Dupree because Dupree and Roshen pertain to analogous fields of technology. Dupree pertains to a system that detects an event e.g., a power outage, and that implements a backup power consumption plan, which prioritizes the power consumption of various devices. Roshen also pertains to a system that detects an event e.g., a detecting the presence of users using a motion detector, and then implements a power consumption plan, which prioritizes and regulates the power consumption of various devices. It would be obvious to modify Dupree to incorporate the features of Roshen i.e., to modify Dupree such that when the system detects that there is a power outage and that people are present or not present, the system implements a backup power plan, with adjustments based on the detected presence or absence of people. It would be desirable to incorporate this feature into Dupree so that the power consumption of devices could be made more efficient e.g., see Roshen [0004-0005, 0006, 0013, 0014, 0025-0028, 0036].
Regarding claim 12, the combination of Dupree and Roshen teaches the invention as claimed in claim 11. The combination of Dupree and Roshen also teaches a data gathering module configured to obtain the energy usage data of at least one of the plurality of devices (Dupree [0090-0091], the system gathers information regarding power consumed by each device in real time; power information can be obtained from switches/routers that connect the UPS/backup power source and devices).
Regarding claim 13, the combination of Dupree and Roshen teaches the invention as claimed in claim 1. The combination of Dupree and Roshen also teaches an energy meter connected to the electrical circuit of the premises and configured to measure energy consumption of at least one of the plurality of devices (Dupree [0090], the UPS functions as a meter i.e., it monitors and collects information on the power consumed by each device and delivered power between the UPS and devices, in real time; this information is provided to the system).
Regarding claim 15, the combination of Dupree and Roshen teaches the invention as claimed in claim 11. The combination of Dupree and Roshen also teaches a user interface module configured to cause a display of a power status of the premises (Dupree [0090-0091], the system can present power analytics for the devices in the system on a user interface e.g., dashboard).
Regarding claim 16, the combination of Dupree and Roshen teaches the invention as claimed in claim 11. The combination of Dupree and Roshen also teaches a user interface module configured to cause a display of a power status of at least one of the plurality of devices (Dupree [0090-0091], the system can present power analytics for the devices in the system on a user interface e.g., dashboard).
Regarding claim 19, the claim corresponds to claim 1 and is rejected for the same reasons. The combination of Dupree and Roshen also teaches
powering the energy management system using a backup power supply upon detecting the energy issue (Dupree Abstract, [0096], the system detects that there is an interruption of power delivery over a main power delivery channel; (Dupree [0092, 0029], the system causes the devices to consume backup power e.g., from a backup power source, such as a UPS, in accordance with the backup power consumption plan; see also Dupree [0082-0087, 0097]);
the determining prioritization information of the plurality of devices based on a continuous power supply of the backup power supply (Dupree [0091, 0092], based on the backup power consumption plan, the system prioritizes devices i.e., determines devices to be critical or non-critical, or to have limited up times; such prioritization is for a situation when power is supplied by the backup power source e.g., UPS)
wherein a total load of the power usage is constrained by the continuous power supply of the backup power supply (Dupree [0091, 0092], based on the backup power consumption plan, the system prioritizes devices i.e., determines devices to be critical or non-critical, to be operational or shut off, or to have limited up times; such prioritization is for a situation when power is supplied by the backup power source e.g., UPS).
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dupree and Roshen, as applied in claim 1, and further in view of Chatterjee (US 2019/0311210).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Dupree and Roshen teaches the invention as claimed in claim 1. The combination of Dupree and Roshen also teaches extracting the energy usage data (Dupree [0090-0091], Dupree obtains power analytics of devices e.g., information regarding the amount of power consumed by each device).
However, the combination of Dupree and Roshen does not expressly disclose receiving an image from a computer system; and the extracting is from the image.
In the same field of endeavor, Chatterjee teaches
receiving an image from a computer system; and
the extracting is from the image (Abstract, [0026, 0032-0034, 0071, 0073, 0075, 0081], Chatterjee relates to a system for automatically obtaining attributes of products/devices; the system obtains an image of a produce/device e.g., from a database or third party system, for example, through an upload process from a repository/computing device; the system these uses machine learning to obtain attribute information about the device by analyzing the image).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have incorporated receiving an image from a computer system; and the extracting is from the image as suggested in Chatterjee into Dupree and Roshen because Dupree and Chatterjee pertain to analogous fields of technology. Dupree pertains to a system that obtains energy consumption attribute information regarding a device, and uses it to determine a power consumption plan. Chatterjee also relates to obtaining attribute information about a device/product. In Chatterjee, an image of a device/product can be uploaded to a system, and then the system can determine attribution information from the image. It would be desirable to incorporate this feature into Dupree to provide additional ways to obtain attribute information about a device e.g., see Chatterjee Abstract, [0026, 0032-0034, 0071, 0073, 0075, 0081].
Claims 9, 14 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dupree and Roshen, as applied in claims 1 and 11, and further in view of Chaoua (US 2021/0200176).
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Dupree and Roshen teaches the invention as claimed in claim 1. The combination of Dupree and Roshen also teaches wherein the energy issue in the premises is a change in a status of a power supply (Dupree Abstract, [0096], the system detects that there is an interruption of power delivery over a main power delivery channel).
However, the combination of Dupree and Roshen does not expressly disclose the power supply is a utility supplied power supply.
In the same field of endeavor, Chaoua teaches the power supply is a utility supplied power supply (Fig. 1, [0037], the primary power source can be a public power grid).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have incorporated the power supply is a utility supplied power supply as suggested in Chaoua into Dupree and Roshen because Dupree and Chaoua pertain to analogous fields of technology. Both Dupree and Chaoua relate to system that draw power from a primary main power source. In Chaoua, the main power source is a utility i.e., the public power grid. It would be desirable to incorporate this feature into Dupree so that power may be drawn from a variety of known sources e.g., see Chaoua Fig. 1, [0037].
Regarding claim 14, the combination of Dupree and Roshen teaches the invention as claimed in claim 11. The combination of Dupree and Roshen also teaches an energy meter configured to measure a supply of power to the electrical panel from a utility (Dupree [0090], the UPS/backup power source functions as a meter i.e., it monitors and collects information on the power consumed by each device and delivered power between the UPS and devices, in real time; this information is provided to the system).
However, the combination of Dupree and Roshen does not expressly disclose the energy meter connected to an electrical panel of the premises.
In the same field of endeavor, Chaoua teaches the energy meter connected to an electrical panel of the premises (Fig. 1, [0037], a distribution panel 106 is connected to both main power and a backup power source).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have incorporated the energy meter connected to an electrical panel of the premises as suggested in Chaoua into Dupree and Roshen because Dupree and Chaoua pertain to analogous fields of technology. Dupree relates to a system that includes a backup power source/UPS e.g., a meter, which also monitors how much power is being consumed by devices. Chaoua also pertains to a system comprising devices, a main power source and backup power source. In Chaoua, the panel is connected to the backup power source i.e., both power sources are coupled to an electrical panel, which in turn distributes power to all connected devices. It would be desirable to incorporate this feature into Dupree to allow for a variety of arrangements for monitoring and providing power to devices e.g., see Chaoua Fig. 1, [0037].
Regarding claim 17, the combination of Dupree and Roshen teaches the invention as claimed in claim 11. The combination of Dupree and Roshen also teaches comprising an energy meter (Dupree [0090], the UPS/backup power source functions as a meter i.e., it monitors and collects information on the power consumed by each device and delivered power between the UPS and devices, in real time; this information is provided to the system), wherein the energy meter is configured to
detect a change in a continuous power supply (Dupree Abstract, [0096], the system detects that there is an interruption of power delivery over a main power delivery channel);
adapt a total load of the plurality of devices to the change in the continuous power supply (Dupree [0092], the system causes the devices to consume backup power in accordance with the backup power consumption plan; see also Dupree [0082-0087], for example, during backup power operation, critical devices might be kept on; non-critical devices might be shut off; other devices may be allowed to be powered during a limited up time period).
However, the combination of Dupree and Roshen does not expressly disclose the continuous power supply is of the backup power system; the energy meter connected to an electrical panel of the premises.
In the same field of endeavor, Chaoua teaches
the continuous power supply is of the backup power system ([042-0045], the backup power source might be in different states; for example, backup power may be at 95%, 50%, etc.; based on the state of the backup power system, the system may command devices to take up different actions e.g., reduce device functionality, enter a low power mode etc.);
the energy meter connected to an electrical panel of the premises (Fig. 1, [0037], a distribution panel 106 is connected to both main power and a backup power source).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have incorporated the continuous power supply is of the backup power system; the energy meter connected to an electrical panel of the premises as suggested in Chaoua into Dupree and Roshen because Dupree and Chaoua pertain to analogous fields of technology. Dupree relates to a system that includes a backup power source/UPS e.g., a meter, which also monitors how much power is being consumed by devices. The system in Dupree also modifies device operations when a change in power supply is detected. Chaoua also pertains to a system comprising devices, a main power source and backup power source, which modifies device operations based on a change in the power supply. In Chaoua, the panel is connected to the backup power source i.e., both power sources are coupled to an electrical panel, which in turn distributes power to all connected devices. Additionally, in Chaoua, when the backup power source enters different states e.g., when available power runs low, the power consumption actions of devices can be adjusted. It would be desirable to incorporate these features into Dupree to allow for a variety of arrangements for monitoring and providing power to devices and to allow the Dupree system to be responsive to changes in the backup power source e.g., see Chaoua Fig. 1, [0037, 0042-0045].
Claims 10 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dupree and Roshen, as applied in claims 1 and 11, and further in view of Kulyk (US 2011/0172846).
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Dupree and Roshen teaches the invention as claimed in claim 1. However, the combination of Dupree and Roshen does not expressly disclose the step of controlling the power usage of the plurality of devices comprises changing a duty cycle of at least one of the plurality of devices.
In the same field of endeavor, Kulyk teaches the step of controlling the power usage of the plurality of devices comprises changing a duty cycle of at least one of the plurality of devices ([0010, 0011, 0041, 0121-0125, 0131], energy consumption of a device can be modified by adjusting the duty cycle assigned to a device; for example, a device could have a 100% duty cycle i.e., always on, a 0% duty cycle i.e., always disabled, or some value in between that reduces power demand but allows it to satisfy an objective).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have incorporated the step of controlling the power usage of the plurality of devices comprises changing a duty cycle of at least one of the plurality of devices as suggested in Kulyk into Dupree and Roshen because Dupree and Kulyk pertain to analogous fields of technology. Dupree pertains to a system for modifying the operation of devices to consume less power e.g., using low power modes, classification as critical and non-critical devices etc. Kulyk teaches that one way of controlling power consumption of a device is to adjust the duty cycle of the device. It would be desirable to incorporate this feature into Dupree to provide additional methods of controlling the power consumption of devices e.g., see Kulyk [0010, 0011, 0041, 0121-0125, 0131].
Regarding claim 18, the combination of Dupree and Roshen teaches the invention as claimed in claim 11. The combination of Dupree and Roshen also teaches wherein the user preference includes a set of priorities (Dupree [0091], the user can provide input to set policies/priorities for energy usage of devices during an outage and usage of backup power e.g., critical, non-critical, low power mode etc.)
However, the combination of Dupree and Roshen does not expressly disclose wherein the set of priorities corresponding to respective duty cycles for a given one of the plurality of devices.
In the same field of endeavor, Kulyk teaches the set of priorities corresponding to respective duty cycles for a given one of the plurality of devices ([0010, 0011, 0041, 0121-0125, 0131], energy consumption of a device can be modified by adjusting the duty cycle assigned to a device; for example, a device could have a 100% duty cycle i.e., always on, a 0% duty cycle i.e., always disabled, or some value in between that reduces power demand but allows it to satisfy an objective).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have incorporated the set of priorities corresponding to respective duty cycles for a given one of the plurality of devices as suggested in Kulyk into Dupree and Roshen because Dupree and Kulyk pertain to analogous fields of technology. Dupree relates to a system where a user can define priorities for different devices in the event of a power outage and the use of backup power i.e., maintaining power for some devices, providing less power or no power to other devices. Kulyk also pertains to modifying power consumption and policies for different devices. In Kulyk, power consumption by a device can be modified by adjusting its duty cycle. It would be desirable to incorporate this feature into Dupree to allow for a variety of ways to control the power consumption and operation of a device e.g., see Kulyk ([0010, 0011, 0041, 0121-0125, 0131].
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dupree and Roshen, as applied in claim 19, and further in view of Orthlieb (US 2015/0270743).
Regarding claim 20, the combination of Dupree and Roshen teaches the invention as claimed in claim 19. However, the combination of Dupree and Roshen does not expressly disclose determining a restoration of a power supply from a utility.
In the same field of endeavor, Orthlieb teaches determining a restoration of a power
supply from a utility ([0012, 0116], the system can detect when the power grid is down, after which power is provided from a backup source; when the power grid comes backup, the system detects this and can resume obtaining power from the grid).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have incorporated determining a restoration of a power supply from a utility as suggested in Orthleb into Dupree and Roshen because Dupree and Orthlieb pertain to analogous fields of technology. Both Dupree and Orthlieb pertain to systems that switch to backup power when a main power supply (e.g., a grid) goes down. In Orthlieb, the system can arrange for the resumption of power delivery from the main power supply when the main power supply e.g., grid, comes back online. It would be desirable to incorporate this feature into Dupree so that power can be delivered from the utility/grid when it is available again after an outage e.g., see Orthlieb [0012, 0116].
Response to Arguments
The Examiner acknowledges the Applicant's amendments to claims 1, 11 and 19.
Regarding the interpretation of claims 11, 12, 15 and 16 under 112(f), Applicant alleges that 112(f) should not apply, because the alleged 112(f) limitations would be readily recognized to have sufficient structure. Examiner respectfully disagrees. As noted in MPEP 2181 I, the determination as to whether a claim limitation invokes 112(f) is based on a three prong analysis. As noted in the section, 112(f) is invoked if a generic placeholder term (such as "module") is used, the term is followed by functional language (e.g., "configured to …") and when the claim language does not modify the term to include sufficient structure. In claim 11, for example, various modules configured to perform operations are recited, and the claim language does not appear to indicate structure for the modules, but only recites their function. Examiner was also unable to find any definitions in the specification that require the claimed modules to incorporate corresponding structure. As a result, the above claims will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f). It should be noted that MPEP 2181 specifically cites terms such as "module" and "configured to" as example features of limitations that typically invoke 112(f), although the analysis is case by case.
Regarding claim 1 and 19, Applicant alleges that the cited prior art does not teach the amended limitation, "detecting that a user is in the premises and, based on the detection that the user is in the premises, performing the following steps." Examiner has therefore rejected claims 1 and 19 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dupree and Roshen. Some of Applicant's remarks are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection.
Applicant further asserts that Roshen does not teach the amended limitation, because Roshen teaches modifying operation of a device if the user is not present, while the claimed invention does the opposite i.e., the system modifies operation of a device if the user is present (see page 11 of the reply). Examiner, however, respectfully disagrees with this interpretation of Roshen. As seen in Fig. 2 and elsewhere in Roshen, the Roshen system actively controls devices, irrespective of whether users are present or not. (See Fig. 2, which indicates that if users are detected, the devices are set to a reduced power consumption state; if the users are not detected, the devices are set to a user-present consumption state.) Given the above, in the view of the Examiner, Roshen does not a teach a system that is entirely passive when users are present; rather, the system controls devices in accordance with a particular plan when people are present, and controls devices in accordance with another, different plan when people are not present.
Although different in various respects, claim 11 has been amended in a similar manner as claims 1 and 19, and the above arguments apply to claim 11 as well.
Applicant further alleges that claims 3-10, 12-18 and 20 are allowable in view of their dependency on claims 1, 11 and 19. Claims 3-10, 12-18 and 20 are rejected as being taught by Dupree, Roshen, Chatterjee, Chaoua, Kulyk and/or Orthlieb.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Weaver (US 2019/0056758) teaches a system for controlling energy usage by devices based on energy usage rules and policies e.g., see Weaver Abstract.
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 extension fee 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 ERIC YOON whose telephone number is (408)918-7581. The examiner can normally be reached on 9 am to 5 pm ET Monday through Friday.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Scott Baderman, can be reached at telephone number 571-272-3644. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated- interview-request-air-form.
/ERIC J YOON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2118
Prosecution Insights