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 .
1. Claims 27-44 are presented for examination, claims 1, 24 and 45-46 are withdrawn from consideration and claims 2-23 and 25-26 are cancelled.
Election/Restrictions
2. Claims 1, 24 and 45-46 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, Group I, Group II and Group IV, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 09/09/2025.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
3. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 42 and 43 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claims 42, the phrase “likely" renders the claim(s) indefinite because the claim(s) include(s) elements not actually disclosed (those encompassed by "likely"), thereby rendering the scope of the claim(s) unascertainable. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Claim 43 is a method claim that is written as Shulhauser type of contingent limitation. It recites "if the comparing indicates that the saving will not be completed …then and "wherein if said...conditions are fulfilled, the method further includes...." Thus, under BRI, when the conditions are not satisfied, i.e., saving will not be completed … or when the conditions are not fulfilled, the steps that follow need not to take place. Consequently, any prior art that do not teach these subsequent steps but nonetheless teaches rest of the claim limitations would be sufficient to teach claim 43. Therefore, the claim needs to be amended such that it is not in this contingency format, especially when the allowable subject matter has been indicated to be the claim as a whole, suggesting that the Examiner was under the assumption that these claim limitations were given weight.
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.
4. 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.
4.1 Claim(s) 27, 31, 33-40 and 42-44 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Grimshaw (US 20130019124 A1) in view of Kelly (US 20170038811 A1).
Regarding claim 27, Grimshaw discloses method of operating an energy offloading system (Fig, 1, electrical power system) a datacenter (also known as a data center) having a plurality of computational devices ([0001], [0010], a facility that houses servers, computers and associated components, such as telecommunications and other equipment that store and backup large amounts of data), the method comprising:
operating the energy offloading system using energy obtained from an energy generation station (Fig. 1, Fig. 3B, [0013], [0020], two or more generators for generating electrical power for the data center. The datacenter switchboard is capable of receiving electrical power from a primary generator source in the infrastructure),
the energy generation station adapted to provide energy ([0020], receiving electrical power from a generator source in the infrastructure) to:
a) an electric grid serving a plurality of paying customers ([0052], electrical power flows through electrical pathways to the datacenter including its server, related computer loads, and other electrical loads (control systems for cooling system, monitoring devices, etc.); and
b) the energy offloading system ([0021], [0043], the datacenter switchboard is capable of receiving electrical power from a primary generator source in the infrastructure);
receiving, by the energy offloading system an energy termination alert ([0025], detecting an interruption in the flow of utility-sourced power) identifying a time in the future that the energy generation station will continue to provide energy to the electric grid but cease to provide energy to the energy offloading system ([0025], The electrical power infrastructure which contains components which are capable of (a) detecting an interruption in the flow of utility-sourced power, (b) shutting off the electrical pathway to the utility-sourced power when said interruption is detected, detecting the capability of generator equipment to supply electrical power to infrastructure components (provide energy to the grid).
Grimshaw fails to disclose in response to receiving the energy termination alert identifying at least one computational device of the plurality of computational devices that is in the process of executing a computation using energy obtained from the energy generation station; determining an attribute of the computation; based on the attribute, saving computational information related to the computation; and after saving, powering down the at least one computational device.
However, Kelly discloses in response to receiving the energy termination alert ([0049], power source 102 ceases to provide power to computing system 200), identifying at least one computational device of the plurality of computational devices that is in the process of executing a computation using energy obtained from the energy generation station ([0004], [0019], [0025], [0049], Power monitoring program 400 determines the status of the power sources ([0019], a grid-based power source, an on-site power source (e.g., backup generator, solar power, fuel cells, wind power, tidal power, etc.), and an UPS) that supply AC power to power loads (e.g., computing devices) included in computing system 200, and the status of each of the power loads (e.g., computing devices); and
determining an attribute of the computation (Fig. 4, [0038], [0040], a contingency for server 120 losing power, server 120 periodically utilizes load monitoring program 500 to generate lists comprised of threshold information, shutdown protocols, override commands, and operational interactions that are customized for each IPU/server configuration);
based on the attribute, saving computational information related to the computation ([0003], Data centers utilize various strategies to obtain goals, which include high reliability, high availability, preventing data loss or corruption, and avoiding negative customer experiences. One strategy is utilizing uninterruptable power supplies (UPS) to support the operations of the data center (e.g., servers), and after saving, powering down the at least one computational device ([0003], [0014], [0025]-[0030], [0068], monitor available backup power and to “gracefully” shut down servers and other aspects of the data center in a controlled fashion to minimize customer impacts and prevent data loss or corruption. A graceful shutdown may include preventing additional tasks or requests from initiating, completing transactions in progress, saving data, suspending network activity, pausing the server, and powering off a server).
Grimshaw and Kelly are analogous art. They relate to a Power management system.
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify a power management, taught by Grimshaw, incorporated with a power monitoring program, taught by Kelly, in order to assure continuous operation, uninterrupted and reliable basis, which is provided with a supporting system or infrastructure for supplying power from the alternat or backup electrical power source.
Regarding claim 31, Grimshaw discloses a method of operating an energy offloading system (Fig. 1, [0052], two uninterruptible power supply (UPS) modules or containers, each containing one or more uninterruptible power supply systems) having a plurality of computational devices ([0064] The datacenters of the present invention include facilities that are used to house computer systems and associated components, such as telecommunications and storage systems. Datacenters contain telecommunication systems to allow users to communicate, manipulate, and store data in controlled and secured locations), the method comprising:
operating the energy offloading system; receiving, by the energy offloading system (Fig. 3B, 2B, [0059], three UPS systems housed in two UPS containers. Each UPS system is electrically connected to the datacenter building, such that electrical power flows from the UPS system to the servers, related computers, and other electrical loads within the datacenter building),
an energy termination alert identifying a time in the future that energy will no longer be provided to the energy offloading system ([0025]-[0026], detecting an interruption in the flow of utility-sourced power).
Grimshaw fails to disclose in response to receiving the energy termination alert, identifying at least one computational device of the plurality of computational devices that is in the process of executing a computation using energy obtained from the energy generation station; determining an attribute of the computation; based on the attribute, saving computational information related to the computation; and after saving, powering down the at least one computational device.
However, Kelly discloses in response to receiving the energy termination alert ([0049], power source 102 ceases to provide power to computing system 200), identifying at least one computational device of the plurality of computational devices that is in the process of executing a computation using energy obtained from the energy generation station ([0004], [0019], [0025], [0049], Power monitoring program 400 determines the status of the power sources ([0019], a grid-based power source, an on-site power source (e.g., backup generator, solar power, fuel cells, wind power, tidal power, etc.), and an UPS that supply AC power to power loads (e.g., computing devices) included in computing system 200, and the status of each of the power loads (e.g., computing devices); and
determining an attribute of the computation (Fig. 4, [0038], [0040], a contingency for server 120 losing power, server 120 periodically utilizes load monitoring program 500 to generate lists comprised of threshold information, shutdown protocols, override commands, and operational interactions that are customized for each IPU/server configuration);
based on the attribute, saving computational information related to the computation ([0003], Data centers utilize various strategies to obtain goals, which include high reliability, high availability, preventing data loss or corruption, and avoiding negative customer experiences. One strategy is utilizing uninterruptable power supplies (UPS) to support the operations of the data center (servers) for saving data); and
after saving, powering down the at least one computational device ([0003],[0014], [0025]-[0030], [0068], monitor available backup power and to “gracefully” shut down servers and other aspects of the data center in a controlled fashion to minimize customer impacts and prevent data loss or corruption. A graceful shutdown may include preventing additional tasks or requests from initiating, completing transactions in progress, saving data, suspending network activity, pausing the server, and powering off a server).
Grimshaw and Kelly are analogous art. They relate to a Power management system.
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify a power management, taught by Grimshaw, incorporated with a power monitoring program, taught by Kelly, in order to assure continuous operation, uninterrupted and reliable basis, which is provided with a supporting system or infrastructure for supplying power from the alternat or backup electrical power source.
Regarding claim 33, Kelly discloses saving computational information further comprises: saving computational information related to the state of the computation being executed by the computational device after receiving the energy termination alert ([0003], [0014], [0025]-[0030], [0068], When power failures occur, UPS s can support the data center from minutes to hours until backup power is activated (e.g., emergency generators), or the primary power supply (e.g., grid power) is restored. A second strategy is to monitor available backup power and to “gracefully” shut down servers and other aspects of the data center in a controlled fashion to minimize customer impacts and prevent data loss or corruption. A graceful shutdown may include preventing additional tasks or requests from initiating, completing transactions in progress, saving data, suspending network activity, pausing the server, and powering off a server).
Regarding claim 34, Kelly discloses the powering down the at least one computational device is performed after saving but before the time identified by the energy termination alert ([0003], [0014], [0025]-[0030], [0068], When power failures occur, UPS s can support the data center from minutes to hours until backup power is activated (e.g., emergency generators), or the primary power supply (e.g., grid power) is restored. A second strategy is to monitor available backup power and to “gracefully” shut down servers and other aspects of the data center in a controlled fashion to minimize customer impacts and prevent data loss or corruption. A graceful shutdown may include preventing additional tasks or requests from initiating, completing transactions in progress, saving data, suspending network activity, pausing the server, and powering off a server).
Regarding claim 35, Kelly discloses the energy offloading system includes a buffer storing data from the plurality of computational devices ([0024], [0051], Server 120 may include user interface (UI) 122, power monitoring program 400, load monitoring program 500, various network communication programs (not shown), and data storage (e.g., in RAM, in ROM, in flash memory) and a network communication device ([0016],[0018], [0024], the monitoring and control aspects of the present invention may be implemented on a mobile computing device, such as a table computer, which can communicate wired or wirelessly with the IPUs, servers (e.g., power loads), and individual rack-mounted computing systems. For example, a tablet computer may allow a data center administrator to access rack-mounted computing systems that may lose network connectivity due to an interruption) and the method further comprises:
in response to receiving the energy termination alert, transmitting the data in the buffer ([0051], power mode unit 304 transmits the state information to power monitoring program 400 to estimate a remaining internal power duration for an IPU. In another embodiment, power mode unit 304 includes a microcontroller that can estimate a remaining internal power duration for the IPU. Power mode unit 304 communicates the remaining internal power duration for the IPU to server 120 via network 110. In some embodiments, power mode unit 304 includes a microcontroller that can store (e.g., in RAM, in ROM, in flash memory) and execute programs); and
after transmitting the data, powering down the network communication device ([0025], [0027], power monitoring program 400 communicates with load monitoring program 500 to determine whether a status of one or more power loads modifies (e.g., prioritizes, dictates, overrides) the shutdown threshold of other power loads).
Regarding claim 36, Grimshaw discloses the energy offloading system includes at least one cooling unit ([0007], [0090], [0096], cooling systems for a datacenter can be included in modular units) and the method further comprises:
powering the at least one cooling unit with energy from the energy generation station ([0089], [0093], generator system is tailored to support the demands of the datacenter including the infrastructure cooling system);
in response to receiving the energy termination alert ([0025]-[0026], detecting the capability of generator equipment to supply usable electrical power to said datacenter components and upon such detection shutting off said energy storage devices, and [0032] f) detecting the resumption of the utility-sourced electrical power and when said resumption is detected, terminating the operation of said generator equipment or said energy storage devices), identifying an alternative power source selected from a battery or the electric grid ([0093], The UPS modules provide connection points to deliver power through pathways into the datacenter); and
operating the at least one cooling unit ([0041], the cooling system comprises a plurality of compressors each capable of operating independently)with energy from the alternative power source ([0013], [0017]-[0018], , two or more generators for generating electrical power; d) two or more transformers; and e) two or more uninterruptible power supply (UPS) units or systems, each including energy storage devices), for a period of time after termination of energy from the energy generation station while not providing energy to the plurality of computational devices ([0025], [0036], [0039], triggering the operation of UPS and energy storage devices when said interruption in utility-sourced power is detected. Triggering flow of electricity from said UPS and energy storage devices, opening the pathway for flow of utility-sourced electrical power system to infrastructure components, terminating the operation of said generator equipment).
Regarding claim 37, Kelly discloses determining the attribute of the computation of the at least one computational device further comprises: identifying one of a) a type of computation being performed by the at least one computational device, b) a processing unit of the at least one computational device, c) an assigned attribute of the at least one computational device, or d) a level of completion of a process being run on the at least one computational device ([0016], [0022], [0024], the power loads (e.g., servers) respectively supported by the IPUs to coordinate the graceful shutdown of power loads that may interact on an operational level);
Regarding claim 38, Kelly discloses determining that the process of executing the computation using energy obtained from the energy generation station has completed more than a predetermined threshold of the computation (Abstract, [0003], [0051], [0068], The tiered selection of power duration thresholds may dictate specific shutdown protocols. For example, server 240A has an initial power duration of five minutes that dictates inhibiting incoming network activity from users utilizing applications executing on server 240A. A second power duration threshold for server 240A is set at three minutes that dictates that a graceful shutdown is initiated).
Regarding claim 39 and 40, while the combination of Grimshaw and Kelly does not specifically disclose predetermined threshold is 75% and the predetermined threshold is 2 hours, Kelly discloses in Fig. 4 and 5, [0026], [0051], [0057], [0068], When the power supply duration associated with IPU 215G drops below 1.25× that of the shutdown threshold duration for server 240G, power monitoring program 400 receives status information at a rate of once per 5 seconds. In another example, power monitoring program 400 may receive a status of “shutdown” when a server completes a graceful shutdown. Load monitoring program 500 receives status information associated with the status of power sources supplying AC power to computing system 200 and the status of the power loads of computing system 200 from power monitoring program 400. Load monitoring program 500 subsequently determines operational hierarchies for the active power loads included in computing system 200 and interactions between software applications executing on active power loads of computing system 200. Load monitoring program 500 also determines one or more internal power duration thresholds and shutdown protocols for each active power load and transmits the information to power monitoring program 400.
In view of the above, Examiner finds that the particular a predetermined threshold is 75% and the predetermined threshold is 2 hours to unpatentable design choice because such threshold would be modified based on the server/computing system workload. See /n re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950); In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975); MPEP §2144.04(VI)(C).
Therefore, it would be readily apparent to one of ordinary skill in the art that giving a specific predetermined threshold by percentage or hours is dictates inhibiting incoming network activity from users utilizing applications executing on server in order to obtain goals which include high reliability, high availability, preventing data loss or corruption, and avoiding negative customer experience.
Regarding claim 42, Kelly discloses determining a time of likely completion of saving the computational information ([0003], monitor available backup power and to “gracefully” shut down servers and other aspects of the data center in a controlled fashion to minimize customer impacts and prevent data loss or corruption. A graceful shutdown may include preventing additional tasks or requests from initiating, completing transactions in progress, saving data, suspending network activity, pausing the server, and powering off a serve); and comparing the time of likely completion to the time identified by the energy termination alert that the energy generation station will cease to provide energy to the energy offloading system ([0025], [0026], power monitoring program 400 monitors the power level of each IPU supplying backup power to a power load within computing system 200. In response to a determination that a power level of an IPU decreases to a power level that sustains a power load for less than a threshold duration, power monitoring program 400 activates a shutdown protocol for the related power load. In some embodiments, power monitoring program 400 communicates with load monitoring program 500 to determine whether a status of one or more power loads modifies (e.g., prioritizes, dictates, overrides) the shutdown threshold of other power loads).
Regarding claim 43, Kelly discloses if the comparing indicates that the saving will not be completed by the time identified by the energy termination alert, ([0004], Abstract, identifying a first active power load that is imposed on the computing system by one or more computing devices in the computing system, wherein the first active power load is affected by the identified power failure to the computing system. The method further includes responding to an identification of the indication of the power failure by activating a first in-line power unit (IPU) that is connected to the first active power load, wherein the first IPU supplies power to the first active power load. The method further includes identifying a power duration threshold for the first active power load. The method further includes determining whether a duration of power stored in the first IPU is less than the identified power duration of the first active power load. The method further includes responding to a determination that the duration of power stored in the first IPU is less than the identified power duration threshold of the first active power load by initiating a shutdown protocol for the first active power load), identifying an alternative power source selected from a battery or the electric grid ([0003], [0025]-[0026], When power failures occur, UPS s can support the data center from minutes to hours until backup power is activated (e.g., emergency generators), or the primary power supply (e.g., grid power) is restored), and powering the at least one computational device with energy from the alternative power source ([0003], [0025]-[0026], uninterruptable power supplies (UPS) to support the operations of the data center (e.g., servers); and after completion of the saving, powering down the at least one computational device ([0003], [0025], [0026], A graceful shutdown may include preventing additional tasks or requests from initiating, completing transactions in progress, saving data, suspending network activity, pausing the server, and powering off a server).
Regarding claim 44, Grimshaw discloses the energy offloading system receives energy from an energy generation station ([0021], switchboard also capable of receiving electrical power from a reserve generator source), the energy generation station adapted to provide energy to a) an electric grid serving a plurality of paying customers ([0020], utility-sourced electrical power is capable of receiving electrical power from a power generator source) and b) the energy offloading system, and wherein the energy offloading system cannot receive energy from the electric grid ([0020] If there is a loss in utility-sourced electrical power, one or more ATS units within a switchboard container is capable of detecting the loss of utility power and sensing alternative available power sources in the infrastructure and is capable of carrying out steps to transfer the load to one or more available alternative sources of electrical power). Also, if there is a loss in utility-sourced electrical power, said primary switchboard is capable of receiving electrical power from a primary generator source in the infrastructure).
4.2 Claim(s) 28-30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Grimshaw (US 20130019124 A1) in view of Kelly (US 20170038811 A1) further in view of Miller (US 20070276547A1).
Regarding claim 28, Grimshaw and Kelly discloses the limitations of claim 27, as state above, in addition, Grimshaw discloses wherein operating the energy offloading system further comprises:
providing energy from the energy generation station to the electric grid ([0025], a generator device to supply electrical power to an infrastructure); and
operating the energy offloading system using the excess energy ([0040], the generator system being capable of supplying sufficient electrical power to operate said datacenter and components of the datacenter with a capacity that exceeds the amount required to operate the datacenter including supporting systems of the datacenter during the time period of required operation of the generator system).
However, Grimshaw and Kelly fail to disclose determining that there is excess energy available beyond that provided to the electric grid.
However, Miller discloses determining that there is excess energy available beyond that provided to the electric grid ([[0056], the excess production (shown as the distance between the supply and demand curves at any time) may exceed the ability of the system's electronics to deliver power to the grid);
Miller, Grimshaw and Kelly are analogous art. They relate to a Power management system.
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify an energy control algorithm, taught by Miller, incorporated with teaching of Grimshaw and Kelly, as state above, in order to increase the efficiency with which energy is managed, and by supply of energy from various sources, optimization algorithm determines based on various factors when to activate the energy sources and when to activate the consumption devices to maximize efficiency and minimize waste.
Regarding claim 29, the combination of Miller and Grimshaw disclose:
Miller discloses monitoring an amount of energy provided by the energy generation station to the electric grid ([0025]-[0032], Fig. 1, the apparatus 101 comprises a unit 103 comprising a controller 104 and an internal storage device 105. The internal storage device 105 may include, for example, a plurality of lead-acid or nickel metal hydride batteries and/or large capacitors for storing electrical energy. An external storage device 106 may optionally be included to store additional electrical energy. During normal operation, power from one or more power sources can be used to charge storage units 105 and 106 and/or meet demand other than grid 115. During power outages or power savings of the power grid 115, these additional power sources (and storage units 105 and 106) may be used to meet energy requirements (equivalent to manage termination of energy received directly from an energy generation station, the method comprising that energy from the energy generation station will terminate, as a result changing power source from the energy generation station to a backup energy source). Additionally, the remaining power can be sold back to the grid based on optimization of supply and demand calculations), and
Grimshaw discloses generating the energy termination alert based at least in part on the amount of energy provided to the electric grid ([0001], [0025], [0041]-[0046], [0073]) detecting an interruption in the flow of electricity from a utility source (equivalent to receiving an indication from the energy generation station that energy from the energy generation station will terminate), (b) cutting an electrical pathway of power to the utility source when the interruption is detected (equivalent to shutting down power to at least one computer as a result of receiving the indication), (c) triggering operation of the UPS and the energy storage device when the interruption in power of the utility source is detected, (d) triggering operation of a generator device after detecting the interruption in power of the utility source and shutting off power flow from the energy storage device upon such detection).
Regarding claim 30, Grimshaw discloses monitoring an amount of excess energy received by the energy offloading system from the energy generation station ([0026], infrastructure power system comprising control equipment that senses or controls or activates equipment to supply usable electrical power to computer and related equipment of the datacenter even),
based on the amount of excess energy received from the energy generation station, selecting a subset of computational devices from the plurality of computational devices, and operating the subset of computational devices using the excess energy ([0025]-[0026], [0038],[0052], An energy storage device (ESD) is included within each UPS system or unit of the power system and it comprises a ready and available power source. An ESD of one UPS system is capable of supplying electrical power independently of an ESD of another UPS system. The UPS system controls all operations of its ESD, including charging, recharging, discharging, monitoring, activating and shut off. The UPS systems of the datacenter's power infrastructure are capable of supplying electricity from one or more ESD sources with a capacity that exceeds the amount required to operate the computer and related equipment of the datacenter during the necessary operating time period).
4.3 Claim(s) 32 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Grimshaw (US 20130019124 A1) in view of Kelly (US 20170038811 A1) further in view of Forber Jr. (US 20160334824 A1).
Regarding claim 32, the combination of Grimshaw and Kelly discloses the limitations of claim 31, in addition, Kelly discloses ([0022], server 120 is representative of any programmable electronic device or combination of programmable electronic devices capable of executing machine readable program instructions and communicating with power source 102; but Grimshaw and Kelly fail to disclose a program related to at least one of data mining, graphic rendering, cryptocurrency mining, blockchain validation, distributed ledger processing, or distributed computation.
However, Forbes discloses at least one of the subset of computational devices is adapted to execute a program related to at least one of data mining, graphic rendering, machine learning, cryptocurrency mining, blockchain validation, distributed ledger processing, or distributed computation ([0011],[0132], use of blockchain technologies to solve problems associated with transparency, digital contracts, distributed ledgers, consensus, security, and compensation for suppliers and consumers of electric power in a market-based system, such as an Independent System Operator (ISO). provides for the use of blockchain technologies that provide for market based electric power usage (past, current, and/or future projected).
Forbes, Grimshaw and Kelly are analogous art. They relate to a power management system.
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify a power management system, taught by Forbes, incorporated with the teaching of Kelly and Grimshaw, as state above, in order to advanced energy settlements, messaging, and applications for electric power supply, load, and/or curtailment and data analytics associated with the same, and to solve problems associated with transparency, digital contracts, distributed ledgers, consensus, security, and compensation for suppliers and consumers of electric power in a market-based system.
4.4 Claim(s) 41 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Grimshaw (US 20130019124 A1) in view of Kelly (US 20170038811 A1) further in view of Smith et al. (US 20160373502 A1).
Regarding claim 41, the combination of Grimshaw and Kelly discloses the limitation of claims 31 and 37, but fail to disclose the limitations of claim 41. However, Smith discloses determining the attribute of the computation of the at least one computational device further comprises: identifying that the at least one computational device is executing a graphic rendering computation ([0013], a client device to offload high performance graphics rendering and processing to a remote server and an edge server in a manner that ensures low latency).
Smith, Grimshaw and Kelly are analogous art. They relate to execution, by the server, of the interactive application.
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify a server interface, taught by smith, incorporated with the teaching of Kelly and Grimshaw, as state above, in order to improve low latency interactive application solutions; interactive application fully or partially offloaded to a remote server to make the application more accessible to all user.
Double Patenting
5. The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 27-29 and 31-40 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-10 of U.S. Patent No. 11,537,183. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because they have similar limitation and same invention as show in the table below:
Instant US Application 18/069,345
Parent US Patent 11,537,783
Independent claim 27.
A method of operating an energy offloading system having a plurality of computational devices, the method comprising:
dependent Claim 28. operating the energy offloading system using the excess energy.
operating the energy offloading system using energy obtained from an energy generation station, the energy generation station adapted to provide energy to
a) an electric grid serving a plurality of paying customers
b) the energy offloading system;
receiving, by the energy offloading system, an energy termination alert identifying a time in the future that the energy generation station will continue to provide energy to the electric grid but cease to provide energy to the energy offloading system;
in response to receiving the energy termination alert, identifying at least one computational device of the plurality of computational devices that is in the process of executing a computation using energy obtained from the energy generation station;
determining an attribute of the computation;
based on the attribute, saving computational information related to the computation; and
after saving, powering down the at least one computational device.
Independent claim 1.
A method of operating an energy offloading system
that operates off of excess energy from an energy generation station,
energy generation station adapted to provide energy independently to both an electric grid serving a plurality of paying customers and the energy offloading system, the method comprising:
operating the energy offloading system using excess energy obtained directly from the energy generation station,
wherein the energy offloading system includes a plurality of computational devices;
receiving, by the energy offloading system, an energy termination alert including a time in the future that the energy generation station will cease to provide excess energy to the energy offloading system in order to provide the excess energy to the electric grid;
in response to receiving the energy termination alert, identifying an active subset of computational devices of the plurality of computational devices, wherein the active subset of computational devices being those computational devices of the plurality that are currently active and wherein each computational device of the active subset of computational devices has an associated computational state;
identifying the associated computational state of each computational device of the active subset of computational devices;
based on an evaluation of the associated computational state of each computational device of the active subset of computational devices, and
saving at least some computational information of at least one of the computational devices in the active subset of computational devices; and
after saving, powering down the active subset of computational devices.
Independent claim 31.
A method of operating an energy offloading system having a plurality of computational devices, the method comprising:
operating the energy offloading system;
receiving, by the energy offloading system, an energy termination alert identifying a time in the future that energy will no longer be provided to the energy offloading system;
in response to receiving the energy termination alert, identifying at least one computational device of the plurality of computational devices that is in the process of executing a computation using energy obtained from the energy generation station;
determining an attribute of the computation;
based on the attribute, saving computational information related to the computation; and
after saving, powering down the at least one computational device.
The instant dependent claims 30 and 32-40 has the same limitation as the Parent US Patent Claims 2-10, respectively.
Independent claim 1.
A methos of operating an energy offloading system that operates off of excess energy from an energy generation station,
energy generation station adapted to provide energy independently to both an electric grid serving a plurality of paying customers and the energy offloading system, the method comprising:
operating the energy offloading system using excess energy obtained directly from the energy generation station,
wherein the energy offloading system includes a plurality of computational devices;
receiving, by the energy offloading system, an energy termination alert including a time in the future that the energy generation station will cease to provide excess energy to the energy offloading system in order to provide the excess energy to the electric grid;
in response to receiving the energy termination alert, identifying an active subset of computational devices of the plurality of computational devices, wherein the active subset of computational devices being those computational devices of the plurality that are currently active and wherein each computational device of the active subset of computational devices has an associated computational state;
identifying the associated computational state of each computational device of the active subset of computational devices;
based on an evaluation of the associated computational state of each computational device of the active subset of computational devices, and
saving at least some computational information of at least one of the computational devices in the active subset of computational devices; and
after saving, powering down the active subset of computational devices.
Citation Pertinent prior art
6. The prior art made of record and not relied u6pon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Hamilton -US20090235097A1 relate to managing power consumption of a data center includes monitoring power consumption of a data center.
Whitted -US20090206670A1 relate to computer program products involve a highly efficient uninterruptible power distribution architecture to support modular processing units.
A reference to specific paragraphs, columns, pages, or figures in a cited prior art reference is not limited to preferred embodiments or any specific examples. It is well settled that a prior art reference, in its entirety, must be considered for allthat it expressly teaches and fairly suggests to one having ordinary skill in the art. Stated differently, a prior art disclosure reading on a limitation of Applicant's claim cannot be ignored on the ground that other embodiments disclosed wereinstead cited. Therefore, the Examiner's citation to a specific portion of a single prior art reference is not intended to exclusively dictate, but rather, to demonstrate an exemplary disclosure commensurate with the specific limitations being addressed. In re Heck, 699 F.2d 1331, 1332-33,216 USPQ 1038, 1039 (Fed. Cir. 1983) (quoting In re Lemelson, 397 F.2d 1006, 1 009, 158 USPQ 275, 277 (CCPA 1968)). In re: Upsher-Smith Labs. v. Pamlab, LLC, 412 F.3d 1319, 1323, 75 USPQ2d 1213, 1215 (Fed. Cir. 2005); In re Fritch, 972 F.2d 1260, 1264, 23 USPQ2d 1780, 1782 (Fed. Cir. 1992); Merck& Co. v. Biocraft Labs., Inc., 874 F.2d804, 807, 10 USPQ2d 1843, 1846 (Fed. Cir. 1989); In re Fracalossi, 681 F.2d 792,794 n.1, 215 USPQ 569, 570 n.1 (CCPA 1982); In re Lamberti, 545 F.2d 747, 750, 192 USPQ 278, 280 (CCPA 1976); In re Bozek, 416 F.2d 1385, 1390, 163USPQ 545, 549 (CCPA 1969).
Conclusion
7. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed Kidest Worku whose telephone number is 571-272-3737. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Ali Mohammad can be reached on 571-272-4105. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone 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.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application information Retrieval IPAIRI system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PMR 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 PAG system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217- 9197.
/KIDEST WORKU/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2119