DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Status of the Claims
In the communication filed on 07/24/2026 claims 1-9, 12, and 14 are pending. Independent claims 1 has been amended by incorporating the limitations of cancelled claims 10-11.
Response to Arguments and Amendments
Applicant's arguments and amendments filed 07/24/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The applicant argues in pages 13-17 of the Remarks dated 07/24/2026 that Morisaki fails to disclose the limitations incorporated from claims 10-11 into claim 1. Applicant’s arguments center around Morisaki’s lack of applicability towards a Demand Response (DR) scenario. Specifically, the applicant argues that Morisaki’s triggering conditions are based on predictions of heavy-load traveling after parking and that Morisaki has nothing to do with demand response, electric power grid balancing, V1G vehicles, electricity supply-demand adjustment, or any grid-centric concern. However, the examiner respectfully disagrees with the applicant’s position that Morisaki is unrelated to the invention.
In response to applicant's argument that Morisaki is nonanalogous art, it has been held that a prior art reference must either be in the field of the inventor’s endeavor or, if not, then be reasonably pertinent to the particular problem with which the inventor was concerned, in order to be relied upon as a basis for rejection of the claimed invention. See In re Oetiker, 977 F.2d 1443, 24 USPQ2d 1443 (Fed. Cir. 1992). In this case, Morisaki is cited specifically for the following limitations “the control device starts the SOC lowering control when at least one of the following conditions is satisfied: a preceding time comes, the preceding time being a time a threshold period of time before a scheduled time of travel end that is a time at which the vehicle is scheduled to arrive at the travel end point, or a distance from the vehicle to the travel end point decreases to a threshold distance”. Morisaki is related to the invention because it involves SOC control methods for a vehicle in transit towards a charging station considering time and distance.
In response to applicant’s argument that there is no teaching, suggestion, or motivation to combine the references, the examiner recognizes that obviousness may be established by combining or modifying the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed invention where there is some teaching, suggestion, or motivation to do so found either in the references themselves or in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 5 USPQ2d 1596 (Fed. Cir. 1988), In re Jones, 958 F.2d 347, 21 USPQ2d 1941 (Fed. Cir. 1992), and KSR International Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007). In this case, applicant argues that the motivation “to have a vehicle which is capable of performing SOC reduction when it is closer to the destination rather than during the entire trip” is conclusory. However, Morisaki expressly teaches the benefit of this adaptation being that power storage capacity decreasing control is prohibited in situations in which the vehicle may require heavy-load traveling (see ¶[07-09] of Morisaki) thus ensuring the battery has enough SOC to provide sufficient power in such cases. Accordingly, the motivation is supported by the prior-art teaching rather than by a conclusory statement.
In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., “In the present application, the SOC lowering control is triggered when the vehicle participates in down DR at a travel end point” in page 14 of the Remarks) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993). Specifically, the claims recite “the control device starts the SOC lowering control when at least one of the following conditions is satisfied: a preceding time comes, the preceding time being a time a threshold period of time before a scheduled time of travel end that is a time at which the vehicle is scheduled to arrive at the travel end point” is different than “in the present application, the SOC lowering control is triggered when the vehicle participates in down DR at a travel end point” as argued by the applicant. Applicant’s argument is missing additional limitations which provides context to Morisaki’s citations.
In response to applicant's argument that “repurposing Morisaki’s distance-based triggering mechanism to instead serve a trigger for DR-related SOC lowering control would fundamentally change Morisaki’s principle of operation from vehicle performance optimization to electric power grid balancing”, the test for obviousness is not whether the features of a secondary reference may be bodily incorporated into the structure of the primary reference; nor is it that the claimed invention must be expressly suggested in any one or all of the references. Rather, the test is what the combined teachings of the references would have suggested to those of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981).
The remaining arguments are moot as the applicant’s arguments for the remaining claims were based on dependency of the independent claims.
The claim objection is withdrawn due to the amendments made by the applicant.
This Office Action is made Final due to the amendments.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The 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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-4, 7-9, 12, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsuchiya (USPGPN 20210376402), in view of Hiramitsu (Japanese Patent JP-2020150717-A, identified by the applicant in the IDS), in view of Jang et al. (Korean Patent KR-20210148759-A), and further in view of Morisaki (USPGPN 20190168616).
With respect to claim 1, Tsuchiya teaches a vehicle that is capable of participating in demand response (DR) for adjustment of electricity supply-demand balance in an electric power grid (Figs. 1-3 and 6-7; ¶[49, 63]; vehicle 50 that is capable of participating in demand response (DR) for adjustment of electricity supply-demand balance in an electric power grid PG).
Tsuchiya teaches the vehicle comprising an electric load (Fig. 1; ¶[54]; the vehicle 50 comprises a traction drive unit 140 which includes a power control unit and motor generator (i.e., an electrical load))
Tsuchiya teaches an electricity reception device configured to receive electricity from the electric power grid via an electricity facility installed outside of the vehicle (Fig. 2; an inlet 110 configured to receive electricity from the electric power grid PG via an EVSE 40 installed outside of the vehicle 50).
Tsuchiya teaches an electricity storage device that stores the electricity received by the electricity reception device (Fig. 2; a battery 130 that stores electricity received by the inlet 110).
Tsuchiya teaches a control device that controls the electric load and charging of the electricity storage device (Fig. 1; an ECU 150 that controls the traction drive unit 140 and charging of the battery 130).
Tsuchiya teaches wherein the control device is configured to perform external charging that charges the electricity storage device by using the electricity reception device (Fig. 3; ¶[43]; the ECU 150 is configured to perform external charging (i.e., charging schedule) that charges the battery 130 by using the inlet 110).
Tsuchiya teaches the DR includes down DR that requests that the vehicle decrease an amount of charge of the electricity storage device in the external charging when the vehicle participates in the DR (Figs. 6-7; ¶[98-99]; the DR includes a downward DR that requests that the vehicle 50 decreases an amount of charge of the battery 130 in the external charging when the vehicle 50 participates in the DR).
However, Tsuchiya fails to explicitly teach the control device performs state-of-charge (SOC) lowering control that controls the electric load in such a manner that when the vehicle participates in the down DR at a travel end point of the vehicle where the electricity facility is installed, a travel end SOC becomes lower than when the vehicle does not participate in the down DR at the travel end point, the travel end SOC being a SOC of the electricity storage device at the travel end point; and the vehicle is a V1G vehicle configured to perform only the external charging out of external discharging and the external charging, the external discharging being discharging of the electricity stored in the electricity storage device into the electric power grid via the electricity facility; wherein the control device starts the SOC lowering control when a preceding time comes, the preceding time being a time a threshold period of time before a scheduled time of travel end that is a time at which the vehicle is scheduled to arrive at the travel end point, or a distance from the vehicle to the travel end point decreases to a threshold distance.
Hiramitsu teaches the control device performs state-of-charge (SOC) lowering control that controls the electric load in such a manner that when the vehicle participates in the down forecast at a travel end point of the vehicle where the electricity facility is installed, a travel end SOC becomes lower than when the vehicle does not participate in the down forecast at the travel end point, the travel end SOC being a SOC of the electricity storage device at the travel end point (¶[59 and 61]; when there is too much power available at the destination, the vehicles load is operated such that the SOC is lower than the normal SOC (i.e., when a vehicle does not participate) creating extra capacity so that it can charge more from the grid when it gets there. One of ordinary skill understands that this is a travel end SOC being a SOC of the electricity storage device at the travel end point).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have adapted Hiramitsu’s forecast driven SOC management method to Tsuchiya’s demand response capable vehicle in order to have a vehicle which is capable of matching grid demand response requests by managing the SOC of it’s battery accordingly. The benefit of this adaptation being an electric power utility may properly account for power grid balancing and EV users participating in the balancing may be properly compensated for their participation (see ¶[02-03] of Hiramitsu).
However, Tsuchiya fails to explicitly teach the vehicle is a V1G vehicle configured to perform only the external charging out of external discharging and the external charging, the external discharging being discharging of the electricity stored in the electricity storage device into the electric power grid via the electricity facility; wherein the control device starts the SOC lowering control when a preceding time comes, the preceding time being a time a threshold period of time before a scheduled time of travel end that is a time at which the vehicle is scheduled to arrive at the travel end point, or a distance from the vehicle to the travel end point decreases to a threshold distance.
Jang teaches the vehicle is a V1G vehicle configured to perform only the external charging out of external discharging and the external charging, the external discharging being discharging of the electricity stored in the electricity storage device into the electric power grid via the electricity facility (¶[08]; V1G vehicles are used for reduced peak electricity demand in which one of ordinary skill understands that this aspect applies to V1G vehicles which are charge-only vehicles).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have adapted Jang’s demand response system to Tsuchiya’s demand response capable vehicle in order to apply demand response to V1G vehicles. The benefit of this adaptation being battery life can be improved with a collectively managed charging schedule, the charger connection rate is improved, EV owners are more prone to connect their EVs to grids managed by this system, the utility value of the EV batteries is improved, and power grids benefit from trading the energy stored by utilizing surplus SOC (see ¶[51-56] of Jang).
However, Tsuchiya fails to explicitly teach wherein the control device starts the SOC lowering control when a preceding time comes, the preceding time being a time a threshold period of time before a scheduled time of travel end that is a time at which the vehicle is scheduled to arrive at the travel end point, or a distance from the vehicle to the travel end point decreases to a threshold distance.
Morisaki teaches wherein the control device starts the SOC lowering control when a preceding time comes, the preceding time being a time a threshold period of time before a scheduled time of travel end that is a time at which the vehicle is scheduled to arrive at the travel end point (Fig. 3; in steps S190-S210 the power storage capacity decreasing control determines the remaining distance L to the predicted target point P[i] and compares it to a threshold distance L1 and when L≤L1 the target SOC is changed from S1 to a lower value of S2 before arriving. One of ordinary skill understands that by knowing the remaining distance then a preceding time prior to arriving may be determined).
Morisaki teaches wherein the control device starts the SOC lowering control when a distance from the vehicle to the travel end point decreases to a threshold distance (Fig. 3; in steps S190-S210 the power storage capacity decreasing control determines the remaining distance L to the predicted target point P[i] and compares it to a threshold distance L1 and when L≤L1 the target SOC is changed from S1 to a lower value of S2 before arriving).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have adapted Morisaki’s distance-based energy management system to Tsuchiya’s demand response capable vehicle in order to have a vehicle which is capable of performing SOC reduction when it is closer to the destination rather than during the entire trip. The benefit of this adaptation being that power storage capacity decreasing control is prohibited in situations in which the vehicle may require heavy-load traveling (see ¶[07-09] of Morisaki) thus ensuring the battery has enough SOC to provide sufficient power in such cases.
With respect to claim 2, Tsuchiya teaches the invention as discussed above in claim 1. Further, Tsuchiya teaches when the vehicle does not participate in the down DR at the travel end point during a first period, the amount of charge in the external charging during the first period is a first amount of charge (Fig. 7; line L1 illustrates a vehicle that does not participate in the down DR at the travel end point during a first period wherein the amount of charging is denoted by Px (i.e., a first amount of charge)).
Tsuchiya teaches when the vehicle participates in the down DR at the travel end point during the first period, the amount of charge in the external charging during the first period is a second amount of charge that is smaller than the first amount of charge (Fig. 7; a vehicle participating in the down DR during the first period is charged at a Py level which is smaller than the first amount of charge denoted by Px).
Tsuchiya teaches the control device performs the external charging in such a manner that the electricity storage device is charged with a differential amount of electricity during a second period from an end time of the first period to a scheduled time of departure of the vehicle, the differential amount of electricity being an amount of electricity corresponding to a difference between the first amount of charge and the second amount of charge (Fig. 7; at L2 the battery 130 of the vehicle is charged by a differential amount Px after the downward demand response period (i.e., a second period from an end time of the first period), wherein the differential amount of electricity Px at L2 being an amount of electricity corresponding to a difference between the first amount of charge (i.e., Px before the downward DR) and the second amount of charge (i.e., Py during the downward DR). One of ordinary skill in the art understands that the vehicle is then charged at the higher level in L2 after being charged at a lower level during the downward DR period so that it can meet an acceptable level of charge at a scheduled time of departure).
With respect to claim 3, Tsuchiya teaches the invention as discussed above in claim 1. Further, Tsuchiya teaches the DR includes up DR that requests that the vehicle increase the amount of charge in the external charging (¶[98]; the demand response includes upward demand response wherein power demand on the power grid PG is increased thereby it is understood by one of ordinary skill this to be an increase to the amount of charge).
However, Tsuchiya fails to explicitly teach the SOC lowering control includes control of the electric load that is performed in such a manner that when the vehicle participates in the up DR at the travel end point, the travel end SOC becomes lower than when the vehicle does not participate in the up DR at the travel end point.
Hiramitsu teaches the SOC lowering control includes control of the electric load that is performed in such a manner that when the vehicle participates in the up forecast at the travel end point, the travel end SOC becomes lower than when the vehicle does not participate in the up forecast at the travel end point (Fig. 7; ¶[71]; in step S3 if the power supply amount is greater than the predicted power amount then the process moves to step S7 wherein the SOC is set to a low value (i.e., in this case 30%) so that in step S8 the vehicle loads consume power so that the vehicle arrives at it’s destination with the 30% SOC and be available for charging from the grid).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have adapted Hiramitsu’s forecast driven SOC management method to Tsuchiya’s demand response capable vehicle in order to have a vehicle which is capable of matching grid demand response requests by managing the SOC of it’s battery accordingly. The benefit of this adaptation being an electric power utility may properly account for power grid balancing and EV users participating in the balancing may be properly compensated for their participation (see ¶[02-03] of Hiramitsu).
With respect to claim 4, Tsuchiya teaches the invention as discussed above in claim 1. Further, Tsuchiya teaches the electric load includes a rotating electric machine that generates driving force for travel of the vehicle by consuming the electricity stored in the electricity storage device (Fig. 1; ¶[54]; the vehicle 50 comprises a traction drive unit 140 which includes a power control unit and motor generator (i.e., an electrical load) which is configured to drive the vehicle 50 using the electric power stored in the battery 130).
However, Tsuchiya fails to explicitly teach the SOC lowering control includes control of the rotating electric machine that is performed in such a manner that when the vehicle participates in the DR at the travel end point, an upper limit of output produced by the rotating electric machine during travel of the vehicle becomes higher than when the vehicle does not participate in the DR at the travel end point.
Hiramitsu teaches the SOC lowering control includes control of the rotating electric machine that is performed in such a manner that when the vehicle participates in the forecast at the travel end point, an upper limit of output produced by the rotating electric machine during travel of the vehicle becomes higher than when the vehicle does not participate in the forecast at the travel end point (Fig. 7; ¶[71] output suppression of the drive motor 7 is released (i.e., the drive motor is used to consume power) therefore increasing the upper limit of the output produced by the drive motor in order to consume more power and lower the SOC of the vehicle when it reaches the travel end point compared to a vehicle that does not participate in this).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have adapted Hiramitsu’s forecast driven SOC management method to Tsuchiya’s demand response capable vehicle in order to have a vehicle which is capable of matching grid demand response requests by managing the SOC of it’s battery accordingly. The benefit of this adaptation being an electric power utility may properly account for power grid balancing and EV users participating in the balancing may be properly compensated for their participation (see ¶[02-03] of Hiramitsu).
With respect to claim 7, Tsuchiya teaches the invention as discussed above in claim 1. Further, Tsuchiya teaches the electric load includes an accessory machine that operates by consuming the electricity stored in the electricity storage device (Fig. 1; an electric cooling device 132 and a heating device 133 operate by consuming stored electricity).
However, Tsuchiya fails to explicitly teach the SOC lowering control includes control of the accessory machine that is performed in such a manner that when the vehicle participates in the DR at the travel end point, electricity consumption by the accessory machine increases, compared to when the vehicle does not participate in the DR at the travel end point.
Hiramitsu teaches the SOC lowering control includes control of the machine that is performed in such a manner that when the vehicle participates in the forecast at the travel end point, electricity consumption by the accessory machine increases, compared to when the vehicle does not participate in the forecast at the travel end point (Fig. 7; ¶[71]; in step S3 if the power supply amount is greater than the predicted power amount then the process moves to step S7 wherein the SOC is set to a low value (i.e., in this case 30%) so that in step S8 the vehicle loads consume power so that the vehicle arrives at it’s destination with the 30% SOC and be available for charging from the grid).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have adapted Hiramitsu’s forecast driven SOC management method to Tsuchiya’s demand response capable vehicle in order to have a vehicle which is capable of matching grid demand response requests by managing the SOC of it’s battery accordingly, in this case by utilizing Tsuchiya’s accessory machine to consume power to manage the SOC. The benefit of this adaptation being an electric power utility may properly account for power grid balancing and EV users participating in the balancing may be properly compensated for their participation (see ¶[02-03] of Hiramitsu).
With respect to claim 8, Tsuchiya teaches the invention as discussed above in claim 1. Further, Tsuchiya teaches the electric load includes an accessory machine that operates by consuming the electricity stored in the electricity storage device (Fig. 1; an electric cooling device 132 and a heating device 133 operate by consuming stored electricity)
Tsuchiya teaches the control includes control of the accessory machine that is performed in such a manner that when the vehicle participates in the DR at the travel end point, the accessory machine starts operating before a scheduled time of travel start of the vehicle (Figs. 8 and 12; in Fig. 8 when the vehicle is at the travel end point as indicated by the “connect charging connector” indication, temperature adjustment is performed before a charging schedule thus one of ordinary skill understands temperature adjustment is done prior to a scheduled travel start time. Further, in Fig. 12 battery temperature adjustments are performed for vehicles that participate in DR).
However, Tsuchiya fails to explicitly teach the SOC lowering control.
Hiramitsu teaches the SOC lowering control (Fig. 1; SOC adjustment control means 37).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have adapted Hiramitsu’s forecast driven SOC management method to Tsuchiya’s demand response capable vehicle in order to have a vehicle which is capable of matching grid demand response requests by managing the SOC of it’s battery accordingly. The benefit of this adaptation being an electric power utility may properly account for power grid balancing and EV users participating in the balancing may be properly compensated for their participation (see ¶[02-03] of Hiramitsu).
With respect to claim 9, Tsuchiya teaches the invention as discussed above in claim 1. Further, Tsuchiya teaches the electric load includes a generator that is configured to perform regenerative electricity generation in connection with braking of the vehicle (¶[54]; the motor generator is configured to regeneratively generate electric power in which one of ordinary skill understands it is through braking of the vehicle).
Tsuchiya teaches regenerative electricity that is electricity generated by the regenerative electricity generation is supplied from the generator to the electricity storage device (¶[54]; the regeneratively generated electric power is supplied to the battery 130).
However, Tsuchiya fails to explicitly teach the SOC lowering control includes control of the generator that is performed in such a manner that when the vehicle participates in the down DR at the travel end point, the regenerative electricity during travel of the vehicle is decreased, compared to when the vehicle does not participate in the down DR at the travel end point.
Hiramitsu teaches the SOC lowering control includes control of the generator that is performed in such a manner that when the vehicle participates in the down forecast at the travel end point, the regenerative electricity during travel of the vehicle is decreased, compared to when the vehicle does not participate in the down forecast at the travel end point (Fig. 7; ¶[71]; regenerative power is suppressed (i.e., decreased) when the vehicle participates in forecast/demand management when the supply is less than the demand).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have adapted Hiramitsu’s forecast driven SOC management method to Tsuchiya’s demand response capable vehicle in order to have a vehicle which is capable of matching grid demand response requests by managing the SOC of it’s battery accordingly. The benefit of this adaptation being an electric power utility may properly account for power grid balancing and EV users participating in the balancing may be properly compensated for their participation (see ¶[02-03] of Hiramitsu).
With respect to claim 12, Tsuchiya teaches the invention as discussed above in claim 1. However, Tsuchiya fails to explicitly teach wherein the control device performs the SOC lowering control when the electricity facility is able to perform, of discharging processing and charging processing, only the charging processing, the discharging processing causing the electricity stored in the electricity storage device to be discharged into the electric power grid via the electricity facility, the charging processing causing the control device to perform the external charging by using electricity from the electric power grid.
Jang teaches wherein the control device performs the SOC lowering control when the electricity facility is able to perform, of discharging processing and charging processing, only the charging processing, the discharging processing causing the electricity stored in the electricity storage device to be discharged into the electric power grid via the electricity facility, the charging processing causing the control device to perform the external charging by using electricity from the electric power grid (¶[08]; V1G vehicles are used for reduced peak electricity demand in which one of ordinary skill understands that SOC lowering control is done when the charger can only charge the car and not send power back to the grid).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have adapted Jang’s demand response system to Tsuchiya’s demand response capable vehicle in order to apply demand response to V1G vehicles. The benefit of this adaptation being battery life can be improved with a collectively managed charging schedule, the charger connection rate is improved, EV owners are more prone to connect their EVs to grids managed by this system, the utility value of the EV batteries is improved, and power grids benefit from trading the energy stored by utilizing surplus SOC (see ¶[51-56] of Jang).
With respect to claim 14, Tsuchiya teaches the invention as discussed above in claim 7. Further, Tsuchiya teaches wherein the accessory machine comprises at least one of a battery heater or an air-conditioning device (Fig. 1; an electric cooling device 132 and a heating device 133 are known by one of ordinary skill to be accessory machines).
Claims 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsuchiya, Hiramitsu, Jang, and Morisaki, and further in view of Naito et al. (USPGPN 20100106401).
With respect to claim 5, Tsuchiya teaches the invention as discussed above in claim 1. However, Tsuchiya fails to explicitly teach in such a manner that SOC of the electricity storage device does not become less than a required SOC; and the required SOC is a SOC of the electricity storage device that is required for the vehicle to travel up to a destination of the vehicle as the travel end point.
Hiramitsu teaches the control device controls the electric load during travel of the vehicle (¶[23-24]; the drive motor is controlled during travel of the vehicle to consume power to control the SOC of the battery).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have adapted Hiramitsu’s forecast driven SOC management method to Tsuchiya’s demand response capable vehicle in order to have a vehicle which is capable of matching grid demand response requests by managing the SOC of it’s battery accordingly. The benefit of this adaptation being an electric power utility may properly account for power grid balancing and EV users participating in the balancing may be properly compensated for their participation (see ¶[02-03] of Hiramitsu).
Naito teaches in such a manner that SOC of the electricity storage device does not become less than a required SOC (Figs. 6-8; the process determines if the SOC is enough to reach it’s travel destination. Thus, it ensures the SOC does not become less than a required SOC).
Naito teaches the required SOC is a SOC of the electricity storage device that is required for the vehicle to travel up to a destination of the vehicle as the travel end point (Figs. 6-8; the SOC values obtained and analyzed are the required SOC required for the vehicle to travel to a destination of the vehicle as the travel end point).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have adapted Naito’s SOC based travel guidance system to Tsuchiya’s demand response capable vehicle in order to have a vehicle which is capable of ensuring it has enough SOC in the battery to reach it’s travel destination. The benefit of this adaptation being a vehicle with the SOC based travel guidance system benefits from efficient recharging cycles with shorter wait times and ensures complete round trips with enough SOC (see ¶[07-09] of Naito).
With respect to claim 6, Tsuchiya teaches the invention as discussed above in claim 5. However, Tsuchiya fails to explicitly teach the control device is configured to predict a plurality of candidates for the destination; the required SOC is determined based on a first required SOC and a second required SOC; the first required SOC is a SOC of the electricity storage device that is required for the vehicle to travel up to a first candidate among the plurality of candidates for the destination; and the second required SOC is a SOC of the electricity storage device that is required for the vehicle to travel up to a second candidate among the plurality of candidates for the destination, the second candidate having a longer distance from the vehicle than the first candidate.
Naito teaches the control device is configured to predict a plurality of candidates for the destination (Fig. 6; ¶[69]; steps S7-S8 a plurality of candidates for the destination is determined).
Naito teaches the required SOC is determined based on a first required SOC and a second required SOC; the first required SOC is a SOC of the electricity storage device that is required for the vehicle to travel up to a first candidate among the plurality of candidates for the destination; and the second required SOC is a SOC of the electricity storage device that is required for the vehicle to travel up to a second candidate among the plurality of candidates for the destination, the second candidate having a longer distance from the vehicle than the first candidate (Fig. 6; steps S10-S11 the SOC for the destinations is determined. It is understood by one of ordinary skill in the art that each destination will have a SOC determined for it to determine how much SOC is required to make the trip therefore it is inherent that a first candidate with a first SOC and a second candidate with a second SOC wherein the second candidate having a longer distance).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have adapted Naito’s SOC based travel guidance system to Tsuchiya’s demand response capable vehicle in order to have a vehicle which is capable of ensuring it has enough SOC in the battery to reach it’s travel destination. The benefit of this adaptation being a vehicle with the SOC based travel guidance system benefits from efficient recharging cycles with shorter wait times and ensures complete round trips with enough SOC (see ¶[07-09] of Naito).
Relevant Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
The additional prior art identified by the applicant in the Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) were considered by the examiner, however, for examination purposes were not relied upon for citation purposes.
Conclusion
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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Frank A Silva whose telephone number is (703)756-1698. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 09:30 am -06:30 pm ET.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Drew Dunn can be reached at 571-272-2312. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/FRANK ALEXIS SILVA/Examiner, Art Unit 2859
/DREW A DUNN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2859
Prosecution Insights