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 . This action is made final.
Claims 1-25 filed on 11/12/2025 have been reviewed and considered by this office action.
Claims 1-8, 10-14, 16, 17, 20, 21, 24, and 25 have been amended.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Step 1: Claims 1-24 are directed to a process. Claim 25 is directed to a machine or an article of manufacture.
With respect to claim 1:
2A Prong 1: The claim recites an abstract idea. Specifically:
identifying at least one occurrence of an event in the electrical system based on the energy-related data; (Mental process – identifying an occurrence of an event is an evaluation that can be practically performed in the human mind or by a human using a pen and paper as a physical aid)
analyzing the energy-related data associated with the at least one identified event to determine impact of the event on loads and/or zones associated with the electrical system, and whether recovery from the event has been initiated or started for at least one of the loads and/or zones impacted by the event; (Mental process – analyzing data is an evaluation that can be practically performed in the human mind or by a human using a pen and paper as a physical aid)
in response to determining recovery from the event has been initiated or started for at least one of the loads and/or zones impacted by the event, determining a plurality of different load types and a recovery profile for the plurality of different load types; (Mental process – determining recovery from the event has been initiated is a judgment that can be practically performed in the human mind or by a human using a pen and paper as a physical aid)
tracking the recovery profile for the plurality of different load types and tracking when the plurality of different load types are added back into the electrical system until recovery has met one or more recovery criteria (Mental process – tracking a recovery profile is an observation that can be practically performed in the human mind or by a human using a pen and paper as a physical aid)
2A Prong 2: The additional elements recited in the claim do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application, individually or in combination.
Additional elements:
capturing energy-related data using at least one Intelligent Electronic Device (IED) in an electrical system (Insignificant extra-solution activity (mere data gathering) – see MPEP § 2106.05(g))
performing at least one action during the recovery from the event and/or after the recovery from the event has met the recovery criteria to provide at least one of an indication, optimization or optimization recommendation, and feedback response associated with the recovery from the event (Adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea – see MPEP § 2106.05(f))
2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Additional elements:
capturing energy-related data using at least one Intelligent Electronic Device (IED) in an electrical system (Insignificant extra-solution activity (mere data gathering) – see MPEP § 2106.05(g))
performing at least one action during the recovery from the event and/or after the recovery from the event has met the recovery criteria to provide at least one of an indication, optimization or optimization recommendation, and feedback response associated with the recovery from the event (Adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea – see MPEP § 2106.05(f))
Therefore, claim 1 is ineligible.
With respect to claim 2:
2A Prong 1: The claim recites an abstract idea. Specifically:
wherein at least one of: the load, load type, and/or zone recovering from the event and the recovery profile for each of the loads, load types and/or zones is/are determined by identifying at least one of a new "running mode," an existing "running mode," changes in an existing and/or new "running mode," a temporary "stability," a temporary "instability," and a change in any electrical characteristic and/or control signal associated with the electrical system. (Mental process – identifying one of a number of modes or changes is an observation that can be practically performed in the human mind or by a human using a pen and paper as a physical aid)
Therefore, claim 2 is ineligible.
With respect to claim 3:
2A Prong 1: The claim recites an abstract idea. Specifically:
wherein the plurality of load types is determined based on an analysis of one or more types, parameters, or behaviors of data, the one or more types of data including at least one of time-series data logs, waveform captures, real-time data, I/O data, user input(s) (Mental process – determining a plurality of load types based on analysis of data is an evaluation that can be practically performed in the human mind or by a human using a pen and paper as a physical aid)
Therefore, claim 3 is ineligible.
With respect to claim 4:
2A Prong 1: The claim recites an abstract idea. Specifically:
wherein the recovery criteria is considered met in response to at least one of: user feedback indicating the recovery criteria has been met, the recovery profile for the plurality of load types and/or the addition of the plurality of load types back into to the electrical system meeting one or more user defined and/or learned thresholds or definitions associated with and/or indicating a recovery, I/O signals from equipment or loads indicating the recovery, a heuristic evaluation, and a statistical evaluation of the recovery profile for the plurality of load types indicating the recovery (Mental process – determining the recovery criteria is considered met is a judgment that can be practically performed in the human mind or by a human using a pen and paper as a physical aid)
Therefore, claim 4 is ineligible.
With respect to claim 5:
2A Prong 1: The claim recites an abstract idea. Specifically:
wherein the user defined and/or learned thresholds or definitions associated with and/or indicating a recovery have an associated or prescribed time period or duration (Mental process – the thresholds having an associated duration is an additional piece of information for making a judgment that can be practically performed in the human mind or by a human using a pen and paper as a physical aid)
Therefore, claim 5 is ineligible.
With respect to claim 6:
2A Prong 1: The claim recites an abstract idea. Specifically:
wherein the statistical evaluation uses at least one of: statistical methods, time-series analysis methodology, shape or signal recognition, fixed timeboxing, or dynamic timeboxing (Mental process – statistical evaluation is an evaluation that can be practically performed in the human mind or by a human using a pen and paper as a physical aid)
Therefore, claim 6 is ineligible.
With respect to claim 7:
2A Prong 1: The claim recites an abstract idea. Specifically:
wherein determining the plurality of load types recovering from the event and a recovery profile for the plurality of load types, includes: determining if the plurality of load types are recovering from the event (Mental process – determining if a plurality of load types is recovering from an event is an evaluation that can be practically performed in the human mind or by a human using a pen and paper as a physical aid)
Therefore, claim 7 is ineligible.
With respect to claim 8:
2A Prong 2: The additional elements recited in the claim do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application, individually or in combination.
Additional elements:
wherein the tracking includes a recovery characteristic, behavior, and/or parameters comprising at least one of a load type profile, load type information, or load type status (Generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use – see MPEP § 2106.05(h))
2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Additional elements:
wherein the tracking includes a recovery characteristic, behavior, and/or parameters comprising at least one of a load type profile, load type information, or load type status (Generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use – see MPEP § 2106.05(h))
Therefore, claim 8 is ineligible.
With respect to claim 9:
2A Prong 2: The additional elements recited in the claim do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application, individually or in combination.
Additional elements:
further comprising: creating a list of recovery events to optimize recovery improvements and/or facilitate building a standard operating procedure(s) (SOP(s)) for recovery from an event (Insignificant extra-solution activity – creating a list of recovery events represents pre-solution activity (selecting a particular data source or type of data to be manipulated) – see MPEP § 2106.05(g))
2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Additional elements:
further comprising: creating a list of recovery events to optimize recovery improvements and/or facilitate building a standard operating procedure(s) (SOP(s)) for recovery from an event (Insignificant extra-solution activity – creating a list of recovery events represents pre-solution activity (selecting a particular data source or type of data to be manipulated) – see MPEP § 2106.05(g))
Therefore, claim 9 is ineligible.
With respect to claim 10:
2A Prong 2: The additional elements recited in the claim do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application, individually or in combination.
Additional elements:
wherein the SOP(s) are built to optimize at least one of peak demand reduction, billing reduction, recovery duration or time period, energy consumption during recovery, CO2 emissions associated with recoveries, specific load or zone improvements, load type changes, technology changes, equipment or system protection, or safety improvements (Generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use – see MPEP § 2106.05(h))
2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Additional elements:
wherein the SOP(s) are built to optimize at least one of peak demand reduction, billing reduction, recovery duration or time period, energy consumption during recovery, CO2 emissions associated with recoveries, specific load or zone improvements, load type changes, technology changes, equipment or system protection, or safety improvements (Generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use – see MPEP § 2106.05(h))
Therefore, claim 10 is ineligible.
With respect to claim 11:
2A Prong 1: The claim recites an abstract idea. Specifically:
wherein the analysis includes evaluating energy signals and/or data and/or other signals to characterize the plurality of load types being added during recovery or order of the plurality of load types being re-energized to recovery characteristics and/or baselines from similar or dissimilar market segment (Mental process – evaluating data is an evaluation that can be practically performed in the human mind or by a human using a pen and paper as a physical aid)
Therefore, claim 11 is ineligible.
With respect to claim 12:
2A Prong 2: The additional elements recited in the claim do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application, individually or in combination.
Additional elements:
wherein the plurality of different load types have different number of electrical phases (Generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use – see MPEP § 2106.05(h))
2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Additional elements:
wherein the plurality of different load types have different number of electrical phases (Generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use – see MPEP § 2106.05(h))
Therefore, claim 12 is ineligible.
With respect to claim 13:
2A Prong 2: The additional elements recited in the claim do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application, individually or in combination.
Additional elements:
wherein the recovery profile indicates when the plurality of different load types were added back into the electrical system, wherein the plurality of different load types are added back at different times (Generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use – see MPEP § 2106.05(h))
2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Additional elements:
wherein the recovery profile indicates when the plurality of different load types were added back into the electrical system, wherein the plurality of different load types are added back at different times (Generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use – see MPEP § 2106.05(h))
Therefore, claim 13 is ineligible.
With respect to claim 14:
2A Prong 2: The additional elements recited in the claim do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application, individually or in combination.
Additional elements:
wherein performing the at least one action further comprises changing a configuration of the at least one IED (Adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea – see MPEP § 2106.05(f))
2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Additional elements:
wherein performing the at least one action further comprises changing a configuration of the at least one IED (Adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea – see MPEP § 2106.05(f))
Therefore, claim 14 is ineligible.
With respect to claim 15:
2A Prong 1: The claim recites an abstract idea. Specifically:
wherein real-time recovery demand versus an existing peak demand is analyzed to minimize risk of inadvertently establishing a new peak demand for at least one of an application, process, zone, and the entire electrical system associated with a site(s). (Mental process – analyzing demand is an evaluation that can be practically performed in the human mind or by a human using a pen and paper as a physical aid)
Therefore, claim 15 is ineligible.
With respect to claim 16:
2A Prong 1: The claim recites an abstract idea. Specifically:
analyzing recovery information acquired from plurality of load types behavior to determine at least part of how an electrical hierarchy is constructed within the electrical system (Mental process – analyzing recovery information is an evaluation that can be practically performed in the human mind or by a human using a pen and paper as a physical aid)
2A Prong 2: The additional elements recited in the claim do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application, individually or in combination.
Additional elements:
automatic grouping of loads into zones based upon historic analysis of at least one previous recovery, or customer segment type(s) (Adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea – see MPEP § 2106.05(f))
2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Additional elements:
automatic grouping of loads into zones based upon historic analysis of at least one previous recovery, or customer segment type(s) (Adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea – see MPEP § 2106.05(f))
Therefore, claim 16 is ineligible.
With respect to claim 17:
2A Prong 2: The additional elements recited in the claim do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application, individually or in combination.
Additional elements:
further comprising: providing alarms to indicate at least one of: 1) recovery from an event in progress or still in progress, 2) risk of new peak demand during or just after a recovery, 3) load(s) that have or have not been re-energized during recovery, 4) load type(s) that have or have not been re- energized during the recovery, 5) zone(s) which have or have not re-energized during the recovery, 6) recovery time that exceeds a threshold, and 7) magnitude or amount of load that has been recovered with respect to pre-event parameters (Adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea – see MPEP § 2106.05(f))
2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Additional elements:
further comprising: providing alarms to indicate at least one of: 1) recovery from an event in progress or still in progress, 2) risk of new peak demand during or just after a recovery, 3) load(s) that have or have not been re-energized during recovery, 4) load type(s) that have or have not been re- energized during the recovery, 5) zone(s) which have or have not re-energized during the recovery, 6) recovery time that exceeds a threshold, and 7) magnitude or amount of load that has been recovered with respect to pre-event parameters (Adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea – see MPEP § 2106.05(f))
Therefore, claim 17 is ineligible.
With respect to claim 18:
2A Prong 2: The additional elements recited in the claim do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application, individually or in combination.
Additional elements:
wherein the at least one action is load(s) specific, load type(s) specific, zone(s) specific, event(s) specific, application(s) specific and/or customer(s) specific (Generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use – see MPEP § 2106.05(h))
2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Additional elements:
wherein the at least one action is load(s) specific, load type(s) specific, zone(s) specific, event(s) specific, application(s) specific and/or customer(s) specific (Generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use – see MPEP § 2106.05(h))
Therefore, claim 18 is ineligible.
With respect to claim 19:
2A Prong 1: The claim recites an abstract idea. Specifically:
wherein the at least one identified event occurrence is indicative of an anomalous condition in the electrical system. (Mental process – identifying an event is indicative of an anomalous condition is an observation that can be practically performed in the human mind or by a human using a pen and paper as a physical aid)
Therefore, claim 19 is ineligible.
With respect to claim 20:
2A Prong 2: The additional elements recited in the claim do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application, individually or in combination.
Additional elements:
wherein characteristics and/or behaviors suitable for identifying the at least one identified event occurrence include at least one of: magnitude; duration; frequency components; sag type; phase(s) impacted; phase angle(s); a combination of the magnitude, the duration, the associated frequency components, or the sag type with associated phase angle(s) (Generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use – see MPEP § 2106.05(h))
2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Additional elements:
wherein characteristics and/or behaviors suitable for identifying the at least one identified event occurrence include at least one of: magnitude; duration; frequency components; sag type; phase(s) impacted; phase angle(s); a combination of the magnitude, the duration, the associated frequency components, or the sag type with associated phase angle(s) (Generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use – see MPEP § 2106.05(h))
Therefore, claim 20 is ineligible.
With respect to claim 21:
2A Prong 2: The additional elements recited in the claim do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application, individually or in combination.
Additional elements:
wherein the at least one captured energy-related signal includes at least one of: a voltage signal, a current signal, or another signal or data derived from one or both of the voltage signal or the current signal (Insignificant extra-solution activity – capturing an energy-related signal represents pre-solution activity (mere data gathering) – see MPEP § 2106.05(g))
2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Additional elements:
wherein the at least one captured energy-related signal includes at least one of: a voltage signal, a current signal, or another signal or data derived from one or both of the voltage signal or the current signal (Receiving or transmitting data over a network have been deemed as well‐understood, routine, and conventional functions – see MPEP § 2106.05(d))
Therefore, claim 21 is ineligible.
With respect to claim 22:
2A Prong 2: The additional elements recited in the claim do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application, individually or in combination.
Additional elements:
wherein the voltage signal and the current signal are at least one of: a single-phase voltage and current signal, and a polyphase voltage and current signal. (Generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use – see MPEP § 2106.05(h))
2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Additional elements:
wherein the voltage signal and the current signal are at least one of: a single-phase voltage and current signal, and a polyphase voltage and current signal. (Generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use – see MPEP § 2106.05(h))
Therefore, claim 22 is ineligible.
With respect to claim 23:
2A Prong 2: The additional elements recited in the claim do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application, individually or in combination.
Additional elements:
wherein the at least one captured energy-related signal is associated with at least one load, load type, and/or zone in the electrical system (Generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use – see MPEP § 2106.05(h))
2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Additional elements:
wherein the at least one captured energy-related signal is associated with at least one load, load type, and/or zone in the electrical system (Generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use – see MPEP § 2106.05(h))
Therefore, claim 23 is ineligible.
With respect to claim 24:
2A Prong 2: The additional elements recited in the claim do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application, individually or in combination.
Additional elements:
further comprising: storing information associated with the recovery profile for future use and/or analysis (Insignificant extra-solution activity – storing information for future use represents post-solution activity – see MPEP § 2106.05(g))
2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Additional elements:
further comprising: storing information associated with the recovery profile for future use and/or analysis (Storing and retrieving information in memory have been deemed as well‐understood, routine, and conventional functions – see MPEP § 2106.05(d))
Therefore, claim 24 is ineligible.
With respect to claim 25:
2A Prong 1: The claim recites an abstract idea. Specifically:
process the energy-related data from or derived from at least one energy-related signal captured by the IED in the electrical system to identify at least one occurrence of an event in the electrical system; (Mental process – processing data to identify an occurrence of an event is an evaluation that can be practically performed in the human mind or by a human using a pen and paper as a physical aid)
analyze the energy-related data associated with the at least one identified event occurrence to determine impact of the event on loads and/or zones associated with the electrical system, and whether recovery from the event has been initiated or started for at least one of the loads and/or zones impacted by the event; (Mental process – analyzing data is an evaluation that can be practically performed in the human mind or by a human using a pen and paper as a physical aid)
in response to determining recovery from the event has been initiated or started for at least one of the loads and/or zones impacted by the event, determine a plurality of different load types and a recovery profile for the plurality of different load types; (Mental process – determining recovery from the event has been initiated is a judgment that can be practically performed in the human mind or by a human using a pen and paper as a physical aid)
track the recovery profile for the plurality of different load types and track when the plurality of different load types are added back into the electrical system until recovery has met one or more recovery criteria (Mental process – tracking a recovery profile is an observation that can be practically performed in the human mind or by a human using a pen and paper as a physical aid)
2A Prong 2: The additional elements recited in the claim do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application, individually or in combination.
Additional elements:
at least one Intelligent Electronic Device (IED) configured to capture energy-related data in an electrical system (Insignificant extra-solution activity (mere data gathering) – see MPEP § 2106.05(g))
at least one processor; at least one memory device coupled to the at least one processor, the at least one processor and the at least one memory device configured to: (Mere recitation of a generic computer component – see MPEP § 2106.05(b)(I))
perform at least one action during the recovery from the event and/or after the recovery from the event has met the recovery criteria to provide at least one of an indication, optimization or optimization recommendation, and feedback response associated with the recovery from the event (Adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea – see MPEP § 2106.05(f))
2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Additional elements:
at least one Intelligent Electronic Device (IED) configured to capture energy-related data in an electrical system (Insignificant extra-solution activity (mere data gathering) – see MPEP § 2106.05(g))
at least one processor; at least one memory device coupled to the at least one processor, the at least one processor and the at least one memory device configured to: (Mere recitation of a generic computer component – see MPEP § 2106.05(b)(I))
perform at least one action during the recovery from the event and/or after the recovery from the event has met the recovery criteria to provide at least one of an indication, optimization or optimization recommendation, and feedback response associated with the recovery from the event (Adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea – see MPEP § 2106.05(f))
Therefore, claim 25 is ineligible.
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.
Claims 1-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Menzel et al. (US 2020/0011903 A1), in view of Anwar et al. (Anwar, Asif, and Ali, Mohd Hasan. "Sizing of Energy Storage System for Power Restoration in Different Types of Islanded Microgrid Aided by Load-Characterization and Modeling." In 2018 IEEE Energy Conversion Congress and Exposition (ECCE), pp. 3771-3776. IEEE, 2018.)
Regarding claim 1, Menzel teaches a method for automatically assessing event recovery in an electrical system, comprising:
capturing energy-related data using at least one Intelligent Electronic Device (IED) in an electrical system ([0005]: “a method for analyzing power quality events in an electrical system includes processing electrical measurement data from or derived from energy-related signals captured by a plurality of metering devices (e.g., intelligent electronic devices (IEDs)) in the electrical system to generate or update a plurality of dynamic tolerance curves”);
identifying at least one occurrence of an event in the electrical system based on the energy-related data ([0005]: “The method also includes selectively aggregating power quality data from the plurality of dynamic tolerance curves to analyze power quality events in the electrical system”);
analyzing the energy-related data associated with the at least one identified event to determine impact of the event on loads and/or zones associated with the electrical system, and whether recovery from the event has been initiated or started for at least one of the loads and/or zones impacted by the event ([0008]: “the plurality of metering devices may evaluate a power quality event's magnitude, duration, load impact, recovery time from impact”; FIG. 30 and [0235]: a “recovery time clock” begins when it is determined recovery from the event has been initiated);
tracking the recovery profile for the plurality of different load types ([0322]: “An example method according to the disclosure for reducing recovery time periods includes providing a method of tracking the recovery as it progresses. By identifying and monitoring the recovery periods through discrete IEDs, zones, hierarchies, and/or the system in real-time”; [0180]: The recovery criteria is met “when the load exceeds a predetermined threshold of the pre-event load”); and
performing at least one action during the recovery from the event and/or after the recovery from the event has met the recovery criteria to provide at least one of an indication, optimization or optimization recommendation, and feedback response associated with the recovery from the event ([0442]: “the identified degradations or improvements in the loads or the electrical system's sensitivity or resilience to power quality events may be reported by generating and/or initiating a warning (e.g., a key performance indicator) indicating the identified degradations or improvements in the electrical system's sensitivity or resilience to power quality events”; [0459]: “the dynamic tolerance curve may be used to prevent tripping of more critical loads by driving counter measures, including system level process optimization”; [0289]: “recommendations can be made to energy consumers on how to achieve a faster recovery time based on historical event data regarding the effective sequencing to reenergize loads,” which corresponds to an optimization recommendation; [0205]: “Information taken from the evaluation may be used to provide feedback and metrics regarding the operational repercussions that could have been avoided if one or more mitigative devices, apparatuses, and/or equipment would have been installed at a location”);
While Menzel teaches using load types to derive metrics to evaluate the impact of events ([0320]: “Other classifications of hierarchies (e.g., protection layout schemes, separately derived sources, processes or sub-systems, load types, sub-billing groups or tenants, network communications schemes, etc.) may be used to create/derive additional useful metrics as needed to better evaluate the impact of voltage events on a facility's operation”), Menzel does not explicitly teach “in response to determining recovery from the event has been initiated or started for at least one of the loads and/or zones impacted by the event, determining a plurality of different load types and a recovery profile for the plurality of different load types” or “tracking the recovery profile for the plurality of different load types and tracking when the plurality of different load types are added back into the electrical system until recovery has met one or more recovery criteria.”
Anwar teaches in response to determining recovery from the event has been initiated or started for at least one of the loads and/or zones impacted by the event, determining a plurality of different load types and a recovery profile for the plurality of different load types (Tables I and II and Page 3772: “Table II shows the multiples of steady-state current for different load types during the four time-intervals of service restoration”);
tracking the recovery profile for the plurality of different load types and tracking when the plurality of different load types are added back into the electrical system (Page 3775: “The ramp-up process and the sequence of events for power restoration and re-transfer to the utility source is shown in Fig. 6,” where this recovery profile can be tracked for different load types using the parameters of Table II; Page 3773: “In this step, the total circuit current during different stages of power restoration is calculated. In general, four specific time intervals are considered for evaluating the current draw: T1 : 0s – 10 to15 cyc (0s – 0.16s): This period characterizes initial circuit energization which includes inrush current to all connected loads. T2 : 0s –0.2s inrush which characterizes circuit loads. such as miscellaneous small motors transitioning from starting to running. T3 : 0s – 2s : characterizes the time at which steady state current has been established. T4 : 0s – 15min, which characterizes a sustained circuit load operation before load diversity of the bulk system begins to recover. Multiples of steady-state current from Table II during the four time-intervals of service restoration will now be used to characterize the electrical behavior of different types of loads,” which corresponds to tracking when the plurality of different load types are added back into the electrical system); and
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to adapt the method of Menzel to incorporate the teachings of Anwar so as to include in response to determining recovery from the event has been initiated or started for at least one of the loads and/or zones impacted by the event, determining a plurality of different load types and a recovery profile for the plurality of different load types and tracking the recovery profile for the plurality of different load types and tracking when the plurality of different load types are added back into the electrical system until recovery has met one or more recovery criteria. Doing so would allow event recovery to be tracked for different load types with the aim of accurately characterize the response of different types of loads (Anwar, Page 3772: “Knowledge of diversity factors for each type of load is necessary to characterize the load behavior during power restoration, and in [8] such an approach has been described and is used as the starting point for modeling different types of facilities”).
Regarding claim 2, Menzel in view of Anwar teaches the method of claim 1.
Menzel further teaches wherein at least one of: the load, load type, and/or zone recovering from the event and the recovery profile for each of the loads, load types and/or zones is/are determined by identifying at least one of a new “running mode,” an existing “running mode,” changes in an existing and/or new “running mode,” a temporary “stability,” a temporary “instability,” and a change in any electrical characteristic and/or control signal associated with the electrical system ([0300]: “It is useful to identify, “tag” (i.e., denote), and/or differentiate aberrant or atypical operational data from normal operational data (i.e., non-recovery data) for performing calculations, metrics, analytics, statistical evaluations, and so forth,” where normal operation corresponds to a running mode; [0169]: “Further evaluations may include changes in voltage, current, power factor, total harmonic distortion (THD) levels, discrete harmonic component levels, total demand distortion (TDD), imbalance, or any other electrical parameter/characteristic that can provide an indication of the type (load or source), magnitude, and location of change within the electrical system.”).
Regarding claim 3, Menzel in view of Anwar teaches the method of claim 1.
Menzel further teaches wherein the plurality of load types is determined based on an analysis of one or more types, parameters, or behaviors of data, the one or more types of data including at least one of time-series data logs, waveform captures, real-time data, I/O data, user input(s) ([0169]: “The source of data may originate from logged data, waveform data, direct MODBUS reads, or any other means,” where logged data corresponds to time-series data logs; [0230]: “the measurements may be acquired in real-time (e.g., via direct MODBUS reads), historically (e.g., logged data), or by some other means”; [0028]: “Load losses may be indicated by measured parameters such as voltage, current, power, energy, harmonic distortion, imbalance, etc., or they may be indicated by discrete (digital) and/or analog input-output (I/O) signals originating from equipment directly and/or indirectly connected to the electrical system”; [0499]: “the criticality modeled dynamic tolerance curve(s) may be generated using simple rules, such as above, or other more complex calculations, for example, in response to one or more user inputs”).
Regarding claim 4, Menzel in view of Anwar teaches the method of claim 1.
Menzel further teaches wherein the recovery criteria is considered met in response to at least one of: user feedback indicating the recovery criteria has been met, the recovery profile for the plurality of load types and/or the addition of the plurality of load types back into to the electrical system meeting one or more user defined and/or learned thresholds or definitions associated with and/or indicating a recovery, I/O signals from equipment or loads indicating the recovery, a heuristic evaluation, and a statistical evaluation of the recovery profile for the plurality of load types indicating the recovery ([0033]: For “a determined impact (or severity) of the power quality event being outside of a range or threshold,” the range may be “a predetermined range, for example, a user configured range. Additionally, in some embodiments the range is automatic, for example, using standards-based thresholds. Further, in some embodiments the range is “learned,” for example, by starting with a nominal voltage and pushing out the thresholds as non-impactful events occur in the natural course of the electrical network's operation”; [0180]: “The recovery threshold can be determined using a relative percentage of the pre-event load, an absolute value (kW), the recovery of the voltage or current levels, an external or manual trigger, a recognized standard value, a subjective configuration, or by some other method using an electrical or non-electrical parameter(s)”; [0324]: “Actual historical voltage event impact and recovery time data may be used to produce relevant models through various means including statistical analyses (and/or analytics) and evaluations, simple interpolation/extrapolation, and/or any other method that produces a reasonable typical value(s). Baseline/reference models may range from simple to complex, and may be created or determined for discrete IED locations, zones, or entire systems”).
Regarding claim 5, Menzel in view of Anwar teaches the method of claim 4.
Menzel further teaches wherein the user defined and/or learned thresholds or definitions associated with and/or indicating a recovery have an associated or prescribed time period or duration ([0179]: “‘recovery time’ is defined as the period of time required to return the electrical system parameters back to (or approximately back to) their original state prior to the event that prompted their initial perturbation”; [0180]: “One example method for calculating the recovery time includes measuring the elapsed time between the occurrence of a first impactful event and the point when the load exceeds a predetermined threshold of the pre-event load”).
Regarding claim 6, Menzel in view of Anwar teaches the method of claim 4.
Menzel further teaches wherein the statistical evaluation uses at least one of: statistical methods, time-series analysis methodology, shape or signal recognition, fixed timeboxing, or dynamic timeboxing ([0324]: “Actual historical voltage event impact and recovery time data may be used to produce relevant models through various means including statistical analyses (and/or analytics) and evaluations, simple interpolation/extrapolation, and/or any other method that produces a reasonable typical value(s). Baseline/reference models may range from simple to complex, and may be created or determined for discrete IED locations, zones, or entire systems”; [0339]: “Statistical determinations including means, standard deviations, correlations, confidence, error, accuracy, precision, bias, coefficients of variation, and any other statistical methods and/or techniques may be employed to aggregate/consolidate the data from multiple IEDs to a representative value or values for the zone”).
Regarding claim 7, Menzel in view of Anwar teaches the method of claim 1.
Menzel further teaches wherein determining the plurality of load types recovering from the event and a recovery profile for the plurality of load types, includes: determining if the plurality of load types are recovering from the event (FIG. 52 and [0414-0415]: “At block 5215, it is determined if the identified power quality event has an impact on the at least one load or on the electrical system. If it is determined the identified power quality event has an impact on the at least one load or on the electrical system, the method proceeds to block 5220. At block 5220, a recovery time for the at least one load or the electrical system to recover from the identified power quality event is determined,” thus, if an event has an impact, a recovery time is determined for recovery from the event; [0322]: recovery is tracked as it progresses through discrete IEDs, zones, hierarchies, and/or the system in real-time).
Regarding claim 8, Menzel in view of Anwar teaches the method of claim 1.
Menzel further teaches wherein the tracking includes a recovery characteristic, behavior, and/or parameters comprising at least one of a load type profile, load type information, or load type status ([0322]: recovery is tracked as it progresses through discrete IEDs, zones, hierarchies, and/or the system in real-time; [0300]: “It is useful to identify, “tag” (i.e., denote), and/or differentiate aberrant or atypical operational data from normal operational data (i.e., non-recovery data) for performing calculations, metrics, analytics, statistical evaluations, and so forth”; [0419]: “Referring to FIG. 53, a flowchart illustrates an example method 5300 for reducing recovery time from a power quality event in an electrical system, for example, by tracking a response characteristic of the electrical system”).
Regarding claim 9, Menzel teaches the method of claim 1.
Menzel further teaches further comprising: creating a list of recovery events to optimize recovery improvements and/or facilitate building a standard operating procedure(s) (SOP(s)) for recovery from an event ([0284]: “additional relevant data associated with the voltage event may be appended to the voltage event data record/file at a later time (e.g., calculated recovery time from event, additional voltage event information from other IEDs, determined event source location, metadata, IED data, other electrical parameters, updated historical norms, statistical analysis, etc.),” where the event data record file corresponds to a list of recovery events; [0322]: “This embodiment would also allow the energy consumer to review historical data to make recovery improvements, produce and/or update recovery procedures, identify zonal recovery constrictions, troublesome equipment, and so forth to improve future event recovery situations,” where recovery procedures correspond to standard operating procedures for recovery from an event).
Regarding claim 10, Menzel in view of Anwar teaches the method of claim 9.
Menzel further teaches wherein the SOP(s) are built to optimize at least one of peak demand reduction, billing reduction, recovery duration or time period, energy consumption during recovery, CO2 emissions associated with recoveries, specific load or zone improvements, load type changes, technology changes, equipment or system protection, or safety improvements ([0322]: “This embodiment would also allow the energy consumer to review historical data to make recovery improvements, produce and/or update recovery procedures, identify zonal recovery constrictions, troublesome equipment, and so forth to improve future event recovery situations,” where recovery procedures correspond to standard operating procedures and are produced/built based on historical data to improve/optimize recovery from future events; [0296]: “The activity of restarting processes and/or equipment consumes energy and can (in some cases) produce a peak demand for the facility… quantifying the financial impact of voltage events to utility bills can provide incentives to mitigate the voltage events leading to these unexpected and potentially impactful losses”; [0297]: “Evaluation and analyses may be performed on these parameters to determine discrete, zonal and/or system metrics (including aggregation), comparisons to historical event metrics, incremental energy/demand/power factor costs and so forth. These metrics may be evaluated against local utility rate structures to calculate the total energy-related costs for recovery, discrete, zonal, and/or systems most susceptible and most costly during the recovery period for targeted mitigation, expectations based on historical voltage event data (e.g., number of events, recovery period of events, energy costs for events, etc.), opportunities to operationally/procedurally improve voltage event response time, and so forth”; [0008]: “Examples of electrical measurement data that may be captured by the plurality of metering devices may include at least one of continuously measured voltage and current signals and their derived parameters and characteristics. Electrical parameters and events may be derived, for example, from analyzing energy-related signals (e.g., real power, reactive power, apparent power, harmonic distortion, phase imbalance, frequency, voltage/current transients, voltage sags, voltage swells, etc.). More particularly, the plurality of metering devices may evaluate a power quality event's magnitude, duration, load impact, recovery time from impact, unproductive recovery energy consumed, CO2 emissions from recovery energy, costs associated with the event, and so forth”; [0211-0216]: The method described aims to “Accurately assess voltage events to quantify savings (in impact, recovery time, uptime, losses, or other economic factors), Reduce voltage quality uncertainties to reasonable levels, Aid in monitoring equipment performance, Identify additional monitoring and/or mitigation opportunities, Reduce impact to targeted equipment, and Improve operations and maintenance”).
Regarding claim 11, Menzel in view of Anwar teaches the method of claim 1.
Menzel further teaches wherein the analysis includes evaluating energy signals and/or data and/or other signals to characterize the plurality of load types being added during recovery or order of the plurality of load types being re-energized to recovery characteristics and/or baselines from similar or dissimilar market segments (FIG. 45 and [0349-0354]: The method 4500 captures energy signals at step 4505, identifies power quality events at step 4510, and evaluates the energy signals to determine the impact of power quality events at step 4515 to characterize them at step 4520; [0289]: “Additionally, recommendations can be made to energy consumers on how to achieve a faster recovery time based on historical event data regarding the effective sequencing to reenergize loads,” where sequencing corresponds to an order of load types being re-energized; [0028]: “a load loss (sometimes also referred to as a “loss of load”) is the unexpected, unplanned and/or unintentional removal of one or more loads from the electrical system,” which corresponds to missing load(s), load type(s), and/or zone(s) and “the determined relative criticality score (e.g., a criticality score using a historical analysis of the voltage event impacts) may be used to determine how significant load loss effects the system operation,” as supported by [0451]; [0324]: “Another example method for determining expected recovery times uses factors such as market segments and/or customer types, processes-based evaluations, and/or load and equipment types to determine the expected recovery times”).
Regarding claim 12, Menzel in view of Anwar teaches the method of claim 1.
Menzel further teaches wherein the plurality of different load types have different number of electrical phases ([0010]: “the energy-related signals captured by the plurality of metering devices include at least one of: voltage, current, energy, active power, apparent power, reactive power, harmonic voltages, harmonic currents, total voltage harmonic distortion, total current harmonic distortion, harmonic power, individual phase currents, three-phase currents, phase voltages, and line voltages”).
Regarding claim 13, Menzel in view of Anwar teaches the method of claim 11.
While Menzel teaches tracking a recovery profile of different loads ([0322]: “a method of tracking the recovery as it progresses. By identifying and monitoring the recovery periods through discrete IEDs, zones, hierarchies, and/or the system in real-time”), Menzel does not explicitly teach “wherein the recovery profile indicates when the plurality of different load types were added back into the electrical system, wherein the plurality of different load types are added back at different times.”
Anwar further teaches wherein the recovery profile indicates when the plurality of different load types were added back into the electrical system, wherein the plurality of different load types are added back at different times (Page 3775: “The ramp-up process and the sequence of events for power restoration and re-transfer to the utility source is shown in Fig. 6,” where this recovery profile can be tracked for different load types using the parameters of Table II; Page 3773: “In this step, the total circuit current during different stages of power restoration is calculated. In general, four specific time intervals are considered for evaluating the current draw: T1 : 0s – 10 to15 cyc (0s – 0.16s): This period characterizes initial circuit energization which includes inrush current to all connected loads. T2 : 0s –0.2s inrush which characterizes circuit loads. such as miscellaneous small motors transitioning from starting to running. T3 : 0s – 2s : characterizes the time at which steady state current has been established. T4 : 0s – 15min, which characterizes a sustained circuit load operation before load diversity of the bulk system begins to recover. Multiples of steady-state current from Table II during the four time-intervals of service restoration will now be used to characterize the electrical behavior of different types of loads,” where T1 indicated the time at which a load was added back into an electrical system).
The reasons to combine Anwar into Menzel are the same as articulated in claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 14, Menzel in view of Anwar teaches the method of claim 1.
Menzel further teaches wherein performing the at least one action further comprises changing a configuration of the at least one IED ([0283]: “The existing voltage alarm magnitude and duration threshold setpoints may then reconfigure to the magnitude and duration of the non-impactful event (i.e., reconfigured to less sensitive setpoints). Ultimately, in embodiments the more severe voltage event that does not indicate any operational and/or equipment functional impact at the IED point will become the new voltage magnitude and duration threshold for the voltage event alarms for that respective IED”).
Regarding claim 15, Menzel in view of Anwar teaches the method of claim 1.
Menzel further teaches wherein real-time recovery demand versus an existing peak demand is analyzed to minimize risk of inadvertently establishing a new peak demand for at least one of an application, process, zone, and the entire electrical system associated with a site(s) ([0302-0303]: “aberrant operational modes may be analyzed to help understand, quantify and ultimately mitigate impacts associated with impactful voltage events… The process of restarting equipment and processes consumes energy and can (in some cases) produce a new peak demand for the facility... Perhaps most importantly, quantifying the financial impact of voltage events to utility bills can provide incentive to mitigate the voltage events leading to these unexpected and potentially impactful losses”).
Regarding claim 16, Menzel in view of Anwar teaches the method of claim 1.
Menzel further teaches further comprising: automatic grouping of loads into zones based upon historic analysis of at least one previous recovery, or customer segment type(s) ([0266]: “In FIG. 32, another method to automatically determine zones involves leveraging hierarchical context to evaluate voltage, current, and/or power data (other parameters may also be used as necessary) to identify transformer locations”); and
analyzing recovery information acquired from plurality of load types behavior to determine at least part of how an electrical hierarchy is constructed within the electrical system ([0267]: “Once zone priorities are established, it is then possible to analyze the load impact and recovery time for voltage events from a zonal perspective. Again, all of this may be automated using the techniques described above for establishing zones, prioritizing based on the historical effects of voltage events within the electrical system”; [0320]: “It is also understood that each of the metrics discussed above may be further determined and partitioned for upstream, downstream, internal (e.g., facility), and external (e.g., utility) voltage event sources as appropriate. The latter two mentioned (internal/external) may require some level of hierarchical classification of the IED and/or electrical system”; [0322]: “By identifying and monitoring the recovery periods through discrete IEDs, zones, hierarchies, and/or the system in real-time, the energy consumer (and the systems and methods disclosure herein) is/are better able to identify, manage, and expedite the recovery process for an event throughout their facility”).
Regarding claim 17, Menzel in view of Anwar teaches the method of claim 1.
Menzel further teaches further comprising: providing alarms to indicate at least one of: 1) recovery from an event in progress or still in progress, 2) risk of new peak demand during or just after a recovery, 3) load(s) that have or have not been re-energized during recovery, 4) load type(s) that have or have not been re- energized during the recovery, 5) zone(s) which have or have not re-energized during the recovery, 6) recovery time that exceeds a threshold, and 7) magnitude or amount of load that has been recovered with respect to pre-event parameters ([0288]:”It is possible to use other parameters to customize the alarm templates. For example, the energy consumer may only be interested in voltage events with a recovery times greater than 5 minutes”; [0291]: “any or all captured events (including voltage events) may then be analyzed to automatically prioritize the alarms at a discrete, zone and/or system level based on any number of parameters including: alarm type, alarm description, alarm time, alarm magnitude, affected phase(s), alarm duration, recovery time, waveform characteristics, load impact associated with an alarm, location, hierarchical aspects, metadata, IED characteristics, load type, customer type, economic aspects, relative importance to operation or load, and/or any other variable, parameter or combination thereof related to the event (including voltage events) and the energy consumer's operation. Prioritizing may be relevant for the inherent characteristics of discrete events or involve comparisons of more than one event (including voltage events), and may be performed as events originate, deferred to a later time, or dependent on the aforementioned parameters”; [0322]: “Alarming capabilities may be incorporated into recovery situations to provide indications of constraining locations within zones or the facility. Historical recovery metrics or some other configured setpoints may be used to determine recovery alarm threshold settings for IEDs, system software, and/or cloud, and outputs from embodiments of this disclosure may be provided by one or more reports, texts, emails, audible indications, screens/displays, or through any other interactive means”; [0324]: “Another example method for determining expected recovery times uses factors such as market segments and/or customer types, processes-based evaluations, and/or load and equipment types to determine the expected recovery times. By defining recovery times based on these and other factors, for example, a recovery time baseline or reference can be developed with respect to a voltage event's magnitude, duration, percent load impacted, and/or any other electrical parameter, metadata, or IED specification. The baselines/references may be used to set recovery alarm thresholds”).
Regarding claim 18, Menzel in view of Anwar teaches the method of claim 1.
Menzel further teaches wherein the at least one action is load(s) specific, load type(s) specific, zone(s) specific, event(s) specific, application(s) specific and/or customer(s) specific ([0023]: “The processor may be further configured to adjust at least one parameter associated with one or more of the plurality of loads in response to the power quality events analyzed,” which corresponds to a load specific action; [0287]: “it is possible to alarm when only certain types of loads experience an impact due to a voltage event,” which corresponds to a load type specific action; [0322]: “Alarming capabilities may be incorporated into recovery situations to provide indications of constraining locations within zones or the facility,” which corresponds to zone specific actions; [0291]: “any or all captured events (including voltage events) may then be analyzed to automatically prioritize the alarms at a discrete, zone and/or system level based on any number of parameters including: alarm type, alarm description, alarm time, alarm magnitude, affected phase(s), alarm duration, recovery time, waveform characteristics, load impact associated with an alarm, location, hierarchical aspects, metadata, IED characteristics, load type, customer type, economic aspects, relative importance to operation or load, and/or any other variable, parameter or combination thereof related to the event (including voltage events) and the energy consumer's operation,” which corresponds to event specific, application specific, and/or customer specific actions).
Regarding claim 19, Menzel in view of Anwar teaches the method of claim 1.
Menzel further teaches wherein the at least one identified event occurrence is indicative of an anomalous condition in the electrical system ([0029]: “identifying the power quality event may include identifying…a magnitude of the anomalous power quality event”; [0434]: “Example actions that may be performed in response to the alarm being triggered, e.g., due to an anomalous voltage condition, may include, for example, reporting an anomalous voltage condition (e.g., through a voltage event alarm generated by at least one IED”).
Regarding claim 20, Menzel teaches the method of claim 1.
Menzel further teaches wherein characteristics and/or behaviors suitable for identifying the at least one identified event occurrence include at least one of: magnitude; duration; frequency components; sag type; phase(s) impacted; phase angle(s); a combination of the magnitude, the duration, the associated frequency components, or the sag type with associated phase angle(s) ([0016]: “power quality events in each of the plurality of dynamic tolerance curves may be tagged with relevant and characterizing information based on information extracted about the power quality events. Examples of relevant and characterizing information may include at least one of: severity (magnitude), duration, power quality type (e.g., sag, swell, interruption, oscillatory transient, impulsive transient, etc.), time of occurrence, process(es) involved, location, devices impacted, relative or absolute impact, recovery time, periodicity of events or event types, etc.”; [0010]: “the energy-related signals captured by the plurality of metering devices include at least one of: voltage, current, energy, active power, apparent power, reactive power, harmonic voltages, harmonic currents, total voltage harmonic distortion, total current harmonic distortion, harmonic power, individual phase currents, three-phase currents, phase voltages, and line voltages,” which corresponds to frequency components, phase(s) impacted, and phase angle(s), and “the energy-related signals may include (or leverage) substantially any electrical parameter derived from voltage and current signals (including the voltages and currents themselves), for example”).
Regarding claim 21, Menzel in view of Anwar teaches the method of claim 1.
Menzel further teaches wherein the at least one captured energy-related signal includes at least one of: a voltage signal, a current signal, or another signal or data derived from one or both of the voltage signal or the current signal ([0010]: “the energy-related signals captured by the plurality of metering devices include at least one of: voltage, current, energy, active power, apparent power, reactive power, harmonic voltages, harmonic currents, total voltage harmonic distortion, total current harmonic distortion, harmonic power, individual phase currents, three-phase currents, phase voltages, and line voltages. In embodiments, the energy-related signals may include (or leverage) substantially any electrical parameter derived from voltage and current signals (including the voltages and currents themselves), for example”).
Regarding claim 22, Menzel in view of Anwar teaches the method of claim 21.
Menzel further teaches wherein the voltage signal and the current signal are at least one of: a single-phase voltage and current signal, and a polyphase voltage and current signal ([0010]: “the energy-related signals captured by the plurality of metering devices include at least one of: voltage, current, energy, active power, apparent power, reactive power, harmonic voltages, harmonic currents, total voltage harmonic distortion, total current harmonic distortion, harmonic power, individual phase currents, three-phase currents, phase voltages, and line voltage”).
Regarding claim 23, Menzel in view of Anwar teaches the method of claim 1.
Menzel further teaches wherein the at least one captured energy-related signal is associated with at least one load, load type, and/or zone in the electrical system ([0008]: “Electrical parameters and events may be derived, for example, from analyzing energy-related signals,” and evaluation and analyses may be performed on parameters obtained from captured energy-related signals “to determine discrete, zonal and/or system metrics (including aggregation),” as supported by [0297]).
Regarding claim 24, Menzel in view of Anwar teaches the method of claim 1.
Menzel further teaches further comprising: storing information associated with the recovery profile for future use and/or analysis ([0346]: “any relevant information and/or data derived from IEDs, customer types, market segment types, load types, IED capabilities, and any other metadata may be stored, analyzed, displayed, and/or processed in the cloud, on-site (software and/or gateways), or in a IED”; [0294]: “The energy consumer may be notified of the third event occurrence, and the voltage event data, calculations, derivation and any analyses may be stored for future reference/benefits”).
Regarding claim 25, Menzel teaches a system for automatically assessing event recovery in an electrical system, comprising: at least one Intelligent Electronic Device (IED) configured to capture energy-related data in an electrical system ([0005]: “a method for analyzing power quality events in an electrical system includes processing electrical measurement data from or derived from energy-related signals captured by a plurality of metering devices (e.g., intelligent electronic devices (IEDs)) in the electrical system to generate or update a plurality of dynamic tolerance curves”),
at least one processor ([0023]: “The system for managing power quality events also includes a processor coupled to receive electrical measurement data from or derived from energy-related signals captured by the plurality of metering devices from the at least one system input”);
at least one memory device coupled to the at least one processor ([0140]: memory device 215), the at least one processor and the at least one memory device configured to:
process the energy-related data from or derived from at least one energy-related signal captured by the IED in the electrical system to identify at least one occurrence of an event in the electrical system ([0005]: “a method for analyzing power quality events in an electrical system includes processing electrical measurement data from or derived from energy-related signals captured by a plurality of metering devices (e.g., intelligent electronic devices (IEDs)) in the electrical system to generate or update a plurality of dynamic tolerance curves… The method also includes selectively aggregating power quality data from the plurality of dynamic tolerance curves to analyze power quality events in the electrical system”);
analyze the energy-related data associated with the at least one identified event occurrence to determine impact of the event on loads and/or zones associated with the electrical system, and whether recovery from the event has been initiated or started for at least one of the loads and/or zones impacted by the event ([0008]: “the plurality of metering devices may evaluate a power quality event's magnitude, duration, load impact, recovery time from impact”; FIG. 30 and [0235]: a “recovery time clock” begins when it is determined recovery from the event has been initiated);
track the recovery profile for the plurality of different load types ([0322]: “An example method according to the disclosure for reducing recovery time periods includes providing a method of tracking the recovery as it progresses. By identifying and monitoring the recovery periods through discrete IEDs, zones, hierarchies, and/or the system in real-time, the energy consumer (and the systems and methods disclosure herein) is/are better able to identify, manage, and expedite the recovery process for an event throughout their facility”; [0180]: The recovery criteria is met “when the load exceeds a predetermined threshold of the pre-event load”); and
perform at least one action during the recovery from the event and/or after the recovery from the event has met the recovery criteria to provide at least one of an indication, optimization or optimization recommendation, and feedback response associated with the recovery from the event ([0442]: “the identified degradations or improvements in the loads or the electrical system's sensitivity or resilience to power quality events may be reported by generating and/or initiating a warning (e.g., a key performance indicator) indicating the identified degradations or improvements in the electrical system's sensitivity or resilience to power quality events”; [0459]: “the dynamic tolerance curve may be used to prevent tripping of more critical loads by driving counter measures, including system level process optimization”; [0289]: “recommendations can be made to energy consumers on how to achieve a faster recovery time based on historical event data regarding the effective sequencing to reenergize loads,” which corresponds to an optimization recommendation; [0205]: “Information taken from the evaluation may be used to provide feedback and metrics regarding the operational repercussions that could have been avoided if one or more mitigative devices, apparatuses, and/or equipment would have been installed at a location”).
While Menzel teaches using load types to derive metrics to evaluate the impact of events ([0320]: “Other classifications of hierarchies (e.g., protection layout schemes, separately derived sources, processes or sub-systems, load types, sub-billing groups or tenants, network communications schemes, etc.) may be used to create/derive additional useful metrics as needed to better evaluate the impact of voltage events on a facility's operation”), Menzel does not explicitly teach “in response to determining recovery from the event has been initiated or started for at least one of the loads and/or zones impacted by the event, determine a plurality of different load types and a recovery profile for the plurality of different load types” or “track the recovery profile for the plurality of different load types and track when the plurality of different load types are added back into the electrical system until recovery has met one or more recovery criteria.”
Anwar teaches in response to determining recovery from the event has been initiated or started for at least one of the loads and/or zones impacted by the event, determine a plurality of different load types and a recovery profile for the plurality of different load types (Tables I and II and Page 3772: “Table II shows the multiples of steady-state current for different load types during the four time-intervals of service restoration”);
track the recovery profile for the plurality of different load types and track when the plurality of different load types are added back into the electrical system (Page 3775: “The ramp-up process and the sequence of events for power restoration and re-transfer to the utility source is shown in Fig. 6,” where this recovery profile can be tracked for different load types using the parameters of Table II; Page 3773: “In this step, the total circuit current during different stages of power restoration is calculated. In general, four specific time intervals are considered for evaluating the current draw: T1 : 0s – 10 to15 cyc (0s – 0.16s): This period characterizes initial circuit energization which includes inrush current to all connected loads. T2 : 0s –0.2s inrush which characterizes circuit loads. such as miscellaneous small motors transitioning from starting to running. T3 : 0s – 2s : characterizes the time at which steady state current has been established. T4 : 0s – 15min, which characterizes a sustained circuit load operation before load diversity of the bulk system begins to recover. Multiples of steady-state current from Table II during the four time-intervals of service restoration will now be used to characterize the electrical behavior of different types of loads,” which corresponds to tracking when the plurality of different load types are added back into the electrical system).
The reasons to combine Anwar into Menzel are the same as articulated in claim 1 above.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 11/12/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding the rejections under 35 USC § 101, applicant argues that “capturing energy-related data using IEDs in an electrical system cannot be interpreted as a mental process.” Examiner agrees that this is not a mental process, however, the IED as claimed is only being used to gather data. In claim 14, the IED is merely used to receive the result of the mental progress and it is unclear what configuration has changed, how the change is performed, or how the change in configuration leads to a functional improvement of the device.
Applicant’s amended claims, filed 11/12/2025, have overcome the rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 102. However, a new ground of rejection is made in view of Menzel and in view of Anwar.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Xie, Dunjian, Yan Xu, Sivakumar Nadarajan, Vaiyapuri Viswanathan, and Amit Kumar Gupta. “Dynamic frequency-constrained load restoration considering multi-phase cold load pickup behaviors.” IEEE Transactions on Power Systems 39, no. 1 (2023): 107-118.
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 Magdalena Kossek whose telephone number is (571)272-5603. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9:00-5:00 EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Robert Fennema can be reached at (571)272-2748. 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.
/M.I.K./Examiner, Art Unit 2117
/Christopher E. Everett/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2117