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 .
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 – 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claims do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (ie an abstract idea) without significantly more.
Step 2A, Prong One: Judicial exception
The claims, when given their broadest reasonable interpretation, recite the steps of:
receiving, by a server, first charging data from an electric vehicle (EV), wherein the first charging data identifies one or more of a first charge depletion rate or a first charge depletion amount of a battery of the EV; -collecting data
receiving, by the server, second charging data from a different EV, wherein the second charging data identifies one or more of a second charge depletion rate or a second charge depletion amount of a battery of the different EV; - collecting data
identifying that the one or more of the first charge depletion rate or the first charge depletion amount is greater than the one or more of the second charge depletion rate or the second charge depletion amount; -analyzing data
causing, by the server, the EV the one or more of the first charge depletion rate or the first charge depletion amount – the server is merely performing a conventional function and it is unclear how a server “causes” the EV to alter a driving style. This is not a technological improvement.
These steps amount to:
1) collecting data (energy source and charge type)
2) analyzing the data to compare the depletion rates
3) providing a notification based on the analysis
Data gathering, comparison and notification are acts that can be performed mentally or by pen and paper. Such activities have been identified as Abstract Ideas the category of Mental Processes wherein, a claim to “collecting information, analyzing it, and displaying certain results of the collection and analysis.”
Accordingly claim 1 is directed to an Abstract Idea – specifically analyzing information and providing notifications to influence behavior, which is a form of organizing human activity and a mental process.
Dependent claims 2-7 recite additional data analysis or notification refinements (eg determining a threshold, adjusting severity or modifying cost) which are themselves abstract mental judgements or mathematical relationships.
Claim 5, indicates, “causing the EV to alter a distance traveled for a time period.” There is no indication as to how the “causing” is performed. The specification indicates notifying a vehicle to alter a distance.
Claims 6, 13, and 20 indicate, “in response, reducing a cost of the renewable energy for the EV for an upcoming time period.” This “reducing a cost” is a financial activity and thus an Abstract Idea.
The system claims 8 – 14 and computer readable medium claims (15-20) recite the same Abstract process implements using generic computer components (processor, memory, instructions). Thus, these claims are also directed to the same Abstract Idea.
Step 2A, Prong Two: Practical application
The claims do not recite any additional element that integrates the abstract idea into a practical application.
The claims processor and memory are described generically, without any improvement to the functioning of the computer itself or to another technology or technical field.
The claims merely use the computer to perform generic data analysis and communication functions.
There is no indication that the claimed invention improves battery charging, vehicle control system or communication technologies.
The additional elements are used merely as tools to implement the abstract idea, which does
not constitute integration into a practical application. There for the claims are not integrated into a practical application.
Step 2B: Whether the claim recites significantly more
When the additional claim elements are considered individually and in combination, they do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea itself.
The recited “processor,” “memory,” and “computer-readable storage medium” are well
understood, routine, and conventional computer components used to perform basic data processing functions.
The functions of determining, comparing and notifying are well understood data
processing operations that do not improve computer technology or any technical field.
The claims do not recite any unconventional hardware arrangement, specialized circuitry,
or inventive data manipulation technique.
The claims merely implement the Abstract Idea on a generic computer, which does not provide and inventive concept.
Claim 15 recites, “a computer-readable medium…” without specifying that the medium is a “Non-Transitory Computer Readable Medium” storing the software. Thus the claim is rendered indefinite.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 6, 13, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
The limitation, “…in response, reducing a cost of the renewable energy for the EV for an upcoming time period” is indefinite. This limitation is problematic because the claim does not recite any mechanism or device that performs a reduction of the cost. The claim reads as if the method, system or algorithm changes the price of energy itself, which is not a clear technical operation performed by the system. The claim reads as an economic outcome and does not specify whether the system is :
applying a discount
modifying a billing record
adjusting a pricing parameter
generating a credit or
updating a displayed estimated cost.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, 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.
1. Claims 1 – 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang (US 20210284043) in view of Ropel (US 20240144747).
Regarding claim 1, Wang teaches a method (figure 16 shows a method including a charging algorithm ), comprising:
receiving, by a server, first charging data from an electric vehicle (EV), wherein the first charging data identifies one or more of a first charge depletion rate or a first charge depletion amount of a battery of the EV (defined in paragraph [0123] – [0124] wherein a first vehicle with a battery charge depletion is identified);
receiving, by the server, second charging data from a different EV, wherein the second charging data identifies one or more of a second charge depletion rate or a second charge depletion amount of a battery of the different (paragraph [0125] and [0126] teaches wherein a charge depletion from another vehicle is determined)
identifying that the one or more of the first charge depletion rate or the first charge depletion amount is greater than the one or more of the second charge depletion rate or the second charge depletion amount (paragraph [0126] identifies which vehicle has a greater amount of charge depletion. Based on this charge depletion, the server or scheduler may notify, request or otherwise cause one or both of the vehicles to slow down or speed up);
causing by the sever the EV to alter a driving style the server or scheduler may notify, request or otherwise cause one or both of the vehicles to slow down or speed up
Wang does not explicitly teach alter a driving style contributing to the one or more of the first depletion rate or the first charge depletion amount.
Ropel teaches alter a driving style contributing to the one or more of the first depletion rate or the first charge depletion amount (defined in paragraph [0067] wherein notifications including data on a display, mobile device or alarms, indicate various vehicle information and warnings such as driving style and EV operation. Paragraph [0155]-[0157] teaches wherein an alarm is provided for a vehicle or driver to operate the EV in a less aggressive manner and to alter the driving style).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the charging system of the Wang reference with the notification system of the Ropel reference so that the vehicle batteries are not damaged by aggressive driving habits.
The suggestion/motivation for combination can be found in the Ropel reference in paragraph [0157] wherein preventing damage to vehicle batteries is taught.
PNG
media_image1.png
562
742
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Wang figure 3 shows a plurality of vehicles with battery charge depletions.
PNG
media_image2.png
725
565
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Ropel Figure 8 show wherein the vehicle and/or user is provided with a notification to alter driving style.
Regarding claim 2, Wang teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the causing the EV to alter the driving style comprises wirelessly communicating a notification to the EV, wherein the notification comprises a parameter that controls an operation of the EV (paragraph [0120] teaches wherein causing to alter the driving style includes a receiving wireless communication notification, in this case a battery charge, and controlling the vehicle by providing a notification or controlling the speed of the vehicle).
Regarding claim 3, Wang teaches the method of claim 2, but does not explicitly teach wherein a severity of the notification is based on the one or more of the first charge depletion rate or the first charge depletion amount.
Ropel teaches wherein a severity of the notification is based on the one or more of the first charge depletion rate or the first charge depletion amount (paragraph [0067] teaches wherein vehicle operation is notified and provided to the vehicle and/or the user in various way such as an alarm or a display. Paragraph [0089] teaches wherein alerts for battery charging level, depletion or decay is provided. Paragraphs [0141] – [0142] discloses wherein the display indicates a severe state of a battery degradation at different thresholds. Thus, a notification for providing a severity of battery depletion is known).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the charging system of the Wang reference with the notification system of the Ropel reference so that the vehicle batteries are not damaged by aggressive driving habits.
The suggestion/motivation for combination can be found in the Ropel reference in paragraph [0157] wherein preventing damage to vehicle batteries is taught.
Regarding claim 4, Wang teaches the method of claim 2, wherein the causing the EV to alter the driving style comprises: modifying parameter based on a difference between the one or more of the first charge depletion rate or the first charge depletion amount and threshold (paragraph [0126] teaches wherein modifying an EV driving parameter includes modifying the speed of the vehicle by speeding up or slowing down the vehicle as the depletion rate or amount varies).
Wang does not explicitly teach a driving style.
Ropel teaches a driving styles and altering driving styles in regards to a threshold (Paragraph [0111] teaches wherein the driving style, interpreted as vehicle operation is monitored and determined based on an operational condition. When the condition is above or below the threshold operational condition, the user is notified of this information. Paragraph [0112] teaches wherein an alteration of a driving style, ie less aggressively is suggested to the user after the determination of the operational condition).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the charging system of the Wang reference with the notification system of the Ropel reference so that the vehicle batteries are not damaged by aggressive driving habits.
The suggestion/motivation for combination can be found in the Ropel reference in paragraph [0157] wherein preventing damage to vehicle batteries is taught.
Regarding claim 5, Wang teaches the method of claim 1, comprising:
calculating a difference between the one or more of the first charge depletion rate or the first charge depletion amount and the one or more of the second charge depletion rate or the second charge depletion amount (paragraph [0124] teaches determining a difference between a first vehicle charge depletion rate compared to another (second) vehicle by comparing the two battery depletion amounts).
determining the difference corresponds to a difference in distance traveled between the EV and the different EV (paragraph [0124] teaches wherein this difference in depletion amount is indicative of an insufficient charge for the vehicle to travel planned distance, destination or route); and
wherein the causing the EV to alter the driving style comprises: causing notifying the EV to alter a distance traveled for a time period (paragraph [0127] teaches wherein the controller controls the vehicle to alter the distance or travel route for a time period based on battery depletion).
Regarding claim 6, Wang teaches the method of claim 1, comprising:
determining that the altered driving style has slowed the first charge depletion rate or decreased the first charge depletion amount; and in response, reducing a cost of renewable energy for the EV for an upcoming time period.
Ropel teaches comprising: determining that the altered driving style has slowed the first charge depletion rate or decreased the first charge depletion amount (paragraph [0122]-[0123] teaches wherein the charge degradation is determined based on the driving style or operating condition changes. Paragraph [0123] teaches wherein the degradation rate is determined to occur at a slower rate due to the improving of operational performance of the EV); and
in response, reducing a cost of renewable energy for the EV for an upcoming time period (paragraph [0123] teaches wherein improving the driving style or operational performance is used to perform a cost-benefit analysis and determines that operating the EV in a specific manner is advantageous to the user as it extends the time to replace a battery module).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the charging system of the Wang reference with the notification system of the Ropel reference so that the vehicle batteries are not damaged by aggressive driving habits.
The suggestion/motivation for combination can be found in the Ropel reference in paragraph [0157] wherein preventing damage to vehicle batteries is taught.
Regarding claim 7, Wang teaches the method of claim 1, comprising: determining that the altered driving style has slowed the first charge depletion rate or decreased the first charge depletion amount; and in response, notifying the different EV of the altered driving style.
Ropel teaches comprising: determining that the altered driving style has slowed the first charge depletion rate or decreased the first charge depletion amount (paragraph [0122]-[0123] teaches wherein the charge degradation is determined based on the driving style or operating condition changes. Paragraph [0123] teaches wherein the degradation rate is determined to occur at a slower rate due to the improving of operational performance of the EV); and
notifying the different EV of the altered driving style (paragraph [0094] teaches wherein the alteration of a driver’s style is updated within a user profile. Paragraph [0094] teaches wherein the profiles are updated and provided to other vehicle or third parties).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the charging system of the Wang reference with the notification system of the Ropel reference so that the vehicle batteries are not damaged by aggressive driving habits.
The suggestion/motivation for combination can be found in the Ropel reference in paragraph [0157] wherein preventing damage to vehicle batteries is taught.
Regarding claim 8, Wang teaches a system, comprising a processor that executes instructions stored in a memory to configure the processor (figures 3 and 16, defined in the Abstract and [0098]), comprising:
receive first charging data from an electric vehicle (EV), wherein the first charging data identifies one or more of a first charge depletion rate or a first charge depletion amount of a battery of the EV (defined in paragraph [0123] – [0124] wherein a first vehicle with a battery charge depletion is identified);
receive second charging data from a different EV, wherein the second charging data identifies one or more of a second charge depletion rate or a second charge depletion amount of a battery of the different EV (paragraph [0125] and [0126] teaches wherein a charge depletion from another vehicle is determined) ;
identify that the one or more of the first charge depletion rate or the first charge depletion amount is greater than the one or more of the second charge depletion rate or the second charge depletion amount (paragraph [0126] identifies which vehicle has a greater amount of charge depletion. Based on this charge depletion, the server or scheduler may notify, request or otherwise cause one or both of the vehicles to slow down or speed up); and
causing by the sever the EV to alter a driving style the server or scheduler may notify, request or otherwise cause one or both of the vehicles to slow down or speed up
Wang does not explicitly teach alter a driving style contributing to the one or more of the first depletion rate or the first charge depletion amount.
Ropel teaches alter a driving style contributing to the one or more of the first depletion rate or the first charge depletion amount (defined in paragraph [0067] wherein notifications including data on a display, mobile device or alarms, indicate various vehicle information and warnings such as driving style and EV operation. Paragraph [0155]-[0157] teaches wherein an alarm is provided for a vehicle or driver to operate the EV in a less aggressive manner and to alter the driving style).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the charging system of the Wang reference with the notification system of the Ropel reference so that the vehicle batteries are not damaged by aggressive driving habits.
The suggestion/motivation for combination can be found in the Ropel reference in paragraph [0157] wherein preventing damage to vehicle batteries is taught.
Regarding claim 9, Wang teaches the system of claim 8, wherein when the processor causes the EV to alter the driving style, the processor is configured to: wirelessly communicating a notification to the EV, wherein the notification comprises a parameter that controls an operation of the EV (paragraph [0120] teaches wherein causing to alter the driving style includes a receiving wireless communication notification, in this case a battery charge, and controlling the vehicle by providing a notification or controlling the speed of the vehicle).
Regarding claim 10, Wang teaches the system of claim 9, but does not explicitly teach wherein a severity of the notification is based on the one or more of the first charge depletion rate or the first charge depletion amount.
Ropel teaches wherein a severity of the notification is based on the one or more of the first charge depletion rate or the first charge depletion amount (paragraph [0067] teaches wherein vehicle operation is notified and provided to the vehicle and/or the user in various way such as an alarm or a display. Paragraph [0089] teaches wherein alerts for battery charging level, depletion or decay is provided. Paragraphs [0141] – [0142] discloses wherein the display indicates a severe state of a battery degradation at different thresholds. Thus, a notification for providing a severity of battery depletion is known).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the charging system of the Wang reference with the notification system of the Ropel reference so that the vehicle batteries are not damaged by aggressive driving habits.
The suggestion/motivation for combination can be found in the Ropel reference in paragraph [0157] wherein preventing damage to vehicle batteries is taught.
Regarding claim 11, Wang teaches the system of claim 9, wherein when the processor causes the EV to alter the driving style, the processor is configured to: modify the parameter based on a difference between the one or more of the first charge depletion rate or the first charge depletion amount and threshold (paragraph [0126] teaches wherein modifying an EV driving parameter includes modifying the speed of the vehicle by speeding up or slowing down the vehicle as the depletion rate or amount varies).
Wang does not explicitly teach a driving style.
Ropel teaches a driving styles and altering driving styles in regards to a threshold (Paragraph [0111] teaches wherein the driving style, interpreted as vehicle operation is monitored and determined based on an operational condition. When the condition is above or below the threshold operational condition, the user is notified of this information. Paragraph [0112] teaches wherein an alteration of a driving style, ie less aggressively is suggested to the user after the determination of the operational condition).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the charging system of the Wang reference with the notification system of the Ropel reference so that the vehicle batteries are not damaged by aggressive driving habits.
The suggestion/motivation for combination can be found in the Ropel reference in paragraph [0157] wherein preventing damage to vehicle batteries is taught.
Regarding claim 12, Wang teaches the system of claim 8, wherein the processor is configured to:
calculate a difference between the one or more of the first charge depletion rate or the first charge depletion amount and the one or more of the second charge depletion rate or the second charge depletion amount (paragraph [0124] teaches determining a difference between a first vehicle charge depletion rate compared to another (second) vehicle by comparing the two battery depletion amounts).
determine the difference corresponds to a difference in distance traveled between the EV and the different EV (paragraph [0124] teaches wherein this difference in depletion amount is indicative of an insufficient charge for the vehicle to travel planned distance, destination or route); and
wherein the processor causes the EV to alter the driving style comprises: causing notifying the EV to alter a distance traveled for a time period (paragraph [0127] teaches wherein the controller controls the vehicle to alter the distance or travel route for a time period based on battery depletion).
Wang does not explicitly teach a driving style.
Ropel teaches a driving styles and altering driving styles in regards to a threshold (Paragraph [0111] teaches wherein the driving style, interpreted as vehicle operation is monitored and determined based on an operational condition. When the condition is above or below the threshold operational condition, the user is notified of this information. Paragraph [0112] teaches wherein an alteration of a driving style, ie less aggressively is suggested to the user after the determination of the operational condition).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the charging system of the Wang reference with the notification system of the Ropel reference so that the vehicle batteries are not damaged by aggressive driving habits.
The suggestion/motivation for combination can be found in the Ropel reference in paragraph [0157] wherein preventing damage to vehicle batteries is taught.
Regarding claim 13, Wang teaches the system of claim 8, wherein processor is configured to:
determine that the altered driving style has slowed the first charge depletion rate or decreased the first charge depletion amount; and in response, reduce a cost of renewable energy for the EV for an upcoming time period.
Ropel teaches comprising: determining that the altered driving style has slowed the first charge depletion rate or decreased the first charge depletion amount (paragraph [0122]-[0123] teaches wherein the charge degradation is determined based on the driving style or operating condition changes. Paragraph [0123] teaches wherein the degradation rate is determined to occur at a slower rate due to the improving of operational performance of the EV); and
in response, reducing a cost of renewable energy for the EV for an upcoming time period (paragraph [0123] teaches wherein improving the driving style or operational performance is used to perform a cost-benefit analysis and determines that operating the EV in a specific manner is advantageous to the user as it extends the time to replace a battery module).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the charging system of the Wang reference with the notification system of the Ropel reference so that the vehicle batteries are not damaged by aggressive driving habits.
The suggestion/motivation for combination can be found in the Ropel reference in paragraph [0157] wherein preventing damage to vehicle batteries is taught.
Regarding claim 14, Wang teaches the system of claim 8, wherein the processor is configured to: determine that the altered driving style has slowed the first charge depletion rate or decreased the first charge depletion amount; and in response, notifying the different EV of the altered driving style.
Ropel teaches comprising: determining that the altered driving style has slowed the first charge depletion rate or decreased the first charge depletion amount (paragraph [0122]-[0123] teaches wherein the charge degradation is determined based on the driving style or operating condition changes. Paragraph [0123] teaches wherein the degradation rate is determined to occur at a slower rate due to the improving of operational performance of the EV); and
notifying the different EV of the altered driving style (paragraph [0094] teaches wherein the alteration of a driver’s style is updated within a user profile. Paragraph [0094] teaches wherein the profiles are updated and provided to other vehicle or third parties).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the charging system of the Wang reference with the notification system of the Ropel reference so that the vehicle batteries are not damaged by aggressive driving habits.
The suggestion/motivation for combination can be found in the Ropel reference in paragraph [0157] wherein preventing damage to vehicle batteries is taught.
Regarding claim 15, Wang teaches a computer readable storage medium comprising instructions ([0254] teaches a computer readable storage medium),
receiving, by a server, first charging data from an electric vehicle (EV), wherein the first charging data identifies one or more of a first charge depletion rate or a first charge depletion amount of a battery of the EV (defined in paragraph [0123] – [0124] wherein a first vehicle with a battery charge depletion is identified);
receiving, by the server, second charging data from a different EV, wherein the second charging data identifies one or more of a second charge depletion rate or a second charge depletion amount of a battery of the different (paragraph [0125] and [0126] teaches wherein a charge depletion from another vehicle is determined)
identifying that the one or more of the first charge depletion rate or the first charge depletion amount is greater than the one or more of the second charge depletion rate or the second charge depletion amount (paragraph [0126] identifies which vehicle has a greater amount of charge depletion. Based on this charge depletion, the server or scheduler may notify, request or otherwise cause one or both of the vehicles to slow down or speed up);
causing by the sever the EV to alter a driving style the server or scheduler may notify, request or otherwise cause one or both of the vehicles to slow down or speed up
Wang does not explicitly teach alter a driving style contributing to the one or more of the first depletion rate or the first charge depletion amount.
Ropel teaches alter a driving style contributing to the one or more of the first depletion rate or the first charge depletion amount (defined in paragraph [0067] wherein notifications including data on a display, mobile device or alarms, indicate various vehicle information and warnings such as driving style and EV operation. Paragraph [0155]-[0157] teaches wherein an alarm is provided for a vehicle or driver to operate the EV in a less aggressive manner and to alter the driving style).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the charging system of the Wang reference with the notification system of the Ropel reference so that the vehicle batteries are not damaged by aggressive driving habits.
The suggestion/motivation for combination can be found in the Ropel reference in paragraph [0157] wherein preventing damage to vehicle batteries is taught.
Regarding claim 16, Wang teaches the computer-readable medium of claim 15, wherein the causing the EV to alter the driving style comprises wirelessly communicating a notification to the EV, wherein the notification comprises a parameter that controls an operation of the EV (paragraph [0120] teaches wherein causing to alter the driving style includes a receiving wireless communication notification, in this case a battery charge, and controlling the vehicle by providing a notification or controlling the speed of the vehicle).
Regarding claim 17, Wang teaches the computer-readable medium of claim 16, but does not explicitly teach wherein a severity of the notification is based on the one or more of the first charge depletion rate or the first charge depletion amount.
Ropel teaches wherein a severity of the notification is based on the one or more of the first charge depletion rate or the first charge depletion amount (paragraph [0067] teaches wherein vehicle operation is notified and provided to the vehicle and/or the user in various way such as an alarm or a display. Paragraph [0089] teaches wherein alerts for battery charging level, depletion or decay is provided. Paragraphs [0141] – [0142] discloses wherein the display indicates a severe state of a battery degradation at different thresholds. Thus, a notification for providing a severity of battery depletion is known).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the charging system of the Wang reference with the notification system of the Ropel reference so that the vehicle batteries are not damaged by aggressive driving habits.
The suggestion/motivation for combination can be found in the Ropel reference in paragraph [0157] wherein preventing damage to vehicle batteries is taught.
Regarding claim 18, Wang teaches the computer-readable medium of claim 16, wherein the causing the EV to alter the driving style comprises: modifying the parameter based on a difference between the one or more of the first charge depletion rate or the first charge depletion amount and threshold (paragraph [0126] teaches wherein modifying an EV driving parameter includes modifying the speed of the vehicle by speeding up or slowing down the vehicle as the depletion rate or amount varies).
Wang does not explicitly teach a driving style.
Ropel teaches a driving styles and altering driving styles in regards to a threshold (Paragraph [0111] teaches wherein the driving style, interpreted as vehicle operation is monitored and determined based on an operational condition. When the condition is above or below the threshold operational condition, the user is notified of this information. Paragraph [0112] teaches wherein an alteration of a driving style, ie less aggressively is suggested to the user after the determination of the operational condition).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the charging system of the Wang reference with the notification system of the Ropel reference so that the vehicle batteries are not damaged by aggressive driving habits.
The suggestion/motivation for combination can be found in the Ropel reference in paragraph [0157] wherein preventing damage to vehicle batteries is taught.
Regarding claim 19, Wang teaches the computer-readable medium of claim 15, wherein the instructions cause the processor to perform:
calculating a difference between the one or more of the first charge depletion rate or the first charge depletion amount and the one or more of the second charge depletion rate or the second charge depletion amount (paragraph [0124] teaches determining a difference between a first vehicle charge depletion rate compared to another (second) vehicle by comparing the two battery depletion amounts).
determining the difference corresponds to a difference in distance traveled between the EV and the different EV (paragraph [0124] teaches wherein this difference in depletion amount is indicative of an insufficient charge for the vehicle to travel planned distance, destination or route); and
wherein causing the EV to alter the driving style comprises: causing notifying the EV to alter a distance traveled for a time period (paragraph [0127] teaches wherein the controller controls the vehicle to alter the distance or travel route for a time period based on battery depletion).
Wang does not explicitly teach a driving style.
Ropel teaches a driving styles and altering driving styles in regards to a threshold (Paragraph [0111] teaches wherein the driving style, interpreted as vehicle operation is monitored and determined based on an operational condition. When the condition is above or below the threshold operational condition, the user is notified of this information. Paragraph [0112] teaches wherein an alteration of a driving style, ie less aggressively is suggested to the user after the determination of the operational condition).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the charging system of the Wang reference with the notification system of the Ropel reference so that the vehicle batteries are not damaged by aggressive driving habits.
The suggestion/motivation for combination can be found in the Ropel reference in paragraph [0157] wherein preventing damage to vehicle batteries is taught.
Regarding claim 20, Wang teaches the computer-readable medium of claim 15, wherein the instructions cause the processor to perform:
determining that the altered driving style has slowed the first charge depletion rate or decreased the first charge depletion amount; and in response, reducing a cost of renewable energy for the EV for an upcoming time period.
Ropel teaches comprising: determining that the altered driving style has slowed the first charge depletion rate or decreased the first charge depletion amount (paragraph [0122]-[0123] teaches wherein the charge degradation is determined based on the driving style or operating condition changes. Paragraph [0123] teaches wherein the degradation rate is determined to occur at a slower rate due to the improving of operational performance of the EV); and
in response, reducing a cost of renewable energy for the EV for an upcoming time period (paragraph [0123] teaches wherein improving the driving style or operational performance is used to perform a cost-benefit analysis and determines that operating the EV in a specific manner is advantageous to the user as it extends the time to replace a battery module).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the charging system of the Wang reference with the notification system of the Ropel reference so that the vehicle batteries are not damaged by aggressive driving habits.
The suggestion/motivation for combination can be found in the Ropel reference in paragraph [0157] wherein preventing damage to vehicle batteries is taught.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 01/12/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding the Rejection under 35 U.S.C. §101
The applicant argues that the amended claims overcome the rejection. The applicant argues that claims 1 – 20 are not directed to an Abstract Idea because the claim recites, “causing, by the server, the EV to alter a driving style.” The examiner disagrees. The amended claims are directed towards an Abstract Idea. Claim 1 (and claims 8 and 15) recites receiving charging data from multiple EVs, comparing depletion information, and determining that one EV has a greater depletion rate or depletion amount than another EV. These steps constitute collecting and analyzing information, which is a mental process.
The additional step of “causing, by the server, the EV to alter a driving style” merely applies the result of the data analysis and does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical technological improvement. Dependent claim 2 further clarifies that the “causing” comprises, “wirelessly communicating a notification to the EV that includes a parameter controlling an operation of the EV.” This limitation indicates that the server simply communicates information or instructions to the vehicle based on the analysis.
Proving a notification or parameter to influence behavior based on analyzed data merely applies the Abstract Idea using generic computing and communication technology and does not improve the functioning of the EV, its battery system or, vehicle control technology.
Rejection under 35 U.S.C. §112
The amended claims overcome the previous rejection, but a 112 rejection for claims 6, 13, and 20, in regards to “reducing a cost of renewable energy for the EV for an upcoming time period”
Claim 15, the claim and its dependents should be amended to read, “a non-transitory computer readable medium…”
Rejection under 35 U.S.C. §103
Applicant’s arguments, see Arguments/Remarks and amended claims, filed 01/12/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claims 1 - 20 under Uyeki in view of Ropel have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Wang in view of Ropel.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1 - 20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Us 20120286052 A1 Thermal Management Atluri; Venkata Prasad Et Al.
Us 20120323415 Mode Selection For Energy Management Atluri; Venkata Prasad Et Al.
Us 20220149630 A1 Using Second Life Batteries Burchardt; Trygve
Us 20160209472 A1 Estimating Battery Life Chow; Mo-Yuen Et Al.
Us 20110023772 A1 Displaying Recovered Energy Crombez; Dale Scott
Us 20230173936 A1 Charging Electric Vehicle Supercapacitors Cronin; John
Us 20230173937 A1 Solar Radiation Maps Dudar; Aed M.
Us 20160063772 A1 Instantaneous Status Esler; Craig Edward Et Al.
Us 11130422 B1 Hybrid Battery Management System Goldfarb; Scott Et Al.
Us 20180339597 A1 Charging Connector Kruszelnicki; Martin
Us 20230158893 A1 Electric Vehicle Charging System Lin; Haosheng
Us 20210070185 A1 Smart Power Hub Liu; Xuechao Et Al.
Us 20140163854 A1 Drive Assist Apparatus Matsumoto; Satoru Et Al.
Us 11953860 B2 Vehicle Battery Charging Time Using Big Data Park; Hyun Soo
Us 20220410752 A1 Adapter For (Evse) Plasterer, Ii; Jon E.
Us 20240142534 A1 Intelligent Battery System Ropel; Andreas Martin Viktor Et Al.
Us 20230219455 A1 Vehicle And Home Energy Storage Systems Salter; Stuart C. Et Al.
Us 20170240174 A1 Hybrid Vehicle Control Device Sawada; Takanobu Et Al.
Us 20140091747 A1 Clean Charging Of Electric Vehicles Uyeki; Robert Masahiko
Us 20240101120 A1 Drive Mode Selection Welch; Sean M. Et Al.
Us 20230094310 A1 Electrified Vehicle Configured To Selectively Deactivate Restricted Power Mode Based On Acceleration Request Zhao; Yanan Et Al.
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 ALEXIS B PACHECO whose telephone number is (571)272-5979. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00 - 5:30.
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, Julian Huffman can be reached at 571-272-2147. 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.
ALEXIS BOATENG PACHECO
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2859
/ALEXIS B PACHECO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2859