DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendment
This office action has been issued in response to the amendment filed on December 30, 2025.
Claims 1-20 are pending.
Applicant’s arguments have been carefully and respectfully considered. Rejections have been maintained where arguments were not persuasive. Also, new rejections based on the amended claims have been set forth. Accordingly, claims 1-20 are rejected, and this action is made FINAL, as necessitated by amendment.
Response to Arguments
Amendments to claims 15-18 overcome the previous claim objections. Accordingly, the claim objections have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1, 9 and 15 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.
Applicant argues Zhao does not disclose: implementing, by a controller, a delay of time.
New reference Austin (US 2011/0175569) discloses the argued amended limitations: a controller (50) (Fig.15) configured to: implement a delay of time before transmitting signals to command a charging station (28) to provide charging power to an electric vehicle (18) (Par.97-98).
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, 6-7, 9-10, 15 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhao et al. (US 2016/0352113) in view of Austin (US 2011/0175569).
Claim 1: Zhao teaches a system (Fig.1), comprising:
a charging station (35) configured to connect to a plurality of electric vehicles (12) and receive data from controls hardware of each vehicle of the plurality of vehicles (12) (Par.42); and
a controller (25) coupled to the charging station (35) so that the charging station (35) is configured to transmit data to the controller (25) (Par.27; The control routine is accessible from the external controller 25.), the controller (25) configured to:
receive a first set of data from the charging station (35) (Par.22; The charging station (35) communicates with the controller (25) via a communication device (38). There is no direct communication between the plurality of vehicles (12) and the controller (25).) to determine a first set of charging parameters for a first electric vehicle in the plurality of electric vehicles (12) including a first optimal charge level and a first total charge time (Par.45; Period of time required to achieve a full charge (100%).);
receive a second set of data from the charging station (35) to determine a second set of charging parameters for a second electric vehicle in the plurality of electric vehicles (12) including a second optimal charge level and a second total charge time (Par.73; Period of time required to achieve a full charge. The calculation is performed for each of the plurality of vehicles.);
transmit signals to command the charging station to provide charging power to the first electric vehicle (12) for a first time period (Par.52), the first time period being less than the first total charge time (Par.45; A target charge level (85%) is below a full charge level (100%). Therefore, the time to arrive to the target charge level (85%) would be less than the total charge time to reach a full charge level (100%)) (Par.63);
receive a third set of data to determine that the first electric vehicle has been charged to a first charge level for the first time period, the first charge level (85%) being less than the first optimal charge level (fully charged) (Par.45 and 63);
transmit signals to command the charging station to provide charging power to the second electric vehicle for a second time period, the second time period being less than the second total charge time (Par.45; A target charge level (85%) is below a full charge level (100%). Therefore, the time to arrive to the target charge level (85%) would be less than the total charge time to reach a full charge level (100%)) (Par.63-64; After a vehicle is charged the next vehicle in the queue is charged.); and
receive a fourth set of data from the charging station to determine that the second electric vehicle has been charged to a second charge level (85%) for the second time period, the second charge level (85%) being less than the second optimal charge level (fully charged) (Par.45 and 63-64).
Zhao does not explicitly teach the controller configured to: implement a delay of time before transmitting signals to command the charging station to provide charging power.
Austin teaches a controller (50) (Fig.15) configured to: implement a delay of time before transmitting signals to command a charging station (28) to provide charging power to an electric vehicle (18) (Par.97-98).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have had the teachings of Austin in the system of Zhao to have had started charging at a desirable future time to optimize charging time completion, power demand and/or cost of power (Par.97).
Claim 6: Zhao in view of Austin teaches the limitations of claim 1 as disclosed above. Zhao teaches wherein: the first set of data from the first electric vehicle includes first telematics data and first battery aging data associated with the first electric vehicle (Par.42; Battery information including SOC);
the second set of data from the second electric vehicle includes second telematics data and second battery aging data associated with the second electric vehicle (Par.42); and
the controller (25) is further configured to determine a priority for providing charging power to the first electric vehicle or the second electric vehicle based on the first set of data and the second set of data (Par.26 and 44-45).
Claim 7: Zhao in view of Austin teaches the limitations of claim 6 as disclosed above. Zhao teaches wherein the controller (25) determines the first optimal charge level (full charge) and the first total charge time (required time to reach full charge) based on the first telematics data and the first battery aging data (Par.73); and
the controller (25) determines the second optimal charge level and the second total charge time based on the second telematics data and the second battery aging data (Par.73).
Claim 9: Zhao teaches a controller (25), comprising:
a processor (Par.23); and
a memory including instructions that, when executed by the processor, cause the controller (25) (Par.23 and 27) to:
determine a first set of charging parameters for a first electric vehicle in a plurality of electric vehicles (12) including a first optimal charge level and a first total charge time (Par.27) (Par.45; Period of time required to achieve a full charge (100%).);
determine a second set of charging parameters for a second electric vehicle in the plurality of electric vehicles (12) including a second optimal charge level and a second total charge time;
provide charging power to the first electric vehicle from a charging station (35) for a first time period, the first time period being less than the first total charge time (Par.73; Period of time required to achieve a full charge. The calculation is performed for each of the plurality of vehicles.);
determine that the first electric vehicle has been charged to a first charge level (target charge level) for the first time period, the first charge level being less than the first optimal charge level (Par.45; A target charge level (85%) is below a full charge level (100%). Therefore, the time to arrive to the target charge level (85%) would be less than the total charge time to reach a full charge level (100%)) (Par.63);
provide charging power to the second electric vehicle from the charging station (35) for a second time period, the second time period being less than the second total charge time (Par.45; A target charge level (85%) is below a full charge level (100%). Therefore, the time to arrive to the target charge level (85%) would be less than the total charge time to reach a full charge level (100%)) (Par.63-64; After a vehicle is charged the next vehicle in the queue is charged.); and
determine that the second electric vehicle has been charged to a second charge level (85%) for the second time period, the second charge level (85%) being less than the second optimal charge level (full charge) (Par.45 and 63-64).
Zhao does not explicitly teach the controller, comprising: implement a delay of time before providing charging power.
Austin teaches a controller (50) (Fig.15) configured to: implement a delay of time before providing charging power to an electric vehicle (18) (Par.97-98).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have had the teachings of Austin in the system of Zhao to have had started charging at a desirable future time to optimize charging time completion, power demand and/or cost of power (Par.97).
Claim 13: Zhao in view of Austin teaches the limitations of claim 12 as disclosed above. Zhao teaches wherein the instructions, when executed by the processor, further cause the controller (25) (Par.23) to:
receive a first set of data from the first electric vehicle including first telematics data and first battery aging data associated with the first electric vehicle (Par.42; Battery information including SOC);
receive a second set of data from the second electric vehicle including second telematics data and second battery aging data associated with the second electric vehicle (Par.42); and
determine a priority for providing charging power to the first electric vehicle or the second electric vehicle based on the first set of data and the second set of data (Par.26 and 44-45).
Claim 14: Zhao in view of Austin teaches the limitations of claim 13 as disclosed above. Zhao teaches wherein the instructions, when executed by the processor, further cause the controller (25) to:
determine the first optimal charge level and the first total charge time based on the first telematics data and the first battery aging data (Par.73); and
determine the second optimal charge level and the second total charge time based on the second telematics data and the second battery aging data (Par.73).
Claim 15: Zhao teaches a method, comprising:
receiving, by a controller (25) (Par.27; The control routine is accessible from the external controller 25.), a first set of data (Par.22);
determining, by the controller (25) using the first set of data, a first set of charging parameters for a first electric vehicle in a plurality of electric vehicles (12), the first set of charging parameters including a first optimal charge level and a first total charge time (Par.45; Period of time required to achieve a full charge (100%).);
receiving, by the controller (25), a second set of data; determining, by the controller (25) using the second set of data, a second set of charging parameters for a second electric vehicle in the plurality of electric vehicles, the second set of charging parameters including a second optimal charge level and a second total charge time (Par.73; Period of time required to achieve a full charge. The calculation is performed for each of the plurality of vehicles.);
commanding a charging station to provide power to the first electric vehicle by transmitting signals, with the controller (25), to the charging station (35) (Par.26-27);
providing charging power to the first electric vehicle from the charging station (35) for a first time period, the first time period being less than the first total charge time (Par.45; A target charge level (85%) is below a full charge level (100%). Therefore, the time to arrive to the target charge level (85%) would be less than the total charge time to reach a full charge level (100%)) (Par.63);
receiving, by the controller (25), a third set of data (Par.45 and 63);
determining, by the controller (25) using the third set of data, that the first electric vehicle has been charged to a first charge level for the first time period, the first charge level being less than the first optimal charge level; commanding the charging station (35) to provide power to the second electric vehicle by transmitting signals, with the controller (25), to the charging station (35) (Par.26-27)(Par.45; A target charge level (85%) is below a full charge level (100%). Therefore, the time to arrive to the target charge level (85%) would be less than the total charge time to reach a full charge level (100%)) (Par.63-64; After a vehicle is charged the next vehicle in the queue is charged.);
providing charging power to the second electric vehicle from the charging station (35) for a second time period, the second time period being less than the second total charge time (Par.45 and 63-64);
receiving, to the controller (25), a fourth set of data; and determining, by the controller (25) using the fourth set of data, that the second electric vehicle has been charged to a second charge level for the second time period, the second charge level being less than the second optimal charge level (Par.45 and 63-64).
Zhao does not explicitly teach implementing, with the controller, a delay of time.
Austin teaches implementing, with a controller (50) (Fig.15), a delay of time (Par.97-98).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have had the teachings of Austin in the system of Zhao to have had started charging at a desirable future time to optimize charging time completion, power demand and/or cost of power (Par.97).
Claim 20: Zhao in view of Austin teaches the limitations of claim 15 as disclosed above. Zhao teaches wherein: the first set of data includes first telematics data and first battery aging data associated with the first electric vehicle (Par.42; Battery information including SOC);
the second set of data includes second telematics data and second battery aging data associated with the second electric vehicle (Par.42); and
the method further comprises determining, by the controller, a priority for providing charging power to the first electric vehicle or the second electric vehicle based on the first set of data and the second set of data (Par.26 and 44-45).
Claims 2-5, 10-12 and 16-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhao et al. (US 2016/0352113) in view of Austin (US 2011/0175569) as applied to claims 1, 9 and 15 above, and further in view of Caffy (US 2013/0314037) and Wang et al. (US 2023/0105559).
Claims 2-4, 10-12 and 16-18: Zhao in view of Austin teaches the limitations of claim 1 as disclosed above. Zhao does not explicitly teach wherein the controller is further configured to: transmit signals to command the charging station to provide charging power to the first electric vehicle from the charging station for a third time period, the third time period being less than the first total charge time; receive a fifth set of data from the charging station to determine that the first electric vehicle has been charged to a third charge level for the third time period, the third charge level being greater than the first charge level and less than the first optimal charge level; transmit signals to command the charging station to provide charging power to the second electric vehicle for a fourth time period, the fourth time period being less than the second total charge time; and receive a sixth set of data from the charging station to determine that the second electric vehicle has been charged to a fourth charge level for the fourth time period, the fourth charge level being greater than the second charge level and less than the second optimal charge level; wherein the controller is further configured to: transmit signals to command the charging station to provide charging power to the first electric vehicle for one or more time periods in addition to the first time period and the third time period; and receive a seventh set of data from the charging station to determine that the first electric vehicle has been charged to the first optimal charge level after the one or more time periods; wherein a sum of the first time period, the third time period, and the one or more time periods is equal to the first total charge time; wherein the controller is further configured to: transmit signals to command the charging station to provide charging power to the second electric vehicle from the charging station for one or more time periods in addition to the second time period and the fourth time period; and receive an eighth set of data to determine that the second electric vehicle has been charged to the second optimal charge level after the one or more time periods; wherein a sum of the second time period, the fourth time period, and the one or more time periods is equal to the second total charge time.
Caffy teaches a controller (140) configured to transmit signals to command a charging station (120) to provide charging power to a first electric vehicle (200, #1) from the charging station for a first time period, until the first electric vehicle (200, #1) has been charged to a fist charge level (80%) (Par.36 and 41);
transmit signals to command the charging station (120) to provide charging power to a second electric vehicle (200, #4) from the charging station (120) for a second time period, until the second electric vehicle (200, #4) has been charged to a second charge level (80%) (Par.36 and 41);
transmit signals to command the charging station (120) to provide charging power to the first electric vehicle (200, #1) from the charging station (120) for a third time period (Par.42; Topping off after all vehicles have been charged to the predetermined fraction of battery charge capacity.);
receive a fifth set of data to determine that the first electric vehicle (200, #1) has been charged to a third charge level for the third time period, the third charge level (Fully charged/Topped off) being greater than the first charge level (80%) (Par.42-43 and 46);
transmit signals to command the charging station (120) to provide charging power to the second electric vehicle (200, #4) for a fourth time period (Par.42-43; Topping off after all vehicles have been charged to the predetermined fraction of battery charge capacity.); and
receive a sixth set of data to determine that the second electric vehicle (200, #4) has been charged to a fourth charge level for the fourth time period, the fourth charge level (Fully charged/Topped off) being greater than the second charge level (80%) (Par.42-43 and 46).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have had the teachings of Caffy in the system of Zhao to have had initially limited charging to a fraction of the battery charge capacity thereby optimizing efficiency of the charging system and increasing the amount of vehicles that can be charged in the least amount of time (Par.41).
The combination of Zhao in view of Wang does not explicitly teach the third time period being less than the first total charge time; the third charge level being less than the first optimal charge level; the fourth time period being less than the second total charge time; the fourth charge level being less than the second optimal charge level; wherein the controller is further configured to: transmit signals to command the charging station to provide charging power to the first electric vehicle for one or more time periods in addition to the first time period and the third time period; and receive a seventh set of data from the charging station to determine that the first electric vehicle has been charged to the first optimal charge level after the one or more time periods; wherein a sum of the first time period, the third time period, and the one or more time periods is equal to the first total charge time; wherein the controller is further configured to: transmit signals to command the charging station to provide charging power to the second electric vehicle from the charging station for one or more time periods in addition to the second time period and the fourth time period; and receive an eighth set of data to determine that the second electric vehicle has been charged to the second optimal charge level after the one or more time periods; wherein a sum of the second time period, the fourth time period, and the one or more time periods is equal to the second total charge time.
Wang teaches wherein a controller is further configured to: transmit signals to command a charging station to provide charging power to an electric vehicle (B2) for one or more time periods (Charging from 60% to 100%) in addition to a first time period/second time period (Charging from 20% to 40%) and a third time period/fourth time period (Charging from 40% to 60%) (Fig.45) (Par.235); and
receive data to determine that the electric vehicle (B2) has been charged to a first optimal charge level (100%) after the one or more time periods (Fig.45; Charging is completed if the charge level is equal to 100%); wherein a sum of the first time period/third time period, the third time period/fourth time period, and the one or more time periods is equal to the first total charge time (Par.235; Total charge time to reach fully charged.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have had the teachings of Wang in the combination of Zhao in view of Austin and Caffy to have had fully charged multiple electric vehicles having different power levels to full state at the same time thereby avoiding overcharging and increasing the service life of the electric vehicle battery (Par.235).
Claims 5 and 19: Zhao in view of Austin, Caffy and Wang teach the limitations of claims 2 and 16 as discloses above. Zhao teaches wherein the controller (25) is configured to: transmit signals to command the charging station (35) to provide charging power to the second electric vehicle for the second time period in response to determining that the first electric vehicle has been charged to the first charge level (Par.52 and 63-64).
Zhao does not explicitly teach transmit signals to command the charging station to provide charging power to the first electric vehicle for the third time period in response to determining that the second electric vehicle has been charged to the second charge level; and transmit signals to command the charging station to provide charging power to the second electric vehicle for the fourth time period in response to determining that the first electric vehicle has been charged to the third charge level.
Caffy teaches transmit signals to command a charging station to provide charging power to the first electric vehicle (200, #1) for the third time period in response to determining that the second electric vehicle has been charged to the second charge level (80%) (Par.42-43; Topping off after all vehicles have been charged to the predetermined fraction of battery charge capacity in order of connection. Therefore, with only two vehicles being charged once the second vehicle is charged to 80% the first vehicle will be topped off.); and transmit signals to command the charging station to provide charging power to the second electric vehicle for the fourth time period in response to determining that the first electric vehicle has been charged to the third charge level (Par.42-43; Topping off after all vehicles have been charged to the predetermined fraction of battery charge capacity. Once the first vehicle is topped off if no additional vehicles have been connected the second vehicle will be automatically topped off.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have had the teachings of Caffy in the system of Zhao to have had initially limited charging to a fraction of the battery charge capacity, before fully charging, thereby optimizing efficiency of the charging system and increasing the amount of vehicles that can be charged in the least amount of time (Par.41).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhao et al. (US 2016/0352113) in view of Austin (US 2011/0175569) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Homma et al. (US 2018/0154791).
Claim 8: Zhao in view of Austin teaches the limitations of claim 1 as disclosed above. Zhao does not explicitly teach wherein the controller is further configured to transmit signals to the charging station to selectively return power from at least one vehicle of the plurality of electric vehicles to a grid electrically coupled to the charging station.
Homma teaches a controller (3) configured to transmit signals to a charging station to selectively return power from at least one vehicle of a plurality of electric vehicles (10) to a grid electrically coupled to the charging station (Par.18 and 83).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have had the teachings of Homma in the system of Zhao to have had reduced the degree of variation in state of charge in a plurality of vehicles (Par.7) thereby suppressing acceleration in energy storage deterioration (Par.156).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: Farber (US 2019/0152335) teaches after all vehicles (4) have been charged up to a first charge level (80%), then charging all vehicles (4) sequentially up to a second charge level (100%) (Par.29).
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 JOHALI ALEJANDRA TORRES RUIZ whose telephone number is (571)270-1262. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10:00am-6:00pm.
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, Taelor Kim can be reached at 571-270-7166. 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.
/JOHALI A TORRES RUIZ/Examiner, Art Unit 2859
/JULIAN D HUFFMAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2859
Prosecution Insights