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 Arguments
Applicant’s arguments/amendments with respect to the claims have been considered but are moot because the arguments do not apply to the combination of references being used in the current rejection. In light of the art demonstrated below from parent applications (specifically Bishop), the double patenting rejections are maintained. Similar for the 103 rejections, though the 102 rejections are withdrawn. The drawing and claim objections are withdrawn due to the amendments filed by the applicant. The 112[a] rejections are withdrawn due to the amendments.
Applicant's arguments/amendments filed 5/13/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The applicant has not amended the specification to replace GPSS with GPS. Thus, the specification objections are maintained in part. The 112(b) rejections are further withdrawn in part as some issues were not addressed sufficiently.
Examiner has corrected Bissonette’s citation as corroborated by the PTO-892 document mailed 2/13/2026.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
The specification contains a claimed term “GPSS” wireless communication which was not supported by the full meaning of the acronym. The meaning of the term is not clear from a simple browsing of the prior art. If the applicant can provide proof that it is supported and well known only as a single meaning, then provide the evidence. Or if the applicant meant the well-known GPS (which would not appear to be an appropriate context for communication for charging purposes), then consider making the change.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claim 17 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Applicant has claimed “a mobile charging application” in line 3. Emend to “one of the plurality of mobile charging applications” to improve clarity.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 3 and 7-20 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.
Claims 8, 9, and 20 recite the limitation "the plurality of mobile applications". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It would appear the applicant meant to claim “the plurality of mobile charging applications”
Claims 10 and 14 recite the limitation "the plurality of charging units". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims. For purposes of Examination, the examiner will assume Claim 14 meant “the charging unit”. Specifically for Claim 10, emend “the plurality of charging units are” to “the charging unit is”.
Claim 10 recites the limitation "the electrical connection" in line 15. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Emend to “the electrical grid connector”
Claims 12 and 16 [claims 13, 17, & 18 due to dependence upon claims 12 & 16] recites the limitation "the at least one interface". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims. Emend to “the at least one communication interface” to align with Claim 10.
Claims 3, 7, and 20 recites the limitation "the at least one interface". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims. Emend to “the at least one communication interface” to align with Claim 1 and earlier in Claim 20, respectively.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claim 10 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20, 21, 25, and 26 of U.S. Patent No. 10857902. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the elements of the charging connector are present and charging unit structure.
Claims 10 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 7, and 17-20 of U.S. Patent No. 11912153. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the elements of the charging connector are present and charging unit structure.
Claims 11-18 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over
claims [1-20, 21, 25, and 26 of U.S. Patent No. 10857902]
claims [1, 7, and 17-20 of U.S. Patent No. 11912153]
in view of McCool et al (USPGPN 20140021908) for limitations regarding the wireless communication and control of charging by the application (see 103 rejections below). Where one of ordinary skill in the art understands that wireless communication of controls by a mobile application is more convenient for a user rather than them having to walk to a charging station to perform every operation (thus for claims 12, 13, & 16-18)
in view of Bissonette et al (USPGPN 20120249064, hereinafter Bisson) for limitations regarding the level of the battery charger and the connection to the voltage level of the grid (see 102 and 103 rejections below by Bisson), where one of ordinary skill in the art understands that level 1/2 chargers & 102/220-240 VAC outlets are commonly used and standard, and thus are convenient for users to use, replace parts, & understand (thus for Claims 14 & 15)
in Amelio et al (USPGPN 20150244121) for limitations on the ganged outlet (see 103 rejections below using Amelio as a secondary reference), Amelio teaches in ¶[114] that the ganged outlet allows retrofitting, i.e. improves flexibility and convenience for users (official notice taken if applicant would like more evidence; thus for Claim 11).
Claims 1-10, 19, and 20 are similarly rejected for substantially the same reasons over claims [1-20 of USPN 11912153] and [1-28 of USPN 10857902]
The claims recite the further limitations: “an electric grid connector for connecting to the local power grid to receive electrical power; a secondary power interface for connecting to an alternate power source to receive the electrical power; and wherein the plurality of charging units are configured to switch between the electrical power provided from the electric grid connection and the electrical power from the secondary power interface responsive to tariff periods of the local power grid.”
As for US patent 11912153 B2, these limitations are substantially met by Claims [1, 7, 8], [11, 12], and [17, 18].
As for US patent 10857902 B2, these limitations are substantially met by Claims [1, 8, 9], [11, 17, 18], and [21, 25, 26]. Therefore, at least Claims 1, 10, and 19 of the current application are rejected due to these considerations.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1, 3-10, and 12-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over McCool et al (USPGPN 20140021908) in view of Bissonette et al (USPGPN 20120249065, hereinafter Bisson) and Bishop et al (USPGPN 20130176000)
Independent Claim 1, McCool teaches a system (Figs. 1-3 & 14) for controlling a group of charging stations (¶’s [07, 11, 46, 55, 67, 68, 73, 77, 80] & Fig. 20) for at least one electric vehicle (12), comprising:
a central device charger controller (40, see ¶’s [54, 55, 76, 78] see at least Fig. 1 for remote location from the vehicle) for controlling system operation;
a plurality of charging units communicating with the central device charger controller (10, see abstract, ¶’s [05-07, 52-54, 71, 73, 75),
wherein the plurality of charging units each further comprises:
charging circuitry for generating a charging current to the at least one electric vehicle responsive to provided electrical power provided from a local power grid (20, see ¶[48], 28, ¶’s [50, 56], utility line is claimed local power grid);
at least one communication interface for enabling communications with the central device charger controller and a plurality of mobile charging applications and for controlling charging of a connected at least one electric vehicle (25 described communication in ¶’s [53, 78] with 34 and server/central-computer-elements,
vehicle communication with server shown between 34 and 36 in Fig. 2; mobile application and server shown between 38 and 36 in Fig. 2, see abstract, ¶’s [05, 06, 54, 71, 73, 75, 79, 81], see control in Fig. 31);
an electric grid connector for connecting to the local power grid to receive electrical power (¶’s [50, 56], see at least Fig. 4);
McCool is silent to a secondary power interface for connecting to an alternate power source to receive the electrical power; and
wherein the charging unit is configured to switch between the electrical power provided from the electric grid connection and the electrical power from the secondary power interface responsive to tariff periods of the local power grid.
McCool is silent to each charging unit further comprises a connector providing the generated charging current from the charging circuitry to the at least one electric vehicle.
Bisson teaches each charging unit (210, Figs. [1-7, esp. 1-3]) further comprises a connector (212) providing the generated charging current from the charging circuitry to the at least one electric vehicle (100).
Bisson further teaches a secondary power interface for connecting to an alternate power source to receive the electrical power (see Five options in Figs. 1-3); and
wherein the plurality of charging units are configured to switch between the electrical power provided from the electric grid connection and the electrical power from the secondary power interface (Fig. 1 shows wind/solar generator and utility/grid, see elements 240 & 250; Figs. 9 & 10 show choosing the grid or renewable energy sources due to costs, as the wind energy being part of the station, as it costs nothing for the station, vs paying for the grid, see also ¶'s [92-95]). Bissonette teaches this flexibility with multiple power sources provides improved speed, costs, and efficiency (¶'s [05, 10, 49, 51, abstract]).
One of ordinary skill in the art understands that an electrical connection, versus a wireless connection as in McCool, serves to improve the efficiency of the energy transfer.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify McCool with Bisson to provide improved costs, efficiency, and speed.
McCool is silent to the charging unit is configured to switch between the electrical power provided from the electric grid connection and the electrical power from the secondary power interface responsive to tariff periods of the local power grid.
Bishop teaches the charging unit (100 of Figs. [1, 2]) is configured to switch between the electrical power provided from the electric grid connection and the electrical power from the secondary power interface ([10, 20, 30] provide power to loads [120, 130], including load potentially being vehicle ¶[61]) responsive to tariff periods of the local power grid (¶[83], esp. penultimate sentence).
Bishop teaches this process/apparatus serves to reduce charging costs (¶’s [20, 89, 90]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify McCool in view of Bisson with Bishop to provide reduced charging costs.
Dependent Claims 3 and 4, McCool teaches each of the plurality of charging units further comprises wireless communications circuitry for communicating with the plurality of mobile charging applications through the at least one interface via wireless communications (with respect to [wrt] claim 3; abstract & ¶’s [52, 54], see Fig. 2 for the communication with user device 34 via server 36, with ¶’s [60-74, 76, 77, 79, 81, 82] providing more detail on the application) the wireless communications comprise at least one of Bluetooth, Wi-Fi, cellular and GPS (wrt Claim 4, ¶[52] describes 1st two, ¶[67] describing 3rd).
Dependent Claim 5, the combination of McCool, Bishop, and Bisson teaches the plurality of charging units comprises Level 1 or Level 2 battery chargers (Bisson ¶’s [38, 42], where cable 13 is the connector for charging unit/circuitry 125).
Dependent Claim 6, the combination of McCool, Bishop, and Bisson teaches the connector connects to the local power grid via at least one of a 120 V AC outlet or a range of outlets form 220 V to 240 V AC (Bisson: ¶[42], cable 13 is the connector for charging unit/circuitry 125)
Dependent Claim 7, McCool teaches the charging circuitry controls provision of the charging current to the at least one electric vehicle responsive to control signals provided by the plurality of mobile charging applications through the at least one interface (Fig. 31, ¶[77]).
Dependent Claim 8, McCool teaches each of the plurality of mobile applications initiate provision of the charging signal to the at least one electric vehicle responsive to a user input to a mobile application (Fig. 31, ¶[77], “user selects ‘power up’”).
Dependent Claim 9, McCool teaches each of the plurality of mobile applications tracks charging and provides for billing of a user for charging of the electric vehicle (Fig. 31, ¶[74]).
Independent Claim 10, McCool teaches a charging unit (¶’s [07, 11, 46, 55, 67, 68, 73, 77, 80] & Fig. 20) for at least one electric vehicle (12), comprising (Figs. 1-3 & 14):
charging circuitry for generating a charging current to the at least one electric vehicle responsive to provided electrical power provided from a local power grid (20, see ¶[48], 28, ¶’s [50, 56], utility line is claimed local power grid);
at least one communication interface for enabling communications with the central device charger controller and a plurality of mobile charging applications and for controlling charging of a connected at least one electric vehicle (25 described communication in ¶’s [53, 78] with 34 and server/central-computer-elements,
vehicle communication with server shown between 34 and 36 in Fig. 2; mobile application and server shown between 38 and 36 in Fig. 2, see abstract, ¶’s [05, 06, 54, 71, 73, 75, 79, 81], see control in Fig. 31);
an electric grid connector for connecting to the local power grid to receive electrical power (¶’s [50, 56], see at least Fig. 4);
McCool is silent to a secondary power interface for connecting to an alternate power source to receive the electrical power; and
wherein the charging unit is configured to switch between the electrical power provided from the electric grid connection and the electrical power from the secondary power interface responsive to tariff periods of the local power grid.
McCool is silent to each charging unit further comprises a connector providing the generated charging current from the charging circuitry to the at least one electric vehicle.
Bisson teaches each charging unit (210, Figs. [1-7, esp. 1-3]) further comprises a connector (212) providing the generated charging current from the charging circuitry to the at least one electric vehicle (100).
Bisson further teaches a secondary power interface for connecting to an alternate power source to receive the electrical power (see Five options in Figs. 1-3); and
wherein the plurality of charging units are configured to switch between the electrical power provided from the electric grid connection and the electrical power from the secondary power interface (Fig. 1 shows wind/solar generator and utility/grid, see elements 240 & 250; Figs. 9 & 10 show choosing the grid or renewable energy sources due to costs, as the wind energy being part of the station, as it costs nothing for the station, vs paying for the grid, see also ¶'s [92-95]). Bissonette teaches this flexibility with multiple power sources provides improved speed, costs, and efficiency (¶'s [05, 10, 49, 51, abstract]).
One of ordinary skill in the art understands that an electrical connection, versus a wireless connection as in McCool, serves to improve the efficiency of the energy transfer.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify McCool with Bisson to provide improved costs, efficiency, and speed.
McCool is silent to the charging unit is configured to switch between the electrical power provided from the electric grid connection and the electrical power from the secondary power interface responsive to tariff periods of the local power grid.
Bishop teaches the charging unit (100 of Figs. [1, 2]) is configured to switch between the electrical power provided from the electric grid connection and the electrical power from the secondary power interface ([10, 20, 30] provide power to loads [120, 130], including load potentially being vehicle ¶[61]) responsive to tariff periods of the local power grid (¶[83], esp. penultimate sentence).
Bishop teaches this process/apparatus serves to reduce charging costs (¶’s [20, 89, 90]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify McCool in view of Bisson with Bishop to provide reduced charging costs.
Dependent Claims 12 and 13, McCool teaches each of the plurality of charging units further comprises wireless communications circuitry for communicating with the plurality of mobile charging applications through the at least one interface via wireless communications (with respect to [wrt] claim 12; abstract & ¶’s [52, 54], see Fig. 2 for the communication with user device 34 via server 36, with ¶’s [60-74, 76, 77, 79, 81, 82] providing more detail on the application) the wireless communications comprise at least one of Bluetooth, Wi-Fi, cellular and GPS (wrt Claim 13, ¶[52] describes 1st two, ¶[67] describing 3rd).
Dependent Claim 14, the combination of McCool, Bishop, and Bisson teaches the plurality of charging units comprises Level 1 or Level 2 battery chargers (Bisson ¶’s [38, 42], where cable 13 is the connector for charging unit/circuitry 125).
Dependent Claim 15, the combination of McCool, Bishop, and Bisson teaches the connector connects to the local power grid via at least one of a 120 V AC outlet or a range of outlets form 220 V to 240 V AC (Bisson: ¶[42], cable 13 is the connector for charging unit/circuitry 125)
Dependent Claim 16, McCool teaches the charging circuitry controls provision of the charging current to the at least one electric vehicle responsive to control signals provided by the plurality of mobile charging applications through the at least one interface (Fig. 31, ¶[77]).
Dependent Claim 17, McCool teaches each of the plurality of mobile applications initiate provision of the charging signal to the at least one electric vehicle responsive to a user input to a mobile application (Fig. 31, ¶[77], “user selects ‘power up’”).
Dependent Claim 18, McCool teaches each of the plurality of mobile applications tracks charging and provides for billing of a user for charging of the electric vehicle (Fig. 31, ¶[74]).
Independent Claim 19, McCool teaches a system (Figs. 1-3 & 14) for controlling a group of charging stations (¶’s [07, 11, 46, 55, 67, 68, 73, 77, 80] & Fig. 20) for at least one electric vehicle (12), comprising:
a central device charger controller (40, see ¶’s [54, 55, 76, 78] see at least Fig. 1 for remote location from the vehicle) for controlling system operation;
a plurality of charging units communicating with the central device charger controller (10, see abstract, ¶’s [05-07, 52-54, 71, 73, 75),
wherein the plurality of charging units each further comprises:
charging circuitry for generating a charging current to the at least one electric vehicle responsive to provided electrical power (20, see ¶[48], 28, ¶’s [50, 56], utility line is claimed local power grid);
at least one communication interface for enabling communications with the central device charger controller and a plurality of mobile charging applications and for controlling charging of a connected at least one electric vehicle (25 described communication in ¶’s [53, 78] with 34 and server/central-computer-elements,
vehicle communication with server shown between 34 and 36 in Fig. 2; mobile application and server shown between 38 and 36 in Fig. 2, see abstract, ¶’s [05, 06, 54, 71, 73, 75, 79, 81], see control in Fig. 31);
wireless communications circuitry for communicating with at least one of the plurality of mobile charging application through the at least one interface via wireless communications (abstract & ¶’s [52, 54], see Fig. 2 for the communication with user device 34 via server 36, with ¶’s [60-74, 76, 77, 79, 81, 82] providing more detail on the application); and
wherein the charging circuitry controls provision of the charging current to the at least one electric vehicle responsive to control signals provided by the plurality of mobile charging applications through the at least one interface (Fig. 31, ¶[77]);
an electric grid connector for connecting to the local power grid to receive electrical power (¶’s [50, 56], see at least Fig. 4);
McCool is silent to a secondary power interface for connecting to an alternate power source to receive the electrical power; and
wherein the charging unit is configured to switch between the electrical power provided from the electric grid connection and the electrical power from the secondary power interface responsive to tariff periods of the local power grid.
McCool is silent to each charging unit further comprises a connector providing the generated charging current from the charging circuitry to the at least one electric vehicle.
Bisson teaches each charging unit (210, Figs. [1-7, esp. 1-3]) further comprises a connector (212) providing the generated charging current from the charging circuitry to the at least one electric vehicle (100).
Bisson further teaches a secondary power interface for connecting to an alternate power source to receive the electrical power (see Five options in Figs. 1-3); and
wherein the plurality of charging units are configured to switch between the electrical power provided from the electric grid connection and the electrical power from the secondary power interface (Fig. 1 shows wind/solar generator and utility/grid, see elements 240 & 250; Figs. 9 & 10 show choosing the grid or renewable energy sources due to costs, as the wind energy being part of the station, as it costs nothing for the station, vs paying for the grid, see also ¶'s [92-95]). Bissonette teaches this flexibility with multiple power sources provides improved speed, costs, and efficiency (¶'s [05, 10, 49, 51, abstract]).
One of ordinary skill in the art understands that an electrical connection, versus a wireless connection as in McCool, serves to improve the efficiency of the energy transfer.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify McCool with Bisson to provide improved costs, efficiency, and speed.
McCool is silent to the charging unit is configured to switch between the electrical power provided from the electric grid connection and the electrical power from the secondary power interface responsive to tariff periods of the local power grid.
Bishop teaches the charging unit (100 of Figs. [1, 2]) is configured to switch between the electrical power provided from the electric grid connection and the electrical power from the secondary power interface ([10, 20, 30] provide power to loads [120, 130], including load potentially being vehicle ¶[61]) responsive to tariff periods of the local power grid (¶[83], esp. penultimate sentence).
Bishop teaches this process/apparatus serves to reduce charging costs (¶’s [20, 89, 90]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify McCool in view of Bisson with Bishop to provide reduced charging costs.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify
Dependent Claim 20, McCool teaches each of the plurality of mobile applications tracks charging & provides for billing of a user for charging of the electric vehicle (Fig.31, ¶[74]).
Claims 1-4 and 7-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over McCool et al (USPGPN 20140021908) in view of Bishop et al (USPGPN 20130176000) and Amelio et al (USPGPN 20150244121)
Independent Claim 1, McCool teaches a system (Figs. 1-3 & 14) for controlling a group of charging stations (¶’s [07, 11, 46, 55, 67, 68, 73, 77, 80] & Fig. 20) for at least one electric vehicle (12), comprising:
a central device charger controller (40, see ¶’s [54, 55, 76, 78] see at least Fig. 1 for remote location from the vehicle) for controlling system operation;
a plurality of charging units communicating with the central device charger controller (10, see abstract, ¶’s [05-07, 52-54, 71, 73, 75),
wherein the plurality of charging units each further comprises:
charging circuitry for generating a charging current to the at least one electric vehicle responsive to power provided from a local power grid (20, see ¶[48) responsive to power provided from a local power grid (28, ¶’s [50, 56], utility line is claimed local power grid);
at least one communication interface for enabling communications with the central device charger controller and a plurality of mobile charging applications and for controlling charging of a connected at least one electric vehicle (25 described communication in ¶’s [53, 78] with 34 and server/central-computer-elements,
vehicle communication with server shown between 34 and 36 in Fig. 2; mobile application and server shown between 38 and 36 in Fig. 2, see abstract, ¶’s [05, 06, 54, 71, 73, 75, 79, 81], see control in Fig. 31);
an electric grid connector for connecting to the local power grid to receive electrical power (¶’s [50, 56], see at least Fig. 4);
McCool is silent to a secondary power interface for connecting to an alternate power source to receive the electrical power; and
wherein the charging unit is configured to switch between the electrical power provided from the electric grid connection and the electrical power from the secondary power interface responsive to tariff periods of the local power grid.
McCool is silent to each charging unit further comprises a connector providing the generated charging current from the charging circuitry to the at least one electric vehicle.
Amelio teaches each charging unit ([104, 204, 304, 404] in Figs. [1-7]) further comprises a connector (shown between charging unit and vehicle 102) providing the generated charging current from the charging circuitry to the at least one electric vehicle (102).
One of ordinary skill in the art understands that an electrical connection, versus a wireless connection as in McCool, serves to improve the efficiency of the energy transfer.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify McCool with Amelio to provide improved efficiency.
McCool is silent to a secondary power interface for connecting to an alternate power source to receive the electrical power; and wherein the charging unit is configured to switch between the electrical power provided from the electric grid connection and the electrical power from the secondary power interface responsive to tariff periods of the local power grid.
Bishop teaches a secondary power interface for connecting to an alternate power source to receive the electrical power (sources 10, 20, 30 shown in Figs. [1, 2]); and wherein the charging unit (100) is configured to switch between the electrical power provided from the electric grid (10) connection and the electrical power from the secondary power (20, 30) interface responsive to tariff periods of the local power grid ([10, 20, 30] provide power to loads [120, 130], including load potentially being vehicle ¶[61]) responsive to tariff periods of the local power grid (¶[83], esp. penultimate sentence).
Bishop teaches this process/apparatus serves to reduce charging costs (¶’s [20, 89, 90]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify McCool in view of Amelio with Bishop to provide reduced charging costs.
Dependent Claim 2, McCool is silent to each of the plurality of charging units connects to other user devices via a ganged connection to provide power.
Amelio teaches the charging unit connects to other user devices via a ganged connection to provide power (¶[114], see at least Figs. 7, 8, 11, 12, 13B & 14). Analogous to McCool (¶[04]), and the present application, Amelio supports conversion of local-grid/micro-grid elements to electricity (¶[210-218, esp. 213]), in addition to mains connection (see at least ¶’s [131, 154]). Amelio teaches in ¶[114] that the ganged outlet allows retrofitting, i.e. improves flexibility and convenience for users (official notice taken if applicant would like more evidence to support this rationale).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify McCool in view of Bishop with Amelio to provide improved convenience and flexibility.
Dependent Claims 3 and 4, McCool teaches each of the plurality of charging units further comprises wireless communications circuitry for communicating with the plurality of mobile charging applications through the at least one interface via wireless communications (with respect to [wrt] claim 3; abstract & ¶’s [52, 54], see Fig. 2 for the communication with user device 34 via server 36, with ¶’s [60-74, 76, 77, 79, 81, 82] providing more detail on the application) the wireless communications comprise at least one of Bluetooth, Wi-Fi, cellular and [[GPSS]] (wrt Claim 4, ¶[52] describes 1st two, ¶[67] describing 3rd).
Dependent Claim 7, McCool teaches the charging circuitry controls provision of the charging current to the at least one electric vehicle responsive to control signals provided by the plurality of mobile charging applications through the at least one interface (Fig. 31, ¶[77]).
Dependent Claim 8, McCool teaches each of the plurality of mobile applications initiate provision of the charging signal to the at least one electric vehicle responsive to a user input to a mobile application (Fig. 31, ¶[77], “user selects ‘power up’”).
Dependent Claim 9, McCool teaches each of the plurality of mobile applications tracks charging and provides for billing of a user for charging of the electric vehicle (Fig. 31, ¶[74]).
Independent Claim 10, McCool teaches a charging unit (¶’s [07, 11, 46, 55, 67, 68, 73, 77, 80] & Fig. 20) for at least one electric vehicle (12), comprising (Figs. 1-3 & 14):
charging circuitry for generating a charging current to the at least one electric vehicle responsive to provided electrical power provided from a local power grid (20, see ¶[48], 28, ¶’s [50, 56], utility line is claimed local power grid);
at least one communication interface for enabling communications with the central device charger controller and a plurality of mobile charging applications and for controlling charging of a connected at least one electric vehicle (25 described communication in ¶’s [53, 78] with 34 and server/central-computer-elements,
vehicle communication with server shown between 34 and 36 in Fig. 2; mobile application and server shown between 38 and 36 in Fig. 2, see abstract, ¶’s [05, 06, 54, 71, 73, 75, 79, 81], see control in Fig. 31);
an electric grid connector for connecting to the local power grid to receive electrical power (¶’s [50, 56], see at least Fig. 4);
McCool is silent to a secondary power interface for connecting to an alternate power source to receive the electrical power; and
wherein the charging unit is configured to switch between the electrical power provided from the electric grid connection and the electrical power from the secondary power interface responsive to tariff periods of the local power grid.
McCool is silent to each charging unit further comprises a connector providing the generated charging current from the charging circuitry to the at least one electric vehicle.
Amelio teaches each charging unit ([104, 204, 304, 404] in Figs. [1-7]) further comprises a connector (shown between charging unit and vehicle 102) providing the generated charging current from the charging circuitry to the at least one electric vehicle (102).
One of ordinary skill in the art understands that an electrical connection, versus a wireless connection as in McCool, serves to improve the efficiency of the energy transfer.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify McCool with Amelio to provide improved efficiency.
McCool is silent to a secondary power interface for connecting to an alternate power source to receive the electrical power; and wherein the charging unit is configured to switch between the electrical power provided from the electric grid connection and the electrical power from the secondary power interface responsive to tariff periods of the local power grid.
Bishop teaches a secondary power interface for connecting to an alternate power source to receive the electrical power (sources 10, 20, 30 shown in Figs. [1, 2]); and wherein the charging unit (100) is configured to switch between the electrical power provided from the electric grid (10) connection and the electrical power from the secondary power (20, 30) interface responsive to tariff periods of the local power grid ([10, 20, 30] provide power to loads [120, 130], including load potentially being vehicle ¶[61]) responsive to tariff periods of the local power grid (¶[83], esp. penultimate sentence).
Bishop teaches this process/apparatus serves to reduce charging costs (¶’s [20, 89, 90]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify McCool in view of Amelio with Bishop to provide reduced charging costs.
Dependent Claim 11, McCool is silent to each of the plurality of charging units connects to other user devices via a ganged connection to provide power.
Amelio teaches the charging unit connects to other user devices via a ganged connection to provide power (¶[114], see at least Figs. 7, 8, 11, 12, 13B & 14). Analogous to McCool (¶[04]), and the present application, Amelio supports conversion of local-grid/micro-grid elements to electricity (¶[210-218, esp. 213]), in addition to mains connection (see at least ¶’s [131, 154]). Amelio teaches in ¶[114] that the ganged outlet allows retrofitting, i.e. improves flexibility and convenience for users (official notice taken if applicant would like more evidence to support this rationale).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify McCool in view of Bishop with Amelio to provide improved convenience and flexibility.
Dependent Claims 12 and 13, McCool teaches each of the plurality of charging units further comprises wireless communications circuitry for communicating with the plurality of mobile charging applications through the at least one interface via wireless communications (with respect to [wrt] claim 12; abstract & ¶’s [52, 54], see Fig. 2 for the communication with user device 34 via server 36, with ¶’s [60-74, 76, 77, 79, 81, 82] providing more detail on the application) the wireless communications comprise at least one of Bluetooth, Wi-Fi, cellular and GPS (wrt Claim 13, ¶[52] describes 1st two, ¶[67] describing 3rd).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN T TRISCHLER whose telephone number is (571)270-0651. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30A-3:30P (often working later), M-F, ET, Flexible. Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Drew Dunn can be reached at 5712722312. 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.
/JOHN T TRISCHLER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2859
Prosecution Insights