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 – 6 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 (an Abstract Idea) and does not include additional elements that amount to significantly more than the Abstract Idea itself.
Step 2A, Prong One: Abstract Idea
Claim 1 recites a series of operations which collectively describe collecting information, analyzing the information to predict a future condition, making a decision based on the analysis, and presenting the result, which constitutes an Abstract Idea, such as mental process and mathematical concept as well as organizing human activity (ie scheduling an activity based on a prediction).
The claims recite limitations that can be reasonably characterized as:
Collecting information:
acquiring charge-related information
acquiring power consumption history
acquiring a user schedule
Evaluating/analyzing information:
Predicting a future SOC
Determining when SOC will fall below a threshold
Setting a scheduled charge date
Taking actions based on the analysis
Notifying the scheduled charge date
Reserving charging equipment (claim 1)
Performing charging based on scheduled charge date (claim 2)
Step 2A, Prong Two: No Practical Application
Claims 1 - 6 does not integrate the Abstract Idea into a practical application. The recited processing circuitry is described generically and merely performs conventional functions of data acquisition, analysis, decision making, and notification. The claimed battery mounted on an electric vehicle serves as an intended field of use and does not reflect an improvement to battery technology, charging technology or vehicle operation.
The claim does not recite any technical features regarding how the future SOC is predicted, how the scheduling is technically implemented, or how the system improves the functioning of a computer or other technology. Instead, the claim simply automates reserving and scheduling the process of charging a vehicle that could be performed by a human using generic computing components.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because although the claim recites, “controlling a charging machine to charge the electric vehicle, this additional element merely applies the Abstract Idea using generic components and does not impose any meaningful limit on the judicial exception.
The claim:
does not improve the functioning of the electric vehicle or charging machine,
does not recited a specific technical implementation for controlling the charging machine, and
merely uses the calculated and predicted values to determine when to stop charging.
The recited charging step is therefore insignificant extra-solution activity and amounts to
Applying the Abstract Idea in a generic technical environment.
Accordingly, the claim does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Thus, the Abstract Idea is not integrated into a practical application.
Step 2B: No Inventive Concept
Claim 1 does not include additional elements that amount to significantly more than the Abstract Idea. The additional elements, such as acquiring information, predicting SOC, setting a scheduled charge date based on a threshold, and notifying the result are performed using generic processing circuitry and represent well-understood, routine and conventional computer functions.
Dependent claims 2-6 merely recite additional types of information (eg user schedule, reservation status of charging, weather information or selecting candidate dates), which are simply additional data inputs and routine decision criteria and do not ad any unconventional technical feature or improvement.
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.
Claims 1– 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Birek (US 20190143832) in view of North (US 20150226572) and in further view of Katanoda (US 20180099570).
Regarding claim 1, Birek teaches a charge management system for a battery mounted on an electric vehicle (figures 1 and 2 and [0045] teaches a human-machine interface with selectable options mounted within an electric vehicle. The interface displays a charge management system for a vehicle battery item 11),
the charge management system comprising processing circuitry configured to: acquire charge-related information that is information on whether charge is possible ([0059] figure 3 shows block 31 as acquiring charge related information, interpreted as determining a routine. [0060]-[0062] discloses wherein the user charging and driving schedule is determined from this routine and whether charging will occur) ;
acquire power consumption history of the battery (paragraph [0050] wherein power consumption is monitored, stored, and acquired or selected) ;
predict a future SOC of the battery based on the power consumption history (paragraph [0063] teaches wherein a future SOC is predicted as a function of modeling SOC over time. [0064] teaches using data such as power consumption of battery usage, SOC is predicted);
set a scheduled charge date when a predicted SOC value of the battery is predicted to decrease to a threshold or less (paragraph [0008] discloses predicting a reduction of SOC. Paragraph [0069] teaches wherein a charge date is scheduled, interpreted as a user requirement for future driving is determined. The user requirement, sets a schedule, or a time period in which the battery will be depleted, thus requiring recharging. [0075] discloses determining how the SOC has decreased, interpreted as determining how much charge has been consumed defined as ad change in SOC. This prediction is determined as the SOC consumed during a specific time); and
notify the scheduled charge date, wherein the processing circuitry sets the scheduled charge date based on the charge-related information (Paragraphs [0084] –[0086] and figure 3 block 37 discloses wherein the user is notified by an output being provided to the user indicative of a time requirement to recharge the battery based on the data monitored);
wherein the charge-related information includes information on a schedule of a user indicating at least one of on which date or at what time the user can charge the battery or cannot charge the battery (paragraphs [0069] and [0073] discloses wherein charge related information includes a time period of when the battery can or cannot be charged).
Birek does not explicitly teach reserve a charge equipment and wherein the processing circuitry sets the scheduled charge date based on the schedule of the user and reserves the charge equipment on the scheduled charge date.
North teach reserve a charge equipment (defined in paragraph [0072] wherein the charging station is reserved).
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 Birek reference with the charging system of the North reference so that the vehicle user may extend the driving range of the vehicle during an extended trip
The suggestion/motivation for combination can be found in North reference in paragraph [0005] wherein driving range is extended.
Birek in view of North do not explicitly teach wherein the processing circuitry sets the scheduled charge date based on the schedule of the user and reserves the charge equipment on the scheduled charge date.
Katanoda teaches wherein the processing circuitry sets the scheduled charge date based on the schedule of the user and reserves the charge equipment on the scheduled charge date (paragraphs [0120] – [0121] discloses wherein processing circuitry, a control apparatus 44, sets a reservation date based on user scheduled dates).
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 Birek in view of North reference with the charging system of the Katanoda reference so that the vehicle user may have the desired priority reservation and charging prior to a different vehicle
The suggestion/motivation for combination can be found in Katanoda reference in paragraph [0003] wherein priority reservations and charging is taught.
PNG
media_image1.png
743
328
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Birek figure 3 shows the steps to predicting an SOC within a vehicle battery
Regarding claim 2, Birek teaches a charge management system for a battery mounted on an electric vehicle (figures 1 and 2 and [0045] teaches a human-machine interface with selectable options mounted within an electric vehicle. The interface displays a charge management system for a vehicle battery item 11),
the charge management system comprising processing circuitry configured to: acquire charge-related information that is information on whether charge is possible ([0059] figure 3 shows block 31 as acquiring charge related information, interpreted as determining a routine. [0060]-[0062] discloses wherein the user charging and driving schedule is determined from this routine and whether charging will occur) ;
acquire power consumption history of the battery (paragraph [0050] wherein power consumption is monitored, stored, and acquired or selected) ;
predict a future SOC of the battery based on the power consumption history (paragraph [0063] teaches wherein a future SOC is predicted as a function of modeling SOC over time. [0064] teaches using data such as power consumption of battery usage, SOC is predicted);
set a scheduled charge date when a predicted SOC value of the battery is predicted to decrease to a threshold or less (paragraph [0008] discloses predicting a reduction of SOC. Paragraph [0069] teaches wherein a charge date is scheduled, interpreted as a user requirement for future driving is determined. The user requirement, sets a schedule, or a time period in which the battery will be depleted, thus requiring recharging. [0075] discloses determining how the SOC has decreased, interpreted as determining how much charge has been consumed defined as ad change in SOC. This prediction is determined as the SOC consumed during a specific time); and
notify the scheduled charge date, wherein the processing circuitry sets the scheduled charge date based on the charge-related information (Paragraphs [0084] –[0086] and figure 3 block 37 discloses wherein the user is notified by an output being provided to the user indicative of a time requirement to recharge the battery based on the data monitored);
wherein the charge-related information includes information on a schedule of a user indicating at least one of on which date or at what time the user can charge the battery or cannot charge the battery (paragraphs [0069] and [0073] discloses wherein charge related information includes a time period of when the battery can or cannot be charged)
wherein the charge-related information includes information on a schedule of a user, and wherein the processing circuitry sets the scheduled charge date based on the schedule of the user (paragraph [0009], [0022] teaches wherein the user schedule is determined as a personal routine including schedules and driving patterns).
Birek does not explicitly teach reserve a charge equipment and wherein the processing circuitry sets the scheduled charge date based on the schedule of the user and reserves the charge equipment on the scheduled charge date.
North teach reserve a charge equipment (defined in paragraph [0072] wherein the charging station is reserved).
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 Birek reference with the charging system of the North reference so that the vehicle user may extend the driving range of the vehicle during an extended trip
The suggestion/motivation for combination can be found in North reference in paragraph [0005] wherein driving range is extended.
Birek in view of North do not explicitly teach wherein the processing circuitry sets the scheduled charge date based on the schedule of the user and reserves the charge equipment on the scheduled charge date.
Katanoda teaches wherein the processing circuitry sets the scheduled charge date based on the schedule of the user and reserves the charge equipment on the scheduled charge date (paragraphs [0120] – [0121] discloses wherein processing circuitry, a control apparatus 44, sets a reservation date based on user scheduled dates) and perform charging and perform charging of the battery based on a charge plan including the scheduled charge date (paragraph [0035] discloses wherein charging is performed and Paragraph [0073] teaches wherein the EV uses electricity supply equipe to receive charge).
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 Birek in view of North reference with the charging system of the Katanoda reference so that the vehicle user may have the desired priority reservation and charging prior to a different vehicle
The suggestion/motivation for combination can be found in Katanoda reference in paragraph [0003] wherein priority reservations and charging is taught.
Regarding claim 3, Birek teaches the charge management system according to claim 1, but does not explicitly teach wherein the charge-related information includes information on a reservation status of charge equipment, and wherein the processing circuitry sets the scheduled charge date based on the reservation status of the charge equipment.
North teaches wherein the charge-related information includes information on a reservation status of charge equipment, and wherein the processing circuitry sets the scheduled charge date based on the reservation status of the charge equipment (defined in paragraph [0038] wherein a charging date is set based on the reservation status of the charging equipment or charging station. This charging schedule is set as a station is selected for a charging based on the travel time for the user).
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 Birek reference with the charging system of the North reference so that the vehicle user may extend the driving range of the vehicle during an extended trip
The suggestion/motivation for combination can be found in North reference in paragraph [0005] wherein driving range is extended.
PNG
media_image2.png
498
715
media_image2.png
Greyscale
North Figure 1 shows a vehicle processing circuitry
Regarding claim 4, Birek teaches the charge management system according to claim 3, but does not explicitly teach wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to reserve the charge equipment before notifying the user of the scheduled charge date.
North teaches the processing circuitry is further configured to reserve the charge equipment before notifying the user of the scheduled charge date (defined in paragraph [0072] wherein a processing circuitry, interpreted as a vehicle routing system may automatically reserve a charging station).
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 Birek reference with the charging system of the North reference so that the vehicle user may extend the driving range of the vehicle during an extended trip
The suggestion/motivation for combination can be found in North reference in paragraph [0005] wherein driving range is extended.
Regarding claim 5, Birek teaches the charge management system according to claim 1, but does not explicitly teach wherein the charge-related information includes weather information of a charge site, and wherein the processing circuitry sets the scheduled charge date based on the weather information.
North teaches wherein the charge-related information includes weather information of a charge site, and wherein the processing circuitry sets the scheduled charge date based on the weather information (defined in paragraph [0040] wherein the current weather is determined while determining charging station information).
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 Birek reference with the charging system of the North reference so that the vehicle user may extend the driving range of the vehicle during an extended trip
The suggestion/motivation for combination can be found in North reference in paragraph [0005] wherein driving range is extended.
Regarding claim 6, Birek teaches the charge management system according to claim 1, but does not explicitly teach wherein the processing circuitry selects a plurality of candidate dates earlier than an expected date on which a predicted SOC value of the battery decreases to a threshold or less, and sets the scheduled charge date from the plurality of candidate dates.
North teaches wherein the processing circuitry selects a plurality of candidate dates earlier than an expected date on which a predicted SOC value of the battery decreases to a threshold or less, and sets the scheduled charge date from the plurality of candidate dates (paragraphs [0038] and [0054] teaches wherein charging stations are selected based on a travel time associated with a predicted SOC or after a time period has elapsed).
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 Birek reference with the charging system of the North reference so that the vehicle user may extend the driving range of the vehicle during an extended trip
The suggestion/motivation for combination can be found in North reference in paragraph [0005] wherein driving range is extended.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 04/22/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding rejection under 35 USC 101, the amended claims do not overcome the applied rejection. As disclosed above, Claims 1 and 2 recite a series of operations which collectively describe collecting information, analyzing the information to predict a future condition, making a decision based on the analysis, and presenting the result, which constitutes an Abstract Idea, such as mental process and mathematical concept as well as organizing human activity (ie scheduling an activity based on a prediction).
The claims do not recite any technical features regarding how the future SOC is predicted, how the scheduling is technically implemented, or how the system improves the functioning of a computer or other technology. Instead, the claim simply automates reserving and scheduling the process of charging a vehicle that could be performed by a human using generic computing components.
Thus, according to 35 USC 101, the claims are patently ineligible.
Regarding rejection under 35 USC 112, the amended claims overcome the rejection, thus the rejection is withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, see Arguments/Remarks, filed 04/22/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claims 1 - 6 under Birek in view of North 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 Birek, North and in further view of Katanoda. Please see arguments above.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Us 7173396 B2 Hybrid Electric Vehicle Gunji; Kenichirou
Us 20090045815 A1 Managing Power Flow Zhang; Xiaodong Et Al.
Us 20120256588 A1 Electric Vehicle Charge Control Hayashi; Masanori Et Al.
Us 20150066258 A1 Bev Life Support System Loftus; Michael Edward Et Al.
Us 20150066837 A1 Predicting Charging Twarog; Christopher J. Et Al.
Us 20140265560 A1 Voltage Bus Levels Leehey; Jonathan R. Et Al.
Us 20180080995 A1 Remaining Running Time Of A Battery Heinen; Garrett David
Us 20200101850 A1 Electric Charge Management Harty; Ryan D. Et Al.
Us 20190143831 A1 Determining A Charging Requirement Birek; Lech Andrzej Et Al.
Us 20220376541 A1 Battery Charging Management Liu; Chuan Et Al.
Us 20210086647 A1 Electric Vehicle Fleet Management Kiessling; Thomas Et Al.
Us 20220135019 A1 Prediction Of Vehicle State Kigure; Hiromitsu
Us 20220219561 A1 Charge And Discharge Control Kobuna; Shunsuke Et Al.
Us 20240295407 A1 Charging Reservation Lei; Oliver
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
Prosecution Insights