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 Status Claims 1-19 have been amended. Claim 20 has been added. Claims 1-20 remain pending and are ready for examination. 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. Claim s 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. Regarding claim 1: Step 1: This part of the eligibility analysis evaluates whether the claim falls within any statutory category. MPEP 2106.03. The claim is to a method, i.e. one of the statutory categories. Step 2A prong one : This part of the eligibility analysis evaluates whether the claim recites a judicial exception. As explained in MPEP 2106.04(11) and the October 2019 Update, a claim "recites" a judicial exception when the judicial exception is "set forth" or "described" in the claim. The claim recites: “predicting power load of the device in a first electricity price interval, wherein the first electricity price interval is a continuous time period in which electricity prices are the same; selecting a power supply policy for the device based on the power load of the device in the first electricity price interval, a quantity of stored electric charges of a power storage device at a first moment, and an electricity price of a second electricity price interval within which the first moment falls;” These limitations recite concepts that can be practically performed in the human mind but for the recitation of generic computer components . Thus, the limitations fall into the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas. (Step 2A prong one: YES). Step 2A prong two: This part of the eligibility analysis evaluates whether the claim as a whole integrates the recited judicial exception into a practical application of the exception. This evaluation is performed by (a) identifying whether there are any additional elements recited in the claim beyond the judicial exception, and (b) evaluating those additional elements individually and in combination to determine whether the claim as a whole integrates the exception into a practical application. 2019 PEG Section lll {A){2), 84 Fed. Reg. at 54-55. This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because: Besides the abstract idea, the claim recites the additional limitations of: “supplying power to the device based on the selected power supply policy.” The limitations “supplying power to the device based on the selected power supply policy” does not integrate the invention into a practical application because it’s just “applying” the abstract idea. It can also be viewed as generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a technological environment. Even when viewed in combination, these additional elements do not integrate the recited judicial exception into a practical application and the claim is directed to the judicial exception (Step 2A prong two: NO). Step 2B: This part of the eligibility analysis evaluates whether the claim as a whole amounts to significantly more than the recited exception, i.e., whether any additional element, or combination of additional elements, adds an inventive concept to the claim. MPEP 2106.05 Regarding the additional elements: “supplying power to the device based on the selected power supply policy.” The limitations “supplying power to the device based on the selected power supply policy” represents a mere instruction “to apply” the judicial exceptions . The limitation in the claim is thus insignificant extra-solution activity. This is also well-understood, routine, conventional activity (See MPEP 2106.05(d) – receiving or transmitting data over a network.). Rahardjo ( US 20140208136 A1 ) discloses select a first one of the PSU operational power modes of the at least one PSU based on the determined current power policy for the system load; and cause the PSU to supply power to the system load using the selected first one of the PSU operational power modes. Further, Pan ( US 20110187193 A1 ) discloses supply power to the connected first digital data processing device according to the management policy and/or management principle recorded in the first profile which is obtained from the remote power management system . In view of the foregoing, in accord with MPEP 2106.05(d), simply appending well-understood, routine, conventional activities previously known to the industry, specified at a high level of generality, to the judicial exception does not qualify the claim as reciting “significantly more”. Even when considered in combination, these additional elements represent mere instructions to apply an exception and insignificant extra-solution activity, which do not provide an inventive concept (Step 2B: NO). The claim is not patent eligible. Regarding claims 2-9 , under their broadest reasonable interpretation, the limitations of claim 2 further defines the selecting , claim 3 further defines the determining, claim 4 further defines the calculating, claims 5 and 8-9 defines further the method, claim 6 defines further the charging, claim 7 defines further supplying, which have been established to include abstract ideas. There are no additional limitations in the claims to apply, rely on, or use the judicial exception in a manner that would impose a meaningful limit on the judicial exception. Accordingly, the claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. Thus, claims 2-9 are not patent eligible. Regarding claim s 10 and 19 , the claims have similar limitations as claim 1; moreover, c laim 10 recites a power supply control apparatus , claim 19 recites a computing device , which are generic computer components and do not practically integrate the invention nor amount to significantly more. The claim s 9, 21, and 24 are not patent eligible. Dependent claims 11-18 and 20 are the claims have similar limitations as claims 2-9 , Therefore, the rejections applied to claims 2-9 above also apply to claims 11-18 and 20 , and as such, they are not patent eligible. 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. Claim (s) 1-2, 10-11, and 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang et al. ( CN104200297B -hereinafter Yang -Note: As the machine translation attached) in view of Steven et al. ( US20140039965A1 -hereinafter Steven). Regarding Claim 1 , Y ang teaches a method for supplying power to a device, wherein the method comprises: predicting power load of the device in a first electricity price interval (see page 5, paragraph 4; Yang: “(1) the adopted power grid real-time electricity price, wind energy and solar energy power generation trends are day-ahead prediction results, and each variable is sampled 48 times a day according to sampling intervals of every half hour;”) , selecting a power supply policy for the device ( see page 10, paragraph 11; Yang: “ (6) establishing a Distributed energy (DG) -based load scheduling strategy target function according to a formula 2”. See page 6, last paragraph: “ Step (12) establishes the RTP-based load scheduling policy objective function, as shown in formula 3.”) based on the power load of the device in the first electricity price interval (see page 7, first paragraph: “ P i must is the total power consumption of the rigid load at time i ,”) , a quantity of stored electric charges of a power storage device at a first moment, and an electricity price of a second electricity price interval within which the first moment falls; and (see page 7, first paragraph; Yang: “ RTP j And RTP k Respectively representing the real-time electricity price at the corresponding moment, and since the execution time of all the equipment at each sampling point is half an hour, and the electricity purchasing quantity is the product of the electricity purchasing power and the time, the objective function needs to be respectively multiplied by 0.5 h”) supplying power to the device based on the selected power supply policy. (see page 12, paragraph 7; Yang: “(17) executing an energy storage energy scheduling strategy, judging and searching an optimal DG-storage battery-load energy optimization mode in a segmented mode according to the RTP trend, and dynamically adjusting the DG power supply amount through the charging and discharging actions of the energy storage device to be matched with the planned load power consumption requirement”) However, Yang does not explicitly teach wherein the first electricity price interval is a continuous time period in which electricity prices are the same; Steven the same or similar field of endeavor teaches wherein the first electricity price interval is a continuous time period in which electricity prices are the same; (see [0011]; Steven: “The LMP may be calculated periodically at specified nodes (e.g., every 5 minutes, every half-hour, every hour) depending on the particular market in which the energy customer is participating. More generally, revenue generation relating to participation in an economic demand response wholesale electricity market is based on a prevailing “wholesale electricity price” for the particular market in question, which in turn generally is based on the LMP (calculated at various intervals), as discussed above.”) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the teaching of Yang to include Steven ’s features of wherein the first electricity price interval is a continuous time period in which electricity prices are the same. Doing so would provide a significant improvement for more accurately determining revenue earned from economic demand response wholesale electricity markets. (Steven, [0027]) Regarding Claim 2, the combination of Yang and Steven teaches all the limitations of claim 1 above, Yang further teaches wherein the selecting a power supply policy for the device (see page 10, paragraph 11; Yang: “(6) establishing a Distributed energy (DG)-based load scheduling strategy target function according to a formula 2”. See page 6, last paragraph: “Step (12) establishes the RTP-based load scheduling policy objective function, as shown in formula 3.”) based on the power load of the device in the first electricity price interval (see page 7, first paragraph: “ P i must is the total power consumption of the rigid load at time i ,”) , a quantity of stored electric charges of a power storage device at a first moment, and an electricity price of the second electricity price interval comprises: (see page 7, first paragraph; Yang: “ RTP j And RTP k Respectively representing the real-time electricity price at the corresponding moment, and since the execution time of all the equipment at each sampling point is half an hour, and the electricity purchasing quantity is the product of the electricity purchasing power and the time, the objective function needs to be respectively multiplied by 0.5 h”) calculating a quantity of redundant electric charges of the power storage device based on the power load of the device in the first electricity price interval, the quantity of stored electric charges of the power storage device at the first moment, and the electricity price of the second electricity price interval; and (see page 6, paragraph 7; Yang: “Step (11) calculating the initial electricity purchasing quantity BuyElec and the electricity purchasing cost BestCost : in the time interval of every half hour, if DG is greater than the total load demand, the system has electric quantity redundancy at the current moment, and electricity purchasing is not needed; and otherwise, calculating the absolute value of the difference as the electricity purchasing power at the current moment, and finally obtaining the electricity purchasing power vector BuyElec at different moments in one day. The electricity purchasing cost is a function of electricity purchasing quantity, electricity utilization time and real-time electricity price, so that the electricity purchasing cost is higher than the electricity purchasing cost.”) determining a power supply mode for the device based on the quantity of redundant electric charges of the power storage device, wherein the power supply mode comprises any one of selecting a power supply to supply power to the device and selecting the power storage device to supply power to the device. (see page 2, third paragraph; Yang: “dynamically adjusting the DG power supply amount through the charge-discharge action of the energy storage device so as to match the DG power supply amount with the planned load power demand.”) Regarding Claim 1 0 , the limitations in this claim is taught by the combination of Yang and Steven as discussed connection with claim 1 . Regarding Claim 1 1 , the limitations in this claim is taught by the combination of Yang and Steven as discussed connection with claim 2 . Regarding Claim 1 9 , the limitations in this claim is taught by the combination of Yang and Steven as discussed connection with claim 1 . Regarding Claim 20 , the limitations in this claim is taught by the combination of Yang and Steven as discussed connection with claim 1 . Claim (s) 3, 5 -7, 12, and 14 -16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang in view of Steven in view of Chen (CN 107453425 A -hereinafter Chen -As the machine translation attached ) . Regarding Claim 3, the combination of Yang and Steven teaches all the limitations of claim 2 above, Li further teaches wherein the determining a power supply mode for the device based on the quantity of redundant electric charges of the power storage device comprises: (see [0425]; Steven: “the regulation signal is “net zero,” meaning that the quantity of charged/discharged energy averages to zero over a given 24-hour period.”) However, it does not explicitly teach: when the quantity of redundant electric charges of the power storage device is less than or equal to a first threshold, selecting the power supply to supply power to the device; and when the quantity of redundant electric charges of the power storage device is greater than or equal to a second threshold, selecting the power storage device to supply power to the device. Chen the same or similar field of endeavor teaches: when the quantity of redundant electric charges of the power storage device is less than or equal to a first threshold, selecting the power supply to supply power to the device; and (see page 5, paragraph 8; Chen: “When the electricity of first power supply is less than the first power supply thresholding, it is the wireless charge and discharge to control the second source The hardware system power supply of electric equipment . ”) when the quantity of redundant electric charges of the power storage device is greater than or equal to a second threshold, selecting the power storage device to supply power to the device. (see page 5, paragraph 9; Chen: “When the electricity of the second source is more than the second power supply thresholding, the second source is controlled to enter wireless electric discharge shape State, so that the second source discharges for charging equipment”) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the teaching of Yang and Steven to include Chen ’s features of when the quantity of redundant electric charges of the power storage device is less than or equal to a first threshold, selecting the power supply to supply power to the device; and when the quantity of redundant electric charges of the power storage device is greater than or equal to a second threshold, selecting the power storage device to supply power to the device. Doing so would improve the functional reliability of charging/discharging apparatus. (Chen, page 8, paragraph 9) Regarding Claim 5, the combination of Yang , Steven , and Chen teaches all the limitations of claim 3 above, Yang further teaches: when a voltage of the power storage device is less than or equal to a voltage threshold: stopping supplying power to the device; and (see page 12, first paragraph; Yang: “otherwise, aborting the charging operation”) selecting the power supply to continue to supply power to the device, wherein a discharging capacity of the power storage device is the quantity of redundant electric charges. (see page 12, first paragraph; Yang: “judging whether the benefit brought by discharging from the storage battery to the load is greater than the cost of starting the storage battery, if so, supplying power from the storage battery to the load until the power consumption requirement is met, or continuing supplying power from the power grid to the load after the discharge limit is reached, and updating the charge state, the discharge capacity and the power purchase quantity of the load to the power grid according to the formulas ⑤ - ⑦ ,”) Chen further teaches wherein the method further comprises: when the quantity of redundant electric charges of the power storage device is less than or equal to the first threshold, selecting the power supply to supply power to the device, wherein the power supply charges the power storage device while supplying power to the device, and wherein a charging capacity of the power storage device is an absolute value of the quantity of redundant electric charges; and (see page 5, paragraph 8; Chen: “When the electricity of first power supply is less than the first power supply thresholding, it is the wireless charge and discharge to control the second source The hardware system power supply of electric equipment . ”) when the quantity of redundant electric charges of the power storage device is greater than or equal to the second threshold: selecting the power storage device to supply power to the device, and (see page 5, paragraph 9; Chen: “When the electricity of the second source is more than the second power supply thresholding, the second source is controlled to enter wireless electric discharge shape State, so that the second source discharges for charging equipment”) The same motivation to combine Yang , Steven , and Chen a set forth for Claim 3 equally applies to Claim 5 . Regarding Claim 6, the combination of Yang , Steven , and Chen teaches all the limitations of claim 5 above , Yang further teaches wherein charging the power storage device by the power supply comprises: calculating a charging power based on the quantity of redundant electric charges of the power storage device and duration of the second electricity price interval; and (see page 6, last paragraph; Yang: “calculating the initial electricity purchasing quantity BuyElec and the electricity purchasing cost BestCost : in the time interval of every half hour, if DG is greater than the total load demand, the system has electric quantity redundancy at the current moment,”) adjusting a power supply voltage based on the charging power, to enable the power supply voltage to be higher than the voltage of the power storage device, and to enable the power supply t o charge the power storage device. (see page 11 last paragraph and page 12 first paragrpah ; Yang: “ If the voltage is larger than the predetermined value, the surplus power supply amount is stored from the DG to the storage battery until the charging limit of the storage battery is reached .”) Regarding Claim 7 , the combination of Yang , Steven , and Chen teaches all the limitations of claim 5 above, Yang further teaches wherein supplying power to the device by the power storage device comprises: calculating a discharging power based on the quantity of redundant electric charges of the power storage device and duration of the second electricity price interval; and (see page 12, paragraph 2; Yang: “The initial time q and the total discharge quantity sLoad2 of the storage battery to the load to be discharged are calculated according to a formula ⑧ ”) adjusting a power supply voltage based on the discharging power, to enable the power supply voltage to be lower than the voltage of the power storage device, and to enable the power storage device to supply power to the device. (see page 12, paragraph 3; Yang: “And (21) charging the storage battery from the DG, and judging whether the storage battery or the load needs to purchase power from the power grid or not according to the S state.”) Regarding Claim 1 2 , the limitations in this claim is taught by the combination of Yang , Steven , and Chen as discussed connection with claim 3 . Regarding Claim 1 4 , the limitations in this claim is taught by the combination of Yang , Steven , and Chen as discussed connection with claim 5 . Regarding Claim 1 5 , the limitations in this claim is taught by the combination of Yang , Steven , and Chen as discussed connection with claim 6 . Regarding Claim 1 6 , the limitations in this claim is taught by the combination of Yang , Steven , and Chen as discussed connection with claim 7 . Claim (s) 4 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang in view of Steven in view of Wang et al. (CN 108898282 A -hereinafter Wang -As the machine translation attached. ) Regarding Claim 4, the combination of Yang and Steven teaches all the limitations of claim 2 above ; however, it does not explicitly teach further teaches wherein the calculating a quantity of redundant electric charges of the power storage device based on the power load of the device in the first electricity price interval, the quantity of stored electric charges of the power storage device at the first moment, and the electricity price of the second electricity price interval comprises: calculating a quantity of consumed electric charges of the device in the first electricity price interval and a quantity of rechargeable electric charges of the power supply in the first electricity price interval based on the power load of the device in the first electricity price interval; obtaining a quantity of low-price rechargeable electric charges and a quantity of high-price consumed electric charges through statistics collection based on the quantity of consumed electric charges of the device in the first electricity price interval and the quantity of rechargeable electric charges of the power supply in the first electricity price interval, wherein the quantity of low-price rechargeable electric charges is a sum of one or more quantities of rechargeable electric charges of the power supply in one or more first electricity price intervals, each of the one or more first electricity price intervals having an electricity price lower than the electricity price of the second electricity price interval, and the quantity of high-price consumed electric charges is a sum of quantities of consumed electric charges of the device in one or more second electricity price intervals, each of the one or more second electricity price intervals having an electricity price higher than the electricity price of the second electricity price interval; and obtaining the quantity of redundant electric charges of the power storage device through calculation based on the quantity of stored electric charges of the power storage device at the first moment, the quantity of low-price rechargeable electric charges, and the quantity of high- price consumed electric charges, wherein the quantity of redundant electric charges of the power storage device is a result of subtracting the quantity of high-price consumed electric charges from a sum of the quantity of stored electric charges of the power storage device at the first moment and the quantity of low-price rechargeable electric charges. Wang the same or similar field of endeavor teaches wherein the method further comprises: calculating a quantity of consumed electric charges of the device in the first electricity price interval and a quantity of rechargeable electric charges of the power supply in the first electricity price interval based on the power load of the device in the first electricity price interval; (see page 2 last paragraph ; Wang: “ acquiring a first electric energy supply amount of renewable energy sources, a second electric energy supply amount of the energy storage system, the electric charge price of the day-ahead electric power market and the carbon emission amount of a power grid. ”) obtaining a quantity of low-price rechargeable electric charges and a quantity of high-price consumed electric charges through statistics collection based on the quantity of consumed electric charges of the device in the first electricity price interval and the quantity of rechargeable electric charges of the power supply in the first electricity price interval, wherein the quantity of low-price rechargeable electric charges is a sum of one or more quantities of rechargeable electric charges of the power supply in one or more first electricity price intervals, each of the one or more first electricity price intervals having an electricity price lower than the electricity price of the second electricity price interval, and the quantity of high-price consumed electric charges is a sum of quantities of consumed electric charges of the device in one or more second electricity price intervals, each of the one or more second electricity price intervals having an electricity price higher than the electricity price of the second electricity price interval; and (see page 3 first paragraph; Wang: “Specifically, in the case of mainly considering electricity prices, the energy storage system should be charged when the electricity prices are low, and supply power to the data center when the electricity prices are high; under the condition of mainly considering carbon emission, an energy storage system is charged when the carbon emission of a power grid is low, and supplies power to a load when the carbon emission is high.”) obtaining the quantity of redundant electric charges of the power storage device through calculation based on the quantity of stored electric charges of the power storage device at the first moment, the quantity of low-price rechargeable electric charges, and the quantity of high- price consumed electric charges, wherein the quantity of redundant electric charges of the power storage device is a result of subtracting the quantity of high-price consumed electric charges from a sum of the quantity of stored electric charges of the power storage device at the first moment and the quantity of low-price rechargeable electric charges. (see page 3, first paragraph; Wang: “determining load distribution and power supply composition of each time period of the data center according to the load, the first electric energy supply quantity, the second electric energy supply quantity, the electricity fee price and the carbon emission of the power grid.”) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the teaching of Yang and Steven to include Wang ’s features . Doing so would achieve a solution with the lowest economic cost and the minimum environmental pollution or the balance of the economic cost and the environmental pollution. (page 2, paragraph 6) Regarding Claim 1 3 , the limitations in this claim is taught by the combination of Yang , Steven , and Wang as discussed connection with claim 4 . Claim (s) 8 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang in view of Steven in view of Chen in view of Takahashi et al. ( US20170291501A1 -hereinafter Takahashi). Regarding Claim 8 , the combination of Yang , Steven , and Chen teaches all the limitations of claim 6 above ; however, it does not explicitly teach wherein the method further comprises: obtaining a current of the power storage device; determining, based on the obtained current of the power storage device, whether to adjust the charging power or a discharging power; and adjusting at least one of a current limiting coefficient of the power supply or a current limiting coefficient of the power storage device in response to determining to adjust the charging power or the discharging power. Takahashi the same or similar field of endeavor teaches wherein the method further comprises : obtaining a current of the power storage device; (see [0036]; Takahashi: “ the electric current inputted by the electric current measurement unit 16C3. ”) determining, based on the obtained current of the power storage device, whether to adjust the charging power or a discharging power; and (see [0019]; Takahashi: “ FIG. 7E is a drawing showing a charging/discharging electric power limiting factor with respect to the electric current of the electrical storage device, ”) adjusting at least one of a current limiting coefficient of the power supply or a current limiting coefficient of the power storage device in response to determining to adjust the charging power or the discharging power. (see [0057]; Takahashi: “ The storage battery characteristics upper and lower limit determination unit 22C determines the upper and lower limit determination value to be “0” when the value of each storage battery characteristic is within the upper and lower limit range as shown in FIG. 6, for example, determines the upper and lower limit determination value to be “1” when the value of each storage battery characteristic is out of the upper and lower limit range, and transmits the determination result to the output command unit 22F. ”) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the teaching of Yang , Steven , and Chen to include Takahashi ’s features of obtaining a current of the power storage device; determining, based on the obtained current of the power storage device, whether to adjust the charging power or a discharging power; and adjusting at least one of a current limiting coefficient of the power supply or a current limiting coefficient of the power storage device in response to determining to adjust the charging power or the discharging power. Doing so would affect charging/discharging of an electrical storage device appropriately . (Takahashi, [0009]) Regarding Claim 1 7 , the limitations in this claim is taught by the combination of Yan g, Steven , Chen, and Takahashi as discussed connection with claim 8 . Claim (s) 9 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang in view of Steven in view of Ian et al. ( CN111080037A -hereinafter Tian -Note: As the machine translation attached ) in view of Sun et al. ( CN 105676824 A -hereinafter Sun -As the machine translation attached ). Regarding Claim 9, the combination of Yang and Steven teaches all the limitations of claim 1 above ; however, it does not explicitly teach wherein before the predicting power load of the device in a first electricity price interval, the method further comprises: determining an initial power prediction model, wherein the initial power prediction model comprises a deep learning model; obtaining historical power load data of the device, wherein the historical power load data comprises power load of the device recorded before the first moment; and training the initial power prediction model by using the historical power load data. Tian the same or similar field of endeavor teaches the method further comprises: determining an initial power prediction model, wherein the initial power prediction model comprises a deep learning model; (see page 3, paragraph 6; Tian: “ the process of building the pre-built deep neural network model ”) obtaining historical power load data of the device (see page 3, paragraph 6; Tian: “ taking the historical characteristic data as an input layer training sample of an initial deep neural network model, ”) , and training the initial power prediction model by using the historical power load data. (see page 3, paragraph 6; Tian: “training the initial deep neural network model, and obtaining the trained deep neural network model;”) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the teaching of Yang , Steven , and Chen to include Tian ’s features of determining an initial power prediction model, wherein the initial power prediction model comprises a deep learning model; obtaining historical power load data of the device; and training the initial power prediction model by using the historical power load data. Doing so would provide a short-term power load prediction method with fast calculation speed and high prediction accuracy. (Tian, page 7, paragraph 4) However, it does not explicitly teach wherein the historical power load data comprises power load of the device recorded before the first moment; Sun the same or similar field of endeavor teaches wherein the historical power load data comprises power load of the device recorded before the first moment; (see page 12, paragraph 4; Sun: “Load prediction module is according to the historical weather data set in the time period, cold heat load equipment and the history the electric consumption information that receive, adopt optimized algorithm (such as: genetic algorithm, neutral net, ant group algorithm etc.) load prediction is carried out optimum solve, predicted load a few days ago;”) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the teaching of Yang , Steven , Chen, and Tian to include Sun ’s features of the historical power load data comprises power load of the device recorded before the first moment. Doing so would achieve short-term forecast and/or the ultra-short term prediction to regenerative resource or load . (Sun, page 3, paragraph 11) Regarding Claim 1 8 , the limitations in this claim is taught by the combination of Yang , Steven , Tian, and Sun as discussed connection with claim 9 . Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Lee ( US 20200076196 A1 ) discloses l oad/rate predictor may be used to predict electric rates, but could also be used to predict other energy-related rates, such as, for example, the price of gasoline, water, or propane . Kearns ( US 20140052305 A1 ) discloses builds the optimal operating instructions for one or more of the distributed energy storage systems 103 by running simulations using multiple categories of data, which may include: electric rate plan and tariff information (e.g., utility rates, billing period, temporal energy and demand prices, and averaging periods), utility data (e.g., requests for grid services like voltage support and frequency regulation), current and future weather data, (e.g., time of day, sunrise and sunset times, temperature, cloud cover, and other weather forecasts) , etc. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT VI N TRAN whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)272-1108 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT Mon-Fri 9:00-5:00 . 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, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT ROBERT FENNEMA can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT (571) 272-2748 . The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /V.N.T./ Examiner, Art Unit 2117 /ROBERT E FENNEMA/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2117