DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1 - 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claims do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (an abstract idea) without significantly more.
Step 1: Statutory Category
Claims 1, 9, and 16 are directed to a system, a method, and a computer readable medium respectively. These fall within the statutory categories of machine, process, and manufacture. Therefore, the analysis proceeds to Step 2A.
Step 2A, Prong One: Judicial Exception
The claims recite, inter alia, limitations directed to:
obtaining charging information from a vehicle; (collecting data or information)
obtaining a real-time charging rate; (collecting data or information)
obtaining a projected charging rate; (collecting data or information)
calculating a difference between the projected and real-time charging rates; (analyzing data or information)
determining the difference exceeds a predefined threshold; and (analyzing data or information)
transmitting a maintenance request based on that determination (e.g. transmitting a notification or displaying information).
These limitations describe collecting and analyzing data and generating notifications
based on the analysis. Such concepts represent mathematical relationships, data comparisons, and mental processes-which are abstract ideas.
Accordingly, the claims recite an abstract idea.
Step 2A, Prong Two: Integration into a Practical Application
The additional claim elements namely, the transceiver, memory, and processor are described at a high level of generality and performed their generic computer functions of receiving, storing, calculating and transmitting information.
The claims do not recite any improvement to the functioning of the computer, the transceiver, or the charger hardware. The recited elements are merely used at tools to implement the abstract data analysis, and the field of application (vehicle charging systems) does not impose any meaningful limits on the abstract idea.
The claims invention does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it:
does not improve the functioning of a computer or another technology,
does not effect a transformation or reduction of an article to a different state or thing, and
merely uses computer to perform abstract calculation more efficiently.
Therefore, the claims do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Step 2B: Whether the Claim Recites Significantly More (Inventive Concept)
The claims do not include additional elements that amount to significantly more than the abstract idea itself.
The transceiver, memory, and processor are generic computing components performing their well-understood, routing, and conventional functions as tools to implement the abstract steps.
The claimed “predetermined action,” such as “transmitting a notification associated with charger maintenance,” constitutes post-solution activity that does not meaningfully limit the abstract idea.
When considered as an ordered combination, the claim elements merely instruct one to:
collect charging data, compare the data to a threshold, and generate a notification
all of which are conventional data processing operations implemented using generic computer technology.
Thus, the claims do not recite an inventive concept sufficient to transform the abstract
idea into patent eligible subject matter.
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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maeda (US 20220050143) in view of Uesugi (US 20110193522) and in further view of King (US 20240190286).
Regarding claim 1, Maeda teaches a system (shown in figure 1 item 100, defined as a system) comprising:
a transceiver configured to receive charging information (shown in figure 2 item 214 interpreted as a communication interface. Paragraph [0034] teaches a transceiver wherein the electric vehicle (EV) may transmit and receive data including a charging rate. Paragraph [0038] teaches wherein a charger to charge an electric vehicle, interpreted as a charging station item 112, provides information such as a charging rate pertaining to a charging station. Figure 2 item 200 shows an EV computing device which transmits and receives charging data, including charging rate. Paragraph [0040] teaches wherein real-time charging rates are transmitted to the Electric vehicle. Paragraph [0047] teaches wherein a portable device item 222 may be used to communicate and exchange data via a smart charge application);
a memory (figure 2 item 206 shows a memory and item 208 shows a data store. Paragraph [0044] teaches wherein the memory stores data. Paragraph [0091] teaches wherein the charging rates, including predicted and real-time charging rates, are stored in a data store); and
a processor communicatively coupled with the transceiver and the memory (shown in figure 2 wherein a processor item 204 is coupled with a memory, data store, a transceiver (interpreted as a communication interface item 214)),
wherein the processor is configured to:
obtain, from the vehicle, a real-time charging rate at which the vehicle is charged using the charger (paragraph [0040]-[0043] teaches wherein the projected or perspective and real time charging rate is obtained by the processor within the EV or a mobile device with the smart charge application);
obtain, from a server associated with the charger, a projected charging rate for the charger (paragraph [0040]-[0043] teaches wherein the projected or perspective and real time charging rate is obtained by a server within an network);
calculate a first difference in charging rate between the projected charging rate and the real-time charging rate (paragraph [0143] teaches wherein a difference between a predicted charging rate (the calculated charging information) and a real-time charging rate (updated charging information) is determined. Paragraphs [0127]-[0129] teaches wherein a predicted charging speed or rate is determined based on various charging parameters. Paragraph [0130] teaches wherein real-time charging data is received. Paragraph [0114] teaches wherein the charging rates are displayed to the user to visually compare the predicted charging rates and the real-time charging rates);
determine that the first difference in charging rate is greater than a first predefined threshold (paragraph [0143] teaches wherein the value is compared to a threshold).
Maeda does not explicitly teach obtain charging information indicating that a vehicle is connected to a charger, the wherein both the vehicle and the charger are remote from the system; transmit a maintenance request to the server associated with the charger based on a determination that the first difference is greater than the first predefined threshold.
Uesugi teaches obtain charging information indicating that a vehicle is connected to a charger, the wherein both the vehicle and the charger are remote from the system (defined in paragraph [0056] wherein the connection state of the charging connector is determined).
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 Maeda reference with the charging system of the Uesugi reference so that the charging times at the charging station can be managed more efficiently.
The suggestion/motivation for combination can be found in the Uesugi reference in paragraph [0015] wherein the charging times at the charging station are managed efficiently.
Maeda discloses determining that the first difference is greater than the first predefined threshold defined in paragraph [0143] wherein the difference between charging rates is determined as the difference between charging information and the values are updated to a server) but Maeda in view of Uesugi do not explicitly teach wherein the processor is configured to: transmit a maintenance request to the server.
King discloses wherein the processor is configured to: transmit a maintenance request to the server (defined in paragraph [0041] wherein maintenance requests or alerts are provided to the server and displayed on the charging stations display).
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 Maeda and Uesugi reference with the charging system of the King reference so that the charging station may be properly maintained
The suggestion/motivation for combination can be found in the King reference in paragraph [0038] wherein the charging station are maintained properly.
PNG
media_image1.png
766
527
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Maeda Figures 1 and show a system for managing charge rate information
Regarding claim 3, Maeda teaches the system of claim 1, wherein the memory is further configured to store the real-time charging rate associated with the charger (paragraph [0050] teaches wherein real-time charging rates are stored in the memory and data store).
Regarding claim 4, Maeda teaches the system of claim 1, wherein the processor is further configured to: obtain an actual charge time duration from the vehicle (paragraphs [0120] – [0121] teaches wherein an actual charge time, interpreted as a finish time to charging is displayed within the smart charge application, which includes a processor); and
calculate an actual energy transferred to the vehicle based on the real-time charging rate and the actual charge time duration (paragraph [0126] teaches wherein actual energy transferred, interpreted as amount of charge received is determined during the actual charge time duration).
Regarding claim 5, Maeda teaches the system of claim 4, wherein the processor is further configured to: obtain a projected energy transferred to the vehicle from the charger (paragraph [0126] teaches wherein a projected amount of energy transferred is the amount of charge received. Paragraph [0128] teaches wherein a predicted charging speed is calculated using a parameter such as the amount of charge transferred or received);
calculate a second difference between the projected energy and the actual energy (paragraphs [0139]-[0140] teaches wherein a difference is calculated by determining an updated charging speed based on the projected or predicted model with the actual or real-time value of the charging time);
determine that the second difference is greater than a second predefined threshold (paragraphs [0139]-[0140] teaches wherein a difference is calculated by determining an updated charging speed based on the projected or predicted model with the actual or real-time value of the charging time); and
transmit a notification to a second external server responsive to the second difference being greater than the second predefined threshold (paragraphs [0135] and [0142] teaches transmitting a notification interpreted as wherein the calculations and updates are notified as displayed on a map on a computing device).
Regarding claim 6, Maeda teaches the system of claim 1, wherein the transceiver is further configured to receive vehicle information from the vehicle, and wherein the vehicle information comprises a first vehicle type (paragraph [0035] teaches wherein the transceiver includes wired or wireless communication between the vehicle and the charging stations, to transmit and receive data (e.g., charge parameters, charging data and feedback, vehicle system data) to and from the EV 102 and/or the remote server 108).
Regarding claim 7, Maeda teaches the system of claim 6, wherein the processor is further configured to: obtain the first vehicle type from the transceiver (paragraph [0035] teaches wherein a type may be determined from vehicle system data which is transferred from the EV to the charger);
calculate an expected charge time duration associated with the first vehicle type and the charger based on the real-time charging rate; and store the expected charge time duration in the memory (paragraphs [0117] and [0120]-[0121] teaches wherein charging data, which includes a real-time charging rate and an expected or predicted charging time, is based on vehicle information and data, which is stored within the memory).
Regarding claim 8, Maeda teaches the system of claim 7, but does not explicitly teach wherein the processor is further configured to: obtain a request for a charge time duration associated with the charger from a user device, wherein the request comprises a second vehicle type; determine that the second vehicle type is same as the first vehicle type; fetch the expected charge time duration from the memory responsive to the second vehicle type being the same as the first vehicle type; and transmit the expected charge time duration to the user device.
Uesugi teaches wherein the processor is further configured to: obtain a request for a charge time duration associated with the charger from a user device, wherein the request comprises a second vehicle type (figure 2 paragraphs [0060]-[0061] teaches wherein a charging station with a user database item 25 requests vehicle type data (33) to determine charging time (36) for a vehicle);
determine that the second vehicle type is same as the first vehicle type (paragraph [0071] teaches wherein the user database comprises a plurality of databases which includes vehicle type data for a plurality of vehicle types. The vehicle type is retrieved and the charging time is performed based on the charging times from vehicles of the same type);
fetch the expected charge time duration from the memory responsive to the second vehicle type being the same as the first vehicle type; and transmit the expected charge time duration to the user device (paragraph [0104] teaches wherein the vehicle type is stored and retrieved within a database when a user wants to charge the vehicle. Paragraph [0107] teaches wherein the charging time is based on the vehicle type and refers to using the database to retrieve the information on the vehicle).
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 Maeda reference with the charging system of the Uesugi reference so that the charging times at the charging station can be managed more efficiently.
The suggestion/motivation for combination can be found in the Uesugi reference in paragraph [0015] wherein the charging times at the charging station are managed efficiently.
Regarding claim 9, Maeda teaches a method (shown in figure 1 item 100, defined as a system) comprising:
obtaining, by a processor charging information (shown in figure 2 item 214 interpreted as a communication interface), a projected charging rate associated with a charger, and a real-time charging rate at which a vehicle is charged using the charger (paragraph [0034] teaches a transceiver wherein the electric vehicle (EV) may transmit and receive data including a charging rate. Paragraph [0038] teaches wherein a charger to charge an electric vehicle, interpreted as a charging station item 112, provides information such as a charging rate pertaining to a charging station. Figure 2 item 200 shows an EV computing device which transmits and receives charging data, including charging rate. Paragraph [0040] teaches wherein real-time charging rates are transmitted to the Electric vehicle. Paragraph [0047] teaches wherein a portable device item 222 may be used to communicate and exchange data via a smart charge application);
calculating, by the processor, a first difference in charging rate between the projected charging rate and the real-time charging rate (paragraph [0143] teaches wherein a difference between a predicted charging rate (the calculated charging information) and a real-time charging rate (updated charging information) is determined. Paragraphs [0127]-[0129] teaches wherein a predicted charging speed or rate is determined based on various charging parameters. Paragraph [0130] teaches wherein real-time charging data is received. Paragraph [0114] teaches wherein the charging rates are displayed to the user to visually compare the predicted charging rates and the real-time charging rates);
determining, by the processor, that the first difference in charging rate is greater than a first predefined threshold (paragraph [0143] teaches wherein the value is compared to a threshold); and
Maeda does not explicitly teach obtain charging information indicating that a vehicle is connected to a charger, the wherein both the vehicle and the charger are remote from the system; transmit a maintenance request to the server associated with the charger based on a determination that the first difference is greater than the first predefined threshold.
Uesugi teaches obtain charging information indicating that a vehicle is connected to a charger, the wherein both the vehicle and the charger are remote from the system (defined in paragraph [0056] wherein the connection state of the charging connector is determined).
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 Maeda reference with the charging system of the Uesugi reference so that the charging times at the charging station can be managed more efficiently.
The suggestion/motivation for combination can be found in the Uesugi reference in paragraph [0015] wherein the charging times at the charging station are managed efficiently.
Maeda discloses determining that the first difference in charging rate is greater than the first predefined threshold (defined in paragraph [0143] wherein the difference between charging rates is determined as the difference between charging information and the values are updated to a server) but Maeda in view of Uesugi do not explicitly teach wherein the processor is configured to: transmit a maintenance request to the server.
King discloses wherein the processor is configured to: transmit a maintenance request to the server (defined in paragraph [0041] wherein maintenance requests or alerts are provided to the server and displayed on the charging stations display).
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 Maeda and Uesugi reference with the charging system of the King reference so that the charging station may be properly maintained
The suggestion/motivation for combination can be found in the King reference in paragraph [0038] wherein the charging station are maintained properly.
Regarding claim 11, Maeda teaches the method of claim 9 further comprising storing the real-time charging rate associated with the charger in a memory (paragraph [0050] teaches wherein real-time charging rates are stored in the memory and data store).
Regarding claim 12, Maeda teaches the method of claim 9 further comprising: obtaining an actual charge time duration from the vehicle (paragraphs [0120] – [0121] teaches wherein an actual charge time, interpreted as a finish time to charging is displayed within the smart charge application, which includes a processor); and
calculating an actual energy transferred to the vehicle based on the real-time charging rate and the actual charge time duration (paragraph [0126] teaches wherein actual energy transferred, interpreted as amount of charge received is determined during the actual charge time duration).
Regarding claim 13, Maeda teaches the method of claim 12 further comprising: obtaining a projected energy transferred to the vehicle from the charger (paragraph [0126] teaches wherein a projected amount of energy transferred is the amount of charge received. Paragraph [0128] teaches wherein a predicted charging speed is calculated using a parameter such as the amount of charge transferred or received);
calculating a second difference between the projected energy and the actual energy (paragraphs [0139]-[0140] teaches wherein a difference is calculated by determining an updated charging speed based on the projected or predicted model with the actual or real-time value of the charging time);
determining that the second difference is greater than a second predefined threshold (paragraphs [0139]-[0140] teaches wherein a difference is calculated by determining an updated charging speed based on the projected or predicted model with the actual or real-time value of the charging time); and
transmitting a notification to a second external server responsive to the second difference being greater than the second predefined threshold (paragraphs [0135] and [0142] teaches transmitting a notification interpreted as the calculations and updates are notified as displayed on a map on a computing device).
Regarding claim 14, Maeda teaches the method of claim 9 further comprising: obtaining a first vehicle type from the vehicle (paragraph [0035] teaches wherein a type may be determined from vehicle system data which is transferred from the EV to the charger);
calculating an expected charge time duration associated with the first vehicle type and the charger based on the real-time charging rate; and storing the expected charge time duration in a memory (paragraphs [0117] and [0120]-[0121] teaches wherein charging data, which includes a real-time charging rate and an expected or predicted charging time, is based on vehicle information and data, which is stored within the memory).
Regarding claim 15, Maeda teaches the method of claim 14 but does not explicitly teach further comprising: obtaining a request for a charge time duration associated with the charger from a user device, wherein the request comprises a second vehicle type; determining that the second vehicle type is same as the first vehicle type; fetching the expected charge time duration from the memory responsive to the second vehicle type being the same as the first vehicle type; and transmitting the expected charge time duration to the user device.
Uesugi teaches obtaining a request for a charge time duration associated with the charger from a user device, wherein the request comprises a second vehicle type (figure 2 paragraphs [0060]-[0061] teaches wherein a charging station with a user database item 25 requests vehicle type data (33) to determine charging time (36) for a vehicle);
determining that the second vehicle type is same as the first vehicle type (paragraph [0071] teaches wherein the user database comprises a plurality of databases which includes vehicle type data for a plurality of vehicle types. The vehicle type is retrieved and the charging time is performed based on the charging times from vehicles of the same type);
fetching the expected charge time duration from the memory responsive to the second vehicle type being the same as the first vehicle type; and transmitting the expected charge time duration to the user device (paragraph [0104] teaches wherein the vehicle type is stored and retrieved within a database when a user wants to charge the vehicle. Paragraph [0107] teaches wherein the charging time is based on the vehicle type and refers to using the database to retrieve the information on the vehicle).
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 Maeda reference with the charging system of the Uesugi reference so that the charging times at the charging station can be managed more efficiently.
The suggestion/motivation for combination can be found in the Uesugi reference in paragraph [0015] wherein the charging times at the charging station are managed efficiently.
Regarding claim 16, Maeda teaches a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium having instructions stored thereupon which, when executed by a processor (shown in figure 1 item 100, defined as a system), cause the processor to:
obtain a projected charging rate associated with a charger, and a real-time charging rate at which a vehicle is charged using the charger (paragraph [0034] teaches a transceiver wherein the electric vehicle (EV) may transmit and receive data including a charging rate. Paragraph [0038] teaches wherein a charger to charge an electric vehicle, interpreted as a charging station item 112, provides information such as a charging rate pertaining to a charging station. Figure 2 item 200 shows an EV computing device which transmits and receives charging data, including charging rate. Paragraph [0040] teaches wherein real-time charging rates are transmitted to the Electric vehicle. Paragraph [0047] teaches wherein a portable device item 222 may be used to communicate and exchange data via a smart charge application);
calculate a first difference in charging rate between the projected charging rate and the real-time charging rate (paragraph [0143] teaches wherein a difference between a predicted charging rate (the calculated charging information) and a real-time charging rate (updated charging information) is determined. Paragraphs [0127]-[0129] teaches wherein a predicted charging speed or rate is determined based on various charging parameters. Paragraph [0130] teaches wherein real-time charging data is received. Paragraph [0114] teaches wherein the charging rates are displayed to the user to visually compare the predicted charging rates and the real-time charging rates);
determine that the first difference in charging rate is greater than a first predefined threshold (paragraph [0143] teaches wherein the value is compared to a threshold); and
Maeda does not explicitly teach obtain charging information indicating that a vehicle is connected to a charger, the wherein both the vehicle and the charger are remote from the system; transmit a maintenance request to the server associated with the charger based on a determination that the first difference in charging rate is greater than the first predefined threshold.
Uesugi teaches obtain charging information indicating that a vehicle is connected to a charger, the wherein both the vehicle and the charger are remote from the system (defined in paragraph [0056] wherein the connection state of the charging connector is determined).
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 Maeda reference with the charging system of the Uesugi reference so that the charging times at the charging station can be managed more efficiently.
The suggestion/motivation for combination can be found in the Uesugi reference in paragraph [0015] wherein the charging times at the charging station are managed efficiently.
Maeda discloses determining that the first difference is greater than the first predefined threshold defined in paragraph [0143] wherein the difference between charging rates is determined as the difference between charging information and the values are updated to a server) but Maeda in view of Uesugi do not explicitly teach wherein the processor is configured to: transmit a maintenance request to the server.
King discloses wherein the processor is configured to: transmit a maintenance request to the server (defined in paragraph [0041] wherein maintenance requests or alerts are provided to the server and displayed on the charging stations display).
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 Maeda and Uesugi reference with the charging system of the King reference so that the charging station may be properly maintained
The suggestion/motivation for combination can be found in the King reference in paragraph [0038] wherein the charging station are maintained properly.
Regarding claim 17, Maeda teaches the non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 16, wherein performing the predetermined action comprises transmitting notification associated with charger maintenance to a first external server (paragraph [0134] teaches wherein charging information is displayed on a portable device or the EV via an external server).
Regarding claim 18, Maeda teaches the non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 16, having further instructions stored thereupon to store the real-time charging rate associated with the charger in a memory (paragraph [0050] teaches wherein real-time charging rates are stored in the memory and data store).
Regarding claim 19, Maeda teaches the non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 16, having further instructions stored thereupon to: obtain an actual charge time duration from the vehicle (paragraphs [0120] – [0121] teaches wherein an actual charge time, interpreted as a finish time to charging is displayed within the smart charge application, which includes a processor); and
calculate an actual energy transferred to the vehicle based on the real-time charging rate and the actual charge time duration (paragraph [0126] teaches wherein actual energy transferred, interpreted as amount of charge received is determined during the actual charge time duration).
Regarding claim 20, Maeda teaches the non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 19, but does not explicitly teach having further instructions stored thereupon to: obtain a projected energy transferred to the vehicle from the charger (paragraph [0126] teaches wherein a projected amount of energy transferred is the amount of charge received. Paragraph [0128] teaches wherein a predicted charging speed is calculated using a parameter such as the amount of charge transferred or received);
calculate a second difference between the projected energy and the actual energy (paragraphs [0139]-[0140] teaches wherein a difference is calculated by determining an updated charging speed based on the projected or predicted model with the actual or real-time value of the charging time);
determine that the second difference is greater than a second predefined threshold (paragraphs [0139]-[0140] teaches wherein a difference is calculated by determining an updated charging speed based on the projected or predicted model with the actual or real-time value of the charging time); and
transmit a notification to a second external server responsive to the second difference being greater than the second predefined threshold (paragraphs [0135] and [0142] teaches transmitting a notification interpreted as wherein the calculations and updates are notified as displayed on a map on a computing device).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 11/24/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Regarding claim rejections under 35 U.S.C. §101, the applicants argue that the claims do not recite a mathematical concept and the claims are merely based on or involve the calculation in order to detect when a charger or charging station is in need of maintenance. These arguments are not persuasive.
Mathematical concept
The claim explicitly recites “calculating a first difference between a projected charging rate and a real-time charging rate” and “determining whether the first difference is greater than a threshold.” Calculating a numerical difference of two values (the difference of rates) is a mathematical operation. Comparing the calculated value to a threshold is also a mathematical evaluation. The fact that the calculation is performed for a particular purpose (eg, detecting or alerting maintenance needs) does not remove the mathematical nature of the limitation. An Abstract Idea is not rendered non-Abstract merely because it is applied in a particular context. Here, the claim recites performing arithmetic and threshold comparison on numerical values. Such operations fall squarely within the mathematical concepts grouping identified in the eligibility guidance.
Mental Process
The applicant’s argument that “the human mind is not capable of determining real-time charging rates” misinterprets the proper 101 analysis. The inquiry is not whether a human could physically measure charging rates without technological tools. Rather the inquiry is whether the claimed steps, once the data is obtained, amount to evaluation, judgement, and decision-making processes that could be performed mentally.
Here the claim recites:
Obtaining numerical data,
Calculating a difference between two values
Comparing that value to a threshold,
Determining whether the threshold is exceeded, and transmitting a maintenance request based on that determination.
These steps constitute data evaluation and conditional decision-making. Such activities fall within the category of mental process, even when performed by a computer and even when the underlying data originates from sensors or is obtained in real time. The course have repeatedly held that collecting information, analyzing it, and acting on the results – without more- constitutes an Abstract Idea.
3. Applicant’s arguments, in regards to the 35 U.S.C.§ 102(a)(1) with respect to Maeda 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 Maeda in view of Uesugi and in futher view of King.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Us 20240034184 Minimizing Electric Vehicle Outage Al Gafri; Mohammed Hadi Et Al.
Us 20240140239 A1 Management Of Vehicle-Related Services Anand; Geethanjali
Us 20230024900 A1 Real-Time Distributed Micro-Grid Optimization Ayoola; Folasade
Us 20110130885 A1 Managing The Provisioning Of Energy Bowen; Donald J. Et Al.
Us 20230408273 A1 Charging/Discharging Electric Vehicle Dow; Young Soo
Us 20240157836 A1 Energy Distribution Galbraith; Christopher Et Al.
Us 20130179061 A1 Smart Electric Vehicle (Ev) Charging Gadh; Rajit Et Al.
Us 20230271521 A1 Customized Charging Protocols Jiang; Meng Et Al.
Us 20200022103 A1 Electronic Device Kim; Jinwoo Et Al.
Us 20220051568 A1 Demand-Based Control Schemes Kessler; Patrick
Us 12409751 Real-Time Electric Vehicle Fleet Management Kiessling; Thomas Et Al.
Us 20210252993 A1 Power Management System Kinomura; Shigeki Et Al.
Us 20250112476 A1 Hybrid Vehicle Charging System Malik; Ammar Et Al.
Us 20210101504 A1 Charging Control Apparatus Okamoto; Yusuke Et Al.
Us 20240149719 A1 Optimal Timed Charging Ropel; Andreas Et Al.
Us 20200111175 A1 Providing Oem Control To Maximize Profits Uyeki; Robert Et Al.
Us 20200324667 A1 Electric Vehicle Charging Platform Yaldo; Valor Et Al.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALEXIS B PACHECO whose telephone number is (571)272-5979. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00 - 5:30.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Julian Huffman can be reached at 571-272-2147. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
ALEXIS BOATENG PACHECO
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2859
/ALEXIS B PACHECO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2859