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 .
Acknowledgement is made of application #18/169,307 filed on 02/15/2023 in which claims 1-27 have been presented for prosecution in a first action on the merits.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 08/16/2023 and 08/07/2024 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner and placed of record. Initialed copies are attached herewith.
Specification
Claim Objections
Claims 1,10 and 19 are objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 1 recites the underlined limitations of, “…optimizing, by the DSF system, a value of an objective function subject to a set of constraints, the value of the object function being optimized for a time interval based on the a of constants, the set of predictions, and a set of variables, values of variables in the set of variables being adjusted during optimization…”. The underlined limitations of, “object function” lack antecedent basis since an objective function has been previously recited and not object function and render the claim indefinite. Furthermore, the limitations of, “the a of constants” are unclear and indefinite and should read --the set of constants --.
The same applies to claims 10 and 19.
Claims 2-9, 11-18 and 20-27 depend directly or indirectly from claims 1,10 and respectively 19 and therefore they inherit the same deficiencies and are also objected for the same reasons.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 3,12 and 21 are objected due to the minor informalities: Claim 3 recites the underlined limitations of, “wherein the set of variables comprises a first value representing an amount of power to source from the set of EVs to the power grid in place of high-cost power generation, a second pattern indicating an amount of power to source to the power grid from the set of EVs in place of market procurement…”. The limitations of “a second pattern” is indefinite since “a first pattern” must be first defined before “a second pattern”. It is suggested that the limitations “a second pattern” should and would read for examination purpose --a second value--.
The same applies to claims 12 and 21 as being indefinite for the same reasons.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claims 1,10 and 19 are rejected to because of the following: Claim 1 recites the underlined limitations of, “…optimizing, by the DSF system, a value of an objective function subject to a set of constraints, the value of the object function being optimized for a time interval based on the a of constants, the set of predictions, and a set of variables, values of variables in the set of variables being adjusted during optimization…”. The underlined limitations of, “object function” lack antecedent basis since an objective function has been previously recited and not object function and render the claim indefinite. Furthermore, the limitations of, “the a of constants” are unclear and indefinite and should read --the set of constants --.
The same applies to claims 10 and 19.
Claims 2-9, 11-18 and respectively 20-27 depend directly or indirectly from claims 1,10 and respectively 19 and therefore they inherit the same deficiencies and are also rejected for the same reasons.
Claims 3,12 and 21 are further rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 3,12 and 21 are rejected due to the minor informalities: Claim 3 recites the underlined limitations of, “wherein the set of variables comprises a first value representing an amount of power to source from the set of EVs to the power grid in place of high-cost power generation, a second pattern indicating an amount of power to source to the power grid from the set of EVs in place of market procurement…”. The limitations of “a second pattern” is indefinite since “a first pattern” must be first defined before “a second pattern”. It is suggested that the limitations “a second pattern” should and would read for examination purpose --a second value--.
The same issues apply to claims 12 and 21 and are also rejected for the same reasons.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-27 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
The prior art of record either taken alone or in combination thereof fails to teach or reasonably suggest, “ receiving, by demand-side flexibility (DSF) system, data representative of a set of constants; determining, by the DSF system, data representative of a set of predictions, wherein at least a portion of predictions in the set of predictions is determined from a set of machine learning (ML) models; optimizing, by the DSF system, a value of an objective function subject to a set of constraints, the value of the objective function being optimized for a time interval based on the set of constants, the set of predictions, and a set of variables, values of variables in the set of variables being adjusted during optimization; providing, by the DSF system, the set of variables as output of optimizing the value of the objective function; and transmitting, by the DSF system, instructions to a set of assets of the power grid to provision power based on values of at least a sub-set of variables in the set of variables, the set of assets at least partially comprising a set of electric vehicles (EVs)”.
Citation of Prior art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
USPAT 9,619,848 to de Castro et al., (de Castro) discloses techniques to determine settings for an electrical distribution network using power flow heuristics.
US 2024/0072570 A1 to El Moursi et al., (El Moursi) discloses bus inertia for enhancing dynamic flexibility of hybrid power systems.
US 2020/0379424 A1 to Wang et al., (Wang) discloses systems and method for enhanced power system model validation.
USPAT 10,608,433 B1 to Mc Namara et al., (Mc Namara) discloses methods and systems for adjusting load power consumption based on a power option agreement.
USPAT 11,275,355 B2 to Wenzel et al., (Wenzel) discloses the general state of the art regarding systems and methods for distributing building thermal energy loads across a plurality of subplants configured to serve the building thermal energy loads.
USPAT 11,714,393 B2 to Burroughs et al., (Burroughs) discloses a building control system with load curtailment optimization.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to M'BAYE DIAO whose telephone number is (571)272-6127. The examiner can normally be reached M-F; 9:00AM-6:30PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, DREW A DUNN can be reached at 571-272-2312. 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.
M'BAYE DIAO
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2859
/M BAYE DIAO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2859 November 20, 2025