DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
This office action is a response to an amendment/arguments filed on 3/19/2026 which was in response to the office action mailed on 12/19/2025 (hereinafter the prior office action).
Claim(s) 1-22 is/are pending.
Claim(s) 1-2, 6, 8, 16 and 18 is/are amended.
Claim(s) 21-22 is/are new.
Claim(s) 1 and 11 is/are independent.
Applicant’s amendments have overcome prior rejection(s) based on 35 U.S.C. 112.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed on 3/19/2026, have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant states in Pg. 6-8 in “Remarks” that the prior art does not teach the claim limitations of resource system and programming.
Examiner respectfully disagrees because Raghavan teaches the resource system (Para. 14 - - secure communication device; Fig. 2 - - processing circuitry 24 is the resource controller; Para. 11 - - tracking, i.e. monitoring, is performed; Fig. 2 - - clients and devices 28 are loads) and the programming (Para. 44 - - linear regression is used to tune/compensate resource system, where tuning block is being interpreted as compensation module).
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 of this title, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Raghavan et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2021/0216330) (hereinafter “Raghavan”) in view of Prasad et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2021/0288493) (hereinafter “Prasad”).
Regarding claims 1 and 11, Raghavan teaches a method for adjusting a resource response in a resource system, (Para. 17-18 - - resource is managed/adjusted in resource system; Para. 44 - - performance is tuned/adjusted)
the resource system including a secure communication device, a resource controller,…a monitoring system and a load, (Para. 14 - - secure communication device; Fig. 2 - - processing circuitry 24 is the resource controller; Para. 11 - - tracking, i.e. monitoring, is performed; Fig. 2 - - clients and devices 28 are loads)
the method comprising: capturing and storing current performance data associated with the resource system; (Para. 14 - - performance analyzer accesses stored data to analyze performance of the resource system)
performing a regression analysis on the captured and stored current performance data to provide a best linear regression fit; (Para. 11, 39 - - linear fit is obtained by performing linear regression calculations)
developing a compensation equation based on the best linear regression fit; (Para. 18 - - system is adjusted, i.e. compensated; Para. 11, 39 - - linear regression fit is used; Para. 44 - - performance is tuned/compensated)
programming the compensation equation into a compensation module at resource controller at the resource system; (Para. 44 - - linear regression is used to tune/compensate resource system, where tuning block is being interpreted as compensation module)
and adjusting, at the resource controller, incoming signals from a control center to compensate…to provide an adjusted system. (Para. 17-18 - - resource is managed/adjusted in resource system; Para. 44 - - performance is tuned/adjusted)
But Raghavan does not explicitly teach power electronic converters,
compensate for system non-idealities
However, Prasad teaches power electronic converters, (Para. 16 - - devices like solar cells, etc. are used, which include power electronic converters)
compensate for system non-idealities (Para. 35 - - ability to predict allows for compensating for system non-idealities)
Raghavan and Prasad are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor and contain overlapping structural and/or functional similarities. They both contain adjusting of systems to compensate and adjust using linear regression.
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ), it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the above limitation(s) as taught by Raghavan, by incorporating the above limitation(s) as taught by Prasad.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this modification in order to decrease maintenance events and decrease downtime, as suggested by Prasad (Para. 35).
Regarding claims 2 and 12. The method of Claim 1, wherein capturing current performance data comprises initializing a test signal to test the performance of the system and generating the performance data therefrom. (Fig. 1 - - analyzer sends signal to system)
Regarding claims 3 and 13. The method of Claim 2, wherein initializing a test signal further comprises transmitting a signal having a predetermined length to a resource in the resource system to mimic an incoming command from a control center and wherein generating the performance data comprises tracking performance of the resource based on performance of the signal. (Fig. 1 - - analyzer sends signal to system; Para. 42 - - modeling is used to mimic inputs, i.e. incoming command)
Regarding claims 4 and 14. The method of Claim 3, wherein the predetermined length of the signal is two seconds. (Fig. 1 - - analyzer sends signal to system; Para. 27 - - operations per second is used, where predetermined length corresponds to duration of operations)
Regarding claims 5 and 15, Raghavan further teaches wherein the regression analysis is a statistical method that allows examination of a relationship between two or more variables presented by the captured performance data. (Para. 11, 39, 44 - - linear regression analysis examines relationship between two or more variables with respect to performance data, where linear regression is a statistical method)
Regarding claims 6 and 16, Raghavan further teaches wherein actual performance of the resource system…is represented by a distribution of points around a line y = x and wherein the adjusted system has a performance that is closer to ideal performance than the resource system before adjustment. (Fig. 4 - - p=1 line is being interpreted as y=x)
Prasad further teaches the resource system is not ideal (Para. 35 - - ability to predict allows for compensating for system non-idealities)
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this modification in order to decrease maintenance events and decrease downtime, as suggested by Prasad (Para. 35).
Regarding claims 7 and 17, Raghavan further teaches wherein the compensated system provides a resource response that is in line with an incoming command from a control center and provides improved resource precision and performance scores. (Para. 17-18 - - resource is managed/adjusted in resource system; Para. 44 - - performance is tuned/adjusted; Para. 45 - - performance is improved; Para. 47 - - resource is saved, i.e. resource precision is improved)
Regarding claims 8 and 18, Raghavan further teaches wherein a precision metric of the performance scores improved by at least 15 points and wherein performance scores are based on at least accuracy, delay and precision. (Fig. 4 - - performance is improved from low return zones towards p = 1, where scores improved by at least 15 points based on the p values)
Regarding claims 9 and 19, Raghavan further teaches wherein determining the compensation equation comprises determining the compensation equation based on an incoming signal (RegD) and system performance (Creg). (Para. 17-18 - - resource is managed/adjusted in resource system; Para. 27 - - input of data is being interpreted as incoming signal; Para. 44 - - performance is tuned/adjusted using performance values, i.e. system performance)
Regarding claims 10 and 20, Raghavan further teaches wherein determining the compensation equation further comprises determining the compensation equation using linear regression on a performance data set. (Para. 17-18 - - resource is managed/adjusted in resource system; Para. 44 - - performance is tuned/adjusted using an estimate that is calculated using linear regression of performance values, i.e. data set)
Regarding claim 21, Prasad further teaches wherein the control center comprises one of a Regional Transmission Organization (RTO) and an Independent System Operator (ISO). (Para. 16, 91 - - system manages network of power generators including the electrical grid, i.e. RTO or ISO)
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this modification in order to decrease maintenance events and decrease downtime, as suggested by Prasad (Para. 35).
Regarding claim 22, Prasad further teaches wherein the resource controller is positioned in an uninterruptible power supply (UPS). (Para. 91 - - uninterrupted power is supplied using batteries, i.e. UPS)
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this modification in order to decrease maintenance events and decrease downtime, as suggested by Prasad (Para. 35).
It is noted that any citations to specific, pages, columns, lines, or figures in the prior art references and any interpretation of the reference should not be considered to be limiting in any way. A reference is relevant for all it contains and may be relied upon for all that it would have reasonably suggested to one having ordinary skill in the art. See MPEP 2123.
Citation of Pertinent Prior Art
The following prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
U.S. Pub. No. 2019/0207544 by Sumita et al., which discloses motor control including adjusting the balance of evaluation values in a trade-off relationship (Title/Abstract).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 extension fee 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 Saad M. Kabir whose telephone number is 571-270-0608 (direct fax number is 571-270-9933). The examiner can normally be reached on Mondays to Fridays 9am to 5pm EST.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Mohammad Ali can be reached on 571-272-4105. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/SAAD M KABIR/
Examiner, Art Unit 2119
/MOHAMMAD ALI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2119
Prosecution Insights