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 .
Notice for all Patent Application as subject to AIA
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 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.
RESPONSE TO AMENDMENT
Amended claims 1-10, 12-20, 22-27, 29-30, and 32 are pending and remain for further examination.
The New Grounds of Rejection
Applicants’ amendments and arguments with respect to the claims 1-10, 12-20, 22-27, 29-30, and 32 filed on July 07, 2026, have been fully considered. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made. Applicants’ amendment necessitated the new ground of rejection.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 First Paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a)
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-10, 12-20, 22-27, 29-30, and 32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claims 1 and 23 recite as follows: “An artificial-intelligence-based (AI-based) orchestration platform for enabling intelligent orchestration and management of power and energy across a set of distributed energy resources, the AI-based orchestration platform comprising:
an adaptive energy data pipeline (164) configured to communicate data across a set of nodes in a network, wherein, each node of the set of nodes is adapted to operate on an energy data set associated with at least one of energy generation, energy storage, energy delivery, or energy consumption for at least one distributed energy resource of a set of distributed energy resources, and at least one node of the set of nodes is configured to record, in a distributed ledger, the energy data set including at least one energy-related event associated with at least one distributed energy resource of the set of distributed energy resources;
an energy simulation system (136) configured to perform a simulation associated with the set of distributed energy resources using the energy data set, wherein, performing the simulation includes generating an output to predict a future state of the at least one distributed energy resource; and
a smart contract system (132) configured to process a set of smart contracts, wherein, the set of smart contracts is configured to operate on the distributed ledger, the set of smart contracts receives, as inputs, the energy data set stored in the distributed ledger, and at least one smart contract of the set of smart contracts is configured based on the energy data set.
The instant specification describes “an energy simulation system (136)” as part of Intelligence Enablement System 112 (see figures 1 and 2B, pars. 0026, 0036 and figure 6 pars. 0108, 0112).
Thus, the instant specification describes in detail the functions of the “an energy simulation system (136)” with regards to figures 1, 2B, and 6, and corresponding description of such figures in paragraphs 0036 and 0112.
Regarding claims 1 and 23, the amended limitations, “an energy simulation system configured to perform a simulation associated with the set of distributed energy resources using the energy data set, wherein performing the simulation includes generating an output to predict a future state of the at least one distributed energy resource;” is not described in the specification. Specifically, “an energy simulation system (136)” shown in the figures 1 and 6 above is not described in the instant specification for performing the function of “a simulation associated with the set of distributed energy resources using the energy data set, and performing the simulation includes generating an output to predict a future state of the at least one distributed energy resource.”
A review of the Specification shows that (figures 1, 2B, and 6, and pars.0026, 0034-0036, 0096, and 0108-0116) describe all the elements with regards to the AI-Based Energy Edge Platform 102 that includes the “Intelligence Enablement System” 112 that further includes a set of adaptive energy digital twin systems 134, and/or a set of energy simulation systems 136. Please also note that claim 1 is directed to “…the AI-based orchestration platform (110) comprising…” that will not correspond to the elements of the AI-Based Energy Edge Platform 102 that includes the adaptive energy digital twin systems 134 and the energy simulation system 136.
Thus, the instant specification does not describe that the “an energy simulation system (136)” shown in the figures 1, 2B, and 6 above, which is part of the “Intelligence Enablement System” 112 “perform a simulation associated with the set of distributed energy resources using the energy data set, and performing the simulation includes generating an output to predict a future state of the at least one distributed energy resources” as recited in the claims 1 and 23.
Therefore, the description as originally filed does not provide written support for the amended limitations.
Other dependent claims 2-10, 12-20, 22, 24-27, 29-30, and 32, which are not specifically cited above are also rejected because of the deficiencies of their respective parent claims 1 and 23.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 Second Paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(b)
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 1-10, 12-20, 22-27, 29-30, and 32 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claims 1 and 23 recite the limitation "…the AI-based orchestration platform comprising: “… an energy simulation system (136)…and…a smart contract system (132)…,” which is unclear about the locations of the both limitations, because the energy simulation system (136) and the smart contract system (132) are not part of the “AI-based Orchestration Platform” (110) (see figures 1-2s), but the both limitations are part of the “Intelligence Enablement System” (112) (see figures 1-2s); therefore, the claims 1 and 23 are being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which applicant regards as the invention.
Other dependent claims 2-10, 12-20, 22, 24-27, 29-30, and 32, which are not specifically cited above are also rejected because of the deficiencies of their respective parent claims 1 and 23.
Response to Arguments
Applicants’ amendments with respect to the claims 1-10, 12-20, 22-27, 29-30, and 32 filed on July 07, 2026, have been fully considered but they are deemed to be moot in a new ground(s) of rejection is made in response to consideration of amended claims 1 and 23. The examiner has attempted to answer (response) to the remarks (arguments) in the body of the Office Action (see new rejection of claims 1 and 23).
Applicants’ amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicants are reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for replying 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 date of this final action.
Content Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Bharat Barot whose telephone number is (571)272-3979. The examiner can normally be reached on 7:00AM-3:30PM.
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, Kamal B Divecha can be reached on (571)272-5863. 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.
/BHARAT BAROT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2453September 09, 2026
Prosecution Insights