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 .
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s cancellation of claims 9, 22 and 23 is acknowledged and objections for the cancelled claims previously set forth in the office action mailed on 11/03/2025 are therefore withdrawn.
Applicant’s cancellation of claims 6-7,9 and 20-23 is acknowledged and 112f claim interpretation for the above cancelled claims previously set forth in the office action mailed on 11/03/2025 are therefore withdrawn.
Applicants’ argument for the newly amended claim 1 that neither in combination nor individually JP18, Fiddigatti et al. and Ozog et al. does not teach a computer capable of communicating with power consumers included in a plurality of power distribution areas of a power distribution system, the computer determining the priority order based on customer information including a plan contracted by the power consumer, notify the power system operating system of the priority order, and sets a higher power selling price to the power consumer as the priority order of the power distribution area including the power consumer is higher have been fully considered but in moot in view of newly cited reference, Buttgenbach et al. in combination with cited prior arts of record JP18 and Fiddigatti et al.. Buttgenbach et al. explicitly teaches there is an pre-agreement between the consumer and energy supplier using the energy forecast and the allocation system about maximum energy limit. Consumer priority is determined based on consumer’s will to pay higher prices as taught in [0088] and [0084]. Furthermore the consumer priority is notified to the energy supplier and stored in a relational database to determine energy control based on determined consumer priority as taught in [0097], [0100] and [0110]. Also the energy forecast and the allocation system communicates with the consumers via text message or email or similar technologies about the energy usage as taught in [0087] and [0035]. Buttgenbach et al., JP18 and Fiddigatti et al. are analogous art because they are from the same field on endeavor that is performing energy control in power transmission lines based on various factors. Therefore it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the power distribution system distributing power among plurality of power consumers in plurality of areas while considering change in frequency and frequency change rate of the power distribution and consumer/load priority as taught by combination of JP18 and Fiddigatti et al. by applying the known concept of determining customer (consumer) priority based on a plan contracted by the power consumer, and based on the priority, set higher selling price to higher priority consumer as taught by Buttgenbach et al. as an improvement to power distribution system to yield predictable results of effectively distributing energy to the higher priority consumers first and then allocating energy for the remaining lower-priority consumers as taught by Buttgenbach et al. in [0085].
Claim Objections
Claim 8 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 8, the phrase, " ... higher power purchase price from the power consumer" is wrong because the preposition "from" is incorrect to the context of the claim. Power is sold to the consumer not bought from the consumer. Suggested correction replace "from" with "for" such as " ... higher power purchase price for the power consumer…".
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim(s) 1,5,8,10,14 and 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP18 (JP2020089218A) in view of Fiddigatti et al. (US 20180159327 A1) and Buttgenbach et al. (US 20230275430 A1).
Regarding claim 1, JP18 teaches, a power system (electric power
system having power transmission line, [0008] and [0009]) comprising:
a power distribution system (electric power system having power transmission line, [0008] and [0009]), wherein:
the power distribution system comprises:
a plurality of switchgear units interposed between a feeder connected to a
substation and the plurality of power distribution areas1 (plurality of circuit breakers 30 such as 30-1,30-2,30-3 .. 30-N connected between power transmission and plurality of loads 40-1,40-2,40-3 ... 40-N (power distribution areas) to control power distribution to the loads, [0008] and Fig.1); and
a power system operating system (protection relay system communicating and
controlling power between the transmission line and the plurality of the loads, [0008])
that is capable of communicating with the plurality of switchgear units and is configured to control power supply to the plurality of power distribution areas via the plurality of switchgear units (the protection relay system includes UF relay circuit, cut off condition changing unit and power information acquisition unit based of which the
protection relay system controls power distribution among plurality of the loads via the
circuit breakers, [0008]-[0011]),
the power system operating system is configured to set any one of
an allowable frequency (when the power transmission frequency drops below lower
frequency limit value, selectively and sequentially cut off power the loads, [0015] and [
0017]), and an allowable response time (when drop in frequency in power
transmission for a circuit breaker is detected, time limit - output time is monitored in view
of the output time from the storage unit (allowable response time) and when the time
limit or output time is reached, the circuit breaker is tripped or power is cut off for the
corresponding load, [0032] and [0033]) for at least two switchgear units (when the frequency drops below lower frequency limit value and the time limit reaches output
time from the storage unit, sequentially and selectively the circuit breakers 30-N
(plurality of switchgear units) are tripped, [0033],[0015] and [0019]),
each of the at least two switchgear units is configured to: cut off a power
supply path between the feeder and the power distribution area when a frequency
of power on the feeder falls below the allowable frequency in a case where the
allowable frequency has been set (for each of the circuit breaker there is a lower limit
value and when the power transmission frequency drops below the lower limit value, the
circuit breaker is tripped sequentially to cut off power to the corresponding load, [0032],
[0033] and [0017]),
cut off the power supply path between the feeder and the power
distribution area when an elapsed time since a state in which the power supply
path between the feeder and the power distribution area is to be cut off is formed
exceeds the allowable response time in a case where the allowable response time
has been set (when drop in frequency in power transmission for a circuit breaker is
detected, time limit - output time is monitored in view of the predetermined output time
(allowable response time, [0040]) and when the time limit or output time is reached,
based on output signal, the circuit breaker is tripped or power is cut off for the
corresponding load, [0031], [0032] and [0033], see also [0036],[0039] and [0042]), and
an absolute value of a difference between the allowable frequency and a
reference frequency is larger as the priority order is higher (the reference
frequency is 50Hz and the first frequency is set to 49Hz for 30-1 circuit breakers, 48Hz
for the 30-2 circuit breaker and so on, so when the power transmission frequency falls below 49Hz, 30-1 circuit breaker is tripped and so on. That is 30-1 is the least priority
load among the loads and for tripping, the difference between the reference and the
corresponding power transmission frequency for each breaker is considered, [0017],
[0029], [0046]),
the allowable response time is longer as the priority order is higher (the first
load 40-1 has lower response time compared to other loads 40-N since when frequency
drops below lower limit value, the first 30-1 circuit breaker is first tripped when the
predetermined time output for that circuit breaker is reached. For 30-1, the
predetermined output time is reached first among the plurality of loads, meaning load
corresponding to circuit breaker 30-1 is of lowest priority among other loads, [0017],
[0032] and [0033]).
JP18 does not explicitly teach the details of cutting off power supply path when
frequency change rate of the feeder exceeds allowable frequency change rate, transaction system, a computer capable of communicating with power consumers included in a plurality of power distribution areas of a power distribution system, the computer is configured to: determine the priority order based on customer information including a plan contracted by the power consumer, and notify the power system operating system of the priority order, the power system operating system includes a database, and is configured to store the priority order received from the computer in the database, and the computer is further configured to set a higher power selling price to the power consumer as the priority order of the power distribution area including the power consumer is higher. However JP18 teaches to cut off power supply when the frequency of the power transmission for a corresponding circuit breaker drops below frequency lower limit value and the allowed response time or predetermined output time is reached in [0017],[0008],[0032] and [0033].
Fiddigatti et al. teaches, cut off the power supply path between the feeder
and the power distribution area when a frequency change rate (variation of frequency over certain time, [0072]) of power on the feeder exceeds the allowable frequency change rate in a case where the allowable frequency change rate has been set (for each load, there is a corresponding variation of frequency over a certain period of time such as F.sub.1 ... F.sub.N and when drop in frequency is detected, the variation is frequency for each load F.sub.1 ... F.sub.N is compared to variation in frequency threshold (F.sub.TH1 .. THN) to determine whether to disconnect the load or not, [0072],[0073], [0075] and [0083],
based on priority orders assigned to the plurality of power distribution
areas (loads are disconnected based on priority, [0041] and [0067]).
JP18 and Fiddigatti et al. are analogous art because they are from the same field on endeavor that is performing energy control in power transmission lines based on various factors.
Neither in combination nor individually, JP18 and Fiddigatti et al. teach transaction system, a computer capable of communicating with power consumers included in a plurality of power distribution areas of a power distribution system, the computer is configured to: determine the priority order based on customer information including a plan contracted by the power consumer, and notify the power system operating system of the priority order, the power system operating system includes a database, and is configured to store the priority order received from the computer in the database, and the computer is further configured to set a higher power selling price to the power consumer as the priority order of the power distribution area including the power consumer is higher.
Buttgenbach et al. teaches, transaction system (a data processing system determine consumer priority based on consumer paid energy price thus the data processing system works a transaction system, [0092] and [0088]),
a computer capable of communicating with power consumers included in a
plurality of power distribution areas of a power distribution system (the data processing system having a computer implementing the EFAS system can communicate with the consumers distributed in areas via mobile phone app, email or other similar techniques to inform the consumers about energy usage/loads, [0087], [0091] and [0092]),
the computer (data processing system having a computer, [0091] and [0087]) is configured to:
determine the priority order based on customer information including a
plan (pre-arranged agreement, [0089]) contracted by the power consumer (the data processing system can determine the priority order of the loads/consumer based on the pre-arranged agreement between the energy supplier and the loads/consumers related to maximum energy limit and consumer paid energy price, [0092], [0088] and [0089]), and
notify the power system operating system of the priority order (data processing system identifying associating priority with consumer loads based on paid energy price, [0092], [0094] and [0097], see also [0096]),
the power system operating system includes a database (relational database, [0097]), and is configured to store the priority order received from the computer in the database (“…The data processing system may store relationship between the priorities and the consumer loads in the relational database (e.g., store the priorities and their respective consumer loads in the same rows within the relational database). Accordingly, the data processing system may establish a priority order that indicates which consumer load to prioritize when allocating energy to the different consumer loads...”, [0097]), and
the computer is further configured to set a higher power selling price to the power consumer as the priority order of the power distribution area including the power consumer is higher (consumer willing to pay higher energy price than other consumers is set as the highest priority consumer among consumers in the system. The data processing system determines the priority of consumers based on the paid energy price to determine energy allocation, [0084],[0096] and see also [0082] and [0088]).
Buttgenbach et al., JP18 and Fiddigatti et al. are analogous art because they are from the same field on endeavor that is performing energy control in power transmission lines based on various factors.
Therefore it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the power distribution system distributing power among plurality of power consumers in plurality of areas while considering change in frequency and frequency change rate of the power distribution and consumer/load priority as taught by combination of JP18 and Fiddigatti et al. by applying the known concept of determining customer (consumer) priority based on a plan contracted by the power consumer, and based on the priority, set higher selling price to higher priority consumer as taught by Buttgenbach et al. as an improvement to power distribution system to yield predictable results of effectively distributing energy to the higher priority consumers first and then allocating energy for the remaining lower-priority consumers as taught by Buttgenbach et al. in [0085].
Buttgenbach et al. teach:
[0092] At operation 502, the data processing system determines priorities for one or more consumer loads. The data processing system may determine the priorities for the one or more consumer loads based on prioritization criteria that the data processing system has stored in memory. The prioritization criteria may include one or more rules that indicate how to prioritize different consumer loads based on different types of data. In one example, the prioritization criteria may include a rule that indicates for the data processing system to prioritize consumer loads based on the historical energy utilization of the different loads (e.g., the data processing system may determine that consumer loads that historically utilize more energy have higher priorities consumer loads than consumer loads that historically utilize less energy). In this example, the data processing system may maintain a list of historical energy utilization (which the data processing system may receive from meters at the respective loads) for each consumer load in memory and compare the historical energy utilization for each consumer load with each other. The data processing system may determine the priorities for the
consumer loads to have an ascending or descending order based on the historical energy utilization between the consumer loads. In another example, the prioritization criteria may include a rule that indicates for the data processing system to assign priorities based on a value (e.g., a paid energy price) of the respective consumer loads. The data processing system may store the values and associations between the values and identifications of the different consumer loads and determine the priorities for the consumer loads to have an ascending or descending order by comparing the values
for the consumer loads and determining the priorities accordingly.
[0084] The EFAS can be configured to allocate, for each of the plurality of time periods, a maximum energy limit available to each of the one or more consumer loads. The maximum energy limit may be a maximum energy limit that can be drawn by the one or more consumer loads over an entire forecast period. The EFAS may ensure, using the forecast of the amount of electrical energy available from the RES and the ESS for a forecast period, that the maximum energy drawn by the one or more consumer
loads does not lower the state of charge of the ESS below its minimum charge limit. The energy allocations can be determined such that an equal amount of energy is allocated to each of the one or more consumer loads. Alternatively, the energy allocations can be determined based on a priority system. The priority system may comprise a list of higher priority consumer loads and lower priority consumer loads. The priority system may be based on pricing tiers, determinations of need, household/building size, type of home/building, geographic location of the home/building, demographic information, or other similar systems. For example, some consumers may pay a higher price for
energy than others, and the system may allocate a higher maximum energy limit to higher paying customers than lower paying customers2.….
[0089] In some embodiments, a consumer load's energy allocation may be determined by an advance agreement3 between a user of the consumer load and the renewable micro utility. Based on the forecast of energy consumption of the consumer load, if the EFAS determines that the energy allocation of the consumer load can be increased without an adverse impact on the energy availability to other consumer loads on the renewable micro utility, the EFAS can communicate with the user of the consumer load offering to increase the energy allocation to the consumer load. The increased energy allocation can come with an additional payment from the user of the consumer load.
[0096] The prioritization criteria may include any number of rules. For example, the prioritization criteria may include a rule in which energy users may pay a fixed fee to be assigned a higher priority rating for a period of time4 (regardless of how much energy they use).
For claim 5, combination of JP18, Fiddigatti et al. and Buttgenbach et al. teach the power transaction system of claim 1. In addition JP18 teaches, wherein, in a case where power supply between the feeder and the power distribution area is cut off by the switchgear unit (circuit breakers are sequentially tripped based on corresponding power transmission frequency and allowable response time for each load, [0013], [0017] and [0034]). In addition Fiddigatti et al. teaches, the power distribution area for which the power supply from the substation is cut off
forms an off-grid (when faults are detected on the main grid, the microgrid (substation)
powering the loads is disconnected from the main grid and operates in islanded mode-off grid, [0004] and [0006]).
For claim 8, combination of JP18, Fiddigatti et al. and Buttgenbach et al. teach the power transaction system of claim 1. In addition Buttgenbach et al. teaches, wherein the computer is configured to set a higher power purchase price from the power consumer as the priority order of the power distribution area including the power consumer is higher (consumer willing to pay higher energy price than other consumers is set as the highest priority consumer among consumers in the system. The data processing system determines the priority of consumers based on the paid energy price to determine energy allocation, [0084],[0096] and see also [0082] and [0088]. Also the if the higher priority user has energy left after usage, can sell the excess energy to the energy supplier or to another consumer within the system as taught in [0090]).
For claim 10, combination of JP18, Fiddigatti et al. and Buttgenbach et al. teach the power transaction system of claim 1. In addition Buttgenbach et al. teaches, wherein the priority order of the power distribution area is set to be higher as an
average value of power purchase prices by power consumers included in the power distribution area is higher (consumer willing to pay higher energy price is assigned higher priority. Therefore the area of the higher priority consumer will also be assigned higher priority area, [0084], [0078] and [0092]).
For claim 14, combination of JP18, Fiddigatti et al. and Buttgenbach et al. teach the power distribution system of claim 1. In addition JP18 teaches, wherein the switchgear unit is configured to change a set value of an operation condition when a failure occurs in communication5 (drop in frequency) with the power system operating system (the change determination unit determines whether to change the cut off condition such as frequency lower limit value or response time (value of operation condition) for each circuit breaker based on the drop in frequency of the power transmission. When determined to change, the change determination unit changes the lower limit value for the circuit breaker, [0042], [0043], [0046], see also [0026]-[0028]).
For claim 30, combination of JP18, Fiddigatti et al. and Buttgenbach et al. teach the power transaction system of claim 1. In addition Buttgenbach et al. teaches, wherein the computer is further configured to determine a priority order of the switchgear unit based on the plan contracted by the power consumer (In view of [0110] of Fiddigatti et al., each load has corresponding circuit breakers which are interpreted as switchgears in view of [0078] of Buttgenbach et al..Based on determined priority of the consumers which is determined based on the paid energy price as agreed on the pre-arranged agreement, someone of ordinary skill in the art can use the known technique of determining priority of consumer for determining priority of switchgear units associated with consumers (similar devices)6 for disconnection such that high priority consumer corresponding switchgear unit is disconnected last, [0088], [0092] and [0078]7).
Claim(s) 12 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP18 (JP2020089218A) in view of Fiddigatti et al. (US 20180159327 A1) and Buttgenbach et al. (US 20230275430 A1) and Khajehoddin et al. (US 20190109461 A1).
Regarding claim 12, combination JP18, Fiddigatti et al. and Buttgenbach et al. teach the power transaction system of claim 5. In addition Fiddigatti et al. teaches, wherein a power generation system or a power storage system included in the power distribution area (portions of the microgrid serving various loads in power distribution area have generators (power generation system) and energy storage units (power storage system) serving the loads, [0043]-[0045]), when the power distribution area forms the off-grid (during grid fault, the microgrid serving the power distribution area with loads disconnects from the main grid and operates in islanded mode that is forms an off-grid, [0006]).
Neither in combination nor individually JP18 and Fiddigatti et al. teach the details
of to switch a control algorithm applied to an inverter that controls power generation or
power storage from a grid following inverter to a grid forming inverter. However Fiddigatti et al. explicitly teaches in [0043] and [0045] that microgrid serving the loads
has energy storage units which serves the loads when needed. Also Buttgenbach et al. teaches to use inverter to delivering power but does not teach the specifics about the control algorithm for controlling power generation.
Khajehoddin et al. teaches, to switch a control algorithm applied to an
inverter that controls power generation or power storage from a grid following
inverter to a grid forming inverter (virtual synchronous inverter controlled by software
(the software has control algorithm in it) operates in two modes, SA mode and GC
mode. In SA mode, the inverter is disconnected from the grid and supply power to the
local loads by being connected to local power generation and storage systems and in SC mode, the inverter injects power to the grid from the PV source thus forming grid
following inverter to grid forming inverter, [0056], [0093] and [0095]).
JP18, Fiddigatti et al., Buttgenbach et al. and Khajehoddin et al. are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor that is performing energy control in power transmission lines based on various factors.
Therefore it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the
claimed invention to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the power distribution
system including power generation system or power storage system having inverter as taught by combination of JP18, Fiddigatti et al. and Buttgenbach et al. by applying the known technique of controlling the inverter by switching algorithm which controls power generation or power storage from a grid following inverter to a grid forming inverter as taught by Khajehoddin et al. as an improvement to power distribution to yield predictable results for controlling power flow while providing seamless transition between the operation modes based on grid transient conditions as taught by Khajehoddin et al. in [0049].
Regarding claim 13, combination JP18, Fiddigatti et al. and Buttgenbach et al. teach the power transaction system of claim 5. In addition Fiddigatti et al. teaches, wherein a power generation system or a power storage system included in the power distribution area (portions of the microgrid serving various loads in power distribution area have generators (power generation system) and energy storage units (power storage system) serving the loads, [0043]-[0045]), when the power distribution area forms the off-grid (during grid fault, the microgrid serving the power distribution area with loads disconnects from the main grid and operates in islanded mode that is forms an off-grid, [0006]).
Neither in combination nor individually JP18 and Fiddigatti et al. teach the details of shift a control algorithm applied to an inverter that controls power generation or power storage from a state in which a virtual synchronous generator does not function to a state in which the virtual synchronous generator functions.
Khajehoddin et al. teaches, to shift a control algorithm applied to an
inverter that controls power generation or power storage from a state in which a
virtual synchronous generator does not function to a state in which the
virtual synchronous generator functions (control device implementing a model (control algorithm) of virtual synchronous generator model on an inverter operates during grid transients in grid connected mode (GC mode) and in standalone mode (SA mode). In GC mode, the inverter acting as the synchronous generator injects power to the grid and in SA mode, inverter in off grid or disconnected from the grid provides power to the loads, but does not provide power to the grid (state in which does not function), [0022], [0056], [0093] and [0095]).
Therefore it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the
claimed invention to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the power distribution
system including power generation system or power storage system as taught by
combination of JP18, Fiddigatti et al. and Buttgenbach et al. by applying the known technique of having an inverter controlled by switching algorithm controls power generation or power storage acting as a virtual synchronous generator as taught by Khajehoddin et al. as an improvement to power distribution to yield predictable results for controlling power flow while providing seamless transition between the operation modes based on grid transient conditions as taught by Khajehoddin et al. in [0049].
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Wolter (US 20160241036 A1) teaches an energy system and method having plurality of switchgear units associated with loads and are disconnected based on priority assigned to each switchgear units as taught in [0037] and [0073]-[0075].
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 ANZUMAN SHARMIN whose telephone number is (571)272-7365. The examiner can normally be reached M and Th 7:00am - 3:00pm and Tue 8:00am-12:00pm.
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, KAMINI SHAH can be reached at (571)272-2279. 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.
/ANZUMAN SHARMIN/Examiner, Art Unit 2115
/KAMINI S SHAH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2115
1 The plurality of loads could either be in same area or in different areas. Different areas are an obvious
variation of same area. It will be obvious to someone of ordinary skilled in the art to choose from a finite
number of identified, predictable solutions that is either in same area or different areas with a reasonable
expectation of success to distribute power among the loads distributed in different areas, MPEP.2143.I.(E).
2 Higher paying consumer is of higher priority than other consumers in the system.
3 Contract plan by the power consumer.
4 Another example of determining higher priority of consumer based on paid energy price.
5 The claim does not specify the type of failure in communication with the power system. It is unclear whether the failure is due to lack of communication with the power system or detecting a failure based on communication with the power system. Therefore a drop in frequency in the power system is considered as the failure in communication with the power system.
6 MPEP.2143.I.(C).
7 The system delivers power to the consumers using switchgear units.
Prosecution Insights