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. Priority Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statements (IDS) were submitted on 12/13/2023 , 09/12/2024 , 03/18/2025 , and 07/09/2025 . The submissions are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner. When applicable, the examiner considered the US equivalents of the foreign publications cited on the IDS. IDS citation US equivalent Pub. Date Inventor KR 10-2011-0084751 A US 2011/0175451 A1 07/21/2011 Moon KR 10-2013-0066100 A US 2013/0169046 A1 07/04/2013 Shin et al. KR 10-2016-0080908 A US 2016/0190864 A1 06/30/2016 Yeon et al. KR 10-1795301 B1 US 2019/0181644 A1 06/13/2019 Chae et al. KR 10-2228132 B1 US 2022/0140365 A1 05/05/2022 Mun et al. Drawings The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the following FILLIN "Enter features that must be shown" \* MERGEFORMAT must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered. “ low -speed charging interval” (claims 2, 18) “high-speed or ultra-fast charging interval” (claim 2) “high-speed charging interval” (claims 9, 18) “ predetermined time” (claim 7) “ first step” (claim s 9, 17, 22) “ second step” (claims 9, 17, 21) “ third step” (claim 15) “ input unit” (claim 16) “ output unit” (claim 16) “ control unit” (claim 16) “ conventional energy storage system (ESS) having a lithium battery” (claim 20) Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) and/or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance. Claim Interpretation The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f): (f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof. The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph: An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof. The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked. As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph: (A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function; (B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and (C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function. Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. The following terms are interpreted with their broadest reasonable interpretations. The Specification does not define sufficient structure for these claim limitations. Claim 16 : “input unit” Claim 16 : “output unit” Claim 16 : “control unit” Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 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. Claim s 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph, because the claim purports to invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, but fails to recite a combination of elements as required by that statutory provision and thus cannot rely on the specification to provide the structure, material or acts to support the claimed function. As such, the claim recites a function that has no limits and covers every conceivable means for achieving the stated function, while the specification discloses at most only those means known to the inventor. Accordingly, the disclosure is not commensurate with the scope of the claim. Claim 16 : “input unit” Claim 16 : “output unit” Claim 16 : “control unit” Claims 17-20 are further rejected 35 U.S.C. 112(a) for their dependency on other rejected claims. 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 2-3, 5, and 7 -22 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. Claim 2 , line 4, claim 8 , line 4, claim 9 , line 4 , and claim 21 , line 4 each recite “the electric vehicle”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this term in each claim. Claim 2 , line s 3 -4, and claim 8 , lines 2-4 each recite “ the power of the power grid is primarily used in the high-speed or ultra-fast charging interval to charge the electric vehicle ”. The term “primarily” is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “primarily” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Thus, the claim language is indefinite as to how much “the power of the power grid” is used “in the high-speed or ultra-fast charging interval to charge the electric vehicle”. Thus, “primarily used” is simply interpreted as “used”. Claim 5 , lines 1-2 and claim 14 , lines 1-2 each recite “changes of charging and discharging outputs of the ESS are relatively large”. The term “relatively” is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “relatively” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Thus, the claim language is indefinite as to how large the “changes of charging and discharging outputs of the ESS” are. Claim 5 , lines 1-2 and claim 14 , lines 1-2 each recite “ since changes of charging and discharging outputs of the ESS are relatively large according to a state of the power grid, a battery having a range coverage from a low output to a high output is applied to the ESS to discharge or charge the ESS ”. The language “since … according to a state of the power grid” appears to be a reason /motivation , rather than a structural or method limitation, the language “since … according to a state of the power grid” is not interpreted to be limiting . Claim 7 , line 2 recites “the charging process”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this term. Claim 9 inconsistently uses the terms “power” and “energy” in such a way that the language is indefinite as to which parameter is intended. Claim 9, lines 5-6 recite “a power which is in a range of exceeding the maximum electric energy”. This language leads the examiner to interpret that “power” and “energy” are intended to be interchangeable terms. Thus, the examiner interprets that either term can be intended to mean either “power” or “energy”. Claim 10 , lines 3-4 recite “in the second step … the charging and the discharging of the ESS”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for “the discharging of the ESS” during the “second step”. Claim 9 only says the second step includes “charging the ESS”. Claim 10 , line 2 and claim 18 , line 2 each recites “the electric vehicle is charged by primarily using the power of the power grid”. The term “primarily” is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “primarily” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Thus, the claim language is indefinite as to how much of the charging is performed with power from the power grid. Thus, “primarily using” is simply interpreted as “using”. Claim 12 recites “performed to minimize changes”. The term “minimize” is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “minimize” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Thus, the claim language is indefinite as to how much change of the SoC is claimed. Claim 13 recites “charging up to a level”. This language is unclear whether the “level” is a charge level for the electric vehicle or the ESS. Claim 13 recites “minimizing the change”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for the term “the change”. Claim 15 , lines 1-2 recite “the second step further comprises charging the electric vehicle only with the power grid”. This language is indefinite as to whether the electric vehicle is the only recipient of charging or if, as interpreted for examination, the charging power is only being supplied by the power grid, rather than by the ESS. The c laim 16 limitations “input unit”, “output unit”, and “control unit” invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. The specification is devoid of structure to perform the claimed functions. The specification ¶ [24] states each of these means “are, for example programs stored in the control device 20”, which is insufficient structure for each of these “means”. Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph. Applicant may: (a) Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph; (b) Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what structure, material, or acts perform the entire claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or (c) Amend the written description of the specification such that it clearly links the structure, material, or acts disclosed therein to the function recited in the claim, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)). If applicant is of the opinion that the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts and clearly links them to the function so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either: (a) Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or (b) Stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181. Claim 16 , line 10 recites “ maintained to be similar to each other ”. The term “similar” is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “similar” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Thus, the claim language is indefinite as to how closely the SoC of the secondary battery is at the start and end of the electric vehicle charging. Thus, “similar” is interpreted with the broadest reasonable interpretation. Claim 16 , line 14 and claim 21 , lines 9-10 each recite “the electric vehicle charging procedure”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this term in each claim. Claim 17 , lines 4-5 recite “ charging the electric vehicle in the charger connected to the ESS including the secondary battery, and the power grid”. This language is unclear as to what is intended to be modified by “and the power grid”. One may interpret the language intends to require that the ESS is including the power grid. For examination purposes, it is interpreted that the charger is connected to the power grid. This language is further unclear as to how the electric vehicle is “in the charger”. For examination purposes, it is interpreted that the electric vehicle is merely connected to, rather than “in”, the charger. Claim 19 , line 19 recites “a secondary battery”. However, “at least one secondary battery” was introduced prior in claim 16, line 2. Thus, claim 19 is indefinite as to the plurality of the secondary battery/batteries. and as to whether a new secondary battery is intended to be introduced. Further, claim 19 is unclear as to what is being limited by the language “the input unit, the output unit, and the control unit are provided to implement the ESS”, because this structure appears to be already claimed by claim 16. To remedy these issues of claim 19, the language may be revised to: “ wherein the ESS has a capacity smaller than a capacity of a conventional energy storage system (ESS) having a lithium battery.” Claim 20 , lines 1-2 recites “changes of charging and discharging outputs of the secondary battery are relatively large”. The term “relatively” is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “relatively” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Thus, the claim language is indefinite as to how large the “changes of charging and discharging outputs of the secondary battery ” are. Claim 20 , lines 1-2 recites “ since changes of charging and discharging outputs of the secondary battery are relatively large according to a state of the power grid, a battery having a range coverage from a low output to a high output is applied to the ESS to discharge or charge the secondary battery”. The language “since … according to a state of the power grid” appears to be a reason/motivation, rather than a structural or method limitation, the language “since … according to a state of the power grid” is not interpreted to be limiting. Claim 20 , line 2 recites “the secondary battery”. However, “at least one secondary battery” was introduced prior in claim 16, line 2. Thus, claim 20 is indefinite as to the plurality of the secondary battery/batteries. For examination purposes, it is interpreted that claim 20 intends to refer to “the at least one secondary battery”. Claims 3, 11, 15, and 22 are further rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) for their dependency on other rejected claims. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA) 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. The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action: A person shall be entitled to a patent unless – (a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. (a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claims 1 , 5- 6, and 1 6 are rejected under 35 U.S. C. 102(a)(1)/102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Smolenaers (US 2022/0402390 A1; hereinafter “ Smol ”). Regardin g Claim 1 , Smol discloses a method for electric vehicle charging (operational method for “multimodal converter for use in electric vehicle charging stations”, per Abstract) , the method comprising the following. Smol further discloses receiving power from at least one of a power grid (¶ [70]: “AC electrical source represented as electrical grid 105”; Figs. 1-2) and an energy storage system (ESS) (¶ [70]: “DC source or sink represented as energy storage system (ESS) 104”; Figs. 1-2) and performing an electric vehicle charging procedure (any operation of “ 5 00” in which “electric vehicle (EV) 200” is connected to “DC interface 101”; Figs. 1-2) through a charger ( “charging station 500”, including “multimodal converter 100”; Figs. 1-2). Smol further discloses performing the electric vehicle charging procedure ( any operation of “ 5 00” in which “EV 200” is connected) through the charger ( 500, 1 00) using the power received from at least one (¶ [5]: “charge the electric vehicle by deriving energy from both the AC grid and DC storage simultaneously”) among the power grid (105; ¶ [16]: “charging station draws energy from the AC grid”; ¶ [35]: “in the first state the controller uses the multimodal converter to draw current from the AC source or sink”) and the ESS (104; ¶ [16]: “the stations draws energy from the DC energy source and supplies it to an electric vehicle coupled to the charging station”). Smol further discloses enabling charging (¶ [27]: “selectively act to charge a source connected to the further DC interface from the source connected to the AC interface ”) of the ESS (104) from the power grid (105) during the electric vehicle charging procedure (any operation of “ 5 00” in which “EV 200” is connected). Smol further discloses allowing switching (¶ [30]: “the same converter can be used to either supply or draw current to or from an electric vehicle, and/or the further DC source by selective use of the switching mechanism”) from discharging to charging (¶ [27]: “selectively act to charge a source connected to the further DC interface from the source connected to the AC interface, or to charge an electric vehicle at the electric vehicle interface from the AC interface, or the electric vehicle from the further DC interface, or the electric vehicle from the AC interface and the further DC interface simultaneously”) of the ESS (104) during the electric vehicle charging procedure (any operation of “ 5 00” in which “EV 200” is connected). . Regarding Claim 5 , Smol discloses the method according to claim 1. Smol further discloses that since changes of charging and discharging outputs of the ESS (104) are relatively large (“104” varies its input/output power based on the incoming power from power grid “5”) according to a state of the power grid (105), a battery (14) having a range coverage from a low output to a high output (output power from “104” ranges from zero up to an output power level used to charge the vehicle connected to “101”) is applied to the ESS (14) to discharge (“104” discharges to supply power to vehicle connected to “101”) or charge (“104” receives charge from “105”) the ESS (14). Regarding Claim 6 , Smol discloses the method according to claim 1. Smol further discloses both the charging and discharging (¶ [27]: “selectively act to charge a source connected to the further DC interface from the source connected to the AC interface, or to charge an electric vehicle at the electric vehicle interface from the AC interface, or the electric vehicle from the further DC interface, or the electric vehicle from the AC interface and the further DC interface simultaneously”; ¶ [30]: “the same converter can be used to either supply or draw current to or from an electric vehicle, and/or the further DC source by selective use of the switching mechanism”) of the ESS (104) are performed during the electric vehicle charging procedure (any operation of “ 5 00” in which “EV 200” is connected). Regarding Claim 16 , Smol discloses a system (Figs. 1-2) for electric vehicle charging (Abstract: “multimodal converter for use in electric vehicle charging stations”) , the system comprising the following features. Smol further discloses at least one secondary battery (¶ [70]: “DC source or sink represented as energy storage system (ESS) 104”; Figs. 1-2; ¶ [73]: “104 is a pack of batteries”) capable of charging and discharging (¶ [30]: “the same converter can be used to either supply or draw current to or from … the further DC source). Smol further discloses an input unit (combo of “AC interface 103”, “switching mechanism 170”, and “transformer 106”, each part of “100”; Figs. 1-2) receiving power from a power grid (105; ¶ [76]: “AC coupler 103 for connecting with AC energy source 105”) in order to charge the secondary battery (105). Smol further discloses an output unit (“switching mechanism 120”; Fig. 2) providing the power to a charger (“charging station 500”, including “multimodal converter 100”; Figs. 1-2) for charging an electric vehicle (“electric vehicle (EV) 200”; Fig. 1) by discharging (closing the switches of “120” allows power to flow from “104” to “110” and then to “200”; Figs. 1-2) the secondary battery (104). Smol further discloses a control unit (“controller 300”; Fig. 1) operatively connected (“300” is operatively connected to full system through “100”; further, per ¶ [70], “300 is also able to communicate with any of the sources or sinks to provide or receive instructions, commands, feedback, or information”) to the secondary battery (104) , the input unit (103, 170, & 106) , and the output unit (120). Smol further discloses controlling a state of charge (SoC) of the secondary battery (104) when the electric vehicle charging starts (in range from “the minimum voltage of ESS 104 (e.g. 0% state of charge voltage)” to “the maximum DC voltage of ESS (e.g. 100% state of charge voltage)” per ¶ [98]; this range is valid at the start, end, and throughout all operation of charging the “EV 200” and any other operation of the system) and a state of charge (SoC) of the secondary battery (104) when the electric vehicle charging ends (also in range 0-100% state of charge voltage per ¶ [98]) to be maintained to be similar to each other (both starting SoC and ending SoC are similar by being in the range of 0-100%). Smol further discloses a charging procedure (any operation of “500” in which “EV 200” is connected) is performed through the charger (500) by receiving the power of at least one (¶ [5]: “charge the electric vehicle by deriving energy from both the AC grid and DC storage simultaneously”) of the power grid (105 ; ¶ [16]: “charging station draws energy from the AC grid”; ¶ [35]: “in the first state the controller uses the multimodal converter to draw current from the AC source or sink” ) and an energy storage system (ESS) ( ¶ [70]: “DC source or sink represented as energy storage system (ESS) 104”; Figs. 1-2 ; ¶ [16]: “the stations draws energy from the DC energy source and supplies it to an electric vehicle coupled to the charging station” ). Smol further discloses charging (¶ [27]: “selectively act to charge a source connected to the further DC interface from the source connected to the AC interface”) of the ESS (104) from the power grid (105). Smol further discloses switching (¶ [30]: “the same converter can be used to either supply or draw current to or from an electric vehicle, and/or the further DC source by selective use of the switching mechanism”) from discharging to charging (¶ [27]: “selectively act to charge a source connected to the further DC interface from the source connected to the AC interface, or to charge an electric vehicle at the electric vehicle interface from the AC interface, or the electric vehicle from the further DC interface, or the electric vehicle from the AC interface and the further DC interface simultaneously”) of the ESS (104) is enabled via control of the control unit (300) during the electric vehicle charging procedure (any operation of “500” in which “EV 200” is connected). Claims 1 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Heo (US 2023/0391219 A1). Regarding Claim 1 , Heo discloses a method for electric vehicle charging (¶ [9]: “method of managing power of an electric vehicle charging station by using an energy storage system (ESS) in a power management device”) , the method comprising the following. Heo further discloses receiving power from at least one of a power grid (“distribution network”; Fig. 1; also referred to as “grid network”) and an energy storage system (ESS) (“ESS 200” Fig. 1; ¶ [38]: “ESS 200 … may discharge the charged power to be supplied to the plurality of high-speed chargers 300”; the chargers “310” and “320” receive power from “200”, which receives power from the “distribution network”). Heo further discloses performing an electric vehicle charging procedure (Fig. 3, which includes “high-speed charge service”; ¶ [10, 62-78]) through a charger (“first high-speed charger 310”; Fig. 1). Heo further discloses performing the electric vehicle charging procedure (Fig. 3) through the charger (310) using the power received from at least one (“310” uses power from “200”, which receives power from the “distribution network”; thus, “310” uses power from each of the power grid and the ESS) among the power grid (“distribution network”) and the ESS (200). Heo further discloses enabling charging (¶ [73]: “400 may set the ESS 200 to be in the charge mode even if the high-speed charging through the high-speed charger in operation is not completed”) of the ESS (200) from the power grid (“distribution network”) during the electric vehicle charging procedure (Fig. 3). Heo further discloses allowing switching from discharging (per ¶ [67], “200” is in the “discharge mode” while a “high-speed charger” is in operation) to charging (per ¶ [73], “200” is switched into the “charge mode” if the “ESS charging amount” falls below the “second set value” during the execution of Fig. 3) of the ESS (200) during the electric vehicle charging procedure (Fig. 3). Regarding Claim 6 , Heo discloses the method according to claim 1. Heo further discloses both the charging (per ¶ [73], “200” is switched into the “charge mode” if the “ESS charging amount” falls below the “second set value” during the execution of Fig. 3) and discharging (per ¶ [67], “200” is in the “discharge mode” while a “high-speed charger” is in operation) of the ESS (200) are performed during the electric vehicle charging procedure (Fig. 3). Claims 9 -1 2, 14, and 21-22 are rejected under 35 U .S.C. 102(a)(1)/102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Hau et al. (US 2020/0189404 A1 ; hereinafter “Hau” ). Regarding Claim 9 , Hau discloses a method for electric vehicle charging (¶ [2]: “electric charging system and method … for a vehicle”). Hau further discloses the method is executed in an electric vehicle charging system (“charging station 10”; Figs. 6 A -6C) in which a power grid (“grid 5”; Figs. 6 A -6C) connected to an energy storage system (ESS) (“battery 13”; Figs. 6B-6C) has a maximum electric energy (¶ [44]: “peak power P peak from the grid”; Figs. 6B-6C). Hau further discloses a charger (combo of “converter 14”, “transformer 15”, & “connector 12”) connected to the ESS (13) and the power grid (5) has a requested electric energy requested (“ P ferry ”; Figs. 6 A -6C; power inherently includes energy) for charging the electric vehicle (“ferry 1 ” ; Figs. 6A-6C ). Hau further discloses the method comprising a first step (scenario of Fig. 6B wherein “13” provides “ P boost ” to “1”) of charging the electric vehicle (1) by discharging the ESS (“13” discharged by “ P boost ”) for a power (“ P ferry ” is the sum of “ P peak ” from grid and “ P boost ” from ESS; ¶ [44]: “peak power P peak from the grid, together with boost power P boost from the energy storage system may be provided from the charging station 10 to the ferry 1”) which is in a range of exceeding ( P ferry = P peak + P boost ; thus, P ferry > P peak ) the maximum electric energy ( P peak ) when the requested electric energy ( P ferry ) is equal to or larger than the maximum electric energy ( P peak ). Hau further discloses the method comprising a second step (scenario of Fig. 6B wherein “13” receives “P L ” from “5”) of charging the ESS (13) with power (“load power P L ”; Fig. 6B) in a range below the maximum electric energy ( P peak ) when the requested electric energy ( P ferry = 0 when “there is no direct connection to charge the vessel”, per ¶ [44]) is smaller than the maximum electric energy ( P peak ). Regarding Claim 10 , Hau discloses the method according to claim 9. Hau further discloses that in the first step as a high-speed charging interval (scenario of Fig. 6B wherein “13” provides “ P boost ” to “1”; ¶ [47]: “high current charging is possible, so the batteries 4 on the vessel may be charged relatively quickly compared to what would be possible with that AC power grid 5 alone”) , the electric vehicle (1) is charged by primarily using the power of the power grid (“ P peak ” from “5”) , and the ESS (“ P boost ” from “13”) assists the power grid (5). Hau further discloses that in the second step as a low-speed charging interval (scenario of Fig. 6B wherein “13” receives “P L ” from “5”; ¶ [47]: “13, which are charged more slowly from the AC power grid the vessel would require) , the charging and the discharging of the ESS (“13”, charged with “P L ” from grid “5”) are performed according to a state (“P L ” comes from grid “5”; thus, the ESS “13” is charged/discharged according to a state of “5”) of the power grid (5). Regarding Claim 11 , Hau discloses the method according to claim 10. Hau further discloses comparing (“ P peak ” and “ P ferry ” are compared to determine whether to supplement grid power “ P grid ” with ESS power “ P boost ”, per ¶ [44]) the maximum electric energy (“ P peak ” from “5”) and the requested electric energy (“ P ferry ” delivered to “1”) in order to determine the state (determines whether the available power “ P grid ” from “5” exceeds the requested “ P ferry ”) of the power grid (5). Regarding Claim 12 , Hau discloses the method according to claim 9. Hau further discloses the first step (scenario of Fig. 6B wherein “13” provides “ P boost ” to “1”; ¶ [47]: “high current charging is possible, so the batteries 4 on the vessel may be charged relatively quickly compared to what would be possible with that AC power grid 5 alone”) and the second step (scenario of Fig. 6B wherein “13” receives “P L ” from “5”; ¶ [47]: “13, which are charged more slowly from the AC power grid the vessel would require) are performed to minimize changes (SoC changes of “13” are minimized by using max power “ P peak ” from grid 5” to minimize “ P boost ” and by recharging “13” with “P L ” when possible) of a state of charge (SoC) of the ESS when the electric vehicle charging starts (connection of “1” to “connector 12”; Figs. 6A-6C) and a state of charge (SoC) of the ESS when electric vehicle charging ends (disconnection of “1” from “12”). Regarding Claim 14 , Hau discloses the method according to claim 9. Hau further discloses that since changes of charging and discharging outputs (“P L ” and “ P boost ”, each dependent on “ P grid ”; Fig. 6B) of the ESS (13) are relatively large according to a state (“ P grid ” and/or “ P peak ” from “5”) of the power grid (5) , a battery (13) , that is part of the ESS (13) , capable of discharging power from a low output to a high output (output from “13” ranges from zero up to “ P boost ”) is used to perform the first step (scenario of Fig. 6B wherein “13” provides “ P boost ” to “1”; ¶ [47]: “high current charging is possible, so the batteries 4 on the vessel may be charged relatively quickly compared to what would be possible with that AC power grid 5 alone”) and the second step (scenario of Fig. 6B wherein “13” receives “P L ” from “5”; ¶ [47]: “13, which are charged more slowly from the AC power grid the vessel would require) . Regarding Claim 21 , Hau discloses a method for electric vehicle charging (¶ [2]: “electric charging system and method … for a vehicle”) for an electric vehicle charging system (“charging station 10”; Figs. 6A-6C). Hau further discloses a power grid (“grid 5”; Figs. 6A-6C) connected to an energy storage system (ESS) (“battery 13”; Figs. 6B-6C) has a maximum electric energy (¶ [44]: “peak power P peak from the grid”; Figs. 6B-6C). Hau further discloses a charger (combo of “converter 14”, “transformer 15”, & “connector 12”) connected to the ESS (13) and the power grid (5) has a requested electric energy requested (“ P ferry ”; Figs. 6 A -6C; power inherently includes energy) for charging the electric vehicle (“ferry 1 ” ; Figs. 6A-6C ). Hau further discloses the method comprising a second step (scenario of Fig. 6B wherein “13” receives “P L ” from “5”) of charging the ESS (13) with power (“load power P L ”; Fig. 6B) in a range below the maximum electric energy ( P peak ) when the requested electric energy ( P ferry = 0 when “there is no direct connection to charge the vessel”, per ¶ [44]) is smaller than the maximum electric energy ( P peak ). Hau further discloses a charging procedure (any operation of “ charging station 10 ” ) is performed through the charger (14, 15, & 12) by receiving the power of at least one (“ P grid ” from “5”; “ P boost ” from “13”) of the power grid (5) and the ESS (13). Hau further discloses charging of the ESS (13) from the power grid (5) or switching from discharging (when outputting “ P boost ” from “13”) to charging (when “P L ” is being received by “13” from “5”) of the ESS (13) is enabled during the electric vehicle charging procedure (any operation of “charging station 10”). Regarding Claim 22 , Hau discloses the method according to claim 21. Hau further discloses the method further comprising a first step (scenario of Fig. 6B wherein “13” provides “ P boost ” to “1”) of ch arging the electric vehicle (1) by discharging the ESS (“13” discharged by “ P boost ”) for a power (“ P ferry ” is the sum of “ P peak ” from grid and “ P boost ” from ESS; ¶ [44]: “peak power P peak from the grid, together with boost power P boost from the energy storage system may be provided from the charging station 10 to the ferry 1”) which is in a range of exceeding ( P ferry = P peak + P boost ; thus, P ferry > P peak ) the maximum electric energy ( P peak ) when the requested electric energy ( P ferry ) is equal to or larger than the maximum electric energy ( P peak ). 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 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Smolenaers (US 2022/0402390 A1; hereinafter “ Smol ”) in view of Haugan et al. (US 2020/0189404 A1; hereinafter “Hau”). Regarding Claim 2 , Smol discloses the method according to claim 1. Smol further discloses the electric vehicle charging procedure (any operation of “500” in which “EV 200” is connected) includes a high-speed or ultra-fast charging interval (¶ [5]: “fast charge the vehicle at a higher power rate”). Smol further discloses the power of the power grid (105) is primarily used in the high-speed or ultra-fast charging interval to charge (¶ [5]: “charge the electric vehicle by deriving energy from both the AC grid and DC storage simultaneously”) the electric vehicle (200) , and the power grid (105) is assisted by performing the discharge of the ESS (104). Smol does not disclose “the electric vehicle charging procedure enters a low-speed charging interval after a high-speed or ultra-fast charging interval first starts,”. Smol further does not disclose “the charging of the ESS is performed according to a state of the power grid in the low-speed charging interval.” Hau teaches the electric vehicle charging procedure (any operation of “charging station 10”, used to charge “ferry 1”; Figs. 6A-6C; ¶ [2]: “electric charging system and method … for a vehicle”) enters a low-speed charging interval (scenario of Fig. 6B wherein “13” provides “ P boost ” to “1”; ¶ [47]: “high current charging is possible, so the batteries 4 on the vessel may be charged relatively quickly compared to what would be possible with that AC power grid 5 alone”) after a high-speed or ultra-fast charging interval (scenario of Fig. 6B wherein “13” provides “ P boost ” to “1”; ¶ [47]: “high current charging is possible, so the batteries 4 on the vessel may be charged relatively quickly compared to what would be possible with that AC power grid 5 alone”) first starts (the low-speed charging interval occurs anytime after “1” disconnects from “connector 12”, per ¶ [44]). Hau further teaches the power ( P grid ) of the power grid (“grid 5”; Figs. 6A-6C) is primarily used in the high-speed or ultra-fast charging interval (scenario of Fig. 6B wherein “13” provides “ P boost ” to “1”) to charge the electric vehicle (“ferry 1”; Figs. 6A-6C) , and the power grid (5) is assisted (“ P ferry ” is the sum of “ P peak ” from grid and “ P boost ” from ESS; ¶ [44]: “peak power P peak from the grid, together with boost power P boost from the energy storage system may be provided from the charging station 10 to the ferry 1”) by performing the discharge of the ESS (“13” discharged by “ P boost ”). Hau further teaches the charging of the ESS (“13”, charged with “P L ” from grid “5”) is performed according to a state (“P L ” comes from grid “5”; thus, the ESS “13” is charged/discharged according to a state “ P grid ” / “ P peak ” of “5”) of the power grid (5) in the low-speed charging interval (scenario of Fig. 6B wherein “13” receives “P L ” from “5”). Hau further teaches the low-speed charging interval so the ESS can be re-charged by the grid at a slower rate, so the ESS can better support the next high-speed charging interval (¶ [47]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the electric vehicle charging procedure disclosed by Smol to incorporate a low- speed charging interval after the high-speed charging interval, as taught by Hau, so the ESS can better support the next high-speed charging interval . Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Smolenaers (US 2022/0402390 A1; hereinafter “ Smol ”) in view of Haugan et al. (US 2020/0189404 A1; hereinafter “Hau”) and the IEEE article by “Rich” (L. Richard et al., Fast charging Station with Battery Storage System for EV: Optimal Integration into the Grid , 12/23/2018, 2018 IEEE Power & Energy Society General Meeting (PESGM)) . NOTE: The IEEE article by Rich is currently accessible at the following link: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8585856 Regarding Claim 3 , the combination of Smol and Hau teaches the method according to claim 2 . The combo of Smol & Hau teaches the state of the power grid (from Hau: “ P grid ” / “ P peak ”) which is the output power from the power grid. The combo of Smol & Hau teaches an extra output of the power grid (per modification from Hau: extra output “P L ” from power grid “5”) is used for charging the ESS ( Smol : “104”; Hau equivalent: “13”, which is charged by extra output “P L ”). Smol does not disclose “ the state of the power grid is related to a contract power of the power grid ”. Rich teaches (see annotated Fig. 2, included infra ) the state of the power grid is related to a contract power of the power grid (Fig. 2 shows that the charger’s output power “P EV ” is compared to the power grid’s contract power “ P grid_contr ”). Rich further teaches an extra output of the power grid (extra output “ P batt ch ” is the surplus of the power grid’s contract power “ P grid_contr ” minus the charger’s output power “P EV ”) is used for charging the ESS (Fig. 2: “available power for BESS charging”). Rich further teaches us ing the surplus contract power to charge the ESS to reduce operational costs by optimizing the use of the ESS to store surplus grid contract power. ( Section I. Introduction ). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the state of the power grid (i.e., the power grid’s output power) disclosed by the combo of Smol & Hau to be related to a contract power of the power grid, as taught by Rich , to reduce operational costs by optimizing the use of the ESS to store surplus grid contract power. Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Smolenaers (US 2022/0402390 A1; hereinafter “ Smol ”) in view of the IEEE article by “Rich” (L. Richard et al., Fast charging Station with Battery Storage System for EV: Optimal Integration into the Grid , 12/23/2018, 2018 IEEE Power & Energy Society General Meeting (PESGM)). Regarding Claim 4 , Smol discloses the method according to claim 1 . Smol does not disclose “ when an output of the charger decreases to a reference value or less, the ESS is charged with the power provided by the power grid, and wherein the reference value is related to a contract power of the power grid, and an extra output of the power grid is used for charging the ESS. ” Rich teaches (see annotated Fig. 2, included supra ) when an output of the charger (P EV ) decreases to a reference value ( P grid_contr ) or less (“yes ” response to Fig. 2 method step: “P EV < P grid_contr ” ) , the following occurs. Rich further teaches the ESS is charged (Fig. 2: “available power for BESS charging”) with the power provided by the power grid (“ P batt ch ” is part of the power from the grid). Fich further teaches an extra output of the power grid (extra output “ P batt ch ” is the surplus of the power grid’s contract power “ P grid_contr ” minus the charger’s output power “P EV ”) is used for charging the ESS (Fig. 2: “available power for BESS charging”). Rich further teaches us ing the surplus contract power to charge the ESS to reduce operational costs by optimizing the use of the ESS to store surplus grid contract power. (Section I. Introduction). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the method disclosed Smol & Hau charge the ESS with the power grid’s extra power when the charger’s output power is less than the grid’s contract power , as taught by Rich, to reduce operational costs by optimizing the use of the ESS to store surplus grid contract power. Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Smolenaers (US 2022/0402390 A1; hereinafter “ Smol ”) in view of the IEEE article by “ Bodet ” ( Bodet et al., Hierarchical Control of Combined Power Control Resources Mitigating Local Power Grid Fluctuations , 11/01/ 2013, 2013 XXIV International Conference on Information, Communication and Automation Technologies (ICAT) ). NOTE: The IEEE article by Bodet is currently accessible at the following link: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?arnumber=6684037 Regarding Claim 7 , Smol discloses the method according to claim 1 . Smol further discloses the discharging and the charging of the ESS (104) during the charging process (any operation of “charging station 500”) are performed so that a difference between a state of charge (SoC) of the ESS when the electric vehicle charging starts (in range from “the minimum voltage of ESS 104 (e.g. 0% state of charge voltage)” to “the maximum DC voltage of ESS (e.g. 100% state of charge voltage)” per ¶ [98]; this range is valid at the start, end, and throughout all operation of charging the “EV 200” and any other operation of the system) and a state of charge (SoC) of the ESS when the electric vehicle charging ends (also in range 0-100% state of charge voltage per ¶ [98]) is controlled to be within a predetermined level or less ( the difference between the starting SoC and the ending SoC are within 100% or less). Smol does not disclose the discharging and the ch