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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 01/28/2026. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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 Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 01/23/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that Theisen fails to discloses that the charging operation data include time information indicating a starting time point of the charging operation and a finishing time point of the charging operation, as recited in the amended claim 11.
Examiner respectfully disagrees, Theisen teaches that charging operation information may be communicated “at the end of a charging process, or during the charging process, or at the start of a charging process” [0069], thereby inherently disclosing charging operation data associated with the beginning and completion of the charging operation. Applicant further argues Theisen does not discloses determining charging information with regard to the total quantity of energy delivered to the vehicle based on both electricity meter side quantity of energy, asserting that meter 16 is only used to determine non vehicle consumer load.
Examiner respectfully states that Theisen teaches measuring a vehicle side quantity of energy by meter 8 and a power side quantity of energy by meter 16 [0057, 59], these quantities are associated with the same charging operation and are transmitted and used in generating charging and billing information [0065, 69-72]. The claim does not require that the delivered energy quantity be mathematically computed from both quantities in a particular manner, only that charging information be determined “based on” both quantities. Using both measurements in the charging information determination satisfies this limitation.
Applicant further argues, that Salem does not explicitly discloses determining charging information based on a mean value of the electricity meter side quantity of energy and the vehicle side quantity of energy.
Examiner respectfully disagrees, Salem teaches comparing independently obtained energy measurements corresponding to the dame charging session to verify accuracy and plausibility (“those data points are compared, if there is a greater than 0.5% error…” [0034], an alert may be generated [0035]). Once two independently obtained measurements are available, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to reconcile discrepancies through predictable mathematical techniques, including averaging or determining a mean value, in order to improve reliability, of the delivered energy.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
4. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 11-18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Theisen (U.S. Publication 20120143423) in view of Salem (U.S. Publication 20180188346).
Regarding claim 11, Theisen teaches a method for determining charging information with regard to a charging operation (quantity of power from power point 12 fig. 1 [0021]) at a non-public location (a domestic power network or an industrial power network [0014]), the method comprising:
receiving metering data from an electricity meter of the non-public location for a charging point of the non-public location (a domestic power network or an industrial power network [0014] “The meter 8 counts the current exchanged with the battery or the quantity of power exchanged with the battery. The meter 16 counts not only this quantity of power but rather at the same time also the quantity of power obtained by the consumers 24” [0057]), wherein the electricity meter is configured to capture the metering data with regard to a charging current which is delivered at the charging point (“During the charging of the vehicle 2 or of the battery 4 of the vehicle 2 via the cable 10, current flows from the power supply network 22 via the meter 16 and the power socket 14 and also the cable 10, the meter 8 and the charging unit 6 into the battery 4. While back-charging or outputting a current from the vehicle 2 or the battery 4 into the power supply network 22, the flow takes place via the cable 10, the power socket 14 and the meter 16 into the power supply network 22. The sum of the power obtained and dispensed can represent the exchanged quantity of power” [0056-0057]) ;
receiving from a vehicle (fig. 1 (via 8 from vehicle)), charging operation data with regard to the charging operation of the vehicle at the charging point (“The meter 8 counts the current exchanged with the battery or the quantity of power exchanged with the battery” [0056-0057]), wherein the charging operation data comprise time information with regard to a start and a finish of the charging operation, wherein the time information indicates a starting time point of the charging operation and a finishing time point of the charging operation (charging operation information may be communicated “at the end of a charging process, or during the charging process, or at the start of a charging process” [0069], and continuously during charging [0060] thereby inherently disclosing charging operation data associated with the beginning and completion of the charging operation), and wherein the charging operation data indicate a vehicle-side quantity of energy for the charging operation, which is determined by the vehicle (“in a first step (30), the first quantity of power is measured in the vehicle 2 by means of the meter 8. At the end of a charging process, or during the charging process, or at the start of a charging process, the vehicle 2 requests (50) a power point identifier from the power point 12 or the meter 16. The power point 12 or the meter 16 transmits (52) this power point identifier to the vehicle 2. In parallel with this, the power point 12 measures a total power in the meter 16” [0069] the start and the end of charging process);
determining, based on the metering data and time information with regard to the start and the finish of the charging operation, an electricity meter-side quantity of energy for the charging operation (“in the meter 16, the first quantity of power is subtracted (42) from the total quantity of power. The second quantity of power is thus determined, which is the difference between the total quantity of power and the first quantity of power and represents the value of the power obtained by the consumer 24 via the meter 16” [0063]); and
determining, based on the electricity meter-side quantity of energy and the vehicle- side quantity of energy (total quantity of power [0072]), charging information with regard to a total quantity of energy which has been delivered by the charging point to the vehicle during the charging operation (“Firstly, in a first step (30), the first quantity of power is measured in the vehicle 2 by means of the meter 8. At the end of a charging process, or during the charging process, or at the start of a charging process, the vehicle 2 requests (50) a power point identifier from the power point 12 or the meter 16. The power point 12 or the meter 16 transmits (52) this power point identifier to the vehicle 2. In parallel with this, the power point 12 measures a total power in the meter 16, During this or at a later or earlier point in time, the power point 12 or the meter 16 transmits (59) the measured total power together with a power point identifier to the billing center 20. This may take place for example at the end of the charging process, for example once the cable 10 has been removed from the socket 14” [0069-0072] this includes both vehicle and meter side power).
Theisen further teaches determining the quantity of energy delivered to the vehicle by using both the vehicle side and the power point side measurement (“In the meter 16, the first quantity of power is subtracted (42) from the total quantity of power. The second quantity of power is thus determined” [0063], “the value of the second quantity of power and the power point identifier are transmitted, and the two data packets are calculated” [0065] thus charging information (total energy obtained by the vehicle) is derived from both the vehicle side energy and the meter side energy quantities)
Theisen does not explicitly teach determining charging information based on a mean value of both measurements, nor performing a plausibility or accuracy check of one measurement relative to the other.
Salem in a relevant art teaching a direct comparison and plausibility verification between two energy measurements corresponding to the same charging sessions (“measurements are collected from the meter test device 250, those data points may be compared to those measurements independently obtained by the submeter 230, If there is a greater than 0.5% error, then there is a need to recalibrate the electric vehicle charging station 220 because it is no longer measuring accurate information” [0034] “Data from both measurements may be stored onto a computing device that is connected both to the electric vehicle charging station 220 and the meter test device 250, an alert may be generated so that when the measurements from the submeter 230 and the meter test device 250 reaches a certain error percentage” [0035] thus inherently teaching checking the plausibility or accuracy of one metering results (the submeter/station side measurement) based on another independent measurement (the reference device/vehicle side)) as the comparison determines whether both readings are consistent (plausibility check).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the dual measurement determination of vehicle delivered energy of Theisen by incorporating Salem’s technique of comparing or averaging the two measurement results to verify accuracy and or plausibility.
PNG
media_image1.png
371
533
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 12, Theisen as modified further teaches the metering data comprise a plurality of meter reading values from the electricity meter for a corresponding plurality of time points (multiple readings from meter 16 [0060-0063]); the charging operation data indicate a starting time point of the charging operation and a finishing time point of the charging operation (“At the end of a charging process, or during the charging process, or at the start of a charging process” [0069]); and the method further comprises: determining, based on the metering data, a starting meter reading value of the electricity meter at the starting time point of the charging operation, and a finishing meter reading value of the electricity meter at the finishing time point of the charging operation (“Firstly, in a first step (30), the first quantity of power is measured in the vehicle 2 by means of the meter 8. At the end of a charging process, or during the charging process, or at the start of a charging process, the vehicle 2 requests (50) a power point identifier from the power point 12 or the meter 16” [0069]); and determining the charging information with regard to the total quantity of energy based on the starting meter reading value and the finishing meter reading value (The power point 12 or the meter 16 transmits (52) this power point identifier to the vehicle 2. In parallel with this, the power point 12 measures a total power in the meter 16, During this or at a later or earlier point in time, the power point 12 or the meter 16 transmits (59) the measured total power together with a power point identifier to the billing center 20. This may take place for example at the end of the charging process, for example once the cable 10 has been removed from the socket 14” [0069-0072] this includes both vehicle and meter side power).
Regarding claim 13, Theisen as modified further teaches the electricity meter is a submeter of a smart meter gateway of the non-public location; and the metering data received are data which have been transmitted by the smart meter gateway (“meter on the side of the power point is a so-called "smart meter"” [0017]).
Regarding claim 14, Theisen as modified further teaches wherein at least one of: the submeter transmits the metering data via a local metrological network of the non- public location to the smart meter gateway; or the smart meter gateway receives the metering data via the local metrological network of the non-public location (“It is preferred if the meter on the side of the power point is a so-called "smart meter". Such a meter can be read remotely. Remote reading of such a meter may for example be TCP/IP-based. Remote reading of the meter may take place via a telephone network or a power supply network, for example by means of power line communication” [0017], “The remotely readable meter 16 is connected to a billing center 20 via a communication network 18” [0054]).
Regarding claims 15, 16, Theisen as modified further teaches the charging operation data comprise an identifier of the vehicle; and the method further comprises determining, based on the identifier of vehicle, charging information with regard to a mode of billing for total costs of the total quantity of energy which has been delivered to the vehicle from the charging point during the charging operation (“The power point identifier is received in the vehicle 2, and a data packet is created (54) which contains the power point identifier, the vehicle identifier and information concerning the first quantity of power. The vehicle transmits (56) this data packet via the communication link 28 to the billing centre 26. In the billing centre 26, the vehicle identifier and the first quantity of power are extracted from the data packet, and a further data set is created (58) which can be used for billing for the power obtained by the vehicle” [0070-0071]).
Regarding claim 17, 18, Theisen as modified further teaches wherein the non-public location is a household of a user of the vehicle (“the power point may in this case for example have a meter, to which there are connected on the one hand a plurality of power sockets for charging electric vehicles and on the other hand for example a domestic power network” [0014]).
Regarding claim 20, the structure recited is intrinsic to the method recited in claim 11, as disclosed by Theisen (U.S. Publication 20120143423) in view of Salem (U.S. Publication 20180188346) as the recited structure will be used during the normal operation of the method, as discussed above with regard to claim 11.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
DeBoer (U.S. Publication 20170043674) discloses AUTOMATICALLY SELECTING CHARGING ROUTINE FOR AN ELECTRIC VEHICLE BY BALANCING UTILITY AND USER CONSIDERATIONS.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TAQI R NASIR whose telephone number is (571)270-1425. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM-5PM EST M-F.
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, Lee Rodak can be reached at (571) 270-5628. 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.
/TAQI R NASIR/Examiner, Art Unit 2858
/LEE E RODAK/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2858