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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted April 10, 2023 was filed before the mailing date of this non-final rejection. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-20 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 1 recites “wherein charging the second electric vehicle comprises permitting access to the charging location for the second charging session upon:… after detecting the check-in at the EVSE unit according to the reservation parameter, causing the EVSE unit to charge the second electric vehicle” and Claim 17 similarly recites “wherein charging the second electric vehicle comprises permitting access to the charging location for the second charging session upon:… after detecting the check-in at the EVSE unit, causing the EVSE unit to charge the second electric vehicle”.
It is unclear how the “after detecting the check-in at the EVSE unit, causing the EVSE unit to charge the second electric vehicle” can occur prior to “permitting access to the charging location for the…charging session”. Specifically the claims recite that the “permitting access to the charging location for the…charging session” is “upon” and lists steps (e.g.., upon: receiving a reservation request, scheduling the …second charging session, detecting a check-in). However it is unclear how the “permitting access to the charging location for the…charging session” can be “upon… after detecting the check-in at the EVSE unit, causing the EVSE unit to charge the second electric vehicle”. For examination purpose the claims will be interpreted as follows:
1. …wherein charging the second electric vehicle comprises permitting access to the charging location for the second charging session upon
receiving a reservation request comprising a reservation parameter for the second charging session,
scheduling the second charging session based upon the reservation parameter, and
detecting a check-in involving the second electric vehicle and the charging location; and
after detecting the check-in at the EVSE unit according to the reservation parameter, causing the EVSE unit to charge the second electric vehicle.
17. wherein charging the second electric vehicle comprises permitting access to the charging location for the second charging session upon:
receiving a reservation request comprising an access code associated with a fleet group for the second charging session,
scheduling the second charging session based upon the access code, and
detecting a check-in involving the second electric vehicle and the charging location during business hours of the fleet; and
after detecting the check-in at the EVSE unit, causing the EVSE unit to charge the second electric vehicle.
Claims 2-16 and 18-20 are rejected by virtue of dependency.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Step 1
Claims 1-20 recite a method (i.e., process). Therefore the claims all fall within one of the four statutory categories of invention.
Step 2A, Prong One
Claim 1 recites a first electric vehicle is associated with a first charging session, and wherein a second electric vehicle is associated with a second charging session, wherein charging the second electric vehicle comprises permitting access to the charging location for the second charging session upon: receiving a reservation request comprising a reservation parameter for the second charging session, scheduling the second charging session based upon the reservation parameter, detecting a check-in involving the second electric vehicle and the charging location, and after detecting the check-in at the EVSE unit according to the reservation, charging the second electric vehicle.
Claim 17 recites a first electric vehicle is associated with a first charging session, and wherein a second electric vehicle is associated with a second charging session, and wherein the charging location comprises a fleet charging location, wherein charging the second electric vehicle comprises permitting access to the charging location for the second charging session upon: receiving a reservation request comprising an access code associated with a fleet group for the second charging session, scheduling the second charging session based upon the access code, detecting a check-in involving the second electric vehicle and the charging location during business hours of the fleet, and after detecting the check-in at the EVSE unit, charge the second electric vehicle.
The claim as a whole recites a certain method of organizing human activity. The limitations recited above, under broadest reasonable interpretation, recite the abstract idea of a certain method of organizing human activity, e.g., commercial interactions or fundamental economic practices. Therefore, the claims recite an abstract idea.
Step 2A, Prong Two
The judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. Claims 1 and 18 as a whole amount to: generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use (i.e., electric vehicle charging). See MPEP 2106.05(h).
Claims 1 and 17 recite the additional elements of: (i) charging a first and a second electric vehicle with an Electric Vehicle Service Equipment (EVSE) unit; and (ii) causing the EVSE unit to charge the second electric vehicle
The above additional elements of: (i) and (ii) are recited at a high-level of generality such that, when viewed as whole/ordered combination, it amounts to no more than generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use (i.e., electric vehicle charging) (See MPEP 2106.05(h)).
Accordingly, these additional elements, when viewed as a whole/ordered combination (See Figs. 1 and 2) do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. Thus, the claims are directed to an abstract idea.
Step 2B
As discussed above with respect to Step 2A Prong Two, the additional elements amount to no more than generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use. The same analysis applies here in 2B, i.e., generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use (i.e., electric vehicle charging), does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application at Step 2A or provide an inventive concept at Step 2B.
Therefore, the additional elements discussed above do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application at Step 2A or provide an inventive concept at Step 2B. Thus, even when viewed as a whole/ordered combination, nothing in the claim adds significantly more (i.e., an inventive concept) to the abstract idea. Thus, the claims are ineligible.
Dependent claims 2-9 and 19-20 further recite details which merely narrow the previously recited abstract idea limitiaitions. For these reasons, as described above with respect to claims 1 and 17, these judicial exceptions are not meaningfully integrated into a practical application or significantly more than the abstract idea. Thus, claims 2-9 and 19-20 are also ineligible.
Claim 10 recites performing actions in response to a demand response event – which merely narrows the previously recited abstract idea.
The claim adds the additional element of wherein causing the EVSE unit to charge the second electronic vehicle comprises throttling output of the EVSE unit (in response to a demand response event). The abstract idea is not integrated into a practical application because the additional element generally links the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use (i.e., electric vehicle charging). See MPEP 2106.05(h). The claim does not include limitations sufficient, either alone or in combination, to amount to significantly more than the claimed abstract idea because the aforementioned additional element generally links the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use (i.e., electric vehicle charging). See MPEP 2106.05(h).
Claim 10 recites performing actions in response to a demand response event – which merely narrows the previously recited abstract idea.
The claim adds the additional element of wherein causing the EVSE unit to charge the second electronic vehicle comprises throttling output of the EVSE unit (in response to a demand response event). The abstract idea is not integrated into a practical application because the additional element generally links the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use (i.e., electric vehicle charging). See MPEP 2106.05(h). The claim does not include limitations sufficient, either alone or in combination, to amount to significantly more than the claimed abstract idea because the aforementioned additional element generally links the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use (i.e., electric vehicle charging). See MPEP 2106.05(h).
Claim 11 recites detecting the check-in comprises detecting a card used as an access method – which merely narrows the previously recited abstract idea.
The claim adds the additional element of using an RFID card. The abstract idea is not integrated into a practical application because the additional element generally links the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use (i.e., RFID). See MPEP 2106.05(h). The claim does not include limitations sufficient, either alone or in combination, to amount to significantly more than the claimed abstract idea because the aforementioned additional element generally links the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use (i.e., RFID). See MPEP 2106.05(h).
Claim 12 recites detecting the check-in comprises detecting an access method – which merely narrows the previously recited abstract idea.
The claim adds the additional element of using a mobile application as the access method. The abstract idea is not integrated into a practical application because the additional element generally links the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use (i.e., mobile applications). See MPEP 2106.05(h). The claim does not include limitations sufficient, either alone or in combination, to amount to significantly more than the claimed abstract idea because the aforementioned additional element generally links the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use (i.e., mobile applications). See MPEP 2106.05(h).
Claim 13 adds the additional element of wherein the EVSE unit permits V2G charging. The abstract idea is not integrated into a practical application because the additional element generally links the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use (i.e., V2G technology). See MPEP 2106.05(h). The claim does not include limitations sufficient, either alone or in combination, to amount to significantly more than the claimed abstract idea because the aforementioned additional element generally links the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use (i.e., V2G technology). See MPEP 2106.05(h).
Claim 14 recites supporting a calendar for scheduling the second charging session – which merely narrows the previously recited abstract idea.
The claim adds the additional element of wherein the EVSE unit is operable in a disconnected mode in response to a connectivity issue with a cloud-based operation platform. The abstract idea is not integrated into a practical application because the additional element generally links the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use (i.e., EVSE unit technology/offline technology). See MPEP 2106.05(h). The claim does not include limitations sufficient, either alone or in combination, to amount to significantly more than the claimed abstract idea because the aforementioned additional element generally links the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use (i.e., EVSE unit technology/offline technology). See MPEP 2106.05(h).
Claim 16 further recite details which merely narrow the previously recited abstract idea limitiaitions. For these reasons, as described above with respect to claims 1 and 14, these judicial exceptions are not meaningfully integrated into a practical application or significantly more than the abstract idea. Thus, claim 16 is also ineligible.
Claim 15 recites the additional element of operating in the disconnected mode comprises at allowing the second electric vehicle to charge during an ad hoc charging session. The abstract idea is not integrated into a practical application because the additional element generally links the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use (i.e., EVSE unit technology/offline technology). See MPEP 2106.05(h). The claim does not include limitations sufficient, either alone or in combination, to amount to significantly more than the claimed abstract idea because the aforementioned additional element generally links the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use (i.e., EVSE unit technology/offline technology). See MPEP 2106.05(h).
Claim 18 recites detecting the check-in comprises detecting a card as an access method – which merely narrows the previously recited abstract idea.
The claim adds the additional element of using at least one of : an RFID card a mobile application as the access method. The abstract idea is not integrated into a practical application because the additional element generally links the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use (i.e., mobile applications or RFID technology). See MPEP 2106.05(h). The claim does not include limitations sufficient, either alone or in combination, to amount to significantly more than the claimed abstract idea because the aforementioned additional element generally links the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use (i.e., mobile applications or RFID technology). See MPEP 2106.05(h).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a), the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned at the time any inventions covered therein were made absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and invention dates of each claim that was not commonly owned at the time a later invention was made in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(c) and potential pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(e), (h) or (g) prior art under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a).
Claims 1, 7-8, 11-12 and 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2012/0233077 to Tate et al. (hereinafter “Tate”) in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2013/0110296 to Khoo et al. (hereinafter “Khoo”).
In regard to claim 1, Tate discloses charging a first electric vehicle and a second electric vehicle at a charging location with an Electric Vehicle Service Equipment (EVSE) unit, wherein the first electric vehicle is associated with a first charging session, and wherein the second electric vehicle is associated with a second charging session (Abst.; Paras. 15, and 30) (… the vehicle 13 commences charging at the reserved (i.e., associated with a charging session) charging station (i.e., charging a… electric vehicle at a charging location with an Electric Vehicle Service Equipment). Examiner notes Para. 15 discusses vehicles in the plural (i.e., first and second electric vehicle).)
Tate discloses wherein charging the second electric vehicle comprises permitting access to the charging location for the second charging session (Paras. 26-28 and 30; Fig. 2) (At step 114, the server 16 locks and holds access to the designated charging station 20 that was reserved at step 112 (i.e., permitting access to the charging location for the second charging session). Only the holder of the token 22 may access that particular charging station 20 at the assigned time…. At step 116, the vehicle 13 commences charging at the reserved charging station 20 (i.e., charging the second electric vehicle).)
Tate discloses permitting access to the charging location for the second charging session upon: receiving a reservation request comprising a reservation parameter for the second charging session (Paras. 4 and 23-24) (a method for reserving an electric charging station includes receiving a desired destination from a client device (i.e., receiving a reservation request comprising a reservation parameter), e.g., a navigation system or a smart phone, using a server, and automatically verifying the availability of the station at an expected arrival time at the desired destination. The method includes reserving the station when the station is available at the expected arrival time…The expected arrival time… could be selected by the driver (i.e., a reservation parameter for the second charging session).)
Tate discloses permitting access to the charging location for the second charging session upon: scheduling the second charging session based upon the reservation parameter (Paras. 25-26) (At step 110, the server 16 processes the information from the charging station 20 to determine whether the charging station 20 is available at the expected arrival time (i.e., based on the reservation parameter). If the designated charging station 20 is available, the method 100 proceeds to step 112…At step 112, the server 16 generates a reservation (i.e., scheduling the second charging session).)
Tate discloses according to the reservation parameter, causing the EVSE unit to charge the second electric vehicle (Paras. 28 and 30) (Only the holder of the token 22 may access that particular charging station 20 at the assigned time (i.e., according to the reservation parameter)… At step 116, the vehicle 13 commences charging at the reserved charging station (i.e., causing the EVSE unit to charge the second electric vehicle).
While Tate discloses generating a reservation and issuing a token with the assigned time, wherein only the holder of the token may access the charging station the assigned time (Paras. 26 and 28), Tate does not explicitly disclose or teach, however, Khoo teaches permitting access to the charging location for the second charging session upon: detecting a check-in involving the second electric vehicle and the charging location; and after detecting the check-in at the EVSE Unit…causing the EVSE unit to charge the second electric vehicle (Fig. 4; Paras. 63, 76, 101-104) (As shown in Fig. 4, the mobile device 140 (i.e., involving the second electric vehicle) connects to the charging station 190 (i.e., detecting a check-in involving the second electric vehicle and the charging location)…. in response to receiving the response, the access key, and the charging parameters from the cloud server 110, the charging station 190 may check the access key against an algorithm or stored information to determine whether the received access key is valid. The charging station 190 may store specific access keys for specific periods of time to determine validity. If the access key is determined by the charging station 190 to be valid, a charging current may be enabled for the electric vehicle 130 (i.e., permitting access to the charging location for the second charging session upon: detecting; and after detecting the check-in at the EVSE Unit…causing the EVSE unit to charge the second electric vehicle).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the access key of Khoo with the charging of Tate in order to provide a security system with low risks (See Para. 87 of Khoo).
In regard to claim 7, Tate discloses wherein the reservation parameter comprises a time window (Paras. 4 and 23-24, 26) (….the driver can request a reservation for a designated one of the charging stations 20 identified at step 104 as being near the desired destination…The expected arrival time could be… selected by the driver…For example, the server 16 may access the calendar 24 and the database 26, and may record a block of time (i.e., reservation parameter comprises a time window) which is sufficient for charging the vehicle 13 given its known charging characteristic.)
In regard to claim 8, Tate discloses wherein the reservation parameter comprises a charging duration (Paras. 4 and 23-24, 26) (….the driver can request a reservation for a designated one of the charging stations 20 identified at step 104 as being near the desired destination….For example, the server 16 may access the calendar 24 and the database 26, and may record a block of time (i.e., reservation parameter comprises a charging duration) which is sufficient for charging the vehicle 13 given its known charging characteristic.)
In regard to claim 11, Tate does not explicitly disclose or teach, however, Khoo teaches wherein detecting the check-in comprises detecting a radio frequency identification (RFID) card used as an access method (Paras. 65 and 165) (The connection 170 between the mobile device 140 and the charging station 190 may be a wireless connection over one of many wireless protocols such as …Radio Frequency Identification (RFID), or another method…Short-range geolocation information from …RFID…can alert the charging station 1190 or the cloud server 1110 whether an electric vehicle or a mobile device is entering or leaving the charging station 1190 (i.e., detecting check-in).)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the RFID technology of Khoo with the charging of Tate in order to provide a more efficient way to check-in.
In regard to claim 12, Tate does not explicitly disclose or teach, however, Khoo teaches wherein detecting the check-in comprises detecting a mobile application used as an access method (Para. 85) (At step 410, the process starts, i.e., the mobile device 140 connects to the charging station 190. These steps are similar to steps 310-320 and are described in more detail with reference to steps 310-320. The mobile device 140 may be accompanied by a mobile application (“Mobile App”), which initiates the connection.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the “Mobile App” of Khoo with the charging of Tate in order to provide a more efficient way to check-in.
In regard to claim 14, Tate does not explicitly disclose or teach, however, Khoo teaches wherein the EVSE unit is operable in a disconnected mode in response to a connectivity issue with a cloud-based operation platform supporting a calendar for scheduling the second charging session (Abst.; Paras. 68, 88, 122; Figs. 9 and 10) (The method includes receiving a request for a charge transfer for an electric vehicle over a network link between an electric vehicle charging station and a cloud server…. A second user 870 contacts a cloud server 810 using his mobile device 860 to obtain a reservation ticket (not shown) for the charging space 820 at a specific time (i.e., a cloud-based operation platform supporting a calendar for scheduling the second charging session )… Where the charging station 190 has no alternative network connection to the cloud server 110 (i.e., wherein the EVSE unit is operable in a disconnected mode) outside of the mobile device 140, the mobile device 140 may be responsible for sending or relaying requests for electric vehicle charge transfers, charging parameters or updates to existing charging parameters between the cloud server 110 and the charging station 190 (i.e., operable in a disconnected mode).)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the cloud server with the ability for alternative connections of Khoo with the reservation system of Tate in order to provide a more efficient system for handling reservations in times of intermittent connectivity.
In regard to claim 15, Tate does not explicitly disclose or teach, however, Khoo teaches wherein operating in the disconnected mode comprises at allowing the second electric vehicle to charge during an ad hoc charging session (Abst.; Paras. 68, 88, 122; Figs. 9 and 10) (Where the charging station 190 has no alternative network connection to the cloud server 110 (i.e., wherein the EVSE unit is operable in a disconnected mode) outside of the mobile device 140, the mobile device 140 may be responsible for sending or relaying requests for electric vehicle charge transfers, charging parameters or updates to existing charging parameters between the cloud server 110 and the charging station 190 (i.e., an ad hoc charging session).)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the cloud server with the ability for alternative connections of Khoo with the reservation system of Tate in order to provide a more efficient system for handling reservations in times of intermittent connectivity.
Claims 2 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tate in view of Khoo, as applied to claim 1, and further in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2013/0096962 to Craig et al. (hereinafter “Craig”).
In regard to claim 2, Tate in view of Khoo, does not explicitly disclose or teach, however, Criag teaches wherein the reservation parameter comprises an access code associated with an access group (Para. 15) (…guest reservation data may include ….room rate, group or company discount code).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the group discount code of Craig with the reservation of Tate in view of Khoo in order to provide user satisfaction with discounted benefits.
In regard to claim 5, Tate in view of Khoo, does not explicitly disclose or teach, however, Criag teaches wherein the access group is an employee group (Para. 15) (…guest reservation data may include ….room rate, group or company discount code).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the company discount code of Craig with the reservation of Tate in view of Khoo in order to provide user satisfaction with discounted benefits.
Claims 3-4, 6 and 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tate in view of Khoo, and further in view of Craig, as applied to claim 2 for claims 3-4 and 6, and further in view of WO 2020/150155 to Books (hereinafter “Books”).
In regard to claim 3, Tate in view of Khoo, and further in view of Craig, does not explicitly disclose or teach, however, Books teaches wherein the access group is a fleet group (Pars. 2-3 and 16) (..the present disclosure relates to systems and methods for charging vehicles that are part of a fleet of electric and/or hybrid vehicles.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the fleet of vehicle charging of Books with the reservation system of Tate in view of Khoo and further in view of Craig in order to provide user satisfaction for charging needs of a variety of vehicles.
In regard to claim 4, Tate discloses wherein causing the EVSE unit to charge the second electric vehicle comprises permitting charging of the second electric vehicle within business hours of the…charging location.(Paras. 3-5) (allowing a driver to automatically reserve an electric charging station, and by ensuring the charging priority of the vehicle at the reserved charging station upon arrival… method for reserving an electric charging station includes… automatically verifying the availability of the station at an expected arrival time at the desired destination. The method includes reserving the station when the station is available at the expected arrival time…(i.e., within business hours of the charging location).
Tate in view of Khoo, and further in view of Craig, does not explicitly disclose or teach, however, Books teaches wherein the charging location (of Tate) comprises a fleet charging location (Para. 17) (The fleet of vehicles is charged at a charging facility).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the fleet of vehicles charging facility of Books with the reservation system of Tate in view of Khoo and further in view of Craig in order to provide user satisfaction for charging needs of a variety of vehicles.
In regard to claim 6, Tate in view of Khoo, and further in view of Craig, does not explicitly disclose or teach, however, Books teaches wherein the access group is associated with a ridesharing electrical vehicle group (Para. 22) (The fleet of vehicles 10 includes a plurality of vehicles 18 that can include electric vehicles…In some embodiments, the fleet of vehicles 10 can include …ridesharing cars…)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the ridesharing cars in a fleet of Books with the reservation system of Tate in view of Khoo and further in view of Craig in order to provide user satisfaction for charging needs of a variety of vehicles.
In regard to claim 17 Tate discloses charging a first electric vehicle and a second electric vehicle at a charging location with an Electric Vehicle Service Equipment (EVSE) unit, wherein the first electric vehicle is associated with a first charging session, and wherein the second electric vehicle is associated with a second charging session (Abst.; Paras. 15, and 30) (… the vehicle 13 commences charging at the reserved (i.e., associated with a charging session) charging station (i.e., charging a… electric vehicle at a charging location with an Electric Vehicle Service Equipment). Examiner notes Para. 15 discusses vehicles in the plural (i.e., first and second electric vehicle).)
Tate discloses wherein charging the second electric vehicle comprises permitting access to the charging location for the second charging session (Paras. 26-28 and 30; Fig. 2) (At step 114, the server 16 locks and holds access to the designated charging station 20 that was reserved at step 112 (i.e., permitting access to the charging location for the second charging session). Only the holder of the token 22 may access that particular charging station 20 at the assigned time…. At step 116, the vehicle 13 commences charging at the reserved charging station 20 (i.e., charging the second electric vehicle).)
Tate discloses permitting access to the charging location for the second charging session upon: receiving a reservation request for the second charging session (Paras. 4 and 23-24) (a method for reserving an electric charging station includes receiving a desired destination from a client device (i.e., receiving a reservation request), e.g., a navigation system or a smart phone, using a server, and automatically verifying the availability of the station at an expected arrival time at the desired destination. The method includes reserving the station when the station is available at the expected arrival time…The expected arrival time… could be selected by the driver.)
Tate discloses permitting access to the charging location for the second charging session upon: scheduling the second charging session (Paras. 25-26) (At step 110, the server 16 processes the information from the charging station 20 to determine whether the charging station 20 is available at the expected arrival time. If the designated charging station 20 is available, the method 100 proceeds to step 112…At step 112, the server 16 generates a reservation (i.e., scheduling the second charging session).)
Tate discloses causing the EVSE unit to charge the second electric vehicle (Paras. 28 and 30) (Only the holder of the token 22 may access that particular charging station 20 at the assigned time… At step 116, the vehicle 13 commences charging at the reserved charging station (i.e., causing the EVSE unit to charge the second electric vehicle).)
While Tate discloses generating a reservation and issuing a token with the assigned time, wherein only the holder of the token may access the charging station the assigned time (Paras. 26 and 28), Tate does not explicitly disclose or teach, however, Khoo teaches permitting access to the charging location for the second charging session upon: detecting a check-in involving the second electric vehicle and the charging location; and after detecting the check-in at the EVSE Unit…causing the EVSE unit to charge the second electric vehicle (Fig. 4; Paras. 63, 76, 101-104) (As shown in Fig. 4, the mobile device 140 (i.e., involving the second electric vehicle) connects to the charging station 190 (i.e., detecting a check-in involving the second electric vehicle and the charging location)…. in response to receiving the response, the access key, and the charging parameters from the cloud server 110, the charging station 190 may check the access key against an algorithm or stored information to determine whether the received access key is valid. The charging station 190 may store specific access keys for specific periods of time to determine validity. If the access key is determined by the charging station 190 to be valid, a charging current may be enabled for the electric vehicle 130 (i.e., permitting access to the charging location for the second charging session upon: detecting; and after detecting the check-in at the EVSE Unit…causing the EVSE unit to charge the second electric vehicle).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the access key of Khoo with the charging of Tate in order to provide a security system with low risks (See Para. 87 of Khoo).
Tate in view of Khoo, does not explicitly disclose or teach, however, Criag teaches wherein the reservation parameter comprises an access code associated with a group; and that the scheduling…is based upon the access code (Para. 15) (…guest reservation data may include ….room rate, group or company discount code).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the group discount code of Craig with the reservation of Tate in view of Khoo in order to provide user satisfaction with discounted benefits.
Tate in view of Khoo, and further in view of Craig, does not explicitly disclose or teach, however, Books teaches wherein the charging location (of Tate) comprises a fleet charging location; that the group of Craig is a fleet group; and that the check-in is during business hours of the fleet (Pars. 2-3, 16-17 and 20) (...the present disclosure relates to systems and methods for charging vehicles that are part of a fleet of electric and/or hybrid vehicles…The fleet of vehicles is charged at a charging facility….The mobile battery charging device can determine a priority structure for charging the vehicles based on the SOC each of the battery systems of the vehicles, the amount of charge required for each of the vehicles to complete its upcoming mission (i.e., during business hours of the fleet), and/or a charging time for each of the battery systems of the vehicles. The mobile battery charging device then charges the battery systems of the vehicles according to the priority structure.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the fleet of vehicles charging facility of Books with the reservation system of Tate in view of Khoo and further in view of Craig in order to provide user satisfaction for efficiently charging needs of a variety of vehicles.
In regard to claim 18, Tate does not explicitly disclose or teach, however, Khoo teaches wherein detecting the check-in comprises detecting a radio frequency identification (RFID) card used as an access method (Paras. 65 and 165) (The connection 170 between the mobile device 140 and the charging station 190 may be a wireless connection over one of many wireless protocols such as …Radio Frequency Identification (RFID), or another method…Short-range geolocation information from …RFID…can alert the charging station 1190 or the cloud server 1110 whether an electric vehicle or a mobile device is entering or leaving the charging station 1190 (i.e., detecting check-in).)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the RFID technology of Khoo with the charging of Tate in order to provide a more efficient way to check-in.
In regard to claim 19, as discussed above, Craig teaches that the fleet can be charged at anytime (before a mission or overnight). Tate discloses receiving a second reservation request for charging at the charging location from a non-fleet entity, comprising a time window during anytime (Paras. 12-13 and 23-24) (…the driver can request a reservation for a designated one of the charging stations 20 identified at step 104 as being near the desired destination. If the driver makes such a request (i.e., receiving a second reservation request for charging at the charging location), the method 100 proceeds to step 106…server 16 contacts the designated charging station 20 identified at step 104 and determines its availability at an expected arrival time… , and is configured to accurately schedule blocks of charging time in response to this type of information (i.e., comprising a time window).)
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tate in view of Khoo, as applied to claim 1, and further in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2021/0046846 to Maeda et al. (hereinafter “Maeda”).
In regard to claim 9, Tate in view of Khoo, does not explicitly disclose or teach, however, Maeda teaches wherein the charging location is a shared home charging location (Paras. 31 and 84) (…the charging station(s) 112 may include charging equipment that may be installed at a residential home).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include residential home charging of Maeda with the reservation system of Tate in view of Khoo in order to provide user satisfaction for a location that permits vehicle to vehicle charging.
Claims 10 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tate in view of Khoo, as applied to claim 1, and further in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2021/0094437 to Tsubokura et al. (hereinafter “Tsubokura”).
In regard to claim 10, Tate in view of Khoo, does not explicitly disclose or teach, however, Tsubokura teaches wherein causing the EVSE unit to charge the second electric vehicle comprises throttling output of the EVSE unit in response to a demand response event (Para. 32) (In any event, the profile associated with the EV 130 may be utilized by the charge controller 122 of the charging station 120…, and thereby sell demand response services… by throttling the charging rate associated with the EV 130).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the demand response services of Tsubokura with the reservation system of Tate in view of Khoo in order to provide user satisfaction for meeting the user’s charging needs.
In regard to claim 13, Tate in view of Khoo, does not explicitly disclose or teach, however, Tsubokura teaches wherein the EVSE unit permits vehicle to grid (V2G) charging (Para. 32) (In any event, the profile associated with the EV 130 may be utilized by the charge controller 122 of the charging station 120 or the controller of the EV 130 to communicate with the power grid, and thereby sell demand response services by either returning electricity to the grid….)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the demand response services of Tsubokura with the reservation system of Tate in view of Khoo in order to provide a commercial benefit to the charging stations.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tate in view of Khoo, as applied to claim 14, and further in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2022/0144123 to Stichowski et al. (hereinafter “Stichowski”).
In regard to claim 16, as discussed above in claim 14, Khoo teaches where the charging station 190 has no alternative network connection to the cloud server 110, the mobile device 140 may be responsible for sending or relaying requests for electric vehicle charge transfers. That is, local charge transfer requests albeit via the mobile 140. Tate in view of Khoo does not explicitly disclose or teach, however, Stichowski teaches wherein operating in the disconnected mode comprises preventing scheduling of future reserved charging sessions (Para. 26) (…In the method of the invention, the blocking message is finally discarded, i.e., …excluded from further processing, provided that… if the determined charging state of the first charging station indicates the charging, or a current charging process of a second vehicle at the first charging station).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the discarding of the blocking message of Stichowski with the reservation system of Tate in view of Khoo in order to prevent double booking of an in-use station.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tate in view of Khoo, and further in view of Craig, and further in view of Books, as applied to claim 19, and further in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2011/0191265 to Lowenthal et al. (hereinafter “Lowenthal”).
In regard to claim 20, Tate in view of Khoo, and further in view of Craig, and further in view of Books does not explicitly disclose or teach, however Lowenthal teaches permitting charging at the charging location at a pricing level different from charging of the second electric vehicle (Para. 32) (The hosts can also use the interface to define pricing for different electric vehicle operators (e.g., some electric vehicle operators may be exempt from payment, some electric vehicle operators may be required to pay a surcharge, some electric vehicle operators may pay a reduced rate, etc.) for one or more of their charging stations).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the discriminatory pricing of Lowenthal in the system of Tate in view of Khoo and further in view of Craig, and further in view of Books in order to maximize profits for the charging station.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1, 4, and 14-16 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being anticipated by claims 1 and 2 of U.S. Patent No. 11,648,846 (hereinafter “’846 Patent”) as shown below.
Claim 1 of 18/297,640
Claim 1 of US Patent No. 11,648,846
A method comprising:
A method comprising:
charging a first electric vehicle and a second electric vehicle at a charging location with an Electric Vehicle Service Equipment (EVSE) unit, wherein the first electric vehicle is associated with a first charging session, and wherein the second electric vehicle is associated with a second charging session,
charging at least one of a first electric vehicle of a fleet and a second electric vehicle,wherein the first electric vehicle is associated with an ad hoc charging session at a charging location, and wherein the second electric vehicle is associated with a reserved charging session at the charging location, wherein charging the first electric vehicle comprises permitting access to a first Electric Vehicle Service Equipment (EVSE) at the charging location for the ad hoc charging session, and
wherein charging the second electric vehicle comprises permitting access to the charging location for the second charging session upon:receiving a reservation request comprising a reservation parameter for the second charging session,
wherein charging the second electric vehicle comprises:receiving a reservation request comprising a reservation parameter indicative of a scheduled time period,
scheduling the second charging session based upon the reservation parameter,
upon determination that the scheduled time period is outside of business hours of the fleet, scheduling the reserved charging session based on the reservation parameter,
detecting a check-in involving the second electric vehicle and the charging location,
determining a check in involving the second electric vehicle at a second EVSE for the reserved charging session
after detecting the check-in at the EVSE unit according to the reservation parameter, causing the EVSE unit to charge the second electric vehicle.
after determining the check in at the second EVSE for the reserved charging session, causing the second EVSE to charge the second electric vehicle in association with the scheduled time period,
Claim 4 of 18/297,640
Claim 2 of US Patent No. 11,648,846
wherein the charging location comprises a fleet charging location, and wherein causing the EVSE unit to charge the second electric vehicle comprises permitting charging of the second electric vehicle within business hours of the fleet charging location
further comprising: restricting access to the charging location by the second electric vehicle during business hours of the fleet.
Claim 14 of 18/297,640
Claim 1 of US Patent No. 11,648,846
wherein the EVSE unit is operable in a disconnected mode in response to a connectivity issue with a cloud-based operation platform supporting a calendar for scheduling the second charging session.
wherein at least the first EVSE and the second EVSE is operable in a disconnected mode in response to a connectivity issue with a cloud-based operation platform supporting the cloud-based calendar
Claim 15 of 18/297,640
Claim 1 of US Patent No. 11,648,846
wherein operating in the disconnected mode comprises at allowing the second electric vehicle to charge during an ad hoc charging session.
wherein the first electric vehicle is associated with an ad hoc charging...wherein at least the first EVSE and the second EVSE is operable in a disconnected mode.
Claim 16 of 18/297,640
Claim 1 of US Patent No. 11,648,846
operating in the disconnected mode comprises preventing scheduling of future reserved charging sessions
wherein operating in the disconnected mode comprises at least one of: preventing scheduling of future charging sessions,
Claim 2 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of the ’846 Patent, in view of Craig.
In regard to claim 2, Claim 1 of the ’846 Patent does not explicitly disclose or teach, however, Criag teaches wherein the reservation parameter comprises an access code associated with an access group (Para. 15) (…guest reservation data may include ….room rate, group or company discount code).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the group discount code of Craig with the Claim 1 of the ‘846 Patent in order to provide user satisfaction with discounted benefits.
Claim 3 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of the ’846 Patent, in view of Craig, as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Books.
In regard to claim 3, Claim 1 of the ’846 Patent in view of Craig, does not explicitly disclose or teach, however, however, Books teaches wherein the access group is a fleet group (Pars. 2-3 and 16) (..the present disclosure relates to systems and methods for charging vehicles that are part of a fleet of electric and/or hybrid vehicles.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the fleet of vehicle charging of Books with Claim 1 of the ‘846 Patent in view of Craig in order to provide user satisfaction for charging needs of a variety of vehicles.
Claim 1 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being anticipated by claim 1 U.S. Patent No. 10,836,274 (hereinafter “’274 Patent”) as shown below.
Claim 1 of 18/297,640
Claim 1 of ‘274 Patent
A method comprising:
charging a first electric vehicle and a second electric vehicle at a charging location with an Electric Vehicle Service Equipment (EVSE) unit, wherein the first electric vehicle is associated with a first charging session, and wherein the second electric vehicle is associated with a second charging session,
A method for charging a first electric vehicle during a scheduled time period and for charging a second electric vehicle during an ad hoc time period, the method comprising
wherein charging the second electric vehicle comprises permitting access to the charging location for the second charging session upon:receiving a reservation request comprising a reservation parameter for the second charging session,
scheduling a reserved charging session for the first user based on the at least one reservation parameter; in response to determining the check in at the EVSE for the reserved charging session, causing the EVSE to charge the first electric vehicle during the scheduled time period, based on the integration with the EVSE
scheduling the second charging session based upon the reservation parameter,
scheduling a reserved charging session for the first user based on the at least one reservation parameter;
detecting a check-in involving the second electric vehicle and the charging location,
determining a check in involving the second electric vehicle at a second EVSE for the reserved charging session
after detecting the check-in at the EVSE unit according to the reservation parameter, causing the EVSE unit to charge the second electric vehicle.
in response to determining the check in at the EVSE for the reserved charging session, causing the EVSE to charge the first electric vehicle during the scheduled time period, based on the integration with the EVSE.
Prior Art
The following prior art, made of record and not relied upon, is considered pertinent to Applicant’s disclosure:
U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2011/0246252 to Uesugi (hereinafter “Uesugi”). Useugi discloses a charging allocation managing server for setting a vehicle charging allocation schedule for specifying a charging station and a charting time zone to charge each of the vehicles on the basis of a battery residual capacity.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Rupangini Singh whose telephone number is 571-270-0192. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday – Friday, 9:30 AM – 6:30 PM.
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, Shannon Campbell can be reached on Monday – Friday at (571) 272-5587. 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.
/RUPANGINI SINGH/
Examiner, Art Unit 3628