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. 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. Claim(s) 1-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by NAKAGAWA et al. (US 2014/0049216 A1, hereinafter NAKAGAWA) . Regarding claims 1 and 1 2 (claim 1 is considered representative for limitation matching purposes), NAKAGAWA discloses a computing device for a battery mounted on a vehicle (See Fig.1, Item#50, discloses a battery ECU) and configured to store electric power including first power obtained from renewable energy (See Fig.1, Item#18, discloses the charging site 14 comprising a solar panel for charging the vehicle battery 16) and second power different from the first power (See Fig.1, discloses the charging site 14, comprising a system energy source 32 for charging the vehicle battery 16) , the computing device comprising: a memory configured to store accumulated information including an index value of electric energy of the first power stored in the battery (See Fig.1, Items#56 and 58 and Par. 75-77, disclose storage units for storing remaining amount of renewable energy [56] and amount of renewable energy saved in external sites [58]) ; and a controller configured to control the memory (See Fig.1, Item#50, discloses an ECU. The presence of a controller in the ECU to update the values stored in memory units 56 and 58 is inherent) , wherein the controller is configured to: when the battery is charged by a power device provided outside the vehicle, update the accumulated information based on first information related to the first power used for charging (See Figs.1, 8 and 13, and Pars.113-115 and 142-150, disclose calculating the total amount of energy in vehicle, calculating an amount of renewable energy retained in the vehicle. Determining when charge or discharge are taking place and updating the amount of retained renewable energy [Step S27] by adding or subtracting the charge or discharged amount to the previously determined retained renewable amount. In the case of charging, the additional charged amount is added to RE; RE+shifted amount) ; and when the electric power in the battery is discharged to the power device, update the accumulated information based on second information related to the first power used for discharging ( See Figs.1, 8 and 13, and Pars.113-115 and 142-150, disclose calculating the total amount of energy in vehicle, calculating an amount of renewable energy retained in the vehicle. Determining when charge or discharge are taking place and updating the amount of retained renewable energy [Step S27] by adding or subtracting the charge or discharged amount to the previously determined retained renewable amount . In the case of discharging , the discharged amount is subtracted from RE; RE - shifted amount ) . Regarding claim 2, NAKAGAWA discloses t he computing device according to claim 1 as discussed above , wherein: the computing device is configured to acquire the first information generated based on specification by a user (See Par.92, discloses the user selects to charge the vehicle battery using renewable energy, Pars.200-201, also disclose the battery ECU selects discharging to drive the vehicle using stored renewable energy or system energy) ; and the controller is configured to update the accumulated information based on the acquired first information (See Fig.13, discloses the amount of renewable energy stored in the vehicle battery is updated, based on user selection, i.e. when the user selects charging using renewable energy , the charged energy is added to the already stored renewable energy value RE [Step#S2 7 ]). Regarding claim 3, NAKAGAWA discloses t he computing device according to claim 1 as discussed above , wherein: the computing device is configured to acquire the second information generated based on specification by a user (See Par.92, discloses the user selects to charge the vehicle battery using system energy, Pars.200-201, also disclose the battery ECU selects discharging to drive the vehicle using stored renewable energy or system energy) ; and the controller is configured to update the accumulated information based on the acquired second information ( See Fig.13, discloses the amount of renewable energy stored in the vehicle battery is updated, based on user selection, i.e. when the user selects charging using system energy , the charged energy is added to the already stored system energy [Step#S2 7-S28 ] ) . Regarding claim 4, NAKAGAWA discloses t he computing device according to claim 1 as discussed above , wherein: the memory is configured to store third information to be used to calculate the first power consumed from a start of drive of the vehicle to a stop of the drive of the vehicle (See Figs.5-7 and Pars.92-101, disclose calculating the amount of consumed renewable energy [Par.94]) ; and the controller is configured to update the accumulated information based on the third information when the drive of the vehicle is stopped (See Fig.13, Steps#S27-S29 and Fig.14, step#S49-and S54 , disclose updating the amount of energy stored in the vehicle ) . Regarding claim 6, NAKAGAWA discloses t he computing device according to claim 1, wherein: the memory is configured to store fourth information to be used to calculate the first power consumed from a stop of drive of the vehicle to a start of the drive of the vehicle (See Figs.5-7 and Pars.92-101, disclose calculating the amount of consumed renewable energy [Par.94]) ; and the controller is configured to update the accumulated information based on the fourth information when the drive of the vehicle is started (See Fig.13, Steps#S27-S29 and Fig.14, step#S49-and S54, disclose updating the amount of energy stored in the vehicle) . Regarding claim s 5 and 7- 8, NAKAGAWA discloses the computing device according to claim 6 as discussed above , wherein: the fourth information includes a ratio of the consumed first power to power consumption from the stop of the drive of the vehicle to the start of the drive of the vehicle (See Fig.14, Step#S43, discloses that renewable is not prioritized which is interpreted as 0% renewable used [Step#S45] ; and the ratio of the first power in the fourth information is 0% (See Fig.14, Step#S45, disclose that selecting that renewable energy is not prioritized is interpreted as 0% renewable used . In case the applicant disagrees with the examiner’s interpretation that a selection of priority is equivalent to selecting a ratio, the examiner provided AOSHIMA below in the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 to address the limitation under a different interpretation. Regarding claim 9, NAKAGAWA discloses t he computing device according to claim 1 as discussed above , wherein the computing device is configured to notify a user of the vehicle about the updated accumulated information (See Fig.1, Item#54 and Pars.22 and 96, disclose a display for notifying the user to the updated amount of renewable energy) . Regarding claim 10, NAKAGAWA discloses t he vehicle comprising the computing device according to claim 1 (See Fig.1, Item#12 discloses a vehicle comprising a battery ECU 50). Regarding claim 11, NAKAGAWA discloses a management server configured to manage the vehicle, the management server comprising the computing device according to claim 1 as discussed above , wherein the memory is configured to store the accumulated information of the vehicle for each vehicle identification information of the vehicle (See Fig.1, Item#64, discloses a server comprising memory 56 for storing the renewable energy and 58 for storing external saved amount of energy) . 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. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 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 the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. Claim (s) 5 and 7-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over NAKAGAWA in view of AOSHIMA et al. (US 2021/0295455 A1, hereinafter AOSHIMA) . Regarding claim s 5 and 7 -8 , NAKAGAWA discloses t he computing device according to claim 4 as discussed above , NAKAGAWA discloses selecting the type of power discharged from the battery to the vehicle [Pars.92-94]. However, NAKAGAWA does not disclose wherein: the third information includes a ratio of the consumed first power to power consumption from the start of the drive of the vehicle to the stop of the drive of the vehicle; and the ratio of the first power in the third information is specified by a user. AOSHIMA discloses a system controlling energy consumption comprising: a third information includes a ratio of the consumed first power to power consumption (See Fig.12A-12B and Par.168, disclose a ratio of renewable energy percentage of 40%); and the ratio of the first power in the third information is specified by a user (See Par.168, discloses the value of 4 0 % is entered by the user). NAKAGAWA and AOSHIMA are analogous art since they both deal with energy management and control. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the invention disclosed by NAKAGAWA with the teachings of AOSHIMA by adding a field for the user to select a percentage of renewable energy use for the benefit of allowing the user to control the amount of renewable energy use by simplifying the selection process . Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT AHMED H OMAR whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)270-7165 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT 10:00 am -7:00 PM EST . 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, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT Drew Dunn can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT 571-272-2312 . 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. /AHMED H OMAR/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2859