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. Status of Claims This Office Action is in response to the application filed on 6/12/2023 . Claims 1-16 are presently pending and are presented for examination. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 6/12/2023 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. Claim Objections Claims 5-7 and 13-15 are objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 5-7 and 13-15 recites “ stopping the energy flow when a change in the total energy level in between charging sessions is detected by the monitoring unit “ which lack antecedence basis. An energy flow is not claim ed in a claim from which is depends. Also claims 1 and 9 does not claim nor is it inherent that the energy flow is ongoing while comparing the start and stop total energy. Examiner will examine/interpret as “ stopping an energy flow “ . Appropriate correction required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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. Claims 1,2,5,9-10, and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Beck ( EP 3521102) . Note: Examiner uses Beck (EP 3521102) to make rejection but relies on machine translation to clarify position. As to claim 1 , Beck discloses a method for energy metering of an EV charging device (Abstract and Fig. 1) , comprising: metering an energy level by at least one meter unit during a charging session (Abstract and [0008] … a starting meter reading (initial meter reading, value) of the charging station at the beginning and/or a final meter reading (final meter value) after completion (i.e. at the end) of a charging process ) ; monitoring a total energy level of the at least one meter unit with a monitoring unit at least in between two consecutive charging sessions ( [0009]- [ 0010] display the starting meter reading and/or the final meter reading, by calculating the difference between these two values, the amount of energy consumed during the charging process . Consequently, the customer has the opportunity to view the meter readings and/or the energy consumed during the charging process (i.e. total amount of energy determined in between the next charging session) . . This creates a data package containing a data block that represents the starting counter reading and/or the final counter reading of the charging process … each containing information representing the start counter value and/or the end counter value of at least one charging process preceding in time and/or at least one charging process following in time ) ; and comparing a start total energy level of a new charging session with a stop total energy level of a previous charging session ( [0011] the information representing the final counter reading of one of the data blocks, which is assigned to a first charging process, is compared with the information representing the starting counter reading of the data block of the corresponding, next charging process in time ) . As to claim 2, Beck discloses the method according to claim 1, further comprising generating a message when the start total energy level of a new charging session is different from the stop total energy level from the previous charging session ([0013] and [0046] data block of the most recent charging process does not match the counter reading of the charging station, then there is an error in the recording or further processing of the measurement data . [0009] .. display the starting meter reading and/or the final meter reading) . As to claim 5 , Beck discloses the method according to claim 1, further comprising stopping the energy flow when a change in the total energy level in between charging sessions is detected by the monitoring unit ([0013] if the final counter reading of the first charging process represented by the information does not match the starting counter reading of the next charging process or the final counter reading of the data block of the most recent charging process does not match the counter reading of the charging station, then there is an error in the recording or further processing of the measurement data . As to claim 9, Beck discloses an electric vehicle (EV) charging device (Abstract and Fig. 1) , comprising: at least one meter unit ( meter 8 ) configured for metering an energy level of a charging session (Abstract and [0008] … a starting meter reading (initial meter reading, value) of the charging station at the beginning and/or a final meter reading (final meter value) after completion (i.e. at the end) of a charging process) ; and at least one monitoring unit (verification unit and element that compares starting and final counter reading) configured for monitoring at least one total energy level ([0009]-[001 1 ] [0032] the verification unit has a comparison unit for determining a deviation of the information stored in the storage medium about the final meter reading of the last data block from the meter reading of the charging station and/or for determining a deviation of the information representing the start meter reading or the final meter reading ) ; wherein the monitoring unit operates to compare a start total energy level of a new charging session with the stop total energy level of a previous charging session ( [0011] the information representing the final counter reading of one of the data blocks, which is assigned to a first charging process, is compared with the information representing the starting counter reading of the data block of the corresponding, next charging process in time ) , and wherein the monitoring unit monitors the total energy level at least in between charging sessions ([0009]-[001 1 ] [0032][0046] … This creates a data package containing a data block that represents the starting counter reading and/or the final counter reading of the charging process… each containing information representing the start counter value and/or the end counter value of at least one charging process preceding in time and/or at least one charging process following in time ). As to claim 10, Beck discloses the EV charging device according to claim 9, wherein the monitoring unit is further configured to generate a message when the start total energy level of a new charging session is different from the stop total energy level from the previous charging session ([0013] and [0046] data block of the most recent charging process does not match the counter reading of the charging station, then there is an error in the recording or further processing of the measurement data. [0009].. display the starting meter reading and/or the final meter reading) . As to claim 13, Beck discloses the EV charging device according to claim 9, wherein the monitoring unit is further configured to cause the energy flow to stop when a change in the total energy level in between charging sessions is detected by the monitoring unit ([0013] if the final counter reading of the first charging process represented by the information does not match the starting counter reading of the next charging process or the final counter reading of the data block of the most recent charging process does not match the counter reading of the charging station, then there is an error in the recording or further processing of the measurement data) . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action: A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made. Claim s 3 and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Beck ( EP 3521102 ) in view of Campbell (US 20210405097 ) . As to claim 3, Beck discloses the method according to claim 2 . Beck does not disclose/teach wherein the message is a logbook entry in an electronic logbook of the monitoring unit. Campbell teaches wherein the message is a logbook entry in an electronic logbook of the monitoring unit ([0036] The metering health report or log generation module 46 may keep track of metering data messages that have experience a failed transmission to the event destination. In one illustration, the metering health report or log generation module 46 maintains a failure log 48 including a plurality of records (illustrated as rows of a table), wherein each record may include identification of a metering data message, failure type or parameter …[0022 ] The log of failed metering data messages may be included in a metering health report and used for remediation based on failure type. ) . It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to modify the method of Beck to wherein the message is a logbook entry in an electronic logbook of the monitoring unit in order to be used for remediation [0022 ]. As to claim 11, Beck discloses the EV charging device according to claim 10. Beck does not disclose/teach wherein the message is a logbook entry in an electronic logbook of the monitoring unit. Campbell teaches wherein the message is a logbook entry in an electronic logbook of the monitoring unit ([0036] The metering health report or log generation module 46 may keep track of metering data messages that have experience a failed transmission to the event destination. In one illustration, the metering health report or log generation module 46 maintains a failure log 48 including a plurality of records (illustrated as rows of a table), wherein each record may include identification of a metering data message, failure type or parameter…[0022] The log of failed metering data messages may be included in a metering health report and used for remediation based on failure type.) . It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to modify the EV charging device of Beck to wherein the message is a logbook entry in an electronic logbook of the monitoring unit in order to be used for remediation [0022]. Claim 4 ,6 -8 ,12, and 14-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Beck ( EP 3521102 ) . As to claim 4, Beck discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein the monitoring unit monitors at least one total energy level of at least one meter unit by reading out the monitoring unit ( [0008]-[0009] ). Beck does not disclose/teach at least one total energy level is monitored at least every second . It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to modify the monitoring unit of Beck to reading out the monitoring unit at least every second in order to analyze real-time power quality, detect micro-surges, and calculate instantaneous power consumption . As to claim 6 , Beck discloses the method according to claim 5 . Beck does not disclose/teach wherein stopping the energy flow is accomplished by performing a software reset, which resets a software of the charging device . However Examiner takes official notice that performing software resets (i.e. reboots) to stop the operation of a processor controlled system is well known method. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to modify the method of Beck to wherein stopping the energy flow is accomplished by performing a software reset, which resets a software of the charging device in order to resolve freezes and return the system to its default state . As to claim 7, Beck discloses the method according to claim 5 . Beck does not disclose/teach wherein stopping the energy flow includes activating a hardware interlock . However Examiner takes official notice that performing hardware interlocks (i.e. reboots) to stop the operation of computer controlled system is well known method. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to modify the method of Beck to wherein stopping the energy flow includes activating a hardware interlock to prevent unsafe actions or damage . As to claim 8, Beck discloses the method according to claim 1 , wherein the stop total energy level at the end of a charging session and the start total energy level of a consecutive charging session differ from each other ( [0011] of Beck ). Beck does not disclose/teach in a predefined range between 0.1 to 1.0 Wh. However, absent an objective showing of criticality with regards to the claimed predefined range in which the consecutive charging sessions differ , it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art , before the effective filing date, through routine experimentation to detect the first and second charging sessions differing between 0.1 to 1.0 Wh as it would have been based on the monitoring devices tolerance . As to claim 12, Beck discloses the EV charging device according to claim 9, wherein the monitoring unit monitors at least one total energy level of at least one meter unit by reading out the monitoring unit ([0008]-[0009]) Beck does not disclose/teach at least one total energy level is monitored at least every second. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to modify the monitoring unit of Beck to reading out the monitoring unit at least every second in order to analyze real-time power quality, detect micro-surges, and calculate instantaneous power consumption. As to claim 14, Beck discloses the EV charging device according to claim 13. Beck does not disclose/teach wherein stopping the energy flow is accomplished by performing a software reset, which resets a software of the charging device . However Examiner takes official notice that performing software resets (i.e. reboots) to stop the operation of a processor controlled system is well known method. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to modify the EV charging device of Beck to wherein stopping the energy flow is accomplished by performing a software reset, which resets a software of the charging device in order to resolve freezes and return the system to its default state. As to claim 15, Beck discloses the EV charging device according to claim 13, Beck does not disclose/teach wherein stopping the energy flow includes activating a hardware interlock . However Examiner takes official notice that performing hardware interlocks (i.e. reboots) to stop the operation of computer controlled system is well known method. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to modify the EV charging device of Beck to wherein stopping the energy flow includes activating a hardware interlock to prevent unsafe actions or damage. As to claim 16, Beck discloses the EV charging device according to claim 9, wherein the stop total energy level at the end of a charging session and the start total energy level of a consecutive charging session differ from each other ([0011] of Beck). Beck does not disclose/teach in a predefined range between 0.1 to 1.0 Wh. However, absent an objective showing of criticality with regards to the claimed predefined range in which the consecutive charging sessions differ, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, through routine experimentation to detect the first and second charging sessions differing between 0.1 to 1.0 Wh as it would have been based on the monitoring devices tolerance. Conclusion and Related Art The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Shui et al ( US 20220360095 and [0063] ) is cited for having the difference is greater than the preset threshold, it indicates that the data acquired by the charging module of the charging pile differs greatly from the data acquired by the external electric meter, the external electric meter acquires data abnormally. . Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT TYNESE V MCDANIEL whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (313)446-6579 . The examiner can normally be reached on FILLIN "Work schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT M to F, 9am to 530pm . If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Taelor Kim can be reached at 571-27 0-7166 . The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /TYNESE V MCDANIEL/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2859