DETAILED ACTION
This Non-Final Office Action is in response to the arguments and amendments filed August 14, 2026 and Request for Continued Examination filed September 21, 2026.
Claims 14, 22, 24, and 26 have been amended.
Claim 29 has been cancelled.
Claims 14-17, 21-28, and 30-36 are currently pending and have been considered below.
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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on September 21, 2026 has been entered.
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 14-17, 21-28, and 30-36 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed towards non-eligible subject matter.
In terms of Step 1, claims 14-17, 21-28, and 30-36 are directed towards one of the four categories of statutory subject matter.
In terms of Step 2(a)(1), independent claims 14 and 24 are directed towards, “an input for receiving utility usage information regarding utility usage at one or more facilities, and environmental information regarding one or more environmental conditions in or around each of the one or more facilities; determine a meter group for at least one of the one or more facilities from a user selection of two or more meters, wherein determining the meter group comprises creating a user-defined virtual meter that aggregates utility usage amounts from the two or more meters selected by the user; apply a […] model to the received utility usage information and the received environmental information to determine a baseline utility usage for a current time period for the meter group; determine, for the current time period, a measure of current usage utility for the meter group based on the received utility usage information, wherein the measure of current utility usage represents aggregated utility usage amounts of the user-defined virtual meter; determine whether the measure of current utility usage for the meter group exceeds the baseline utility usage for the meter group by at least a threshold amount; issue an alert when the measure of current utility usage for the meter group exceeds the baseline utility usage for the meter group by at least the threshold amount; receiving, based at least in part on the alert, an input from a user to control one or more of the devices associated with the meter group to reduce utility usage”. The claims are describing a collection of information, high level analysis (emissions, costs, and usage rolled over time periods), and displaying the results of the collected information (providing a dashboard to display the emission, usage, and cost. This is further provided in terms of displaying a control command to a user that is then selected and acted upon based on the user selection. The claims are directed towards a mental process. A person is able to receive information that is displayed, observe, and provide an input that is acted upon based on the displayed information. This further includes that the user is providing the input for the selected meters and aggregating the user-defined meters merely based on a measure of current usage. As such, the claims are directed towards an abstract idea under the mental process grouping.
In terms of step 2(a)(II), the additional elements of the claim are considered with respect to being transformative into a practical application. The additional elements of claim 14 and 24 are, “A system for monitoring and controlling utility usage at one or more facilities, wherein each facility includes one or more devices that use a commodity or service provided by a utility, the system comprising; a memory for storing the received utility usage information, the received environmental information, historical information and a definition of a meter group; a controller operatively coupled to the input and the memory, the controller configured to; apply a non-linear model to; and send control commands to control the one or more devices based on the received user input”. The additional elements of the computer aspects (memory, dashboard, and control commands) are described in the originally filed specification figure 1 and paragraphs [20-22 and 33-35]. The additional elements are merely describing generic technology to implement the abstract idea. Further, in terms of the mental process consideration, the mental process is merely being applied to a computer environment, but the additional elements are not describing or directed towards a technical improvement. This is further based on the control operations that are based on the user inputs. The control operations are utilizing the mental selection to perform the action. This also includes the consideration that the control operations are an idea of a solution in that there is no specific technical limitation or description for providing the solution and thus is an idea of a solution. As the claim specifically states that the user inputs provides the control operations then the controls are merely tools to implement the identified abstract idea. The consideration of the non-linear model is based on the specification paragraphs [27-29]. The non-linear model is merely a tool to implement the analysis step described above. The non-linear model is not directed towards a specific model or algorithm, but rather a generic modeling technique to apply the inputs and determine an output. As such, the non-linear model is not directed towards a technical improvement. The claim is not directed towards additional elements that are transformative into a practical application as the additional elements are merely generic technology to implement the abstract idea. Refer to MPEP 2106.05(f).
In terms of step 2(b), the additional elements of the claim are considered with respect to being significantly more than the identified abstract idea. The additional elements of claim 14 and 24 are, “A system for monitoring and controlling utility usage at one or more facilities, wherein each facility includes one or more devices that use a commodity or service provided by a utility, the system comprising; a memory for storing the received utility usage information, the received environmental information, historical information and a definition of a meter group; a controller operatively coupled to the input and the memory, the controller configured to; apply a non-linear model to; and send control commands to control the one or more devices based on the received user input”. The additional elements of the computer aspects (memory, dashboard, and control commands) are described in the originally filed specification figure 1 and paragraphs [20-22 and 33-35]. The additional elements are merely describing generic technology to implement the abstract idea. Further, in terms of the mental process consideration, the mental process is merely being applied to a computer environment, but the additional elements are not describing or directed towards a technical improvement. This is further based on the control operations that are based on the user inputs. The control operations are utilizing the mental selection to perform the action. This also includes the consideration that the control operations are an idea of a solution in that there is no specific technical limitation or description for providing the solution and thus is an idea of a solution. As the claim specifically states that the user inputs provides the control operations then the controls are merely tools to implement the identified abstract idea. The consideration of the non-linear model is based on the specification paragraphs [27-29]. The non-linear model is merely a tool to implement the analysis step described above. The non-linear model is not directed towards a specific model or algorithm, but rather a generic modeling technique to apply the inputs and determine an output. As such, the non-linear model is not directed towards a technical improvement. The claim is not directed towards additional elements that are significantly more than the identified abstract idea as the additional elements are merely generic technology to implement the abstract idea. Refer to MPEP 2106.05(f).
Dependent claims 16-17 and 21-23 are further describing the abstract idea and are not directed towards additional elements beyond those identified above. The claims are further directed towards the collection of information (utility usage), the high level analysis (providing user input threshold values), and the display of information (the alert and rendering of the dashboard). The claims are merely describing the collection, analysis, and display for the utility usage dashboard that is considered under the abstract idea. The additional elements are not transformative into a practical application or significantly more than the identified abstract idea. Refer to MPEP 2106.05(f).
Dependent claims 25-28 and 30-36 are further describing the abstract idea and are not directed towards additional elements beyond those identified above. The claims are further directed towards the collection of information (utility information sources and usage, and meter group for common area), the high level analysis (providing user input threshold values and baseline values), and the display of information (the alert and rendering of the dashboard). The claims are merely describing the collection, analysis, and display for the utility usage dashboard that is considered under the abstract idea. The additional elements are not transformative into a practical application or significantly more than the identified abstract idea. Refer to MPEP 2106.05(f).
The claimed invention is describing an abstract idea without additional elements that are significantly more or transformative into a practical application. Therefore, claims 14-17, 21-28, and 30-36 are rejected under 35 USC 101 for being directed towards non-eligible subject matter.
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.
Claim(s) 14-17, 21-28, and 30-36 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Singh et al [8,818,758], hereafter Singh, in view of Drees et al [2022/0092500], hereafter Drees.
Regarding claim 14, Singh discloses a method for monitoring and controlling utility usage at one or more facilities, wherein each facility includes one or more devices that use a commodity or service provided by a utility, the method comprising: receiving utility usage information regarding utility usage at one or more facilities (Fig 1, 2, and C6:26 to C7:31; Singh discloses the dashboard system that provides information from utility and other information regarding services provided to a building and historical aspects to provide a dashboard of utility/emission/cost displays.);
receiving environmental information regarding one or more environmental conditions in or around each of the one or more of the facilities (Fig 1, 2, and C6:26 to C7:31; Singh discloses the dashboard system that provides information from utility and other information regarding services provided to a building and historical aspects to provide a dashboard of utility/emission/cost displays. The display provides per-building information and a dashboard for multiple buildings and environmental information (interpreted through the CO2 emissions display).);
determining a meter group for at least one of the one or more facilities from a user selection of two or more meters, wherein determining the meter group comprises creating a user-defined virtual meter that aggregates utility usage amounts from the two or more meters selected by the user (Fig 1, 2, 5, and C24:10 to C25:6; Singh discloses a meter group for one or more buildings that is based on one or more (interpreted as two or more) utility meters (shown through electricity, water, and gas). The user selection is based on the user providing account information that the platform utilizes to supply the utility information [C19:22-67].);
determining, for the current time period a measure of current utility usage for the meter group based on the received utility usage information, wherein the measure of current utility usage represents aggregated utility usage amounts of the user-defined virtual meter; determining whether the measure of current utility usage for the meter group exceeds the baseline utility usage for the meter group by at least a threshold amount (Fig 1, C4:40-61, and C8:9-55; Singh discloses a mapping of building information using utility, cost, and other information and the information map is provided on a grid. Further, Singh discloses that the display can be used to depict location with a map overlay alongside providing aggregated information within the platform. The user selection is based on the user providing account information that the platform utilizes to supply the utility information which is aggregated within the platform [C19:22-67].);
Singh discloses the above-enclosed limitations, however, Singh does not specifically teach non-linear modeling or alerts based on utility aspects;
applying a non-linear model to the received utility usage information and the received environmental information to determine a baseline utility usage for a current time period for the meter group (Paragraphs [169-173]; Drees teaches a similar system in terms of utility calculations and building usage with specific modeling that includes nonlinear optimization utilized in the utility calculations. Within the combination, Singh provides linear modeling and Drees is substituting the specific nonlinear modeling in a similar utility calculation system to solve optimization problem.);
issuing an alert when the measure of current utility usage for the meter group exceeds the baseline utility usage for the meter group by at least the threshold amount (Paragraphs [94-102]; Drees teaches a similar building utility/energy usage system that specifically provides utility calculations and determinations that provide alerts based on detected faults that are compared with model-predicted outputs (interpreted as threshold). This provides users attempts to repair or work around the fault based on the diagnostics.);
receiving, based at least in part on the alert, an input from a user to control one or more devices associated with the meter group to reduce utility usage; and sending control commands to control the one or more devices associated with the meter group based on the received user input (Paragraphs [103-104]; Drees teaches an alert and providing control elements for the building automation. The rules and equipment for the control elements are shown in [97] to be controlled by user input.).
Singh discloses an emission and utility dashboard system to collect and provide information regarding a plurality of facilities, however, Singh does not specifically disclose a nonlinear analysis and alert based on threshold elements for the utility usage.
Drees teaches a similar building utility/energy usage system that specifically provides nonlinear analysis for generating alerts on detected faults.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the emission and utility dashboard system to collect and provide information regarding a plurality of facilities of Singh the ability to include a similar building utility/energy usage system that specifically provides nonlinear analysis for generating alerts on detected faults of Drees since the claimed invention is merely a combination of prior art elements and in the combination each element would have performed the same function as it did separately and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized the results of the combination were predictable as the alerts provides users attempts to repair or work around the fault based on the diagnostics [Drees 102].
Regarding claim 15, Singh further discloses the method of claim 14, wherein the meter group comprises a common area meter group (Fig 1, 2, 5, and C24:65 to C25:12; Singh discloses that the meter includes common area utility information.).
Regarding claim 16, the combination teaches the above-enclosed limitations of the method of claim 14,
Drees further teaches wherein the threshold amount is user selectable (Paragraphs [142-144 and 239]; Drees teaches the controller and other aspects are user-defined and selected.).
Singh discloses an emission and utility dashboard system to collect and provide information regarding a plurality of facilities, however, Singh does not specifically disclose user inputs to control commands based on the alerts.
Drees teaches a similar building utility/energy usage system that specifically provides analysis for generating alerts on detected faults and user commands for building systems based on the faults/alerts.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the emission and utility dashboard system to collect and provide information regarding a plurality of facilities of Singh the ability to include a similar building utility/energy usage system that specifically provides analysis for generating alerts on detected faults and user commands for building systems based on the faults/alerts as taught by Drees since the claimed invention is merely a combination of prior art elements and in the combination each element would have performed the same function as it did separately and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized the results of the combination were predictable as the alerts provides users attempts to repair or work around the fault based on the diagnostics [Drees 102].
Regarding claim 17, the combination teaches the above-enclosed limitations of the method of claim 14,
Singh discloses wherein the measure of current utility usage comprises one or more of carbon emission, energy usage and energy cost (Fig 2 and C8:32 to C9:44; Singh discloses emission, energy, and cost.).
Regarding claim 21, the combination teaches the above-enclosed limitations of the method of claim 14,
Drees further teaches wherein the alert includes a suggested action (Paragraphs [103-104]; Drees teaches an alert and providing control elements for the building automation. The suggested action is interpreted through the schedule aspect and control to attempt repair [102-103].).
Regarding claim 22, the combination teaches the above-enclosed limitations of the method of claim 14,
Drees further discloses wherein the alert includes an age indication (Paragraphs [103-104]; Drees teaches an alert and providing control elements for the building automation. The “age indication” is interpreted through the time-series data that is provided. Further, within the combination of Singh provides the year and other time data within the utility usage data [C2:6-31 and C10:18-45].).
Regarding claim 23, the combination teaches the above-enclosed limitations of the method of claim 14,
Singh discloses further comprising rendering a dashboard for display, wherein the dashboard displays the measure of current utility usage for the current time period relative to utility usage over a previous time period (Fig 1, 2, 5, and C6:26 to C7:31; Singh discloses the dashboard system that provides information from utility and other information regarding services provided to a building and historical aspects to provide a dashboard of utility/emission/cost displays. The display provides per-building information and a dashboard for multiple buildings and timeline information.).
Regarding claim 24, Singh discloses a system for monitoring and controlling utility usage at one or more facilities, wherein each facility includes one or more devices that use a commodity or service provided by a utility, the system comprising (Fig 1, 2, and C6:26 to C7:31; Singh discloses the dashboard system that provides information from utility and other information regarding services provided to a building and historical aspects to provide a dashboard of utility/emission/cost displays.):
an input for receiving utility usage information regarding utility usage at one or more facilities, and environmental information regarding one or more environmental conditions in or around each of the one or more facilities (Fig 1, 2, and C6:26 to C7:31; Singh discloses the dashboard system that provides information from utility and other information regarding services provided to a building and historical aspects to provide a dashboard of utility/emission/cost displays. The display provides per-building information and a dashboard for multiple buildings and environmental information (interpreted through the CO2 emissions display).);
a memory for storing the received utility usage information, the received environmental information, historical information and a definition of a meter group; a controller operatively coupled to the input and the memory, the controller configured to (Fig 12 and C6:55 to C7:20 and C21:45 to C22:50; Singh discloses the database storage and communication between inputting and providing the information within the system.):
determine a meter group for at least one of the one or more facilities from a user selection of two or more meters, wherein determining a meter group comprises creating a user-defined virtual meter that aggregates utility usage information from the two or more meters selected by the user (Fig 1, 2, 5, and C24:10 to C25:6; Singh discloses a meter group for one or more buildings that is based on one or more (interpreted as two or more) utility meters (shown through electricity, water, and gas).);
determine, for the current time period, a measure of current utility usage for the meter group based on the received utility usage information (Fig 1 and C8:9-55; Singh discloses a mapping of building information using utility, cost, and other information and the information map is provided on a grid. Further, Singh discloses that the display can be used to depict location with a map overlay.);
Singh discloses the above-enclosed limitations, however, Singh does not specifically teach non-linear modeling or alerts based on utility aspects;
apply a non-linear model to the received utility usage information and the received environmental information to determine a baseline utility usage for a current time period for the meter group (Paragraphs [169-173]; Drees teaches a similar system in terms of utility calculations and building usage with specific modeling that includes nonlinear optimization utilized in the utility calculations. Within the combination, Singh provides linear modeling and Drees is substituting the specific nonlinear modeling in a similar utility calculation system to solve optimization problem.);
determine whether the measure of current utility usage for the meter group exceeds the baseline utility usage for the meter group by at least a threshold amount; issue an alert when the measure of current utility usage for the meter group exceeds the baseline utility usage for the meter group by at least the threshold amount (Paragraphs [94-102]; Drees teaches a similar building utility/energy usage system that specifically provides utility calculations and determinations that provide alerts based on detected faults that are compared with model-predicted outputs (interpreted as threshold). This provides users attempts to repair or work around the fault based on the diagnostics.);
receive, based at least in part on the alert, an input from a user to control one or more of the devices associated with the meter group to reduce utility usage; and send control commands to control the one or more devices based on the received user input (Paragraphs [103-104]; Drees teaches an alert and providing control elements for the building automation. The rules and equipment for the control elements are shown in [97] to be controlled by user input.).
Singh discloses an emission and utility dashboard system to collect and provide information regarding a plurality of facilities, however, Singh does not specifically disclose a nonlinear analysis and alert based on threshold elements for the utility usage.
Drees teaches a similar building utility/energy usage system that specifically provides nonlinear analysis for generating alerts on detected faults.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the emission and utility dashboard system to collect and provide information regarding a plurality of facilities of Singh the ability to include a similar building utility/energy usage system that specifically provides nonlinear analysis for generating alerts on detected faults of Drees since the claimed invention is merely a combination of prior art elements and in the combination each element would have performed the same function as it did separately and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized the results of the combination were predictable as the alerts provides users attempts to repair or work around the fault based on the diagnostics [Drees 102].
Regarding claim 25, Singh further discloses the system of claim 24, wherein the meter group comprises a common area meter group (Fig 1, 2, 5, and C24:65 to C25:12; Singh discloses that the meter includes common area utility information.).
Regarding claim 26, the combination teaches the above-enclosed limitations of the system of claim 24,
Drees further teaches wherein the threshold amount is user selectable (Paragraphs [142-144 and 239]; Drees teaches the controller and other aspects are user-defined and selected.).
Singh discloses an emission and utility dashboard system to collect and provide information regarding a plurality of facilities, however, Singh does not specifically disclose user inputs to control commands based on the alerts.
Drees teaches a similar building utility/energy usage system that specifically provides analysis for generating alerts on detected faults and user commands for building systems based on the faults/alerts.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the emission and utility dashboard system to collect and provide information regarding a plurality of facilities of Singh the ability to include a similar building utility/energy usage system that specifically provides analysis for generating alerts on detected faults and user commands for building systems based on the faults/alerts as taught by Drees since the claimed invention is merely a combination of prior art elements and in the combination each element would have performed the same function as it did separately and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized the results of the combination were predictable as the alerts provides users attempts to repair or work around the fault based on the diagnostics [Drees 102].
Regarding claim 27, Singh further discloses the system of claim 24, wherein the measure of current utility usage comprises one or more of carbon emission, energy usage, and energy cost (Fig 2 and C8:32 to C9:44; Singh discloses emission, energy, and cost.).
Regarding claim 28, Drees further teaches the system of claim 24, wherein the alert includes a suggested action (Paragraphs [103-104]; Drees teaches an alert and providing control elements for the building automation. The suggested action is interpreted through the schedule aspect and control to attempt repair [102-103].).
Regarding claim 30, Drees further teaches the system of claim 24, wherein the alert includes an age indication (Paragraphs [103-104]; Drees teaches an alert and providing control elements for the building automation. Drees further provides time elements for the alert. Further, within the combination, Singh provides the year and other data within the utility usage data [C2:6-31 and C10:18-45].).
Regarding claim 31, Singh further discloses the system of claim 24, wherein the controller is configured to render a dashboard for display on a display (Fig 1, 2, 5, and C6:26 to C7:31; Singh discloses the dashboard system that provides information from utility and other information regarding services provided to a building and historical aspects to provide a dashboard of utility/emission/cost displays. The display provides per-building information and a dashboard for multiple buildings and timeline information.).
Regarding claim 32, Singh further discloses the system of claim 31, wherein the dashboard displays the measure of current utility usage for the current time period relative to utility usage over a previous time period (Fig 1, 2, 5, and C6:26 to C7:31; Singh discloses the dashboard system that provides information from utility and other information regarding services provided to a building and historical aspects to provide a dashboard of utility/emission/cost displays. The display provides per-building information and a dashboard for multiple buildings and time period information.).
Regarding claim 33, Singh further discloses the system of claim 24, wherein utility usage information for a particular facility is received from a plurality of sources (Fig 1, 2, 4, and C6:26 to C7:31; Singh discloses the dashboard system that provides information from utility and other information regarding services provided to a building and historical aspects to provide a dashboard of utility/emission/cost displays. The information is received from a plurality of utility sources (electricity, water, gas, etc).).
Regarding claim 34, Singh further discloses the system of claim 33, wherein the controller is configured to create a virtual meter that aggregates utility usage amounts from selected ones of the plurality of sources for the particular facility (Fig 1, 2, 4, and C6:26 to C7:31; Singh discloses the dashboard system that provides information from utility and other information regarding services provided to a building and historical aspects to provide a dashboard of utility/emission/cost displays. The virtual meter is based on the dashboard shown in Figure 2 that provides specific building utility data information and the plurality is based on the different sources of utility information that is fed into the system for display.).
Regarding claim 35, Singh further discloses the system of claim 34, wherein the selected ones of the plurality of sources are selected via a user input (FIG 1, 2, 3, and C10:41 to C11:43; Singh discloses and provides a dashboard to compare and display the utility and other data for a plurality of facilities (specific in Fig 3). In terms of the plurality of sources, the utility data is gathered and collected {C7:32-47 and C8:32-53}.).
Regarding claim 36, Drees further teaches the system of claim 24, wherein the baseline utility usage for the current time period is determined based at least in part on the historical information (Paragraphs [169-173]; Drees teaches a similar system in terms of utility calculations and building usage with specific modeling that includes nonlinear optimization utilized in the utility calculations. Within the combination, Singh provides linear modeling and Drees is substituting the specific nonlinear modeling in a similar utility calculation system to solve optimization problem.).
Singh discloses an emission and utility dashboard system to collect and provide information regarding a plurality of facilities, however, Singh does not specifically disclose a nonlinear analysis and alert based on threshold elements for the utility usage.
Drees teaches a similar building utility/energy usage system that specifically provides nonlinear analysis for generating alerts on detected faults.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the emission and utility dashboard system to collect and provide information regarding a plurality of facilities of Singh the ability to include a similar building utility/energy usage system that specifically provides nonlinear analysis for generating alerts on detected faults of Drees since the claimed invention is merely a combination of prior art elements and in the combination each element would have performed the same function as it did separately and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized the results of the combination were predictable as the alerts provides users attempts to repair or work around the fault based on the diagnostics [Drees 102].
Response to Arguments
In response to the arguments filed August 14, 2026 on pages 7 regarding the 35 USC 112 rejection, specifically that the amended claim limitations and specification provide proper 35 USC 112(a) support. Examiner agrees. The 35 USC 112(a) rejection has been withdrawn.
In response to the arguments filed August 14, 2026 on pages 8-9 regarding the 35 USC 101 rejection, specifically that the claimed invention is directed towards eligible subject matter.
Examiner respectfully disagrees.
The claims are describing a collection of information, high level analysis, and display of the results. This is further based on a person is providing user-selectable utility data and threshold values for the analysis and a user, based on the output, is providing user selections for control commands for the devices. A person is providing the inputs for the analysis, observing the outputs, and providing control commands based on the output. The person is mentally opining and controlling the elements that consider the claimed invention as within the abstract idea of mental process. Further, the arguments allege that the claims are not directed towards mental process elements in terms of creation and use of a virtual meter, however, MPEP 2106.04 provides specific consideration within a technical environment and using technical/computer elements to implement. This is further based on the consideration with respect to Electric Power Group that is collecting, high level analyzing, and displaying results in terms of data analysis. The claims are collecting utility information, high level analyzing (with respect to aggregation), and displaying the results. Further, the display is tied and considered with respect to the control step as a user inputs the control based on the output information. The additional elements are merely generic technology to implement the abstract idea. This includes the computer elements and the control commands itself as an idea of a solution with respect to Step 2(a)(II) and 2(b). As such, the additional elements are not transformative into a practical application or significantly more than the identified abstract idea. As such, claims 14-17, 21-28, and 30-36 are maintaining the 35 USC 101 rejection, as considered above in light of the amended and newly added claim limitations.
In response to the arguments filed April 14, 2026 on pages 9-11 regarding the 35 USC 103 rejection, specifically that the claimed invention is not taught by the cited prior art.
Examiner respectfully disagrees.
Previously cited and considered prior art Singh and Drees teach the amended and newly added claim limitations after further search and consideration. Applicant's arguments fail to comply with 37 CFR 1.111(b) because they amount to a general allegation that the claims define a patentable invention without specifically pointing out how the language of the claims patentably distinguishes them from the references. Examiner wants to further point out that the arguments are alleging that the Singh reference is providing a user-selected utility group (two or more utilities) and the arguments state that the interpretation is not the same utility/meter group as claimed. Examiner points to Fig 6 (provided below) of the originally filed specification that provides the meter group of the claimed invention.
PNG
media_image1.png
679
1002
media_image1.png
Greyscale
And further provides Fig 2 of the prior art Singh reference that shows the similar elements of a utility meter group as claimed.
PNG
media_image2.png
637
853
media_image2.png
Greyscale
The claims recite aspects of receiving utility information and providing a meter group of two or more meters to aggregate utility information. Based on the originally filed specification and the considered prior art Singh, the prior art rejection is within the interpretation and consideration for providing a utility meter group that provides aggregated utility information. The claims are not describing a specific instance of the same utility information or specific aspects of titles or other more specific elements. The claims merely state that the utility group is a user-selected grouping of two or more meters which Singh teaches specifically within the interpretation and written description of the claimed invention. As such, claims 14-17, 21-28, and 30-36 are maintaining the 35 USC 103 rejection, as considered above in light of the amended and newly added claim limitations.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: Vega et al [2021/0123771] (utility usage data analytics platform);
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREW CHASE LAKHANI whose telephone number is (571)272-5687. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 730am - 5pm (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, Sarah Monfeldt can be reached at 571-270-1833. 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.
/ANDREW CHASE LAKHANI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3629
