DETAILED ACTION
This Non-Final Office Action is in response to the originally filed specification and claims [June 6, 2023].
Claims 1-20 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 .
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 towards non-eligible subject matter.
In terms of Step 1, claims 1-20 are directed towards one of the four categories of statutory subject matter.
In terms of Step 2(a)(1), independent claim 1 is directed towards, “A system for monitoring and controlling carbon emission, energy usage and utility costs 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: an input for receiving information regarding use of a commodity or service provided by each of one or more utilities at one or more facilities; wherein the dashboard concurrently displays: a carbon emission card that displays a carbon emission rolled up over a current time period relative to the carbon emission rolled up over a previous time period, wherein the carbon emission rolled up over the current time period and the carbon emission rolled up over the previous time period are determined based at least in part on the information stored in the memory; an energy usage card that displays an energy usage rolled up over the current time period relative to the energy usage rolled up over the previous time period, wherein the energy usage rolled up over the current time period and the energy usage rolled up over the previous time period are determined based at least in part on the information stored in the memory; a utility cost card that displays a utility cost rolled up over the current time period relative to the utility cost rolled up over a previous time period, wherein the utility cost rolled up over the current time period and the utility costs rolled up over the previous time period are determined based at least in part on the information stored in the memory; receive an input from a user to control one or more of the devices to reduce carbon emission, energy usage and/or utility costs at one or more of the facilities; and send control commands to control the one or more devices based on the received user input”. 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. 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 1 are, “A system for monitoring and controlling carbon emission, energy usage and utility costs 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 information including historical information; a controller operatively coupled to the input and the memory, the controller configured to render a dashboard for display on a display, based at least in part on the information stored in the memory; receive an input from a user to control one or more of the devices to reduce carbon emission, energy usage and/or utility costs at one or more of the facilities; 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. 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 1 are, “A system for monitoring and controlling carbon emission, energy usage and utility costs 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 information including historical information; a controller operatively coupled to the input and the memory, the controller configured to render a dashboard for display on a display, based at least in part on the information stored in the memory; receive an input from a user to control one or more of the devices to reduce carbon emission, energy usage and/or utility costs at one or more of the facilities; 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. 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 2-13 are further describing the abstract idea and describing further additional elements beyond those identified above. The claims are directed towards, “wherein the carbon emission card displays a trend of carbon emission over time”, “wherein the carbon emission card displays carbon emission in each of two or more carbon emission categories, wherein the two or more carbon emission categories include direct carbon emission and indirect carbon emission”, “wherein the carbon emission card includes one or more user selectable elements that when selected by a user cause the dashboard to display a carbon emission sub-card that displays a breakdown of carbon emission from each of a plurality of carbon emission sources”, “wherein the carbon emission sub-card includes a sort feature that when selected by the user sorts the breakdown of carbon emission from each of the plurality of carbon emission sources according to a selected sort criteria”, “wherein for each of the plurality of carbon emission sources, the carbon emission sub-card displays carbon emission over the current time period relative to carbon emission over the previous time period”, “wherein the energy usage card displays a trend of energy usage over time”, “wherein the energy usage card includes one or more user selectable elements that when selected cause the dashboard to display an energy usage sub-card that displays a breakdown of energy usage from each of a plurality of energy usage sources”, “wherein the energy usage sub-card includes a sort feature that when selected sorts the breakdown of energy usage from each of the plurality of energy usage sources according to a selected sort criteria”, “wherein for each of the plurality of energy usage sources, the energy usage sub-card displays energy usage over the current time period relative to energy usage over the previous time period”, “wherein the carbon emission card rolls up carbon emission across a selected one of the one or more facilities, the energy usage card rolls up energy usage across the selected one of the one or more facilities, and the utility cost card rolls up the utility cost across the selected one of the one or more facilities”, “wherein the one or more facilities include two or more facilities arranged in a portfolio of facilities, wherein the carbon emission card rolls up carbon emission across the portfolio of facilities, the energy usage card rolls up energy usage across the portfolio of facilities, and the utility cost card rolls up the utility cost across the portfolio of facilities”, and “wherein the dashboard includes an overview view that, when selected by a user, displays a map with an indicator at each location that corresponds to one of the two or more facilities in the portfolio of facilities, wherein each indicator is marked when one or more of: the carbon emission over the current time period exceeds the carbon emission over the previous time period for the corresponding facility by at least a carbon emission threshold; the energy usage over the current time period exceeds the energy usage over the previous time period for the corresponding facility by at least an energy usage threshold; and the utility cost over the current time period exceeds the utility cost over the previous time period for the corresponding facility by at least a utility cost threshold”. The dependent claims are further describing the display aspect of the mental process consideration. The claims provide elements of the information provided in the display dashboard and other user selectable elements that are provided in terms of the collection, high level analysis, and display for the mental process. In terms of the additional elements, dependent claims 5, 9, and 13 provide aspects of additional elements with respect to the sorting and overview map. The originally filed specification describes the additional elements in paragraphs [22-24] {sort} and [26-28 and 34-36] {map}. The additional elements are merely utilizing generic technology to implement the abstract idea. The additional elements are not directed towards a technical improvement and therefore the claims are not significantly more or transformative into a practical application. Refer to MPEP 2106.05(f).
Independent claim 14 is directed towards, “A method for monitoring and controlling utility usage at one or more facilities, the method comprising: receiving utility usage information regarding utility usage at one or more facilities; receive environmental information regarding one or more environmental conditions in or around each of the one or more of the facilities; roll up over the current time period a measure of current utility usage based on the received utility usage information; determine when the measure of current utility usage exceeds the baseline utility usage by at least a threshold amount; and issue an alert when the measure of current utility usage exceeds the baseline utility usage by at least the threshold amount”. The claim is directed towards a process of collecting information, high level analyzing, and displaying the results (in terms of the alert). The high level analysis is in terms of the threshold limitations that provide the alert based on the utility usage. As such, the claim is directed towards an abstract idea under the mental process grouping.
The claim further describes a second abstract idea based on, “receiving utility usage information regarding utility usage at one or more facilities; receive environmental information regarding one or more environmental conditions in or around each of the one or more of the facilities; applying a non-linear model to the received utility usage information and the received environmental information to determining a baseline utility usage for a current time period; roll up over the current time period a measure of current utility usage based on the received utility usage information; determine when the measure of current utility usage exceeds the baseline utility usage by at least a threshold amount; and issue an alert when the measure of current utility usage exceeds the baseline utility usage by at least the threshold amount”. The claims are describing a specific mathematical concept (non-linear model) and using the mathematical concept for computing an alarm limit (issuing an alert). Further, the threshold elements above and other measures provide mathematical relationships. Therefore, the claim also describes an additional abstract idea under the mathematical concepts grouping.
In terms of step 2(a)(II), the additional elements are considered with respect to being transformative into a practical application. The additional elements of claim 14 are, “wherein each facility includes one or more devices that use a commodity or service provided by a utility”. The additional elements of the computer are described in the originally filed specification [20-22]. The devices are merely describing generic technology to implement the abstract idea. As such, the additional elements are not directed towards a technical improvement. The additional elements of the claim are not transformative into a practical application. Refer to MPEP 2106.05(f).
In terms of step 2(b), the additional elements are considered with respect to being significantly more than the identified abstract idea. The additional elements of claim 14 are, “wherein each facility includes one or more devices that use a commodity or service provided by a utility”. The additional elements of the computer are described in the originally filed specification [20-22]. The devices are merely describing generic technology to implement the abstract idea. As such, the additional elements are 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 15-17 further describe the identified abstract idea(s) and are not directed towards additional elements beyond those identified above. The claims are directed towards, “further comprising: receiving an input from a user to control one or more of the devices to reduce utility usage at one or more of the facilities based at least in part on the alert; and send control commands to control the one or more devices based on the received user input”, “wherein the threshold amount is user selectable”, and “wherein the measure of current utility usage comprises one or more of carbon emission, energy usage and energy cost”. The claims are further describing the display elements of the identified abstract idea. In terms of the mental process grouping, the claim provides aspects of a user-selectable threshold and receiving user inputs for control of devices based on the alert. In terms of the mathematical abstract idea, the claims provide further aspects of the control based on the alert, a threshold analysis, and measures based on received information for the usage calculation. There are no further additional elements beyond those identified above. As such, the claims are not significantly more or transformative into a practical application.
Independent claim 18 is directed towards, “A method for determining utility usage at one or more facilities, the method comprising: receiving a plurality of utility usage amounts for each of one or more of a plurality of facilities; aggregating the plurality of utility usage amounts for each of the one or more of the plurality of facilities; and reporting the utility usage for each of the one or more of the plurality of facilities”. The claim is describing a collection, high level analysis, and display of results in terms of utility usage. As such, the claim is 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 18 are, “creating a virtual meter for each of the one or more of the plurality of facilities, wherein each of the virtual meters is configured to report the aggregated utility usage amount as the utility usage for each of the one or more of the plurality of facilities”. The additional elements of the virtual meter are described in the originally filed specification [31-34]. The additional element is merely utilizing generic technology to implement the abstract idea. The virtual meter is a tool and not directed towards a technical improvement. As such, the claim is not directed towards additional elements that are transformative into a practical application. 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 18 are, “creating a virtual meter for each of the one or more of the plurality of facilities, wherein each of the virtual meters is configured to report the aggregated utility usage amount as the utility usage for each of the one or more of the plurality of facilities”. The additional elements of the virtual meter are described in the originally filed specification [31-34]. The additional element is merely utilizing generic technology to implement the abstract idea. The virtual meter is a tool and not directed towards a technical improvement. As such, the claim is not directed towards additional elements that are significantly more than the identified abstract idea. Refer to MPEP 2106.05(f).
Dependent claims 19 and 20 are further describing the abstract idea and are not directed towards additional elements beyond those identified above. The claims are directed towards, “further comprising: comparing the aggregated utility usage amount of one or more of the plurality of facilities with the utility usage of another one of the plurality of facilities; and storing the plurality of facilities based at least in part on the comparison” and “wherein the plurality of utility usage amounts for a particular facility are received from a plurality of sources, the method further comprises: displaying the plurality of sources on a display; receiving a user selection of two or more of the plurality of sources via a user input device; creating a user defined virtual meter that aggregates the utility usage amounts from the selected two or more of the plurality of sources; and the virtual meter for at least one of the one or more of the plurality of facilities includes the user defined virtual meter as one of the plurality of utility usage amounts”. The claims are further describing the collection, high level analysis, and display of results for the mental process abstract idea. The additional element of the virtual meter within claim 20 was considered above under steps 2(a)(II) and 2(b). As such, the dependent claims are further directed towards the abstract idea and are not directed towards additional elements that are significantly more or transformative into a practical application. Refer to MPEP 2106.05(f).
The claimed invention is directed towards an abstract idea without additional elements that are significantly more or transformative into a practical application. Therefore, claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 USC 101 for being directed towards non-eligible subject matter.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Singh et al [8,818,758], hereafter Singh.
Regarding claim 18, Singh discloses a method for determining utility usage at one or more facilities, the method comprising: receiving a plurality of utility usage amounts for each of one or more of a plurality of facilities; aggregating the plurality of utility usage amounts for each of the one or more of the plurality of 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.);
creating a virtual meter for each of the one or more of the plurality of facilities, wherein each of the virtual meters is configured to report the aggregated utility usage amount as the utility usage for each of the one or more of the plurality of facilities; and reporting the utility usage for each of the one or more of the plurality of 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 virtual meter is based on the dashboard shown in Figure 2 that provides specific building utility data information.).
Regarding claim 19, Singh further discloses the method of claim 18, further comprising: comparing the aggregated utility usage amount of one or more of the plurality of facilities with the utility usage of another one of the plurality of facilities; and storing the plurality of facilities based at least in part on the comparison (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).).
Regarding claim 20, Singh further discloses the method of claim 18, wherein the plurality of utility usage amounts for a particular facility are received from a plurality of sources, the method further comprises: displaying the plurality of sources on a display; receiving a user selection of two or more of the plurality of sources via a user input device; creating a user defined virtual meter that aggregates the utility usage amounts from the selected two or more of the plurality of sources; and the virtual meter for at least one of the one or more of the plurality of facilities includes the user defined virtual meter as one of the plurality of utility usage amounts (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}.).
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 (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 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) 1, 2, and 4-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Singh et al [8,818,758], hereafter Singh, in view of Volkmann et al [2014/0114867], hereafter Volkmann.
Regarding claim 1, Singh discloses a system for monitoring and controlling carbon emission, energy usage and utility costs 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: an input for receiving information regarding use of a commodity or service provided by each of one or more utilities at one or more facilities; a memory for storing the received information including historical information; a controller operatively coupled to the input and the memory, the controller configured to render a dashboard for display on a display (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.),
wherein the dashboard concurrently displays: a carbon emission card that displays a carbon emission rolled up over a current time period relative to the carbon emission rolled up over a previous time period, wherein the carbon emission rolled up over the current time period and the carbon emission rolled up over the previous time period are determined based at least in part on the information stored in the memory (Fig 2 and C7:32-47; Singh discloses a dashboard that concurrently displays emissions data for building based on a previous time period (Fig 2 shows June ’05 to Dec ’10).);
an energy usage card that displays an energy usage rolled up over the current time period relative to the energy usage rolled up over the previous time period, wherein the energy usage rolled up over the current time period and the energy usage rolled up over the previous time period are determined based at least in part on the information stored in the memory (Fig 2 and C8:32-53; Singh discloses a dashboard that concurrently displays energy usage data for building based on a previous time period (Fig 2 shows meter data from Jan ’10 to Jan ’11 for electric, gas, and water with additional display information for oil).);
a utility cost card that displays a utility cost rolled up over the current time period relative to the utility cost rolled up over a previous time period, wherein the utility cost rolled up over the current time period and the utility costs rolled up over the previous time period are determined based at least in part on the information stored in the memory (Fig 2 and C8:32 to C9:44; Singh discloses a dashboard that concurrently displays utility cost data for building with respect to electricity, water, and gas based on a previous time period (Fig 2 shows Jan ’10 to Jan ’11).);
Singh discloses the above-enclosed limitations regarding a dashboard display for carbon emission and other data for building(s), however, Singh does not specifically disclose user input for control commands based on the user input to reduce aspects;
Volkmann teaches receive an input from a user to control one or more of the devices to reduce carbon emission, energy usage and/or utility costs at one or more of the facilities; and send control commands to control the one or more devices based on the received user input (Paragraphs [28-29]; Volkmann teaches within a similar carbon emission/energy usage display system the ability to provide user input for emission/utility reduction that further includes user inputs for manually affecting their carbon footprint. The combination is that Singh provides the data for the emission and utility aspects and Volkmann, within a similar system, provides the specific element of emission/utility reduction based on 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 user inputs to control commands based on the input to reduce emissions, usage, or costs.
Volkmann teaches a similar building utility/energy usage system that specifically provides user inputs to reduce emissions or other utility usage to affect their carbon footprint.
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 user inputs to reduce emissions or other utility usage to affect their carbon footprint as taught by Volkmann 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 control elements allows a user to manually affect their carbon footprint [Volkmann 28].
Regarding claim 2, the combination teaches the above-enclosed limitations of the system of claim 1,
Singh further discloses wherein the carbon emission card displays a trend of carbon emission over time (Fig 2 and C8:32 to C9:44; Singh discloses that the emission card displays carbon emission over time.).
Regarding claim 4, the combination teaches the above-enclosed limitations of the system of claim 1,
Singh further discloses wherein the carbon emission card includes one or more user selectable elements that when selected by a user cause the dashboard to display a carbon emission sub-card that displays a breakdown of carbon emission from each of a plurality of carbon emission sources (Fig 1 and C7:21 to C9:25; Singh discloses user-selectable options for displaying a breakdown for the calculated utility and emission data for specific buildings.).
Regarding claim 5, the combination teaches the above-enclosed limitations of the system of claim 4,
Singh further discloses wherein the carbon emission sub-card includes a sort feature that when selected by the user sorts the breakdown of carbon emission from each of the plurality of carbon emission sources according to a selected sort criteria (Fig 1 and C9:25 to C10:40; Singh discloses the system can sort data based on user-selectable aspects including emissions information.).
Regarding claim 6, the combination teaches the above-enclosed limitations of the system of claim 4,
Singh further discloses wherein for each of the plurality of carbon emission sources, the carbon emission sub-card displays carbon emission over the current time period relative to carbon emission over the previous time period (Fig 1 and C7:21 to C9:25; Singh discloses user-selectable options for displaying a breakdown for the calculated utility and emission data for specific buildings. Further, within the combination, Volkmann teaches {figure 8 and paragraph [79]} a breakdown with time periods, sub-windows, and emission source specifically shown in the graphic dashboard.).
Regarding claim 7, the combination teaches the above-enclosed limitations of the system of claim 1,
Singh discloses wherein the energy usage card displays a trend of energy usage over time (Fig 2 and C6:12-38; Singh discloses an energy usage over time display.).
Regarding claim 8, the combination teaches the above-enclosed limitations of the system of claim 1,
Singh further discloses wherein the energy usage card includes one or more user selectable elements that when selected cause the dashboard to display an energy usage sub-card that displays a breakdown of energy usage from each of a plurality of energy usage sources (Fig 2 and C6:12-38; Singh discloses an energy usage over time display. This further includes a breakdown for each utility source.).
Regarding claim 9, the combination teaches the above-enclosed limitations of the system of claim 8,
Singh further discloses wherein the energy usage sub-card includes a sort feature that when selected sorts the breakdown of energy usage from each of the plurality of energy usage sources according to a selected sort criteria (Fig 2 and C6:12-38; Singh discloses an energy usage over time display. This further includes a breakdown for each utility source. Singh further discloses {C9:25 to C10:40} the system can sort data based on user-selectable aspects including emissions information.).
Regarding claim 10, the combination teaches the above-enclosed limitations of the system of claim 8,
Singh further discloses wherein for each of the plurality of energy usage sources, the energy usage sub-card displays energy usage over the current time period relative to energy usage over the previous time period (Fig 2 and C6:12-38; Singh discloses an energy usage over time display. The display provides time breakdowns for the meter level data for each month for each utility.).
Regarding claim 11, the combination teaches the above-enclosed limitations of the system of claim 1,
Singh further discloses wherein the carbon emission card rolls up carbon emission across a selected one of the one or more facilities, the energy usage card rolls up energy usage across the selected one of the one or more facilities, and the utility cost card rolls up the utility cost across the selected one of the one or more facilities (Fig 2 and C8:9 to C9:26; Singh discloses a display dashboard that shows utility, energy, and cost for one selected facility.).
Regarding claim 12, the combination teaches the above-enclosed limitations of the system of claim 1,
Singh further discloses wherein the one or more facilities include two or more facilities arranged in a portfolio of facilities, wherein the carbon emission card rolls up carbon emission across the portfolio of facilities, the energy usage card rolls up energy usage across the portfolio of facilities, and the utility cost card rolls up the utility cost across the portfolio of facilities (Fig 2 and C8:9 to C9:26; Singh discloses a display dashboard that shows utility, energy, and cost for one selected facility. In terms of the two or more facilities, Singh discloses [Fig 3] multiple buildings with the information provided. The data being displayed is taught within C10:41 to C11:57.).
Regarding claim 13, the combination teaches the above-enclosed limitations of the system of claim 12;
Singh teaches wherein the dashboard includes an overview view that, when selected by a user, displays a map with an indicator at each location that corresponds to one of the two or more facilities in the portfolio of facilities, wherein each indicator is marked when one or more of: the carbon emission over the current time period exceeds the carbon emission over the previous time period for the corresponding facility by at least a carbon emission threshold; the energy usage over the current time period exceeds the energy usage over the previous time period for the corresponding facility by at least an energy usage threshold; and the utility cost over the current time period exceeds the utility cost over the previous time period for the corresponding facility by at least a utility cost threshold (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.).
Claim(s) 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Singh et al [8,818,758], hereafter Singh, in view of Volkmann et al [2014/0114867], hereafter Volkmann, further in view of Diaz [2021/0216978].
Regarding claim 3, the combination teaches the above-enclosed limitations of the system of claim 1, however, the combination does not specifically teach indirect/direct emissions;
Diaz teaches wherein the carbon emission card displays carbon emission in each of two or more carbon emission categories, wherein the two or more carbon emission categories include direct carbon emission and indirect carbon emission (Paragraphs [151-152]; Diaz teaches a similar emission system that specifically provides emission categories (Scope 1, 2, and 3) that includes direct and indirect emissions. Within the combination, Singh provides emission calculations and data information and Diaz provides the specific scopes to define and predict similar sustainability and emission data based on the scopes.).
The combination teaches emission information based on collected data for building and other aspects to identify emission, utility, and cost information.
The sole difference between the combination and the claimed subject matter is that the combination does not specifically teach emission categories of direct and indirect emissions.
Diaz teaches a similar emission calculation and analysis system that specifically provides emission categories (Scope 1, 2, and 3) that includes direct and indirect emission categories was known in the prior art at the time of the invention.
Since each individual element and its function are shown in the prior art, albeit shown in the separate reference, the difference between the claimed subject matter and the prior art rests not on any individual element or function but in the very combination itself—that is in the substitution of the emission categories/scopes of Diaz for the emission information of the combination. Therefore, the simple substitution of one known element for another producing a predictable result renders the claim obvious.
Claim(s) 14-17 are 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.);
receive 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).);
Singh discloses the above-enclosed limitations, however, Singh does not specifically teach non-linear modeling or alerts based on utility aspects;
Drees teaches applying a non-linear model to the received utility usage information and the received environmental information to determining a baseline utility usage for a current time period (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.);
roll up over the current time period a measure of current utility usage based on the received utility usage information; determine when the measure of current utility usage exceeds the baseline utility usage by at least a threshold amount; and issue an alert when the measure of current utility usage exceeds the baseline utility usage 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.).
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, the combination teaches the above-enclosed limitations of the method of claim 14,
Drees further teaches further comprising: receiving an input from a user to control one or more of the devices to reduce utility usage at one or more of the facilities based at least in part on the alert; 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 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 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.).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Sharma et al [2018/0206096] (building automation with emission analysis);
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