Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 07/03/2023 and 01/23/2024 was filed before the mailing of this action. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
The following title is suggested: “Operation Planning System for A Hydrogen Production Plant”. This is a mere suggestion and applicant may draft a different title, so long as the title is descriptive and clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: input part in claim 1, output part in claim 1, balancing power scenario creating unit in claims 1-4, 6; calculation condition setting unit in claim 1; scenario mathematical model synthesizing unit claims 6 and 7.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 1 recites an “input part”. The portion of the specification that discloses or details the input part includes [0038] which discloses that the input part receives the state quantity of each of the devices in the hydrogen production plant 10 from the controller 15, the control history by the controller 15, the measured value of the transaction wattmeter 1a (FIG. 1), and the requested value and the command value ΔPd relating to the balancing power from the electric power system 1, as well as information on the specifications or the like of each of the devices in the hydrogen production plant 10 as other external inputs, constraint conditions, and information on objective functions for optimization calculation. The specification recites the function of the input part, but lacks sufficient structural support for the input part, and does not disclose an algorithm for performing the function of the input part.
Claim 1 recites an “output part”. The portion of the specification that discloses or details the output part includes [0052] which discloses that the output part displays calculation results, and the like, and at the same time, outputs command signals to the controller 15. The specification recites the function of the output part, but lacks sufficient structural support for the output part, and does not disclose an algorithm for performing the function of the output part.
Claims 1-4 and 6 recite a balancing power scenario creating unit. The portion of the specification that discloses or details the balancing power scenario creating unit includes [0043] which discloses that the balancing power scenario creating unit 131 sets a scenario to be subjected to an optimization calculation. The balancing power scenario creating unit 131 includes a balancing power price probability distribution creating section 131a, a balancing power price time series creating section 131b, a balancing power ratio probability distribution creating section 131c, a balancing power ratio time series creating section 131d, a time-series data synthesizing section 131e, and a grouping section 131f. The specification recites the function of the balancing power scenario creating unit, but lacks sufficient structural support for the balancing power scenario creating unit, and does not disclose an algorithm for performing the function of the balancing power scenario creating unit.
Claim 1 recites a calculation condition setting unit. The portion of the specification that discloses or details the calculation condition setting unit includes [0042] which discloses that (included in the calculator) the scenario mathematical model creating unit 132 and the scenario mathematical model synthesizing unit 133 are collectively referred to as calculation condition setting unit 135. The specification recites the function of the calculation condition setting unit, but lacks sufficient structural support for the calculation condition setting unit, and does not disclose an algorithm for performing the function of the calculation condition setting unit.
Claims 6 and 7 recite a scenario mathematical model synthesizing unit. The portion of the specification that discloses or details the scenario mathematical model synthesizing unit includes [0051] which discloses that the scenario mathematical model synthesizing unit 133 sets conditions for the mathematical optimization calculator 134 to perform an optimization calculation. The scenario mathematical model synthesizing unit 133 includes an objective function synthesizing section 133a, a balancing power constraint condition creating section 133b, and a state variable constraint condition creating section 133c. The specification recites the function of the scenario mathematical model synthesizing unit, but lacks sufficient structural support for scenario mathematical model synthesizing unit, and does not disclose an algorithm for performing the function of the scenario mathematical model synthesizing unit.
Dependent claims 5 and 8 are also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, due to their dependency on the rejected claims above.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “An operation plan planning device that is connected to an electric power system and plans an operation plan for responding to a request for a balancing power from the electric power system in a hydrogen production plant that includes a renewable energy generator, a water electrolysis device, and a hydrogen storage facility, the device comprising”. It is unclear whether “the device” is referring to the operation planning device or the water electrolysis device. For examination purpose, “the device” is being interpreted as the operation planning device.
Claim 1 recites an “input part”. The portion of the specification that discloses or details the input part includes [0038] which discloses that the input part receives the state quantity of each of the devices in the hydrogen production plant 10 from the controller 15, the control history by the controller 15, the measured value of the transaction wattmeter 1a (FIG. 1), and the requested value and the command value ΔPd relating to the balancing power from the electric power system 1, as well as information on the specifications or the like of each of the devices in the hydrogen production plant 10 as other external inputs, constraint conditions, and information on objective functions for optimization calculation. The specification recites the function of the input part, but lacks sufficient structural support for the input part, and does not disclose an algorithm for performing the function of the input part.
Claim 1 recites an “output part”. The portion of the specification that discloses or details the output part includes [0052] which discloses that the output part displays calculation results, and the like, and at the same time, outputs command signals to the controller 15. The specification recites the function of the output part, but lacks sufficient structural support for the output part, and does not disclose an algorithm for performing the function of the output part.
Claims 1-4 and 6 recite a balancing power scenario creating unit. The portion of the specification that discloses or details the balancing power scenario creating unit includes [0043] which discloses that the balancing power scenario creating unit 131 sets a scenario to be subjected to an optimization calculation. The balancing power scenario creating unit 131 includes a balancing power price probability distribution creating section 131a, a balancing power price time series creating section 131b, a balancing power ratio probability distribution creating section 131c, a balancing power ratio time series creating section 131d, a time-series data synthesizing section 131e, and a grouping section 131f. The specification recites the function of the balancing power scenario creating unit, but lacks sufficient structural support for the balancing power scenario creating unit, and does not disclose an algorithm for performing the function of the balancing power scenario creating unit.
Claim 1 recites a calculation condition setting unit. The portion of the specification that discloses or details the calculation condition setting unit includes [0042] which discloses that (included in the calculator) the scenario mathematical model creating unit 132 and the scenario mathematical model synthesizing unit 133 are collectively referred to as calculation condition setting unit 135. The specification recites the function of the calculation condition setting unit, but lacks sufficient structural support for the calculation condition setting unit, and does not disclose an algorithm for performing the function of the calculation condition setting unit.
Claims 6 and 7 recite a scenario mathematical model synthesizing unit. The portion of the specification that discloses or details the scenario mathematical model synthesizing unit includes [0051] which discloses that the scenario mathematical model synthesizing unit 133 sets conditions for the mathematical optimization calculator 134 to perform an optimization calculation. The scenario mathematical model synthesizing unit 133 includes an objective function synthesizing section 133a, a balancing power constraint condition creating section 133b, and a state variable constraint condition creating section 133c. The specification recites the function of the scenario mathematical model synthesizing unit, but lacks sufficient structural support for scenario mathematical model synthesizing unit, and does not disclose an algorithm for performing the function of the scenario mathematical model synthesizing unit.
Dependent claims 5 and 8 are also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, due to their dependency on the rejected claims above.
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 1-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e. an abstract idea) without significantly more.
Claims 1-8 recite a device (i.e. machine), and claim 9 recites a method (i.e. process). Therefore claims 1-9 fall within one of the four statutory categories of invention.
Independent claim 1 recites the limitations planning an operation plan for responding to a request for a balancing power from [the electric power system] in a hydrogen production plant; reading a constraint condition and an actual performance value; storing the constraint condition and the actual performance value; creating a time series of a balancing power price and a time series of a balancing power ratio, and creating a balancing power scenario by synthesizing the time series of the balancing power price and the time series of the balancing power ratio; performing an optimization calculation of the balancing power on the balancing power scenario; setting a calculation condition for the optimization calculation; outputting a calculation result in [the calculator] to the hydrogen production plant. The invention and claims are drawn towards providing an operation plan for a hydrogen production plant where there are constraints on the amount of produced hydrogen or hydrogen storage capacity and uncertain factors for use in balancing power, and the claim limitations directly correspond to certain methods of organizing human activity (commercial interaction, business relations), as evidenced by limitations detailing reading constraint conditions and actual performance value, creating a balancing power price and ratio, creating a balancing power scenario by synthesizing the time series of the balancing power price and time series of the balancing power ratio, performing optimization calculation, setting a calculation condition for the optimization calculation, and outputting the calculation result to the hydrogen production plant. The claim limitations also correspond to mental processes (observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion) as evidenced by limitations detailing planning an operation plan for responding to a request for a balancing power in a hydrogen production plant; reading a constraint condition and an actual performance value; storing the constraint condition and the actual performance value; creating a time series of a balancing power price and a time series of a balancing power ratio, and creating a balancing power scenario by synthesizing the time series of the balancing power price and the time series of the balancing power ratio, all of which are the evaluation and observation of data, and creating a scenario based on the observation and evaluation. The claims also correspond to mathematical concepts (mathematical formulas or equations mathematical calculations) as evidenced by limitations detailing performing an optimization calculation of the balancing power on the balancing power scenario; setting a calculation condition for the optimization calculation; outputting a calculation result. The claims recite an abstract idea.
Note: The features or elements in brackets in the above Step 2A Prong One section are inserted for reading clarity, but are analyzed as “additional elements” under Step 2A Prong Two and Step 2B below.
The judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application simply because the claims recite the additional elements of: an operation plan device, electric power system, a renewable energy generator, a water electrolysis device, a calculator that includes a balancing power scenario creating unit, a mathematical optimization calculator, a calculation conditioning setting unit, and output part. The additional elements of the operation plan device, calculator that includes a balancing power scenario creating unit, a mathematical optimization calculator, a calculation conditioning setting unit, and output part are computer components recited at a high-level of generality performing the above-mentioned limitations. The combination of the additional elements are no more than mere instructions to apply the judicial exception using a generic computer. Further, the electrolysis device and renewable energy generator amounts to generally linking the judicial exception into a particular field of use (planning operations in hydrogen production plants). Accordingly, in combination, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claim is directed to an abstract idea.
The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional elements amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer, and generally linking the judicial exception to a particular field of use. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer cannot provide an inventive concept. Thus, when viewed as an ordered combination, nothing in the claim adds significantly more (i.e. an inventive concept) to the abstract idea. The claim is not patent eligible.
Dependent claim 6 recites creating a plurality of the balancing power scenarios, and creating an objective function in which expected values of objective functions of respective mathematical models of a plurality of the balancing power scenarios are used to be synthesized. The claims are further directed to the abstract idea analyzed above. The claim also recites the additional elements of the balancing power scenario creating unit and a scenario mathematical model synthesizing unit. The units amount to “apply it” or merely using a computer as a tool to implement the judicial exception. Accordingly, in combination, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. Further, when viewed as an ordered combination, nothing in the claim adds significantly more (i.e. an inventive concept) to the abstract idea. The claim is not patent eligible.
Dependent claim 8 recites the limitations that the additional element of the renewable energy generator includes at least one of a storage battery, a fuel cell, a solar power generator, and a wind power generator. The additional element(s) amount to generally linking the judicial exception to a particular field of use (planning operations in hydrogen production plants). Accordingly, in combination, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. Further, when viewed as an ordered combination, nothing in the claim adds significantly more (i.e. an inventive concept) to the abstract idea. The claim is not patent eligible.
Dependent claims 2-5 and 7 recite additional limitations that are further directed to the abstract idea analyzed in the rejected claims above. The claims also recite additional elements that have been analyzed in the rejected claims above. Thus, claims 2-5 and 7 are also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101.
Independent claim 9 recites the limitations of planning for responding to a request for a balancing power from [the electric power system] in a hydrogen production plant; creating balancing power scenarios for time-series data on a balancing power price and a balancing power ratio; deriving a scenario mathematical model by creating mathematical models of the balancing power scenarios and synthesizing the mathematical models; setting an objective function and a constraint condition on the scenario mathematical model; and optimizing the scenario mathematical model under the constraint condition, wherein when creating the balancing power scenario, a probability distribution of the balancing power price and a probability distribution of the balancing power ratio are used. The invention and claims are drawn towards providing an operation plan for a hydrogen production plant where there are constraints on the amount of produced hydrogen or hydrogen storage capacity and uncertain factors for use in balancing power, and the claim limitations directly correspond to certain methods of organizing human activity (commercial interaction, business relations), as evidenced by limitations detailing planning for responding to a request for a balancing power from [the electric power system] in a hydrogen production plant; creating balancing power scenarios for time-series data on a balancing power price and a balancing power ratio; and optimizing the scenario mathematical model under the constraint condition, wherein when creating the balancing power scenario, a probability distribution of the balancing power price and a probability distribution of the balancing power ratio are used. The claim limitations also correspond to mental processes (observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion) as evidenced by limitations creating balancing power scenarios for time-series data on a balancing power price and a balancing power ratio; deriving a scenario mathematical model by creating mathematical models of the balancing power scenarios and synthesizing the mathematical models; setting an objective function and a constraint condition on the scenario mathematical model; and optimizing the scenario mathematical model under the constraint condition, wherein when creating the balancing power scenario, a probability distribution of the balancing power price and a probability distribution of the balancing power ratio are used. The claims also correspond to mathematical concepts (mathematical formulas or equations mathematical calculations) as evidenced by limitations deriving a scenario mathematical model by creating mathematical models of the balancing power scenarios and synthesizing the mathematical models; setting an objective function and a constraint condition on the scenario mathematical model; and optimizing the scenario mathematical model under the constraint condition, wherein when creating the balancing power scenario, a probability distribution of the balancing power price and a probability distribution of the balancing power ratio are used. The claims recite an abstract idea.
Note: The features or elements in brackets in the above Step 2A Prong One section are inserted for reading clarity, but are analyzed as “additional elements” under Step 2A Prong Two and Step 2B below.
The judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application simply because the claims recite the additional elements of: an electric power system, a renewable energy generator, and a water electrolysis device. The additional elements amount to generally linking the judicial exception into a particular field of use (planning operations in hydrogen production plants). Accordingly, in combination, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claim is directed to an abstract idea.
The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional elements amount to no more than generally linking the judicial exception to a particular field of use. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer cannot provide an inventive concept. Thus, when viewed as an ordered combination, nothing in the claim adds significantly more (i.e. an inventive concept) to the abstract idea. The claim is not patent eligible.
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) 1, 6, 8, and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Harada (2024/0376618).
Claim 1: An operation plan planning device that is connected to an electric power system and plans an operation plan for responding to a request for a balancing power from the electric power system in a hydrogen production plant that includes a renewable energy generator, a water electrolysis device, and a hydrogen storage facility, the device comprising: (Harada ¶0029 disclosing hydrogen station 12 includes a hydrogen production facility 14, a hydrogen storage facility 16, and a gateway device 18; hydrogen production facility 14 includes a hydrogen generator (also referred to as water electrolysis apparatus or electrolysis tank) that produces hydrogen by electrolyzing water using electric power provided from a power grid; hydrogen storage facility 16 includes a hydrogen tank that stores hydrogen produced by the hydrogen production facility 14. The gateway device 18 is a device that communicates with a device outside the hydrogen station 12; ¶0035 disclosing FIG. 1 includes a block diagram illustrating functional blocks of gateway device 18. Each block illustrated in the block diagram of the present specification can be realized by a processor (CPU or the like) of a computer, an element including a memory, an electronic circuit, or a mechanical device in terms of hardware, and is realized by a computer program or the like in terms of software)
an input part to read a constraint condition and an actual performance value; (Harada ¶0037 disclosing the management server 40 (input part); the management server 40 includes a control unit 42 (input part), a storage unit 44, and a communication unit 46. The control unit 42 executes various data processing for creating an operation plan for the hydrogen production facility 14; ¶0038 the storage unit of the management server having a plurality of constants included in the objective function and the constraint condition used; a value acquired from an external device, a past actual value, a design value, or an assumed value may be set to each constant; ¶0039 further disclosing the plurality of constants and values of the index)
a storage to store the constraint condition and the actual performance value that are read by the input part; (Harada ¶0038 storage unit 44 stores a plurality of constants used in the creation of the operation plan, in other words, a plurality of constants included in the objective function and the constraint condition used in the mathematical programming. The constant can be said to be a parameter whose value does not change in the optimization calculation of the objective function based on the mathematical programming. A value acquired from an external device, a past actual value, a design value, or an assumed value may be set to each constant; ¶0040 storage unit 44 also stores a plurality of variables used in the creation of the operation plan, in other words, a plurality of variables included in the objective function and the constraint condition used in the mathematical programming. The variable can be said to be a parameter whose value is optimized by optimization calculation of an objective function based on the mathematical programming)
a calculator that includes: a balancing power scenario creating unit to create a time series of a balancing power price and a time series of a balancing power ratio, and to create a balancing power scenario by synthesizing the time series of the balancing power price and the time series of the balancing power ratio; (Harada ¶0031 disclosing management server 40 is also connected to a power market price distribution device 32 (creating unit) via the communication network 30; power market price distribution device 32 provides actual data or predicted data of the power price in the power market to an external device (the management server 40); power price may vary for each unit time (time series) (e.g., 30 minutes, and is hereinafter also referred to as a “frame”); unit of the power price is, for example, yen/kWh (kilowatt-hour) (ratio); see also ¶0039 regarding the frame (time series); ¶0043 disclosing the parameter acquisition unit 48 acquires data of the power price C.sub.el,i (power price for each frame) used when creating the operation plan from the power market price distribution device 32)
a mathematical optimization calculator to perform an optimization calculation of the balancing power on the balancing power scenario; and (Harada ¶0045 operation plan creation unit 52 (optimization calculator) creates an operation plan for the hydrogen production facility 14 using a mathematical programming. Expression 1 represents an objective function f in the operation plan creation; ¶0046 the objective function f is to sum the difference between the power purchase cost and the earning from DR over all frames in the planning target period; first term of the objective function f indicates the power purchase cost for each frame for operating the hydrogen production facility 14; the first term of the objective function f indicates the cost based on the amount of power related to the operation of the hydrogen production facility 14 for each frame, and in other words, indicates the cost based on the amount of energy consumed by the hydrogen production facility 14 for each frame; see also ¶0047)
a calculation condition setting unit to set a calculation condition for the optimization calculation; and (Harada ¶0045 operation plan creation unit 52 creates an operation plan for the hydrogen production facility 14 using a mathematical programming. Expression 1 represents an objective function f in the operation plan creation; ¶0046 the objective function f is to sum the difference between the power purchase cost and the earning from DR over all frames in the planning target period; first term of the objective function f indicates the power purchase cost for each frame for operating the hydrogen production facility 14; the first term of the objective function f indicates the cost based on the amount of power related to the operation of the hydrogen production facility 14 for each frame, and in other words, indicates the cost based on the amount of energy consumed by the hydrogen production facility 14 for each frame; see also ¶0047 second term and the third term of the objective function f indicate the earning based on the DR possible amount for each frame of the amount of energy related to the operation of the hydrogen production facility 14 and the DR consideration for each frame; the earning is subtracted from the cost, and the smaller the value of the objective function f, the larger the revenue. Therefore, minimizing the value of the objective function f means maximizing the revenue; ¶0050 disclosing expression 4 and 6 define that the hydrogen production amount satisfies the hydrogen sales amount; and ¶0051 expression 5 defining the tank remaining amount (final tank remaining amount) when one operation plan ends (that is, when the index i of the frame number reaches the final value) is set as a specified value)
an output part to output a calculation result in the calculator to the hydrogen production plant. (Harada ¶0060 disclosing the operation plan output unit 54 of the management server 40 transmits the operation plan data to the gateway device 18 of the hydrogen station 12; the processor of the management server 40 outputs data including the operation plan created in the first step (second step))
Claim 6: The operation plan planning device according to claim 1, wherein the balancing power scenario creating unit creates a plurality of the balancing power scenarios, and the calculator further includes a scenario mathematical model synthesizing unit to create an objective function in which expected values of objective functions of respective mathematical models of a plurality of the balancing power scenarios are used to be synthesized. (Harada ¶0023 disclosing an outline of First Example will be described. The “demand response” (hereinafter, also referred to as “DR”) in First Example is a mechanism for adjusting a supply and demand balance of power by adjusting a power demand amount in accordance with a power supply amount; the up DR adjusts the supply and demand balance of power by increasing the power consumption; the down DR adjusts the supply and demand balance of power by lowering the power consumption; ¶0026 disclosing in First Example, processing using a mathematical programming is executed on an objective function to derive the demand response possible amount for each unit time; an operation plan for a hydrogen production facility is created using a mathematical programming in consideration of the value of performing DR. The mathematical programming is a method of obtaining an explanatory variable that minimizes or maximizes (collectively referred to as “optimize”) an objective function while satisfying a predetermined constraint condition; see also ¶0038, ¶0040, ¶0045-¶0047)
Claim 8: The operation plan planning device according to claim 1, wherein the renewable energy generator includes at least one of a storage battery, a fuel cell, a solar power generator, and a wind power generator. (Harada ¶0009 disclosing a renewable energy power generator that generates power using renewable energy, the power supply system including a power conditioner device that adjusts power generated by the renewable energy power generator, a storage battery capable of storing and discharging at least a part of surplus power that is not supplied to the power grid among power adjusted by the power conditioner device; ¶0077 disclosing the energy supply system may include a storage battery, a fuel cell, and the like together with the hydrogen production facility 14; ¶0084 disclosing power supply system 100 is a self-sustaining power supply system that supplies power to a power grid 104 using power from a renewable energy power generator that generates power using renewable energy, for example, a solar power generator (solar panel 102) that generates power using sunlight; see also ¶0086-¶0087)
Claim 9: An operation plan planning method that is connected to an electric power system and plans an operation plan for responding to a request for a balancing power from the electric power system in a hydrogen production plant that includes a renewable energy generator, a water electrolysis device, and a hydrogen storage facility, the method comprising: (Harada ¶0029 disclosing hydrogen station 12 includes a hydrogen production facility 14, a hydrogen storage facility 16, and a gateway device 18; hydrogen production facility 14 includes a hydrogen generator (also referred to as water electrolysis apparatus or electrolysis tank) that produces hydrogen by electrolyzing water using electric power provided from a power grid; hydrogen storage facility 16 includes a hydrogen tank that stores hydrogen produced by the hydrogen production facility 14. The gateway device 18 is a device that communicates with a device outside the hydrogen station 12; ¶0035 disclosing FIG. 1 includes a block diagram illustrating functional blocks of gateway device 18. Each block illustrated in the block diagram of the present specification can be realized by a processor (CPU or the like) of a computer, an element including a memory, an electronic circuit, or a mechanical device in terms of hardware, and is realized by a computer program or the like in terms of software)
creating balancing power scenarios for time-series data on a balancing power price and a balancing power ratio; (Harada ¶0031 disclosing management server 40 is also connected to a power market price distribution device 32 via the communication network 30; power market price distribution device 32 provides actual data or predicted data of the power price in the power market to an external device (the management server 40); power price may vary for each unit time (time series) (e.g., 30 minutes, and is hereinafter also referred to as a “frame”); unit of the power price is, for example, yen/kWh (kilowatt-hour); see also ¶0039 regarding the frame (time series); ¶0043 disclosing the parameter acquisition unit 48 acquires data of the power price C.sub.el,i (power price for each frame) used when creating the operation plan from the power market price distribution device 32)
deriving a scenario mathematical model by creating mathematical models of the balancing power scenarios and synthesizing the mathematical models; (Harada ¶0045 operation plan creation unit 52 creates an operation plan for the hydrogen production facility 14 using a mathematical programming. Expression 1 represents an objective function f in the operation plan creation; ¶0046 the objective function f is to sum the difference between the power purchase cost and the earning from DR over all frames in the planning target period; first term of the objective function f indicates the power purchase cost for each frame for operating the hydrogen production facility 14; the first term of the objective function f indicates the cost based on the amount of power related to the operation of the hydrogen production facility 14 for each frame, and in other words, indicates the cost based on the amount of energy consumed by the hydrogen production facility 14 for each frame; see also ¶0047; also ¶0049-0051 disclosing the expression mathematical models and synthesizing for example in ¶0050 expressions 4 and 6 which define the hydrogen production amounts satisfied the hydrogen sales amount)
setting an objective function and a constraint condition on the scenario mathematical model; and (Harada ¶0026 processing using a mathematical programming is executed on an objective function to derive the demand response possible amount for each unit time; the mathematical programming is a method of obtaining an explanatory variable that minimizes or maximizes (collectively referred to as “optimize”) an objective function while satisfying a predetermined constraint condition; ¶0038 a plurality of constants included in the objective function and the constraint condition used in the mathematical programming; see also ¶0040; ¶0045 operation plan creation unit 52 creates an operation plan for the hydrogen production facility 14 using a mathematical programming. Expression 1 represents an objective function f in the operation plan creation; ¶0046 the objective function f is to sum the difference between the power purchase cost and the earning from DR over all frames in the planning target period; first term of the objective function f indicates the power purchase cost for each frame for operating the hydrogen production facility 14; the first term of the objective function f indicates the cost based on the amount of power related to the operation of the hydrogen production facility 14 for each frame, and in other words, indicates the cost based on the amount of energy consumed by the hydrogen production facility 14 for each frame; see also ¶0047 second term and the third term of the objective function f indicate the earning based on the DR possible amount for each frame of the amount of energy related to the operation of the hydrogen production facility 14 and the DR consideration for each frame; the earning is subtracted from the cost, and the smaller the value of the objective function f, the larger the revenue. Therefore, minimizing the value of the objective function f means maximizing the revenue; ¶0050 disclosing expression 4 and 6 define that the hydrogen production amount satisfies the hydrogen sales amount; and ¶0051 expression 5 defining the tank remaining amount (final tank remaining amount) when one operation plan ends (that is, when the index i of the frame number reaches the final value) is set as a specified value)
optimizing the scenario mathematical model under the constraint condition, wherein when creating the balancing power scenario, a probability distribution of the balancing power price and a probability distribution of the balancing power ratio are used. (Harada ¶0026 processing using a mathematical programming is executed on an objective function to derive the demand response possible amount for each unit time; the mathematical programming is a method of obtaining an explanatory variable that minimizes or maximizes (collectively referred to as “optimize”) an objective function while satisfying a predetermined constraint condition;
¶0045 operation plan creation unit 52 creates an operation plan for the hydrogen production facility 14 using a mathematical programming. Expression 1 represents an objective function f in the operation plan creation; ¶0046 the objective function f is to sum the difference between the power purchase cost and the earning from DR over all frames in the planning target period; first term of the objective function f indicates the power purchase cost for each frame for operating the hydrogen production facility 14; the first term of the objective function f indicates the cost based on the amount of power related to the operation of the hydrogen production facility 14 for each frame, and in other words, indicates the cost based on the amount of energy consumed by the hydrogen production facility 14 for each frame; see also ¶0047 second term and the third term of the objective function f indicate the earning based on the DR possible amount for each frame of the amount of energy related to the operation of the hydrogen production facility 14 and the DR consideration for each frame; the earning is subtracted from the cost, and the smaller the value of the objective function f, the larger the revenue. Therefore, minimizing the value of the objective function f means maximizing the revenue)
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-5 and 7 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, and 35 U.S.C. 101 set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
No prior art is applied to the following claims:
Claim 2: The operation plan planning device according to claim 1, wherein the balancing power scenario creating unit includes: a balancing power price probability distribution creating section to create a balancing power price probability distribution being a probability distribution of the balancing power price; a balancing power price time series creating section to create, based on the balancing power price probability distribution, a balancing power price time series being a time series of the balancing power price; a balancing power ratio probability distribution creating section to create a balancing power ratio probability distribution being a probability distribution of the balancing power ratio; and a balancing power ratio time series creating section to create, based on the balancing power ratio probability distribution, a balancing power ratio time series being a time series of the balancing power ratio.
Claim 3: The operation plan planning device according to claim 1, wherein creation of the balancing power scenario by the balancing power scenario creating unit is performed based on specifications and operating conditions of the hydrogen production plant, a transaction history of the balancing power, and the request for the balancing power.
Claim 4: The operation plan planning device according to claim 1, wherein in creation of the balancing power scenario by the balancing power scenario creating unit, cases where the balancing power ratio is 0% and the balancing power ratio is 100% are included in the balancing power scenario.
Claim 5: The operation plan planning device according to claim 1, wherein the balancing power scenario has a plurality of groups according to a balancing power contract price.
Claim 7: The operation plan planning device according to claim 6, wherein the scenario mathematical model synthesizing unit has a constraint that makes state variables of the hydrogen production plant match at a time before a contract time of the balancing power in each of the balancing power scenarios.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DIONE N SIMPSON whose telephone number is (571)272-5513. The examiner can normally be reached M-F; 7:30 a.m.-4:30 p.m..
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, Resha Desai can be reached at 571-270-7792. 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.
DIONE N. SIMPSON
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3628
/DIONE N. SIMPSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3628