DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendment
This Office Action has been issued in response to amendment filed 12/15/2025. Applicant's arguments have been carefully and fully considered but they are not persuasive. Accordingly, this action has been made FINAL.
Claim Status
Claim 1 has been amended. Claims 7-9 have been added. Claim 2 was canceled. Claims 1 and 3-9 remain pending and are ready for examination.
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.
Claim(s) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hisano (US20120296836A1 -hereinafter Hisano) in view of Nishizaki et al. (JP2012065487A -hereinafter Nishizaki -Note: as per machine translation attached) in view of Sakamoto et al. (JP7040935B2 -hereinafter Sakamoto -Note: as per machine translation attached).
Regarding Claim 1, Hisano teaches a power processing system comprising:
a communication unit (see [0111]; Hisano: “a communication network 9”) configured to communicate with both a first facility in which a renewable energy power generation device is installed (see [0111]; Hisano: “In the present embodiment, the house etc. S1 of the supplier is located in an “area KY”, and is provided at least with a green electricity generating device 7 (not illustrated in FIG. 1, see FIG. 12), which is a wind power generating device or a solar power generating device, and the green electricity supply control device 2.” See [0026]: “). An area EL1 represents a surplus electricity (green electricity generated by solar power generation etc.) to be sold from household to an electricity company.”) and a terminal device of a user of a second facility that is different from the first facility (see [0026]; Hisano: “In the conventional green electricity supply and purchase system, the green electricity is sold to an electricity company etc. and then is sold to public together with non-green electricity (area EL2).”); and
a processing unit, (see [0137]; Hisano: “The main control section 11”)
using normal power that is different from the renewable energy power, (see [0010]; Hisano: ““Non-Green Electricity” . . . in the present Specification, on the contrary to the green electricity, the term “non-green electricity” means electricity generated in association with direct emission of CO2, for example by thermal power generation, gas power generation.”)
wherein when the communication unit receives an allocation request from the terminal device, the processing unit executes a certificate issuance process, (see [0142]; Hisano: “The certificate issuing section 23 is configured to issue a green electricity supply/purchase certificate at a request of the device on the supplier side (green electricity supply control device 2) or on the purchaser side (green electricity reception control device 3). In the present embodiment, the green electricity supply/purchase certificate is a certificate to certify, by showing the amount of the green electricity, that the owner of the device contributes to reduction in a warm-house effect gas (CO2) emission by the green electricity generation (supply) and use (consumption).”)
wherein the allocation request is a signal that requests allocation of at least a portion of an environmental value of the first power consumption to at least a portion of the second power consumption, and (see [0114]; Hisano: “The green electricity reception control device 3 is configured to receive green electricity supplied from the green electricity supply control device 2. The green electricity received by the green electricity reception control device 3 may be further transmitted to another green electricity reception control device 3, or may be consumed for operation and management in the company facility D4.”)
wherein the certificate issuance process is to issue a certificate certifying that at least a portion of the environmental value is allocated to at least a portion of the second power consumption, (see [0142]; Hisano: “the green electricity supply/purchase certificate is a certificate to certify, by showing the amount of the green electricity, that the owner of the device contributes to reduction in a warm-house effect gas (CO2) emission by the green electricity generation (supply) and use (consumption)”)
the processing unit executes …lifecycle CO2 emissions expressed as CO2 emissions per unit of the renewable energy power in which CO2 emissions in a series of processes including manufacturing, operation and disposal of the renewable energy power generation device; (see [0011]; Hisano: ““Life cycle CO2 emission amount” . . . the term “life cycle CO2 emission amount” indicates an amount of CO2 emission throughout power generation per unit of electricity generated by the power generation. For example, the life cycle CO2 emission amount encompasses a CO2 emission amount calculated by converting, into CO2 emission amount, energies consumed in production, installation, and management of a solar power generating device.”)
However, Hisano does not explicitly teach: wherein the processing unit determines first power consumption that is electric energy consumed in the first facility during a predetermined aggregation period of a power generation amount of renewable energy power generated by the renewable energy power generation device during the aggregation period, wherein the processing unit determines second power consumption that is electric energy consumed in a power consumption event implemented in the second facility, the processing unit executes a first classification process of classifying the renewable energy power into a first group or a second group in accordance with lifecycle CO2 emissions… when the renewable energy power is classified into the first group, the lifecycle CO2 emissions are smaller as compared with when the renewable energy power is classified into the second group; the processing unit executes a value setting process that sets up the environmental value in accordance with a result of the first classification process; and the value setting process is to set the environmental value higher when the renewable energy power is classified into the first group as compared with when the renewable energy power is classified into the second group.
Nishizaki from the same or similar field of endeavor teaches:
wherein the processing unit determines first power consumption that is electric energy consumed in the first facility during a predetermined aggregation period of a power generation amount of renewable energy power generated by the renewable energy power generation device during the aggregation period, (see page 7, paragraph 7; Nishizaki: “Here, a part of the generated power may be consumed by the solar operator SC, and the remaining power may be supplied to the power transmission and distribution equipment 4. In this case, the amount of power supplied to the power transmission / distribution facility 4 becomes “amount of power generated by the photovoltaic power generation facility 2” in the power amount task 54 described later.”)
wherein the processing unit determines second power consumption that is electric energy consumed in a power consumption event implemented in the second facility (see page 4, first paragraph; Nishizaki: “the power consumption data of the consumer U is acquired from the second consumer database 52 (step S14),”),
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the teaching of Hisano to include Nishizaki’s features of the processing unit determines first power consumption that is electric energy consumed in the first facility during a predetermined aggregation period of a power generation amount of renewable energy power generated by the renewable energy power generation device during the aggregation period, wherein the processing unit determines second power consumption that is electric energy consumed in a power consumption event implemented in the second facility. Doing so would achieve the benefits of solar power generation without individually installing solar power generation facilities. (Nishizaki, page 7, second paragraph)
However, it does not explicitly teach: the processing unit executes a first classification process of classifying the renewable energy power into a first group or a second group in accordance with lifecycle CO2 emissions… when the renewable energy power is classified into the first group, the lifecycle CO2 emissions are smaller as compared with when the renewable energy power is classified into the second group; the processing unit executes a value setting process that sets up the environmental value in accordance with a result of the first classification process; and the value setting process is to set the environmental value higher when the renewable energy power is classified into the first group as compared with when the renewable energy power is classified into the second group.
Sakamoto from the same or similar field of endeavor teaches:
the processing unit executes a first classification process of classifying the renewable energy power into a first group or a second group in accordance with lifecycle CO2 emissions… (see page 5, second paragraph; Sakamoto: “a business classification evaluation system (S, A, B, C) based on the Act on Rationalization of Energy Use (measures related to factories, etc.) has already started, and each business is carbon dioxide (hereinafter referred to as carbon dioxide)., CO2) Emission factors (actual emission factors) are calculated for each business operator, 2 and are classified into each evaluation class for each evaluation period.”)
when the renewable energy power is classified into the first group, the lifecycle CO2 emissions are smaller as compared with when the renewable energy power is classified into the second group; (see page 11, paragraph 5; Sakamoto: “The above-mentioned regulation parameter R is an evaluation index for evaluating a power generation company with respect to CO2 emissions, and specifically, is a CO2 emission coefficient, a total CO2 emission regulation amount, and the like. In the embodiment shown in FIG. 3, the evaluation period T is one year, and the power generation company classified into the S class has an evaluation value such as an average of the actual values of the regulation parameter R in the evaluation period T of R1 value or less. It is one of the requirements (S class: R≤R1).”)
the processing unit executes a value setting process that sets up the environmental value in accordance with a result of the first classification process; and (see page 11, paragraph 6; Sakamoto: “Further, the above-mentioned target regulation value V is an arbitrary value of the regulation parameter R belonging to the abovementioned target evaluation class Ct. Therefore, if the evaluation value of the regulation parameter R for the evaluation period T of the power generation company is equal to or less than the target regulation value V, the target evaluation class Ct is achieved.”)
the value setting process is to set the environmental value higher when the renewable energy power is classified into the first group as compared with when the renewable energy power is classified into the second group. (see page 11, paragraph 6; Sakamoto: “in the embodiment shown in FIG. 3, as shown in FIG. 3, the larger the value of the regulation parameter R, the lower the evaluation of the energy saving effort status, but the higher the economic efficiency. Therefore, in order to pursue economic efficiency while achieving a certain target evaluation class Ct, evaluation is performed for the target evaluation class Ct in the range of the value of the regulatory parameter R for achieving the target evaluation class Ct. The value at the boundary with the evaluation class C, which is one step inferior (that is, the maximum value of the regulation parameter R in each evaluation class C) may be set as the target regulation value V. Specifically, when the target evaluation class Ct is each of the S class and the A class, the target regulation value V becomes the R1 value and the R2 value, respectively.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the teaching of Hisano and Nishizaki to include Sakamoto’s features of the processing unit executes a first classification process of classifying the renewable energy power into a first group or a second group in accordance with lifecycle CO2 emissions, when the renewable energy power is classified into the first group, the lifecycle CO2 emissions are smaller as compared with when the renewable energy power is classified into the second group; the processing unit executes a value setting process that sets up the environmental value in accordance with a result of the first classification process; and the value setting process is to set the environmental value higher when the renewable energy power is classified into the first group as compared with when the renewable energy power is classified into the second group. Doing so would pursue economic efficiency such as maximizing the above-mentioned total electricity sales profit while achieving the target evaluation class by satisfying the target total emission regulation amount. (Sakamoto, page 3, paragraph 4)
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hisano (US20120296836A1 -hereinafter Hisano) in view of Nishizaki et al. (JP2012065487A -hereinafter Nishizaki -Note: as per machine translation attached) in view of Ishikawa et al. (WO2020044476A1 -hereinafter Ishikawa -Note: as per machine translation attached).
Regarding Claim 3, the combination of Hisano and Nishizaki teaches all the limitations of claim 1 above, Hisano further teaches wherein:
the renewable energy power generation device is a photovoltaic power generation device; (see [0109]; Hisano: “In the green electricity supply and purchase system 100 e according to the present invention, the supplier (S) is S1, which is a farm having a wind power generating device, or a house (building) having a solar power generating device (hereinafter, a house etc. S1).”)
the processing unit determines a photovoltaic power generation amount that is a power generation amount of the renewable energy power generated by the photovoltaic power generation device; (see [0055]; Hisano: “The supply and purchase information at least includes information for identifying the electricity transmission sender for supplying the green electricity, the electricity transmission receiver for receiving the green electricity, the electricity amount of the green electricity transmitted, and the electricity amount of the green electricity received.”)
However, it does not explicitly teach:
the communication unit acquires weather information indicating weather in an area where the first facility is located;
the processing unit determines whether the photovoltaic power generation amount is within an assumed range of the photovoltaic power generation amount in accordance with the photovoltaic power generation amount and the weather information; and
the processing unit reduces the environmental value when the photovoltaic power generation amount is outside the assumed range as compared with when the photovoltaic power generation amount is within the assumed range.
Ishikawa from the same or similar field of endeavor teaches:
the communication unit acquires weather information indicating weather in an area where the first facility is located; (see page 3, paragraph 10; Ishikawa: “This makes it possible to accurately determine the presence or absence of submergence even on a day with a small amount of solar radiation, such as a day with a lot of clouds or a rainy day.”)
the processing unit determines whether the photovoltaic power generation amount is within an assumed range of the photovoltaic power generation amount in accordance with the photovoltaic power generation amount and the weather information; (see page 3, paragraph 9; Ishikawa: “the output of the photovoltaic module main body other than the photovoltaic module main body to be determined is within the predetermined range during the predetermined period.”)
and the processing unit reduces the environmental value when the photovoltaic power generation amount is outside the assumed range as compared with when the photovoltaic power generation amount is within the assumed range. (see page 3, paragraph 9; Ishikawa: “A detecting unit for detecting the generated voltage, generated current or generated power by sampling at regular intervals, and a solar unit in which the value of the detected generated voltage, generated current or generated power has been outside a predetermined range for a predetermined period. A determination unit that determines that the state of the photovoltaic module main body is abnormal. Thereby, the value indicating the electric leakage or the power generation function is detected for each of the photovoltaic module main bodies, and the presence or absence of submergence is determined, so that the determination can be made with high accuracy even on the water where the environment is unstable.” See page 9, paragraph 8: “The insolation and the power value of the other photovoltaic module main body 112 (first index value), which are the reference, are not constant but always change, and the power value of the power generation of the photovoltaic module main body 112 to be determined. Etc. are constantly changing.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the teaching of Hisano and Nishizaki to include Ishikawa’s features of the communication unit acquires weather information indicating weather in an area where the first facility is located; the processing unit determines whether the photovoltaic power generation amount is within an assumed range of the photovoltaic power generation amount in accordance with the photovoltaic power generation amount and the weather information; and the processing unit reduces the environmental value when the photovoltaic power generation amount is outside the assumed range as compared with when the photovoltaic power generation amount is within the assumed range. Doing so would made the determination with high accuracy with an unstable environment. (Ishikawa, page 3, paragraph 6)
Claim(s) 4-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hisano (US20120296836A1 -hereinafter Hisano) in view of Nishizaki et al. (JP2012065487A -hereinafter Nishizaki -Note: as per machine translation attached) in view of Kobayashi et al. (US20210295348A1 -hereinafter Kobayashi).
Regarding Claim 4, the combination of Hisano and Nishizaki teaches all the limitations of claim 1 above; however, it does not explicitly teach further comprising a storage unit that stores a history of CO2 emissions from the second facility, wherein: the processing unit executes a second classification process that classifies the second facility into a first facility group or a second facility group in accordance with the history; when the second facility is classified into the first facility group, the CO2 emissions in the history are smaller as compared with when the second facility is classified into the second facility group; the processing unit executes the certificate issuance process in accordance with a result of the second classification process; and the certificate issuance process is to issue the certificate preferentially when the second facility is classified into the first facility group, as compared with when the second facility is classified into the second facility group.
Kobayashi from the same or similar field of endeavor teaches: further comprising a storage unit that stores a history of CO2 emissions from the second facility, wherein: (see [0013]; Kobayashi: “an environmental load intensity acquisition unit configured to identify and acquire an amount of environmental load caused in generating energy used by the facility per unit amount and evidence information on the amount of environmental load, from a history of energy usage by the facility;”)
the processing unit executes a second classification process that classifies the second facility into a first facility group or a second facility group in accordance with the history; (see Fig. 12 and [0010]; Kobayashi: “Specifically, with regard to an environment contribution effect produced by a financing project for an EV purchaser, it is necessary to calculate a value by calculating an amount of carbon dioxide emission from the EV, based on an annual traveled distance, power consumption of the EV, and a carbon dioxide emission factor of power, and comparing this amount with an amount of carbon dioxide emission from an existing gasoline vehicle.”)
when the second facility is classified into the first facility group (see [0058]; Kobayashi: “Processing step S1903 involves calculating an amount of environmental load caused by the use of an EV.”), the CO2 emissions in the history are smaller as compared with when the second facility is classified into the second facility group; (see Fig. 12 and [0060]; Kobayashi: “Processing step S1905 involves calculating an environment contribution effect produced by the introduction of the EV, as a difference between the amount of environmental load calculated in processing step S1903 and the amount of environmental load calculated in processing step S1904.”)
the processing unit executes the certificate issuance process in accordance with a result of the second classification process; and (see Fig. 12 and [0060]; Kobayashi: “Processing step S1906 involves generating a report for an investor. This report contains the amount of carbon dioxide emission and the evidence information (the link information on the environment certificate, the power retailing plan information). The report is submitted to a green bond investor.”)
the certificate issuance process is to issue the certificate preferentially when the second facility is classified into the first facility group, as compared with when the second facility is classified into the second facility group. (see [0067]; Kobayashi: “The idea of applying the present invention to an EV is conceived from an idea of, based on information about when and where an EV was charged, identifying a carbon dioxide emission factor of electricity and evidence information on the carbon dioxide emission factor, calculating an amount of environmental load caused by charge, from the carbon dioxide emission factor and a charge amount of the electricity, calculating an environment contribution effect produced by introduction of the EV, from a difference between the amount of environmental load caused by the charge and an amount of environmental load caused by the use of a gasoline vehicle, and submitting the environment contribution effect and the evidence information in the format of an environment report.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the teaching of Hisano and Nishizaki to include Kobayashi’s features of further comprising a storage unit that stores a history of CO2 emissions from the second facility, wherein: the processing unit executes a second classification process that classifies the second facility into a first facility group or a second facility group in accordance with the history; when the second facility is classified into the first facility group, the CO2 emissions in the history are smaller as compared with when the second facility is classified into the second facility group; the processing unit executes the certificate issuance process in accordance with a result of the second classification process; and the certificate issuance process is to issue the certificate preferentially when the second facility is classified into the first facility group, as compared with when the second facility is classified into the second facility group. Doing so would minimize environmental load in supplying power to the power load device and in supplying heat to the heat load device, minimize a cost. (Kobayashi, [0007])
Regarding Claim 5, the combination of Hisano, Nishizaki, and Kobayashi teaches all the limitations of claim 4 above, Hisano further teaches wherein:
the power consumption event includes external charging of an electrified vehicle of the user of the second facility; (see [0289]; Hisano: “The green electricity supply control device 2 s of the household S transmits a supply offer (supply offer d1) to the green electricity reception control device 3 m of the vehicle M via the communication network 9.”)
the external charging is charging of a power storage device of the electrified vehicle using power supplied from power equipment that is external to the electrified vehicle and that is provided in the second facility; (see [0285]; Hisano: “the vehicle M includes a green certified battery 6, which is certified as a battery for storing only green electricity. The green certified battery 6 is provided in addition to a conventional battery for storing electricity to be consumed by the vehicle M itself, or for storing electricity generated by driving of the vehicle M.”)
the communication unit acquires event information indicating whether the power consumption event is the external charging; (see [0289]; Hisano: “The green electricity supply control device 2 s of the household S transmits a supply offer (supply offer d1) to the green electricity reception control device 3 m of the vehicle M via the communication network 9.”)
the processing unit executes the certificate issuance process in accordance with the event information; and (see [029]; Hisano: “The green electricity reception control device 3 m stores the received green electricity in the green certified battery 6.”)
the certificate issuance process is to issue the certificate preferentially when the power consumption event is the external charging, as compared with when the power consumption event is not the external charging. (see [0285]; Hisano: “The certification may be done by a battery retailer by transmitting information (such as battery serial number, car plate number to the green electricity supply/purchase certifying device 1 after confirming the battery for green electricity is not connected with a dynamo of the vehicle at installation of the battery on the vehicle. By this, the green electricity supply/purchase certifying device 1 can guarantee that the battery installed on the vehicle M can store only green electricity and certify that the battery as a green certified battery 6.”)
Regarding Claim 6, the combination of Hisano, Nishizaki, and Kobayashi teaches all the limitations of claim 5 above, Hisano further teaches wherein the certificate issuance process includes issuing the certificate only when the power consumption event is the external charging. (see [0359]; Hisano: “FIG. 18 is a view schematically illustrating a green electricity supply and purchase system 100 d of fuel station type. It is expected that, as a result of an increase in vehicles M capable of receiving and transmitting green electricity, fuel stations such as petrol station and electrical charging station to which vehicles stop by often will adopt the green electricity supply and purchase system according to the present invention, whereby the fuel station plays a role of the mediator of the green electricity.”)
Claim(s) 7-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hisano (US20120296836A1 -hereinafter Hisano) in view of Nishizaki et al. (JP2012065487A -hereinafter Nishizaki -Note: as per machine translation attached) in view of Sakamoto (JP7040935B2 -hereinafter Sakamoto -Note: as per machine translation attached) in view of Sako et al. (US20130138256A1 -hereinafter Sako).
Regarding Claim 7, the combination of Hisano, Nishizaki, and Sakamoto teaches all the limitations of claim 1 above; however, it does not explicitly teach wherein the renewable energy power of the first group includes wind power.
Sako from the same or similar field of endeavor teaches wherein the renewable energy power of the first group includes wind power. (see [0110]; Sako: “In addition, although an example in which power is classified roughly into the renewable energy and the exhaustible energy has been described above, this embodiment is applicable even when the renewable energy is sub-divided into power for every type of power generation such as solar power generation, solar thermal power generation, wind power generation, geothermal power generation, wave power generation, temperature difference power generation, biomass power generation, and the like and the exhaustible energy is sub-divided into power for every detailed type of power generation such as classification into types of fossil fuels, for example, coal, oil, natural gas, and methane hydrate, even in the same thermal power generation such as thermal power generation and nuclear power veneration. In addition, this control example is applicable even when the electricity rate is fixedly set or fluctuates in real time.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the teaching of Hisano, Nishizaki, and Sakamoto to include Sako’s features of the renewable energy power of the first group includes wind power. Doing so would prioritize the use of renewable energy so that the target electrical storage amount is achieved. (Sako, [0075])
Regarding Claim 8, the combination of Hisano, Nishizaki, and Sakamoto teaches all the limitations of claim 1 above; however, it does not explicitly teach wherein the renewable energy power of the second group includes solar power.
Sako from the same or similar field of endeavor teaches wherein the renewable energy power of the first group includes wind power. (see [0110]; Sako: “In addition, although an example in which power is classified roughly into the renewable energy and the exhaustible energy has been described above, this embodiment is applicable even when the renewable energy is sub-divided into power for every type of power generation such as solar power generation, solar thermal power generation, wind power generation, geothermal power generation, wave power generation, temperature difference power generation, biomass power generation, and the like and the exhaustible energy is sub-divided into power for every detailed type of power generation such as classification into types of fossil fuels, for example, coal, oil, natural gas, and methane hydrate, even in the same thermal power generation such as thermal power generation and nuclear power veneration. In addition, this control example is applicable even when the electricity rate is fixedly set or fluctuates in real time.”)
The same motivation to combine Hisano, Nishizaki, Sakamoto, and Sako a set forth for Claim 7 equally applies to Claim 8.
Regarding Claim 9, the combination of Hisano, Nishizaki, Sakamoto, and Sako teaches all the limitations of claim 8 above, Sako further teaches wherein the environmental value is set based on whether an amount of power generation of the renewable energy power by a solar power generation device is within an assumed range determined based on weather information. (see [0124]; Sako: “The power control unit 244 controls the use of power based on the weather condition, etc, as the sixth control example. For example, because an amount of power generation by solar power generation is considered to be large on a sunny day, the power control unit 244 may prioritize the use of power obtained by the solar power generation on the sunny day.” See [0119]: “The future predicted supply amount of renewable energy can be estimated based on a previous statistical value or a predicted weather condition.”)
The same motivation to combine Hisano, Nishizaki, Sakamoto, and Sako a set forth for Claim 7 equally applies to Claim 9.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/15/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
With respect to applicant’s argument located on page 9 of the Amendment:
“With regard to original dependent claim 2, the Office Action concedes that the combination of Hisano and Nishizaki does not teach the claimed feature: "executes a first classification process of classifying [] renewable energy power into a first group or a second group in accordance with lifecycle CO2 emissions," as included in original dependent claim 2 (see page 7 of the Office Action). Nonetheless, the Office Action apparently relies on Sakamoto to remedy the conceded deficiencies of Hisano and Nishizaki. Applicant respectfully submits that this is incorrect.”
The Applicant’s argument has been considered but is not deemed persuasive. Examiner respectfully would like to remind applicant that the rejections are based on the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim limitations. Examiner interpreted classifying the renewable energy power into a group in accordance with lifecycle CO2 emissions. Sakamoto discloses Power generation using fossil fuels is said to emit CO2 according to the type (category) of fuel, while solar power, wind power, hydraulic power, geothermal heat, solar heat, atmospheric heat, and other heat existing in the natural world. Power generation using renewable energy such as biomass is not considered to have emitted CO2. That is the renewable power energy is a group. The claims as presently presented do not preclude this interpretation.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Numata (US9828882B2) discloses perform adjustment of an electric power supply required to use unstable renewable energy sources such as solar and wind power, can achieve high efficiency power generation with high temperature working fluid, and can reduce emissions of environmental load substances such as NOx and CO2.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VI N TRAN whose telephone number is (571)272-1108. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9:00-5:00.
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, ROBERT FENNEMA can be reached at (571) 272-2748. 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.
/V.N.T./Examiner, Art Unit 2117
/ROBERT E FENNEMA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2117
Prosecution Insights