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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on September 15, 2023 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the IDS has been considered by the examiner.
Claim Status
In the September 15, 2023 submission, claims 1-13 were presented for consideration and are pending.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-6 and 9-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sakuma et al., US Patent Publication No. 2019/0139161 (published May 2019, hereinafter SAKUMA) in view of Sadreddini et al., “Design of a Decision-Based Multiple-Criteria Reservation System for the EV Parking Lot” (available August 2020, hereinafter SADREDDINI).
As per claim 1, SAKUMA teaches of a server configured to manage power control between a power controller and an electrified vehicle, the power control including at least one of charging and discharging (see fig. 1; and par. 11: reservation server manages power between power controller and electric vehicle (EV) for providing charging services at determined charging locations), the server comprising:
a communication unit configured to acquire information on a power supply and demand balancing request for balancing a power supply and demand status in a predetermined power system (see fig. 1 and par. 34, 39 and 70-72: system employs a reservation server which interface with the user and power resources for scheduling and managing the distribution of power during charging at determined locations); and
one or more processors configured to control the power control in a reservation slot in which a reservation is made for the power control by a user of the electrified vehicle (see par. 6-7: users inquire and set reservation quotas for charging EVs at determined locations).
While SAKUMA focuses on managing charging resources through a reservation server, the art fails to explicitly address a system which checks with the user during a period from a start of the power control in the reservation slot to a time immediately after an end of the power control, whether the power control responding to the power supply and demand balancing request is executable after the reservation slot.
Like SAKUMA, SADREDDINI is directed to controlling power resources used in charging EV’s via a reservation system. However, SADREDDINI further teaches of a system and method which further optimizes the allocation of power by checking with the users at arrival time (AT) during the charging process and at departure time (DT) to further access charging conditions, chech desired state of charge and confirm charging time frames (see pg. 2432, col. 1, “3) Departure Time”; and col. 2, “5) Desired SoC (DSoC)”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, to employ the use of SADREDDINI's system and method of capturing charge data during a reservation , with SAKUMA's system and method of employing a reservation system for EV charging which balances supply and demand via reservation quotas, to optimize power usage and scheduling of vehicles for allocated charging stations.
As per claim 2, the combination of SAKUMA and SADREDDINI teaches all of the limitations noted in the base claim(s) as outlined above, wherein SADREDDINI further teaches of the server according to claim 1, wherein the one or more processors are configured to adjust a length of an execution period of the power control to be executed after the reservation slot based on predetermined information on electric power to be exchanged between the predetermined power system and the electrified vehicle by the power control after the reservation slot (see pg. 2434, col. 1, “Test and Results”: system evaluates both the AT and DT respective of reservation criteria, and based on DSoC, reallocates power and reservation criteria for subsequent requests).
As per claim 3, the combination of SAKUMA and SADREDDINI teaches all of the limitations noted in the base claim(s) as outlined above, wherein SADREDDINI further teaches of the server according to claim 2, wherein the predetermined information includes information on an upper limit value or a lower limit value specified by the user about a charge ratio of the electrified vehicle (see fig. 4 and pg. 2432, col. 2, “5) Desired SoC (DSoC)”: during reservation requests, the maximum charging charging ratio (McR) is set and cannot be exceeded).
As per claim 4, the combination of SAKUMA and SADREDDINI teaches all of the limitations noted in the base claim(s) as outlined above, wherein SAKUMA further teaches of the server according to claim 2, wherein the predetermined information includes information on the power supply and demand status in the predetermined power system after the reservation slot (see par. 7-9: the system balances supply and demand for charging reservations by evaluating request for reservation quotas).
As per claim 5, the combination of SAKUMA and SADREDDINI teaches all of the limitations noted in the base claim(s) as outlined above, wherein SADREDDINI further teaches of the server according to claim 2, wherein the predetermined information includes information on a permissible value of an amount of change in a charge ratio of the electrified vehicle by the power control after the reservation slot, the permissible value being estimated by the one or more processors based on a change history of the charge ratio (see pg. 2433, col. 1, “2) Checking the Consistency” through pg. 2434, col. 1: the charge ratio for each parking lot (PL) is determined prior to AT, and respective of reservation request, wherein the SoC is subsequently evaluated during charge activity and modified respective of changes to the system).
As per claim 6, the combination of SAKUMA and SADREDDINI teaches all of the limitations noted in the base claim(s) as outlined above, wherein SADREDDINI further teaches of the server according to claim 1, wherein the one or more processors are configured to check availability of the power controller after the reservation slot before checking with the user whether the power control is executable after the reservation slot (see fig. 9 and pg. 2436-2437: system evaluates AT and DSoC charging parameters and set PL slots and availability based on charging criteria).
As per claim 9, the combination of SAKUMA and SADREDDINI teaches all of the limitations noted in the base claim(s) as outlined above, wherein SAKUMA further teaches of the server according to claim 1, wherein the communication unit is configured to acquire information on the power supply and demand balancing request in a power grid included in the predetermined power system (see par. 69-70: system evaluates [pre and post] power availability respective of charging reservation quotas and make accommodations to manage supply and demand balance for subsequent reservation quotas).
As per claim 10, the combination of SAKUMA and SADREDDINI teaches all of the limitations noted in the base claim(s) as outlined above, wherein SADREDDINI further teaches of the server according to claim 1, wherein the one or more processors are configured to execute control to notify the user that an execution period of the power control is to be extended when confirmation is made that the power control is executable after the reservation slot (see fig. 9 and pg. 2436-2437: system evaluates DSoC charging criteria, extends charging window and adjust PL slot parameters based on updated charging criteria, whereby supporting dynamic allocation of power).
As per claim 11, the combination of SAKUMA and SADREDDINI teaches all of the limitations noted in the base claim(s) as outlined above, wherein SADREDDINI further teaches of the server according to claim 1, wherein the one or more processors are configured to cause the electrified vehicle to execute the power control responding to the power supply and demand balancing request after the reservation slot when confirmation is made that the power control is executable after the reservation slot (see fig. 9 and pg. 2435-2437: system evaluates current charging criteria and make adjustments to support current conditions, while also PL criteria and power availability and allocation for subsequent reservation slots).
As per claim 12, SAKUMA teaches of a system comprising:
a power controller configured to execute power control including at least one of charging and discharging (see fig. 1; and par. 11: reservation server system which provides charging services between power controller and electric vehicle (EV) for providing charging at determined locations);
an electrified vehicle (see fig. 1: system charges one or more EVs at determined locations); and
a server configured to manage the power control between the power controller and the electrified vehicle (see fig. 1 and par. 34, 39 and 70-72: system employs a reservation server which interface with the user and power resources for scheduling and managing the distribution of power during charging at determined locations), wherein
the server is configured to acquire information on a power supply and demand balancing request for balancing a power supply and demand status in a predetermined power system (see par. 69-70: system evaluates [pre and post] power availability respective of charging reservation quotas and make accommodations to manage supply and demand balance for subsequent reservation quotas), and
the server is configured to control the power control in a reservation slot in which a reservation is made for the power control by a user of the electrified vehicle (see pg. 2434, col. 1, “Test and Results”: system evaluates both the AT and DT respective of reservation criteria, and based on DSoC, reallocates power and reservation criteria for current and subsequent reservations).
While SAKUMA focuses on maintaining the system’s supply and demand power criteria while managing charging resources through a reservation server, the art fails to explicitly address executing a control check, with the user during a period from a start of the power control in the reservation slot to a time immediately after an end of the power control, whether the power control responding to the power supply and demand balancing request is executable after the reservation slot.
SADREDDINI teaches of a system for controlling power resources used in charging EV’s via a reservation system, wherein the reference further focuses on a system which optimizes the allocation of power by checking with the users at arrival time (AT) during the charging process and at departure time (DT) to further access charging conditions, check desired state of charge and confirm charging time frames (see pg. 2432, col. 1, “3) Departure Time”; and col. 2, “5) Desired SoC (DSoC)”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, to employ the use of SADREDDINI's system of capturing charge data during a reservation, with SAKUMA's system of employing a reservation system for EV charging, to optimize power usage and scheduling of vehicles for allocated charging stations.
As per claim 13, SAKUMA teaches of a management method for managing power control between a power controller and an electrified vehicle, the power control including at least one of charging and discharging (see fig. 1; and par. 11: reservation server provides a method of controlling charging power between power controller and electric vehicle (EV) for providing charging services at determined locations), the management method comprising:
acquiring information on a power supply and demand balancing request for balancing a power supply and demand status in a predetermined power system (see par. 69-70: system evaluates [pre and post] power availability respective of charging reservation quotas and make accommodations to manage supply and demand balance for subsequent reservation quotas); and
controlling the power control in a reservation slot in which a reservation is made for the power control by a user of the electrified vehicle (see pg. 2434, col. 1, “Test and Results”: system evaluates both the AT and DT respective of reservation criteria, and based on DSoC, reallocates power and reservation criteria for current and subsequent reservations).
SAKUMA is directed to a method which manages the charging of EVs using a reservation server that balances power resources. However, the reference fails to explicitly focus on a method for checking with a user during a period from a start of the power control in the reservation slot to a time immediately after an end of the power control, whether the power control responding to the power supply and demand balancing request is executable after the reservation slot.
The cited SADREDDINI reference focuses on controlling power resources used in charging EV’s via a reservation system, wherein the method which further optimizes the allocation of power by checking with the users at arrival time (AT), during the charging process and at departure time (DT) to further access charging conditions, further evaluating the desired state of charge and accessing charging time frames (see pg. 2432, col. 1, “3) Departure Time”; and col. 2, “5) Desired SoC (DSoC)”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, to employ the use of SADREDDINI's method of capturing charge data during a reservation , with SAKUMA's method of employing a reservation system for EV charging, to optimize power usage and scheduling of vehicles for allocated charging stations.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7 and 8 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
While the cited art addresses several of the limitations presented in the instant application, the references either singularly or in combination, fail to explicitly teach or suggest of a system and method consistent with the proposed claims 1, 7 and 8, wherein the system is configured to: acquire user stay information as to whether the user is expected to stay after the reservation slot at a predetermined commercial facility including the power controller; determine whether power control is executable after the reservation slot based on a charge ratio of the electrified vehicle after power control in the reservation slot; and access power control executables after the reservation slot by using the user stay information acquired by the communication unit.
Conclusion
The applicant is strongly encouraged to contact the examiner if further clarifications are needed with respect to interpretation of currently presented claims and/or cited prior art.
A reference to specific paragraphs, columns, pages, or figures in a cited prior art reference is not limited to preferred embodiments or any specific examples. It is well settled that a prior art reference, in its entirety, must be considered for all that it expressly teaches and fairly suggests to one having ordinary skill in the art. Stated differently, a prior art disclosure reading on a limitation of Applicant's claim cannot be ignored on the ground that other embodiments disclosed were instead cited. Therefore, the Examiner's citation to a specific portion of a single prior art reference is not intended to exclusively dictate, but rather, to demonstrate an exemplary disclosure commensurate with the specific limitations being addressed. In re Heck, 699 F.2d 1331, 1332-33,216 USPQ 1038, 1039 (Fed. Cir. 1983) (quoting In re Lemelson, 397 F.2d 1006,1009, 158 USPQ 275, 277 (CCPA 1968)). In re: Upsher-Smith Labs. v. Pamlab, LLC, 412 F.3d 1319, 1323, 75 USPQ2d 1213, 1215 (Fed. Cir. 2005); In re Fritch, 972 F.2d 1260, 1264, 23 USPQ2d 1780, 1782 (Fed. Cir. 1992); Merck& Co. v. BiocraftLabs., Inc., 874 F.2d 804, 807, 10 USPQ2d 1843, 1846 (Fed. Cir. 1989); In re Fracalossi, 681 F.2d 792,794 n.1,215 USPQ 569, 570 n.1 (CCPA 1982); In re Lamberti, 545 F.2d 747, 750, 192 USPQ 278, 280 (CCPA 1976); In re Bozek, 416 F.2d 1385, 1390, 163 USPQ 545, 549 (CCPA 1969).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KELVIN BOOKER whose telephone number is (571)272-7827. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 9am-5pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Mohammad Ali can be reached on (571) 272-4105. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is (571) 273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at (866) 217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call (800) 786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or (571) 272-1000.
/Kelvin Booker/
Examiner, Art Unit 2119
/MOHAMMAD ALI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2119
Prosecution Insights