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 .
Claim Objections
1. Claim 2 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 2 recites “an level”, which should read “a level”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Priority
Priority claims to 63/420,890 and 63/531,985 are acknowledged.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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)(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.
2. Claims 2-11 and 13-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Lowenthal (2011/0133693).
As to claim 2: Lowenthal teaches an electric vehicle charging load management system for use with a charging station at a residential home (abstract), comprising:
a load monitor to dynamically monitor a level of power usage by the residential home (figure 4, 415, paragraph 0075);
a load management module to:
receive charging information for an electric vehicle being charged by the charging
station (paragraph 0075);
receive ongoing power measurements from the load monitor (paragraph 0031, updating every few seconds);
compare a present power measurement to a threshold power level (paragraph 0041, detecting a power level to a threshold level); and
communicate charging instructions to the charging station to adjust a rate of
energy transfer of the charging output to the electrical vehicle being charged based on the comparison (paragraphs 0035, 0041, wherein the threshold level triggers a change in the rate of energy transfer, and the energy transfer is governed by an electrical load management policy, which is indicated in part by a threshold, paragraph 0056).
As to claim 3: Lowenthal teaches that the present power measurement is less than the threshold power level, the load management system to instruct the charging station to provide an increased rate of energy transfer to the electrical vehicle so that a power usage by the residential home is equal to the threshold power level, unless the increased rate of energy transfer exceeds a maximum allowable rate of the vehicle, then to instruct the charging station to provide an increased rate of energy transfer equal to the maximum allowable rate (as seen in figure 8, paragraph 0060, wherein the charging point increases to match the electrical load management policy, which is determined in part by a threshold power level, paragraph 0056).
As to claims 4 and 16: Lowenthal teaches that if the present power measurement is greater than the threshold power level, the load management system to instruct the charging station to provide a decreased rate of energy transfer to the electrical vehicle so that a power usage by the residential home is equal to the threshold power level (as seen in figure 8, paragraph 0060, wherein the charging point decreases to match the electrical load management policy, which is determined in part by a threshold power level, paragraph 0056).
As to claims 5 and 17: Lowenthal teaches that the threshold power level is a percentage of a maximum power capacity of a utility service providing energy to the residential home (paragraphs 0035, 0061).
As to claim 6: Lowenthal teaches that the percentage is 90% (paragraph 0061 indicates that the SAE J1772 standard is used and fast charging is used, paragraph 0086, and the SAE J1772 standard indicates that the fast charging standard is 90% of the maximum available current).
As to claim 7: Lowenthal teaches that the load monitor to monitor the amount of power usage by monitoring the power usage on a utility service for the residential home (figure 4, 415, paragraph 0075).
As to claim 8: Lowenthal teaches that the charging information includes one or more of at least a maximum charging rate of the electric vehicle, a charging voltage, a present state of charge of the battery, a minimum desired charge level of the battery, a desired time of completion of a charging operation, and a type of charge desired (claim 22, paragraph 0025).
As to claims 9 and 20: Lowenthal teaches that the load management module further includes utility rate data, and wherein the charging instructions include a time of day to perform a charging operation to minimize utility costs (paragraph 0035, wherein minimizing utility costs is considered intended use language).
As to claim 10: Lowenthal teaches that the load management module is disposed within the charging station (figures 1-4, 124 in 120).
As to claim 11: Lowenthal teaches including a metering module to meter electrical energy used to charge an electric vehicle (paragraph 0038, 620) along with a time-of-day the electric vehicle was charged to enable the charging energy usage to be billed separately from remaining electrical loads of the residential home (paragraph 0035, wherein the data store indicates session start and end times).
As to claim 13: Lowenthal teaches that the load management module provides charging instructions directing a rate of charge of the electric vehicle based on time when the charging needs to be completed (paragraph 0032, threshold time).
As to claims 14 and 19: Lowenthal teaches that the charging information includes one or more of at least a maximum charging rate of the electric vehicle, a charging voltage, a present state of charge of the battery, a minimum desired charge level of the battery, a desired time of completion of a charging operation, and a type of charge desired (paragraph 0025).
As to claim 18: Lowenthal teaches that the load management module receives charging information from at least one of the electrical vehicle (112, figures 1-4), a local user interface (150), and an application on a user device, and, in addition to the power measurements, adjusts a charging rate of the charging output to the electric vehicle based on the charging information (paragraph 0032).
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.
3. Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lowenthal (2011/0133693) as applied to claim 1, and further in view of Nesler (2010/0324962). The teachings of Lowenthal are discussed above.
As to claim 12: Lowenthal teaches a meter module that communicates with an external device (620) and communicates time-of-day information (670, paragraphs 0035-0038).
Lowenthal is silent as to that the data is provided specifically to a utility company.
Nesler teaches smart meters within charging points that communicate use data with utility companies (paragraphs 0073-0077, use data shown in figure 5B).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the teachings of Lowenthal with the teachings of Nesler so that real time pricing and feedback can be received from the utility company (Nesler, paragraph 0073), thereby improving the quality of data presented to the user (figure 5B). Lowenthal already envisions sending data from the meter to the user, so integrating information from the utility company merely enhances this already-existing method in Lowenthal, and would not require undue testing.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID P TARDIF whose telephone number is (571)270-7810. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 11AM-7:30PM. If the examiner cannot be reached by telephone, he can be reached through the following email address: david.tardif@uspto.gov
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone and email are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Thomas Pham can be reached on (571)272-3689. 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 Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated- interview-request-air-form.
DAVID TARDIF
Examiner
Art Unit 2876
/DAVID TARDIF/
Examiner, Art Unit 2876
david.tardif@uspto.gov
/THOMAS K PHAM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2876
Prosecution Insights