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 .
Status of Claims
This Office Action is in response to the application filed on 01/26/2026. Claims 1-2 and 6 are presently pending and are presented for examination.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. JP2023-032240, filed on 03/02/2023.
Should applicant desire to obtain the benefit of foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d) prior to declaration of an interference, a certified English translation of the foreign application must be submitted in reply to this action. 37 CFR 41.154(b) and 41.202(e). Failure to provide a certified translation may result in no benefit being accorded for the non-English application.
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.
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 limitations use 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 limitations are:
“Communication unit” in claim 6.
“Control unit” in claim 6.
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.
Communication unit has been interpreted as a communication interface capable of wireless communication such as 5G as indicated in the specification. [0025]; “The communication unit 121 includes one or more communication interfaces. The communication interface is, for example, an interface compatible with mobile communication standards such as Long Term Evolution (LTE), 4th Generation (4G), or 5th Generation (5G).”.
Control unit has been interpreted as a processor as indicated in the specification. [0022]; “Control unit 103 includes one or more processors, one or more dedicated circuits, or a combination thereof.”
If applicant does not intend to have these limitations interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitations to avoid 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 limitations recite sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious in view of Chae et al. (US 10752125 B2; hereafter Chae) as evidenced by Sim et al. (US 20240125607 A1; hereafter Sim) and Endo et al. (JP2021033590A; hereafter Endo).
Regarding claim 1, Chae discloses a server device ([Fig. 4]; Mobile Charging Support) comprising:
a communication circuitry configured to perform wireless communication ([0052]; “The mobile charging support server 300 includes a communication device 310”); and a control unit including a processor that performs communication using the communication circuitry
([0052]; “The mobile charging support server 300 includes a communication device 310, a memory 320, a database 330 (hereinafter referred to as a “DB”), and a processor 340.”
[0053]; “Furthermore, the communication device 310 transmits charging location information to the vehicle 100 under control of the processor 340.”), wherein:
information proposing a dispatch of a power supply vehicle to the point at the time is transmitted to the terminal device of the user to prompt the user to decide on the dispatch.
([0076]; “In operation S210, the vehicle 100 may determine whether the charging location provided from the server 300 is approved. That is, the vehicle 100 may determine whether a user has approved the charging location.”
[0077]; “In operation S220, the vehicle 100 transmits the approved charging location to the mobile charger 200 via the server 300, when the charging location is approved.”)
Although Chae does teach receiving data from the vehicle such as movement schedules and battery levels ([0065]; “Referring to FIG. 5, in operation S110, the processor 160 of the vehicle 100 may collect vehicle information through the detector 120. The vehicle information includes at least one or more of vehicle identification information, information about a battery level, information about a destination, information about a driving path to the destination, information about the expected battery usage amount, information about a movable distance, and the like.”). Chae does not teach predicting a point and time in which the battery capacity will reach a predetermined level.
However, Sim in the same field of endeavor (electric vehicle charging) teaches the control unit predicts, based on a movement schedule of a user ([0035]; “For example, when the user inputs a destination in a user terminal device or an electric vehicle, information on the input destination may be received through the communication unit 120”) and information on a remaining battery capacity of a vehicle of the user ([0036]; “In addition, information on the electric vehicle battery may include at least one of a real-time remaining battery capacity of the electric vehicle battery”), a point and time at which the remaining battery capacity reaches a predetermined state
([0041]; “In addition, the processor 130 may predict a remaining battery capacity of the electric vehicle battery after reaching the destination based on information on the driving route, transportation time, and the information on the electric vehicle battery in real time and provide the predicted remaining battery capacity of the electric vehicle battery.”
[0068]; “That is, the processor 130 predicts the real-time remaining battery capacity while the electric vehicle 310 is driving, and in order to charge the electric vehicle battery in advance before the remaining battery capacity falls below the preset remaining battery capacity limit, the processor 130 may search for and select the electric vehicle battery charging station 360 within a preset range in the section 320 in which the remaining battery capacity is greater than the preset remaining battery capacity limit.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Chae with Sim. This modification would have been obvious because both Chae and Sim cover subject matter within the same field of endeavor (electric vehicle charging) and it would have been beneficial to predict when and where the battery capacity of the vehicle will be below a predetermined level to provide charging services within the area that the vehicle can reach without running out of power.
Although Chae and Sim teach charging of the vehicle and saving vehicle schedule information, Chae and Sim does not teach transmitting information regarding events near the charging location.
However, Endo within the same field of endeavor teaches transmits information on an event that is held near the predicted point at the predicted time to a terminal device of the user. ([0006] “the matching unit determines the meeting place based on the destination of the identified power supply vehicle and the destination of the demand vehicle of the power supply partner. (8) One aspect of the present invention is an information providing device according to (5) above, further comprising a meeting place candidate database for storing candidate meeting place data, wherein the matching unit determines a meeting place to be a place with parking facilities, a place where an event is held, or a place with commercial facilities.”)
when the control unit receives, from the terminal device, information that the event is selected, the control unit instructs the power supply vehicle to move to a point where the event is held instead of the point. ([0051]; “The matching unit 13 prioritizes locations with parking facilities, event venues, or commercial facilities, and determines these as meeting places where the power supply vehicle Vs and the power supply recipient vehicle Vr will meet.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Chae with Sim and Endo. This modification would have been obvious because both Chae, Sim, and Endo cover subject matter within the same field of endeavor (electric vehicle charging) and it would have been beneficial to provide a list of events nearby as the current state of electric vehicle charge requires vehicles to be charged for a prolonged period of time. During this time, it would be beneficial to complete various other tasks or attend various events/attractions while waiting for the vehicle to complete charging.
Regarding claim 2, Chae in combination with Sim and Endo discloses all the limitations of Claim 1. Additionally Sim discloses the control unit derives a movement route of the user based on the movement schedule ([0046]; “Referring to FIG. 2A, when information on a destination 280 is received from the user of an electric vehicle 210 through the communication unit 120 of the battery charge management server 100 for an electric vehicle, the processor 130 may calculate a first driving route 220 and a first transportation time to the destination”); and
the control unit predicts, based on power consumed by the vehicle traveling on the movement route, the time at which the remaining battery capacity reaches the predetermined state and the point corresponding to the time.
([0036]; “In addition, information on the electric vehicle battery may include at least one of a real-time remaining battery capacity of the electric vehicle battery, a consumption rate”
Note: As stated in the mapping of claim 1, Sim is capable of utilizing various information regarding the electric vehicle battery to predict when the battery will fall below a preset percentage.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Chae with Sim and Endo. This modification would have been obvious because both Chae, Sim and Endo cover subject matter within the same field of endeavor (electric vehicle charging) and it would have been beneficial to predict when and where the battery capacity of the vehicle will be below a predetermined level to provide charging services within the area that the vehicle can reach without running out of power.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 5 is 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.
Claim 6 is allowable over prior art Chae, Sim, and Endo individually or in combination.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRANDON SUNG EUN LEE whose telephone number is (571)272-5684. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9:00 am - 5:00 pm.
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, James Lee can be reached on (571) 270-5965. 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.
/B.S.L./Examiner, Art Unit 3668
/JAMES J LEE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3668
Prosecution Insights