DETAILED ACTION
Notice of 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 .
Claims 1-20 are pending and are rejected.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDSs) filled on 10/20/2023 and 09/28/2023 are compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
Drawings filled on 09/28/2023 are acceptable for examination purpose.
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 13 and 18 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claims 1, 13 and 18 recite, determine/determining one or more operating settings for the mover system based on the first emissions per unit, the first emissions per unit, or both. The term the first emissions per unit is recited twice that is redundant and seems to be a typographical error.
Claim 18 recites, a second emissions per unit for each of the second number of the plurality of movers based on the second amount of energy consumption in lines 6-8. This limitation describes the second number of the plurality of movers that includes typographical error such that “second portion” is erroneously referred to as “the” “second number of,” because earlier in the claim, claim recites, a second portion of the plurality of movers. For the examination purpose, the above described limitation is construed as, the second portion of the plurality of movers…
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1-9 and 11-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Step 1:
Claims 1-9 and 11-20 are directed to system, non-transitory computer-readable medium and method. Thus, each of the claims falls within one of the four statutory categories (i.e., process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter).
Step 2A:
The claims 1-9 and 11-20 fall within the judicial exception of an abstract idea. Specifically, MATHEMATICAL CONCEPTS and/or Mental Processes such that concepts performed in the human mind or with pen and paper including observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion, and/or determination.
Step 2A – Prong 1:
The claim(s) recite(s):
Claims 1, 12 and 18:
determine/determining a first amount of energy consumption associated with a first portion of the plurality of movers and a second amount of energy consumption associated with a second portion of the plurality of movers;
determine/determining a first emissions per unit for each of the first portion of the plurality of movers based on the first amount of energy consumption and a second emissions per unit for each of the second portion/number of the plurality of movers based on the second amount of energy consumption;
determine/determining one or more operating settings for the mover system based on the first emissions per unit, the first emissions per unit, or both;
These limitations given its broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the specification is a mental process since this is a concept that can be performed in the human mind and is analysis and determination (MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III)).
Claims 3 and 15:
determine a maximum number of the plurality of movers used in the mover system based on the one or more operational parameters, the length of the track, the layout of the track, or any combination thereof.
These limitations given its broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the specification is a mental process since this is a concept that can be performed in the human mind and is observation and determination (MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III)).
Claims 6, 16 and 19:
Generate/generating one or more graphs based on the first emissions per unit, the second emissions per unit, or both
These limitations given its broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the specification is a mental process since this is a concept that can be performed in the human mind and is an evaluation and judgment (MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III)).
These limitations given its broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the specification is a mental process since this is MATHEMATICAL CONCEPTS such as Mathematical Relationships (MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(I)).
Claim 7:
the one or more graphs are indicative of carbon emissions per part produced with respect to a first number of the first portion of the plurality of movers, a second number of the second portion of the plurality of movers, or both.
These limitations given its broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the specification is a mental process since this is MATHEMATICAL CONCEPTS such as Mathematical Relationships (MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(I)).
Claim 8:
determine a maximum number of movers of the mover system based on the one or more graphs;
determine one or more minimal carbon emission points based on the one or more graphs; and
determine the one or more commands based on the maximum number of movers, the one or more minimal carbon emission points, or both.
These limitations given its broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the specification is a mental process since this is MATHEMATICAL CONCEPTS such as Mathematical Relationships (MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(I)).
These limitations given its broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the specification is a mental process since this is a concept that can be performed in the human mind and is an evaluation and determination (MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III)).
Claim 11:
determine the one or more commands based on the user input.
These limitations given its broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the specification is a mental process since this is a concept that can be performed in the human mind and is an evaluation and determination (MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III)).
As described above, these limitations describe Mathematical Concepts such as mathematical relationships (MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(I)), and/or Mental Process that can be performed in the human mind, or by a human using a pen and paper (MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III)).
Step 2A – Prong 2 and Step 2B:
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the additional elements such as one or more processors (claims 1-3, 6, 8, 11 and 12), processor (claims 13-17), processing circuitry (claims 18-20), electronic display (claim 5), and non-transitory computer-readable medium (claim 13) are mere instructions to implement an abstract idea or other exception on a computer (apply it; corresponding structure disclosed in the specification is a general purpose computer implementing the claimed functions characterized as abstract ideas above; e.g., determining, sending, displaying, generating, aggregating, storing etc.) (MPEP 2106.05(f)). The claim limitations are implemented on these generic elements such that the following are merely applying the abstract idea on a generic computer: determining, calculating, creating etc.
The claims further recite:
(claim 1) A mover system comprising: a track; a plurality of movers configured to move along the track.
(claim 4) wherein the one or more operational parameters comprise a minimum throughput of the mover system, a maximum throughput of the mover system, a maximum amount of electrical power per unit produced, a maximum cost for electrical power per unit produced, a number of movers of the plurality of movers to be used, or any combination thereof.
(claim 9) the track comprises a first portion and a section portion, wherein the one or more operating settings comprise a number of the plurality of movers to be parked in the second portion.
(claim 13) . A non-transitory computer-readable medium comprising instructions that, when executed by one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to…
(claims 14-17) the instructions, when executed, cause the one or more processors to…
(claim 18) A method comprising:…
This is generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use (MPEP 2106.05(h)). Further, employing generic computer functions to execute an abstract idea, even when limiting the use of the idea to one particular environment, does not add significantly more
The claims recite the additional elements of:
(Claims 1, 13 and 18) send/sending one or more commands to the first number of the plurality of movers, the second number of the plurality of movers, or both based on the one or more operating settings.
(claims 2 and 14) receive data indicative of one or more operational parameters of each of the plurality of movers, a length of the track, a layout of the track, or any combination thereof.
(claim 5) display the one or more operational parameters for the mover system.
(claim 11) receive: a user input indicative of a minimum value and a maximum value of emissions per unit, a minimum value and a maximum value of energy consumption, a minimum number and a maximum number of movers, a minimum value and a maximum value of acceleration, a minimum value and a maximum value of velocity, or any combination thereof;
(claims 12, 17 and 20) aggregate/aggregating the emissions per unit data for each of a plurality of time periods; and store/storing the aggregated emissions per unit data for each of the plurality of time periods.
These additional elements are recited at a high level of generality and amounts to mere data gathering and data input/output which are insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception (MPEP 2106.05(g)).
Accordingly, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea.
Therefore, the claims are directed to an abstract idea.
Even when combined with all of the claim limitations as a whole, it is still directed to the abstract idea of mental process and mathematical concepts. Therefore, the claims are not patent eligible.
Dependent claim(s) when analyzed as a whole are held to be patent ineligible under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the additional recited limitation(s) fail(s) to establish that the claim(s) is/are not directed to an abstract idea, as they recite further embellishment of the judicial exception.
Viewed as a whole, these additional claim element(s) do not provide meaningful limitation(s) to transform the abstract idea into a patent eligible application of the abstract idea such that the claim(s) amounts to significantly more than the abstract idea itself. Claims 1-9 and 11-20 do not include any further additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
The additional elements in the claim amount to no more than insignificant extra solution activity and do not amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because sending/aggregating data and inputting/displaying data are mere data gathering (MPEP 2106.05(g)). Further, the use of the claimed invention in a mover system with track is simply an attempt to limit the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. The claim does not include any further additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Therefore, claims 1-9 and 11-20 rejected under 35 USC 101 as being ineligible.
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 filling 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:
Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1-5, 10, 12-15, 17-18 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kaufman (US20160147242A1) [hereinafter Kaufman’242] and further in view of KAUFMAN et al. (US20100274602A1) [hereinafter KAUFMAN’602].
Regarding claim 1:
Kaufman’242 discloses, A mover system comprising: a track; a plurality of movers configured to move along the track; and one or more processors configured to: [¶41: “industrial control system 22 may monitor and/or control operation of the components 20.” “system 22 may include one or more controllers,” “system 22 is communicatively coupled to” “drive 26, a motor 27, and a conveyer 28 (e.g., components 20)”… ¶52: “the loading components 52 feed pallets of empty cans or bottles into the packaging factory 50. From cell 1, the bottles may move on to cell 2, which as depicted includes a conveyer component 54, an industrial automation power component 78, and washing components 56.”…
Also see fig. 4. And fig. 1 system 10, with movable components/conveyer 20 (with tracks)];
determine a first amount of energy consumption associated with a first portion of the plurality of movers and a second amount of energy consumption associated with a second portion of the plurality of movers; [¶41: “to determine the energy usage of each component 20, a sensor 76 may be placed at every component 20.”… ¶64: “sensors may measure other operational parameters that enable the power usage and/or energy usage of any one of the components 20 to be determined.”… ¶77: “the power usage of all eight components 20 in the cell 89 may be determined (e.g., measured” “through the use of four sensors. Accordingly, the energy usage of the components 20 may be determined based on the power usage over time.” “energy usage of the components 20 is described in FIG. 7.” “measuring the power used by each motor drive and motor pair (process block 118), determining the power used by each motor drive (process block 120), determining the power used by each motor (process block 122),” “determining the actual energy used by each component (process block 130)”];
determine a first emissions per unit…based on the first amount of energy consumption and a second emissions per unit…based on the second amount of energy consumption; [¶189: “control system 22 may quantify the expected carbon cost” ‘the carbon cost may be based on the amount of energy used” “producing 100 kWh of energy by burning coal may produce two metric tons of carbon whereas producing 100 kWh of energy using wind power may produce half a metric ton of carbon.”… ¶77: “the power usage of all eight components 20 in the cell 89 may be determined (e.g., measured” “through the use of four sensors. Accordingly, the energy usage of the components 20 may be determined based on the power usage over time.”
Examiner notes that the term emission per unit is broad and one of ordinary skilled in the art will understand that per unit can be any per unit and is not limited to a particular unit.];
determine one or more operating settings for the mover system based on the first emissions per unit, the first emissions per unit, or both; and [Examiner notes that the optional terms separated by or statement, and only one of them is required and is given the patentable weight.
¶189: “to facilitate selecting an operating strategy to implement, the control system 22 may quantify the expected carbon cost” “the carbon cost may be based on the amount of energy used”… ¶188: “each operating strategy may include operational parameters to be implemented in the industrial automation system 10, such as production run rates, production schedule, product recipes, product routing, and energy sourcing”… ¶190: “determine the expected value added for each operating strategy (process block 254). More specifically, the value added may include factors that offset the carbon costs,”… ¶192: “the control system 22 may select the operating strategy that minimizes the total carbon footprint.”
Examiner notes the claim objection of the redundant terms, the first emissions per unit, the first emissions per unit. For the examination purpose, in broadest reasonable interpretation, it is construed that at least one operating settings are determined based on any emission per unit];
send one or more commands to the first number of the plurality of movers, the second number of the plurality of movers, or both based on the one or more operating settings. [¶193: “the control system 22 may then execute the selected strategy by implementing the operating strategy in one or more components.”… ¶188: “each operating strategy may include operational parameters to be implemented in the industrial automation system 10,”… ¶57: “the control system 22 may instruct the power device 78 to slow down the conveyer section 54 in order to reduce energy usage. Thus, the control system 22 may determine operational parameters for each component 20,” “the operational parameters may include energy usage/consumption, product mixes, product recipes, operating setpoints (e.g., motor speeds, tensions, oven temperature, and conveyor speeds), production run rates, production schedules, product routing, and control algorithms.”], but doesn’t explicitly disclose, and
KAUFMAN’602 discloses, determine a first emissions per unit for each of the first portion of the plurality of movers based on the first amount of energy consumption and a second emissions per unit for each of the second portion of the plurality of movers based on the second amount of energy consumption; [¶30: “process statement 122 can be or constitute portions of a bill of materials that can include a column for energy consumption in connection with automation process 106.” “FIG. 3,” “graphical depiction 300 of an example bill of” “bill of materials 302 includes a part number column 304 that can list the component parts (or component processes)”… ¶29: “process statement 122 can be” “operational (e.g., a command or instruction).”… ¶31: “bill of materials 302 can include the aforementioned energy consumption aspects, which is depicted by column 306.”… ¶32: “bill of materials 302 can also include information associated with emissions as illustrated by the example of carbon dioxide depicted at column 310. Values for each row of column 310 can be supplied either as a function of the associated row of column 306”
Examiner notes, figure 3 shows, for each component listed in 304, emission per unit 308 is determined based on (as a function of) corresponding energy consumption 306];
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filling date of the claimed invention to have combined the capability of determining a first emissions per unit for each of the first portion of the plurality of movers based on the first amount of energy consumption and a second emissions per unit for each of the second portion of the plurality of movers based on the second amount of energy consumption in order to adjust control commands to increase efficiency, conservation, and to reduced costs by utilizing to use the current energy consumption data and corresponding determined emission data taught by KAUFMAN’602 with the system taught by Kaufman’242 as discussed above in order to have reasonable expectation of success such as to adjust control commands to increase efficiency, conservation, and to reduced costs by utilizing to use the current energy consumption data and corresponding determined emission data [KAUFMAN’602: 42: “based upon current energy consumption data 104, or based upon emission data 410 or sustainability factors 412, optimization component 402 can adjust automation process 106 to facilitate, e.g., increased efficiency, conservation, reduced costs,”].
Regarding claim 2:
Kaufman’242 and KAUFMAN’602 disclose, The mover system of claim 1, and
Kaufman’242 further discloses, wherein the one or more processors are configured to receive data indicative of one or more operational parameters of each of the plurality of movers, a length of the track, a layout of the track, or any combination thereof. [Examiner notes that the optional terms separated by or statement, and only one of them is required and is given the patentable weight.
Accordingly, Kaufman’242 teaches, receive data indicative of one or more operational parameters of each of the plurality of movers as described below:
¶48: “to facilitate in the control and monitoring of the components 20, the control system 22 may receive feedback information relating to operational parameters” “sensors may be placed in and/or around the industrial automation system 10 to measure such operational parameters. In some embodiments, the sensors may include pressure sensors, accelerometers, heat sensors, motion sensors, voltage sensors, and the like. For example, the control system 22 may determine the energy usage of a particular component 20 based on the power measured by a power sensor over time. Accordingly, the operational parameters may be received by the control system 22 from the sensors via the I/O ports 40.”].
Regarding claim 3:
Kaufman’242 and KAUFMAN’602 disclose, The mover system of claim 2, and
Kaufman’242 further discloses, wherein the one or more processors are configured to determine a maximum number of the plurality of movers used in the mover system based on the one or more operational parameters, the length of the track, the layout of the track, or any combination thereof. [Examiner notes that the optional terms separated by or statement, and only one of them is required and is given the patentable weight.
Accordingly, Kaufman’242 teaches, determine a maximum number of the plurality of movers used in the mover system based on the one or more operational parameters as described below:
¶58: “to determine the energy usage of each component 20, a sensor 76 may be placed at every component 20.”… ¶48: “the control system 22 may determine the energy usage of a particular component 20 based on the power measured by a power sensor over time. Accordingly, the operational parameters may be received by the control system 22 from the sensors via the I/O ports 40.”
Examiner notes that, system determines to receive the operational parameters can be received from each of the components such as from all/max number of components].
Regarding claim 4:
Kaufman’242 and KAUFMAN’602 disclose, The mover system of claim 3, and
Kaufman’242 further discloses, wherein the one or more operational parameters comprise a minimum throughput of the mover system, a maximum throughput of the mover system, a maximum amount of electrical power per unit produced, a maximum cost for electrical power per unit produced, a number of movers of the plurality of movers to be used, or any combination thereof. [Examiner notes that the optional terms separated by or statement, and only one of them is required and is given the patentable weight.
Accordingly, Kaufman’242 teaches, operational parameter such as minimum throughput as described below:
¶194: “each of the factors may be weighted, for example through formulation of an objective function, to select an operating strategy with desired characteristics (e.g., a minimum throughput, a minimum product quality, a maximum energy usage, a maximum carbon footprint, a maximum uncertainty, or a minimum up-time or reliability).”].
Regarding claim 5:
Kaufman’242 and KAUFMAN’602 disclose, The mover system of claim 3, and
Kaufman’242 further discloses, comprising an electronic display configured to display the one or more operational parameters for the mover system. [¶162: “the control system 22 or a computing device communicatively coupled to the control system 22 may display a graphical user interface on the operator interface 24. One example of a graphical user interface 212 that may be displayed by the control system 22 is described in FIG. 16.”… ¶162: “the graphical user interface 212 includes” “a conveyer section graphical element 216,” “a conveyer section graphical element 222,” “a conveyer section graphical element 226,” “the conveyer section graphical element 216 may convey information relating to the conveyer section 54,”… ¶163: “a graphical element may illuminate green when the energy usage is within the energy usage baseline, illuminate yellow when the energy usage nears the energy usage baseline, and illuminate red when the energy usage exceeds the energy usage baseline.”].
Regarding claim 10:
Kaufman’242 and KAUFMAN’602 disclose, The mover system of claim 1, and
Kaufman’242 further discloses, wherein the one or more commands are configured to cause at least one of the plurality of movers to be powered down, powered up, parked, or any combination thereof. [Examiner notes that the optional terms separated by or statement, and only one of them is required and is given the patentable weight.
¶177: “control system 22 may determine the total energy usage allotment for the one or more components (process block 244).” “allot the industrial automation system 10 a specific amount of energy usage.” “If the energy usage exceeds the allotment,” “ cutoff energy,”].
Regarding claim 12:
Kaufman’242 and KAUFMAN’602 disclose, The mover system of claim 1, and
Kaufman’242 further discloses, aggregate the emissions per unit data for each of a plurality of time periods; and
store the aggregated emissions per unit data for each of the plurality of time periods. [¶122: “the aggregate measure of energy may enable adjustments to the configuration and/or operation of the production process.”… ¶85: “the determined power usage for each component 20 may be stored in memory 36 and/or another storage device, such as a cloud computing system. In some embodiments, the power usage for each component 20 may be continuously determined and stored. Additionally or alternatively, the power usage for each component 20 may be periodically determined and stored (e.g., at discrete intervals).”].
Regarding claim 13:
Kaufman’242 discloses, A non-transitory computer-readable medium comprising instructions that, when executed by one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to: [¶41: “industrial control system 22 may monitor and/or control operation of the components 20.” “system 22 may include one or more controllers,” “system 22 is communicatively coupled to” “drive 26, a motor 27, and a conveyer 28 (e.g., components 20)”… ¶45: “in FIG. 3. As depicted, the industrial control system 22 includes a communication module 32, a processor 34, memory 36, a storage module 38, and input/output (I/O) ports 40.”… ¶46: “The memory 36 and the storage 38 may represent non-transitory computer-readable media (i.e., any suitable form of memory or storage) that may store the processor-executable code used by the processor 34 to perform various techniques described herein.”];
determine a first amount of energy consumption associated with a first portion of the plurality of movers and a second amount of energy consumption associated with a second portion of the plurality of movers; [¶41: “to determine the energy usage of each component 20, a sensor 76 may be placed at every component 20.”… ¶64: “sensors may measure other operational parameters that enable the power usage and/or energy usage of any one of the components 20 to be determined.”… ¶77: “the power usage of all eight components 20 in the cell 89 may be determined (e.g., measured” “through the use of four sensors. Accordingly, the energy usage of the components 20 may be determined based on the power usage over time.” “energy usage of the components 20 is described in FIG. 7.” “measuring the power used by each motor drive and motor pair (process block 118), determining the power used by each motor drive (process block 120), determining the power used by each motor (process block 122),” “determining the actual energy used by each component (process block 130)”];
determine a first emissions per unit…based on the first amount of energy consumption and a second emissions per unit…based on the second amount of energy consumption; [¶189: “control system 22 may quantify the expected carbon cost” ‘the carbon cost may be based on the amount of energy used” “producing 100 kWh of energy by burning coal may produce two metric tons of carbon whereas producing 100 kWh of energy using wind power may produce half a metric ton of carbon.”… ¶77: “the power usage of all eight components 20 in the cell 89 may be determined (e.g., measured” “through the use of four sensors. Accordingly, the energy usage of the components 20 may be determined based on the power usage over time.”
Examiner notes that the term emission per unit is broad and one of ordinary skilled in the art will understand that per unit can be any per unit and is not limited to a particular unit.];
determine one or more operating settings for the mover system based on the first emissions per unit, the first emissions per unit, or both; and [Examiner notes that the optional terms separated by or statement, and only one of them is required and is given the patentable weight.
¶189: “to facilitate selecting an operating strategy to implement, the control system 22 may quantify the expected carbon cost” “the carbon cost may be based on the amount of energy used”… ¶188: “each operating strategy may include operational parameters to be implemented in the industrial automation system 10, such as production run rates, production schedule, product recipes, product routing, and energy sourcing”… ¶190: “determine the expected value added for each operating strategy (process block 254). More specifically, the value added may include factors that offset the carbon costs,”… ¶192: “the control system 22 may select the operating strategy that minimizes the total carbon footprint.”
Examiner notes the claim objection of the redundant terms, the first emissions per unit, the first emissions per unit. For the examination purpose, in broadest reasonable interpretation, it is construed that at least one operating settings are determined based on any emission per unit];
send one or more commands to the first number of the plurality of movers, the second number of the plurality of movers, or both based on the one or more operating settings. [¶193: “the control system 22 may then execute the selected strategy by implementing the operating strategy in one or more components.”… ¶188: “each operating strategy may include operational parameters to be implemented in the industrial automation system 10,”… ¶57: “the control system 22 may instruct the power device 78 to slow down the conveyer section 54 in order to reduce energy usage. Thus, the control system 22 may determine operational parameters for each component 20,” “the operational parameters may include energy usage/consumption, product mixes, product recipes, operating setpoints (e.g., motor speeds, tensions, oven temperature, and conveyor speeds), production run rates, production schedules, product routing, and control algorithms.”], but doesn’t explicitly disclose, and
KAUFMAN’602 discloses, determine a first emissions per unit for each of the first portion of the plurality of movers based on the first amount of energy consumption and a second emissions per unit for each of the second portion of the plurality of movers based on the second amount of energy consumption; [¶30: “process statement 122 can be or constitute portions of a bill of materials that can include a column for energy consumption in connection with automation process 106.” “FIG. 3,” “graphical depiction 300 of an example bill of” “bill of materials 302 includes a part number column 304 that can list the component parts (or component processes)”… ¶29: “process statement 122 can be” “operational (e.g., a command or instruction).”… ¶31: “bill of materials 302 can include the aforementioned energy consumption aspects, which is depicted by column 306.”… ¶32: “bill of materials 302 can also include information associated with emissions as illustrated by the example of carbon dioxide depicted at column 310. Values for each row of column 310 can be supplied either as a function of the associated row of column 306”
Examiner notes, figure 3 shows, for each component listed in 304, emission per unit 308 is determined based on (as a function of) corresponding energy consumption 306];
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filling date of the claimed invention to have combined the capability of determining a first emissions per unit for each of the first portion of the plurality of movers based on the first amount of energy consumption and a second emissions per unit for each of the second portion of the plurality of movers based on the second amount of energy consumption in order to adjust control commands to increase efficiency, conservation, and to reduced costs by utilizing to use the current energy consumption data and corresponding determined emission data taught by KAUFMAN’602 with the system taught by Kaufman’242 as discussed above in order to have reasonable expectation of success such as to adjust control commands to increase efficiency, conservation, and to reduced costs by utilizing to use the current energy consumption data and corresponding determined emission data [KAUFMAN’602: 42: “based upon current energy consumption data 104, or based upon emission data 410 or sustainability factors 412, optimization component 402 can adjust automation process 106 to facilitate, e.g., increased efficiency, conservation, reduced costs,”].
Regarding claim 14:
Kaufman’242 and KAUFMAN’602 disclose, The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 13, and
Kaufman’242 further discloses, receive data indicative of one or more operational parameters of each of the plurality of movers, a length of the track, a layout of the track, or any combination thereof. [Examiner notes that the optional terms separated by or statement, and only one of them is required and is given the patentable weight.
Accordingly, Kaufman’242 teaches, receive data indicative of one or more operational parameters of each of the plurality of movers as described below:
¶48: “to facilitate in the control and monitoring of the components 20, the control system 22 may receive feedback information relating to operational parameters” “sensors may be placed in and/or around the industrial automation system 10 to measure such operational parameters. In some embodiments, the sensors may include pressure sensors, accelerometers, heat sensors, motion sensors, voltage sensors, and the like. For example, the control system 22 may determine the energy usage of a particular component 20 based on the power measured by a power sensor over time. Accordingly, the operational parameters may be received by the control system 22 from the sensors via the I/O ports 40.”].
Regarding claim 15:
Kaufman’242 and KAUFMAN’602 disclose, The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 14, and
Kaufman’242 further discloses, determine a maximum number of the plurality of movers used in the mover system based on the one or more operational parameters, the length of the track, the layout of the track, or any combination thereof. [Examiner notes that the optional terms separated by or statement, and only one of them is required and is given the patentable weight.
Accordingly, Kaufman’242 teaches, determine a maximum number of the plurality of movers used in the mover system based on the one or more operational parameters as described below:
¶58: “to determine the energy usage of each component 20, a sensor 76 may be placed at every component 20.”… ¶48: “the control system 22 may determine the energy usage of a particular component 20 based on the power measured by a power sensor over time. Accordingly, the operational parameters may be received by the control system 22 from the sensors via the I/O ports 40.”
Examiner notes that, system determines to receive the operational parameters can be received from each of the components such as from all/max number of components].
Regarding claim 17:
Kaufman’242 and KAUFMAN’602 disclose, The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 13,, and
Kaufman’242 further discloses, aggregate the emissions per unit data for each of a plurality of time periods; and
store the aggregated emissions per unit data for each of the plurality of time periods. [¶122: “the aggregate measure of energy may enable adjustments to the configuration and/or operation of the production process.”… ¶85: “the determined power usage for each component 20 may be stored in memory 36 and/or another storage device, such as a cloud computing system. In some embodiments, the power usage for each component 20 may be continuously determined and stored. Additionally or alternatively, the power usage for each component 20 may be periodically determined and stored (e.g., at discrete intervals).”].
Regarding claim 18:
Kaufman’242 discloses, A method, comprising: determining, via processing circuitry, [¶34: “a method for determining the energy usage of components without directly measuring the energy usage of each component.”… ¶41: “industrial control system 22 may monitor and/or control operation of the components 20.” “system 22 may include one or more controllers,” “system 22 is communicatively coupled to” “drive 26, a motor 27, and a conveyer 28 (e.g., components 20)”];
determining a first amount of energy consumption associated with a first portion of the plurality of movers and a second amount of energy consumption associated with a second portion of the plurality of movers; [¶41: “to determine the energy usage of each component 20, a sensor 76 may be placed at every component 20.”… ¶64: “sensors may measure other operational parameters that enable the power usage and/or energy usage of any one of the components 20 to be determined.”… ¶77: “the power usage of all eight components 20 in the cell 89 may be determined (e.g., measured” “through the use of four sensors. Accordingly, the energy usage of the components 20 may be determined based on the power usage over time.” “energy usage of the components 20 is described in FIG. 7.” “measuring the power used by each motor drive and motor pair (process block 118), determining the power used by each motor drive (process block 120), determining the power used by each motor (process block 122),” “determining the actual energy used by each component (process block 130)”];
determining a first emissions per unit…based on the first amount of energy consumption and a second emissions per unit…based on the second amount of energy consumption; [¶189: “control system 22 may quantify the expected carbon cost” ‘the carbon cost may be based on the amount of energy used” “producing 100 kWh of energy by burning coal may produce two metric tons of carbon whereas producing 100 kWh of energy using wind power may produce half a metric ton of carbon.”… ¶77: “the power usage of all eight components 20 in the cell 89 may be determined (e.g., measured” “through the use of four sensors. Accordingly, the energy usage of the components 20 may be determined based on the power usage over time.”
Examiner notes that the term emission per unit is broad and one of ordinary skilled in the art will understand that per unit can be any per unit and is not limited to a particular unit.];
determining one or more operating settings for the mover system based on the first emissions per unit, the first emissions per unit, or both; and [Examiner notes that the optional terms separated by or statement, and only one of them is required and is given the patentable weight.
¶189: “to facilitate selecting an operating strategy to implement, the control system 22 may quantify the expected carbon cost” “the carbon cost may be based on the amount of energy used”… ¶188: “each operating strategy may include operational parameters to be implemented in the industrial automation system 10, such as production run rates, production schedule, product recipes, product routing, and energy sourcing”… ¶190: “determine the expected value added for each operating strategy (process block 254). More specifically, the value added may include factors that offset the carbon costs,”… ¶192: “the control system 22 may select the operating strategy that minimizes the total carbon footprint.”
Examiner notes the claim objection of the redundant terms, the first emissions per unit, the first emissions per unit. For the examination purpose, in broadest reasonable interpretation, it is construed that at least one operating settings are determined based on any emission per unit];
sending one or more commands to the first number of the plurality of movers, the second number of the plurality of movers, or both based on the one or more operating settings. [¶193: “the control system 22 may then execute the selected strategy by implementing the operating strategy in one or more components.”… ¶188: “each operating strategy may include operational parameters to be implemented in the industrial automation system 10,”… ¶57: “the control system 22 may instruct the power device 78 to slow down the conveyer section 54 in order to reduce energy usage. Thus, the control system 22 may determine operational parameters for each component 20,” “the operational parameters may include energy usage/consumption, product mixes, product recipes, operating setpoints (e.g., motor speeds, tensions, oven temperature, and conveyor speeds), production run rates, production schedules, product routing, and control algorithms.”], but doesn’t explicitly disclose, and
KAUFMAN’602 discloses, determining, via the processing circuitry, a first emissions per unit for each of the first portion of the plurality of movers based on the first amount of energy consumption and a second emissions per unit for each of the second number of the plurality of movers based on the second amount of energy consumption; [¶30: “process statement 122 can be or constitute portions of a bill of materials that can include a column for energy consumption in connection with automation process 106.” “FIG. 3,” “graphical depiction 300 of an example bill of” “bill of materials 302 includes a part number column 304 that can list the component parts (or component processes)”… ¶29: “process statement 122 can be” “operational (e.g., a command or instruction).”… ¶31: “bill of materials 302 can include the aforementioned energy consumption aspects, which is depicted by column 306.”… ¶32: “bill of materials 302 can also include information associated with emissions as illustrated by the example of carbon dioxide depicted at column 310. Values for each row of column 310 can be supplied either as a function of the associated row of column 306”
Examiner notes, figure 3 shows, for each component listed in 304, emission per unit 308 is determined based on (as a function of) corresponding energy consumption 306
Examiner notes the claim objections due to typographical errors, the second number of the plurality of movers is construed as the second portion of the plurality of movers];
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filling date of the claimed invention to have combined the capability of determining a first emissions per unit for each of the first portion of the plurality of movers based on the first amount of energy consumption and a second emissions per unit for each of the second portion of the plurality of movers based on the second amount of energy consumption in order to adjust control commands to increase efficiency, conservation, and to reduced costs by utilizing to use the current energy consumption data and corresponding determined emission data taught by KAUFMAN’602 with the method taught by Kaufman’242 as discussed above in order to have reasonable expectation of success such as to adjust control commands to increase efficiency, conservation, and to reduced costs by utilizing to use the current energy consumption data and corresponding determined emission data [KAUFMAN’602: 42: “based upon current energy consumption data 104, or based upon emission data 410 or sustainability factors 412, optimization component 402 can adjust automation process 106 to facilitate, e.g., increased efficiency, conservation, reduced costs,”].
Regarding claim 20:
Kaufman’242 and KAUFMAN’602 disclose, The method of claim 18, and
Kaufman’242 further discloses, aggregating, via the processing circuitry, the emissions per unit data for each of a plurality of time periods; and storing, via the processing circuitry, the aggregated emissions per unit data for each of the plurality of time periods [¶122: “the aggregate measure of energy may enable adjustments to the configuration and/or operation of the production process.”… ¶85: “the determined power usage for each component 20 may be stored in memory 36 and/or another storage device, such as a cloud computing system. In some embodiments, the power usage for each component 20 may be continuously determined and stored. Additionally or alternatively, the power usage for each component 20 may be periodically determined and stored (e.g., at discrete intervals).”].
Claim(s) 6-8, 16 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kaufman’242 and KAUFMAN’602 and further in view of Botich et al. (US20090281677A1) [hereinafter Botich].
Regarding claim 6:
Kaufman’242 and KAUFMAN’602 disclose, The mover system of claim 1, but they do not explicitly disclose, and
Botich discloses, wherein the one or more processors are configured to generate one or more graphs based on the first emissions per unit, the second emissions per unit, or both. [Examiner notes that the optional terms separated by or statement, and only one of them is required and is given the patentable weight.
¶126: “The client side computer can then plot the data through the client report interface 115 to thereby generate a “report”.”… ¶127: “the processor 1145 can generate a data point representing the number of pounds of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) emitted by a facility each minute, hour, day, week, month, year, and/or any other time resolution. FIGS. 18B and 18C (described in further detail below) illustrate an exemplary chart and summary table using the weekly and daily values of CO2e generated” “processor 1145 can generate a data point at multiple time resolutions” “processor 1145 can also generate a data point at multiple time resolutions for any overall consumption or emission data for a module, facility or enterprise, such as total electricity consumption, total natural gas consumption, total water consumption, total sulfur dioxide emission, total carbon dioxide emission, total methane emission, and the like.”].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filling date of the claimed invention to have used the technique of generating one or more graphs based on emission per unit in order to utilize these analyzed data to enable energy efficiency optimization and reduction of environmental impact due to emissions related to energy use in a production system taught by Botich with the system taught by Kaufman’242 and KAUFMAN’602 as discussed above in order to have reasonable expectation of success such as to enable energy efficiency optimization and reduction of environmental impact due to emissions related to energy use in a production system [Botich: ¶57: “enabling energy efficiency optimization and reduction of environmental impact due to, for example, greenhouse gas emissions”].
Regarding claim 7:
Kaufman’242, KAUFMAN’602 and Botich disclose, The mover system of claim 6, and
KAUFMAN’602 further discloses, carbon emissions per part produced with respect to a first number of the first portion of the plurality of movers, a second number of the second portion of the plurality of movers, or both. [¶30: “process statement 122 can be or constitute portions of a bill of materials that can include a column for energy consumption in connection with automation process 106.” “FIG. 3,” “graphical depiction 300 of an example bill of” “bill of materials 302 includes a part number column 304 that can list the component parts (or component processes)”… ¶29: “process statement 122 can be” “operational (e.g., a command or instruction).”… ¶31: “bill of materials 302 can include the aforementioned energy consumption aspects, which is depicted by column 306.”… ¶32: “bill of materials 302 can also include information associated with emissions as illustrated by the example of carbon dioxide depicted at column 310. Values for each row of column 310 can be supplied either as a function of the associated row of column 306”
Examiner notes, figure 3 shows, for each component listed in 304, emission per unit 308 is determined based on (as a function of) corresponding energy consumption 306], but Kaufman’242 and KAUFMAN’602 do not explicitly disclose, and
Botich discloses, wherein the one or more graphs are indicative of carbon emissions per part produced with respect to a first number of the first portion…., a second number of the second portion…, or both. [Examiner notes that the optional terms separated by or statement, and only one of them is required and is given the patentable weight.
¶126: “The client side computer can then plot the data through the client report interface 115 to thereby generate a “report”.”… ¶127: “the processor 1145 can generate a data point representing the number of pounds of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) emitted by a facility each minute, hour, day, week, month, year, and/or any other time resolution. FIGS. 18B and 18C (described in further detail below) illustrate an exemplary chart and summary table using the weekly and daily values of CO2e generated” “processor 1145 can generate a data point at multiple time resolutions” “processor 1145 can also generate a data point at multiple time resolutions for any overall consumption or emission data for a module, facility or enterprise, such as total electricity consumption, total natural gas consumption, total water consumption, total sulfur dioxide emission, total carbon dioxide emission, total methane emission, and the like.”].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filling date of the claimed invention to have utilize the collected emission data taught by KAUFMAN’602 and use these data with the technique of generating one or more graphs wherein the one or more graphs are indicative of carbon emissions per part produced with respect to the components to enable energy efficiency optimization and reduction of environmental impact due to emissions related to energy use in a production system taught by Botich with the system taught by Kaufman’242, KAUFMAN’602 and Botich as discussed above in order to have reasonable expectation of success as described above in claim 7 and claim 1.
Regarding claim 8:
Kaufman’242, KAUFMAN’602 and Botich disclose, The mover system of claim 6, and
Kaufman’242 further discloses, determine a maximum number of movers of the mover system… [¶58: “to determine the energy usage of each component 20, a sensor 76 may be placed at every component 20.”… ¶48: “the control system 22 may determine the energy usage of a particular component 20 based on the power measured by a power sensor over time. Accordingly, the operational parameters may be received by the control system 22 from the sensors via the I/O ports 40.”
Examiner notes that, Kaufman’242 system determines to receive the operational parameters can be received from each of the components such as from all/max number of components].
determine one or more minimal carbon emission points… [¶192: “the control system 22 may select the operating strategy that minimizes the total carbon footprint.”… ¶182: “the objective function may be formulated to weigh certain criteria (e.g., targets) for each operating strategy. For example, the objective function may be formulated to minimize energy usage while maintaining a particular amount of throughput and maintaining a particular product quality.”… ¶194: “each of the factors may be weighted, for example through formulation of an objective function, to select an operating strategy with desired characteristics”];
determine the one or more commands based on the maximum number of movers, the one or more minimal carbon emission points, or both. [Examiner notes that the optional terms separated by or statement, and only one of them is required and is given the patentable weight.
Accordingly, Kaufman’242 teaches, determine at least one command based on at least one minimal carbon emission points as described below:
¶186: “an operating strategy may be selected and implemented based on other criteria, such as a carbon footprint”… ¶192: “the control system 22 may select the operating strategy that minimizes the total carbon footprint.”… ¶182: “the objective function may be formulated to weigh certain criteria (e.g., targets) for each operating strategy. For example, the objective function may be formulated to minimize energy usage while maintaining a particular amount of throughput and maintaining a particular product quality.”], but Kaufman’242 and KAUFMAN’602 do not explicitly disclose, and
Botich discloses, determine number of movers…based on the one or more graphs;
determine one or more minimal carbon emission points based on the one or more graphs; and [¶61: “systems and/or methods disclosed herein can provide a real-time energy consumption and related CO2 output at the point of use level. This can be particularly advantageous because it provides executives with information they need to inform their customers and shareholders of specific reductions their companies are making in energy use and carbon emissions on a product, facility or even company-wide basis, in both sustainable and financial terms.”… ¶154: “FIG. 19 illustrates a screen display of an exemplary embodiment of an interval comparison chart 1900. The interval comparison chart 1900 shows a comparison of sulfur dioxide emission by a dairy facility between the current month and the current month last year. This type of chart can be used to identify whether emissions have been successfully reduced by the energy optimization system 100.”].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filling date of the claimed invention to have combined the technique of utilizing analyzed emission related data and component related data from the plot/graph to use it for the purpose of minimizing carbon emission in order to enable energy efficiency optimization and reduction of environmental impact due to emissions related to energy use in a production system taught by Botich and use this technique with the determined maximum number of movers of the mover system and determined one or more minimal carbon emission points taught by Kaufman’242 with the system taught by Kaufman’242, KAUFMAN’602 and Botich as discussed above in order to have reasonable expectation of success as described above in claim 7 and claim 1.
Regarding claim 16:
Kaufman’242 and KAUFMAN’602 disclose, The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 13, but they do not explicitly disclose, and
Botich discloses, generate one or more graphs based on the first emissions per unit, the second emissions per unit, or both. [Examiner notes that the optional terms separated by or statement, and only one of them is required and is given the patentable weight.
¶126: “The client side computer can then plot the data through the client report interface 115 to thereby generate a “report”.”… ¶127: “the processor 1145 can generate a data point representing the number of pounds of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) emitted by a facility each minute, hour, day, week, month, year, and/or any other time resolution. FIGS. 18B and 18C (described in further detail below) illustrate an exemplary chart and summary table using the weekly and daily values of CO2e generated” “processor 1145 can generate a data point at multiple time resolutions” “processor 1145 can also generate a data point at multiple time resolutions for any overall consumption or emission data for a module, facility or enterprise, such as total electricity consumption, total natural gas consumption, total water consumption, total sulfur dioxide emission, total carbon dioxide emission, total methane emission, and the like.”].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filling date of the claimed invention to have used the technique of generating one or more graphs based on emission per unit in order to utilize these analyzed data to enable energy efficiency optimization and reduction of environmental impact due to emissions related to energy use in a production system taught by Botich with the system taught by Kaufman’242 and KAUFMAN’602 as discussed above in order to have reasonable expectation of success such as to enable energy efficiency optimization and reduction of environmental impact due to emissions related to energy use in a production system [Botich: ¶57: “enabling energy efficiency optimization and reduction of environmental impact due to, for example, greenhouse gas emissions”].
Regarding claim 19:
Kaufman’242 and KAUFMAN’602 disclose, The method of claim 18, but they do not explicitly disclose, and
Botich discloses, generating, via the processing circuitry, one or more graphs based on the first emissions per unit, the second emissions per unit, or both. [Examiner notes that the optional terms separated by or statement, and only one of them is required and is given the patentable weight.
¶126: “The client side computer can then plot the data through the client report interface 115 to thereby generate a “report”.”… ¶127: “the processor 1145 can generate a data point representing the number of pounds of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) emitted by a facility each minute, hour, day, week, month, year, and/or any other time resolution. FIGS. 18B and 18C (described in further detail below) illustrate an exemplary chart and summary table using the weekly and daily values of CO2e generated” “processor 1145 can generate a data point at multiple time resolutions” “processor 1145 can also generate a data point at multiple time resolutions for any overall consumption or emission data for a module, facility or enterprise, such as total electricity consumption, total natural gas consumption, total water consumption, total sulfur dioxide emission, total carbon dioxide emission, total methane emission, and the like.”].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filling date of the claimed invention to have used the technique of generating one or more graphs based on emission per unit in order to utilize these analyzed data to enable energy efficiency optimization and reduction of environmental impact due to emissions related to energy use in a production system taught by Botich with the method taught by Kaufman’242 and KAUFMAN’602 as discussed above in order to have reasonable expectation of success such as to enable energy efficiency optimization and reduction of environmental impact due to emissions related to energy use in a production system [Botich: ¶57: “enabling energy efficiency optimization and reduction of environmental impact due to, for example, greenhouse gas emissions”].
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kaufman’242 and KAUFMAN’602 and further in view of Nussbaum (US20170226764A1) [hereinafter Nussbaum].
Regarding claim 9:
Kaufman’242 and KAUFMAN’602 disclose, The mover system of claim 1, and
Kaufman’242 further discloses, wherein the track comprises a first portion and a section portion, [¶34: “wherein may enable the energy usage in a process or system to be determined at various levels of granularity, for example, at a component level, a cell level, an area level, a factory level, or a process level.”… ¶37: “the depicted industrial automation system 10 may be divided into various hierarchical levels, such as factories 12, areas 16,”
Kaufman’242 discloses, number of areas of track as shown in figure 4], but Kaufman’242 and KAUFMAN’602 do not explicitly disclose, and
Nussbaum discloses, wherein the one or more operating settings comprise a number of the plurality of movers to be parked in the second portion. [¶20: “controlled by a central control, which communicates with the maneuvering vehicle or vehicles” “control is programmed to allocate parking spaces to motor vehicles to be parked and, in order to return a vehicle, to determine the respective parking space”].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filling date of the claimed invention to combined the one or more operating settings comprise a number of the plurality of movers to be parked in the second portion in order to have highly flexible parking spaces that advantageously improve access times thereby reducing increasing efficiency of the system taught by Nussbaum with the system taught by Kaufman’242 and KAUFMAN’602 as discussed above in order to have reasonable expectation of success such as to have highly flexible parking spaces that advantageously improve access times thereby reducing increasing efficiency of the system [Nussbaum: ¶19: “The particular advantage of the parking system according to the invention is its high flexibility”… ¶21: “the simultaneous operation of several maneuvering vehicles proves advantageous to improve access times.”].
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kaufman’242 and KAUFMAN’602 and further in view of Rajan (US20240388130A1) [hereinafter Rajan].
Regarding claim 11:
Kaufman’242 and KAUFMAN’602 disclose, The mover system of claim 1, but they do not explicitly disclose, and
Rajan discloses, a user input indicative of a minimum value and a maximum value of emissions per unit, a minimum value and a maximum value of energy consumption, a minimum number and a maximum number of movers, a minimum value and a maximum value of acceleration, a minimum value and a maximum value of velocity, or any combination thereof; and
determine the one or more commands based on the user input. [Examiner notes that the optional terms separated by or statement, and only one of them is required and is given the patentable weight.
Accordingly, Rajan teaches, user input with a minimum value and a maximum value of energy consumption and determine the one or more commands based on the user input as described below:
¶55: “monitoring and control unit (102) of the device (100)” “memory is configured to store a pre-determined limit of energy consumption value for the loads and a set of instructions based on pre-defined conditions/logic.” “processor is configured to receive the monitored parameter values, and is further configured to execute the set of instructions stored in the memory or from the central controlling device to generate an actuating signal for controlling the switching means (106, 107) based on the monitored parameter values and the pre-determined logic.” “The device (100) includes an interface for facilitating the user or the central controlling device to set the pre-determined limit of energy consumption value.”].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filling date of the claimed invention to combined the user input with a minimum value and a maximum value of energy consumption and determine the one or more commands based on the user input in order to have the ability to set the power consumption limit to control power consumption as per energy demand, supply and availability and to reduce carbon emission by preventing unnecessary power consumption outside the set limit taught by Rajan with the system taught by Kaufman’242 and KAUFMAN’602 as discussed above in order to have reasonable expectation of success such as to have the ability to set the power consumption limit to control power consumption as per energy demand, supply and availability and to reduce carbon emission by preventing unnecessary power consumption outside the set limit [Rajan: ¶11: “monitor and control building equipment/loads as per energy demand, supply and availability.” ¶6: “further diminishing the power cost and carbon emissions”].
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure is listed in the PTO-892 Notice of Reference Cited document.
Kaufman’377 et al. (US20100274377A1) - Discrete energy assignments for manufacturing specifications:
¶9: Systems and methods are provided where sustainability factors such as energy are monitored throughout a plant or process and associated with a model such as a bill of material in order to increase plant efficiencies. Automated monitors can receive data from a plurality of sustainability factor data sources that are distributed across an industrial process..
Ziegler (US20180370734A1) - Method and apparatus for determining a specific energy consumption of belt conveyors:
¶13: sensor system provided to compare a calculated energy consumption, which is referred to hereinafter as the power demand, with an actual measured energy consumption while taking into consideration a loading and loading distribution. By taking into consideration the conveyor belt segments or on the basis of the installation sections and applying mathematical methods, it is possible to bring the calculated power demand into agreement with the actually measured energy consumption.
Rawat et al. (US20180031533A1) - System and method for real-time carbon emissions calculation for electrical devices:
¶10: The system also includes a carbon emissions calculator module embedded in or operably connected to the substation controller, the carbon emissions calculator programmed to receive at least one of power consumption data and load information values from each of the one more devices via the demand response protocol, calculate carbon emissions for each of the one more devices based on the at least one of power consumption data and load information values, and generate an output indicating the calculated carbon emissions for each of the one more devices.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MOHAMMED SHAFAYET whose telephone number is (571)272-8239. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30 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, Kamini Shah can be reached at (571)272-2279. 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.
/KAMINI S SHAH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2116
/M.S./
Patent Examiner,
Art Unit 2116