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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicants’ submission filed on 2/10/2026 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
Claims 1, 3 and 5-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
The claims are either directed to a method or an apparatus, which is one of the statutory categories of invention. (Step 1: YES) The examiner has identified claim 1, which substantially includes all the limitations of claims 9 and 10, as the claim that represents the claimed invention for analysis. Independent claim 1 recites the following limitations (bolded text corresponds to the abstract idea):
An energy prediction apparatus comprising:
a memory storing a set of computer program instructions; and
at least one processor configured to function, based on the set of computer program instructions, as:
a first generator configured to:
obtain, at each point of a specified travel route in real time, traveling data of a target vehicle in real time in response to a request input to the at least one processor from a driver of a target vehicle; and
predict based on the traveling data of the target vehicle, a vehicle- speed fluctuation condition indicative of how a speed of a-the target vehicle fluctuates over time while the target vehicle will travel along a scheduled travel route to accordingly generate the vehicle-speed fluctuation condition as first predicted information;
a second generator configured to predict, based on the first predicted information, required travel energy required for the target vehicle to travel along the scheduled travel route to accordingly generate the required travel energy as second predicted information;
an information retrieving unit configured to retrieve environmental variation-factor information on the scheduled travel route, the environmental variation-factor information having an influence on energy consumed by the target vehicle during traveling of the target vehicle along the scheduled travel route;
the information retrieving unit being configured to retrieve, as the environmental variation-factor information, either: a correction coefficient as a function of an amount of snow on each sampled point of the scheduled travel route, or a relationship between the amount of snow on each sampled point of the scheduled travel route and a corrected required travel-energy value at the corresponding sampled point of the scheduled travel route; and
a third generator configured to:
reflect as the environmental variation-factor information, the correction coefficient or the relationship on the second predicted information; and predict, based on the second predicted information on which the correction coefficient or the relationship as the environmental variation-factor information has been reflected, total necessary energy required for the target vehicle to travel along the scheduled travel route to accordingly generate the total necessary energy as third predicted information; and
a fourth generator configured to generate, as fourth predicted information. travel-unrelated energy required, when the target vehicle travels along the scheduled travel route, by the target vehicle independently from traveling of the target vehicle along the scheduled travel route. wherein: the third generator is configured to generate, based on (i) the second predicted information on which the environmental variation-factor information has been reflected, and (ii) the fourth predicted information. the third predicted information; and the second generator is configured to: calculate, based on a past vehicle-speed fluctuation condition and the environmental variation-factor information, consumed travel energy that has been consumed by traveling of the target vehicle along a past traveled route, the past traveled route representing a route along which the target vehicle has traveled before the scheduled route, the past vehicle-speed fluctuation condition representing how the speed of the target vehicle has fluctuated over time during traveling of the target vehicle along the past traveled route; and the fourth generator is configured to: calculate consumed total energy that has been totally consumed by the target vehicle during traveling of the target vehicle along the past traveled route; subtract the consumed travel energy from the consumed total energy to accordingly calculate consumed travel-unrelated energy that has been consumed during traveling of the target vehicle along the past traveled route independently from traveling of the target vehicle along past traveled route; and generate, based on the consumed travel-unrelated energy, the fourth predicted information.
Under its broadest reasonable interpretations, this apparatus is predicting total necessary energy required for the target vehicle to travel along the scheduled travel route. If the broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim limitations entails performance in the human mind, then it falls within the mental processes grouping of abstract ideas. Therefore, the claim recites an abstract idea. (Step 2A-Prong 1: Yes. The claims are abstract.)
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. Limitations that are not indicative of integration into a practical application include: (1) Adding the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea (MPEP 2106.05.f), (2) Adding insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception (MPEP 2106.05.g), (3) Generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use (MPEP 2106.05.h).
In particular, the claims recite additional elements of retrieve environmental variation-factor information on the scheduled travel route. The step of retrieve environmental variation-factor information on the scheduled travel route is recited at a high level of generality and do not comprise any of the above additional elements that individually or in combination, have integrated the judicial exception into a practical application. Specifically, the step of retrieve environmental variation-factor information on the scheduled travel route. constitutes mere data gathering and is insignificant extra-solution activity. There are no additional elements that apply or use the judicial exception in some other meaningful way beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment. (Step 2A-Prong 2: No. The additional claimed elements are not integrated into a practical application.)
The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because, when considered separately and as an ordered combination, they do not add significantly more (also known as an "inventive concept") to the exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional elements amount to no more than generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use. The additional elements claimed amount to insignificant extra-solution activities. See 2106.05(g) for more details. Generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use, cannot provide an inventive concept-rendering the claim patent ineligible. Thus claim 1 and similarly other independent claims are not patent eligible. (Step 2B: NO. The claims do not provide significantly more)
The dependent claims further define the abstract idea that is present in their respective independent claims and hence are abstract for at least the reasons presented above. The dependent claims do not include any additional elements that integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception when considered both individually and as an ordered combination. Therefore, the dependent claims are directed to an abstract idea. Thus, the aforementioned claims are not patent-eligible.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1, 3 and 5-10 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection (s) under 35 U.S.C. 101, set forth in this Office action.
The prior art to Koebler (US20210086658) discloses devices and systems for managing the power consumption of the vehicle typically include power management logic that can calculate an applied power for the vehicle engine based on information provided from the external environment of the vehicle, the operational status of the vehicle, one or more command inputs from a driver, and one or more operational parameters of the vehicle. However, Koebler fails to teach the information retrieving unit being configured to retrieve, as the environmental variation-factor information, either: a correction coefficient as a function of an amount of snow on each sampled point of the scheduled travel route, or a relationship between the amount of snow on each sampled point of the scheduled travel route and a corrected required travel-energy value at the corresponding sampled point of the scheduled travel route.
Response to Arguments
The arguments filed on 2/10/2026 have been considered and are not persuasive. The Office maintains the rejections of claims 1, 3 and 5-10 under 35 USC 101.
Applicant argues that the invention can improve the likelihood that a vehicle requiring energy can reach its destination. Such improvements are not positively recited in the claims and lack support in the specification as to how the predictions affect the running of the target vehicle. Applicant argues that the prediction features cannot be performed in the human mind. Mathematical relationships and algorithms executed on a processor are considered using a computer as a tool to perform a mental process (MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)). Furthermore, the request from a driver, in real-time, and using past traveled route data is still considered an insignificant extra-solution activity for data gathering and outputting (MPEP 2106.05(g)). Whether they are theoretical, or in real-time based on gathered data, calculations are considered mathematical concepts and are thus capable of being performed in the human mind with the aid of a tool (computer or otherwise). Applicant argues that the claim is directed to a practical energy management application. Examiner respectfully disagrees due to the claims not positively reciting any management or control of vehicle energy systems. As an example, US20210086658A1 (previously cited), now issued as US11597296B2, integrates the abstract idea into practical application by “determining time-power efficient operational parameters for said vehicle in response to” predictions and/or determinations.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NAVID MEHDIZADEH whose telephone number is (571)272-7691. The examiner can normally be reached on 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, James Trammell can be reached on (571)-272-6712. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/NAVID Z. MEHDIZADEH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3669