Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/533,647

ENERGY MANAGEMENT APPARATUS AND ENERGY MANAGEMENT METHOD

Non-Final OA §102§112
Filed
Dec 08, 2023
Examiner
JARRETT, RYAN A
Art Unit
2116
Tech Center
2100 — Computer Architecture & Software
Assignee
LG Electronics Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
81%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 10m
To Grant
88%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 81% — above average
81%
Career Allow Rate
695 granted / 861 resolved
+25.7% vs TC avg
Moderate +8% lift
Without
With
+7.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 10m
Avg Prosecution
20 currently pending
Career history
881
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
8.2%
-31.8% vs TC avg
§103
29.9%
-10.1% vs TC avg
§102
34.3%
-5.7% vs TC avg
§112
20.0%
-20.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 861 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §112
DETAILED ACTION The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . Claim Objections Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: In claim 1 line 4, it appears that “on” should be inserted after “based”. Appropriate correction is required. 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. The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph: 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. The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked. As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph: (A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function; (B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and (C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function. Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. 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 limitation(s) uses 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 limitation(s) is/are: “control circuit configured to manage” in claim 1. Because these claim limitation(s) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, they are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. If applicant does not intend to have these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/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 limitation(s) recite(s) 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 § 112 The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a): (a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention. The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112: The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention. Claims 1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph, because the claim purports to invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, but fails to recite a combination of elements as required by that statutory provision and thus cannot rely on the specification to provide the structure, material or acts to support the claimed function. As such, the claim recites a function that has no limits and covers every conceivable means for achieving the stated function, while the specification discloses at most only those means known to the inventor. Accordingly, the disclosure is not commensurate with the scope of the claim. Claims 1-3 are directed to a single means of a “control circuit configured to manage…” Claim 4 recites additional “calculating” and “obtaining” functionality of the control circuit. Claims 5 and 6 depend from claim 4. Claim 7 recites additional “compensating” functionality of the control circuit. Claims 8 and 9 depend from claim 7. Therefore, claims 4-9 are not single means and thus are not rejected under this statute. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action: A person shall be entitled to a patent unless – (a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claims 1-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Idemitsu Kosan Co. JPWO2020/026874 A1 (“Kosan”). Kosan discloses: 1. An energy management apparatus comprising: a control circuit (e.g., Fig. 1 #50,60, [0014]: “control device 50, and a server 60”) configured to manage a power purchase time and a quantity of power to be purchased for each time zone of a plurality of time zones (e.g., [0020]: “determines the discharge start and end time of the storage battery 20 so that the procurement price is optimized”, [0034], [0038]-[0040]) on the basis of a predicted energy generation for each time zone of the plurality of time zones that is based on an energy generation prediction model (e.g., [0017], [0028]) and a predicted energy consumption for each time zone of the plurality of time zones that is based on an energy consumption prediction model (e.g., [0018], [0029]). 2. The energy management apparatus of claim 1, wherein the energy generation prediction model receives as an input value at least one of past energy generation, weather, or energy generation information, and outputs as an output value the predicted energy generation for each time zone of the plurality of time zones (e.g., [0028]). 3. The energy management apparatus of claim 1, wherein the energy consumption prediction model receives as an input value at least one of past energy consumption, weather, holiday information, or home appliance energy consumption, and outputs as an output value predicted energy consumption for each time zone of the plurality of time zones (e.g., [0029]). 4. The energy management apparatus of claim 1, wherein the control circuit calculates a required quantity of power by which a power shortage is expected by computing the predicted energy generation and the predicted energy consumption for each time zone of the plurality of time zones (e.g., [0020]: “during the time when the power generation is below the power consumption”), and obtains the calculate required quantity of power based on a Time of Use (TOU), to store the same in an Energy Storage System (ESS) (e.g., [0020]: “determines the discharge start and end time of the storage battery 20 so that the procurement price is optimized”, [0034], [0038]-[0040]). 5. The energy management apparatus of claim 4, wherein the TOU is a price per unit power fixed for each time zone of the plurality of time zones (e.g., [0019], [0030], [0043]). 6. The energy management apparatus of claim 4, wherein the control circuit determines a power purchase time and a quantity of power to be obtained based on the predicted energy generation and energy consumption for each time zone of the plurality of time zones (e.g., [0020]: “determines the discharge start and end time of the storage battery 20 so that the procurement price is optimized”, [0034], [0038]-[0040]) and the TOU (e.g., [0019], [0030], [0043]), and wherein the predicted energy generation and the energy consumption for each time zone are computed by the control circuit (e.g., [0028], [0029]). 7. The energy management apparatus of claim 1, wherein the control circuit calculates a required quantity of power for a next day for each time zone of the plurality of time zones using the predicted energy generation and the predicted energy consumption for each time zone of the plurality of time zones (e.g., [0020]: “during the time when the power generation is below the power consumption”), wherein the predicted energy generation and the energy consumption for each time zone are computed by the control circuit (e.g., [0028], [0029], and wherein the control circuit compensates for the required quantity of power for each time zone of the plurality of time zones by compensating for the predicted energy generation and the predicted energy consumption for each time zone of the plurality of time zones at a predetermined time before a time point at which TOU rises (e.g., Figs. 7-8, [0047]: “charging of storage batteries may be started when the procurement price is below the threshold [for example, at night when the procurement price is low]”). 8. The energy management apparatus of claim 7, wherein the TOU includes at least two time zones of the plurality of time zones in which different pricings are applied (e.g., [0019], [0030], [0043]), and the control circuit obtains in advance power required at a time zone of the plurality of time zones, in which the pricing rises, at a predetermined time before a time point at which the pricing rises, and stores the obtained power in the ESS (e.g., Figs. 7-8, [0047]: “charging of storage batteries may be started when the procurement price is below the threshold [for example, at night when the procurement price is low]”). 9. The energy management apparatus of claim 8, wherein the power required at the pricing-risen time zone is calculated based on the compensated required quantity of power for each time zone of the plurality of time zones (e.g., Figs. 7-8, [0020], [0034], [0038]-[0040]). 10. An energy management method performed by a device having a control circuit, the method comprising: predicting energy generation for each time zone of a plurality of time zones (e.g., [0017]); predicting energy consumption for each time zone of the plurality of time zones (e.g., [0018]); computing a required quantity of power for each time zone of the plurality of time zones based on the predicted energy generation and the predicted energy consumption (e.g., [0020]: “during the time when the power generation is below the power consumption”); determining a power purchase time and a quantity of power to be purchased based on the required quantity of power for each time zone of the plurality of time zones (e.g., [0020]: “determines the discharge start and end time of the storage battery 20 so that the procurement price is optimized”, [0034], [0038]-[0040]) and a Time of Use (TOU) (e.g., [0019], [0030], [0043]); and obtaining power based on the determined power purchase time and the determined quantity of power (e.g., [0044]: “After 19:00, electricity will be procured by purchasing electricity”). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RYAN A JARRETT whose telephone number is (571)272-3742. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00-5:30. 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, Kenneth Lo can be reached at 571-272-9774. 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. /RYAN A JARRETT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2116 02/27/26
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 08, 2023
Application Filed
Feb 27, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12596350
Linear Actuator Buckling Force Control
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12596356
METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR LOCALIZATION OF FAULTS IN AN INDUSTRIAL MANUFACTURING PLANT
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12593646
Automated Fault Detection in Microfabrication
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12591218
INDUSTRIAL DIGITAL TWIN MODEL ENVIRONMENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12591219
INDUSTRIAL INTERNET OF THINGS SYSTEMS FOR ABNORMAL ANALYSIS, METHODS, AND STORAGE MEDIUM THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
81%
Grant Probability
88%
With Interview (+7.7%)
2y 10m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 861 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month