DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Remarks
2. Claims 16-30 have been examined and rejected. This is the first Office action on the merits.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
3. The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
4. Claims 16, 18, 21-26, 28, and 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Moller et al (U.S. Patent No. 11,936,188).
4-1. Regarding claims 16 and 28, Moller teaches the claim comprising: at least one programmable energy source, by disclosing several sources of energy [column 2, line 63 to column 3, line 2; column 4, lines 36-46] that are used as a first energy asset EA1 and second energy asset EA2 as part of a hybrid power plant [column 10, lines 50-53].
Moller teaches at least one energy storage assembly configured to selectively store or release electrical energy, by disclosing an energy storage unit ESU or system ESS, such as a battery energy storage system BES [column 10, line 65 to column 11, line 6].
Moller teaches a control device configured to: calculate a plant net load reference value on requirements of a grid, by disclosing a power plant controller PPC 200 [column 11, lines 7-9] receives an active power reference [column 11, lines 11-14; fig. 4A, ‘Pset1’].
Moller teaches calculate a required load variation [Fig. 4A, “Pset” after “Pprod_NoCom”] based on the plant net load reference value [Fig. 4A, “Pset”] and based on a current net load to be supplied to a grid [Fig. 4A, “Pprod_NoCom”].
Moller teaches calculate at least one programmable energy source reference load based on the required load variation and taking into account load limits and/or gradient load limits of the at least one programmable energy source, by disclosing calculating set points PS_1 and PS_2 [Fig. 3, “P_S1,” “P_S2,” after Set-Point SPLITTER] based on output from the Active Power Controller [Fig. 4A, “Pset” after “Pprod_NoCom”; Fig. 3] and taking into account load limits of the power generating units [column 9, lines 27-34; fig. 2, “Prefhpp > PavailPGS”].
Moller teaches calculate a reference integrating load so as to obtain the calculated required load variation, when the at least one programmable energy source is not able to satisfy the required load variation, by disclosing calculating Plack to cover lacking power when power from the power generating systems is lacking [column 10, lines 8-22; Fig. 2, “Plack” inside C2a].
Moller teaches control the energy storage assembly so as to selectively release the calculated reference integrating load when the at least one programmable energy source reference load is lower than the plant net load reference value, by disclosing that when power from the power generating systems is lacking [fig. 2, “C1,” “C2a”], then the lacking power will be covered by discharging the ESS to the extent possible [column 10, lines 9-22; fig. 2, “PrefESS = Plack”].
Moller teaches or to store the calculated reference integrating load when the at least one programmable energy source reference load is greater than the plant net load reference value, by disclosing that if excess power from the power generating units is available [fig. 2, “C1,” “C2b”], as much of the excess power as possible will be used to charge the energy storage system ESS [column 9, lines 50-53; Fig. 2, “PrefEss = Pexcess”].
4-2. Regarding claims 18 and 30, Moller teaches all the limitations of claims 16 and 28 respectively, wherein the control device is configured to: calculate the at least one programmable energy source reference load exploiting the maximum gradient reachable by the at least one programmable energy source, by disclosing calculating set points PS_1 and PS_2 [Fig. 3, “P_S1,” “P_S2,” after Set-Point SPLITTER] based on output from the Active Power Controller [Fig. 4A, “Pset” after “Pprod_NoCom”; Fig. 3] and taking into account load limits of the power generating units [column 9, lines 27-34; fig. 2, “Prefhpp > PavailPGS”].
4-3. Regarding claim 21, Moller teaches all the limitations of claim 16, comprising: at least one non-programmable energy source, configured to produce a non-predictable load contributing to a current net load supplied to a grid, by disclosing several sources of energy for a hybrid power plant [column 2, line 63 to column 3, line 2].
4-4. Regarding claim 22, Moller teaches all the limitations of claim 21, wherein the at least one non-programmable energy source comprises: at least one steam turbine assembly, by disclosing several sources of energy for a hybrid power plant [column 2, line 63 to column 3, line 2].
4-5. Regarding claim 23, Moller teaches all the limitations of claim 21, wherein the at least one non-programmable energy source comprises: at least one renewable energy source, by disclosing several sources of energy for a hybrid power plant [column 2, line 63 to column 3, line 2].
4-6. Regarding claim 24, Moller teaches all the limitations of claim 16, comprising: auxiliary devices which are supplied electrically and are configured to assist energy production; and wherein the control device is configured to calculate the required load variation also taking into account energy absorbed the auxiliary devices, by disclosing factoring in electrical losses in the hybrid plant [column 11, lines 50-67; figure 4A].
4-7. Regarding claim 25, Moller teaches all the limitations of claim 16, wherein the control device is configured to: calculate requirements of a grid by at least one primary module configured to calculate a primary load reference of the plant load based on a grid frequency, by disclosing that the active power reference may be received from a Frequency Controller [column 11, lines 19-23; figure 3, “Pref_freq_ctrl”].
4-8. Regarding claim 26, Moller teaches all the limitations of claim 25, wherein the control device is configured to: calculate the requirements of a grid also by a secondary module configured to calculate a secondary load reference of the plant load based on a level signal received by a Transmission System Operator of an electrical grid, by disclosing that the active power reference may be received from a grid operator (TSO) [column 11, lines 19-23; figure 3, “Pref_user”].
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
5. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
6. Claims 17 and 29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moller et al (U.S. Patent No. 11,936,188) in view of Wenzel et al (U.S. Patent No. 10,418,833).
6-1. Regarding claims 17 and 29, Moller teaches all the limitations of claim 16. Moller does not expressly teach wherein the control device, before calculating a programmable energy source reference load, is configured to: check a storage current load of the energy storage assembly; when the required load variation is greater than zero, and when the storage current load of the energy storage assembly is lower than zero, control the storage assembly so as to release energy until a storage current load equal to zero is reached; when the required load variation is lower than zero, and when the storage current load is greater than zero, control the storage assembly so as to store energy until the storage current load equal to zero is reached; and calculate again the required load variation based on the requirements of the grid and based on the current net load when supplied to the grid. Wenzel discloses a frequency response system configured to add or remove electricity from an energy grid [column 1, lines 20-22]. At the start of each frequency response period, a controller uses a frequency response midpoint to determine optimal battery power setpoints and use the optimal battery power setpoints to control an amount of electric power stored or discharged from a battery during a frequency response period [column 1, lines 48-53; column 8, lines 58-60]. The controller generates a midpoint b that will maintain the battery at a constant state-of-charge (SOC) (i.e., a midpoint that will result in the battery having the same SOC at the beginning and end of the frequency response period) [column 8, lines 60-65]. In other words, the battery will be charged/discharged as necessary to maintain a constant charge (i.e. current load = 0). This would extend battery life. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to take appropriate steps to maintain the battery of Moller at a constant state-of-charge during a frequency response period, as taught by Wenzel. This would extend battery life.
7. Claims 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moller et al (U.S. Patent No. 11,936,188) in view of McDaniel et al (U.S. Patent No. 9,997,924).
7-1. Regarding claim 19, Moller teaches all the limitations of claim 16. Moller does not expressly teach wherein the at least one programmable energy source comprises: a gas turbine assembly. McDaniel discloses a hybrid energy facility that uses gas turbine generator (GTG) [column 1, lines 35-38; column 4, lines 22-26]. This would provide an additional alternate energy source to maintain grid stability when renewable energy generation drops. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide, as an energy asset of Moller, a gas turbine assembly to produce energy, as taught by McDaniel. This would provide an additional alternate energy source to maintain grid stability when renewable energy generation drops.
7-2. Regarding claim 20, Moller teaches all the limitations of claim 16. Moller does not expressly teach wherein the at least one programmable energy source comprises: an internal combustion engine. McDaniel discloses a hybrid energy facility that uses gas turbine generator (GTG) [column 1, lines 35-38; column 4, lines 22-26]. This would provide an additional alternate energy source to maintain grid stability when renewable energy generation drops. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide, as an energy asset of Moller, a gas turbine assembly to produce energy, as taught by McDaniel. This would provide an additional alternate energy source to maintain grid stability when renewable energy generation drops.
8. Claim 27 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moller et al (U.S. Patent No. 11,936,188) in view of Moosvi et al (U.S. Patent No. 11,467,616).
8-1. Regarding claim 27, Moller teaches all the limitations of claim 25. Moller does not expressly teach wherein the control device is configured to: calculate the requirements of the grid also by an energy market module configured to calculate an energy reference load profile based on energy sold on an energy market. Moosvi discloses obtaining various types of input data including market data that describes various market inputs [column 7, lines 1-12]. One or more grid service requests may be determined based on the actual market input data, such as frequency response [column 7, lines 13-19]. The grid service requests can specify a requested amount of power, and specify certain performance parameters (e.g., supplied power should be within a certain frequency range) [column 7, lines 19-24]. This would allow for more precise control over fluctuations in frequency. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to calculate requirements of the grid based on market data, as taught by Moosvi. This would allow for more precise control over fluctuations in frequency.
Conclusion
9. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALVIN H TAN whose telephone number is (571)272-8595. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10AM-6PM.
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, Scott Baderman can be reached at 571-272-3644. 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.
/ALVIN H TAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2118