DETAILED ACTION
The instant application having Application No. 18/580,316 filed on 01/06/2025 is presented for examination by the examiner.
Examiner Notes
Examiner cites particular columns and line numbers in the references as applied to the claims below for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested that, in preparing responses, the applicant fully consider the references in entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
(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.
Claims 11-12, 14 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Paulick et al. (of record, see IDS filed 1/18/2024, DE 202019102368 U1 using English equivalent US2022/000525552 A1, hereinafter Paulick).
Regarding claim 11
Paulick teaches a method for providing usage information of an electrical grid to a provider of the electrical grid by an electronic computing device (see fig. 1; par. 16-20) a method comprising: capturing an input of a provider of an electrical grid, wherein the input defines a geometrical map in the electrical grid (see fig. 3-6; par. 16-20 and par 101-104, GIS, graphical objects); determining, by an electronic computing device, at least one power consumption of a plurality of motor vehicles in the geometrical map in a time frame (see fig. 5, par. 105); providing, by the electronic computing device, at least one time stamp for the at least one power consumption (see par. 12); and transferring, by the electronic computing device, the at least one power consumption with the at least one time stamp for the defined geometrical map as the usage information to the provider (see par. 106).
Regarding claim 12
Paulick teaches the method of claim 11, wherein the at least one power consumption is aggregated depending on each power consumption of each motor vehicle of the plurality of motor vehicles (see par. 54).
Regarding claim 14
Paulick teaches the method of claim 11, wherein the time frame is predefined by the provider (see par. 103-105, selection can be made by user from the user interface which includes a point in time to get a calculated result).
Regarding claim 19
Paulick teaches a non-transitory computer program product comprising program code, which when executed by an electronic computing device, causes the electronic computing device to: capture an input of a provider of an electrical grid (see fig. 1; par. 16-20), wherein the input defines a geometrical map in the electrical grid (see fig. 3-6; par. 16-20 and par 101-104, GIS, graphical objects); determine at least one power consumption of a plurality of motor vehicles in the geometrical map in a time frame (see fig. 5, par. 105); provide at least one time stamp for the at least one power consumption (see par. 12); and transfer the at least one power consumption with the at least one time stamp for the defined geometrical map as the usage information to the provider (see par. 106).
Regarding claim 20
Paulick teaches an electronic computing device configured to: capture an input of a provider of an electrical grid (see fig. 1; par. 16-20), wherein the input defines a geometrical map in the electrical grid (see fig. 3-6; par. 16-20 and par 101-104, GIS, graphical objects); determine at least one power consumption of a plurality of motor vehicles in the geometrical map in a time frame (see fig. 5, par. 105); provide at least one time stamp for the at least one power consumption (see par. 12); and transfer the at least one power consumption with the at least one time stamp for the defined geometrical map as the usage information to the provider (see par. 106).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Paulick in view of Penilla et al. US 10714955 (of record, see IDS 1/18/2024, hereinafter Penilla).
Regarding claim 13
Paulick teaches the method of claim 11, but is silent on wherein each motor vehicle of the plurality of motor vehicles is anonymized before transferring the usage information to the provider.
In a related field of electrical power usage, Penilla teaches personal of users are protected and separated for each motor vehicle of the plurality of motor vehicles before information is transferred (see col. 17 lines 34-41).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have private information separated and anonymized when data is shared as taught by Penilla included with the system of Paulick so that personal data of each vehicle owner to enable unification and provide improved sharing of data that is not confidential (see col. 17 lines 34-37).
Claims 15 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Paulick in view of Merkle et al. (DE 102017122283B3 using English equivalent US 11,255,882 hereinafter Merkle).
Regarding claims 15 and 16
Paulick teaches the method of claim 11, but is silent on wherein an amount of possible energy that could be charged to the plurality of motor vehicles in the geometrical map is transferred to the provider; and wherein a possible average or maximum power depending on charging modes in the geometrical map is transferred to the provider.
In a related field of energy monitoring and distribution, Merkle teaches the amount of possible energy usage in each of the distribution center (include charging stations for electric vehicles, see col. 1 lines 55-62) is collected and transferred to a central collection point (see col. 13 lines 38-64).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective date of the claimed invention to include the transfer of energy usage information to a collection point of Merkle to the system of Paulick for the purpose of preventing shortages in the provision of services at the distribution stations (see Merkle col. 2 line 4-17).
Claims 17 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Paulick in view of Schweitzer, III et al. (US 2011/0251732 A1) hereinafter Schweitzer.
Regarding claim 17
Paulick teach the method of claim 11, but is silent on wherein a forecast of a future power consumption is determined by the electronic computing device and the forecast of the future power consumption is transferred to the provider.
In a related field of distribution of electric power loads, Schweitzer teaches predicting behavior of loads connected to an electric power distribution system to optimize future power consumption of the electric power distribution system (see par. 23).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective date of the claimed invention to include predicting future loads consumption of Schweitzer with the system of Paulick because it would provide to optimize control strategy based on load dynamics (see Schweitzer par. 24).
Regarding claim 18
Paulick and Schweitzer teaches the method of claim 17, and Paulick further teaches wherein the forecast of the future power consumption is determined depending on future weather in the geometrical map, a day, the time frame, or navigational routes of the plurality of motor vehicles (see par. 57).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THOMAS PHAM whose telephone number is (571) 572‐3689. The examiner can normally be reached Monday ‐ Thursday 7 AM ‐ 4 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.
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.
/THOMAS K PHAM/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2872
Prosecution Insights