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 .
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
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.
Claims 1-13 and 15-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception without significantly more. A subject matter eligibility analysis is set forth below. See MPEP 2106.
Specifically, representative Claim 1 recites:
An information processing apparatus, comprising
a processing circuitry configured to estimate, based on histories of charge and discharge of storage batteries of one or more consumers in a first period, remaining capacities of the storage batteries in a second period different from the first period, and
calculate a power adjustable capacity that is a total of rechargeable capacities or dischargeable capacities of the storage batteries of the one or more consumers in the second period, based on estimates of the remaining capacities of the storage batteries.
The claim limitations in the abstract idea have been highlighted in bold above; the remaining limitations are “additional elements.”
Similar limitations (i.e., the estimating and calculating steps) comprise the abstract idea of independent Claims 15, 16, and 17.
Under Step 1 of the analysis, Claim 1 belongs to a statutory category, namely it is an apparatus claim. Likewise, claim 15 is a method claim; Claim 16 is a manufacture claim, and Claim 17 is a system claim.
Under Step 2A, prong 1: This part of the eligibility analysis evaluates whether the claim recites a judicial exception. As explained in MPEP 2106.04, subsection II, a claim “recites” a judicial exception when the judicial exception is “set forth” or “described” in the claim.
In the instant case, claim 1 is found to recite at least one judicial exception (i.e. abstract idea), that being a Mental Process and/or Mathematical Concepts. This can be seen in the claim limitations of “estimating” remaining capacities of storage batteries, and “calculating” a power adjustable capacity, which are the judicial exception of a mental process because these limitations are merely data observations, evaluations, and/or judgements in order to and is capable of being performed mentally and/or with the aid of pen and paper. Additionally, the aforementioned limitations recite mathematical calculations.
Similar limitations comprise the abstract ideas of Claims 15-17.
Step 2A, prong 2 of the eligibility analysis evaluates whether the claim as a whole integrates the recited judicial exception(s) into a practical application of the exception. This evaluation is performed by (a) identifying whether there are any additional elements recited in the claim beyond the judicial exception, and (b) evaluating those additional elements individually and in combination to determine whether the claim as a whole integrates the exception into a practical application.
In addition to the abstract ideas recited in claim 1, the claimed apparatus recites additional elements including a processing circuitry, however these elements are found to be merely generic computer hardware for implementing the abstract idea.
In addition to the abstract ideas recited in claim 15, the claimed method recites no additional elements.
In addition to the abstract ideas recited in claim 16, the claimed apparatus recites additional elements including a non-transitory computer readable storage medium that causes a computer to perform a process, however these elements are found to be merely generic computer hardware for implementing the abstract idea.
In addition to the abstract ideas recited in claim 17, the claimed apparatus recites additional elements including a plurality of batteries and a processing circuitry, however the processing circuitry is found to be merely generic computer hardware for implementing the abstract idea. The plurality of batteries are found to be merely for gathering of data for use in the abstract idea, and thus amounts to nothing more than insignificant extra-solution activity.
Thus, under Step 2A, prong 2 of the analysis, even when viewed in combination, these additional elements do not integrate the recited judicial exception into a practical application and the claim is directed to the judicial exception. No specific practical application is associated with the claimed apparatus.
Under Step 2B, the claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the additional elements, as described above with respect to Step 2A Prong 2, merely amount to a general purpose computer system that attempts to apply the abstract idea in a technological environment. Therefore, similarly the combination and arrangement of the above identified additional elements when analyzed under Step 2B also fails to necessitate a conclusion that Claims 1 and 15-17 amount to significantly more than the abstract idea.
With regards to the dependent claims, claims 2-13 merely further expand upon the algorithm/abstract idea and do not set forth further additional elements that integrate the recited abstract idea into a practical application or amount to significantly more. Therefore, these claims are found ineligible for the reasons described for parent claim 1. Specifically, claims 2, 4-10, and 13 merely recite further details of the abstract idea; claims 3 and 11 merely recite further details of the abstract idea and gathering of data for use in the abstract idea; and claims 10 and 12 merely recite an insignificant output of a result of the abstract idea.
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.
Claim(s) 1-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kempton et al (U.S. Pub. No. 2011/0202418, hereinafter “Kempton”).
Regarding Claim 1, Kempton teaches an information processing apparatus, comprising a processing circuitry (Fig. 1, aggregation server 106) configured to estimate, based on histories of charge and discharge of storage batteries of one or more consumers in a first period (paragraph [0082], driver’s prior trips and prior vehicle use are tracked for operations of grid-integrated vehicle and to predict schedule of next trips; each trip/vehicle usage corresponds to charging and discharging of the battery, i.e., history of charge/discharge, see, e.g., paragraph [0084], assuring sufficient charge for a trip; Fig. 6, step 618 and paragraph [0115], driving schedule), remaining capacities of the storage batteries in a second period different from the first period (Fig. 11, steps 1108, 1110, and 1112, paragraphs [0244]-[0246], capacity for each EVE is determined based on predicted schedule), and calculate a power adjustable capacity that is a total of rechargeable capacities or dischargeable capacities of the storage batteries of the one or more consumers in the second period, based on estimates of the remaining capacities of the storage batteries (Fig. 11, step 1112, paragraph [0246], predicted total available capacity from an aggregate of one or more EVEs; see also paragraph [0082], predicted next trips, which is determined based on driving schedule and prior vehicle use, are used to determine amount of electrical capacity to be offered for grid services).
Regarding Claim 2, Kempton teaches everything that is claimed above with respect to Claim 1. Kempton further teaches wherein the processing circuitry estimates connected/disconnected time periods that are time periods during which the storage batteries are connected in a rechargeable and dischargeable manner or disconnected at the consumers, in the second period, based on a history of the connected/disconnected time periods of the storage batteries (paragraph [0246], vehicles that are predicted to likely be available, i.e., connected, in particular blocks of time), and calculates rechargeable capacities or dischargeable capacities of the storage batteries of the consumers, based on estimates of the connected/disconnected time periods (paragraph [0246], sum capacities of vehicles that are available during block of time).
Regarding Claim 3, Kempton teaches everything that is claimed above with respect to Claim 1. Kempton further teaches wherein the processing circuitry (aggregation server 106) obtains information on power demand of the one or more consumers in the second period (paragraph [0246], driving schedule and availability of EVE correspond to power demand, because charging in order to drive uses power), and calculates the rechargeable capacities or the dischargeable capacities of the storage batteries of the consumers, based further on the information on power demand (paragraph [0246], sum capacities of available vehicles, i.e., vehicles that are not on planned trips or charging for planned trips).
Regarding Claim 4, Kempton teaches everything that is claimed above with respect to Claim 3. Kempton further teaches wherein the processing circuitry (aggregation server 106) estimates the power demand of the consumers in the second period, based on histories of meter values at the consumers in a third period (paragraphs [0088], [0091], and [0092], electric meter measures accumulated energy in each direction; paragraph [0083], additional services that require additional power are provided based on next trips; paragraph [0246], driving schedule and availability of EVE correspond to power demand, because charging in order to drive uses power; paragraph [0115]) and calculates the rechargeable capacities or the dischargeable capacities of the storage batteries of the consumers, based further on the estimated power demand (paragraph [0246], sum capacities of available vehicles, i.e., vehicles that are not on planned trips or charging for planned trips).
Regarding Claim 5, Kempton teaches everything that is claimed above with respect to Claim 4. Kempton further teaches wherein the processing circuitry (aggregation server 106) estimates charge output values and discharge output values of the storage batteries in the second period on a time-by-time basis (paragraph [0086], rate of charging equated to charge output value, and rate of provision of grid services equated to discharge output value), based on the power demand, and based on the histories of charge and discharge of the storage batteries (paragraph [0246], driving schedule and availability of EVE correspond to power demand and histories of charge and discharge; paragraph [0082], driver’s prior trips and prior vehicle use are tracked for operations of grid-integrated vehicle and to predict schedule of next trips; each trip/vehicle usage corresponds to a charge output value and discharge output value; see also paragraphs [0092] and [0115]), and, calculates the rechargeable capacities or the dischargeable capacities of the storage batteries of the consumers, based further on the charge output values and the discharge output values estimated, and the power demand estimated (paragraph [0246], sum capacities of available vehicles, i.e., vehicles that are not on planned trips or charging for planned trips; the capacities are based on the rate of charging and rate of provision of grid services).
Regarding Claim 6, Kempton teaches everything that is claimed above with respect to Claim 5. Kempton further teaches wherein the processing circuitry (aggregation server 106) calculates the rechargeable capacities or the dischargeable capacities of the storage batteries of the consumers, based further on control preset for charge and discharge operations of the storage batteries (paragraphs [0051], [0052], and [0057], forward flow limit and reverse flow limit).
Regarding Claim 7, Kempton teaches everything that is claimed above with respect to Claim 1. Kempton further teaches wherein the processing circuitry (aggregation server 106) generates a plurality of scenarios each including estimates of remaining capacities of the storage batteries of the plurality of consumers in the second period, estimates the power adjustable capacities individually for the respective scenarios (paragraph [0246], unplanned and unpredicted trips correspond to plurality of scenarios; unreduced and reduced capacities are also different scenarios), and selects the power adjustable capacity from among the power adjustable capacities estimated individually for the respective scenarios (paragraph [0246], aggregation server 106 may reduce the capacity based on historical ability to provide capacity to the grid due to unplanned or unpredicted trips; the reduced capacity is equated to the selected scenario).
Regarding Claim 8, Kempton teaches everything that is claimed above with respect to Claim 2. Kempton further teaches wherein the processing circuitry (aggregation server 106) generates a plurality of scenarios each including estimates of remaining capacities of the storage batteries of the plurality of consumers in the second period (paragraph [0246], unplanned and unpredicted trips correspond to plurality of scenarios; unreduced and reduced capacities are also different scenarios), and estimates of the connected/disconnected time period, based on the histories of charge and discharge of the storage batteries and on histories of the connected/disconnected time period, and estimates the power adjustable capacities individually for the respective scenarios (paragraph [0246], summed capacities based on availability, i.e., connected/disconnected time, and driving schedule of each vehicle). and selects the power adjustable capacity from among the power adjustable capacities for the respective scenarios (paragraph [0246, aggregation server 106 may adjust capacities based on historical ability to provide capacity to the grid due to unplanned or unpredicted trips; the reduced capacity is equated to the selected scenario).
Regarding Claim 9, Kempton teaches everything that is claimed above with respect to Claim 1. Kempton further teaches wherein the processing circuitry (aggregation server 106) determines a bidding capacity in the second period for a balancing market, based on the power adjustable capacity (paragraphs [0247]-[0249]).
Regarding Claim 10, Kempton teaches everything that is claimed above with respect to Claim 9. Kempton further teaches wherein the processing circuitry (aggregation server 106) transmits data indicating the determined bidding capacity, to a balancing market system which performs processing of the balancing market (paragraphs [0247]-[0249]).
Regarding Claim 11, Kempton teaches everything that is claimed above with respect to Claim 4. Kempton further teaches wherein the processing circuitry (aggregation server 106) receives, as inputs, a number of blocks that divide the second period (paragraph [00246], future time blocks) and prices for the respective blocks (paragraph [0247], highest price available for grid services for each block of time), estimates the power adjustable capacities individually for the respective blocks obtained by dividing the second period by the number of blocks (paragraphs [0246]-[0247], capacities are determined for individual periods, i.e., blocks of time; second period is equated to a larger block of time that is made up of multiple blocks, e.g., a full day), determines the power adjustable capacities for the respective blocks as a restriction condition (paragraph [0246], capacities for particular period of time), calculates procurement capacities of power from the consumers for the individual blocks so as to maximize (optional due to “or”) or quasi-maximize a summation of individual products of unit prices for the respective blocks and procurement capacities for the respective blocks (paragraph [0026], vehicles are charged during periods when there is low demand and supply power during periods when there is high demand, which is equated to quasi-maximization; paragraphs [0245]-[0246], individual capacities are determined for each EVE for various blocks of time based on driving schedule), and determines electric energy obtained by subtracting the procurement capacities for the respective blocks (paragraph [0246], individual capacities are determined for each EVE for various blocks of time based on driving schedule) from differences between planned values of power demand for the respective blocks (paragraph [0246], charging for scheduled trips equated to planned values of power demand) and estimates of the power demand for the respective blocks (paragraph [0246], adjusting to account for unplanned or unscheduled trips is equated to estimates of power demand), the determined electric energy being the bidding capacities for the respective blocks to an electricity exchange market (paragraphs [0246]-[0249], adjusted total available capacity is offered to market).
Regarding Claim 12, Kempton teaches everything that is claimed above with respect to Claim 4. Kempton further teaches wherein the processing circuitry (aggregation server 106) transmits data indicating the determined bidding capacities for the respective blocks, to an electricity exchange market system that performs processing of the electricity exchange market (Fig. 11, block 1116; paragraph [0248]).
Regarding Claim 13, Kempton teaches everything that is claimed above with respect to Claim 1. Kempton further teaches wherein the second period is a target time slot of demand response (paragraph [0026], vehicles are charged during periods when there is low demand and supply power during periods when there is high demand; paragraph [0039], demand response is provided).
Regarding Claim 14, Kempton teaches everything that is claimed above with respect to Claim 13. Kempton further teaches wherein the processing circuitry (aggregation server 106) receives command information on the demand response designating the second period, and controls charge and discharge of the storage batteries of the one or more consumers in the second period, based on the command information (paragraph [0026], aggregation server 106 allocates vehicle supply capacity and demand such that vehicles are charged during periods when there is low demand and supply power during periods when there is high demand).
Regarding Claim 15, Kempton teaches an information processing method comprising estimating, based on histories of charge and discharge of storage batteries of one or more consumers in a first period (paragraph [0082], driver’s prior trips and prior vehicle use are tracked for operations of grid-integrated vehicle and to predict schedule of next trips; each trip/vehicle usage corresponds to charging and discharging of the battery, i.e., history of charge/discharge, see, e.g., paragraph [0084], assuring sufficient charge for a trip; Fig. 6, step 618 and paragraph [0115], driving schedule), remaining capacities of the storage batteries in a second period different from the first period (Fig. 11, steps 1108, 1110, and 1112, paragraphs [0244]-[0246], capacity for each EVE is determined based on predicted schedule), and calculating a power adjustable capacity that is a total of rechargeable capacities or dischargeable capacities of the storage batteries of the one or more consumers in the second period, based on estimates of the remaining capacities of the storage batteries (Fig. 11, step 1112, paragraph [0246], predicted total available capacity from an aggregate of one or more EVEs; see also paragraph [0082], predicted next trips, which is determined based on driving schedule and prior vehicle use, are used to determine amount of electrical capacity to be offered for grid services).
Regarding Claim 16, Kempton teaches a non-transitory computer readable medium having a computer program stored therein which causes a computer to perform processes (aggregation server 106, paragraph [0075]), comprising: estimating, based on histories of charge and discharge of storage batteries of one or more consumers in a first period (paragraph [0082], driver’s prior trips and prior vehicle use are tracked for operations of grid-integrated vehicle and to predict schedule of next trips; each trip/vehicle usage corresponds to charging and discharging of the battery, i.e., history of charge/discharge, see, e.g., paragraph [0084], assuring sufficient charge for a trip; Fig. 6, step 618 and paragraph [0115], driving schedule), remaining capacities of the storage batteries in a second period different from the first period (Fig. 11, steps 1108, 1110, and 1112, paragraphs [0244]-[0246], capacity for each EVE is determined based on predicted schedule), and calculating a power adjustable capacity that is a total of rechargeable capacities or dischargeable capacities of the storage batteries of the one or more consumers in the second period, based on estimates of the remaining capacities of the storage batteries (Fig. 11, step 1112, paragraph [0246], predicted total available capacity from an aggregate of one or more EVEs; see also paragraph [0082], predicted next trips, which is determined based on driving schedule and prior vehicle use, are used to determine amount of electrical capacity to be offered for grid services).
Regarding Claim 17, Kempton teaches an information processing system, comprising a plurality of batteries of one or more consumers (Fig. 1, EVE 102; paragraphs [0246], multiple vehicles, each has at least one battery); and a processing circuitry (Fig. 1, aggregation server 106) configured to estimate, based on histories of charge and discharge of the storage batteries of the one or more consumers in a first period (paragraph [0082], driver’s prior trips and prior vehicle use are tracked for operations of grid-integrated vehicle and to predict schedule of next trips; each trip/vehicle usage corresponds to charging and discharging of the battery, i.e., history of charge/discharge, see, e.g., paragraph [0084], assuring sufficient charge for a trip; Fig. 6, step 618 and paragraph [0115], driving schedule), remaining capacities of the storage batteries in a second period different from the first period (Fig. 11, steps 1108, 1110, and 1112, paragraphs [0244]-[0246], capacity for each EVE is determined based on predicted schedule), and calculate a power adjustable capacity that is a total of rechargeable capacities or dischargeable capacities of the storage batteries of the one or more consumers in the second period, based on estimates of the remaining capacities of the storage batteries (Fig. 11, step 1112, paragraph [0246], predicted total available capacity from an aggregate of one or more EVEs; see also paragraph [0082], predicted next trips, which is determined based on driving schedule and prior vehicle use, are used to determine amount of electrical capacity to be offered for grid services).
Prior Art of Record
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to Applicant’s disclosure.
Steven et al (U.S. Pub. No. 2014/0304025) teaches aggregating capacity from multiple energy storage assets and providing energy to an energy market.
Tsuda et al (U.S. Pub. No. 2012/0053742) teaches determining a sum total of battery capacities and providing power to a distribution system.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CYNTHIA L DAVIS whose telephone number is (571)272-1599. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 7am to 3pm.
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, Shelby A Turner can be reached at (571)272-6334. 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.
/CYNTHIA L DAVIS/ Examiner, Art Unit 2857
/SHELBY A TURNER/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2857
Prosecution Insights