Detailed Action
Claims 1-15 are pending and are examined.
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 .
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:
Regarding claims 1 the term " network communication module" acts as a generic placeholder for the term “means”. The generic placeholder “network communication module” is modified by functional language “for communicating with another device on a peer-to-peer network” in claim 1. The generic placeholders are not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed functions. The specification (see para 0028) includes structure corresponding to the generic placeholder “network communication module” (“Network communication module 41 allows M-device 27 to communicate with another device and/or node on a peer-to-peer network via wire and/or wirelessly. Network communication module 41 can be, for example, a network interface card..”).
Regarding claims 1 the term " date-time module " acts as a generic placeholder for the term “means”. The generic placeholder “date-time module” is modified by functional language “keeps track of local date/time information” in claim 1. Further, the generic placeholders are not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed functions. The claims and specification (see para 0028) are both silent with respect to any structure corresponding to the generic placeholder “date-time module” (“Date-time module 42 keeps track of local date/time information in real-time.”).
Regarding claims 1 the term " electric power measurement module " acts as a generic placeholder for the term “means”. The generic placeholder “electric power measurement module” is modified by functional language “measures and records an amount of electric power produced by a power-generating entity” in claim 1. Further, the generic placeholders are not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed functions. The claims and specification (see para 0029) are both silent with respect to any structure corresponding to the generic placeholder “electric power measurement module”. (“Electric power measurement module 43 measures the amount of electric power produced by a power-generating entity. The power-generating entity can be a conventional power-generating plant (such as power-generating plants 11 in Figure 2) or a distributed power-generating station (such as solar panels 17 and wind turbines 18 in Figure 2).”).
Regarding claims 1 the term " transaction construction module " acts as a generic placeholder for the term “means”. The generic placeholder “transaction construction module” is modified by functional language “constructs a blockchain transaction by combining said unique cryptographic identifier, said local date/time information, and said measured electric power produced, and then places said blockchain transaction onto said peer-to-peer network for verification by an energy blockchain, wherein a combination of said unique cryptographic identifier, said local date/time information, and said measured electric power produced is considered as a proof-of-power for said energy blockchain” in claim 1. Further, the generic placeholders are not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed functions. The claims and specification (see para 0034) are both silent with respect to any structure corresponding to the generic placeholder “transaction construction module”. (“Transaction construction module 44 can construct a blockchain transaction that incorporates an unique cryptographic identifier (from memory module 46), date-time information (from date-time module 42), and the amount of power produced/consumed (from memory module 46).”).
Regarding claim 11 the term "control module " acts as a generic placeholder for the term “means”. The generic placeholder “control module” is modified by functional language “to control said power-generating entity by turning on said power-generating entity in response to a receipt of an ON signal from said network communication module; and turning off said power-generating entity in response to a receipt of an OFF signal from said network communication module.” in claim 11. Further, the generic placeholders are not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed functions. The claims and specification (see para 0031) are both silent with respect to any structure corresponding to the generic placeholder “control module” (“signal to control module 45, which then shuts off the power-generation activity of the power-generating entity being monitored.”).
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/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 this/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 it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claims 2-15 are similarly rejected based on their dependency from their independent claim 1.
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 1-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Means-Plus-Function
Claims 1 and 11 invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) interpretation (see Claim Interpretation section). A means- (or step-) plus-function limitation that is found to be indefinite under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) based on failure of the specification to disclose corresponding structure, material or act that performs the entire claimed function also lacks adequate written description (see MPEP 2181(IV)). Claims 1 and 11 are found to be indefinite under 35 U.S.C. 112(b), therefore the claims are also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) for lacking adequate written description.
Claims 2-15 are similarly rejected based on their dependency from their independent claim 1.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Means-Plus-Function
Claims 1 and 11 invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) interpretation (see Claim Interpretation section). To satisfy the definiteness requirement under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph, the written description must clearly link or associate the corresponding structure, material, or acts to the claimed function (see MPEP 2181(III)). Here, the claims and specification are both silent with respect to any specific structure corresponding to the generic placeholders “date-time module”, “electric power measurement module”, “transaction construction module”, and “control module”. Therefore, these claims are indefinite and are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
Claims 2-15 are similarly rejected based on their dependency from their independent claim 1.
Applicant may:
(a) Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph;
(b) Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what structure, material, or acts perform the entire claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(c) Amend the written description of the specification such that it clearly links the structure, material, or acts disclosed therein to the function recited in the claim, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)).
If applicant is of the opinion that the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts and clearly links them to the function so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either:
(a) Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(b) Stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181.
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 1-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Step 1
Step 1 of the eligibility analysis asks is the claim to a process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter (See MPEP § 2106.03, subsections I and II). Claims 1-15 are directed to a computer-implemented system (i.e., machine, and manufacture). Therefore, these claims fall within the four statutory categories of invention.
Step 2A, Prong One
Prong One asks does the claim recite an abstract idea, law of nature, or natural phenomenon (MPEP § 2106.04(II)(A)(1)). Claim 1 under a broadest reasonable interpretation recites an abstract idea because the claims describe recording electric power produced, grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas (MPEP § 2106.04(a)(2), subsection II). The claim limitations reciting the abstract idea are grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas because the limitations describe commercial or legal interactions, including agreements in the form of contracts of accounting for measured electric power produced. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements.
An energy monitoring device comprising:
a network communication module for communicating with another device on a peer-to-peer network;
a date-time module keeps track of local date/time information;
an electric power measurement module measures and records an amount of electric power produced by a power-generating entity;
a memory module for storing a unique cryptographic identifier and said measured electric power produced; and
a transaction construction module constructs a blockchain transaction by combining said unique cryptographic identifier, said local date/time information, and said measured electric power produced, and then places said blockchain transaction onto said peer-to-peer network for verification by an energy blockchain, wherein a combination of said unique cryptographic identifier, said local date/time information, and said measured electric power produced is considered as a proof-of-power for said energy blockchain.
Step 2A, Prong Two
Prong Two asks does the claim recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application (MPEP § 2106.04(II)(A)(2)). Here, the additional elements of a device, a memory module, and a network communication module, individually and in combination, are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional elements merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea (MPEP § 2106.05(f)) and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment (MPEP § 2106.05(h)). The description of the additional elements evidences that they are generic and conventional elements used as tools to perform the abstract idea. The device may be a generic and conventional device (See Spec. 0032).The memory module may be a generic and conventional memory module (See Spec. 0030).The network communication module may be a generic and conventional network communication module (See Spec. 0028). The date-time module may be a generic and conventional date-time module (See Spec. 0028). The electric power measurement module may be a generic and conventional electric power measurement module (See Spec. 0029). The transaction construction module may be a generic and conventional transaction construction module (See Spec. 0034). The control module may be a generic and conventional control module (See Spec. 0031).
Step 2B
Step 2B determines whether the claim as a whole amount to significantly more than the abstract idea itself (MPEP § 2106.05). Evaluating additional elements to determine whether they amount to an inventive concept requires considering them both individually and in combination to ensure that they amount to significantly more than the abstract idea itself. Individually, the additional elements do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea. As discussed previously, the description of the additional elements evidences that they are generic and conventional elements used as tools to perform the abstract idea (See Spec. 0013, 0016, 0020, and 0075). As such, the additional elements merely serve as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. The ordered combination recites no more than the individual elements do. Thus, the additional elements are not significantly more than the abstract idea. Accordingly, the claims are directed to the abstract idea identified above without significantly more. The claims are not eligible, warranting a rejection for lack of subject matter eligibility and concluding the eligibility analysis.
Dependent Claims
Claims 2-15 have also been analyzed. However, the subject matter of these claims also fails to recite patent eligible subject matter for the following reasons:
Claim 2 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes the same abstract idea as claim 1. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. The additional elements are not significantly more than the abstract idea because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. Therefore, the claim is not eligible. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements.
wherein said unique cryptographic key is a public key
Claim 3 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes the same abstract idea as claim 1. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. The additional elements are not significantly more than the abstract idea because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. Therefore, the claim is not eligible. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements.
wherein said unique cryptographic key is a public/private key pair
Claim 4 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes the same abstract idea as claim 1. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. The additional elements are not significantly more than the abstract idea because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. Therefore, the claim is not eligible. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements.
wherein said network communication module is associated with a unique protocol address
Claim 5 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes the same abstract idea as claim 1. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. The additional elements are not significantly more than the abstract idea because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. Therefore, the claim is not eligible. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements.
wherein said network communication module is a network interface card.
Claim 6 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes the same abstract idea as claim 1. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. The additional elements are not significantly more than the abstract idea because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. Therefore, the claim is not eligible. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements.
wherein said memory module is a programmable memory
Claim 7 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes the same abstract idea as claim 1. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. The additional elements are not significantly more than the abstract idea because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. Therefore, the claim is not eligible. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements.
wherein said programmable memory is an EEPROM
Claim 8 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes the same abstract idea as claim 1. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. The additional elements are not significantly more than the abstract idea because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. Therefore, the claim is not eligible. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements.
wherein said electric power measurement module measures an amount of electric power consumed by a power-consuming entity.
Claim 9 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes the same abstract idea as claim 1. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. The additional elements are not significantly more than the abstract idea because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. Therefore, the claim is not eligible. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements.
wherein said measured electric power consumed is stored in said memory module
Claim 10 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes the same abstract idea as claim 1. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. The additional elements are not significantly more than the abstract idea because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. Therefore, the claim is not eligible. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements.
wherein said transaction construction module constructs a blockchain transaction by combining said unique cryptographic identifier, said local date/time information, and said measured electric power consumed
Claim 11 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes the same abstract idea as claim 1. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. The additional elements are not significantly more than the abstract idea because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. Therefore, the claim is not eligible. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements.
wherein said monitoring device further includes a control module to control said power-generating entity by turning on said power-generating entity in response to a receipt of an ON signal from said network communication module; and turning off said power-generating entity in response to a receipt of an OFF signal from said network communication module.
Claim 12 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes the same abstract idea as claim 1. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. The additional elements are not significantly more than the abstract idea because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. Therefore, the claim is not eligible. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements.
wherein said monitoring device utilizes a modified TCP/IP protocol that includes an HIPv2 identifier, wherein said HIPv2 identifier lies between an Internet Protocol layer and a transport layer of a TCP/IP protocol stack.
Claim 13 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes the same abstract idea as claim 1. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. The additional elements are not significantly more than the abstract idea because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. Therefore, the claim is not eligible. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements.
wherein an authenticity of said monitoring device is certified by a certification authority by verifying said unique cryptographic identifier uniquely identifies said monitoring device.
Claim 14 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes the same abstract idea as claim 1. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. The additional elements are not significantly more than the abstract idea because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. Therefore, the claim is not eligible. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements.
monitoring device includes a processor.
Claim 15 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes the same abstract idea as claim 1. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. The additional elements are not significantly more than the abstract idea because individually and in combination, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality as generic and conventional computers and components merely serving as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. Therefore, the claim is not eligible. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements.
wherein said transaction construction module further constructs a second blockchain transaction by combining said unique cryptographic identifier, said local date/time information, and said measured electric power consumed.
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)(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 1-11, and 13-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 as being anticipated by Orsini et al. (US20170103468A1) (hereinafter “Orsini”).
As per Claim 1, Orsini teaches:
An energy monitoring device comprising: (“The TAG elements which comprise the network are physically embedded in, or securely connected to, devices that comprise or connect to a utility grid.” (Para. 0021); “TAGe can be used to cryptographically secure, control or transfer data on the TAG network. TAGe can include any form of computing device or integrated circuit embedded in, retrofit to, or communicating in any fashion with, a device that monitors, produces, consumes, transfers, measures or stores energy, computation or data.” (Para. 0031); “TAGE can also include combined heat and computation systems, utility meters, smart invertors, and battery storage systems 116.” (Para. 0030)
a network communication module for communicating with another device on a peer-to-peer network; (“market-based, peer-to-peer control, settlement and registry system.” (Para. 0005); “Encrypted data transactions are carried on the peer-to-peer TAG network and stored non-repudiably in the blockchain.” (Para. 0034); “each element can communicate and transact autonomously with one another.” (Para. 0048)
a date-time module keeps track of local date/time information; (“The token value contains the quantity of energy generated, the portion of a REC (renewable energy certificate) created, the location, time, unique identifier of the TAG element, information about the photovoltaic system's construction, size, date of installation, owner, installer and system age and minimum number of TAG elements required to complete the transaction.” (Para. 0022); “essential information can include a timestamp.” (Para. 0052); “affords precise time-synchronization for different grid applications.” (Para. 0056)
an electric power measurement module measures and records an amount of electric power produced by a power-generating entity; (“a photovoltaic panel creates a kilowatt of energy. The energy is measured and assigned a token value by a TAG element embedded in the photovoltaic system's inverter. The token value contains the quantity of energy generated, the portion of a REC (renewable energy certificate) created, the location, time, unique identifier of the TAG element, information about the photovoltaic system's construction, size, date of installation, owner, installer and system age and minimum number of TAG elements required to complete the transaction.” (Para. 0022); “TAGe can relay revenue-grade metrology, system status, control commands, conditions or any form of data generated by or transmitted to TAG-connected devices that consume, provide, measure or curtail power or computation from a TAG-connected device.” (Para. 0034).
a memory module for storing a unique cryptographic identifier and said measured electric power produced; and (“each element has IC, memory and software components so to perform functions including processing, data storage, communications and controls.” (Para. 0049); “A blockchain ledger can be recorded in the memory of devices that comprise the network.” (Para. 0019); “Memory 764 stores data within computing device 750. Memory 764 can be implemented as one or more of a computer-readable medium or media, a volatile memory unit or units, or a non-volatile memory unit or units.” (Para. 0110)
a transaction construction module constructs a blockchain transaction by combining said unique cryptographic identifier, said local date/time information, and said measured electric power produced, (“The token value contains the quantity of energy generated, the portion of a REC (renewable energy certificate) created, the location, time, unique identifier of the TAG element.” (Para. 0022); “The TAG element uses this token information to create a self-executing, smart contract that is deployed to the TAG network. This smart contract may include requirements for the time, location, client type, sale price, environmental footprint, preferred organization type to transact (for-profit or non-profit, commercial, residential, etc.) and TAG network reputation value and the delivery cost of transporting the energy and other values represented in the token across the utility grid as a requirement of successfully transacting.” (Para. 0023); “smart grid contracts perform or direct computation to determine whether and how a transaction shall be executed based on the settlement criteria received and logic model specified (by the entities who created or initiated the smart grid contract).” (Para. 0060)
and then places said blockchain transaction onto said peer-to-peer network for verification by an energy blockchain (“a self-executing, smart contract that is deployed to the TAG network.” (Para. 0023); “TAG network can function as a consensus system that can generate, route and confirm transactions on a cryptographically-secured, shared public ledger (for example, a blockchain ledger) TAGe can process and validate transactions, computations and data transferred on the network to achieve consensus on changes in the network. ” (Para. 0030).
wherein a combination of said unique cryptographic identifier, said local date/time information, and said measured electric power produced is considered as a proof-of-power for said energy blockchain. (“The token value contains the quantity of energy generated, the portion of a REC (renewable energy certificate) created, the location, time, unique identifier of the TAG element, information about the photovoltaic system's construction, size, date of installation, owner, installer and system age and minimum number of TAG elements required to complete the transaction.” (Para. 0022); “A TAG token's history of creation and transaction is recorded on the blockchain and is fractionalized to include the representation of different types and quantities of value to be traded across the network.” (Para. 0021); “transactions and registry adjustments could represent unique, identifiable impacts that could be auditable and hardened against double-counting.” (Para. 0038)
As per Claim 2, Orsini teaches:
The monitoring device of Claim 1, wherein said unique cryptographic key is a public key; (“a system for the cryptographically-secure, automatic or autonomous control of devices comprising, connected to or remotely operating devices in an electrically powered network and the transaction of the benefits, costs or value created by or transacted through the devices in this electrically powered network.” (Para. 0009); “secured through the use of very strong cryptographic primitives inherent to the TAG network.” (Para. 0020); “Devices and users comprising the TAG network can be assigned a unique identifier that can identify them on the TAG network.” (Para. 0032))
As per Claim 3, Orsini teaches:
The monitoring device of Claim 1, wherein said unique cryptographic key is a public/private key pair. (“a system for the cryptographically-secure, automatic or autonomous control of devices comprising, connected to or remotely operating devices in an electrically powered network and the transaction of the benefits, costs or value created by or transacted through the devices in this electrically powered network.” (Para. 0009); “secured through the use of very strong cryptographic primitives inherent to the TAG network.” (Para. 0020); “Devices and users comprising the TAG network can be assigned a unique identifier that can identify them on the TAG network.” (Para. 0032))
As per Claim 4, Orsini teaches:
The monitoring device of Claim 1, wherein said network communication module is associated with a unique protocol address. (“Devices and users comprising the TAG network can be assigned a unique identifier that can identify them on the TAG network.” (Para. 0032); “TAGe allows for the secure, distributed, control of equipment comprising a utility or virtual utility grid whose communication protocols and methods may include but are not limited to SCADA, IEC 61850, IEEE 1547, wireless and various IP based smart grid control systems.” (Para. 0031); “Communication interface 766 can provide for communications under various modes or protocols (e.g., GSM voice calls, SMS, EMS, or MMS messaging, CDMA, TDMA, PDC, WCDMA, CDMA2000, or GPRS, among others.).” (Para. 0112))
As per Claim 5, Orsini teaches:
The monitoring device of Claim 1, wherein said network communication module is a network interface card. (“In the implementation, low-speed controller 712 is coupled to storage device 706 and low-speed expansion port 714. The low-speed expansion port, which can include various communication ports (e.g., USB, Bluetooth®, Ethernet, wireless Ethernet), can be coupled to one or more input/output devices (e.g., a keyboard, a pointing device, a scanner, or a networking device including a switch or router, e.g., through a network adapter.).” (Para. 0105); “Computing device 750 includes processor 752, memory 764, an input/output device (e.g., display 754, communication interface 766, and transceiver 768) among other components.” (Para. 0107))
As per Claim 6, Orsini teaches:
The monitoring device of Claim 1, wherein said memory module is a programmable memory. (“each element has IC, memory and software components so to perform functions including processing, data storage, communications and controls.” (Para. 0049); “Memory 704 stores data within computing device 700.” (Para. 0103); “expansion memory 774 can be provided as a security module for device 750, and can be programmed with instructions that permit secure use of device 750..” (Para. 0110))
As per Claim 7, Orsini teaches:
The monitoring device of Claim 1, wherein said programmable memory is an EEPROM. (“memory 704 is a non-volatile memory unit or units. Memory 704 also can be another form of computer-readable medium (e.g., a magnetic or optical disk. Memory 704 may be non-transitory.).” (Para. 0103); “Storage device 706 is capable of providing mass storage for computing device 1300. In one implementation, storage device 706 can be or contain a computer-readable medium (e.g., a floppy disk device, a hard disk device, an optical disk device, or a tape device, a flash memory or other similar solid state memory device, or an array of devices, such as devices in a storage area network or other configurations.).” (Para. 0111); “can be programmed with instructions that permit secure use of device 750.” (Para. 0110))
As per Claim 8, Orsini teaches:
The monitoring device of Claim 1, wherein said electric power measurement module measures an amount of electric power consumed by a power-consuming entity. (“any value that a device on a utility grid can generate, consume, curtail, store or transport across a utility grid.” (Para. 0021); “a device that monitors, produces, consumes, transfers, measures or stores energy.” (Para. 0031); “data generated by or transmitted to TAG-connected devices that consume, provide, measure or curtail power or computation from a TAG-connected device.” (Para. 0034))
As per Claim 9, Orsini teaches:
The monitoring device of Claim 8, wherein said measured electric power consumed is stored in said memory module. (“TAGe can relay revenue-grade metrology, system status, control commands, conditions or any form of data generated by or transmitted to TAG-connected devices that consume, provide, measure or curtail power or computation from a TAG-connected device.” (Para. 0034); “A blockchain ledger can be recorded in the memory of devices that comprise the network.” (Para. 0019); “Memory 704 stores data within computing device 700.” (Para. 0103))
As per Claim 10, Orsini teaches:
The monitoring device of Claim 9, wherein said transaction construction module constructs a blockchain transaction by combining said unique cryptographic identifier, said local date/time information, and said measured electric power consumed. (“any value that a device on a utility grid can generate, consume, curtail, store or transport across a utility grid.” (Para. 0021); “TAGt may also incorporate data related to a wide range of localized and/or global environmental, social and economic impacts deriving from the production, consumption, transmission, distribution, load curtailment.” (Para. 0037); “smart grid contracts send records 416 of/contributing to the New State 406 to the Public Ledger 402; these records may include elements/entities involved and the resulting states in benefits/goods/services 412 and values exchanged (for example, the payment tokens 414).” (Para. 0062))
As per Claim 11, Orsini teaches:
The monitoring device of Claim 1, wherein said monitoring device further includes a control module to control said power-generating entity by turning on said power-generating entity in response to a receipt of an ON signal from said network communication module; and turning off said power-generating entity in response to a receipt of an OFF signal from said network communication module. (“Smart grid contracts can implement a transaction protocol designed to create and satisfy contractual conditions and securely operate assets in a power grid.” (Para. 0033); “Contract outputs 304 may include information for fulfillment 308 such as equipment control signals/actions, services/products to be enabled or delivered, and token value exchange.” (Para. 0034); “The controller is capable of contracting, transacting, relaying and transmitting cryptographically secure workloads and commands to computation devices (for example, the computational devices 514, 524, 534).” (Para. 0081))
As per Claim 13, Orsini teaches:
The monitoring device of Claim 1, wherein an authenticity of said monitoring device is certified by a certification authority by verifying said unique cryptographic identifier uniquely identifies said monitoring device. (“Devices and users comprising the TAG network can be assigned a unique identifier that can identify them on the TAG network.” (Para. 0032); “These tokens can be associated with the device or user's unique ID and recorded as a representation of value in the shared public ledger of the blockchain.” (Para. 0039); “Reputation may be an important component of peer-to-peer transactions as it establishes a quantified legitimacy of any TAGe and facilitates the trust needed for entering smart grid contracts.” (Para. 0040))
As per Claim 14, Orsini teaches:
The monitoring device of Claim 1, wherein said monitoring device includes a processor. (“Computing device 700 includes processor 702, memory 704, storage device 706, high-speed interface 708 connecting to memory 704 and high-speed expansion ports 710, and low speed interface 712 connecting to low speed bus 714 and storage device 706. Each of components 702, 704, 706, 708, 710, and 712, are interconnected using various busses, and can be mounted on a common motherboard or in other manners as appropriate. Processor 702 can process instructions for execution within computing device 700, including instructions stored in memory 704 or on storage device 706 to display graphical data for a GUI on an external input/output device, including, e.g., display.” (Para. 0102))
As per Claim 15, Orsini teaches:
The monitoring device of Claim 1, wherein said transaction construction module further constructs a second blockchain transaction by combining said unique cryptographic identifier, said local date/time information, and said measured electric power consumed. (“TAG token can embody any value that can be quantified for the purpose of transacting benefit across the network in a peer-to-peer fashion.” (Para. 0021); “TAGe can relay revenue-grade metrology, system status, control commands, conditions or any form of data generated by or transmitted to TAG-connected devices that consume, provide, measure or curtail power or computation from a TAG-connected device.” (Para. 0034); “Once the counterparties are located and contract terms are settled, the transaction can be recorded to the blockchain ledger and value can be exchanged via the token between the TAG elements that have transacted.” (Para. 0025))
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 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Orsini et in view of Moskowitz et al. (Host Identity Protocol Version 2 (HIPv2), 2015).
Orsini does not disclose:
• “wherein said monitoring device utilizes a modified TCP/IP protocol that includes an HIPv2 identifier, wherein said HIPv2 identifier lies between an Internet Protocol layer and a transport layer of a TCP/IP protocol stack.” (claim 1).
However, as per Claim 1, Moskowitz in the analogous art of authentication over networks, teaches: “wherein said monitoring device utilizes a modified TCP/IP protocol that includes an HIPv2 identifier, wherein said HIPv2 identifier lies between an Internet Protocol layer and a transport layer of a TCP/IP protocol stack.”. (See “HIP is based on a Diffie-Hellman key exchange, using public key identifiers from a new Host Identity namespace for mutual peer authentication.” (Pg. 1); “In HIP, public cryptographic keys, of a public/private key pair, are used as host identifiers, to which higher-layer protocols are bound instead of an IP address.” (Pg. 5); “strong authentication between hosts at the TCP/IP stack level can be obtained.” (Pg. 5))
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the method of Orsini with the technique of Moskowitz to a modified TCP/IP protocol having an HIPv2 identifier between the IP-layer locator function and the transport-layer communication function. Therefore, the incentives of providing stable cryptographic device identity, and improving node security provided a reason to make an adaptation, and the invention resulted from application of the prior knowledge in a predictable manner.
Conclusion
The following prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: US20220414772A1 (Berbach), discussing “where the energy certificate at least comprises a time stamp indicating the predetermined period of time, an identifier indicating the one or group of renewable energy generators having produced the energy amount, and the produced energy amount.” (Abstract).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Justin A. Jimenez whose telephone number is (571) 270-3080. The examiner can normally be reached on 8:30 AM - 5:00 PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, John W. Hayes can be reached on 571-272-6708. 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.
/Justin Jimenez/
Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3697
/ARI SHAHABI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3697
Prosecution Insights