DETAILED ACTION
The present application (Application No. 18/667,058), filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
This Office action is in reply to filing dated 17 May, 2024.
Foreign Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. JP 2023-169150, filed on 09/29/2023.
This application claims priority of Japan Application No. JP 2023-169150, filed on Sep. 29, 2023 09/29/2023. Applicant’s claim for the benefit of these prior filed applications is acknowledged. Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55
Status of Claims
Claims 1-5, are pending and addressed below.
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 1-5, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more.
Step 1: In the instant case, claims 1-5, are directed to a method, therefore the claims are directed to statutory categories of invention.
Step 2A- Prong 1: Independent claim 1 comprises steps of: determining whether either or both of the pickup location and the drop-off location are located within a predetermined range from a location of the charging equipment; and providing an incentive when either or both of the pickup location and the drop-off location are located within the predetermined range.
These claimed steps are steps of collecting/tracking data (transmitting, receiving, storing, gathering), analyzing data, making determinations/correlations/comparisons, and displaying/presenting data. All these steps are generic functions which relate to concepts that can be performed in the human mind, including observations, evaluations, judgements or opinions.
The independent claims are directed to a method for providing incentives to electric taxi passengers in exchange for using a pickup location and/or a drop-off location located within a predetermined range from a location of an EV charging equipment. Accordingly, the claimed steps represent a method of organizing commercial interactions comprising advertising, marketing and sales activities, which falls within the “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity” abstract idea grouping, wherein all the claim steps can be seen as being part of the abstract idea of providing incentives.
Step 2A- Prong 2: The independent claim 1 does not recite a computer that executes the claimed steps of determinizing and providing, and therefore the claim does not positively recite additional elements. It is noted that the preamble recites an electric vehicle (EV) in which the user rides that is chargeable with a charging equipment. These pseudo-additional elements are only recited in the preamble and are not directly involved in the execution of the claimed steps.
The EV in the preamble only represents a particular technological environment, merely a particular technical field of use to which the judicial exception is linked to, and this technological environment is used to merely provide the incentives (transmit, receive, store, gather, analyze, make determinations/correlations with, and display data). It is further noted that as now claimed any EV charging station of the invention is outside the scope of the claims. Since there are no additional elements, then the abstract idea is not integrated into a practical application
Step 2B: Since there are no additional elements and all the claim steps can be seen as being part of the abstract idea, there is no inventive concept present in the claims
The dependent claims have been considered
Dependent claims 2 further narrow the location information, and dependent claims 3 and 5 further narrow the incentives. Dependent claims 2-3, 5 merely narrow the abstract idea of providing incentives.
Dependent claims 4, recites the additional element of a charging equipment, but this element only further narrow the incentives. Dependent claim 4, merely narrows the abstract idea of providing incentives.
When considered as a whole, the same analysis with respect to Step 2A Prong Two and step 2B, apply to these additional elements. They cannot integrate a judicial exception into a practical application at Step 2A or provide an inventive concept in Step 2B.
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 of this title, 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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-2, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Medisetty et al. (US 2023/0153720) (hereinafter “Medisetty3720”), in view of Jo et al. (KR 2016/0104583).
Examiner’s note: For the purpose of examining the instant claims, an Espacenet English machine-translation of Jo et al. (KR 2016/0104583) (hereinafter “Jo4583”) is used.
(preamble)-(method for providing a vehicle service for transporting a user in exchange for payment of a fee from a pickup location to a drop-off location). Transport services system and method (see at least Medisetty3720, ¶11). Transport providers (see at least Medisetty3720, fig. 1, “181”).
(a vehicle in which the user rides being an electrified vehicle that is chargeable with a charging equipment). Electric vehicles (EVs) (see at least Medisetty3720, ¶2). EVs, EV data and EV charging station (see at least Medisetty3720, abstract).
(determining whether either or both of the pickup location and the drop-off location are located within a predetermined range from a location of the charging equipment). (see at least Medisetty3720, fig. 1, ¶30).
[0030] For example, based on the EV data 183, the EV task optimizer 120 can determine a set of EV charging stations within the EV's current range. The matching engine 140 can identify service locations of service requests 173 (e.g., rideshare routes having drop-off locations for requesting users 171 and/or item pickup locations for requesting users 171) that are proximate to EV charging stations that are within range of the EV 186. Based on the service locations of the service requests 173, the matching engine 140 can select an optimal EV charging station location for the EV 186 and match the driver of the EV 186 to a set of one or more service requests 173 that will route the EV 186 towards the optimal EV charging station and enable the driver of the EV 186 to perform tasks while the EV 186 is charging. As provided herein, these tasks can comprise item pickup tasks (e.g., grocery, food item, and/or package pickup tasks) at locations that are within a certain proximity of the optimal EV charging station. (see at least Medisetty3720, fig. 1, ¶30).
Medisetty3720 does not disclose: (providing an incentive when either or both of the pickup location and the drop-off location are located within the predetermined range).
However, Jo4583 discloses: A taxi passenger receives a taxi fare discount if/when the taxi is located within a preset threshold distance from the receiving location of an item, and besides the receiving location of the item, further based on data regarding the passenger's boarding location, and the passenger's destination. (see at least Jo4583, fig. 5-7, ¶113, 118, 123-124).
Referring to FIG. 5, the courier service device (510) includes a processor (511), a communication unit (512), a storage unit (513), and a memory (514). The processor (511) performs various operations in the courier service device (510). The courier service device (510) searches for a taxi located within a preset threshold distance from the receiving location of an item in response to a user's request for on-site pickup through a processor (511), determines whether there is a passenger in the searched taxi, and if it is determined that there is a passenger, calculates a taxi fare discount for the passenger based on data regarding the receiving location of the item, the passenger's boarding location, and the passenger's destination. (see at least Jo4583, fig. 5, ¶113).
Referring to FIG. 6, a taxi-based door-to-door pickup delivery service method according to a second embodiment of the present invention includes a step (S610) in which an integrated server (500) receives a request for door-to-door pickup of goods and delivery data including location information of a place to receive goods from a user terminal (600), a step (S620) in which the integrated server (500) searches for a taxi located within a preset threshold distance from a place to receive goods, a step (S630) in which the integrated server (500) determines whether there is a passenger in the searched taxi, a step (S640) in which the integrated server (500) calculates a taxi fare discount for the passenger if it is determined that there is a passenger, and a step (S650) in which the integrated server (500) transmits delivery data including location information of a place to receive goods and data regarding a discount to a taxi driver terminal (700). (see at least Jo4583, fig. 6, ¶118).
As shown in FIG. 7, the integrated server (500) can search for taxis within a certain distance range (indicated by a dotted circle) from a location to receive goods and classify them as taxis capable of providing a taxi-based delivery service. (see at least Jo4583, fig. 7, ¶123).
Here, the preset threshold distance may be set as the distance from the receiving location of the goods to the current location of a taxi that can visit the receiving location of the goods within the receiving time desired by the user, based on delivery data such as the receiving location of the goods, the receiving time, and the delivery deadline received from the user terminal (600). These critical distances can also be flexibly adjusted in light of real-time road traffic conditions. (see at least Jo4583, fig. 7, ¶124).
Medisetty3720 with Jo4583, they are both directed to comparable, base taxi services that are based on predetermined distance constraints. Jo4583 teaches the further improvement of providing incentives to a taxi passenger. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to expand the taxi services of Medisetty3720 with the incentives of Jo4583; since this expansion is applying a known technique of incentivizing customers to use the taxi services, to improve a similar known technique of identifying service locations of service requests of taxi services (e.g., rideshare routes having drop-off locations for requesting users and/or item pickup locations for requesting users), wherein this improved functionality is a predictable incentivizing result within the capabilities of one of ordinary skill in the art.
Accordingly, when Medisetty3720 is modified with Jo4583 as per above, a passenger of an electric taxi will get incentives (e.g., fare discount) if the boarding and/or drop-off locations are within a predetermined range of an EV charging station, with the motivation that all entities predictably benefit from this arrangement as follows: EV drivers obtain a set of routing and task optimizations that significantly reduce or eliminate downtime during charging and the owners of the EV charging stations ensure optimal station utilization/allocation of their stations for the same reasons (see Medisetty3720, ¶10), moreover EV drivers further gain the added benefit of more customers using their taxi services due to the offered customer incentives; and the passengers gain the benefit of discounted fares, wherein these gained benefits are a predictable incentivizing result within the capabilities of one of ordinary skill in the art
Regarding claim 2, Medisetty3720 in view of Jo4583 discloses: All the limitations of the corresponding parent claims (claim 1) as per the above rejection statements.
Since as explained in the rejection of claim 1, Medisetty3720 discloses: Drop-off locations for requesting users 171 and/or item pickup locations for requesting users 171) that are proximate to EV charging stations that are within range of the EV 186 (see at least Medisetty3720, fig. 1, ¶30, see also ¶32, 37, 40), then, even it could be argued that Medisetty3720 does not specifically disclose: (wherein the incentive is provided when the pickup location is a standby location where the charging equipment is installed);
it would have been obvious to try, by one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have the pickup and/or drop-off location in the same standby location where the charging equipment is installed, since this particular scenario is one of a finite number of predictable implementations (a finite number of identified, predictable potential solutions) to the recognized need of selecting a taxi service request which meets the condition that the EV charging stations are within range of the requested EV taxi service (e.g., routes having drop-off locations for requesting users and/or item pickup locations for requesting users), and one of ordinary skill in the art could have pursued the known potential solutions with a reasonable expectation of success.
Claim 3, is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Medisetty et al. (US 2023/0153720) (hereinafter “Medisetty3720”), in view of Jo et al. (KR 2016/0104583); and further Strock et al. (US 2004/0122736) (hereinafter “Strock2736”).
Examiner’s note: For the purpose of examining the instant claims, an Espacenet English machine-translation of Jo et al. (KR 2016/0104583) (hereinafter “Jo4583”) is used.
Regarding claim 3, Medisetty3720 in view of Jo4583 discloses: All the limitations of the corresponding parent claims (claim 1) as per the above rejection statements.
The parent Medisetty3720/Jo4583 combination does not disclose: (wherein when both the pickup location and the drop-off location are located within the predetermined range, a higher level of the incentive is provided than when either the pickup location or the drop-off location is located within the predetermined range);
However, Strock2736 discloses:
A system and method for providing promotional rewards is provided. The promotional reward offer comprises a promotional reward associated with one or more promotional reward-earning behaviors and a promotional time frame. (see at least Strock2736, abstract)
Participating cardmembers may earn stacked rewards for earning points in multiple programs. Stacked rewards are when multiple earning behaviors and/or transactions must occur to earn a reward; e.g., by purchasing three round-trip airfares in one month, a customer might earn double miles for each purchase and then a bonus 1000 miles for making three purchases in one month. (see at least Strock2736, fig. 3A, ¶119).
Rewards Account Data Processor 24, and the Modules 48, 50 would process the behaviors and transactions according to those stacked rewards programs. For instance, after a Module 48, 50 determines that a behavior earned a reward directly, it may inquire whether any combination of existing reward behaviors or transactions would enable another reward (see at least Strock2736, ¶119)..
The parent Medisetty3720/Jo4583 combination and Strock2736, they are both directed to providing rewards associated with one or more promotional reward-earning behaviors, and accordingly are analogous prior art. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to expand the incentive methodology of the parent Medisetty3720/Jo4583 combination; to include the feature of earning stacked rewards as taught by Strock2736, since this expansion further enhances the incentivizing functionality of the parent system.
Claims 4-5, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Medisetty et al. (US 2023/0153720) (hereinafter “Medisetty3720”), in view of Jo et al. (KR 2016/0104583); and further Rappoport et al. (US 2016/0055441) (hereinafter “Rappoport5441”).
Examiner’s note: For the purpose of examining the instant claims, an Espacenet English machine-translation of Jo et al. (KR 2016/0104583) (hereinafter “Jo4583”) is used.
Regarding claims 4-5, Medisetty3720 in view of Jo4583 discloses: All the limitations of the corresponding parent claims (claim 1; and claims 1-2; respectively) as per the above rejection statements.
The parent Medisetty3720/Jo4583 combination does not disclose: (acquiring output power of the charging equipment located within the predetermined range, wherein the level of the incentive is set according to a magnitude of the output power).
(wherein the incentive is a discount on the fee).
Rappoport5441 discloses: In one embodiment, different users may have different individualized price deals with a merchant that have different locations. The merchant may offer the same product or service at different prices to the public at the different locations. For example, different gas stations of a franchise, a chain, or a brand may offer the same grade of gasoline at different prices. A user may be offered the same price deal applicable to these different participating gas stations publishing different prices in general. The price deal, applicable in these different participating gas stations, may include a flat price, a predetermined amount of discount per gallon, or a predetermined percentage of discount, or other types of discounts that may be dependent on the purchase frequencies, purchase amounts, transaction patterns with other merchants, the transaction profiles (e.g., 127), etc. Different users may have different types of discounts of different amounts. (see at least Rappoport5441, ¶69).
The parent Medisetty3720/Jo4583 combination and Rappoport5441, they are both directed to providing incentives (in the form of discounts) in association with a station where a vehicle goes to for recharging and/or refueling, and accordingly are analogous prior art. Rappoport5441 teaches the further improvement of prorating the level of the incentive according to a magnitude of the recharging output. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the parent Medisetty3720/Jo4583 combination further with Rappoport5441; since this implementation would be a simple substitution of one known incentive element (i.e., the level of the incentive prorated according to a magnitude of the recharging output taught by Rappoport5441) for another known incentive element (i.e., the incentive in the parent Medisetty3720/Jo4583 combination) to obtain the predictable result of enticing a car owner to consume more at that particular station to gain the benefits of greater discounts while the station owner benefits from greater consumption by the user, and the substitution produces no new and unexpected result.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US20180365629 (Zeng); US20210065073 (Maeda).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARIO IOSIF whose telephone number is (571) 270-7785. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday thru Wednesday, 9:00am-4:00pm teleworking.
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, Waseem Ashraf can be reached on 571-270-39485491. 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.
/Mario C. Iosif/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3621