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 .
The preliminary amendment filed 06/17/2024 has been entered. Claims 2, 4, 6-8, 10, 12, 15-19, 21, and 24 amended. Claims 3, 5, 11, and 22 canceled.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) filed 06/17/2024 has been considered. The documents cited in “U.S. PATENTS” appear to be erroneously cited; the documents that it appears to cite (taken from the cited International Search Report) are US Patent Application Publications instead. Furthermore, the copies of International Search Report and Written Opinion lack associated application numbers.
Drawings
The drawings filed 06/17/2024 are considered acceptable for examination purposes.
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: “a sensor module configured to obtain power data for the electrical system”, “a forecast module configured to determine an energy forecast for the electrical system based on the power data, wherein the forecast module is configured to determine the energy forecast using a forecasting module for the electrical system”, “a power scheduling module configured to determine a power schedule for the one or more flexible energy assets to balance the electrical power in the electrical system, wherein the power scheduling module is configured to determine the power schedule using the determined energy forecast” and “a dispatch module configured to control the one or more flexible energy assets based on the determined power schedule to balance the electrical power in the electrical system” in claim 20; “a training module configured to train the forecasting model based on the power data” in claim 21.
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. However, no corresponding structure was found in the specification beyond repetitions of the claim language as seen on page 4 lines 13-29, page 8 lines 34-36, and throughout pages 9-12.
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.
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 20 and 21 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 20, the claim recites “a sensor module configured to obtain power data for the electrical system”, “a forecast module configured to determine an energy forecast for the electrical system based on the power data, wherein the forecast module is configured to determine the energy forecast using a forecasting module for the electrical system”, “a power scheduling module configured to determine a power schedule for the one or more flexible energy assets to balance the electrical power in the electrical system, wherein the power scheduling module is configured to determine the power schedule using the determined energy forecast” and “a dispatch module configured to control the one or more flexible energy assets based on the determined power schedule to balance the electrical power in the electrical system”. However, the only references to the “sensor module”, “forecast module”, “power scheduling module”, and “dispatch module” are found on page 4 lines 13-29, page 8 lines 34-36, and throughout pages 9-17. These sections fail to define what a “sensor module”, “forecast module”, “power scheduling module”, or a “dispatch module” are in terms of hardware or software, as well as failing to teach how they are configured to perform the claimed functions of each.
Regarding claim 21, the claim recites “a training module configured to train the forecasting model based on the power data wherein the training module is configured to train the forecasting model with a first frequency and the power scheduling module is configured to determine the power schedule with a second frequency greater than the first frequency”. However, the only references to the “training module” are found on page 4 lines 25-29, page 17 lines 4-22, page 18 lines 4-22, and page 19 lines 15-17. These sections fail to define what a “training module” is in terms of hardware or software, as well as failing to teach how they are configured to perform the claimed functions of each.
The specification does not demonstrate that the applicant has made an invention that achieves the claimed invention because the invention is not described with sufficient detail such that one of ordinary skill in the art can reasonably conclude the inventor had possession of the claimed invention.
The following is a quotation 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.
Claim 20-21 and 23-24 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 20, claim limitations “a sensor module configured to obtain power data for the electrical system”, “a forecast module configured to determine an energy forecast for the electrical system based on the power data, wherein the forecast module is configured to determine the energy forecast using a forecasting module for the electrical system”, “a power scheduling module configured to determine a power schedule for the one or more flexible energy assets to balance the electrical power in the electrical system, wherein the power scheduling module is configured to determine the power schedule using the determined energy forecast” and “a dispatch module configured to control the one or more flexible energy assets based on the determined power schedule to balance the electrical power in the electrical system.” invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. The only references to the “sensor module”, “forecast module”, “power scheduling module”, and “dispatch module” are found on page 4 lines 13-29, page 8 lines 34-36, and throughout pages 9-17. These sections fail to define what a “sensor module”, “forecast module”, “power scheduling module”, or a “dispatch module” are in terms of hardware or software, as well as failing to teach how they are configured to perform the claimed functions of each. Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph. The sensor module, forecast module, power scheduling module, and dispatch module will be interpreted as anything that can perform the functions of each.
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.
Regarding claim 21, claim limitation “a training module configured to train the forecasting model based on the power data wherein the training module is configured to train the forecasting model with a first frequency and the power scheduling module is configured to determine the power schedule with a second frequency greater than the first frequency” invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. The only references to the “training module” are found on page 4 lines 25-29, page 17 lines 4-22, page 18 lines 4-22, and page 19 lines 15-17. These sections fail to define what a “training module” is in terms of hardware or software, as well as failing to teach how they are configured to perform the claimed functions of each. Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph. The training module will be interpreted as anything that can perform its functions.
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.
Claims 23-24 are also rejected as being dependent on, and failing to cure the deficiencies of rejected claim 21.
Regarding claim 23, the claim recites “An energy management system according to claim 22”. However, claim 22 has been canceled. The claim will be interpreted as being dependent on claim 21.
Regarding claim 24, the claim recites “An energy management system according to claim 22”. However, claim 22 has been canceled. The claim will be interpreted as being dependent on claim 21.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
Claims 1-2, 4, 6-10, 12-21, and 23-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Step 1: Claims 1-2, 4, 6-10, and 12-19 are directed to a method. Claims 20-21 and 23-24 are directed to a machine or an article of manufacture.
Regarding claim 1:
Step 2A Prong One: The claim recites an abstract idea. Specifically:
“determining an energy forecast for the electrical system based on the power data, wherein the energy forecast is determined using a forecasting model for the electrical system;”
“determining a power schedule for controlling the one or more flexible energy assets to balance the electrical power in the electrical system using the determined energy forecast.”
The limitations of determining an energy forecast using a forecasting model and determining a power schedule using the energy forecast can be reasonably performed with the human mind/with pen and paper and thus fall under the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas.
Step 2A Prong Two: The judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. Claim 1 includes the following limitations:
“A method of energy management for an electrical system of a building, the electrical system comprising one or more inflexible energy assets and one or more flexible energy assets, the method comprising:”
“obtaining power data for the electrical system;”
“operating the one or more flexible energy assets to balance electrical power in the electrical system by:”
The limitation of a method of energy management for an electrical system of a building, the electrical system comprising one or more inflexible energy assets and one or more flexible energy assets is a generic system and thus falls under mere instructions to apply an exception. (MPEP 2106.05(f)). The limitation of obtaining power data for the electrical system falls under mere data gathering and is thus insignificant extra-solution activity (MPEP 2105.05(g)). The limitation of operating the one or more flexible energy assets to balance electrical power also falls under mere instructions to apply an exception (MPEP 2106.05(f)).
Step 2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. The limitations of a method of energy management for an electrical system of a building, obtaining power data for the electrical system, and operating the one or more flexible energy assets to balance electrical power represent functions that are well-understood, routine, and conventional when they are claimed in a merely generic manner within the industry.
With regards to “A method of energy management for an electrical system of a building, the electrical system comprising one or more inflexible energy assets and one or more flexible energy assets, the method comprising:”, US 20150248118 A1 to Li et al. (“Li”) describes “To more accurately model the energy consumption for a household and identify an optimal DR strategy for the energy units in the home, energy usage and generation from regulatable loads, fixed deferrable loads, and future fixed non-deferrable loads and sources may be optimized separately and then combined to achieve a final, robust optimal solution” (Paragraph 38). US 20130245847 to Steven et al. (“Steven”) describes “The disclosure herein can be implemented to generate suggested operating schedules for energy assets that include a controllable energy asset, using an objective function. The objective function is determined based on a dynamic simulation model of the energy profile of the energy assets” (abstract).
With regards to “obtaining power data for the electrical system;” Li describes “The HAS 14 receives information from each distributed, local receiver 16a-16c about energy usage of the energy consuming unit 18a-18c, respectively, over the home area network 12 and stores the data in a memory” (Paragraph 45). Steven describes “The objective function is determined based on a dynamic simulation model of the energy profile of the energy assets. The dynamic simulation model is adaptive to physical changes in the energy assets based at least in part on a physical model of the thermodynamic property of the at least one energy asset and at least in part on data representative of an operation characteristic of the controllable energy asset, a thermodynamic property of the energy assets, and/or a projected environmental condition.” (abstract)
With regards to “operating the one or more flexible energy assets to balance electrical power in the electrical system by:”, Li describes “Control commands based on the DR strategy are communicated by the HAS 14 to local receivers 16a-16c via the home area network 12. The local receivers 16a-16c may discontinue the operation of their associated energy consuming unit 18a-18c to a later time period having a cheaper energy price or regulate the operation of the associated energy consuming units 18a-18c, depending on the control commands from the HAS 14” (Paragraph 49). Steven describes “In this example, the at least one processing unit controls the at least one communication interface to transmit to the energy customer the suggested operating schedule as at least one use modulation signal, and the operation of the at least one energy asset according to the at least one use modulation signal causes a modulation with time of the load use of the controllable energy asset.” (Paragraph 43).
In view of the forgoing, in accord with MPEP 2106.05(d), simply appending well-understood, routine, conventional activities previously known to the industry, specified at a high level of generality, to the judicial exception does not qualify the claim as reciting “significantly more”. Th3erefore, the additional claimed features do not amount to significantly more and the claim is not patent eligible.
Regarding claim 2, the additional limitations do not integrate the judicial exception into practical application or add significantly more to the judicial exception. The limitation wherein the method according to claim 1 further comprises training the forecasting model based on the power data wherein the forecasting model is trained with a first frequency falls under mere instructions to apply an exception (MPEP 2106.05(f)). The limitation wherein the power schedule is determined with a second frequency greater than the first frequency falls under a mental process and is thus an abstract idea.
Regarding claim 4, the additional limitations do not integrate the judicial exception into practical application or add significantly more to the judicial exception. The limitation of the method according to claim 2 where the first frequency is one among: daily, monthly, or at least hourly falls under mere instructions to apply an exception (MPEP 2106.05(f)).
Regarding claim 6, the additional limitations do not integrate the judicial exception into practical application or add significantly more to the judicial exception. The limitation of the method according to claim 2, wherein the power data used for training the forecasting model is power data obtained for the interval succeeding the previous training iteration falls under mere data gathering and is thus insignificant extra-solution activity (MPEP 2106.05(g)).
Regarding claim 7, the additional limitations do not integrate the judicial exception into practical application or add significantly more to the judicial exception. The limitation of the method according to claim 2, wherein the power data used for determining the energy forecast is power data obtained for the interval succeeding the previous forecast determination falls under mere data gathering and is thus insignificant extra-solution activity (MPEP 2106.05(g)).
Regarding claim 8, the additional limitations do not integrate the judicial exception into practical application or add significantly more to the judicial exception. The limitation of the method according to claim 1, wherein the forecasting model for the electrical system includes an asset model for each inflexible energy asset falls under mere data gathering and is thus insignificant extra-solution activity (MPEP 2106.05(g)).
Regarding claim 9, the additional limitations do not integrate the judicial exception into practical application or add significantly more to the judicial exception. The limitation of the method according to claim 8, wherein training the forecast module comprises determining each asset model as an asset-specific model for each energy asset falls under a mental process and is thus an abstract idea. Obtaining an initial asset model prescribed for a respective type of inflexible energy asset falls under mere data gathering and is thus insignificant extra-solution activity (MPEP 2106.05(g)). Training the initial asset model based on the obtained power data falls under mere instructions to apply an exception (MPEP 2106.05(f)).
Regarding claim 10, the additional limitations do not integrate the judicial exception into practical application or add significantly more to the judicial exception. The limitations of the method according to claim 9, wherein each asset model is obtained from a datastore comprising a plurality of initial asset models associated with respective types of inflexible energy asset falls under mere data gathering and is thus insignificant extra-solution activity (MPEP 2106.05(g)). The limitation wherein each initial asset model is determined for the respective type of inflexible energy asset during offline analysis and loaded into the datastore falls under a mental process and is thus an abstract idea.
Regarding claim 12, the additional limitations do not integrate the judicial exception into practical application or add significantly more to the judicial exception. The limitation of the method according to claim 1, wherein the determined power schedule comprises a set-pointed schedule for a power input, and/or a power output, of each flexible energy asset for a forecast period falls under mere instructions to apply an exception (MPEP 2106.05(f)).
Regarding claim 13, the additional limitations do not integrate the judicial exception into practical application or add significantly more to the judicial exception. The limitations of a method according to claim 12, wherein determining the power schedule comprises: receiving one or more power balance objectives for the forecast period falls under mere instructions to apply an exception (MPEP 2106.05(f)). Determining the power schedule to satisfy the one or more power balance objectives falls under a mental process and is thus an abstract idea.
Regarding claim 14, the additional limitations do not integrate the judicial exception into practical application or add significantly more to the judicial exception. The limitations of the method according to claim 13, wherein the one or more power balance objectives include one or more of: minimising an operating cost of the electrical system during the forecast period based on one or more energy tariffs; maximising a power input contribution of one or more renewable energy sources to the electrical system during the forecast period; minimising a power input contribution of one or more non-renewable energy sources to the electrical system during the forecast period; and/or maximising an availability of output power during the forecast period; maximising a power output of the electrical system during the forecast period falls under mere instructions to apply an exception (MPEP 2106.05(f)).
Regarding claim 15, the additional limitations do not integrate the judicial exception into practical application or add significantly more to the judicial exception. The limitation of the method according to claim 13, wherein the one or more power balance objectives are received through a user input device falls under mere instructions to apply an exception (MPEP 2106.05(f)).
Regarding claim 16, the additional limitations do not integrate the judicial exception into practical application or add significantly more to the judicial exception. The limitations of the method according to claim 1, wherein the one or more inflexible energy assets includes: one or more non-dispatchable energy sources, optionally, wherein the one or more non- dispatchable energy sources include a renewable energy system, such as a photovoltaic system and/or a wind energy system; and/or one or more inflexible building loads falls under mere instructions to apply an exception (MPEP 2106.05(f)).
Regarding claim 17, the additional limitations do not integrate the judicial exception into practical application or add significantly more to the judicial exception. The limitations of the method according to claim 1, wherein the one or more flexible energy assets includes: one or more building loads controllable by a building energy management system; one or more energy storage systems, e.g. battery energy storage systems (BESS), and/or electric vehicles supplied by EVSE; and/or a dispatchable energy source, optionally, wherein the dispatchable energy source includes a connected power grid falls under mere instructions to apply an exception (MPEP 2106.05(f)).
Regarding claim 18, the additional limitations do not integrate the judicial exception into practical application or add significantly more to the judicial exception. The limitations of the method according to claim 1, wherein the electrical system includes N inflexible energy assets, where N is a positive integer falls under mere instructions to apply an exception (MPEP 2106.05(f)). The limitation wherein the obtained power data comprises one or more N-dimensional data points, each data point comprising a power measurement obtained for each of the N inflexible energy assets at a respective time falls under mere data gathering and is thus insignificant extra-solution activity (MPEP 2106.05(g)).
Regarding claim 19, the additional limitations do not integrate the judicial exception into practical application or add significantly more to the judicial exception. The limitation of a non-transitory, computer-readable storage media having instructions stored thereon that, when executed by a computer processor, cause the computer processor to carry out the method of claim 1 is a generic system and thus falls under mere instructions to apply an exception (MPEP 2106.05(f)).
Regarding claim 20:
Step 2A Prong One: The claim recites an abstract idea. Specifically:
“a forecast module configured to determine an energy forecast for the electrical system based on the power data, wherein the forecast module is configured to determine the energy forecast using a forecasting model for the electrical system;”
“a power scheduling module configured to determine a power schedule for the one or more flexible energy assets to balance the electrical power in the electrical system, wherein the power scheduling module is configured to determine the power schedule using the determined energy forecast;”
The limitations of a forecast module configured to determine an energy forecast using a forecasting model and a power scheduling module configured to determine a power schedule using the determined energy forecast can be reasonably performed with the human mind/with pen and paper and thus fall under the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas.
Step 2A Prong Two: The judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. Claim 20 includes the following limitations:
“An energy management system for an electrical system of a building comprising one or more inflexible energy assets and one or more flexible energy assets, the energy management system comprising:”
“a sensor module configured to obtain power data for the electrical system;”
“a dispatch module configured to control the one or more flexible energy assets based on the determined power schedule to balance the electrical power in the electrical system.”
The limitation of an energy management system for an electrical system of a building comprising one or more inflexible energy assets and one or more flexible energy assets is a generic system and thus falls under mere instructions to apply an exception. (MPEP 2106.05(f)). The limitation of a sensor module configured to obtain power data for the electrical system falls under mere data gathering and is thus insignificant extra-solution activity (MPEP 2105.05(g)). The limitation of a dispatch module configured to control the one or more flexible energy assets to balance electrical power also falls under mere instructions to apply an exception (MPEP 2106.05(f)).
Step 2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. The limitations of a method of energy management for an electrical system of a building, obtaining power data for the electrical system, and operating the one or more flexible energy assets to balance electrical power represent functions that are well-understood, routine, and conventional when they are claimed in a merely generic manner within the industry.
With regards to “An energy management system for an electrical system of a building comprising one or more inflexible energy assets and one or more flexible energy assets, the energy management system comprising:”, US 20150248118 A1 to Li et al. (“Li”) describes “To more accurately model the energy consumption for a household and identify an optimal DR strategy for the energy units in the home, energy usage and generation from regulatable loads, fixed deferrable loads, and future fixed non-deferrable loads and sources may be optimized separately and then combined to achieve a final, robust optimal solution” (Paragraph 38). US 20130245847 to Steven et al. (“Steven”) describes “The disclosure herein can be implemented to generate suggested operating schedules for energy assets that include a controllable energy asset, using an objective function. The objective function is determined based on a dynamic simulation model of the energy profile of the energy assets” (abstract).
With regards to “a sensor module configured to obtain power data for the electrical system;”, Li describes “The HAS 14 receives information from each distributed, local receiver 16a-16c about energy usage of the energy consuming unit 18a-18c, respectively, over the home area network 12 and stores the data in a memory” (Paragraph 45). Steven describes “The objective function is determined based on a dynamic simulation model of the energy profile of the energy assets. The dynamic simulation model is adaptive to physical changes in the energy assets based at least in part on a physical model of the thermodynamic property of the at least one energy asset and at least in part on data representative of an operation characteristic of the controllable energy asset, a thermodynamic property of the energy assets, and/or a projected environmental condition.” (abstract)
With regards to “a dispatch module configured to control the one or more flexible energy assets based on the determined power schedule to balance the electrical power in the electrical system.”, Li describes “Control commands based on the DR strategy are communicated by the HAS 14 to local receivers 16a-16c via the home area network 12. The local receivers 16a-16c may discontinue the operation of their associated energy consuming unit 18a-18c to a later time period having a cheaper energy price or regulate the operation of the associated energy consuming units 18a-18c, depending on the control commands from the HAS 14” (Paragraph 49). Steven describes “In this example, the at least one processing unit controls the at least one communication interface to transmit to the energy customer the suggested operating schedule as at least one use modulation signal, and the operation of the at least one energy asset according to the at least one use modulation signal causes a modulation with time of the load use of the controllable energy asset.” (Paragraph 43).
In view of the forgoing, in accord with MPEP 2106.05(d), simply appending well-understood, routine, conventional activities previously known to the industry, specified at a high level of generality, to the judicial exception does not qualify the claim as reciting “significantly more”. Th3erefore, the additional claimed features do not amount to significantly more and the claim is not patent eligible.
Regarding claim 21, the additional limitations do not integrate the judicial exception into practical application or add significantly more to the judicial exception. The limitations of the energy management system according to claim 20, further comprising a training module configured to train the forecasting model based on the power data wherein the training module is configured to train the forecasting model with a first frequency falls under mere instructions to apply an exception (MPEP 2106.05(f)). The limitation where the power scheduling module is configured to determine the power schedule with a second frequency greater than the first frequency falls under a mental process and is thus an abstract idea.
Regarding claim 23, the additional limitations do not integrate the judicial exception into practical application or add significantly more to the judicial exception. The limitation of the energy management system according to claim 22, wherein the power data used for training the forecasting model is power data is power data obtained for the interval succeeding the previous training iteration falls under mere data gathering and is thus insignificant extra-solution activity (MPEP 2106.05(g)).
Regarding claim 24, the additional limitations do not integrate the judicial exception into practical application or add significantly more to the judicial exception. The limitation of the energy management system according to claim 22, wherein the power data used for determining the energy forecast is power data obtained for the interval succeeding the previous forecast determination falls under mere data gathering and is thus insignificant extra-solution activity (MPEP 2106.05(g)).
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-2, 4, 6-7, 12-21, and 23-24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Li et al. (US 20150248118 A1), herein Li.
Regarding claim 1, Li teaches a method of energy management for an electrical system of a building, the electrical system comprising one or more inflexible energy assets (Paragraph 38 “fixed non-deferrable loads”) and one or more flexible energy assets (Paragraph 38 “regulatable loads”), the method comprising:
obtaining power data for the electrical system (Paragraph 41 “The amount of energy generated…communicated to the HAS 14”, Paragraph 45 “The HAS 14 receives information….stores the data in a memory”); and
operating the one or more flexible energy assets to balance electrical power in the electrical system (Paragraph 49 “The local receivers….control commands from the HAS 14”) by:
determining an energy forecast for the electrical system based on the power data, wherein the energy forecast is determined using a forecasting model for the electrical system (Paragraph 48 ”The next-day DR block….day-ahead energy pricing”); and
determining a power schedule for controlling the one or more flexible energy assets to balance the electrical power in the electrical system using the determined energy forecast (Paragraph 48 “…based on the modeled next-day energy consumption and day-ahead energy pricing”).
Regarding claim 2, Li teaches a method according to claim 1, further comprising training the forecasting model based on the power data wherein the forecasting model is trained with a first frequency (Paragraph 58 “updated daily”) and the power schedule is determined with a second frequency greater than the first frequency (Paragraph 86 “adjust the DR strategy during the current day” where adjusting at least once causes the power schedule to be determined more than daily).
Regarding claim 4, Li teaches a method according to claim 2, where the first frequency is one among: daily (Paragraph 58 “updated daily”), monthly, at least hourly.
Regarding claim 6, Li teaches a method according to claim 2, wherein the power data used for training the forecasting model is power data obtained for the interval succeeding the previous training iteration (Paragraph 91 where the usage data for the most recent day is the power data).
Regarding claim 7, Li teaches a method according to claim 2, wherein the power data used for determining the energy forecast is power data obtained for the interval succeeding the previous forecast determination (Paragraph 91 where the usage data for the most recent day is the power data).
Regarding claim 12, Li teaches a method according to claim 1, wherein the determined power schedule comprises a set-point schedule for a power input, and/or a power output, of each flexible energy asset for a forecast period (Paragraph 85 “The next-day DR strategy…dishwasher, washer, and/or dryer” where the hourly thermostat settings and devices being on/off for specific time frames are the set points and/or power output).
Regarding claim 13, Li teaches a method according to claim 12, wherein determining the power schedule comprises:
receiving one or more power balance objectives for the forecast period (Paragraph 72 “minimize the costs of energy consumption for a particular day”); and
determining the power schedule to satisfy the one or more power balance objectives (Paragraph 72 “create a DR strategy for each regulatable energy unit”).
Regarding claim 14, Li teaches a method according to claim 13, wherein the one or more power balance objectives include one or more of:
minimising an operating cost of the electrical system during the forecast period based on one or more energy tariffs (Paragraph 72 “minimize the costs of energy consumption for a particular day”);
maximising a power input contribution of one or more renewable energy sources to the
electrical system during the forecast period;
minimising a power input contribution of one or more non-renewable energy sources to
the electrical system during the forecast period; and/or
maximising an availability of output power during the forecast period;
maximising a power output of the electrical system during the forecast period.
Regarding claim 15, Li teaches a method according to claim 13 wherein the one or more power balance objectives are received through a user input device (Paragraph 51 “the HEMS 10 may include a display screen through which the user receives information from the HEMS 10 and an input device through which the user provides instructions to the HEMS 10”).
Regarding claim 16, Li teaches a method according to claim 1, wherein the one or more inflexible energy assets includes:
one or more non-dispatchable energy sources, optionally, wherein the one or more non- dispatchable energy sources include a renewable energy system, such as a photovoltaic system and/or a wind energy system (Paragraph 38 “renewable energy sources associated with the house (e.g., solar photovoltaic panels…and wind turbines)“, “Examples of future fixed non-deferrable loads…generated from any renewable energy sources associated with the house”); and/or
one or more inflexible building loads (Paragraph 38 “fixed non-deferrable loads”).
Regarding claim 17, Li teaches a method according to claim 1, wherein the one or more flexible energy assets includes:
one or more building loads controllable by a building energy management system; one or more energy storage systems, e.g. battery energy storage systems (BESS) (Paragraph 38 “battery(s) stories electricity”) and/or electric vehicles supplied by EVSE; and/or
a dispatchable energy source, optionally, wherein the dispatchable energy source includes a connected power grid.
Regarding claim 18, Li teaches a method according to claim 1, wherein the electrical system includes N inflexible energy assets, where N is a positive integer, and wherein the obtained power data comprises one or more N-dimensional data points, each data point comprising a power measurement obtained for each of the N inflexible energy assets at a respective time (Paragraph 17 “at least one energy consuming unit”, Paragraph 45 “The HAS 14 receives….appropriate time period” where the data points consist of the energy usage of each of the units which take place every hour/minute/second)
Regarding claim 19, Li teaches a non-transitory, computer-readable storage medium having
instructions stored thereon that, when executed by a computer processor, cause the computer processor to carry out the method of claim 1 (Paragraph 133, see claim 1 rejection).
Regarding claim 20, Li teaches an energy management system for an electrical system of a building comprising one or more inflexible energy assets and one or more flexible energy assets, the energy management system comprising:
a sensor module configured to obtain power data for the electrical system (Paragraph 45);
a forecast module configured to determine an energy forecast for the electrical system based on the power data, wherein the forecast module is configured to determine the energy forecast using a forecasting model for the electrical system (Paragraph 55 “learning module”);
a power scheduling module configured to determine a power schedule for the one or more flexible energy assets to balance the electrical power in the electrical system, wherein the power scheduling module is configured to determine the power schedule using the determined energy
forecast (Paragraph 55 “optimization module”); and
a dispatch module configured to control the one or more flexible energy assets based on the determined power schedule to balance the electrical power in the electrical system (Paragraph 46 “control block”).
Regarding claim 21, Li teaches an energy management system according to claim 20, further comprising a training module configured to train the forecasting model based on the power data, wherein the training module is configured to train the forecasting model with a first frequency (Paragraph 58 “updated daily”) and the power scheduling module is configured to determine the power schedule with a second frequency greater than the first frequency (Paragraph 86 “adjust the DR strategy during the current day” where adjusting at least once causes the power schedule to be determined more than daily).
Regarding claim 23, Li teaches an energy management system according to claim 22, wherein the power data used for training the forecasting model is power data obtained for the interval succeeding the previous training iteration (Paragraph 91 where the usage data for the most recent day is the power data).
Regarding claim 24, Li teaches an energy management system according to claim 22, wherein the power data used for determining the energy forecast is power data obtained for the interval succeeding the previous forecast determination (Paragraph 91 where the usage data for the most recent day is the power data).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claim(s) 8-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li in light of Brunner et al. (US 20120271472 A1), herein Brunner.
Regarding claim 8¸ Li teaches the method of claim 1.
Li does not explicitly teach wherein the forecasting model for the electrical system includes an asset model for each inflexible energy asset.
However, Brunner teaches an asset model for each energy asset (Paragraph 38).
Li and Brunner are analogous to the claimed invention because they are all in the field of power optimization. It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate the method of Li with the asset models of Brunner in order to provide detailed analytics that can be used to develop future energy management strategies (Paragraph 11).
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Li and Brunner teaches the method according to claim 8.
Brunner also teaches determining each asset model as an asset-specific model for each inflexible energy asset by: obtaining an initial asset model prescribed for a respective type of
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Li and Brunner teaches the method according to claim 9.
Brunner also teaches wherein each initial asset model is obtained from a datastore comprising a plurality of initial asset models associated with respective types of inflexible energy asset (Paragraph 62 “Information pertaining to individual assets…management those individual assets”) and, wherein each asset model is determined for the respective type of energy asset during offline analysis and loaded into the datastore (Paragraph 82 “retrieves energy management policies, power profile information, device profile information, and additional information“, Paragraph 101 “periodically synchronize with assets in order to retrieve device information, and update the corresponding device profiles”).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WILLIAM XIANG ZHANG whose telephone number is (571)272-1276. The examiner can normally be reached M-F (8:30 AM - 5 PM).
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Robert Fennema can be reached at 5712722748. 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.
/W.X.Z./ Examiner, Art Unit 2117
/ROBERT E FENNEMA/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2117
Prosecution Insights