DETAILED ACTION
Examiner acknowledges receipt of amendment to application 17/259,035 filed on October 4, 2023. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Status of Claims
Claims 1-20 are still pending, with claims 1-20.
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 composite power import processing arrangement configured to supply power”; “a composite power export processing arrangement configured to export power”; “a composite power import allocation arrangement […] configured to selectively allocate power”; and “a composite power export allocation arrangement […] configured to selectively export power” in claims 1 and 9.
Claim limitation
Claim Numbers
Structure (PGPUB citation)
a composite power import processing arrangement configured to supply power
1 and 9
stationary and mobile storage devices and software (fig. 2, [0045)
a composite power export processing arrangement configured to export power
1 and 9
stationary and mobile storage devices and software (fig. 2, [0045)
a composite power import allocation arrangement […] configured to selectively allocate power
1 and 9
Software [0046]
a composite power export allocation arrangement […] configured to selectively export power
1 and 9
Software [0046]
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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
Claims 1-9 and 13-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fukuyama JP2017184524A in view of Baumgärtner US PGPUB 2018/0290561, and further in view of Fujioka US Patent 6,087,806. (It is noted that the Fukuyama citations are taken from the machine translation, until a translation is obtained.)
Regarding claim 1, Fukuyama discloses a composite power station for use in connection with equipment items, vehicles, and power consumers [fig. 1, abs., pars. 32 & 35; a power storage system for providing power to various loads F1 to Fn, which may be home appliance loads (par. 32)], the composite power station comprising:
a composite energy storage arrangement having at least one stationary element and at least one mobile element [abs.; a stationary storage battery 70 and a mobile storage battery 60 of vehicle 6];
a composite power import processing arrangement configured to supply power to at least one of the stationary element and the mobile element [abs.; fig. 1; pars. 36-38; power supply 15 supplies power from grid and PV generation via converters 61/71 to the stationary battery via branch 15C and mobile battery via branch 15B; pars. 36-38, 41-43, 48-50, 60-64 & 70-73; batteries 60 and 70 are charged via converters 61/71, each converter consists of conversion circuitry 63/73 and control circuitry 62/72, which is interpreted as the “processing arrangement”];
a composite power export processing arrangement configured to export power from at least one of the stationary element and the mobile element to at least one of the equipment items, attachments, vehicles, and power consumers [abs.; fig. 1; pars. 36-38, 41-43, 48-50, 58-59 & 74-76; batteries 60 and 70 supply power to loads via converters 61/71, each converter consists of conversion circuitry 63/73 and control circuitry 62/72, which is interpreted as the “processing arrangement”];
a composite power import allocation arrangement communicatively connected to at least one of the stationary element and the mobile element configured to selectively allocate power imported to at least one of the stationary element and the mobile element [abs.; fig. 1; pars. 36-38, 41-43, 48-50, 60-64 & 70-73; batteries 60 and 70 are charged via converters 61/71, each converter consists of conversion circuitry 63/73 and control circuitry 62/72, which is interpreted as the “processing arrangement”; power is selectively allocated to one or more of 60/70 according to a priority and the amount of power being generated];
a composite power export allocation arrangement communicatively connected to at least one of the stationary element and the mobile element configured to selectively export power from at least one of the stationary element and the mobile element [abs.; fig. 1; pars. 36-38, 41-43, 48-50, 58-59 & 74-76; batteries 60 and 70 supply power to loads via converters 61/71, each converter consists of conversion circuitry 63/73 and control circuitry 62/72, power is electively exported from one or more of 60/70, depending on the priority (i.e. the mobile battery 60 can discharge first, par. 58 or the fixed storage battery, par. 74)]; and
at least one of a photovoltaic panel, a wind turbine, and a generator configured to supply power to the composite energy storage arrangement [fig. 1, solar power system 10 and panel 11 for charging batteries 60/70; pars. 32-36].
Fukuyuma does not explicitly disclose wherein the mobile element comprises an electrically-powered mobile work platform (MWP), which includes a first end and a second end generally opposite the first end and a first attachment interface connected to the first end, and wherein the electrically-powered MWP serves as a mobile energy storage and power export element, wherein the electrically-powered MWP is configured to operably couple with and operate at least one of the attachments on either, or simultaneously on both, of the first attachment interface and the second attachment, and wherein the MWP includes at least one of maximum power point tracking (MPPT) and electrical vehicle supply equipment (EVSE).
However, Baumgartner discloses an electric vehicle charging system [fig. 1] wherein the mobile element comprises an electrically-powered mobile work platform (MWP) [fig. 1, pars. 62-63; a self-driving range extender vehicle 2 which Examiner is interpreting as a MWP since it functions to recharge an agricultural vehicle (pars. 15 & 17)], which includes a first end and a second end generally opposite the first end and a first attachment interface connected to the first end [fig. 1, the vehicle 2 has a first end and second end opposite to the first end, with an attachment interface 9 on the first end], and wherein the electrically-powered MWP serves as a mobile energy storage and power export element, wherein the electrically-powered MWP is configured to operably couple with and operate at least one of the attachments on either, or simultaneously on both, of the first attachment interface and the second attachment [fig. 1, pars. 62-63; the work vehicle 2 carries an attachment 8 (par. 62, “means for transmitting energy”) which it uses to recharge the main vehicle 4, thus the vehicle 2 operates the first attachment], and wherein the MWP includes at least one of maximum power point tracking (MPPT) and electrical vehicle supply equipment (EVSE) [par. 62-63; the work vehicle comprises EVSE for supplying current from its battery to the main vehicle 4; see also fig. 7, pars. 86-89, transmission means 8].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Fukuyuma to further include wherein the mobile element comprises an electrically-powered mobile work platform (MWP), which includes a first end and a second end generally opposite the first end and a first attachment interface connected to the first end, and wherein the electrically-powered MWP serves as a mobile energy storage and power export element, wherein the electrically-powered MWP is configured to operably couple with and operate at least one of the attachments on either, or simultaneously on both, of the first attachment interface and the second attachment, and wherein the MWP includes at least one of maximum power point tracking (MPPT) and electrical vehicle supply equipment (EVSE) for the purpose of extending the range of another vehicle which can be charged, as taught by Baumgartner (pars. 62-63).
The combination of Fukuyuma and Baumgartner does not explicitly disclose a second attachment interface connected to the second end.
However, Fujioka discloses an electric vehicle charging system wherein the vehicle has a first attachment interface connected to the first end and a second attachment interface connected to the second end [figs. 1 & 4; col. 31-59; col. 4, line 42-col. 5, line 10; the vehicles have attachment interfaces on both ends for transferring power].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Fukuyuma and Baumgartner to further include a second attachment interface connected to the second end for the purpose of allowing power to be transferred through multiple interconnected vehicles , as taught by Fujioka (col. 2, line 20-60).
Regarding claim 2, Fukuyama discloses a logic arrangement that sizes capacities of the composite energy storage arrangement [pars. 51, 59, 62, 67, 69-70 & 82; obtaining the charge amounts and capacities (pars. 46, 82 & 108) of the storage batteries, which could be considered “sizing the capacities”].
Regarding claim 3, Fukuyama discloses a logic arrangement that determines how much power is to be imported by the composite power import processing arrangement [abs.; fig. 1; pars. 36-38, 41-43, 48-50, 60-64 & 70-73; batteries 60 and 70 are charged via converters 61/71, each converter consists of conversion circuitry 63/73 and control circuitry 62/72, power is selectively allocated to one or more of 60/70 according to the amount of power being generated (via the PV panel) versus the amount being consumed, the leftover is “imported” to one or more of the batteries 60/70].
Regarding claim 4, Fukuyama discloses a logic arrangement that determines how much power is to be supplied to the composite power import processing arrangement [abs.; fig. 1; pars. 36-38, 41-43, 48-50, 58-59 & 74-76; batteries 60 and 70 supply power to loads via converters 61/71, each converter consists of conversion circuitry 63/73 and control circuitry 62/72, power is selectively exported from one or more of 60/70 depending on how much is being generated (via the PV panel) versus being consumed, the deficit being exported from the batteries].
Regarding claim 5, Fukuyama discloses a logic arrangement that determines how much power is to be imported to the stationary element and the mobile element [abs.; fig. 1; pars. 36-38, 41-43, 48-50, 60-64 & 70-73; power is selectively allocated to one or more of 60/70 according to the amount of power being generated (via the PV panel) versus the amount being consumed, the leftover is “imported” to one or more of the batteries 60/70].
Regarding claim 6, Fukuyama discloses a logic arrangement that determines how much power is to be allocated from the stationary element and the mobile element [abs.; fig. 1; pars. 36-38, 41-43, 48-50, 58-59 & 74-76; power is selectively exported from one or more of 60/70 depending on how much is being generated (via the PV panel) versus being consumed, the deficit being exported from the batteries].
Regarding claim 7, Fukuyama discloses a logic arrangement that determines how much power is to be taken from the stationary element and the mobile element [abs.; fig. 1; pars. 36-38, 41-43, 48-50, 58-59 & 74-76; power is selectively exported from one or more of 60/70 depending on how much is being generated (via the PV panel) versus being consumed, the deficit being exported from the batteries].
Regarding claim 8, Fukuyama discloses a logic arrangement that determines how much power is to be provided to predetermined power consumers [abs.; fig. 1; pars. 36-38, 41-43, 48-50, 58-59 & 74-76; power is selectively exported from one or more of 60/70 depending on how much is being generated (via the PV panel) versus being consumed, the deficit being exported from the batteries and being provided to consumers (the loads F1-Fn or a “home appliance, pars. 32 & 35)].
Regarding claim 9, Fukuyama discloses an integrated oversight and control logic arrangement an integrated oversight and control logic arrangement configured to control the composite energy storage arrangement, the composite power import processing arrangement, the composite power export processing arrangement, the composite power import allocation arrangement, and the composite power export allocation arrangement [abs.; fig. 1; pars. 36-38, 41-43, 48-50, 58-64 & 70-76; batteries 60 and 70 are charged via converters 61/71, each converter consists of conversion circuitry 63/73 and control circuitry 62/72, power is selectively allocated to one or more of 60/70 according to the amount of power being generated (via the PV panel) versus the amount being consumed, the leftover is “imported” to one or more of the batteries 60/70; power is selectively exported from one or more of 60/70 depending on how much is being generated (via the PV panel) versus being consumed, the deficit being exported from the batteries; thus controllers 62/72 control the storage arrangement (60/70) the import processing (charging), the export processing (discharging), and the allocation of export/import (discharging a deficit, charging a surplus)].
Regarding claim 13, Fukuyama discloses a method, comprising:
providing a composite energy storage arrangement having at least one stationary element and at least one mobile element [abs.; a stationary storage battery 70 and a mobile storage battery 60 of vehicle 6] and a composite power import processing arrangement configured to supply power to at least one of the stationary element and the mobile element t [abs.; fig. 1; pars. 36-38; power supply 15 supplies power from grid and PV generation via converters 61/71 to the stationary battery via branch 15C and mobile battery via branch 15B; pars. 36-38, 41-43, 48-50, 60-64 & 70-73; batteries 60 and 70 are charged via converters 61/71, each converter consists of conversion circuitry 63/73 and control circuitry 62/72, which is interpreted as the “processing arrangement”];
providing a composite power export processing arrangement configured to export power from at least one of the stationary element and the mobile element to at least one of the equipment items, vehicles, and power consumers [abs.; fig. 1; pars. 36-38, 41-43, 48-50, 58-59 & 74-76; batteries 60 and 70 supply power to loads via converters 61/71, each converter consists of conversion circuitry 63/73 and control circuitry 62/72, which is interpreted as the “processing arrangement”] wherein the composite power import processing arrangement is configured for processing, using one or more of the at least one stationary element and the at least one mobile element, the source power into one or more forms suitable for storage in the composite energy storage arrangement [abs.; fig. 1; pars. 36-38; power supply 15 supplies power from grid and PV generation via converters 61/71 to the stationary battery via branch 15C and mobile battery via branch 15B; pars. 36-38, 41-43, 48-50, 60-64 & 70-73; batteries 60 and 70 are charged via converters 61/71, each converter consists of conversion circuitry 63/73 and control circuitry 62/72, which is interpreted as the “processing arrangement”; thus the power is processed into a form such that the stationary battery and the mobile battery can each be charged];
providing a composite power import allocation arrangement configured to selectively allocate power imported to at least one of the stationary element and the mobile element [abs.; fig. 1; pars. 36-38, 41-43, 48-50, 60-64 & 70-73; batteries 60 and 70 are charged via converters 61/71, each converter consists of conversion circuitry 63/73 and control circuitry 62/72, which is interpreted as the “processing arrangement”; power is selectively allocated to one or more of 60/70 according to a priority and the amount of power being generated];
providing a composite power export allocation arrangement configured to selectively export power from at least one of the stationary element and the mobile element [abs.; fig. 1; pars. 36-38, 41-43, 48-50, 58-59 & 74-76; batteries 60 and 70 supply power to loads via converters 61/71, each converter consists of conversion circuitry 63/73 and control circuitry 62/72, power is electively exported from one or more of 60/70, depending on the priority (i.e. the mobile battery 60 can discharge first, par. 58 or the fixed storage battery, par. 74)];
providing at least one of a photovoltaic panel, a wind turbine, and a generator configured to supply power to the composite energy storage arrangement configured to supply power to the composite energy storage arrangement [fig. 1, solar power system 10 and panel 11 for charging batteries 60/70; pars. 32-36];
providing a first logic arrangement that determines at least one of the amount of power to be imported to the stationary element and the mobile element [abs.; fig. 1; pars. 36-38, 41-43, 48-50, 60-64 & 70-73; power is selectively allocated to one or more of 60/70 according to the amount of power being generated (via the PV panel) versus the amount being consumed, the leftover is “imported” to one or more of the batteries 60/70], the amount of power to be allocated from the stationary element and the mobile element, the amount of power to be taken from the stationary element and the mobile element;
providing an integrated oversight and control logic arrangement; and using the integrated oversight and control logic arrangement to the composite energy storage arrangement, the composite power import processing arrangement, the composite power export processing arrangement, the composite power import allocation arrangement, and the composite power export allocation arrangement [abs.; fig. 1; pars. 36-38, 41-43, 48-50, 58-64 & 70-76; batteries 60 and 70 are charged via converters 61/71, each converter consists of conversion circuitry 63/73 and control circuitry 62/72, power is selectively allocated to one or more of 60/70 according to the amount of power being generated (via the PV panel) versus the amount being consumed, the leftover is “imported” to one or more of the batteries 60/70; power is selectively exported from one or more of 60/70 depending on how much is being generated (via the PV panel) versus being consumed, the deficit being exported from the batteries; thus controllers 62/72 control the storage arrangement (60/70) the import processing (charging), the export processing (discharging), and the allocation of export/import (discharging a deficit, charging a surplus)].
Fukuyuma does not explicitly disclose wherein the mobile element comprises an electrically-powered mobile work platform (MWP), which includes a first end and a second end generally opposite the first end and a first attachment interface connected to the first end, and wherein the electrically-powered MWP serves as a mobile energy storage and power export element, wherein the electrically-powered MWP is configured to operably couple with and operate at least one of the attachments on either, or simultaneously on both, of the first attachment interface and the second attachment and wherein the MWP includes at least one of maximum power point tracking (MPPT) and electrical vehicle supply equipment (EVSE).
However, Baumgartner discloses an electric vehicle charging system [fig. 1] wherein the mobile element comprises an electrically-powered mobile work platform (MWP) [fig. 1, pars. 62-63; a self-driving range extender vehicle 2 which Examiner is interpreting as a MWP since it functions to recharge an agricultural vehicle (pars. 15 & 17)], which includes a first end and a second end generally opposite the first end and a first attachment interface connected to the first end [fig. 1, the vehicle 2 has a first end and second end opposite to the first end, with an attachment interface 9 on the first end], and wherein the electrically-powered MWP serves as a mobile energy storage and power export element, wherein the electrically-powered MWP is configured to operably couple with and operate at least one of the attachments on either, or simultaneously on both, of the first attachment interface and the second attachment [fig. 1, pars. 62-63; the work vehicle 2 carries an attachment 8 (par. 62, “means for transmitting energy”) which it uses to recharge the main vehicle 4, thus the vehicle 2 operates the first attachment], and wherein the MWP includes at least one of maximum power point tracking (MPPT) and electrical vehicle supply equipment (EVSE) [par. 62-63; the work vehicle comprises EVSE for supplying current from its battery to the main vehicle 4; see also fig. 7, pars. 86-89, transmission means 8].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Fukuyuma to further include wherein the mobile element comprises an electrically-powered mobile work platform (MWP), which includes a first end and a second end generally opposite the first end and a first attachment interface connected to the first end, and wherein the electrically-powered MWP serves as a mobile energy storage and power export element, wherein the electrically-powered MWP is configured to operably couple with and operate at least one of the attachments on either, or simultaneously on both, of the first attachment interface and the second attachment, and wherein the MWP includes at least one of maximum power point tracking (MPPT) and electrical vehicle supply equipment (EVSE) for the purpose of extending the range of another vehicle which can be charged, as taught by Baumgartner (pars. 62-63).
The combination of Fukuyuma and Baumgartner does not explicitly disclose a second attachment interface connected to the second end.
However, Fujioka discloses an electric vehicle charging system wherein the vehicle has a first attachment interface connected to the first end and a second attachment interface connected to the second end [figs. 1 & 4; col. 31-59; col. 4, line 42-col. 5, line 10; the vehicles have attachment interfaces on both ends for transferring power].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Fukuyuma and Baumgartner to further include a second attachment interface connected to the second end for the purpose of allowing power to be transferred through multiple interconnected vehicles , as taught by Fujioka (col. 2, line 20-60).
Regarding claim 14, Fukuyama discloses providing a first logic arrangement that determines at least one of the amount of power to be imported to the stationary element and the mobile element [abs.; fig. 1; pars. 36-38, 41-43, 48-50, 60-64 & 70-73; power is selectively allocated to one or more of 60/70 according to the amount of power being generated (via the PV panel) versus the amount being consumed, the leftover is “imported” to one or more of the batteries 60/70], the amount of power to be allocated from the stationary element and the mobile element, the amount of power to be taken from the stationary element and the mobile element; and
an integrated oversight and control logic arrangement configured to control at least two different ones of the following: the composite energy storage arrangement, the composite power import processing arrangement, the composite power export processing arrangement, the composite power import allocation arrangement, the composite power export allocation arrangement, and the first logic arrangement [abs.; fig. 1; pars. 36-38, 41-43, 48-50, 58-64 & 70-76; batteries 60 and 70 are charged via converters 61/71, each converter consists of conversion circuitry 63/73 and control circuitry 62/72, power is selectively allocated to one or more of 60/70 according to the amount of power being generated (via the PV panel) versus the amount being consumed, the leftover is “imported” to one or more of the batteries 60/70; power is selectively exported from one or more of 60/70 depending on how much is being generated (via the PV panel) versus being consumed, the deficit being exported from the batteries; thus controllers 62/72 control the storage arrangement (60/70) the import processing (charging), the export processing (discharging), and the allocation of export/import (discharging a deficit, charging a surplus)].
Regarding claim 15, Fukuyama discloses providing a second logic arrangement that sizes capacities of the composite energy storage arrangement [pars. 51, 59, 62, 67, 69-70 & 82; obtaining the charge amounts and capacities (pars. 46, 82 & 108) of the storage batteries, which could be considered “sizing the capacities”]; and
an integrated oversight and control logic arrangement configured to control at least two different ones of the following: the composite energy storage arrangement, the composite power import processing arrangement, the composite power export processing arrangement, the composite power import allocation arrangement, the composite power export allocation arrangement, the first logic arrangement, and the second logic arrangement [abs.; fig. 1; pars. 36-38, 41-43, 48-50, 58-64 & 70-76; batteries 60 and 70 are charged via converters 61/71, each converter consists of conversion circuitry 63/73 and control circuitry 62/72, power is selectively allocated to one or more of 60/70 according to the amount of power being generated (via the PV panel) versus the amount being consumed, the leftover is “imported” to one or more of the batteries 60/70; power is selectively exported from one or more of 60/70 depending on how much is being generated (via the PV panel) versus being consumed, the deficit being exported from the batteries; thus controllers 62/72 control the storage arrangement (60/70) the import processing (charging), the export processing (discharging), and the allocation of export/import (discharging a deficit, charging a surplus)].
Regarding claim 16, Fukuyama discloses providing a third logic arrangement that determines how much power is to be imported by the composite power import processing arrangement [abs.; fig. 1; pars. 36-38, 41-43, 48-50, 60-64 & 70-73; batteries 60 and 70 are charged via converters 61/71, each converter consists of conversion circuitry 63/73 and control circuitry 62/72, power is selectively allocated to one or more of 60/70 according to the amount of power being generated (via the PV panel) versus the amount being consumed, the leftover is “imported” to one or more of the batteries 60/70]; and
an integrated oversight and control logic arrangement configured to control at least two different ones of the following: the composite energy storage arrangement, the composite power import processing arrangement, the composite power export processing arrangement, the composite power import allocation arrangement, the composite power export allocation arrangement the first logic arrangement, the second logic arrangement, and the third logic arrangement [abs.; fig. 1; pars. 36-38, 41-43, 48-50, 58-64 & 70-76; batteries 60 and 70 are charged via converters 61/71, each converter consists of conversion circuitry 63/73 and control circuitry 62/72, power is selectively allocated to one or more of 60/70 according to the amount of power being generated (via the PV panel) versus the amount being consumed, the leftover is “imported” to one or more of the batteries 60/70; power is selectively exported from one or more of 60/70 depending on how much is being generated (via the PV panel) versus being consumed, the deficit being exported from the batteries; thus controllers 62/72 control the storage arrangement (60/70) the import processing (charging), the export processing (discharging), and the allocation of export/import (discharging a deficit, charging a surplus)].
Regarding claim 17, Fukuyama discloses providing a fourth logic arrangement that determines how much power is to be exported from composite power import processing arrangement [abs.; fig. 1; pars. 36-38, 41-43, 48-50, 58-59 & 74-76; batteries 60 and 70 supply power to loads via converters 61/71, each converter consists of conversion circuitry 63/73 and control circuitry 62/72, power is selectively exported from one or more of 60/70 depending on how much is being generated (via the PV panel) versus being consumed, the deficit being exported from the batteries]; and
an integrated oversight and control logic arrangement configured to control at least two different ones of the following: the composite energy storage arrangement, the composite power import processing arrangement, the composite power export processing arrangement, the composite power import allocation arrangement, the composite power export allocation arrangement, the first logic arrangement, the second logic arrangement, the third logic arrangement, and the fourth logic arrangement [abs.; fig. 1; pars. 36-38, 41-43, 48-50, 58-64 & 70-76; batteries 60 and 70 are charged via converters 61/71, each converter consists of conversion circuitry 63/73 and control circuitry 62/72, power is selectively allocated to one or more of 60/70 according to the amount of power being generated (via the PV panel) versus the amount being consumed, the leftover is “imported” to one or more of the batteries 60/70; power is selectively exported from one or more of 60/70 depending on how much is being generated (via the PV panel) versus being consumed, the deficit being exported from the batteries; thus controllers 62/72 control the storage arrangement (60/70) the import processing (charging), the export processing (discharging), and the allocation of export/import (discharging a deficit, charging a surplus)].
Regarding claim 18, Fukuyama discloses providing a fifth logic arrangement that determines how much power is to be imported to the stationary element and the mobile element [abs.; fig. 1; pars. 36-38, 41-43, 48-50, 60-64 & 70-73; power is selectively allocated to one or more of 60/70 according to the amount of power being generated (via the PV panel) versus the amount being consumed, the leftover is “imported” to one or more of the batteries 60/70];
an integrated oversight and control logic arrangement configured to control at least two different ones of the following: the composite energy storage arrangement, the composite power import processing arrangement, the composite power export processing arrangement, the composite power import allocation arrangement, the composite power export allocation arrangement, the first logic arrangement, the second logic arrangement, the third logic arrangement, the fourth logic arrangement, and the fifth logic arrangement [abs.; fig. 1; pars. 36-38, 41-43, 48-50, 58-64 & 70-76; batteries 60 and 70 are charged via converters 61/71, each converter consists of conversion circuitry 63/73 and control circuitry 62/72, power is selectively allocated to one or more of 60/70 according to the amount of power being generated (via the PV panel) versus the amount being consumed, the leftover is “imported” to one or more of the batteries 60/70; power is selectively exported from one or more of 60/70 depending on how much is being generated (via the PV panel) versus being consumed, the deficit being exported from the batteries; thus controllers 62/72 control the storage arrangement (60/70) the import processing (charging), the export processing (discharging), and the allocation of export/import (discharging a deficit, charging a surplus)].
Regarding claim 19, Fukuyama discloses providing a sixth logic arrangement that determines how much power is to be taken from the stationary element and the mobile element [abs.; fig. 1; pars. 36-38, 41-43, 48-50, 58-59 & 74-76; power is selectively exported from one or more of 60/70 depending on how much is being generated (via the PV panel) versus being consumed, the deficit being exported from the batteries]; and
an integrated oversight and control logic arrangement configured to control at least two different ones of the following: the composite energy storage arrangement, the composite power import processing arrangement, the composite power export processing arrangement, the composite power import allocation arrangement, the composite power export allocation arrangement, the first logic arrangement, the second logic arrangement, the third logic arrangement, the fourth logic arrangement, the fifth logic arrangement, and the sixth logic arrangement [abs.; fig. 1; pars. 36-38, 41-43, 48-50, 58-64 & 70-76; batteries 60 and 70 are charged via converters 61/71, each converter consists of conversion circuitry 63/73 and control circuitry 62/72, power is selectively allocated to one or more of 60/70 according to the amount of power being generated (via the PV panel) versus the amount being consumed, the leftover is “imported” to one or more of the batteries 60/70; power is selectively exported from one or more of 60/70 depending on how much is being generated (via the PV panel) versus being consumed, the deficit being exported from the batteries; thus controllers 62/72 control the storage arrangement (60/70) the import processing (charging), the export processing (discharging), and the allocation of export/import (discharging a deficit, charging a surplus)].
Regarding claim 20, Fukuyama discloses providing a seventh logic arrangement that determines how much power is to be provided to predetermined power consumers [abs.; fig. 1; pars. 36-38, 41-43, 48-50, 58-59 & 74-76; power is selectively exported from one or more of 60/70 depending on how much is being generated (via the PV panel) versus being consumed, the deficit being exported from the batteries and being provided to consumers (the loads F1-Fn or a “home appliance, pars. 32 & 35)]; and
an integrated oversight and control logic arrangement configured to control at least two different ones of the following: the composite energy storage arrangement, the composite power import processing arrangement, the composite power export processing arrangement, the composite power import allocation arrangement, the composite power export allocation arrangement, the first logic arrangement, the second logic arrangement, the third logic arrangement, the fourth logic arrangement, the fifth logic arrangement, the sixth logic arrangement, and the seventh logic arrangement [abs.; fig. 1; pars. 36-38, 41-43, 48-50, 58-64 & 70-76; batteries 60 and 70 are charged via converters 61/71, each converter consists of conversion circuitry 63/73 and control circuitry 62/72, power is selectively allocated to one or more of 60/70 according to the amount of power being generated (via the PV panel) versus the amount being consumed, the leftover is “imported” to one or more of the batteries 60/70; power is selectively exported from one or more of 60/70 depending on how much is being generated (via the PV panel) versus being consumed, the deficit being exported from the batteries; thus controllers 62/72 control the storage arrangement (60/70) the import processing (charging), the export processing (discharging), and the allocation of export/import (discharging a deficit, charging a surplus)].
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 10-12 are allowed.
With respect to claim 10, the following is an examiner' s statement of reasons for allowance: the prior art fails to further teach or suggest “wherein the first end of the platform also includes a first steering mechanism and the second end includes a second steering mechanism, whereby the electrically- powered MWP is configured to be propelled and steered in a first direction and propelled and steered in a second direction generally opposite the first direction by the first and second steering mechanisms, respectively” in combination with all the other elements recited in claim 10.
Claims 11-12, being dependent on claim 10, are allowable for the same reasons as claim 10.
Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID V HENZE-GONGOLA whose telephone number is (571)272-3317. The examiner can normally be reached M to F, 9am to 7pm.
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, Julian Huffman can be reached at 571-272-2147. 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.
/DAVID V HENZE-GONGOLA/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2859