DETAILED ACTION
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 .
Claims 1-16 are pending.
Claims 1-16 are rejected below.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-16 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-19 of U.S. Patent No. 12,088,099. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the current claims are a broader version of the patent claims.
Current claims
Patented claims
1. A power control device for a microgrid that is interconnected to a power system and includes an energy storage apparatus, the power control device comprising: an energy management device configured for: calculating a target value of received power of the microgrid, which optimizes energy use efficiency of the microgrid, based on a supply and demand prediction of power in the microgrid, with upper and lower limits of received power of the microgrid and upper and lower limits of output power of the energy storage apparatus as constraint conditions; and generating a signal that adjusts an output current of a bidirectional inverter circuit within the microgrid such that the received power of the microgrid follows the target value.
1. A power control device for a microgrid that is interconnected to a power system via an external measuring instrument and includes an energy storage apparatus, the power control device comprising: an energy management device configured for: … calculating a target value of the received power at the external measuring instrument, the target value of the received power at the external measuring instrument optimizing energy use efficiency of the microgrid based on a supply and demand prediction of power in the microgrid with upper and lower limits of received power of the microgrid and upper and lower limits of output power of the energy storage apparatus as constraint conditions; and generating a signal that adjusts an output current of the bidirectional inverter circuit such that the received power follows the target value.
2. The power control device according to claim 1, wherein the energy use efficiency of the microgrid is evaluated using an objective function.
2. The power control device according to claim 1, wherein the energy use efficiency of the microgrid is evaluated using an objective function.
3. The power control device according to claim 2, wherein the objective function is a function evaluating a use-restricted period of the energy storage apparatus.
3. The power control device according to claim 2, wherein the objective function is a function evaluating a use-restricted period of the energy storage apparatus.
4. The power control device according to claim 2, wherein the objective function is a function evaluating an electricity rate of the microgrid.
4. The power control device according to claim 2, wherein the objective function is a function evaluating an electricity rate of the microgrid.
5. The power control device according to claim 2, wherein the objective function is a function in which a term evaluating the use-restricted period of the energy storage apparatus and a term evaluating the electricity rate of the microgrid are added with weight.
5. The power control device according to claim 2, wherein the objective function is a function in which a term evaluating the use-restricted period of the energy storage apparatus and a term evaluating the electricity rate of the microgrid are added with weight.
6. The power control device according to claim 1, wherein a condition of a degree of change of the target value of the microgrid is added to the constraint condition.
6. The power control device according to claim 1, wherein a condition of a degree of change of the target value of the microgrid is added to the constraint condition.
7. The power control device according to claim 1, wherein a prediction target period of the target value is divided into a plurality of sections, and the target value of the received power optimizing the energy use efficiency of the microgrid is calculated for each of the divided sections.
7. The power control device according to claim 1, wherein a prediction target period of the target value is divided into a plurality of sections, and the target value of the received power optimizing the energy use efficiency of the microgrid for each of the divided sections is calculated.
8. The power control device according to claim 7, wherein the section is longer than a cycle of the supply and demand prediction.
8. The power control device according to claim 7, wherein the section is longer than a cycle of the supply and demand prediction.
9. An energy management method for a microgrid that is interconnected to a power system and includes an energy storage apparatus, the energy management method comprising: calculating, via an energy management device, a target value of received power of the microgrid, which optimizes energy use efficiency of the microgrid, based on a supply and demand prediction of power in the microgrid, with upper and lower limits of received power of the microgrid and upper and lower limits of output power of the energy storage apparatus as constraint conditions; and generating, via the energy management device, a signal that adjusts an output current of a bidirectional inverter circuit within the microgrid such that the received power of the microgrid follows the target value.
9. An energy management method for a microgrid that is interconnected to a power system via an external measuring instrument and includes an energy storage apparatus, the energy management method comprising the steps of: … calculating, via the energy management device, a target value of the received power at the external measuring instrument, the target value of the received power at the external measuring instrument optimizing energy use efficiency of the microgrid based on a supply and demand prediction of power in the microgrid with upper and lower limits of received power of the microgrid and upper and lower limits of output power of the energy storage apparatus as constraint conditions; and generating, via the energy management device, a signal that adjusts an output current of the bidirectional inverter circuit such that the received power follows the target value.
10. The method according to claim 9, wherein: the energy use efficiency of the microgrid is evaluated using an objective function; and one of: the objective function is a function evaluating a use-restricted period of the energy storage apparatus; the objective function is a function evaluating an electricity rate of the microgrid; or the objective function is a function in which a term evaluating the use-restricted period of the energy storage apparatus and a term evaluating the electricity rate of the microgrid are added with weight.
10. The method according to claim 9, wherein: the energy use efficiency of the microgrid is evaluated using an objective function; and one of: the objective function is a function evaluating a use-restricted period of the energy storage apparatus; the objective function is a function evaluating an electricity rate of the microgrid; or the objective function is a function in which a term evaluating the use-restricted period of the energy storage apparatus and a term evaluating the electricity rate of the microgrid are added with weight.
11. The method according to claim 9, wherein a condition of a degree of change of the target value of the microgrid is added to the constraint condition.
11. The method according to claim 9, wherein a condition of a degree of change of the target value of the microgrid is added to the constraint condition.
12. The method according to claim 9, wherein a prediction target period of the target value is divided into a plurality of sections, and the target value of the received power optimizing the energy use efficiency of the microgrid is calculated for each of the divided sections.
12. The method according to claim 9, wherein a prediction target period of the target value is divided into a plurality of sections, and the target value of the received power optimizing the energy use efficiency of the microgrid for each of the divided sections is calculated.
13. A power conditioner comprising: a first converter to which a distributed power supply is connected; a second converter to which a storage battery is connected; a bidirectional inverter circuit to which the first converter and the second converter are connected, and which is interconnected to a power system; and a control device, wherein the control device is configured for: calculating a target value of received power of a microgrid, which optimizes energy use efficiency of the microgrid, based on a supply and demand prediction of power in the microgrid, with upper and lower limits of received power of the microgrid and upper and lower limits of output power of the storage battery as constraint conditions; and generating a signal that adjusts an output current of the bidirectional inverter circuit such that the received power of the microgrid follows the target value.
13. A power conditioner comprising: a first converter to which a distributed power supply is connected; a second converter to which a storage battery is connected; a bidirectional inverter circuit to which the first converter and the second converter are connected on one side thereof, and a control device, wherein the control device is configured for: … calculating a target value of the received power at the external measuring instrument, the target value of the received power at the external measuring instrument optimizing energy use efficiency of the microgrid based on a supply and demand prediction of power in the microgrid with upper and lower limits of received power of the microgrid and upper and lower limits of output power of the energy storage apparatus as constraint conditions, and generating a signal that adjusts an output current of the bidirectional inverter circuit such that the received power follows the target value.
14. The power conditioner according to claim 13, wherein: the energy use efficiency of the microgrid is evaluated using an objective function; and one of: the objective function is a function evaluating a use-restricted period of the energy storage apparatus; the objective function is a function evaluating an electricity rate of the microgrid; or the objective function is a function in which a term evaluating the use-restricted period of the energy storage apparatus and a term evaluating the electricity rate of the microgrid are added with weight.
14. The power conditioner according to claim 13, wherein the energy use efficiency of the microgrid is evaluated using an objective function.
15. The power conditioner according to claim 14, wherein the objective function is a function evaluating a use-restricted period of the energy storage apparatus.
16. The power conditioner according to claim 14, wherein the objective function is a function evaluating an electricity rate of the microgrid.
17. The power conditioner according to claim 14, wherein the objective function is a function in which a term evaluating the use-restricted period of the energy storage apparatus and a term evaluating the electricity rate of the microgrid are added with weight.
15. The power conditioner according to claim 13, wherein a condition of a degree of change of the target value of the microgrid is added to the constraint condition.
18. The power conditioner according to claim 13, wherein a condition of a degree of change of the target value of the microgrid is added to the constraint condition.
16. The power conditioner according to claim 13, wherein a prediction target period of the target value is divided into a plurality of sections, and the target value of the received power optimizing the energy use efficiency of the microgrid is calculated for each of the divided sections.
19. The power conditioner according to claim 13, wherein a prediction target period of the target value is divided into a plurality of sections, and the target value of the received power optimizing the energy use efficiency of the microgrid for each of the divided sections is calculated.
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.
Claim(s) 1-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chae (U.S. PG Pub. 2019/0181644) in view of Ghotra (U.S. Pat. 11,139,654).
As to claims 1, 9 and 13, Chae teaches a power control device for a microgrid that is interconnected to a power system and includes an energy storage apparatus, the power control device comprising:
an energy management device configured for: calculating a target value of received power of the microgrid, the target value of the received power optimizing energy use efficiency of the microgrid, based on a supply and demand prediction of power in the microgrid with upper and lower limits of received power of the microgrid and upper and lower limits of output power of the energy storage apparatus as constraint conditions [0034-0039].
Chae teaches most of the claimed invention, but fails to teach all of the claimed invention, however, this is an obvious variation as taught by Ghotra as follows:
As to claims 1, 9 and 13 Ghotra teaches obtaining received power at a power receiving point of the microgrid (col. 3 lines 27-32) and generating a signal that adjust an output current of a bidirectional inverter within the microgrid such that the received power and target value (col. 4 lines 23-39). See also Chae target value above. The structure of the system claim 13 (first five lines) can be seen in fig. 4 of Ghotra.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to include the teachings of Ghotra into the system and methods of Chae. The motivation to combine is that Ghotra teaches PCS-control of output power compensation decreases the cycle time for any control involving battery system 54, PV system 51, AC power sources 70, or any DER or load 66 or 72. The improved control granularity reduces the risk of set-point overshoot, improving grid stability during DER power export (col. 6 line 65- col.7 line 3).
As to claim 2, Chae teaches wherein the energy use efficiency of the microgrid is evaluated using an objective function[ 0010, 0039].
As to claim 3, 10, and 14 Chae teaches wherein the objective function is a function evaluating a use-restricted period of the energy storage apparatus [0116].
As to claim 4, Chae teaches wherein the objective function is a function evaluating an electricity rate of the microgrid [0023].
As to claim 5, Chae teaches wherein the objective function is a function in which a term evaluating the use-restricted period of the energy storage apparatus and a term evaluating the electricity rate of the microgrid are added with weight[0023, 0116].
As to claim 6, 11 and 15 Chae teaches wherein a condition of a change width of a received power target value of the microgrid is added to the constraint condition [0058].
As to claim 7, 12 and 16 Chae teaches wherein a prediction target period of the target value is divided into a plurality of sections, and the target value of the received power optimizing the energy use efficiency of the microgrid for each of the divided sections is calculated[0096].
As to claim 8, Chae teaches wherein the section is longer than a cycle of the supply and demand prediction[0069, 0098]. Chae teaches that the sections are real-time energy use is instantaneous while the predictions occur over a time period.
Other Art of Record
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Worku (U.S. PG Pub. 2021/0075221) teaches real time energy managements of a microgrid.
Jin (U.S. PG Pub. 2019/0319481) teaches monitoring a microgrid for a malfunction.
Dobrowoski (U.S. PG Pub. 2019/0157876) teaches controlling a controlling a microgrid with a renewable and non-renewable generators.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NATHAN L LAUGHLIN whose telephone number is (571)270-1042. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8AM-4PM.
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, Mohammad Ali can be reached on 571-272-4105. 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.
/NATHAN L LAUGHLIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2119
Prosecution Insights