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 .
Drawings
Drawings have been reviewed and accepted.
Specification
The specification filed on 09/11/24 has been entered. Specification has been reviewed and accepted.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted filed on 09/11/24 has been received. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Interpretation
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: “interruption unit”, “monitoring unit”, “determination unit”, “control unit”, “first acquisition unit”, “second acquisition unit”, “input unit”, “transmission unit” in claims 1-9, 11, and 13-14
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.
Sufficient support is found in the specification for “control unit” which is described it as a processor [0026], “monitoring unit” & “determination unit” which is described as software executed by the management device [0007], and “transmission unit” which is described as software in the management device transmitting information [0123].
Sufficient support is not found in the specification regarding structure for “interruption unit” the specification discloses controlling and switching of the interruption unit but is unclear regarding structure. Is the interruption unit the same as interrupter 313 or are these different? Support is not found in the specification regarding structure for “first acquisition unit”, and “second acquisition unit” the specification discloses each of the plurality of outlets includes a first acquisition unit, but neither acquisition unit has sufficient structural support. Additional, structural support is not found for an “input unit” the specification described it as configured to receive settings.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1, 3-9, 11, and 13-14 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. Sufficient support is not found in the specification regarding structure for “interruption unit”, “first acquisition unit”, “second acquisition unit, and “input unit”.
.
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.
Claims 1, 3-9, 11, and 13-14 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. Sufficient support is not found in the specification regarding structure for “interruption unit”, “first acquisition unit”, “second acquisition unit, and “input unit”. Are the interruption unit and interrupter separate devices? Are the acquisition units tag reader 311? Is the input unit a CPU receiving setting or a separate device? For interpretation purposes examiner has interpreted the interruption unit as interrupter (relay/switch), acquisition readers as RFID reader, and input unit as a button/switch receiving user settings).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The claim recites “determine whether or not it is in a supply shortage state based on a difference between supplied power from the power supply source and power consumption of at least one load connected to each of the plurality of outlets”, “determine priorities of the plurality of outlets”, “determines that it is in the supply shortage state” and “determines the priority of the outlet for each of the plurality of outlets based on the priority identification information acquired by the first acquisition unit”.
The limitations of ““determine whether or not it is in a supply shortage state based on a difference between supplied power from the power supply source and power consumption of at least one load connected to each of the plurality of outlets”, “determine priorities of the plurality of outlets”, “determines that it is in the supply shortage state” and “determines the priority of the outlet for each of the plurality of outlets based on the priority identification information acquired by the first acquisition unit” are processes that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components. That is, other than reciting “management device, monitoring unit, and determination unit”, nothing in the claim element precludes the step from practically being performed in the mind. For example, but for the “management device, monitoring unit, and determination unit”, language, “determine” in the context of this claim encompasses that the user mentally could make a decision, calculation, and observation. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas. Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claim recites additional elements- “acquire priority identification information from a storage medium “ which is simply insignificant extra solution activity of data gathering and transmission by acquiring data and information and “A management device configured to control an interruption unit provided between a power supply source and each of a plurality of outlets, the management device comprising: a monitoring unit configured to”, “a determination unit configured to”, “a control unit configured to switch the interruption unit associated with an outlet having a low priority based on a determination result of the determination unit to a disconnection state in a case where the monitoring unit”, and “wherein each of the plurality of outlets includes a first acquisition unit configured to acquire priority identification information from a storage medium to which the priority identification information is assigned when the at least one load is connected, and the determination unit” which is simply using a computer as a tool to perform abstract ideas -Mere instructions to apply an exception – see MPEP 2106.05(f). Therefore these do not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application or provide significantly more. The claim is not patent eligible.
Accordingly these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional element of acquiring data which is simply insignificant extra solution activity of data gathering and transmitting which is considered to be well-understood, routine, conventional activity- see MPEP 2106.05(d) buySAFE Inc. v. Google Inc. (computer receives and sends information over a network), “A management device configured to control an interruption unit provided between a power supply source and each of a plurality of outlets, the management device comprising: a monitoring unit configured to”, “a determination unit configured to”, “a control unit configured to switch the interruption unit associated with an outlet having a low priority based on a determination result of the determination unit to a disconnection state in a case where the monitoring unit”, and “wherein each of the plurality of outlets includes a first acquisition unit configured to acquire priority identification information from a storage medium to which the priority identification information is assigned when the at least one load is connected, and the determination unit” which is simply using a computer as a tool to perform abstract ideas -Mere instructions to apply an exception – see MPEP 2106.05(f). Therefore, these do not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application or provide significantly more. The claim is not patent eligible.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The claim recites- “determines the priorities of the plurality of outlets based on setting information in which the priority of each of the plurality of outlets is set in advance.” which is a mental abstract idea. Additionally, the claim recites- “wherein the determination unit” which is simply using a computer as a tool to perform abstract ideas -Mere instructions to apply an exception – see MPEP 2106.05(f). Therefore, these do not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application or provide significantly more. The claim is not patent eligible.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The claim recites- “wherein in a case where there are a plurality of outlets having the same priority… determines an outlet for which the interruption unit is to be switched to the disconnection state based on the supply status of each of the plurality of outlets.” which is a mental abstract idea. Additionally, the claim recites- “further comprising a second acquisition unit configured to”, and “the control unit” which is simply using a computer as a tool to perform abstract ideas -Mere instructions to apply an exception – see MPEP 2106.05(f). Additionally, the claim recites- “to acquire a supply status of each of the plurality of outlets” which further defined the data acquiring function. Therefore, these do not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application or provide significantly more. The claim is not patent eligible.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The claim recites- “and in a case where there are a plurality of outlets having the same priority…determines at least an outlet in which an increment of the power consumption of the at least one load in a latest predetermined time exceeds a threshold among the plurality of outlets as the outlet for which the interruption unit is to be switched to the disconnection state” which is a mental abstract idea. Additionally, the claim recites- “the control unit” which is simply using a computer as a tool to perform abstract ideas -Mere instructions to apply an exception – see MPEP 2106.05(f). Additionally, the claim recites- “wherein the supply status includes a history of the power consumption of the at least one load connected to each of the plurality of outlets” which further defined the type of data in the acquiring function. Therefore, these do not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application or provide significantly more. The claim is not patent eligible.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The claim recites- “and in a case where there are a plurality of outlets having the same priority, … determines at least an outlet in which a timing at which the at least one load was connected is latest among the plurality of outlets as the outlet for which the interruption unit is to be switched to the disconnection state.” which is a mental abstract idea. Additionally, the claim recites- “the control unit” which is simply using a computer as a tool to perform abstract ideas -Mere instructions to apply an exception – see MPEP 2106.05(f). Additionally, the claim recites- “wherein the supply status includes information regarding a timing at which the at least one load was connected to each of the plurality of outlets” which further defined the type of data in the acquiring function. Therefore, these do not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application or provide significantly more. The claim is not patent eligible.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The claim recites- “and in a case where there are a plurality of outlets having the same priority… determines at least an outlet in which the power consumption of the at least one load is largest among the plurality of outlets as the outlet for which the interruption unit is to be switched to the disconnection state.” which is a mental abstract idea. Additionally, the claim recites- “the control unit” which is simply using a computer as a tool to perform abstract ideas -Mere instructions to apply an exception – see MPEP 2106.05(f). Additionally, the claim recites- “wherein the supply status includes the power consumption of the at least one load connected to each of the plurality of outlets” which further defined the type of data in the acquiring function. Therefore, these do not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application or provide significantly more. The claim is not patent eligible.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The claim recites- “and in a case where there are a plurality of outlets having the same priority, … determines the outlet for which the interruption unit is to be switched to the disconnection state from among the plurality of outlets in a priority order of an outlet in which an increment of the power consumption of the at least one load in a latest predetermined time exceeds a threshold, an outlet in which a timing at which the at least one load is connected is latest, and an outlet in which the power consumption of the at least one load is largest..” which is a mental abstract idea. Additionally, the claim recites- “the control unit” which is simply using a computer as a tool to perform abstract ideas -Mere instructions to apply an exception – see MPEP 2106.05(f). Additionally, the claim recites- wherein the supply status includes a history of the power consumption of the at least one load connected to each of the plurality of outlets and information regarding a timing at which the at least one load is connected to each of the plurality of outlet” which further describing of data in the acquiring function. Therefore, these do not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application or provide significantly more. The claim is not patent eligible.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The claim recites- “wherein in a case where there are a plurality of outlets having the same priority, … determines the outlet for which the interruption unit is to be switched to the disconnection state based on the supply status of each of the plurality of outlets and the disconnection priority condition.” which is a mental abstract idea. Additionally, the claim recites- “further comprising an input unit configured”, and “the control unit” which is simply using a computer as a tool to perform abstract ideas -Mere instructions to apply an exception – see MPEP 2106.05(f). Additionally, the claim recites- “to receive setting of a disconnection priority condition based on the supply status when there are a plurality of outlets having the same priority” which further describing of data received. Therefore, these do not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application or provide significantly more. The claim is not patent eligible.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The claim recites- “determines that it is not in the supply shortage state” which is a mental abstract idea. Additionally, the claim recites- “wherein the control unit repeats control to switch the interruption unit associated with the outlet to the disconnection state until the monitoring unit” which is simply using a computer as a tool to perform abstract ideas -Mere instructions to apply an exception – see MPEP 2106.05(f). Therefore, these do not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application or provide significantly more. The claim is not patent eligible.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The claim inherits mental abstract ideas from claim 1. Additionally, the claim recites- “wherein the power supply source and the plurality of outlets belong to an off-grid power supply system or a microgrid power supply system” which falls under field of use and technological environment- see MPEP 2106.05(h) Parker v. Flook ("Flook established that limiting an abstract idea to one field of use or adding token postsolution components did not make the concept patentable"). Therefore, these do not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application or provide significantly more. The claim is not patent eligible.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The claim recites- “wherein the plurality of outlets are provided in a plurality of demanders, and the management device further comprises” which is a mental abstract idea. Additionally, the claim recites- “further comprising an input unit configured”, and “the control unit” which is simply using a computer as a tool to perform abstract ideas -Mere instructions to apply an exception – see MPEP 2106.05(f). Additionally, the claim recites- “a transmission unit configured to transmit information for specifying the outlet to a contact related to the demander who uses the outlet before disconnection” which further describing of data received. Therefore, these do not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application or provide significantly more. The claim is not patent eligible.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The claim inherits mental abstract ideas from claim 1. Additionally, the claim recites- “wherein the supply shortage state is a state where the power consumption increases and exceeds the supplied power, or a state where the supplied power decreases and falls below the power consumption, or a predetermined state where the supply shortage is expected” which falls under field of use and technological environment- see MPEP 2106.05(h) Parker v. Flook ("Flook established that limiting an abstract idea to one field of use or adding token postsolution components did not make the concept patentable"). Therefore, these do not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application or provide significantly more. The claim is not patent eligible.
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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-2, and 9-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Waterton et al. (US20200125154, herein Waterton).
Regarding claim 1, Waterton teaches A management device configured to control an interruption unit provided between a power supply source and each of a plurality of outlets ([0028] Referring now to FIG. 2, shown is a diagram of an electronic environment 200 in which illustrative embodiments of the present disclosure can be implemented. The electronic environment 200 includes a power distributor 220 having a plurality of sockets 210 electrically coupled to a wall socket 205. A first plug 215-1, a second plug 215-2, a third plug 215-3, a fourth plug 215-4, and a fifth plug 215-1 (herein collectively “plugs 215”) are connected to sockets 210 of the power distributor 220, [0029] As depicted in FIG. 2, the power distributor 220 includes a reader 225, a memory 230, and a processor 235. Upon plugging the plugs 215 into the sockets 210 of the power distributor 220, but prior to providing power, the power distributor 220 can be configured to read power data associated with each of the RFID tags 240 via the reader 225), the management device comprising: a monitoring unit configured to determine whether or not it is in a supply shortage state based on a difference between supplied power from the power supply source and power consumption of at least one load connected to each of the plurality of outlets ([0043] A determination is then made whether the new device will exceed the power limit. This is illustrated at operation 415. Determining whether the new device will exceed the power limit can be completed by comparing the predicted load (considering the addition of the new device) to the power limit. For example, assume a power distributor is currently drawing 800 W (e.g., as indicated by RFID power data of the one or more connected devices) with a power limit of 1,200 W. If the RFID power data of the new device indicates that the new device draws 300 W, then a determination can be made that the new device will not exceed the power limit (e.g., as 1,100 W falls below the 1,200 W power limit). In contrast, if the RFID power data of the new device indicates that the new device draws 500W, then a determination can be made that the new device will exceed the power limit (e.g., as 1,300 W exceeds the 1,200 W power limit), [0044] In some embodiments, the peak power draw (e.g., as indicated in the RFID power data) of each device is considered when comparing the predicted load of the power distributor to the power limit. This can be completed to ensure that, if all devices are operating under their maximum power draw, the power distributor is not overloaded. However, in some embodiments, the average power draw, idle power draw, etc. of respective devices can be considered when determining whether the power limit is exceeded); a determination unit configured to determine priorities of the plurality of outlets ([0049] The new device RFID power data can be received in the same manner as operation 305 of FIG. 3 or operation 405 of FIG. 4. In some embodiments, each set of RFID power data can include priority data for each respective device. The priority data can be used to determine which devices should be prioritized power (e.g., in the event the power distributor reaches capacity, [0052] The priority value can indicate the relative importance of each device, such that if the power distributor reaches capacity, the power distribution can be altered (e.g., prioritized) according to the priority values stored in each respective RFID tag. In some embodiments, a high priority value (e.g., 100 on a scale from 1-100) indicates that a particular device is high priority. Conversely, in some embodiments, a low priority value (e.g., 1 on a scale from 1-100) indicates that a particular device is high priority. The magnitude/range of the priority value scale can vary, [0046] the socket which the new device is plugged into can remain deactivated. For example, a relay, switch, etc. associated with the socket the new device is plugged into can remain); and a control unit configured to switch the interruption unit associated with an outlet having a low priority based on a determination result of the determination unit to a disconnection state (Fig. 5, [0055] If a determination is made that the new device has a higher priority than at least one of the currently connected devices, then the lowest priority device(s) which allow the predicted power load to remain below the power limit (considering the power draw of the new device) are disconnected) in a case where the monitoring unit determines that it is in the supply shortage state ([0055] If a determination is made that the new device has a higher priority than at least one of the currently connected devices, then the lowest priority device(s) which allow the predicted power load to remain below the power limit (considering the power draw of the new device) are disconnected, and the new device is provided power. This is illustrated at operation 535. This allows the new device to be provided power while ensuring the power limit is not exceeded, [0052] If a determination is made that the new device will exceed the power limit, a determination is made whether the new device is higher priority than any currently connected devices), wherein each of the plurality of outlets includes a first acquisition unit ([0029] As depicted in FIG. 2, the power distributor 220 includes a reader 225, a memory 230, and a processor 235. Upon plugging the plugs 215 into the sockets 210 of the power distributor 220, but prior to providing power, the power distributor 220 can be configured to read power data associated with each of the RFID tags 240 via the reader 225, [0041] Upon plugging the new device into the power distributor, but prior to providing power to the new device, an RFID reader embedded in the power distributor can read (e.g., receives) the RFID power data from the RFID tag on the new device's plug)(i.e. first acquisition unit as RFID reader) configured to acquire priority identification information from a storage medium to which the priority identification information is assigned ([0028] The first plug 215-1 includes a first RFID tag 240-1, the second plug 215-2 includes a second RFID tag 240-2, the third plug 215-3 includes a third RFID tag 240-3, the fourth plug 215-4 includes a fourth RFID tag 240-4, and the fifth plug 215-5 includes a fifth RFID tag 240-5. As discussed herein, the first RFID tag 240-1, second RFID tag 240-2, third RFID tag 240-3, fourth RFID tag 240-4, and fifth RFID tag 240-5 can be collectively referred to as “RFID tags 240.”, [0027] The RFID tags (e.g., passive or active RFID) can transmit the power data for each device to the power distributor 120. The power distributor 120 can then issue actions based on the power data received from each device, to be discussed with reference to FIGS. 2-7, [0052] the RFID power data of each device can include a priority value. The priority value can indicate the relative importance of each device, such that if the power distributor reaches capacity, the power distribution can be altered (e.g., prioritized) according to the priority values stored in each respective RFID tag) when the at least one load is connected, and the determination unit determines the priority of the outlet for each of the plurality of outlets based on the priority identification information acquired by the first acquisition unit ([0029] Upon plugging the plugs 215 into the sockets 210 of the power distributor 220, but prior to providing power, the power distributor 220 can be configured to read power data associated with each of the RFID tags 240 via the reader 225. The power distributor 220 can be configured to store the power data in the memory 230 and analyze the data using the processor 235. Based on the analysis, the processor 235 can issue one or more actions to the power distributor 220. In embodiments, these actions can include: providing power (e.g., via a relay or switch), disabling power (e.g., via a relay or switch), issuing notifications, and others. These actions can be completed based on individual sockets 210 or groups of sockets 210, [0052] If a determination is made that the new device will exceed the power limit, a determination is made whether the new device is higher priority than any currently connected devices. This is illustrated at operation 525. As discussed above, the RFID power data of each device can include a priority value. The priority value can indicate the relative importance of each device, such that if the power distributor reaches capacity, the power distribution can be altered (e.g., prioritized) according to the priority values stored in each respective RFID tag ).
Regarding claim 2, Waterton teaches The management device according to claim 1, wherein the determination unit determines the priorities of the plurality of outlets based on setting information in which the priority of each of the plurality of outlets is set in advance ([0052] As discussed above, the RFID power data of each device can include a priority value. The priority value can indicate the relative importance of each device, such that if the power distributor reaches capacity, the power distribution can be altered (e.g., prioritized) according to the priority values stored in each respective RFID tag. In some embodiments, a high priority value (e.g., 100 on a scale from 1-100) indicates that a particular device is high priority. Conversely, in some embodiments, a low priority value (e.g., 1 on a scale from 1-100) indicates that a particular device is high priority. The magnitude/range of the priority value scale can vary, [0069] The RFID power data can then be updated to reflect the change in importance (e.g., the priority value stored in the RFID power data can be increased).
Regarding claim 9, Waterton teaches The management device according to claim 1, wherein the control unit repeats control to switch the interruption unit associated with the outlet to the disconnection state until the monitoring unit determines that it is not in the supply shortage state ([0056]-[0057] assume the power limit of the power distributor is defined as 1000 W. Further, assume four devices are currently connected to the power distributor. A first connected device draws 200 W and has a priority value of 9 (e.g., on a scale of 0-10 with 10 being the highest priority), a second connected device draws 250 W and has a priority value of 5, a third connected device draws 150 W and has a priority value of 4, and a fourth connected device draws 300 W and has a priority value of 8 (as indicated by the RFID power data of each respective device). Thus, the current load on the power distributor is 900 W. A new device is plugged into the power distributor. The RFID power data associated with the new device indicates that the new device draws 300 W and has a priority value of 7. The addition of the new device brings the predicted load above the power limit (e.g., as the predicted load is 1,200 W and the power limit is 1,000 W)… only the second device may be disconnected (e.g., bringing the predicted load down to 950 W). Instead of disconnecting devices starting with the lowest priority and working up, a minimum number of lower priority disconnects can be completed which permit the predicted load to remain below the power limit. In this example, a determination can be made that only the second device is required to be disconnected to bring the predicted load down to a suitable level such that the new device can be provided power. Upon providing power to the newly connected device, method 500 can terminate).
Regarding claim 10, Waterton teaches The management device according to claim 1, wherein the power supply source and the plurality of outlets belong to an off-grid power supply system ([0020] the amount of energy in a UPS can be limited (as a battery typically provides power after mains electricity is unavailable, [0064] If a determination is made that there are devices which have an energy requirement, then the available energy of the UPS is determined. This is illustrated at operation 725. The available energy depends on the amount of energy stored in the UPS (e.g., in a battery of the UPS). The available energy can be specified in amp hours (Ah) or watt hours (Wh). The available energy can be determined by referencing a battery indicator or battery meter associated with a battery of the UPS), [0019] power supplies (collectively “power distributors”) can be configured to transport power from power sources (e.g., mains electricity, batteries, solar panels, etc.) to one or more devices.) or a microgrid power supply system.
Regarding claim 11, Waterton teaches The management device according to claim 10, wherein the plurality of outlets are provided in a plurality of demanders, and the management device further comprises a transmission unit configured to transmit information for specifying the outlet to a contact related to the demander who uses the outlet before disconnection in a case where it is determined to switch the interruption unit associated with the outlet to the disconnection state ([0029] The power distributor 220 can be configured to store the power data in the memory 230 and analyze the data using the processor 235. Based on the analysis, the processor 235 can issue one or more actions to the power distributor 220. In embodiments, these actions can include: providing power (e.g., via a relay or switch), disabling power (e.g., via a relay or switch), issuing notifications, and others. These actions can be completed based on individual sockets 210 or groups of sockets 210, [0039] Though reference is made to not providing power to the new device at operation 325, in some embodiments, power can be provided to the new device and a warning can be issued at operation 325. Warnings can include audio or visual notifications. For example, if a determination is made that the new device and power distributor are incompatible, a light emitting diode (LED) associated with the socket (e.g., adjacent to the socket on the power distributor) the new device is plugged into can be activated, [0047] Warnings can include audio or visual notifications. For example, if a determination is made that the power limit is exceeded upon the addition of the new device, an audio alarm can be triggered warning a user of the potential overload, [0032 the socket in which the fifth device was coupled to can then be disabled (or can remain disabled if sockets are defaulted to “closed”) to prevent overloading the power distributor 220). (i.e. warning is triggered for potential overload, and then the socket is disabled/disconnected preventing the overload)).
Regarding claim 12, Waterton teaches The management device according to claim 1, wherein the supply shortage state is a state where the power consumption increases and exceeds the supplied power, or a state where the supplied power decreases and falls below the power consumption, or a predetermined state where the supply shortage is expected ([0043] A determination is then made whether the new device will exceed the power limit. This is illustrated at operation 415. Determining whether the new device will exceed the power limit can be completed by comparing the predicted load (considering the addition of the new device) to the power limit. For example, assume a power distributor is currently drawing 800 W (e.g., as indicated by RFID power data of the one or more connected devices) with a power limit of 1,200 W. If the RFID power data of the new device indicates that the new device draws 300 W, then a determination can be made that the new device will not exceed the power limit (e.g., as 1,100 W falls below the 1,200 W power limit). In contrast, if the RFID power data of the new device indicates that the new device draws 500W, then a determination can be made that the new device will exceed the power limit (e.g., as 1,300 W exceeds the 1,200 W power limit, [0056] As an example, assume the power limit of the power distributor is defined as 1000 W. Further, assume four devices are currently connected to the power distributor. A first connected device draws 200 W and has a priority value of 9 (e.g., on a scale of 0-10 with 10 being the highest priority), a second connected device draws 250 W and has a priority value of 5, a third connected device draws 150 W and has a priority value of 4, and a fourth connected device draws 300 W and has a priority value of 8 (as indicated by the RFID power data of each respective device). Thus, the current load on the power distributor is 900 W. A new device is plugged into the power distributor. The RFID power data associated with the new device indicates that the new device draws 300 W and has a priority value of 7. The addition of the new device brings the predicted load above the power limit (e.g., as the predicted load is 1,200 W and the power limit is 1,000 W). Accordingly, the devices which are lower priority than the newly connected device which allow the predicted load to remain below the power limit are disconnected (starting with the lowest priority device), and the new device is provided power. In this example, the third device can be disconnected first, as it has the lowest priority value. However, the disconnection of the third device still does not bring the predicted load below the power limit (e.g., as the predicted load is 1050 W upon the disconnection of the third device). As a result, the second device is also disconnected, bringing the predicted load (accounting for the new device) down to 800 W, below the power limit. The new device can then be provided power (e.g., similar to operation 520).).
Regarding claim 13, Waterton teaches A management method of controlling an interruption unit provided between a power supply source and each of a plurality of outlets ([0028] Referring now to FIG. 2, shown is a diagram of an electronic environment 200 in which illustrative embodiments of the present disclosure can be implemented. The electronic environment 200 includes a power distributor 220 having a plurality of sockets 210 electrically coupled to a wall socket 205. A first plug 215-1, a second plug 215-2, a third plug 215-3, a fourth plug 215-4, and a fifth plug 215-1 (herein collectively “plugs 215”) are connected to sockets 210 of the power distributor 220, [0029] As depicted in FIG. 2, the power distributor 220 includes a reader 225, a memory 230, and a processor 235. Upon plugging the plugs 215 into the sockets 210 of the power distributor 220, but prior to providing power, the power distributor 220 can be configured to read power data associated with each of the RFID tags 240 via the reader 225), the management method being executed by a management device and comprising: judging whether or not it is in a supply shortage state based on a difference between supplied power from the power supply source and power consumption of at least one load connected to each of the plurality of outlets ([0043] A determination is then made whether the new device will exceed the power limit. This is illustrated at operation 415. Determining whether the new device will exceed the power limit can be completed by comparing the predicted load (considering the addition of the new device) to the power limit. For example, assume a power distributor is currently drawing 800 W (e.g., as indicated by RFID power data of the one or more connected devices) with a power limit of 1,200 W. If the RFID power data of the new device indicates that the new device draws 300 W, then a determination can be made that the new device will not exceed the power limit (e.g., as 1,100 W falls below the 1,200 W power limit). In contrast, if the RFID power data of the new device indicates that the new device draws 500W, then a determination can be made that the new device will exceed the power limit (e.g., as 1,300 W exceeds the 1,200 W power limit), [0044] In some embodiments, the peak power draw (e.g., as indicated in the RFID power data) of each device is considered when comparing the predicted load of the power distributor to the power limit. This can be completed to ensure that, if all devices are operating under their maximum power draw, the power distributor is not overloaded. However, in some embodiments, the average power draw, idle power draw, etc. of respective devices can be considered when determining whether the power limit is exceeded); determining priorities of the plurality of outlets ([0049] The new device RFID power data can be received in the same manner as operation 305 of FIG. 3 or operation 405 of FIG. 4. In some embodiments, each set of RFID power data can include priority data for each respective device. The priority data can be used to determine which devices should be prioritized power (e.g., in the event the power distributor reaches capacity, [0052] The priority value can indicate the relative importance of each device, such that if the power distributor reaches capacity, the power distribution can be altered (e.g., prioritized) according to the priority values stored in each respective RFID tag. In some embodiments, a high priority value (e.g., 100 on a scale from 1-100) indicates that a particular device is high priority. Conversely, in some embodiments, a low priority value (e.g., 1 on a scale from 1-100) indicates that a particular device is high priority. The magnitude/range of the priority value scale can vary, [0046] the socket which the new device is plugged into can remain deactivated. For example, a relay, switch, etc. associated with the socket the new device is plugged into can remain); and switching the interruption unit associated with an outlet having a low priority based on a determination result in the determining to a disconnection state (Fig. 5, [0055] If a determination is made that the new device has a higher priority than at least one of the currently connected devices, then the lowest priority device(s) which allow the predicted power load to remain below the power limit (considering the power draw of the new device) are disconnected) in a case where it is judged to be in the supply shortage state in the judging ([0055] If a determination is made that the new device has a higher priority than at least one of the currently connected devices, then the lowest priority device(s) which allow the predicted power load to remain below the power limit (considering the power draw of the new device) are disconnected, and the new device is provided power. This is illustrated at operation 535. This allows the new device to be provided power while ensuring the power limit is not exceeded, [0052] If a determination is made that the new device will exceed the power limit, a determination is made whether the new device is higher priority than any currently connected devices, wherein each of the plurality of outlets acquires priority identification information from a storage medium to which the priority identification information is assigned when the at least one load is connected ([0029] As depicted in FIG. 2, the power distributor 220 includes a reader 225, a memory 230, and a processor 235. Upon plugging the plugs 215 into the sockets 210 of the power distributor 220, but prior to providing power, the power distributor 220 can be configured to read power data associated with each of the RFID tags 240 via the reader 225, [0041] Upon plugging the new device into the power distributor, but prior to providing power to the new device, an RFID reader embedded in the power distributor can read (e.g., receives) the RFID power data from the RFID tag on the new device's plug, [0028] The first plug 215-1 includes a first RFID tag 240-1, the second plug 215-2 includes a second RFID tag 240-2, the third plug 215-3 includes a third RFID tag 240-3, the fourth plug 215-4 includes a fourth RFID tag 240-4, and the fifth plug 215-5 includes a fifth RFID tag 240-5. As discussed herein, the first RFID tag 240-1, second RFID tag 240-2, third RFID tag 240-3, fourth RFID tag 240-4, and fifth RFID tag 240-5 can be collectively referred to as “RFID tags 240.”, [0027] The RFID tags (e.g., passive or active RFID) can transmit the power data for each device to the power distributor 120. The power distributor 120 can then issue actions based on the power data received from each device, to be discussed with reference to FIGS. 2-7, [0052] the RFID power data of each device can include a priority value. The priority value can indicate the relative importance of each device, such that if the power distributor reaches capacity, the power distribution can be altered (e.g., prioritized) according to the priority values stored in each respective RFID tag), and in the determination, the priority of the outlet is determined for each of the plurality of outlets based on the acquired priority identification information ([0029] Upon plugging the plugs 215 into the sockets 210 of the power distributor 220, but prior to providing power, the power distributor 220 can be configured to read power data associated with each of the RFID tags 240 via the reader 225. The power distributor 220 can be configured to store the power data in the memory 230 and analyze the data using the processor 235. Based on the analysis, the processor 235 can issue one or more actions to the power distributor 220. In embodiments, these actions can include: providing power (e.g., via a relay or switch), disabling power (e.g., via a relay or switch), issuing notifications, and others. These actions can be completed based on individual sockets 210 or groups of sockets 210, [0052] If a determination is made that the new device will exceed the power limit, a determination is made whether the new device is higher priority than any currently connected devices. This is illustrated at operation 525. As discussed above, the RFID power data of each device can include a priority value. The priority value can indicate the relative importance of each device, such that if the power distributor reaches capacity, the power distribution can be altered (e.g., prioritized) according to the priority values stored in each respective RFID tag ).
Regarding claim 14, Waterton teaches A computer-readable storage medium storing a program for causing a computer configured to control an interruption unit provided between a power supply source and each of a plurality of outlets to execute ([0072] Each CPU 802 can execute instructions stored in the memory subsystem 804, [0028] Referring now to FIG. 2, shown is a diagram of an electronic environment 200 in which illustrative embodiments of the present disclosure can be implemented. The electronic environment 200 includes a power distributor 220 having a plurality of sockets 210 electrically coupled to a wall socket 205. A first plug 215-1, a second plug 215-2, a third plug 215-3, a fourth plug 215-4, and a fifth plug 215-1 (herein collectively “plugs 215”) are connected to sockets 210 of the power distributor 220, [0029] As depicted in FIG. 2, the power distributor 220 includes a reader 225, a memory 230, and a processor 235. Upon plugging the plugs 215 into the sockets 210 of the power distributor 220, but prior to providing power, the power distributor 220 can be configured to read power data associated with each of the RFID tags 240 via the reader 225): judging whether or not it is in a supply shortage state based on a difference between supplied power from the power supply source and power consumption of at least one load connected to each of the plurality of outlets ([0043] A determination is then made whether the new device will exceed the power limit. This is illustrated at operation 415. Determining whether the new device will exceed the power limit can be completed by comparing the predicted load (considering the addition of the new device) to the power limit. For example, assume a power distributor is currently drawing 800 W (e.g., as indicated by RFID power data of the one or more connected devices) with a power limit of 1,200 W. If the RFID power data of the new device indicates that the new device draws 300 W, then a determination can be made that the new device will not exceed the power limit (e.g., as 1,100 W falls below the 1,200 W power limit). In contrast, if the RFID power data of the new device indicates that the new device draws 500W, then a determination can be made that the new device will exceed the power limit (e.g., as 1,300 W exceeds the 1,200 W power limit), [0044] In some embodiments, the peak power draw (e.g., as indicated in the RFID power data) of each device is considered when comparing the predicted load of the power distributor to the power limit. This can be completed to ensure that, if all devices are operating under their maximum power draw, the power distributor is not overloaded. However, in some embodiments, the average power draw, idle power draw, etc. of respective devices can be considered when determining whether the power limit is exceeded); determining priorities of the plurality of outlets ([0049] The new device RFID power data can be received in the same manner as operation 305 of FIG. 3 or operation 405 of FIG. 4. In some embodiments, each set of RFID power data can include priority data for each respective device. The priority data can be used to determine which devices should be prioritized power (e.g., in the event the power distributor reaches capacity, [0052] The priority value can indicate the relative importance of each device, such that if the power distributor reaches capacity, the power distribution can be altered (e.g., prioritized) according to the priority values stored in each respective RFID tag. In some embodiments, a high priority value (e.g., 100 on a scale from 1-100) indicates that a particular device is high priority. Conversely, in some embodiments, a low priority value (e.g., 1 on a scale from 1-100) indicates that a particular device is high priority. The magnitude/range of the priority value scale can vary, [0046] the socket which the new device is plugged into can remain deactivated. For example, a relay, switch, etc. associated with the socket the new device is plugged into can remain); and switching the interruption unit associated with an outlet having a low priority based on a determination result in the determining to a disconnection state (Fig. 5, [0055] If a determination is made that the new device has a higher priority than at least one of the currently connected devices, then the lowest priority device(s) which allow the predicted power load to remain below the power limit (considering the power draw of the new device) are disconnected) in a case where it is judged to be in the supply shortage state in the judging ([0055] If a determination is made that the new device has a higher priority than at least one of the currently connected devices, then the lowest priority device(s) which allow the predicted power load to remain below the power limit (considering the power draw of the new device) are disconnected, and the new device is provided power. This is illustrated at operation 535. This allows the new device to be provided power while ensuring the power limit is not exceeded, [0052] If a determination is made that the new device will exceed the power limit, a determination is made whether the new device is higher priority than any currently connected devices, wherein each of the plurality of outlets acquires priority identification information from a storage medium to which the priority identification information is assigned when the at least one load is connected ([0029] As depicted in FIG. 2, the power distributor 220 includes a reader 225, a memory 230, and a processor 235. Upon plugging the plugs 215 into the sockets 210 of the power distributor 220, but prior to providing power, the power distributor 220 can be configured to read power data associated with each of the RFID tags 240 via the reader 225, [0041] Upon plugging the new device into the power distributor, but prior to providing power to the new device, an RFID reader embedded in the power distributor can read (e.g., receives) the RFID power data from the RFID tag on the new device's plug, [0028] The first plug 215-1 includes a first RFID tag 240-1, the second plug 215-2 includes a second RFID tag 240-2, the third plug 215-3 includes a third RFID tag 240-3, the fourth plug 215-4 includes a fourth RFID tag 240-4, and the fifth plug 215-5 includes a fifth RFID tag 240-5. As discussed herein, the first RFID tag 240-1, second RFID tag 240-2, third RFID tag 240-3, fourth RFID tag 240-4, and fifth RFID tag 240-5 can be collectively referred to as “RFID tags 240.”, [0027] The RFID tags (e.g., passive or active RFID) can transmit the power data for each device to the power distributor 120. The power distributor 120 can then issue actions based on the power data received from each device, to be discussed with reference to FIGS. 2-7, [0052] the RFID power data of each device can include a priority value. The priority value can indicate the relative importance of each device, such that if the power distributor reaches capacity, the power distribution can be altered (e.g., prioritized) according to the priority values stored in each respective RFID tag) , and in the determination, the priority of the outlet is determined for each of the plurality of outlets based on the acquired priority identification information ([0029] Upon plugging the plugs 215 into the sockets 210 of the power distributor 220, but prior to providing power, the power distributor 220 can be configured to read power data associated with each of the RFID tags 240 via the reader 225. The power distributor 220 can be configured to store the power data in the memory 230 and analyze the data using the processor 235. Based on the analysis, the processor 235 can issue one or more actions to the power distributor 220. In embodiments, these actions can include: providing power (e.g., via a relay or switch), disabling power (e.g., via a relay or switch), issuing notifications, and others. These actions can be completed based on individual sockets 210 or groups of sockets 210, [0052] If a determination is made that the new device will exceed the power limit, a determination is made whether the new device is higher priority than any currently connected devices. This is illustrated at operation 525. As discussed above, the RFID power data of each device can include a priority value. The priority value can indicate the relative importance of each device, such that if the power distributor reaches capacity, the power distribution can be altered (e.g., prioritized) according to the priority values stored in each respective RFID tag ).
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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) 3, and 5-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Waterton et al. (US20200125154, herein Waterton), in view of Lim et al. (US20180183238, herein Lim).
Regarding claim 3, Waterton teaches The management device according to claim 1, further comprising a second acquisition unit configured to acquire a supply status of each of the plurality of outlets, wherein in a case where there are a plurality of outlets having …priority, the control unit determines an outlet for which the interruption unit is to be switched to the disconnection state… ([0054] If a determination is made that the new device does not have a higher priority value than any currently connected devices, then power is not provided to the new device. This is illustrated at operation 530. In embodiments, not providing power to the new device can be completed the same as, or substantially similar to, operation 425 of FIG. 4. Method 500 can then terminate, [0041] Power characteristics can include, but are not limited to, required voltage, current draw, power draw, type of current (AC vs. DC), and/or frequency. In some embodiments, the RFID power data can indicate power draw based on the state of the device. For example, the power data can specify peak power draw, idle power draw, average power draw, and/or power draw at particular operating states (e.g., high power mode, medium power mode, low power mode, power draw at particular time periods, etc., [0056] As an example, assume the power limit of the power distributor is defined as 1000 W. Further, assume four devices are currently connected to the power distributor. A first connected device draws 200 W and has a priority value of 9 (e.g., on a scale of 0-10 with 10 being the highest priority), a second connected device draws 250 W and has a priority value of 5, a third connected device draws 150 W and has a priority value of 4, and a fourth connected device draws 300 W and has a priority value of 8 (as indicated by the RFID power data of each respective device). Thus, the current load on the power distributor is 900 W. A new device is plugged into the power distributor. The RFID power data associated with the new device indicates that the new device draws 300 W and has a priority value of 7).
Waterton does not teach the same priority…based on the supply status of each of the plurality of outlets
Lim teaches the same priority… based on the supply status of each of the plurality of outlets ([0086] If it is determined that some connected devices have the same priority, the multi-receptacle may further determine the individual priorities of such connected devices having the same priority according to power consumption, frequency of use, and connection time. Therefore, the multi-receptacle may determine the priorities of all connected device individually).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Watertons’s teaching a plurality of outlets having priorities which the control is based on with Lim’s’s teaching of when there is a same priority level the individual priorities such as power consumption, usage, and time are considered. The combined teaching provides an expected result of a plurality of outlets controlled based on a priority, and if the priority is the same the individual power consumption, usage, and time is then considered. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to improve system efficiency and safety as shown by Lim [0004] “in order to prevent a fire and a device malfunction that may occur due to overheating during the supply of power to multiple devices”.
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Waterton and Lim teach The management device according to claim 3, …in a case where there are a plurality of outlets having … priority, the control unit determines at least an outlet in which a timing at which the at least one load was connected is latest among the plurality of outlets as the outlet for which the interruption unit is to be switched to the disconnection state (Waterton, [0054] If a determination is made that the new device does not have a higher priority value than any currently connected devices, then power is not provided to the new device. This is illustrated at operation 530. In embodiments, not providing power to the new device can be completed the same as, or substantially similar to, operation 425 of FIG. 4. Method 500 can then terminate, [0041] For example, the power data can specify peak power draw, idle power draw, average power draw, and/or power draw at particular operating states (e.g., high power mode, medium power mode, low power mode, power draw at particular time periods, etc.)
Waterton does not teach the same priority…wherein the supply status includes information regarding a timing at which the at least one load was connected to each of the plurality of outlets, and
Lim further teaches wherein the supply status includes information regarding a timing at which the at least one load was connected to each of the plurality of outlets, and ([0089] When the sum of the power consumption of the connected devices exceeds the allowable power, the multi-receptacle may determine at step S420 whether the connection time of a new connected device is within a specific time T1. The new connected device refers to the lastly connected device among the at least one connected devices connected to the multi-receptacle. The specific time T1 may be a predetermined threshold time. The specific time T1 is a relatively short time and may be determined as integer values from 1 second to 5 seconds. If the connection time of the new connected device is within T1, this means that there is any abnormality in the new connected device, [0086] If it is determined that some connected devices have the same priority, the multi-receptacle may further determine the individual priorities of such connected devices having the same priority according to power consumption, frequency of use, and connection time. Therefore, the multi-receptacle may determine the priorities of all connected device individually)
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Waterton and Lim teach The management device according to claim 3, wherein the supply status includes the power consumption of the at least one load connected to each of the plurality of outlets, and in a case where there are a plurality of outlets having … priority, the control unit determines at least an outlet in which the power consumption of the at least one load is largest among the plurality of outlets as the outlet for which the interruption unit is to be switched to the disconnection state (Waterton, [0055] If a determination is made that the new device has a higher priority than at least one of the currently connected devices, then the lowest priority device(s) which allow the predicted power load to remain below the power limit (considering the power draw of the new device) are disconnected, and the new device is provided power. This is illustrated at operation 535. This allows the new device to be provided power while ensuring the power limit is not exceeded, [0057] only the second device may be disconnected (e.g., bringing the predicted load down to 950 W). Instead of disconnecting devices starting with the lowest priority and working up, a minimum number of lower priority disconnects can be completed which permit the predicted load to remain below the power limit )
Lim further teaches the same priority ([0086] If it is determined that some connected devices have the same priority, the multi-receptacle may further determine the individual priorities of such connected devices having the same priority according to power consumption, frequency of use, and connection time. Therefore, the multi-receptacle may determine the priorities of all connected device individually
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Waterton and Lim teach The management device according to claim 3, … , and in a case where there are a plurality of outlets having … priority, the control unit determines the outlet for which the interruption unit is to be switched to the disconnection state from among the plurality of outlets in a priority order of an outlet in which an increment of the power consumption of the at least one load in a latest predetermined time exceeds a threshold, an outlet in which a timing at which the at least one load is connected is latest, and an outlet in which the power consumption of the at least one load is largest (Waterton, [0055] If a determination is made that the new device has a higher priority than at least one of the currently connected devices, then the lowest priority device(s) which allow the predicted power load to remain below the power limit (considering the power draw of the new device) are disconnected, and the new device is provided power. This is illustrated at operation 535. This allows the new device to be provided power while ensuring the power limit is not exceeded, [0057] only the second device may be disconnected (e.g., bringing the predicted load down to 950 W). Instead of disconnecting devices starting with the lowest priority and working up, a minimum number of lower priority disconnects can be completed which permit the predicted load to remain below the power limit, [0054] If a determination is made that the new device does not have a higher priority value than any currently connected devices, then power is not provided to the new device. This is illustrated at operation 530. In embodiments, not providing power to the new device can be completed the same as, or substantially similar to, operation 425 of FIG. 4. Method 500 can then terminate ).
Lim further teaches the same priority…wherein the supply status includes a history of the power consumption of the at least one load connected to each of the plurality of outlets and information regarding a timing at which the at least one load is connected to each of the plurality of outlets ([0060] The multi-receptacle may derive a power consumption pattern for the connected device with the power consumption information according to time. The power consumption pattern may include information about changes in the power consumption of the connected device according to time. The power consumption pattern may be classified into at least one of the following types. Type 1—A type of consuming power stably Type 2—A type of consuming power periodically Type 3—A type of consuming power aperiodically, [0084] information may include history information indicating that, when the multi-receptacle displays on the display unit the interruption of power to the connected device according to the previously determined priority )
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Waterton and Lim teach The management device according to claim 3, further comprising an input unit configured to receive setting of a disconnection priority condition based on the supply status when there are a plurality of outlets having … priority wherein in a case where there are a plurality of outlets having … priority, the control unit determines the outlet for which the interruption unit is to be switched to the disconnection state based on the supply status of each of the plurality of outlets and the disconnection priority condition (Waterton, [0077] the computer system 801 can be a multi-user mainframe computer system, a single-user system, or a server computer or similar device that has little or no direct user interface, but receives requests from other computer systems (clients), [0037] the default option can be configurable by a user (e.g., the user can select the default option via a button, switch, etc.). After power is provided to the new device, method 300 terminates, [0055] If a determination is made that the new device has a higher priority than at least one of the currently connected devices, then the lowest priority device(s) which allow the predicted power load to remain below the power limit (considering the power draw of the new device) are disconnected, and the new device is provided power. This is illustrated at operation 535. This allows the new device to be provided power while ensuring the power limit is not exceeded, [0057] only the second device may be disconnected (e.g., bringing the predicted load down to 950 W). Instead of disconnecting devices starting with the lowest priority and working up, a minimum number of lower priority disconnects can be completed which permit the predicted load to remain below the power limit)
Lim further the same priority… teaches ([0086] If it is determined that some connected devices have the same priority, the multi-receptacle may further determine the individual priorities of such connected devices having the same priority according to power consumption, frequency of use, and connection time. Therefore, the multi-receptacle may determine the priorities of all connected device individually).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Waterton et al. (US20200125154, herein Waterton), in view of Lim et al. (US20180183238, herein Lim), and in further view of Cepulis et al. (US20120030493, herein Cepulis).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Waterton and Lim teach The management device according to claim 3, as the outlet for which the interruption unit is to be switched to the disconnection state (Waterton, [0055] If a determination is made that the new device has a higher priority than at least one of the currently connected devices, then the lowest priority device(s) which allow the predicted power load to remain below the power limit (considering the power draw of the new device) are disconnected, and the new device is provided power. This is illustrated at operation 535. This allows the new device to be provided power while ensuring the power limit is not exceeded, [0057] only the second device may be disconnected (e.g., bringing the predicted load down to 950 W). Instead of disconnecting devices starting with the lowest priority and working up, a minimum number of lower priority disconnects can be completed which permit the predicted load to remain below the power limit)
Lin further teaches wherein the supply status includes a history of the power consumption of the at least one load connected to each of the plurality of outlets, and in a case where there are a plurality of outlets having the same priority… ([0060] The multi-receptacle may derive a power consumption pattern for the connected device with the power consumption information according to time. The power consumption pattern may include information about changes in the power consumption of the connected device according to time. The power consumption pattern may be classified into at least one of the following types. Type 1—A type of consuming power stably Type 2—A type of consuming power periodically Type 3—A type of consuming power aperiodically, [0084] information may include history information indicating that, when the multi-receptacle displays on the display unit the interruption of power to the connected device according to the previously determined priority, [0086] If it is determined that some connected devices have the same priority, the multi-receptacle may further determine the individual priorities of such connected devices having the same priority according to power consumption, frequency of use, and connection time. Therefore, the multi-receptacle may determine the priorities of all connected device individually)
The combination of Waterton and Lim do not teach, the control unit determines at least an outlet in which an increment of the power consumption of the at least one load in a latest predetermined time exceeds a threshold among the plurality of outlets
Cepulis teaches the control unit determines at least an outlet in which an increment of the power consumption of the at least one load in a latest predetermined time exceeds a threshold among the plurality of outlets ([0019] monitors power consumption in the computer system 100 as well as the rate of increase or decrease in power consumption, [0020] A sudden surge in processor demand causes power consumption from power supply 133 to increase at a rate of 100 watts per second. In a little over six seconds, the power capping threshold will be reached. The transient module 324 may be set with a transient time threshold of five seconds. This transient time threshold may be selected to allow the power capping system to attempt to prevent exceeding the steady state power consumption threshold by also slowing the CPU clock rate and reducing processor frequency, and a transient time of less than five seconds may be judged by the system administrator as too short. Thus, in response to this fast transient, the command module 330 sends a power interrupt signal to the switched components, [0021] monitors power consumption by each power-consuming component )
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Watertons’s teaching a plurality of outlets having priorities which the control is based on with Cepulis’s’s teaching of determining increases and decreases in power consumption over a time threshold. The combined teaching provides an expected result of a plurality of outlets having priorities which the control is based on, where the increase in power consumption over a time threshold is considered. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to improve system efficiency and safety as shown by Cepulis [0001] “exceeding rated power also can cause an unintended loss of computer system components, such as by tripping circuit breakers”.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure.
Galin (US20180226797) discloses a smart outlet controlling loads from a group of loads by connecting to or disconnecting from one or more power sources.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communication from the examiner should be directed to YVONNE T FOLLANSBEE whose telephone number is (571)272-0634. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday 1pm - 9pm.
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 on (571) 272-2748 The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppairmy.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786- 9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/YVONNE T FOLLANSBEE/
Examiner, Art Unit 2117
/ALICIA M. CHOI/Primary Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2117
Prosecution Insights