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 .
DETAILED ACTION
2. This action is responsive to the Application filed on 8/13/2024. A filing date 8/13/2024 is acknowledged. A National Stage entry of PCT/EP2023/052714 and international filing date 2/3/2023 is acknowledged. The sought benefit of EP application 22382140.6 (which was filed on 2/18/2022) is acknowledged. Claims 1-14 are pending in this application. Claims 1,13 are independent claims.
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 of this title, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
3. Claims 1-11, 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lukas Hansen et al (US Publication 20200259358 A1, hereinafter Hansen), and in view of Vijay Arya et al (US Publication 20150227124 A1, hereinafter Arya).
As for independent claim 1, Hansen discloses: A method of power management of a power plant ([0044], provide a highly desirable implementation of CCD mode for an integrated renewable energy source (“RES”) (e.g., PV, wind, etc.) and energy storage system (“ESS’) facility or plant, wherein the combination may be referred to here as RES-ESS or a RES-ESS facility (of which a photovoltaic plus storage or “PV+S” facility is a subset) comprising at least one type of renewable power generation equipment and an energy storage system (Abstract, coordinated control of a renewable electrical energy source (RES) and an electrical energy storage (EES) device utilizes a time-dependent forecast of electrical energy production by the RES and a state of charge (SOC) schedule for the EES including at least one SOC target value), wherein the power plant comprises a first point of connection connecting the renewable power generation equipment with an electrical grid and a second point of connection connecting the energy storage system with the electrical grid ([0044], the ESS may additionally be charged from an electric grid connected to the RES-ESS facility), the method comprising: determining a power generation schedule defining a power generation of the renewable power generation equipment of the power plant during a predefined time range on a basis of forecasts parameters ([0008], a time-dependent forecast of electrical energy production by the renewable electrical energy generation resource); determining an optimized energy storage power schedule defining a discharged and/or absorbed power to/from the electrical grid or from the power generation equipment by the energy storage system during the predefined time range on the basis of the forecasts parameters ([0008], a state of charge (SOC) schedule for the electrical energy storage device including at least one SOC target value, to generate a time-varying charge/discharge control signal for the electrical energy storage device, wherein the time-varying charge/discharge control signal is configured to ensure that the SOC schedule is satisfied by charging at the average rate necessary to meet the SOC target value); … determining an optimized state of charge target schedule of the energy storage system during the predefined time range on the basis of the forecasts parameters ([0008], the time-varying charge/discharge control signal is configured to ensure that the SOC schedule is satisfied by charging at the average rate necessary to meet the SOC target value); wherein in the predefined time range the method comprises: supplying and/or absorbing the power from the energy storage system to/from the second point of connection according to the energy storage power schedule ([0008], the time-varying charge/discharge control signal is configured to ensure that the SOC schedule is satisfied by charging at the average rate necessary to meet the SOC target value); controlling the power supply of the power plant from the renewable energy generation equipment to the first point of connection and/or to the energy storage system on a basis of the optimized power injection schedule and the optimized state of charge target schedule ([0053], The settings combiner 56 receives MESA-ESS schedules/modes/curves provided by a utility or grid operator, receives schedules produced by an optimizer; [0076], The ideal power setpoint could be defined as the required BESS active power to reach the SOC target in an optimal fashion), wherein during the predefined time range the method further comprises: modifying the energy storage power schedule and [the optimized power injection schedule] on a basis of generation support parameters ([0053], The settings combiner 56 receives MESA-ESS schedules/modes/curves provided by a utility or grid operator, receives schedules produced by an optimizer; [0076], The ideal power setpoint could be defined as the required BESS active power to reach the SOC target in an optimal fashion).
Hansen does not clearly disclose optimized power injection schedule, in an analogous art of managing and optimizing power generation and distribution system based on forecast information, Arya discloses: determining an optimized power injection schedule of the power plant defining a power supply to the electrical grid during the predefined time range on a basis of the power generation schedule and on a basis of the energy storage power schedule (Arya: [0030], consideration schedules of energy injection);
Hansen and Arya are analogous arts because they are in the same field of endeavor, managing and optimizing power generation and distribution system based on forecast information. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the invention of Hansen using the teachings of Arya to include taking into consideration schedules of energy injection. It would provide Hansen’s method with enhanced capabilities of optimizing power management with more precise controls.
As for claim 2, Hansen-Arya discloses: wherein the first and the second point of connection coincide (Hansen: [0044], the ESS may additionally be charged from an electric grid connected to the RES-ESS facility).
As for claim 3, Hansen-Arya discloses: wherein the at least one type of renewable power generation equipment comprises at least one wind turbine (Hansen: [0018], the renewable electrical energy generation resource comprises at least one wind turbine, the electrical energy storage device comprises a battery array, and the time-dependent forecast of electrical energy production comprises a wind production forecast) and/or at least a solar panel (Hansen: [0003], renewable electric generation resources, such as solar photovoltaic (PV)).
As for claim 4, Hansen-Arya discloses: wherein the forecasts parameters comprise weather forecast parameters, wind speed, wind direction and/or sun irradiation in a region of the power plant (Arya: [0029], predictive analytics and optimization can be employed. Here, if the weather (131), feed-in-tariff (125), time of use pricing (123) and/or other context information is available to regulator 119, it can predict the availability of DES, load requirements and whether are any grid outages might be likely, etc.).
As for claim 5, Hansen-Arya discloses: wherein the forecasts parameters comprise financial parameters and/or a committed power injection schedule (Arya: [0029], predictive analytics and optimization can be employed. Here, if the weather (131), feed-in-tariff (125), time of use pricing (123) and/or other context information is available to regulator 119, it can predict the availability of DES, load requirements and whether are any grid outages might be likely, etc.).
As for claim 6, Hansen-Arya discloses: wherein the forecasts parameters comprise a present availability of the renewable power generation equipment and/or a desired state of charge to be achieved or maintained by the energy storage system (Hansen: Abstract, A time-varying charge/discharge control signal is configured to ensure that the SOC schedule is satisfied by charging at a rate necessary to meet the SOC target value).
As for claim 7, Hansen-Arya discloses: wherein, during the predefined time range, the method further comprises: updating the power generation schedule, energy storage power schedule, the optimized power injection schedule and the optimized state of charge target schedule on a basis of updated forecasts parameters collected during the predefined time range (Hansen: Abstract, A time-varying charge/discharge control signal is configured to ensure that the SOC schedule is satisfied by charging at a rate necessary to meet the SOC target value, while periodically updating the generation of the charge/discharge control signal based upon an updated time-dependent forecast of electrical energy production and/or an updated SOC schedule. A configurable refresh period may be used to limit updates of the time-varying control signal including computation and use of a new basepoint value for aggregated energy supplied from the RES-ESS facility to an electrical grid).
As for claim 8, Hansen-Arya discloses: wherein the updating is performed at regular or irregular time intervals (Hansen: [0053], Such a forecast may have a format of (timestamp, power value) and contain a set of time values of specified intervals (e.g., 15 minutes in 1 minute intervals, 36 hours in 1 hour intervals, etc.)).
As for claim 9, Hansen-Arya discloses: wherein the optimized state of charge target schedule is a constant value in time (Hansen: [0097], the aggregated PV+S output remains substantially constant for each 30 minute time period, since the basepoint control value remains constant during each 30 minute refresh period).
As for claim 10, Hansen-Arya discloses: wherein the optimized state of charge target schedule is a battery level range of the energy storage system to be achieved (Hansen: Abstract, a state of charge (SOC) schedule for the EES including at least one SOC target value).
As for claim 11, Hansen-Arya discloses: measuring a current value of the state of charge of the energy storage system; comparing the current value of the state of charge with the optimized scheduled state of charge target schedule;
controlling the power supply of the power plant from the renewable energy generation equipment to the first point of connection and/or to the energy storage system on a basis of a comparison between the current value of the state of charge and the optimized state of charge target schedule (Hansen: [0087], A gradient or slope between the current plant production and the forecasted PV power values may be calculated and compared with a defined ramp rate down limit).
As per claim 13, it recites features that are substantially same as those features claimed by claim 1, thus the rationales for rejecting claim 1 are incorporated herein. Further, Hansen-Arya also discloses: a local plant controller configured to: (Arya: [0029], Based on these predictions, the regulator 119 can choose to supply generated electricity to grid 109, storage 113 or local loads 107 optimally)
As per claim 14, it recites features that are substantially same as those features claimed by claim 1, thus the rationales for rejecting claim 1 are incorporated herein.
4. Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hansen and Arya as applied on claim 1, and further in view of Gerald Sheble (US Publication 20160077507 A1, hereinafter Sheble).
As for claim 12, Hansen-Arya does not clearly disclose activating or deactivating equipment, in another analogous art of managing and optimizing power generation and distribution system based on forecast information, Sheble discloses: activating and/or deactivating at least a part of the renewable power generating equipment (Sheble: [0043], controlling, by the smart grid control system, the smart energy grid to activate or deactivate one or more resources of the smart energy grid).
Hansen and Arya and Sheble are analogous arts because they are in the same field of endeavor, managing and optimizing power generation and distribution system based on forecast information. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the invention of Hansen using the teachings of Sheble to include activating/deactivating one or more resources of the smart energy grid. It would provide Hansen’s method with enhanced capabilities of optimizing power management with more precise controls.
Examiner’s Note
Examiner has cited particular columns/paragraph and line numbers in the references applied to the claims above for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings of the art and are applied to specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested from the applicant in preparing responses, to fully consider the references in entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the Examiner.
In the case of amending the Claimed invention, Applicant is respectfully requested to indicate the portion(s) of the specification which dictate(s) the structure relied on for proper interpretation and also to verify and ascertain the metes and bounds of the claimed invention. This will assist in expediting compact prosecution. MPEP 714.02 recites: “Applicant should also specifically point out the support for any amendments made to the disclosure. See MPEP § 2163.06. An amendment which does not comply with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.121(b), (c), (d), and (h) may be held not fully responsive. See MPEP § 714.” Amendments not pointing to specific support in the disclosure may be deemed as not complying with provisions of 37 C.F.R. 1.131(b), (c), (d), and (h) and therefore held not fully responsive. Generic statements such as “Applicants believe no new matter has been introduced” may be deemed insufficient.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure. Applicants are required under 37 C.F.R. § 1.111(c) to consider these references fully when responding to this action.
Padmarao (US Publication 20210296898) SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR ENHANCED REACTIVE POWER MANAGEMENT IN A HYBRID ENVIRONMENT
Nishida (US Publication 20180159184) POWER SUPPLY CONTROL DEVICE, POWER SUPPLY SYSTEM, POWER SUPPLY CONTROL METHOD, AND PROGRAM
Alatrash (US Publication 20140097807) Methods And Systems For Mitigation Of Intermittent Generation Impact On Electrical Power Systems
It is noted that any citation to specific pages, columns, lines, or figures in the prior art references and any interpretation of the references should not be considered to be limiting in any way. A reference is relevant for all it contains and may be relied upon for all that it would have reasonably suggested to one having ordinary skill in the art. In re Heck, 699 F.2d 1331, 1332-33, 216 U.S.P.Q. 1038, 1039 (Fed. Cir. 1983) (quoting In re Lemelson, 397 F.2d 1006, 1009, 158 U.S.P.Q. 275, 277 (C.C.P.A. 1968)).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Hua Lu whose telephone number is 571-270-1410 and fax number is 571-270-2410. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Fri 9:00 am to 6:00 pm EST. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Scott Baderman can be reached on 571-272-3644. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 703-273-8300.
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.
/Hua Lu/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2118
