20Notice 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
1. This Office Action is in response to the communication filed on September 19, 2024, which paper has been placed of record in the file.
2. Claims 1-20 are pending in this application.
Information Disclosure Statement
3. The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted September 19, 2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
4. 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.
5. Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claim invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., law of nature, natural phenomenon, or abstract idea) without significantly more.
Regarding independent claim 12, which is analyzing as the following:
Step 1: This part of the eligibility analysis evaluates whether the claim falls within any statutory category. See MPEP 2106.03. The claim recites a non-transitory storage medium. Thus, the claim is to a machine, which is one of the statutory categories of invention. (Step 1: YES).
Step 2A, Prong One: This part of the eligibility analysis evaluates whether the claim recites a judicial exception. As explained in MPEP 2106.04, subsection II, a claim “recites” a judicial exception when the judicial exception is “set forth” or “described” in the claim.
The claim recites a non-transitory storage medium to perform a method for extending a range of a commercial vehicle. The claim recites the steps of: predicting a remaining range of the commercial vehicle in real-time; determining, based on the remaining range, whether the commercial vehicle should engage with one of a smart battery dock or a traction battery swap module…; and scheduling, according to the remaining range and based on the availability of the smart battery dock and availability of the traction battery swap module, a rendezvous of the commercial vehicle with one of the smart battery or the traction battery swap module, as drafted, is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation when read in light of the Specification, covers performance of the limitations in the mind, can be practically performed by human in their mind or with pen/paper, but for the recitation of generic computer components. That is, other than reciting “a computer/processor/automatically”, nothing in the claim elements preclude the steps from practically being performed in the mind. The mere nominal recitation of generic computing devices does not take the claim limitation out of the Mental Processes grouping of abstract ideas. Thus, if a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind, then it falls within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas (concepts performed in the human mind including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion). See MPEP 2106.04(a)(2), subsection III.
Moreover, the claim recites the limitations: the smart battery dock to be towed by the commercial vehicle to charge the traction battery while the commercial vehicle is in motion or the traction battery swap module to swap the traction batteries with other traction batteries, under its broadest reasonable interpretation when read in light of the Specification, falls within “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity” grouping of abstract ideas as they cover performance of commercial or legal interactions including agreements in the form of contracts, legal obligations, advertising, marketing or sales activities or behaviors, business relations; managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people including social activities, teaching, and following rules or instructions.
Therefore, the claim recites an abstract idea. (Step 2A, Prong One: YES).
Step 2A, Prong Two: This part of the eligibility analysis evaluates whether the claim as a whole integrates the recited judicial exception into a practical application of the exception or whether the claim is “directed to” the judicial exception. This evaluation is performed by (1) identifying whether there are any additional elements recited in the claim beyond the judicial exception, and (2) evaluating those additional elements individually and in combination to determine whether the claim as a whole integrates the exception into a practical application. See MPEP 2106.04(d).
The claim recites the additional element of “processing circuitry of a computer device” for performing the steps predicting a remaining range of the commercial vehicle in real-time; determining, based on the remaining range, whether the commercial vehicle should engage with one of a smart battery dock or a traction battery swap module…; and scheduling, according to the remaining range and based on the availability of the smart battery dock and availability of the traction battery swap module, a rendezvous of the commercial vehicle with one of the smart battery or the traction battery swap module. The processing circuitry of a computer device is recited at a high level of generality and is used to perform an abstract idea, as discussed above in Step 2A, Prong One, such that it amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer. See MPEP 2106.05(f). The additional elements recite generic computer components processing circuitry of a computer device, a memory, and software programming instructions that are recited a high-level of generality that merely perform, conduct, carry out, implement, and/or narrow the abstract idea itself. Accordingly, the additional elements evaluated individually and in combination do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they comprise or include limitations that are not indicative of integration into a practical application such as adding the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea -- See MPEP 2106.05(f).
Even when viewed in combination, these additional elements do not integrate the recited judicial exception into a practical application (Step 2A, Prong Two: NO), and the claim is directed to the judicial exception (Step 2A, Prong One: YES).
Step 2B: This part of the eligibility analysis evaluates whether the claim as a whole, amounts to significantly more than the recited exception i.e., whether any additional element, or combination of additional elements, adds an inventive concept to the claim. See MPEP 2106.05.
As discussed in Step 2A, Prong Two above, the recitation of the processing circuitry of a computer device to perform limitations “predicting a remaining range of the commercial vehicle in real-time; determining, based on the remaining range, whether the commercial vehicle should engage with one of a smart battery dock or a traction battery swap module…; and scheduling, according to the remaining range and based on the availability of the smart battery dock and availability of the traction battery swap module, a rendezvous of the commercial vehicle with one of the smart battery or the traction battery swap module”, amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component.
Even when considered in combination, these additional elements represent mere instructions to implement an abstract idea or other exception on a computer, which do not provide an inventive concept. Therefore, the claim is not patent eligible.
(Step 2B: NO).
Regarding independent claim 1, Alice Corp. establishes that the same analysis should be used for all categories of claims. Therefore, independent claim 1 directed to a method, is also rejected as ineligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. 101 for substantially the same reasons as independent medium claim 12.
Regarding dependent claims 2-11 and 13-20, the dependent claims do not impart patent eligibility to the abstract idea of the independent claim. The dependent claims rather further narrow the abstract idea and the narrower scope does not change the outcome of the two-part Mayo test. Narrowing the scope of the claims is not enough to impart eligibility as it is still interpreted as an abstract idea, a narrower abstract idea.
Regarding dependent claims 2 and 13, the claims recite the additional element obtaining locations of smart battery docks and locations of traction battery swap modules within the remaining range of the commercial vehicle, which is mere data gathering and outputting recited at a high level of generality, and thus are insignificant extra-solution activity. See MPEP 2106.05(g) (“whether the limitation is significant”). In addition, all uses of the recited judicial exceptions require such data gathering and outputting, and, as such, these limitations do not impose any meaningful limits on the claim. These limitations amount to necessary data gathering and outputting. See MPEP 2106.05. These elements amount to gathering and displaying data over a network and are well-understood, routine, conventional activity. See MPEP 2106.05(d), subsection II. The courts have recognized the following computer functions as well understood, routine, and conventional functions when they are claimed in a merely genetic manner (e.g., at a high level of generality) or as insignificant extra-solution activity: Receiving or transmitting data over a network, e.g., using the Internet to gather data, Symantec, 838 F.3d at 1321, 120 USPQ2d at 1362 (utilizing an intermediary computer to forward information); TLI Communications LLC v. AV Auto. LLC, 823 F.3d 607, 610, 118 USPQ2d 1744, 1745 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (using a telephone for image transmission); OIP Techs., Inc., v. Amazon.com, Inc., 788 F.3d 1359, 1363, 115 USPQ2d 1090, 1093 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (sending messages over a network); buySAFE, Inc. v. Google, Inc., 765 F.3d 1350, 1355, 112 USPQ2d 1093, 1096 (Fed. Cir. 2014) (computer receives and sends information over a network). Thus, the dependent claims do not add any additional element or subject matter that provides a technological improvement (i.e., an integration into a practical application under Step 2A-Prong Two), results in the claim being directed to patent eligible subject matter or include an element or feature that is significantly more than the recited abstract idea (i.e., a technological inventive concept under Step 2B).
Regarding dependent claims 3 and 14, the claims simply refine the abstract idea by further reciting wherein scheduling the rendezvous of the commercial vehicle with one of the smart battery dock or the traction battery swap is further based on preferences of an operator of the commercial vehicle, that fall under the category of Mental process grouping of abstract ideas as described above in the independent claim 12. Thus, the dependent claims do not add any additional element or subject matter that provides a technological improvement (i.e., an integration into a practical application under Step 2A-Prong Two), results in the claim being directed to patent eligible subject matter or include an element or feature that is significantly more than the recited abstract idea (i.e., a technological inventive concept under Step 2B).
Regarding dependent claims 4 and 15, the claims simply refine the abstract idea by further reciting wherein determining whether the commercial vehicle should engage with one of a smart battery dock or a traction battery swap module is further based on a load of the commercial vehicle and environmental conditions, that fall under the category of Mental process grouping of abstract ideas as described above in the independent claim 12. Thus, the dependent claims do not add any additional element or subject matter that provides a technological improvement (i.e., an integration into a practical application under Step 2A-Prong Two), results in the claim being directed to patent eligible subject matter or include an element or feature that is significantly more than the recited abstract idea (i.e., a technological inventive concept under Step 2B).
Regarding dependent claims 5 and 16, the claims simply refine the abstract idea by further reciting determining whether the commercial vehicle should engage with one of a smart battery dock or a traction battery swap module comprises: determining that the commercial vehicle should engage with the smart battery dock…; and determining that the commercial vehicle should engage with the traction batter swap module...., that fall under the category of Mental process grouping of abstract ideas as described above in the independent claim 12. Thus, the dependent claims do not add any additional element or subject matter that provides a technological improvement (i.e., an integration into a practical application under Step 2A-Prong Two), results in the claim being directed to patent eligible subject matter or include an element or feature that is significantly more than the recited abstract idea (i.e., a technological inventive concept under Step 2B).
Regarding dependent claim 6, the claim simply refines the abstract idea by further reciting wherein the first load threshold and the second load threshold are the same threshold, that fall under the category of Mental process grouping of abstract ideas as described above in the independent claim 12. Thus, the dependent claim does not add any additional element or subject matter that provides a technological improvement (i.e., an integration into a practical application under Step 2A-Prong Two), results in the claim being directed to patent eligible subject matter or include an element or feature that is significantly more than the recited abstract idea (i.e., a technological inventive concept under Step 2B).
Regarding dependent claims 7 and 17, the claims simply refine the abstract idea by further reciting wherein predicting a remaining range of the commercial vehicle in real-time comprises predicting when a charge of the traction battery will be at a low battery threshold, that fall under the category of Mental process grouping of abstract ideas as described above in the independent claim 12. Thus, the dependent claims do not add any additional element or subject matter that provides a technological improvement (i.e., an integration into a practical application under Step 2A-Prong Two), results in the claim being directed to patent eligible subject matter or include an element or feature that is significantly more than the recited abstract idea (i.e., a technological inventive concept under Step 2B).
Regarding dependent claims 8 and 18, the claims simply refine the abstract idea by further reciting wherein predicting when a charge of the traction battery will be at a low battery threshold comprises determining a battery charge draining rate based on the load of the commercial vehicle, a speed of the commercial vehicle, environmental conditions of a route of the commercial vehicle, and topography of the route, that fall under the category of Mental process grouping of abstract ideas as described above in the independent claim 12. Thus, the dependent claims do not add any additional element or subject matter that provides a technological improvement (i.e., an integration into a practical application under Step 2A-Prong Two), results in the claim being directed to patent eligible subject matter or include an element or feature that is significantly more than the recited abstract idea (i.e., a technological inventive concept under Step 2B).
Regarding dependent claims 9 and 19, the claims simply refine the abstract idea by further reciting providing a warning to the operator of the commercial vehicle to adjust speed to decrease the battery charge draining rate, that fall under the category of Organizing Human Activity grouping of abstract ideas as described above in the independent claim 12. Thus, the dependent claims do not add any additional element or subject matter that provides a technological improvement (i.e., an integration into a practical application under Step 2A-Prong Two), results in the claim being directed to patent eligible subject matter or include an element or feature that is significantly more than the recited abstract idea (i.e., a technological inventive concept under Step 2B).
Regarding dependent claim 10, the claim simply refines the abstract idea by further reciting providing a suggestion to the operator of the commercial vehicle of a recommended gear to use to decrease or maintain the battery charge draining rate, that fall under the category of Organizing Human Activity grouping of abstract ideas as described above in the independent claim 12. Thus, the dependent claim does not add any additional element or subject matter that provides a technological improvement (i.e., an integration into a practical application under Step 2A-Prong Two), results in the claim being directed to patent eligible subject matter or include an element or feature that is significantly more than the recited abstract idea (i.e., a technological inventive concept under Step 2B).
Regarding dependent claims 11 and 20, the claims simply refine the abstract idea by further reciting wherein scheduling, according to the remaining range and based on the availability of the smart battery dock and availability of the traction battery swap module, a rendezvous of the commercial vehicle with one of the smart battery dock or the traction battery swap module comprises…, that fall under the category of Mental process grouping of abstract ideas as described above in the independent claim 12. Thus, the dependent claims do not add any additional element or subject matter that provides a technological improvement (i.e., an integration into a practical application under Step 2A-Prong Two), results in the claim being directed to patent eligible subject matter or include an element or feature that is significantly more than the recited abstract idea (i.e., a technological inventive concept under Step 2B).
Therefore, none of the dependent claims alone or as an ordered combination add limitations that qualify as significantly more than the abstract idea.
Accordingly, claims 1-20 are not draw to eligible subject matter as they are directed to an abstract idea without significantly more and are rejected under 35 USC § 101 as being directed to non-statutory subject matter.
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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
6. 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.
7. Claims 1-8, 11-18, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Pettersson (US 2013/0046457).
Regarding to claim 1, Pettersson discloses a method for extending a range of a commercial vehicle having a traction battery, the method comprising:
predicting a remaining range of the commercial vehicle in real-time (para [0026], A further object of the invention is to improve the battery management for electrically powered vehicles comprising the guidance of the vehicles and to achieve a more accurate forecast of consumption and remaining range of the transportation means with the residual charge of the battery; para [0044], To be able to achieve a decent forecast of the remaining range available with the remaining charge of the battery, some additional information is helpful; para [0047], a consumption prediction of the vehicle is required to estimate the available range of the vehicle, achievable by the available amount of energy. In the simplest form this can be expressed as an average energy consumption per distance, but more accurate results can be achieved by taking into account at least one of the following sets of information; para [0048], As e.g. solar cells are also allowing a regeneration during driving or stopovers, this can also be taken into account when determining the expected range by incorporation of actual data of energy supplied from such a source and/or by a forecast of such, which can e.g. consider weather forecasts and the resulting expectable sunshine (equivalent to the claimed “in real-time”); para [0004], The vehicles can be expected to be dominated by wheelers comparable to the presently used passenger cars, but also other transportation means such as lorries, trucks, tractors, public buses, scooters, motorcycles…);
determining, based on the remaining range, whether the commercial vehicle should engage with one of a smart battery dock or a traction battery swap module based on the remaining range and availability of the smart battery dock and availability of the traction battery swap module (para [0101], To select an assignment of a reconditioning station 3a, 3b, or 3c to the transportation means 2, an achievable range of the transportation means 2 has to be evaluated, which certainly has to involve a determination of the remaining power of the powering battery 4, as described above; para [0105], The path 12b cannot be taken, since the range 11b is not sufficient to reach the destination 5 with the amount of energy from the energy cell 4 associated to the transportation means 2. Therefore, a reconditioning of the power energy cell 4 by charge or exchange would be needed but apparently, no station 3 for doing so is available along the path 12b, so that this path cannot be chosen; para [0130], FIG. 6 shows an exemplary setup were a path 15 of the transportation means 2 to a destination 5 is shown, along which a reconditioning station 3 is assigned to the transportation means 2, where its assigned battery can be exchanged); and
scheduling, according to the remaining range and based on the availability of the smart battery dock and availability of the traction battery swap module, a rendezvous of the commercial vehicle with one of the smart battery dock to be towed by the commercial vehicle to charge the traction battery while the commercial vehicle is in motion or the traction battery swap module to swap the traction batteries with other traction batteries (para [0072], in particular when closing in to a desired reconditioning location, a narrowing of the solution space of the optimisation will occur, whereby for example in a first step a preliminary reservation of an available stock or regeneration slot can be executed, and/or in a second step a fixed booking of the desired resources can be executed to ensure the availability at the time the desired location is reached (equivalent to the claimed “rendezvous”), and also inform management means(s) of the reduced resources at the desired location, which has to be concerned in the further optimisations; para [0094], Close to the reconditioning station 3b there is a restaurant 6 located, which can be visited by the driver for a lunch or coffee stopover during which the battery of his vehicle can be reconditioned, which means it can be exchanged or charged).
Examiner Note: The claimed language “one of” defines a smart battery dock and a traction battery swap module, Pettersson discloses only “a traction battery swap module” (see figure 7 and para [0132], An entity of the set of transportation means 2 which has an associated or currently assigned battery 4 is assigned to an entity of reconditioning station 3 out of a set of such stations), which meets the claimed language.
Regarding to claim 2, Pettersson discloses the method of Claim 1, further comprising: obtaining locations of smart battery docks and locations of traction battery swap modules within the remaining range of the commercial vehicle (para [0076], The steps of determining a condition of the battery, and forecasting a consumption prediction of the transportation means, for evaluating an achievable range of mobility of the transportation means according to its consumption prediction and the condition of its powering battery and the step of guiding the transportation means to the selected reconditioning station, which is located within the range of mobility of the transportation means along a path to a desired target and assigning the selected reconditioning station to the transportation means for charge or substitute of the powering battery).
Regarding to claim 3, Pettersson discloses the method of Claim 1, wherein scheduling the rendezvous of the commercial vehicle with one of the smart battery dock or the traction battery swap is further based on preferences of an operator of the commercial vehicle (para [0062], It is also possible to work out the most relevant alternatives and provide those as options for the driver to choose from. In particular the mentioned identification of the driver or analysing the choices from a history of the same or similar trips enables the system to tune the presented alternatives according to the preferences of the driver or even automatically choose the drivers preferred route if the driver and his preferences are known as for example the daily route to and from work).
Regarding to claim 4, Pettersson discloses the method of Claim 1, wherein determining whether the commercial vehicle should engage with one of a smart battery dock or a traction battery swap module is further based on a load of the commercial vehicle and environmental conditions (para [0052], Also the characteristics of the vehicle itself have influence on the energy consumption. Such characteristics can range from a simple numerical factor representing the characteristic kWh/km, over a speed and/or load dependent characteristic, to a plurality of information such as type of vehicle, weight and load conditions, aerodynamic resistance, top speed, most efficient speed, characteristic energy consumption on different types of roads, which can for example also be determined according to analyses of recorded history data).
Regarding to claim 5, Pettersson discloses the method of Claim 4, determining whether the commercial vehicle should engage with one of a smart battery dock or a traction battery swap module comprises:
determining that the commercial vehicle should engage with the smart battery dock when the load of the commercial vehicle is below a first load threshold; and
determining that the commercial vehicle should engage with the traction batter swap module when the load of the commercial vehicle is above a second load threshold (para [0012], The therein presented method of changing the target of travel to a charging location when the battery level drops below a certain threshold might be acceptable if the recharging of the energy storage can be done within short time).
Regarding to claim 6, Pettersson discloses the method of Claim 5, wherein the first load threshold and the second load threshold are the same threshold (para [0012], The therein presented method of changing the target of travel to a charging location when the battery level drops below a certain threshold might be acceptable if the recharging of the energy storage can be done within short time).
Regarding to claim 7, Pettersson discloses the method of Claim 1, wherein predicting a remaining range of the commercial vehicle in real-time comprises predicting when a charge of the traction battery will be at a low battery threshold (para [0046], By involving at least one of them, the accuracy of the forecast can be improved. For example, the remaining available capacity or the allowable peak current can strongly depend on the temperature or usage history of the battery. In advanced embodiments for example even the heating of the battery can be predicted dependent on an estimated forecast of current consumption, whereof not only a variation of available capacity but also a possibly resulting restriction of further current limits dependent on the expected rise in the temperature of the battery can be taken into account in the management of the battery).
Regarding to claim 8, Pettersson discloses the method of Claim 7 wherein predicting when a charge of the traction battery will be at a low battery threshold comprises determining a battery charge draining rate based on the load of the commercial vehicle, a speed of the commercial vehicle, environmental conditions of a route of the commercial vehicle, and topography of the route (para [0052], Also the characteristics of the vehicle itself have influence on the energy consumption. Such characteristics can range from a simple numerical factor representing the characteristic kWh/km, over a speed and/or load dependent characteristic, to a plurality of information such as type of vehicle, weight and load conditions, aerodynamic resistance, top speed, most efficient speed, characteristic energy consumption on different types of roads, which can for example also be determined according to analyses of recorded history data. The energy consumption can also be classified per road or path segment. Thereby a desirable optimum-speed on a road segment can be determined according to the actual position and road segment the vehicle is travelling, for example to optimize the energy consumption of the vehicle, to enhance the road usage, for traffic guidance, according to road conditions, to enhance service life of the top-surface and/or according to the gradients of the road segments).
Regarding to claim 11, Pettersson discloses the method of Claim 1, wherein scheduling, according to the remaining range and based on the availability of the smart battery dock and availability of the traction battery swap module, a rendezvous of the commercial vehicle with one of the smart battery dock or the traction battery swap module comprises:
providing an operator of the commercial vehicle with at least one option for scheduling the rendezvous of the commercial vehicle with one of the smart battery dock or the traction battery swap module (para [0062], In particular since some of the above mentioned characteristics are dependent on each other or on the chosen route, an overall optimisation also including the choice of route can be done, e.g. in cooperation with a state of the art car navigation system. The criteria therefore can for example be the shortest time to travel, shortest distance to travel, lowest energy consumption, nicest view, sightseeing spots, avoiding of toll charges or parking fees, optimized connections to public transportation means, optimized round-trip time by inclusion of a plurality of destinations, possible activities during stopovers like coffee breaks, meals, golf courses, swimming pools, hotels, or others. It is also possible to work out the most relevant alternatives and provide those as options for the driver to choose from).
receiving an indication of a selection of one option of the at least one option (para [0108], For example the driving characteristics can be implemented as a mathematical model of a driver which is parameterized according to historical data recorded for the same driver, or also automatic detection according to the present behaviour of the driver or by input from the driver which helps to indicate the fact how "urgent" a travel is and if a higher energy consumption has to predicted due to the sportive driving style which will be used); and
scheduling the rendezvous of the commercial vehicle with one of the smart battery dock or the traction battery swap module based on the one option selected (para [0072], In particular when closing in to a desired reconditioning location, a narrowing of the solution space of the optimisation will occur, whereby for example in a first step a preliminary reservation of an available stock or regeneration slot can be executed, and/or in a second step a fixed booking of the desired resources can be executed to ensure the availability at the time the desired location is reached).
Regarding to claims 12-18 and 20, Pettersson discloses a computer program product comprising a non-transitory storage medium including program code to be executed by processing circuitry of a computing device (para [0039], the possibility of dynamic changes of auxiliary conditions also has to be taken into account when designing an appropriate algorithm which will most likely be implemented as a computer program product for the execution of the herein described methods, in particular those of the independent and dependent claims, by a digital processor, and which will be stored in some memory means), whereby execution of the program code causes the computing device to perform the operations described in claims 1-5, 7-8, and 11 above, therefore, are rejected by the same rationale.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
8. 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.
9. Claims 9-10 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pettersson (US 2013/0046457) in view of Liu (US 2016/0375785).
Regarding to claims 9-10, Pettersson does not disclose, however, Liu discloses the method of Claim 8, further comprising providing a warning to the operator of the commercial vehicle to adjust speed to decrease the battery charge draining rate; providing a suggestion to the operator of the commercial vehicle of a recommended gear to use to decrease or maintain the battery charge draining rate (see Abstract, A method is provided that gives real time feedback to the driver of an electric vehicle (EV) regarding the car's driving range, thereby allowing the driver to easily regulate battery usage, and thus driving range, by adjusting their driving style (e.g., top speed, acceleration/deceleration rates, etc.) as well as the settings of the car's various electrically powered auxiliary systems; para [0034], Preferably interface 405 also includes means for the control system to provide information to the driver, specifically the current driving range. Additionally, interface 405 may also be used to provide information such as a navigation map or driving instructions as well as the operating performance of any of a variety of vehicle systems (e.g., battery pack charge level, selected gear, current entertainment system settings such as volume level and selected track information, external light settings, current vehicle speed, current HVAC settings such as cabin temperature and/or fan settings, etc.). Interface 405 may also be used to warn the driver of a vehicle condition (e.g., low battery charge level) and/or communicate an operating system malfunction (battery system not charging properly, charging cable not connected properly, low tire air pressure, malfunctioning light, etc.); para [0046], For example, the system controller may be configured to allow the user to select between adjusting the top speed and altering an auxiliary system setting. Once the user selects from the offered categories, system controller 401 provides a suggestion within the selected category for either altering driver behavior or an auxiliary system in order to extend driving range. Thus, for example, if the controller provides the user with three categories to select from, specifically top speed, HVAC settings, and ‘other’, and the user selects top speed, then controller 401 will provide a suggestion for lowering top speed (e.g., to 65 mph) in order to extend the driving range (e.g., to 48 miles, or to increase driving range by 11 miles).)
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 Pettersson’s to incorporate the features taught by Liu above, for the purpose of providing the driver to easily regulate the battery usage by providing the warning and recommended to the driver. Since Pettersson discloses determining a battery charge draining rate based on a speed of the commercial vehicle (see para [0052], Also the characteristics of the vehicle itself have influence on the energy consumption. Such characteristics can range from a simple numerical factor representing the characteristic kWh/km, over a speed and/or load dependent characteristic, to a plurality of information such as type of vehicle, weight and load conditions, aerodynamic resistance, top speed, most efficient speed), Liu discloses adjusting speed and recommended gear to use to decrease or maintain the battery charge draining rate, as described above, therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the combination of Pettersson and Liu would have yield predictable results in providing the driver the electronic vehicle information.
Claim 19 is written in a computer program product comprising a non-transitory storage medium, and contains the same limitations as found in claim 9 above, therefore is rejected by the same rationale.
Conclusion
10. Claims 1-20 are rejected.
11. The prior arts made of record and not relied upon are considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Schaffer et al. (US 2020/0317084) disclose method to implement the example EV mobile charge system of FIG. 1 to enable the EV to receive a battery charge from the Mobile Charging Unit at a rendezvous location.
Diamond et al. (Us 2020/0286305) disclose systems and methods that provide predictive range estimations for energy sources, as well as indications for estimating no-start conditions, available range, and automated dispatching of charging services. These systems and methods can be utilized in battery electric vehicles (BEVs) and hybrid vehicles.
Adegbohun (US 2022/0289067) discloses a Universal Battery Pack (UBP), electric vehicle powertrain design and battery swapping network with battery health management enabling a user of an electric vehicle to access data such as state of health monitoring to enable advanced interface with the electricity grid to address challenges in the adoption of electric vehicles which include cost, range anxiety, charging time and infrastructure, and impacts of vehicle to grid (V2G) operations.
Li et al. (US 2023/0061401) disclose the battery swapping technology utilizes a “vehicle-station separation” approach, in which a battery swapping station provides a battery swapping service for vehicles (see para [0053]).
Chakraborty et al. (US 2020/0262305) disclose systems and methods relate generally to on-the-go entity-to-entity charging in transportation systems. A method can include determining charge levels, current positions, and transport speeds for an electric vehicle (EV), identifying one or more EVs in need of charging, and mobilizing a nearby EV for on-the-go peer-to-peer charging.
Mantea (US 2020/0016984) discloses a system and method for providing charged rechargeable batteries. The system may include a charging facility, a transport system and a battery exchange station. The charged batteries may be used with electric vehicles. The system may also include a mount to secure the rechargeable batteries to the electric vehicles.
Lai et al. (Us 2019/0202416) disclose methods and associated systems for managing a battery-exchange station.
Goei (US 2019/0255963) discloses method and device for converting standalone EV charging stations into intelligent stations with remote communications connectivity and control
12. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to examiner NGA B NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571) 272-6796. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 7AM-5PM.
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, Beth Boswell can be reached on (571) 272-6737. 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 http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. 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.
/NGA B NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3625 November 14, 2025