DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on August 3, 2026 has been entered.
Status of Claims
This Office Action is in response to the Applicants’ filing on August 3, 2026. Claims 1-4, 6-12 and 14-22 were previously pending, of which claims 1, 10, 17 and 22 have been amended, no claims have been cancelled, and no claims have been newly added. Accordingly, claims 1-4, 6-12 and 14-22 are currently pending and are being examined below.
Response to Arguments
With respect to Applicant's remarks, see pages 8-14 filed August 3, 2026; Applicant’s “Amendment and Remarks” have been fully considered. Applicant’s remarks will be addressed in sequential order as they were presented.
Applicant's arguments and amendments regarding 35 U.S.C. §103 Rejections have been fully considered and they are persuasive. In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., “cause[s] the vehicle to receive, from the electrical port, a quantity of electrical energy along a first route-segment of the plurality of route-segments, wherein the quantity of electrical energy is based on satisfaction of at least one of an energy demand or an emissions target of a second route-segment of the plurality of route-segments that is subsequent to the first route-segment along the plurality of route-segments, and wherein the conductive element is disposed along the first route-segment and is absent along the second route-segment”) were not clearly defined in the prior art and therefore the rejection below in view of the amended claims is withdrawn. Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, the new limitations from the amended claims are not persuasive in view of a further search for prior art where US20120316717A1 by Daum et al (see [0128-0132]) was located. Therefore, the rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 103 is maintained, as presented in the Office Action below.
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.
Claims 1-4, 6-12, 15-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Myers, in view of Myers et al., US 2018/0334177 A1 (Hereinafter, “Myers”)(from IDS) in view of Kumar et al., US 2007/0142985 A1 (Hereinafter, “Kumar”)(from IDS), in further view of Daum et al., US20120316717A1 (Hereinafter “Daum”).
Regarding Claim 1, 3, 10 and 17, Myers discloses a system to generate mechanical energy for vehicle propulsion See [0022], “mechanical-electric drive system 18 that includes one or more traction motors 28 drivingly coupled to wheels (shown in FIG. 3) for propelling the locomotive.”
comprising: an electrical port configured to receive electrical energy from a conductive element exterior to a vehicle, the conductive element disposed along a route for the vehicle; See Fig.1 and [0024], “hybrid power system 12 may further include a connection 34, such as an electrical bus (third rail, overhead power line, etc.), for being connected to an external power source, such as an external power line.”
an energy conversion device configured to receive a first fuel and a second fuel; and See [0021], “The hybrid power system 12 also may optionally include at least one dual fuel engine 26 powered by both natural gas and diesel fuel (also referred to as a dual fuel engine(s) 26.”
A controller, comprising one or more processors coupled with memory, to determine, based on an energy demand for the vehicle along the first route segment and the receipt of the quantity of the electrical energy, a first consumption rate of the first fuel and a second consumption rate of the second fuel.” See [0027]-[0028], where Myers discloses determining the power levels for the hybrid and (if needed) natural gas engines to satisfy a power demand which when read in light of [0033] “ It is also understood that although the method 100 is shown with reference to the controller's operation of the natural gas powered engine(s) 14 and the diesel powered engine(s), that power from additional sources may be introduced into the method 100, as would be understood by those having skill in the art. For example, power from the battery 32 and/or external power source 34, which have essentially zero emissions, may be utilized as a source of power to propel the locomotive. The battery 32 and/or the external power source 34 may be utilized prior to utilizing the natural gas powered engine(s) 14, or may be utilized simultaneously with the natural gas powered engine(s) 14, or thereafter while utilizing the diesel powered engine(s) 16.” Here Myers discloses that first electrical energy/battery power is used (utilized prior) to the combustion (natural gas and diesel) engines being controlled to makeup the additional power demands thus the power demands which are satisfied from the combustion engines are based in part on the total power demand (to reach a needed speed/torque) and the currently received electrical engine power.)
Myers however does not explicitly disclose the reception and use of route segments (and the subsequent charging amount along a first segment being based on a second route segment. Instead the power demand and controls of Myers are based on the current location/speed demands (e.g. [0026]) Myers discloses a multi-fuel system to generate electrical power for vehicle propulsion, but does not explicitly disclose the consumption rate or receipt of preferred/stored energy for each section/segment.
However, Kumar teaches a train control system which includes:
a controller, comprising one or more processors coupled with memory, configured to: receive the route as comprising a plurality of route-segments cause the vehicle to receive from the electrical port, See [0017], “Another aspect of the invention relates to an energy management system for use in connection with a hybrid-energy off-highway vehicle that traverses a known course. The hybrid energy off-highway vehicle includes an engine. A power converter is driven by the engine and provides primary electric power. A traction motor system receives the primary electric power. The traction motor system selectively propels the off-highway vehicle in response to the received primary electric power.” The train of Kumar travels over a known course (route and route-segments); + [0134] “Although the foregoing descriptions have often referred to AC diesel-electric locomotive systems to describe several pertinent aspects of the disclosure, the embodiment of the present invention should not be interpreted as being limited to such locomotive systems. For example, aspects of the present disclosure may be employed with "all electric" locomotives powered by electric "third rails" or overhead power systems.” Here teaches that Kumar directly envisions the use of current and upcoming route segments (and subsequent control of electric power levels/charging and discharging) is also applicable to third rails powered trains/locomotives (i.e. power from the electrical port”)
a quantity of electrical energy along a first route-segment of the plurality of route-segments, wherein the quantity of electrical energy based on satisfaction of at least one of an energy demand or an emissions target of a second route-segment of the plurality of route-segments that is subsequent to the first route-segment along the plurality of route-segments; See [0062] “ The energy management processor 506 preferably uses the present and/or upcoming track situation information, along with vehicle status information, to determine power storage and power transfer requirements. Energy management processor 506 also determines possible energy storage opportunities based on the present and future track situation information. For example, based on the track profile information, energy management processor 506 may determine that it is more efficient to completely use all of the stored energy, even though present demand is low, because a dynamic braking region is coming up (or because the train is behind schedule and is attempting to make up time). In this way, the energy management system 502 improves efficiency by accounting for the stored energy before the next charging region is encountered. As another example, energy management processor 506 may determine not to use stored energy, despite present demand, if a heavier demand is upcoming.” Here Kumar teaches a first received charge amount along the current segment (first segment) is based on a predicted/upcoming demand (i.e. the present power-transfer demand/charging is based on the upcoming (second segment) power demands) and [0095] planned energy storage amount/transfers are based in part on upcoming route segment).
determine, based on an energy demand for the vehicle and the receipt of the electrical energy, a first consumption rate of the first fuel and a second consumption rate of the second fuel. See [0142], “The energy management system 500' includes an energy management processor 506' to determine a power storage parameter (receipt of electrical energy), a power transfer parameter (energy demand), and an engine transfer parameter for each location along the track to minimize the total fuel consumed of each fuel type during the trip subject to at least one fuel parameter constraint. In an exemplary embodiment, the fuel parameter is fuel efficiency and the fuel parameter constraint is an emission output constraint.”
As both are in the same field of endeavor, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine Myer’s energy management device with the energy management improvements disclosed in Kumar with reasonable expectation of success. The motivation for doing so would have been to improve efficiency by accounting for the stored energy before the next charging region is encountered, see Kumar [0062].
Myers and Kumar teach a multi-fuel system with segmented efficiency improvements, but do not explicitly disclose receiving of a quantity of electrical power from the port based on the satisfaction of an energy demand and/or emission targets of a first and second segments of a route wherein the first portion has a conductive element and the second does not. However, Daum teaches a train control system which includes: wherein the conductive element is disposed along the first route-segment and is absent along the second route-segment; See [0128]-[0132], [0134] + fig. 10 as posted below, [0128] “FIG. 10 illustrates operation of the vehicle 300 in accordance with one or more embodiments of the subject matter described herein. In the illustrated embodiment, the vehicle 300 travels along the route 312 that includes a powered portion 1000 and an unpowered portion 1002. The powered portion 1000 includes external power sources, such as the catenaries 318 and/or an electrified rail. The unpowered portion 1002 does not include any external power sources. For example, the unpowered portion 1002 does not include any off-board sources of electric current that can power the vehicle 300: “ + [0129] “The vehicle 300 may use the energy management system 326 and the onboard energy storage device 302 to travel along the powered and unpowered portions 1000, 1002 of the route 312….” + “[0130] In one embodiment, the trip plan may direct the controller 322 to charge the energy storage device 302 using the energy from the catenary 318 (and/or electrified rail or other off-board energy source) while the vehicle 300 travels through the powered portion 1000 of the route 312. Alternatively or additionally, the trip plan may direct the controller 322 to charge the energy storage device 302 using electric energy generated by the alternator 304 while the traction motors 314 are powered by the catenary 318 (and/or electrified rail or other off-board energy source).” + [0131] “The energy management system 326 may create and/or modify the trip plan as the vehicle 300 travels based on a variety of factors, such as previously acquired characteristics of the route 312 (e.g., the grade, curvature, friction, and the like, of the route 312 that was measured during a previous trip of the vehicle 300 or another vehicle along the route 312), currently acquired characteristics of the route 312 (e.g., characteristics that are measured by onboard sensors of the vehicle 300 during the current trip), the current state of charge of the energy storage device 302, and/or the performance characteristics of the energy storage device 302. As described above, the trip plan may be generated to ensure that the vehicle 300 can be powered to travel to a destination, taking into account that the vehicle 300 will have an external source of energy during the powered portion 1000 but not during the unpowered portion 1002.” + [0134] “In the one embodiment, the vehicles 300 may communicate with each other in order to coordinate the consumption and/or transfer of electric current by the vehicles 300. For example, the vehicles 300 may coordinate how much electric current each vehicle 300 draws from the catenary 318 at various locations and/or points in time.” trip plan includes setting/controlling charging via catenaries rails 318 during a first portion to ensure proper amount of energy for the following 1002 section without the catenary; from [0132] it is known that charge plan which was calculated to satisfy energy demands of both 1000 and 1002 sections, includes an estimated amount of energy that will be obtained during first section 1000. And [0131] mentions relying on the onboard energy during the second 1002 sections from [0026] we know on board energy sources include both batteries but also fuel sources + [0169] “In another embodiment, a system for controlling an electric vehicle includes a control module configured to be operably coupled with the electric vehicle and to generate signals for controlling at least one of tractive effort of the electric vehicle or a source of electrical power for the vehicle based on one or more of: (a) one or more onboard parameters comprising: a schedule of the vehicle; a location of the vehicle with respect to wayside stations along a route of the vehicle, the wayside stations configured to provide electrical power to the vehicle; a maximum capacity and/or a present capacity of an energy storage device on board the vehicle; one or more costs associated with powering the vehicle using energy from a first onboard source comprising an energy storage device; or one or more parameters relating to powering the vehicle using energy from one or more second onboard sources different from the energy storage device; or (b) one or more off-board parameters comprising: cost information associated with powering the vehicle using energy from the wayside stations; locations of the wayside stations; or a present and/or an expected capacity of the wayside stations for providing electrical power to the vehicle. “ further teaches that energy plan/control of the electric powered motor is based on part on the parameters (emissions/cost) from the second onboard sources (combustion engine/diesel) power sources). Additionally [0134]-[0135] teaches amount of energy received via catenaries is controlled by the vehicle, i.e. the vehicle itself/its conductive port causes it to receive a quantity of electrical energy along a first section of route.
PNG
media_image1.png
466
402
media_image1.png
Greyscale
As both are in the same field of endeavor, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine Myer’s energy management device with the segmented conductive element use disclosed in Daum with reasonable expectation of success. The motivation for doing so would have been to improve efficiency by accounting for the external energy sources before the next charging region is encountered thereby better ensuring proper power/energy is obtained and stored for the vehicle without overtaxing/overloading the catenaries, see Daum [0048], [0054]-[0056], [0134].
Regarding Claim 2, 11 and 19, Myers discloses the following limitation dependent on Claim 1:
a first emissions output for the first fuel; a second emissions output for the second fuel; and a third emissions output for the electrical energy. See at least [0052], “The at least one natural gas powered engine may have a NOx emission rate of less than 1.0 g/bhp-hr.” And [0059], “The at least one diesel and/or dual fuel powered engine may have a NOx emission rate of less than 2.0 g/bhp-hr.” Also [0033], “power from the battery 32 and/or external power source 34, which have essentially zero emissions, may be utilized as a source of power to propel the locomotive.”
Myers discloses a multi-fuel system to generate electrical power for vehicle propulsion, but does not explicitly disclose the fuel consumption rate. However, Kumar teaches:
wherein the controller is further configured to determine the first consumption rate and the second consumption rate based on: an emissions target for the vehicle along the first route-segment; See [0142], “The energy management system 500' includes … an engine transfer parameter for each location along the track to minimize the total fuel consumed of each fuel type during the trip subject to at least one … fuel parameter constraint is an emission output constraint.” And [0146], “The energy management processor 506' determines the engine transfer parameter and the power transfer parameter for each location (route segment) along the trip based upon at least one fuel parameter for each of the plurality of fuel types at each location (route segment) along the trip.”
As both are in the same field of endeavor, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine Myer’s energy management device with the energy management improvements disclosed in Kumar with reasonable expectation of success. The motivation for doing so would have been to improve efficiency by accounting for the stored energy before the next charging region is encountered, see Kumar [0062].
Regarding Claim 4 and 21, Myers discloses the following limitation dependent on Claim 1:
wherein the controller is further configured to: determine the first consumption rate of the first fuel and the second consumption rate of the second fuel based on a source of the electrical energy received from the conductive element. See at least [0025], “controller 20 is configured to individually control power distribution from the respective engines (14, 16, and/or 24), the battery 32, and/or the external power source 34 to the drive system 18, and more particularly to the traction motors 28, for transmitting power to the wheels to propel the locomotive 10. The controller 20 also may be configured to control the distribution of power from the engines (14, 16, and/or 24) and/or the external power source 34 to the battery 32 for storage of energy.”
Regarding Claim 6, Myers as modified in claim 1 above, discloses the following limitation dependent on Claim 1:
wherein the controller is configured to: determine the quantity of electrical energy based on a speed of the vehicle navigating the first route-segment, the speed based on the second route-segment of the route. See [0027], “the controller 20 may utilize an algorithm to determine the power demand from each of the engines that is needed to attain a desired parameter, such as torque or speed at the engine or wheels, for example.” + Kumar [0062] “The energy management processor 506 preferably uses the present and/or upcoming track situation information, along with vehicle status information, to determine power storage and power transfer requirements. Energy management processor 506 also determines possible energy storage opportunities based on the present and future track situation information. “ Here Kumar teaches using power transfer requirement (electric quantity received) based on present status (locomotive speed) and upcoming track (second segment) information + Kumar [0162] teaches that operating parameters in the context of Kumar includes locomotive speed
Regarding Claim 7 and 22, Myers discloses the following limitation dependent on Claim 17:
wherein the controller is configured to: determine the quantity of electrical energy based on a portion of the quantity of electrical energy provided to an energy storage device, See at least [0025], “controller 20 is configured to individually control power distribution from the respective engines (14, 16, and/or 24), the battery 32, and/or the external power source 34 to the drive system 18, and more particularly to the traction motors 28, for transmitting power to the wheels to propel the locomotive 10. The controller 20 also may be configured to control the distribution of power from the engines (14, 16, and/or 24) and/or the external power source 34 to the battery 32 for storage of energy.”
the energy storage device configured to provide the electrical energy to a traction motor during the See [0032], “operator selecting a predefined power level (e.g., notch selection) as shown in FIGS. 5A-7B … controller 20 may proceed to supply power … according to predefined engine parameters (e.g., engine speed (rpm), torque, horsepower, etc.).” Also [0033], “method 100 is shown with … power from the battery 32 and/or external power source 34, which have essentially zero emissions, may be utilized as a source of power to propel the locomotive.“ Also [0072], “The system controller may be operatively coupled to battery to receive power, and the controller may be configured to charge or discharge the battery based upon the desired power demand.”
Myers discloses a multi-fuel system to generate electrical power for vehicle propulsion, but does not explicitly disclose the consumption rate or receipt of preferred/stored energy for each section/segment.
However, Kumar teaches in [0062] a train control system which includes “The energy management processor 506 preferably uses the present and/or upcoming track situation information, along with vehicle status information, to determine power storage and power transfer requirements. Energy management processor 506 also determines possible energy storage opportunities based on the present and future track situation information. For example, based on the track profile information, energy management processor 506 may determine that it is more efficient to completely use all of the stored energy, even though present demand is low, because a dynamic braking region is coming up (or because the train is behind schedule and is attempting to make up time). In this way, the energy management system 502 improves efficiency by accounting for the stored energy before the next charging region is encountered. As another example, energy management processor 506 may determine not to use stored energy, despite present demand, if a heavier demand is upcoming.”
As both are in the same field of endeavor, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine Myer’s energy management device with the energy management improvements disclosed in Kumar with reasonable expectation of success. The motivation for doing so would have been to improve efficiency by accounting for the stored energy before the next charging region is encountered, see Kumar [0062].
Regarding Claim 8, Myers discloses a multi-fuel system to generate electrical power for vehicle propulsion, but does not explicitly disclose the regenerative storage of energy for each section/segment. However, Kumar teaches in Myers discloses the following limitation dependent on Claim 1:
wherein: the vehicle comprises a traction motor to generate the electrical energy via regenerative braking while descending a grade of the second route-segment; and the controller (506) is configured to determine the quantity of electrical energy based on the regenerative braking for the grade. See [0061], “The energy management processor (controller) 506 determines present and anticipated train position information via … track grade.” And [0075], “Referring first to FIGS. 6A-D, these figures reflect an energy management system that stores energy at the maximum rate possible during dynamic braking … energy is transferred to the energy storage medium from excess prime mover power available during motoring.“ And [0079], “During a second time period (second route segment) B (from approximately 70-80 minutes), dynamic braking energy is transferred to the energy storage medium at the maximum rate (e.g., 500 units) until the storage is full.”
Regarding Claim 9, Myers discloses the following limitation dependent on Claim 1:
wherein: the energy conversion device is configured to generate the electrical energy from a fuel source; and See [0023], ”The hybrid power system 12 may … be operatively coupled to the electrical generators of the traction control system 30 via the controller 20 for converting mechanical energy from the engines (14, 16, and/or 26) into electrical energy for charging the battery.”
the controller is configured to: receive an indication of an emissions target for the vehicle See [0037], “the hybrid power system is configured to control the power output of the natural gas powered engine(s) and the diesel powered engine(s) (and/or the dual fuel engine(s)) for minimizing the combined average emissions rate, preferably below 0.2 g/bhp-hr NOx.”
receive an indication of an emissions output corresponding to the fuel source and a quantity of electrical energy; and determine, based on the emissions target and the emissions output, the quantity of electrical energy. And [0038], “Referring particularly to FIG. 5A/5B, hybrid power system for a 1,270 horsepower (~1016 kw) switcher locomotive includes … natural gas powered engine … output of about 320 horsepower (~256 kw*) and an emissions rate of about 0.02 g/bhp-hr NOx … diesel powered engine … output of about 950 horsepower (~760 kw*) and an emissions rate of about 1.3 g/bhp-hr NOx … hybrid power system configuration is shown to produce only 0.086 NOx as an average percentage of the duty cycle according to the notch schedule (column P, last row), which is below a threshold of 0.2 g/bhp-hr NOx.”
* Electrical energy calculated based on generator output using 80% efficiency.
Myers discloses a hybrid locomotive system, but does not explicitly disclose emissions target by segment. However, Kumar teaches a hybrid system in at least [0146], “The energy management processor 506' determines the engine transfer parameter and the power transfer parameter for each location (route segment) along the trip based upon at least one fuel parameter for each of the plurality of fuel types at each location (route segment) along the trip. For example, the fuel efficiency and emission output, among other fuel parameters of each of the plurality of fuel types is considered by the energy management processor 506' in determining an engine transfer parameter.”
As both are in the same field of endeavor, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine Myer’s energy management device with the energy management improvements disclosed in Kumar with reasonable expectation of success. The motivation for doing so would have been to improve efficiency by accounting for the stored energy before the next charging region is encountered, see Kumar [0062].
Regarding Claim 12, Myers discloses the following limitation dependent on Claim 10:
further comprising: determining, by the controller, a source of the electrical energy; See [0033], “method 100 is shown with reference to the controller's operation … power from the battery 32 and/or external power source 34, which have essentially zero emissions, may be utilized as a source of power to propel the locomotive … or may be utilized simultaneously with the natural gas powered engine(s) 14, or thereafter while utilizing the diesel powered engine(s) 16.”
determining, by the controller, an emissions output associated with the electrical energy based on the source; and See [0033], “where one or more dual fuel engines 26 are provided (which may have emission rates between that of the natural gas engine 14 and the diesel engine 26), then these dual fuel engines 26 may be incorporated into the method 100 after utilizing the natural gas powered engine(s) 14, but before utilizing the diesel powered engine(s) 16, so as to supplement the cleaner burning natural gas power prior to bringing the diesel powered engine(s) 16 online.“
determining, by the controller, the See [0037], “the hybrid power system is configured to control the power output of the natural gas powered engine(s) and the diesel powered engine(s) (and/or the dual fuel engine(s)) for minimizing the combined average emissions rate, preferably below 0.2 g/bhp-hr NOx.”
Myers discloses a multi-fuel system to generate electrical power for vehicle propulsion, but does not explicitly disclose the fuel consumption rate. However, Kumar teaches in [0142], “The energy management system 500' includes an energy management processor 506' to determine a power storage parameter, a power transfer parameter, and an engine transfer parameter for each location along the track to minimize the total fuel consumed of each fuel type during the trip subject to at least one fuel parameter constraint. In an exemplary embodiment, the fuel parameter is fuel efficiency and the fuel parameter constraint is an emission output constraint.”
As both are in the same field of endeavor, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine Myer’s energy management device with the energy management improvements disclosed in Kumar with reasonable expectation of success. The motivation for doing so would have been to improve efficiency by accounting for the stored energy before the next charging region is encountered, see Kumar [0062].
Regarding Claim 15 and 16, Myers discloses a multi-fuel system to generate electrical power for vehicle propulsion, but does not explicitly disclose the speed of the vehicle. However, Kumar teaches:
further comprising: determining, by the controller, a speed/quantity of electrical energy for the vehicle based on the quantity of electrical energy/speed. See [0061], “energy management processor 506, a database 508, and a position identification system 510 … determines present and anticipated train position information via the position identification system 510. … other vehicle information such as … present and anticipated speed, present and anticipated electrical load, and so on may also be included in a database (or supplied in real or near real time) and used by energy management processor 506.”
As both are in the same field of endeavor, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine Myer’s energy management device with the energy management improvements disclosed in Kumar with reasonable expectation of success. The motivation for doing so would have been to improve efficiency by accounting for the stored energy before the next charging region is encountered, see Kumar [0062].
Regarding Claim 18 and 20, Myers discloses a multi-fuel system to generate electrical power for vehicle propulsion, but does not explicitly disclose consumption rates. However, Kumar teaches:
wherein the controller is further configured to: determine the first consumption rate of the first fuel based on a second consumption rate of a second fuel for the energy conversion device; and determine the first consumption rate and the second consumption rate based on an emissions target for the vehicle along the first route-segment. See at least [0146], “The energy management processor 506' determines the engine transfer parameter and the power transfer parameter (via conversion device) for each location along the trip based upon at least one fuel parameter for each of the plurality of fuel types at each location along the trip. For example, the fuel efficiency (consumption rate) and emission output, among other fuel parameters of each of the plurality of fuel types is considered by the energy management processor 506' in determining an engine transfer parameter … emission restriction may prevent usage of fuel A, in which case the energy management processor 506' may determine an engine transfer parameter supplying the engine with fuel B.”
As both are in the same field of endeavor, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine Myer’s energy management device with the energy management improvements disclosed in Kumar with reasonable expectation of success. The motivation for doing so would have been to improve efficiency by accounting for the stored energy before the next charging region is encountered, see Kumar [0062].
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Myers in view of Kumar et al., in further view of Fisher et al., US 2015/0300830 A1 (Hereinafter, “Fisher”)(from IDS).
Regarding Claim 14, Myers discloses the following limitation dependent on Claim 10:
further comprising: allocating, by the controller, a first portion of an emissions target to the
See Fig.5A/5B and [0038], “the total NOx of the weighted usage of the natural gas engine and diesel engine is about 0.38 g/bhp-hr (first portion emissions target) … from notch 4 up to notch 8 (first route segment)
allocating, by the controller, a second portion of the emissions target to the
See Fig.5A/5B and [0038], “low power demands, such as at idle and notches 1-3 (second route segment) … low emissions natural gas powered engine is utilized (satisfies emissions target).”
and determining, by the controller, the quantity of the electrical energy to satisfy the emissions target, See Fig.5A/5B and [0037], “hybrid power systems are … configured to control power output from the respective natural gas powered engine(s) and/or the diesel powered engine(s) according to a predetermined notch schedule (column A), where each notch corresponds to a desired power level (column C).”
wherein: the first portion of the emissions target does not accord to the emissions target;
See Fig.5A/5B and [0038], “diesel powered engine … emissions rate of about 1.3 g/bhp-hr NOx (does not accord to emissions target).”
the second portion of the emissions target satisfies the emissions target;
See Fig.5A/5B and [0033], “natural gas powered engine … emissions rate of about 0.02 g/bhp-hr NOx (satisfies emission target).”
and a combination of the first portion and the second portion satisfies the emissions target. See at least Fig.5A/5B and [0038], “hybrid power system configuration is shown to produce only 0.086 NOx (satisfies emission target) as an average percentage of the duty cycle (combined emissions) according to the notch schedule (column P, last row), which is below a threshold of 0.2 g/bhp-hr NOx.”
Myers discloses a multi-fuel system to generate electrical power for vehicle propulsion, but does not explicitly disclose the emissions over a route segment . However, Fisher teaches notch schedules based on route segments for trip planning in [0045-0050] where “example scenario 300 depicted in FIG. 3, a vehicle 310 traverses a route 320 in a direction of travel 306. The route 320 includes a first portion (second route segment) 302 having a negative grade or slope along the direction of travel 306, and a second portion 304 (first route segment) having a positive grade or slope along the direction of travel 306.” And [0048], “a notch setting of 4 or 5 may be utilized to maintain the vehicle 310 at a desired speed over the second portion 304 (first route segment) when a notch setting of 2 or lower was used over the first portion 302 (second route segment).” And [0049], “trip planning module 122 may be configured to formulate a group of potential trip plans at least some of which have portions with higher notch settings (i.e. 4 through 8) than would be used to achieve other objectives, and to select a trip plan from among the group based on the resulting total combined fuel cost (optionally, with consideration to other resulting objectives (i.e. emission levels)).” And [0050], “using a model, the resulting total combined fuel cost … along with other results such as emission levels … may be determined for each potential trip plan, and a trip plan selected from the potential trip plans.”
As both are in the same field of endeavor, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine Myer’s energy management device with the trip planning in Fisher with reasonable expectation of success. The motivation for doing so would have been to improve efficiency by using trip planning models, see Fisher [0050].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRIAN KEITH PALMARCHUK whose telephone number is (571)272-6261. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7 AM - 5 PM EST.
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, Navid Mehdizadeh can be reached at (571) 272-7691. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/B.K.P./Examiner, Art Unit 3669
/KENNETH M DUNNE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3669
Prosecution Insights