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
Claims 38-57 have been examined.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Independent Claims 38, 56, 57 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The claims are in a statutory category of invention. However, the claims recite determining a target advertisement based on advertisement information and profile information of an electric vehicle (EV) or a user of the EV; determining information indicating charging of the EV by an EV charging apparatus is to be performed; transmitting the target advertisement; receiving advertisement delivery information including an indication of rendering of the target advertisement. This is considered in the Abstract Idea grouping of certain methods of organizing human activity - advertising, marketing or sales activities or behaviors. This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the claim is directed to an abstract idea with additional generic computer elements. The additional elements are considered over a communication network, and to the EV charging apparatus or to a wireless communication device of the user, encoding the advertisement delivery information into a blockchain. These are considered generic. The network and use of blockchain are considered generic. The generically recited computer elements do not add a practical application or meaningful limitation to the abstract idea because they amount to simply implementing the abstract idea on a computer.
The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. The additional limitations only perform well-understood, routine, conventional computer functions as recognized by the court decisions listed in MPEP § 2106.05(d). Also, the additional hardware elements are: (i) mere instructions to implement the idea on a computer, and/or (ii) recitation of generic computer structure that serves to perform generic computer functions. Viewed separately or as a whole, these additional claim elements do not provide meaningful limitations to transform the abstract idea into a patent eligible application of the abstract idea such that the claims amounts to significantly more than the abstract idea itself. The claim does not provide significantly more than the identified abstract idea, in that there is no improvement to another technology or technical field, no improvement to the functioning of a computer, no application with, or by use of a particular machine, no transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing, no specific limitation other than what is well-understood, routing and conventional in the field, no unconventional step that confines the claim to a particular useful application, or meaningful limitations that amount to more than generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. Therefore, the claims are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as being directed to non-statutory subject matter.
Dependent claims 39-55 are not considered directed to any additional non-abstract claim elements. The use of blockchain here is considered generic. So, these claims offer further descriptive limitations of elements found in the independent claims and addressed above. While these descriptive elements may provide further helpful description for the claimed invention, these elements do not confer subject matter eligibility to the invention since their individual and combined significance is still not more than the abstract concepts identified in the claimed invention. Hence, these dependent claims are also rejected under 101.
Please see the 35 USC 101 section at the Examination Guidance and Training Materials page on the USPTO website.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 38-43, 46, 48, 50-52, 55-57 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Forbes (20170358041).
Claims 38, 56, 57. Forbes discloses a method comprising:
determining a target advertisement based on advertisement information and profile information of an electric vehicle (EV) or a user of the EV ([182, 195], “[194]… The systems and methods of the present invention further provide for analyzing the control activity, responses to the controls (for example like Google adwords so that when a marketing message is provided, then there is compensation for the messaging like Google adwords), e.g., least cost provider for recharging mobile electric power storage and/or EVs; whoever plugs in also is preferably connected to the financial settlement network associated with the mobile app and/or charging terminal, which may further include a marketing database, so that as the consumer is reviewing possible opportunities”; also notice in-car advertising at [195] and in car computers at [194]);
determining information indicating charging of the EV by an EV charging apparatus is to be performed ([182, 194, 195]);
transmitting, over a communication network, the target advertisement to the EV charging apparatus or to a wireless communication device of the user ([182, 194, 195]);
receiving, over the communication network, advertisement delivery information including an indication of rendering of the target advertisement (“[183]… user profile(s) preferably includes… history of offers and responses made for products and/or services…additional advertising and offers for products and/or services may be provided via the GUI based upon the corresponding profile for the user” and “[194]… The systems and methods of the present invention further provide for analyzing the control activity, responses to the controls (for example like Google adwords so that when a marketing message is provided, then there is compensation for the messaging like Google adwords),… and for delivering the marketing message, and the analytics over the marketing message including but not limited to open rate, response rate, referral rate, purchase conversion rate.”); and
encoding the advertisement delivery information into a blockchain (also see blockchain and ad/target ad at [273, 274]).
Claim 39. Forbes further discloses the method of claim 38, wherein the method is implemented on a server remote from the EV charging apparatus (see server and network [13]).
Claim 40. Forbes further discloses the method of claim 38 further comprising encoding into each block of the blockchain an EV identifier or a user identifier (see blockchain and payor/payee info at [251], also see blockchain at [250]).
Claim 41. Forbes further discloses the method of claim 38 further comprising encoding into each block of the block chain a digital coin value (see blockchain and transactions and settlements at [250, 251]).
Claim 42. Forbes further discloses the method of claim 41, wherein the digital coin value is a sum of a prior digital coin value indicated in a prior block in the chain and a value corresponding to the information encoded in the block (see blockchain and aggregated transactions at [250]).
Claim 43. Forbes further discloses the method of claim 42, wherein the value is a positive value when the information encoded corresponds to energy being supplied from the EV to the EV charging apparatus ([5] and see blockchain and compensation at [272, 131]).
Claim 46. Forbes further discloses the method of claim 42, wherein the value is a positive value when upon detection the EV charging apparatus is using energy produced by a renewable energy source (see renewable energy sources at [13] and [127] and the positive value is interpreted as the indicator that it was a renewable).
Claim 48. Forbes further discloses the method of claim 38, wherein the advertisement delivery information includes sensor information indicating a time the user viewed the target advertisement (see “[194]…when a marketing message is provided… open rate, response rate, referral rate, purchase conversion rate.” so the when of an ad is interpreted as tracked; also note and history of offers at [183]).
Claim 50. Forbes further discloses the method of claim 38 further comprising transmitting charging instructions to the wireless communication device of the user ([182]).
Claim 51. Forbes further discloses the method of claim 50, wherein the charging instructions include a location of the EV charging apparatus (see charging and locate at [182]).
Claim 52. Forbes further discloses the method of claim 50, wherein the charging instructions include a charging schedule (see charging and reservation at [182] and time at [156]).
Claim 55. Forbes further discloses the method of claim 38, wherein the wireless communication device is a smart phone or tablet ([145]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim 44, 45, 47, 53, 54 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Forbes (20170358041).
Claim 44. Forbes does not explicitly disclose the method of claim 42, wherein the value is a positive value when upon detection the user watched the targeted advertisement. However, see Forbes and advertising and open/response/conversion rate at [194] and see compensation related to ad message provided at [194] and see blockchain and compensation at [272, 131] and see marketing offers at [131], see blockchain and transactions and settlements [250, 251]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to add Forbes compensation for ads to Forbes blockchain and marketing messages and compensation and settling contracts. One would have been motivated to do this in order to better use blockchain to settle contracts.
Claim 45. Forbes further discloses the method of claim 42, a value when upon detection the EV was relocated to another EV charging apparatus based on a utility demand response command to stop or re-schedule EV charging (see interrupt and couple or decouple at [202], see market based financial settlement at [202]). Forbes does not explicitly disclose wherein the value is a positive value or an award for the action. However, Forbes discloses awarding and compensate at [5] see blockchain and compensation at [272, 131] and see marketing offers at [131], see blockchain and transactions and settlements [250, 251]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to add Forbes desired load balancing to Forbes blockchain and marketing messages and compensation and settling contracts. One would have been motivated to do this in order to better use blockchain to settle contracts and incite desired actions.
Claim 47. Forbes further discloses the method of claim 42, a value when upon detection the EV charging apparatus was predetermined for the user (see reservation at [182]; see load balancing and couple or decouple at [202], see market based financial settlement at [202]). Forbes does not explicitly disclose wherein the value is a positive value or an award for the action. However, Forbes discloses awarding and compensate at [5] see blockchain and compensation at [272, 131] and see marketing offers at [131], see blockchain and transactions and settlements [250, 251]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to add Forbes desired load balancing to Forbes blockchain and marketing messages and compensation and settling contracts. One would have been motivated to do this in order to better use blockchain to settle contracts and incite desired actions.
Claim 53. Forbes further discloses the method of claim 38, wherein: the EV charging apparatus is located at a home of the user (user profile includes address and building type [227]); and transmitting the target advertisement is based on a time (see when and ad at [194]). Forbes does not explicitly disclose the on an expected time of arrival of the EV. However, Forbes discloses user profile includes predict energy usage [224] and user profile includes address and building type [227]. And, Forbes discloses targeted ads at the charging station [182]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to add Forbes profile for predicting user energy usage and Forbes profile including user address so that it can predict energy usage at a service address to Forbes targeted message. One would have been motivated to do this in order to better provide targeted ads.
Claim 54. Forbes does not explicitly disclose the method of claim 53, wherein the expected time of arrival is determined from a predictive pattern of the EV in relation to the home. However, Forbes discloses user profile includes predict energy usage [224] and user profile includes address and building type [227]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to add Forbes profile for predicting user energy usage to Forbes profile including user address so that it can predict energy usage at a service address. One would have been motivated to do this in order to better predict energy usage.
Claim 44, 45, 47, 53, 54 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Forbes (20170358041) in view of Cornish (20140067660).
Claim 49. Forbes does not explicitly disclose the method of claim 48, wherein the sensor information is based on image data from a camera embedded within the EV charging apparatus. However, Forbes discloses cameras at [187, 191]. And, Cornish discloses EV charging stations and identifying the EV with a camera [96]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to add Cornish’s EV and camera for identifying to Forbes EV and profile and targeted marketing. One would have been motivated to do this in order to better provide targeted marketing.
Conclusion
The following prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Note allowed CON parent 15863206/ patent 12148004;
Zachary discloses chaging and ads [10] and blockchain and ads [98]; Turner Fig. 2, 13; [22, 50]; Figs. 15, 16 has relevant features for all but blockchain; Karner Menendez Wheeler Cornish disclose relevant features.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ARTHUR DURAN whose telephone number is (571)272-6718. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs, 7-5pm.
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, Ilana Spar can be reached at (571) 270-7537. 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.
/ARTHUR DURAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3621 10/20/25