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 .
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.
FINAL ACTION
This action is in response to applicant’s claim amendment(s) submitted on 12/31/2025. Claims 1, 3, 4, 6, 9-12, 14 and 18-20 are amended. Claims 1-4, 6 and 8-22 are pending.
Response to Arguments
Examiner’s Remarks – Double Patenting
The examiner withdraws the rejection in view of applicant’s approved Terminal Disclaimer.
Examiner’s Remarks - 35 USC § 112
The examiner withdraws the rejection in view of applicant’s claim amendment(s).
Examiner’s Remarks - 35 USC § 103 – Claims 1 and 12
The examiner notes that the applicant has amended each independent claim to include the feature(s) of, “transferring, by the EV charger, data of the charging session to the user’s mobile device”. In view of the claim amendment(s) the examiner notes the teachings of prior art reference CHOI (WO 2017192005 A1) to the record. The examiner notes that Choi teaches a process for sending vehicle charging related data to a user’s device. See rejection below.
The examiner notes that the applicant has amended each independent claim to include the feature(s) of, “transferring, by the user’s mobile device, the data of the charging session to a server configured to store the data of the charging session”. In view of the claim amendment(s) the examiner notes the teachings of prior art reference ZHAI (WO2020/019325) to the record. The examiner notes that ZHAIF teaches a process for sending charging related session data to a server. See rejection below.
Examiner’s remarks - 35 USC § 103 – Claims 2-4, 6 and 8-22
Applicant's arguments do not comply with 37 CFR 1.111(c) because they do not clearly point out the patentable novelty which he or she thinks the claims present in view of the state of the art disclosed by the references cited or the objections made. Further, they do not show how the amendments avoid such references or objections.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1-4, 6, 9, 12-16 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ISHIBASHI (US Patent Publication No. 2011/0144844 and ISHIBASHI hereinafter) in view of CHOI (WO 2017192005 A1) and further in view of ZHAI (WO2020/019325).
As to claims 1 and 12, ISHIBASHI teaches a method of charging an electric vehicle, comprising:
a. receiving, at an electric vehicle (EV) charger, a first input from a mobile device, wherein the first input comprises a digital token comprising a command (i.e. …teaches in pars. 0175 & 0176 the following: “Then, the electric vehicle 50 generates a random number R.sub.EV (S156). Then, the electric vehicle 50 generates a ciphertext E.sub.EV using the random number R.sub.EV, the random number R.sub.C, and the identification information ID.sub.C (S158). Then, the electric vehicle 50 transmits the ciphertext E.sub.EV to the charging apparatus 40 (S160). Then, the charging apparatus 40 decrypts the ciphertext E.sub.EV received from the electric vehicle 50 (S162).[0176] Next, the charging apparatus 40 checks whether the random number R.sub.C and the identification information ID.sub.C obtained by the decryption processing in step S162 are the same as the random number R.sub.C and the identification information ID.sub.C that the charging apparatus 40 holds (S164). ” …teaches in par. 0083 the following: “the user of the electric vehicle 50 brings his/her security token 80 into proximity or in contact with the reader/writer 70 installed in the store, parking lot, or the like. At this time, the reader/writer 70 reads identification information from the security token 80.”),
executing the command of the digital token (i.e. …teaches in pars. 0175 & 0176 the following: “Then, the electric vehicle 50 generates a random number R.sub.EV (S156). Then, the electric vehicle 50 generates a ciphertext E.sub.EV using the random number R.sub.EV, the random number R.sub.C, and the identification information ID.sub.C (S158). Then, the electric vehicle 50 transmits the ciphertext E.sub.EV to the charging apparatus 40 (S160). Then, the charging apparatus 40 decrypts the ciphertext E.sub.EV received from the electric vehicle 50 (S162).[0176] Next, the charging apparatus 40 checks whether the random number R.sub.C and the identification information ID.sub.C obtained by the decryption processing in step S162 are the same as the random number R.sub.C and the identification information ID.sub.C that the charging apparatus 40 holds (S164). ”),
wherein executing the command of the digital token comprises using the EV charger to start a charging session (i.e., …teaches in pars. 0176 & 0177 the following: “In a case the check result is positive, the charging apparatus 40 generates a session key K (S166). Then, the charging apparatus 40 generates a ciphertext E.sub.C by encrypting the random numbers R.sub.C and R.sub.EV and the session key K (S168). Then, the charging apparatus 40 transmits the ciphertext E.sub.C to the electric vehicle 50 (S170). [0177] Next, the electric vehicle 50 decrypts the ciphertext E.sub.C received from the charging apparatus 40 (S172). Then, the electric vehicle 50 checks whether the random numbers R.sub.C and R.sub.EV obtained by the decryption processing in step S172 are the same as the random numbers R.sub.C and R.sub.EV that the electric vehicle 50 holds (S174). In a case the check result is positive, the mutual authentication between the electric vehicle 50 and the charging apparatus 40 is successful. Then, a secure communication path based on the session key K is established between the electric vehicle 50 and the charging apparatus 40.”).
The system of ISHIBASHI does not expressly teach:
c. receiving, at the EV charger, a second command related to ending the charging session, wherein the EV charger ends the charging session in response to the second command
and
d. transferring, by the EV charger, data of the charging session to the user’s mobile device.
In this instance the examiner notes the teachings of prior art reference CHOI.
With regards to applicant’s claim limitation element of, “receiving, at the EV charger a second command related to ending the charging session”, CHOI teaches in figure 4 the following: “the information receiver 210 may receive a message requesting to stop charging from the charger user terminal 10”.
With regards to applicant’s claim limitation element of, “wherein the EV charger ends the charging session in response to the second command”, CHOI in figure 4 the following: “during the operation S320, the information receiver 210 may receive a message requesting to stop charging from the charger user terminal 10. In this case, the information receiving unit 210 may receive a charge stop request message. the information receiving unit 210 may refer to a step of receiving, from the charger user terminal 10, a charge stop request message that is a message for requesting a stop of charging of the charge target 20.”.
With regards to applicant’s claim limitation element of, “transferring, by the EV charger, data of the charging session to the user’s mobile device”, CHOI teaches in figure 4 the following: “In step S430, the information transmitting unit 230 may refer to a step of transmitting the refund point information to the charger user terminal 10.”. The examiner notes that the refund points are remaining points from the charging session that goes from the charger to the user related device.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the of the claimed invention was made to implement the teachings of ISHIBASHI with the teachings of CHOI by having their system comprises an enhanced electric vehicle charging data handling process. One would have been motivated to do so to provide a simple and effective means to provide a more comprehensive data handling process, wherein the enhanced electric vehicle charging data handling process helps facilitate data security within the electric vehicle charging networks and will make it easier to maintain charging data.
The system of ISHIBASHI and CHOI do not expressly teach:
transferring, by the user’s mobile device, the data of the charging session to a server configured to store the data of the charging session.
In this instance the examiner notes the teachings of prior art reference ZHAI.
ZHAI teaches on page 12 lines 15-20 the following: “the user terminal can transmit the user information, the vehicle information, and the charging information of the vehicle to the cloud server. … the user terminal can transmit the charging information of the vehicle to the cloud server once a charging of the vehicle is completed.”.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the of the claimed invention was made to implement the teachings of ISHIBASHI and CHOI with the teachings of ZHAI by having their system comprises an enhanced communication process. One would have been motivated to do so to provide a simple and effective means to provide a secure data transferring process, wherein the enhanced communication process helps facilitate data security and will make it easier to store charging session data.
As to claims 2 and 13, the system of ISHIBASHI, CHOI and ZHAI as applied to claim 1 above teaches EV charging, specifically ISHIBASHI teaches a method of claim 1, further comprising decrypting one or more components of the digital token (i.e. …teaches in pars. 0175 & 0176 the following: “Then, the electric vehicle 50 generates a random number R.sub.EV (S156). Then, the electric vehicle 50 generates a ciphertext E.sub.EV using the random number R.sub.EV, the random number R.sub.C, and the identification information ID.sub.C (S158). Then, the electric vehicle 50 transmits the ciphertext E.sub.EV to the charging apparatus 40 (S160). Then, the charging apparatus 40 decrypts the ciphertext E.sub.EV received from the electric vehicle 50 (S162).[0176] Next, the charging apparatus 40 checks whether the random number R.sub.C and the identification information ID.sub.C obtained by the decryption processing in step S162 are the same as the random number R.sub.C and the identification information ID.sub.C that the charging apparatus 40 holds (S164).”).
As to claims 3 and 14, the system of ISHIBASHI, CHOI and ZHAI as applied to claim 1 above teaches EV charging, specifically ISHIBASHI teaches method of claim 1, further comprising verifying the digital token from the user’s mobile device prior to starting the charging session (i.e. …teaches in pars. 0175 & 0176 the following: “Then, the electric vehicle 50 generates a random number R.sub.EV (S156). Then, the electric vehicle 50 generates a ciphertext E.sub.EV using the random number R.sub.EV, the random number R.sub.C, and the identification information ID.sub.C (S158). Then, the electric vehicle 50 transmits the ciphertext E.sub.EV to the charging apparatus 40 (S160). Then, the charging apparatus 40 decrypts the ciphertext E.sub.EV received from the electric vehicle 50 (S162).[0176] Next, the charging apparatus 40 checks whether the random number R.sub.C and the identification information ID.sub.C obtained by the decryption processing in step S162 are the same as the random number R.sub.C and the identification information ID.sub.C that the charging apparatus 40 holds (S164). I”).
As to claims 4 and 15, the system of ISHIBASHI, CHOI and ZHAI as applied to claim 1 above teaches EV charging, specifically ISHIBASHI and CHOI do not expressly teach method of claim 1, wherein the data of charging session comprises a duration of the charging session, energy used during the charging session, a plug-in status, a status of the EV charger, diagnostics data, temperature data, or humidity data.
In this instance the examiner notes the teachings of prior art reference ZHAI.
The examiner notes that applicant’s usage of the term “or” places the above limitation in alternative form. As such the examiner notes that ZHAI teaches on page 11 lines 15-20 the following: “The charging information can include at least one of a voltage information, a power amount information, and a current information of the battery to which is charging is completed.”.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the of the claimed invention was made to implement the teachings of ISHIBASHI and CHOI with the teachings of ZHAI by having their system comprises an enhanced communication process. One would have been motivated to do so to provide a simple and effective means to provide a secure data transferring process, wherein the enhanced communication process helps facilitate data security and will make it easier to store charging session data.
5. (Canceled)
As to claims 6 and 16, the system of ISHIBASHI, CHOI and ZHAI as applied to claim 1 above teaches EV charging, specifically ISHIBASHI does not expressly teach a method of claim 1, wherein the second user input command is received from the user’s mobile device comprises an encrypted message.
In this instance the examiner notes the teachings of prior art reference CHOI.
CHOI teaches in figure 4 the following: “the information receiver 210 may receive a message requesting to stop charging from the charger user terminal 10…during the operation S320, the information receiver 210 may receive a message requesting to stop charging from the charger user terminal 10. In this case, the information receiving unit 210 may receive a charge stop request message. the information receiving unit 210 may refer to a step of receiving, from the charger user terminal 10, a charge stop request message that is a message for requesting a stop of charging of the charge target 20.”.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the of the claimed invention was made to implement the teachings of ISHIBASHI with the teachings of CHOI by having their system comprises an enhanced electric vehicle charging data handling process. One would have been motivated to do so to provide a simple and effective means to provide a more comprehensive data handling process, wherein the enhanced electric vehicle charging data handling process helps facilitate data security within the electric vehicle charging networks and will make it easier to maintain charging data.
7. (Canceled)
As to claims 9 and 18, the system of ISHIBASHI, CHOI and ZHAI as applied to claim 1 above teaches EV charging, specifically ISHIBASHI does not expressly teach a method of claim 1, further comprising transferring the data of the charging session to a second user’s mobile device.
In this instance the examiner notes the teachings of prior art reference CHOI.
CHOI teaches in figure 4 the following: “In step S430, the information transmitting unit 230 may refer to a step of transmitting the refund point information to the charger user terminal 10.”. The examiner notes that the refund points are remaining points from the charging session that goes from the charger to the user related device.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the of the claimed invention was made to implement the teachings of ISHIBASHI with the teachings of CHOI by having their system comprises an enhanced electric vehicle charging data handling process. One would have been motivated to do so to provide a simple and effective means to provide a more comprehensive data handling process, wherein the enhanced electric vehicle charging data handling process helps facilitate data security within the electric vehicle charging networks and will make it easier to maintain charging data.
Claim(s) 8 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ISHIBASHI and CHOI in view of ZHAI as applied to claims 1 and 12 above and further in view of Donnelly et al. (US Patent Publication No. 2011/0106329 and Donnelly hereinafter).
As to claims 8 and 17, the system of ISHIBASHI, CHOI and ZHAI as applied to claim 1 above teaches EV charging, specifically neither of the references expressly teaches a method of claim 1, wherein: the EV charger further comprises a locking mechanism, and wherein the method further comprises releasing, by the EV charger, the locking mechanism upon ending the charging session.
In this instance the examiner notes the teachings of prior art reference Donnelly.
Donnelly teaches in pars. 103 & 104 the following: “A sensor or circuit is used to detect when an EV is plugged in to the charging port. Another circuit detects the power fail condition. Logic implemented in either hardware or software determines when an EV is plugged in and the power fails and energizes the solenoid. [0104] Additionally, this circuit is energy efficient since the solenoid is only energized briefly when the door is to be unlocked and only consumes power when recharging after an unlock event.”.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the of the claimed invention was made to implement the teachings of ISHIBASHI, CHOI and ZHAI with the teachings of Donnelly by having their system comprises an enhanced electric vehicle charging support process. One would have been motivated to do so to provide a simple and effective means to provide a more comprehensive electric vehicle charging process, wherein the enhanced electric vehicle charging support process helps facilitate alternative charging configurations within the electric vehicle charging networks and will make it easier to charge electric vehicles.
Claim(s) 10, 11 and 19-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ISHIBASHI and CHOI in view of ZHAI as applied to claims 1 and 12 above and further in view of, SHUMAKER (WO 2016/089925)
As to claims 10 and 19, the system of ISHIBASHI, CHOI and ZHAI as applied to claim 1 above teaches EV charging, specifically neither of the references expressly teaches a method of claim 1, further comprising: a. receiving one or more pieces of firmware from the mobile device or the vehicle; and b. performing, by the EV charger, a firmware update using the one or more pieces of firmware.
In this instance the examiner notes the teachings of prior art reference SHUMAKER.
With regards to applicant’s claim limitation element of, “a. receiving one or more pieces of firmware from the mobile device or the vehicle”, SHUMAKER teaches in par. 0035 the following: “In addition to providing charging authorization and charging related data between the home office 227 and the EVSE 200, via the EVSE mobile application 225 on the phone 204, additional information can be sent that is not seen by the user. This additional information may include software updates, settings, diagnostics, information to show on a display on the EVSE 200, such as pricing, advertising, user feedback, etc. This information can be sent not just to the EVSE 200 that the user is using or intends to use, but also to all EVSEs within range of the wireless connection from the phone 204.”.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the of the claimed invention was made to implement the teachings of ISHIBASHI, CHOI and ZHAI with the teachings of SHUMAKER by having their system comprises an enhanced communication network. One would have been motivated to do so to provide a simple and effective means to provide a more comprehensive system configuring process, wherein the enhanced communication network helps facilitate alternative data communication and will make it easier to configure the EV charging system.
As to claims 11 and 20, the system of ISHIBASHI, CHOI and ZHAI as applied to claim 1 above teaches EV charging, specifically neither of the references expressly teaches a method of claim 1, further comprising: a. receiving a first piece of firmware from the mobile device or the vehicle; b. receiving a second piece of firmware from a second mobile device or second vehicle; and c. performing a firmware update of the EV charger using the first piece of firmware and the second piece of firmware.
In this instance the examiner notes the teachings of prior art reference SHUMAKER.
With regards to applicant’s claim limitation element of, “receiving a first piece of firmware from the mobile device or the vehicle”, SHUMAKER teaches in par. 0035 the following: “In addition to providing charging authorization and charging related data between the home office 227 and the EVSE 200, via the EVSE mobile application 225 on the phone 204, additional information can be sent that is not seen by the user. This additional information may include software updates, settings, diagnostics, information to show on a display on the EVSE 200, such as pricing, advertising, user feedback, etc. This information can be sent not just to the EVSE 200 that the user is using or intends to use, but also to all EVSEs within range of the wireless connection from the phone 204.”.
With regards to applicant’s claim limitation element of, “…receiving a second piece of firmware from a second mobile device or second vehicle”, SHUMAKER teaches in par. 0035 the following: “In addition to providing charging authorization and charging related data between the home office 227 and the EVSE 200, via the EVSE mobile application 225 on the phone 204, additional information can be sent that is not seen by the user. This additional information may include software updates, settings, diagnostics, information to show on a display on the EVSE 200, such as pricing, advertising, user feedback, etc. This information can be sent not just to the EVSE 200 that the user is using or intends to use, but also to all EVSEs within range of the wireless connection from the phone 204.”.
With regards to applicant’s claim limitation element of, “performing a firmware update of the EV charger using the first piece of firmware and the second piece of firmware”, SHUMAKER teaches in par. 0035 the following: “In addition to providing charging authorization and charging related data between the home office 227 and the EVSE 200, via the EVSE mobile application 225 on the phone 204, additional information can be sent that is not seen by the user. This additional information may include software updates, settings, diagnostics, information to show on a display on the EVSE 200, such as pricing, advertising, user feedback, etc. This information can be sent not just to the EVSE 200 that the user is using or intends to use, but also to all EVSEs within range of the wireless connection from the phone 204.”.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the of the claimed invention was made to implement the teachings of ISHIBASHI, CHOI and ZHAI with the teachings of SHUMAKER by having their system comprises an enhanced communication network. One would have been motivated to do so to provide a simple and effective means to provide a more comprehensive system configuring process, wherein the enhanced communication network helps facilitate alternative data communication and will make it easier to configure the EV charging system.
As to claim 21, the system of ISHIBASHI, CHOI and ZHAI as applied to claim 1 above teaches EV charging, specifically neither of the references expressly teaches a method of claim 1, further comprising transferring, by the EV charger, the data of the charging session to a second EV charger.
In this instance the examiner notes the teachings of prior art reference SHUMAKER.
SHUMAKER teaches in par. 0035 the following: “In addition to providing charging authorization and charging related data between the home office 227 and the EVSE 200, via the EVSE mobile application 225 on the phone 204, additional information can be sent that is not seen by the user. This additional information may include software updates, settings, diagnostics, information to show on a display on the EVSE 200, such as pricing, advertising, user feedback, etc. This information can be sent not just to the EVSE 200 that the user is using or intends to use, but also to all EVSEs within range of the wireless connection from the phone 204.”.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the of the claimed invention was made to implement the teachings of ISHIBASHI, CHOI and ZHAI with the teachings of SHUMAKER by having their system comprises an enhanced communication network. One would have been motivated to do so to provide a simple and effective means to provide a more comprehensive system configuring process, wherein the enhanced communication network helps facilitate alternative data communication and will make it easier to configure the EV charging system.
As to claim 22, the system of ISHIBASHI, CHOI and ZHAI as applied to claim 12 above teaches EV charging, specifically neither of the references expressly teaches a system of claim 12, wherein the processor is further configured to cause the EV charger to transfer the data of the charging session to a second EV charger.
In this instance the examiner notes the teachings of prior art reference SHUMAKER.
SHUMAKER teaches in par. 0035 the following: “In addition to providing charging authorization and charging related data between the home office 227 and the EVSE 200, via the EVSE mobile application 225 on the phone 204, additional information can be sent that is not seen by the user. This additional information may include software updates, settings, diagnostics, information to show on a display on the EVSE 200, such as pricing, advertising, user feedback, etc. This information can be sent not just to the EVSE 200 that the user is using or intends to use, but also to all EVSEs within range of the wireless connection from the phone 204.”.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the of the claimed invention was made to implement the teachings of ISHIBASHI, CHOI and ZHAI with the teachings of SHUMAKER by having their system comprises an enhanced communication network. One would have been motivated to do so to provide a simple and effective means to provide a more comprehensive system configuring process, wherein the enhanced communication network helps facilitate alternative data communication and will make it easier to configure the EV charging system.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRYAN F WRIGHT whose telephone number is (571)270-3826.
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, Eleni Shiferaw can be reached on (571)272-3867. 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.
/BRYAN F WRIGHT/ Examiner, Art Unit 2497