DETAILED ACTION
This Non-Final Office Action is in response to claims filed 12/20/2024.
Claims 1-14 are pending.
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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d).
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 6/4/2025 and 12/20/2024 have been considered by the examiner.
Examiner’s Note
To enhance clarity, claim language is underlined throughout this Office Action.
Citations to the prior art are provided in parentheses following each claim limitation, along with any necessary supplemental explanations.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
a guiding device in claims 1, 13, and 14, and
a search device in claim 11.
The devices described supra are being interpreted consistent with Applicant’s specification at paragraph [0105] which recites “[i]n the navigation system 500 according to the present modification, the control device 510, the storage device 520, and the indication device 530 cooperate with each other to function as both a guiding device and a search device” and paragraphs [0074] through [0075] which recite:
“The control device 510 includes a processor 511, such as a central processing unit (CPU), and a random-access memory (RAM) 512 that temporarily stores data. A control program and map information are stored in the storage device 520 beforehand. The map information includes information (for example, position information and specification information) related to a plurality of replacement sites and a plurality of supply sites. The processor 511 executes the program stored in the storage device 520, whereby a process flow F1, which will be described later, is performed. However, processes in the process flow F1 may be performed only by hardware (an electronic circuit), without use of software. The indication device 530 includes a display 531 and a speaker 532. The display 531 is, for example, a touch-panel display. The display 531 may include an instrument cluster panel or a head-up display. The display 531 may change orientations in accordance with an instruction from the control device 510. The display 531 may render a display based on extended reality (XR) technology (the technology that combines a real physical space with a virtual space), such as virtual reality (VR) or augmented reality (AR). The speaker 532 may include a buzzer.”
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Objections
Claims 6 and 7 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 6 recites each of the energy storage device and the energy storage device for replacement is an electrical storage device configured to be attachable and detachable by a replacement apparatus (emphasis added). It is recommended to define the first instance of “energy storage device” to be of the vehicle, so as to clearly distinguish between the two energy storage devices.
Claim 7 recites presenting the second information is that the display device displays the replacement site and the supply site on a map, or that the display device displays the replacement site and the supply site on the map, each in a distinguishable form, in order to guide the vehicle driven by the user. This second limitation of “the display device displays the replacement site and the supply site on the map” appears to be redundant.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claims 1-3, 5-8, 10, 11, 13, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hershkovitz et al. (US 2010/0094496 A1), hereinafter Hershkovitz.
Claim 1
Hershkovitz discloses the claimed navigation system configured to guide a vehicle (see Figure 1, depicting electric vehicle network 100, described as providing guidance to an electric vehicle based on an energy plan in ¶0033) including an energy storage device (i.e. battery pack 104) which is attachable and detachable (see ¶0121, regarding that one or more battery packs 104 are coupled/decoupled to the frame of the electric vehicle 102 via battery pack lock module 202, so as to be exchanged at battery exchange stations, as described in ¶0099), the navigation system comprising a guiding device configured to present information for guiding the vehicle to at least one of a replacement site and a supply site (see ¶0150, regarding that energy-aware navigation module 332 executes the energy plan, defined as including a navigation plan from a current location of the electric vehicle to battery service stations, e.g., charge station or battery exchange station; Figure 7C, depicting an example route 714 from a current location of electric vehicle 102 to battery exchange station 712), wherein:
the replacement site is a site where the energy storage device is replaced (see ¶0099, regarding battery exchange station are for exchanging one or more battery packs 104; Figure 16, depicting the overall battery exchange process, described as including operations of decoupling batteries from the battery bay and coupling new batteries to the battery bay in ¶0251-¶0270; Figure 9, depicting battery exchange stations 910-1, 910-2 on map 901);
the supply site is a site where an energy supply facility is provided, the energy supply facility supplying energy to the energy storage device (see ¶0099, regarding charge stations are for charging the one or more battery packs 104; Figure 17, depicting the overall battery charging process, described as including operations of enabling current flow between the charge station 1704 and electric vehicle in ¶0271-0280; Figure 9, depicting charge stations 912-1, 912-2 on map 901).
Hershkovitz further discloses that the guiding device is configured to guide the vehicle to the supply site when a predetermined condition is met, and to not guide the vehicle to the supply site when the predetermined condition is not met (see ¶0175-0176, with respect to step 604 of Figure 6, regarding that the energy-aware navigation module 332 selects a suitable battery service station that is able to service the battery packs of the electric vehicle based on profile 352 that includes user preferences, driving history of the user, previous battery service stations used by the user, etc. and/or a battery service station specified by the user and verifies that the selected battery service station can service the battery of the electric vehicle, where the selected battery service station is added as a waypoint in order to provide guidance for navigation, as described in ¶0178, with respect to step 608). Given that the battery service stations of Hershkovitz include separate and distinct battery exchange stations and charge stations (see Figure 9, depicting battery exchange stations 910-1, 910-2 and charge stations 912-1, 912-2), Hershkovitz discloses the guidance to a charge station (i.e. “supply site”) under particular “predetermined conditions” that are not met when performing guidance to a battery exchange station (i.e. “replacement site”).
Claim 2
Hershkovitz further discloses that the guiding device is configured to determine whether or not the vehicle includes first equipment for allowing an energy supply from the energy supply facility to the energy storage device (see ¶0106, regarding that a charger 108 that receives energy from an energy source via conductive or inductive coupling may or may not be included in electric vehicle 102, where data representing the battery status, i.e. unique identifier, manufacturer, and model number of the battery pack, is received from BMS 206 of vehicle 102, as described in ¶0117), and the predetermined condition includes a fact that the vehicle includes the first equipment (see ¶0173-0176, with respect to steps 602 and 604 of Figure 6, regarding that the energy-aware navigation module 332 selects a suitable battery service station that is able to service the battery packs of the electric vehicle based on profile 352 that includes previous battery service stations used by the user and/or a battery service station specified by the user and verifies that the selected battery service station can service the battery of the electric vehicle, where the selected battery service station is added as a waypoint in order to provide guidance for navigation, as described in ¶0178, with respect to step 608). A charge station (i.e. “supply site”) cannot be considered a suitable battery service station in Hershkovitz under the condition in which charger 108 is not included in electric vehicle 102. Further, conditions provided in profile 352 in which the previous battery service stations include a charge station inherently teaches “a fact that the vehicle includes the first equipment,” given that charger 108 is required to receive energy from an energy source via conductive or inductive coupling of a charge station in Hershkovitz. The “fact” may additionally be provided by the battery service station specified by the user in Hershkovitz. There is no claimed relationship between the “fact” and the “determine” step.
Claim 3
Hershkovitz further discloses that the guiding device is configured to present first information when the predetermined condition is not met, the first information guiding the vehicle to the replacement site and not guiding the vehicle to the supply site (see ¶0175-0176, with respect to step 604 of Figure 6, regarding that the energy-aware navigation module 332 selects a suitable battery service station that is able to service the battery packs of the electric vehicle based on profile 352 that includes previous battery service stations used by the user and/or a battery service station specified by the user and verifies that the selected battery service station can service the battery of the electric vehicle, where the selected battery service station is added as a waypoint in order to provide guidance for navigation, as described in ¶0178, with respect to step 608). As discussed in the rejection of claim 1, given that the battery service stations of Hershkovitz include separate and distinct battery exchange stations and charge stations (see Figure 9, depicting battery exchange stations 910-1, 910-2 and charge stations 912-1, 912-2), Hershkovitz discloses the guidance to a battery exchange station (i.e. “replacement site”) when the “predetermined condition” discussed in the rejection of claim 2 is not met, such that the “first information” is taught by the displayed route to the battery exchange station (e.g., see Figure 7B, depicting route 714 to battery exchange station 712).
Hershkovitz further discloses that the guiding device is configured to present any one of second information and third information when the predetermined condition is met, the second information guiding the vehicle to both the replacement site and the supply site, the third information guiding the vehicle to the supply site and not guiding the vehicle to the replacement site (see ¶0175-0176, with respect to step 604 of Figure 6, regarding that the energy-aware navigation module 332 selects a suitable battery service station that is able to service the battery packs of the electric vehicle based on profile 352 that includes previous battery service stations used by the user and/or a battery service station specified by the user and verifies that the selected battery service station can service the battery of the electric vehicle, where the selected battery service station is added as a waypoint in order to provide guidance for navigation, as described in ¶0178, with respect to step 608). As discussed in the rejection of claim 1, given that the battery service stations of Hershkovitz include separate and distinct battery exchange stations and charge stations (see Figure 9, depicting battery exchange stations 910-1, 910-2 and charge stations 912-1, 912-2), Hershkovitz discloses the guidance to a charge station (i.e. “supply site”) when the “predetermined condition” discussed in claim 2 is met, such that the “third information” is taught by the displayed route to the charge station.
Claim 5
Hershkovitz further discloses a search device configured to search for the replacement site existing in a predetermined area (see ¶0173, with respect to Figure 6, regarding the method of determining suitable battery service stations within a theoretical maximum range of the current location), wherein:
with regard to the replacement site found in the predetermined area through the search, the guiding device is configured to acquire stock information indicating stock status of an energy storage device for replacement that is available to be attached to the vehicle in place of the energy storage device, and configured to determine, by using the stock information, whether or not the replacement site has the energy storage device for replacement in stock (see ¶0173, regarding that suitable battery services stations are determined within a theoretical maximum range of the current location, where a suitable battery service station is determined as having the type of battery packs that are compatible with the electric vehicle and the compatible battery packs are charged, where a number and type of suitable charged battery packs available at the respect battery service station are provided by control center 130, as described in ¶0108); and
the guiding device is configured to present the third information when it is determined that the vehicle includes the first equipment and that the replacement site including the energy storage device for replacement in stock does not exist in the predetermined area (see ¶0178, regarding energy-aware navigation module 332 adds the selected battery service station as a waypoint to provide guidance for the route, where the selected battery service station is defined as being able to service the battery packs of the electric vehicle in ¶0175-0176).
Claim 6
Hershkovitz further discloses that:
each of the energy storage device and the energy storage device for replacement is an electrical storage device configured to be attachable and detachable by a replacement apparatus (see ¶0121, regarding that one or more battery packs 104 are coupled/decoupled to the frame of the electric vehicle 102 via battery pack lock module 202, so as to be exchanged at battery exchange stations, as described in ¶0099);
the replacement site is a site where the replacement apparatus is provided (see ¶0099, regarding battery exchange station are for exchanging one or more battery packs 104; Figure 16, depicting the overall battery exchange process, described as including operations of decoupling batteries from the battery bay and coupling new batteries to the battery bay in ¶0251-¶0270; Figure 9, depicting battery exchange stations 910-1, 910-2 on map 901);
when it is determined that the replacement site including the energy storage device for replacement in stock exists in the predetermined area, the guiding device is configured to decide on, by using the stock information, the replacement site including the energy storage device for replacement that satisfies a predetermined requirement, as a target of guiding (see ¶0173, regarding that suitable battery services stations are determined within a theoretical maximum range of the current location, where a suitable battery service station is determined as having the type of battery packs that are compatible with the electric vehicle and the compatible battery packs are charged, where a number and type of suitable charged battery packs available at the respect battery service station are provided by control center 130, as described in ¶0108); and
the predetermined requirement is set with regard to at least one of stored electricity amount, maximum output electric power, maximum regenerated electric power, and capacity of the electrical storage device (see ¶0173, regarding that the suitable battery service station has compatible battery packs that are charged). Only one of the limitations of stored electricity amount, maximum output electric power, maximum regenerated electric power, or capacity of the electrical storage device is required to be taught by the claim language. Hershkovitz is applied to teach the limitation of “stored electricity amount” as fully charged.
Claim 7
Hershkovitz further discloses that the guiding device includes a display device configured to display information to a user of the vehicle (see ¶0124, regarding energy-aware navigation module 332 determines routes, destinations, and battery service locations for display on display device 306 of electric vehicle 102).
Hershkovitz further discloses presenting the first information is that the display device displays the replacement site and does not display the supply site on a map, or that the display device displays the replacement site and the supply site on the map, each in a distinguishable form, in order to guide the vehicle driven by the user (see ¶0175-0176, with respect to step 604 of Figure 6, regarding that the energy-aware navigation module 332 selects a suitable battery service station that is able to service the battery packs of the electric vehicle, where the selected battery service station is added as a waypoint in order to provide guidance for navigation, as described in ¶0178, with respect to step 608). As depicted in Figures 7A-7C and Figure 9 of Hershkovitz, battery exchange stations and charge stations are displayed differently. Only one of the limitations of “displays the replacement site and does not display the supply site on a map” or “displays the replacement site and the supply site on the map, each in a distinguishable form” is required to be taught by prior art. Hershkovitz is applied to teach the limitation of “displays the replacement site and the supply site on the map, each in a distinguishable form.”
Hershkovitz further discloses presenting the second information is that the display device displays the replacement site and the supply site on a map, or that the display device displays the replacement site and the supply site on the map, each in a distinguishable form, in order to guide the vehicle driven by the user (see ¶0175-0176, with respect to step 604 of Figure 6, regarding that the energy-aware navigation module 332 selects a suitable battery service station that is able to service the battery packs of the electric vehicle, where the selected battery service station is added as a waypoint in order to provide guidance for navigation, as described in ¶0178, with respect to step 608). As depicted in Figures 7A-7C and Figure 9 of Hershkovitz, battery exchange station and charge stations are displayed differently.
Hershkovitz further discloses presenting the third information is that the display device displays the supply site and does not display the replacement site on a map, or that the display device displays the replacement site and the supply site on the map, each in a distinguishable form, in order to guide the vehicle driven by the user (see ¶0175-0176, with respect to step 604 of Figure 6, regarding that the energy-aware navigation module 332 selects a suitable battery service station that is able to service the battery packs of the electric vehicle, where the selected battery service station is added as a waypoint in order to provide guidance for navigation, as described in ¶0178, with respect to step 608). As depicted in Figures 7A-7C and Figure 9 of Hershkovitz, battery exchange station and charge stations are displayed differently. Only one of the limitations of “displays the supply site and does not display the replacement site on a map” or “displays the replacement site and the supply site on the map, each in a distinguishable form” is required to be taught by prior art. Hershkovitz is applied to teach the limitation of “displays the replacement site and the supply site on the map, each in a distinguishable form.”
Claim 8
Hershkovitz further discloses that the guiding device further includes a speaker, in addition to the display device (see ¶0124, regarding user interface 305 includes display device 306 and speakers).
Claim 10
Hershkovitz further disclose an input device that receives a request for guiding from a user (see ¶0124, regarding user interface 210 receives commands from a user and generates user interface objects to be displayed on display device 306), wherein:
the guiding device is configured to decide on a target of guiding including at least one of the replacement site and the supply site when the input device receives the request for guiding (see ¶0175, regarding that the energy-aware navigation module 332 selects the battery service station based on a battery service station specified by the user); and
the guiding device is configured to guide the vehicle to the target of guiding (see ¶0178, regarding the selected battery service station is added as a waypoint for use by energy-aware navigation module 332 to provide guidance).
Claim 11
Hershkovitz further discloses a search device configured to search for the replacement site existing in a predetermined area (see ¶0173, with respect to Figure 6, regarding the method of determining suitable battery service stations within a theoretical maximum range of the current location), wherein:
when at least one replacement site is to be a target of guiding, the guiding device is configured to acquire stock information with regard to each candidate for the target of guiding found in the predetermined area through the search, the stock information indicating stock status of an energy storage device for replacement that is available to be attached to the vehicle in place of the energy storage device (see ¶0173, regarding that suitable battery services stations are determined within a theoretical maximum range of the current location, where a suitable battery service station is determined as having the type of battery packs that are compatible with the electric vehicle and the compatible battery packs are charged, where a number and type of suitable charged battery packs available at the respect battery service station are provided by control center 130, as described in ¶0108); and
the guiding device is configured to decide on the target of guiding by using the stock information, and to guide the vehicle to the target of guiding (see ¶0178, regarding energy-aware navigation module 332 adds the selected battery service station as a waypoint to provide guidance for the route, where the selected battery service station is defined as being able to service the battery packs of the electric vehicle in ¶0175-0176).
Claim 13
Hershkovitz discloses the claimed vehicle (i.e. electric vehicle 102, depicted in Figure 1) comprising a navigation system configured to guide the vehicle (see ¶0104, regarding electric vehicle 102 includes electric vehicle control system 107 that provides energy-aware navigation), and an electrical storage device as an energy storage device which is attachable and detachable (see ¶0121, regarding that one or more battery packs 104 are coupled/decoupled to the frame of the electric vehicle 102 via battery pack lock module 202, so as to be exchanged at battery exchange stations, as described in ¶0099), wherein the vehicle is configured to be able to travel by using electricity output from the electrical storage device (see ¶0099, regarding the distance that electric vehicle 104 travels is defined by the charge of the battery pack 104), as further discussed in the rejection of claim 1.
Claim 14
Hershkovitz discloses the claimed navigation system configured to guide a vehicle (see ¶0104, regarding electric vehicle 102 includes electric vehicle control system 107 that provides energy-aware navigation), as further discussed in the rejection of claim 1.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hershkovitz in view of Agassi et al. (US 2009/0082957 A1), hereinafter Agassi.
Claim 9
Hershkovitz further discloses that the guiding device is configured to guide the vehicle to the target of guiding (see ¶0175-0176, with respect to step 604 of Figure 6, regarding that the energy-aware navigation module 332 selects a suitable battery service station that is able to service the battery packs of the electric vehicle, where the selected battery service station is added as a waypoint in order to provide guidance for navigation, as described in ¶0178, with respect to step 608). While Hershkovitz further discloses determining whether a destination is reachable from the current location of an electric vehicle based on a current charge level (see ¶165-0167), Hershkovitz does not further disclose that the guiding device is configured to decide on a target of guiding including at least one of the replacement site and the supply site when a stored energy amount in the energy storage device mounted on the vehicle becomes less than a reference value. However, comparing the current charge level to a threshold is a known alternative method of triggering a determination for a battery service station, in light of Agassi.
Specifically, Agassi teaches vehicle 1700 that includes memory 1710 that stores modules executed by one or more processing units 1702 (similar to the guiding device taught by Hershkovitz), as described in ¶0088, with respect to Figure 17, that is configured to decide on a target of guiding including at least one of a charge station (similar to the supply site taught by Hershkovitz) or battery exchange station (similar to the replacement site taught by Hershkovitz) when a stored energy amount in battery 104 (similar to the energy storage device mounted on the vehicle taught by Hershkovitz) becomes less than a reference value (see ¶0164-0168, with respect to Figure 4, regarding that positioning module 1718 of vehicle 102 determines battery service stations when the charge level of the battery is below a specified threshold, so as to generate a route to a selected battery service station for display; ¶0048, regarding the battery service stations are selected from charge stations and battery exchange stations). Agassi teaches this feature as an alternative to determining a maximum distance that the vehicle can travel before the battery can no longer power the vehicle (see ¶0165), similar to Hershkovitz.
Since the systems of Hershkovitz and Agassi are directed to the same purpose, i.e. providing guidance to a battery service station selected from battery exchange stations and charge stations, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the guiding device of Hershkovitz to be configured to decide on a target of guiding including at least one of the replacement site and the supply site when a stored energy amount in the energy storage device mounted on the vehicle becomes less than a reference value, in light of Agassi, with the predictable result of determining if a battery needs to be recharged using a known alternative method (¶0165 of Agassi).
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hershkovitz.
Claim 12
Hershkovitz further discloses the guiding device includes a display device and a control device, the display device being configured to display information to a user of the vehicle, the control device being configured to control the display device (see ¶0124, regarding energy-aware navigation module 332 determines routes, destinations, and battery service locations for display on display device 306 of electric vehicle 102).
Hershkovitz further discloses that when the vehicle includes a plurality of the energy storage devices, the control device is configured to classify the target of guiding as any one of a first replacement site and a second replacement site (see ¶0175-0176, regarding that the selected battery service station may be either a battery exchange station or a charge station, where electric vehicle 102 is defined as including one or more battery packs 104, each including one or more batteries in ¶0098). The claimed “classify” step is not influenced by the “plurality of batteries.”
Hershkovitz further discloses the display device is configured to display the first replacement site and the second replacement site in a form that allows the user to distinguish between the first replacement site and the second replacement site (see ¶0175-0176, with respect to step 604 of Figure 6, regarding that the energy-aware navigation module 332 selects a suitable battery service station that is able to service the battery packs of the electric vehicle, where the selected battery service station is added as a waypoint in order to provide guidance for navigation, as described in ¶0178, with respect to step 608). As depicted in Figures 7A-7C and Figure 9 of Hershkovitz, battery exchange stations and charge stations are displayed differently. The claimed “display” is not influenced by the “stock status.”
While Hershkovitz does not explicitly disclose that the first replacement site having stock status that allows all of the plurality of energy storage devices included in the vehicle to be replaced, the second replacement site having stock status that allows only one or some of the plurality of energy storage devices included in the vehicle to be replaced, Hershkovitz teaches the selection of a suitable service station based on a number of suitable charged battery packs available at the respective battery service station (see ¶0108); therefore, it would be capable of instant and unquestionable demonstration to define the “first replacement site” as having a number of suitable charged battery packs to account for the “plurality of energy storage devices included in the vehicle” and the “second replacement site” as having a number of suitable charged battery packs to account for “only one or some of the plurality of energy storage devices,” given this claimed feature does not influence the “classify” or “display” steps discussed above.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the first replacement site of Hershkovitz as having stock status that allows all of the plurality of energy storage devices included in the vehicle to be replaced, and the second replacement site of Hershkovitz as having stock status that allows only one or some of the plurality of energy storage devices included in the vehicle to be replaced, with the predictable result of providing particular numbers of suitable charged battery packs available at the respective battery service station (¶0108 of Hershkovitz) that would be “obvious to try” by choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 4 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The closest prior art of record, Hershkovitz, taken alone or in combination, does not teach that the claimed guiding device is configured to determine whether or not an abnormality has occurred in second equipment for allowing the energy storage device to be attached to and detached from the vehicle; and the guiding device is configured to present the third information when it is determined that the vehicle includes the first equipment and that an abnormality has occurred in the second equipment, in light of the overall claim.
Specifically, prior art systems are well-known to determine whether or not an abnormality has occurred in a battery pack (i.e. “energy storage device”), so as to perform reactive safety operations of a vehicle, e.g., see ¶0122 of Lagnedahl et al. (US 2019/0160948 A1), and prior art systems are well-known to determine whether or not an abnormality has occurred in a claw arms (i.e. “second equipment”) for allowing a battery to be attached and detached from a vehicle, so as to perform reactive safety operations of a battery swapping station, e.g., see ¶0135-0139 of Chen et al. (translation of WO 2024/016254 A1). However, no reasonable combination of prior art can be made to teach presenting “third information” defined as “guiding the vehicle to the supply site and not guiding the vehicle to the replacement site” in claim 3, from which claim 4 depends, when it is determined that the vehicle includes the “first equipment” defined as “allowing an energy supply from the energy supply facility to the energy storage device” in claim 2, from which claim 3 depends, and that an abnormality has occurred in the “second equipment” defined as “allowing the energy storage device to be attached to and detached from the vehicle,” in light of the overall claim.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Specifically, Hershkovitz et al. (US 2015/0039391 A1) teaches selecting a battery service station from charge stations for recharging the batteries of electric vehicles and battery exchange stations for replacing the batteries of electric vehicles (see ¶0024), where a map is displayed indicating respective demand for battery services in one or more geographical areas (see ¶0031), Pedersen (US 2018/0238698 A1) teaches determining a suggested route by considering locations of charging stations that are in range of the present location of the EV requesting battery charging or replacement assistance (see ¶0116), and Ota et al. (US 2022/0019245 A1) teaches the determination of a takeoff and landing site as a battery replacement facility or battery charging facility based on takeoff and landing site information (see ¶0160).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Sara J Lewandroski whose telephone number is (571)270-7766. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 9 am-5 pm ET.
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, Ramya P Burgess can be reached at (571)272-6011. 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.
/SARA J LEWANDROSKI/Examiner, Art Unit 3661
Prosecution Insights