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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 6/10/2026 has been entered.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
paragraph 0104 recites “base model 114” this should be changed to read “base model 116”.
Paragraph 0105 recites “switch off path 1 122 122 and turn on path 2 124 124” this appears to erroneously recite duplicate element numerals. This error is also present in paragraph 106.
Appropriate correction is required.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the description: 182 mentioned in paragraph 0112. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action.
The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
With respect to claims 1, 11 and 21 the claim recites the limitation “metadata” however it is not clear what data constitutes the recited metadata. The specification does not provide sufficient guidance as what constitutes metadata as set forth in the claims or how the metadata is distinguished from the historical pattern itself.
With respect to claims 9 and 19 the claim recites “the energy controller further determines one or more characteristics of current power use based on a machine learning model trained to identify power use associated with one or more of a plurality of different components of the electric vehicle.” It is not clear the model used by the controller or what characteristics the claim is referring to. The specification discusses identifying power draw however does not make clear a model that determines power use of one or more components of the electric vehicle. Therefore, the claim indefinite and unclear.
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)(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, 5, 10-11, 15 and 20-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ramamurthy et al. (US 20190280483).
With respect to claims 1, 11 and 21 Ramamurthy teaches a method of energy management, the method comprising:
storing information in memory (stored in cloud or memory see Fig. 12) regarding a historical use pattern (paragraph 0052) regarding use of a plurality of energy storage units that include a supercapacitor (paragraph 0045) and an electrochemical battery (paragraph 0045), the historical use pattern stored in association with metadata (paragraph 0033);
identifying a use pattern (paragraph 0052) corresponding to the stored historical use pattern regarding use of the plurality of energy storage units over time; and executing instructions (energy control policies) in accordance with the metadata stored in association with the historical use pattern via an energy controller, wherein the energy controller executes the instructions (paragraph 0045)to switch between different power use configurations for drawing power from one or more of the supercapacitor, the electrochemical battery, or both the supercapacitor and the electrochemical battery.
With respect to claim 5 and 15 Ramamurthy teaches a database (paragraph 0077) in memory that stores the historical use pattern in association with the metadata and one or more thresholds (when load exceeds generation), wherein the switch between the different power use configurations is based on one of the thresholds being met.
With respect to claim 10 and 20 Ramamurthy teaches an output interface (paragraph 0077) that presents one or more indications (see information on energy and models and analyzing operation data are indications of use) of power use associated with the supercapacitor or the electrochemical battery.
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.
Claims 2-4 and 12-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ramamurthy in view of Lee et al. (US 20210257841)
With respect to claim 2 and 12 Ramamurthy teaches the use of a circuit interfacing the supercapacitor and battery however does not teach the switch as claimed. Lee teaches the know use a switch (200) that controls power draw. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify Ramamurthy to use a switch as seen in Lee to control the switching in accordance with one or more of the different power use configurations as specified by the metadata for the benefit of ensuring stable operation consistent with the energy control policies.
With respect to claim 3 and 13 Ramamurthy teaches the use of sensors however does not teach the measuring or sensing the characteristics of power use associated with the supercapacitor and the electrochemical battery. Lee teaches the known use of measuring or sensing the characteristics (see voltage measuring paragraph 0022) of power use associated with the supercapacitor and the electrochemical battery. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify Ramamurthy to include the measuring as seen in Lee to ensuring the proper buffer level is maintained according to energy policy to ensuring stable operations.
With respect to claim 4 and 14 Ramamurthy teaches establishing a pattern however doesn’t teach the pattern is associated with measured characteristics of power use associated with the supercapacitor or the electrochemical battery over time. Lee teaches the control based on measured characteristics (paragraph 0033). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify Ramamurthy to include in the determined pattern measurements of power characteristics for the benefit of selecting the correct buffer source.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6-8 and 16-18 are 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 and overcoming the 112 rejections idented above.
With respect to claim 6, 16, 8 and 18 Ramamurthy teaches energy control however does not teach predicting an upcoming change in power use, and wherein the switch between the different power use configurations is further based on the predicted change in power use. At least this further limitation is not taught or rendered obvious by the prior art.
With respect to claims 7 and 17 Ramamurthy teaches energy control however does not teach the energy controller predicts the upcoming change in power use based on one or more of global positioning system (GPS) and map data. At least this further limitation is not taught or rendered obvious by the prior art.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Michael Fin whose telephone number is (571)272-5921. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9am-5:30.
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, Rexford Barnie can be reached at 571-272-7429. 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.
MICHAEL FIN
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2836
/MICHAEL R. FIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2836
Prosecution Insights