DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Applicant’s response filed on 05/05/2026 has been entered and considered. Upon entering claims 1-20 were pending; and claims 1, 6, 11, and 16 have been amended.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed on 05/05/2026 have been fully considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection as further noted.
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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
Claims 1, 8-9, 11, and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Varadarajan et al. (US 2017/0288413) in view of Jin et al. (CN115800374).
Regarding claim 1, Varadarajan teaches A method (see figures 1, 4-6 and 8) of controlling a power system (fig.4@ microgrid system 400), comprising: determining whether a state of charge of an energy storage system (fig. 4@ battery system 410) is lower than a first threshold value (see figure 6: “Too Low” (L1), “Low” (L2)); when the state of charge is lower than the first threshold (L1 and L2) value and a renewable energy device (fig. 4@ PV-based EG system 430) is insufficient (see figure 5: state 3; par. [0054], “In state 3, solar PV is OFF, storage is OFF”), a power generator (fig. 4@ diesel generator set 440) activating (figure 5: state 3; par. [0054], “In state 3, solar PV is OFF, storage is OFF, and diesel gen is ON”) and determining whether the power generator is abnormal (see figure 5: state 1; par. [0051], “diesel gen is OFF”); when the power generator (440) is normal, performing a phase-locked synchronization to the power generator (440) and the energy storage system (410) to supply the power to loads by the power generator (see figure 5: state 6; par. [0057], “In state 6, solar PV is OFF, storage is ON, and diesel gen is ON”); when the power generator (440) is abnormal, supplying the power to the loads by the energy storage system (410), (see figure 5: state 5; par. [0056], “In state 5, solar PV is OFF, storage is ON, and diesel gen is OFF”), and determining whether the state of charge of the energy storage system is lower than a second threshold value (see figure 6 and par. [0063], ““Too Low” (L1), “Low” (L2)).
However, Varadarajan does not explicitly teach reducing a part of the loads when the state of charge is lower than the second threshold value.
Jin teaches reducing a part of the loads when the state of charge is lower than the second threshold value (see par. [n0038], [n0081]).
Therefore, 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 Varadarajan with the teachings of Jin by having reducing a part of the loads when the state of charge is lower than the second threshold value in order to prevent total system blackouts, avoids deep battery discharge, and protects sensitive equipment from low-voltage strain.
Regarding claim 8, the combination teaches wherein the first threshold (L2) value is greater than the second threshold value (L1), (see figure 6 and par. [0063], ““Too Low” (L1), “Low” (L2); Varadarajan).
Regarding claim 9, the combination teaches when the state of charge is lower than the first threshold value, and the power generator is determined to be abnormal, opening a switch of the power generator and determining whether the state of charge is lower than the second threshold value; and when the state of charge is greater than the second threshold value, providing a power to the plurality of loads by the energy storage system (see figure 3 and par. [n0081]; Jin).
Regarding claim 11, Varadarajan teaches A power system (see figures 1, 4-6 and 8), comprising: an energy storage system (fig. 4@ battery system 410) connecting to a bus (see figure 4), configured to power a plurality of loads (fig. 4@ electrical load 450; par. [0032], “Electrical load can include any suitable load including residential loads, commercial site loads, industrial loads, or combinations”; and par. [0056], “In state 5, solar PV is OFF, storage is ON, and diesel gen is OFF”), and the energy storage (410) system including a state of charge (see figure 6 and par. [0072-0074], the energy storage device may be charged); a power generator (fig. 4@ diesel generator set 440) connecting to the bus configured to power the plurality of loads (see figure 5: state 3; and par. [0054]; “In state 3, solar PV is OFF, storage is OFF, and diesel gen is ON”); and a controller (fig. 4@ controller 420 and par. [0047]) configured to determine whether the state of charge of the energy storage system is lower than a first threshold value (see figure 6), and whether the power generator (440) is abnormal (see par. [0051], “In state 1, solar PV is ON, storage is ON, and diesel gen is OFF”), wherein when the state of charge is lower than the first threshold value and a renewable energy device (fig. 4@ PV system 430) is insufficient, the controller activates the power generator (see figure 5: state 3; par. [0054], “In state 3, solar PV is OFF, storage is OFF, and diesel gen is ON”), when the power generator (440) is normal, the controller performs a phase-locked synchronization to the power generator (440) and the energy storage system (410) and the power generator supplies the power to the plurality of loads (see figure 5: state 6; par. [0057], “In state 6, solar PV is OFF, storage is ON, and diesel gen is ON”), when the power generator (440) is abnormal, the energy storage system (410) supplies the power to the loads (see figure 5: state 5, par. [0056], “In state 5, solar PV is OFF, storage is ON, and diesel gen is OFF”), and the controller determines whether the state of charge of the energy storage system (410) is lower than a second threshold value (see figure 6).
However, Varadarajan does not explicitly teach a plurality of switches connecting the plurality of loads to the bus; and when the state of charge is lower than the second threshold value, the controller reduces a part of the plurality of loads by the switches.
Jin teaches a plurality of switches (fig. 3@ switch 3 - switch 5) connecting the plurality of loads (core load, secondary load and discardable load) to the bus (see figure 3); and when the state of charge is lower than the second threshold value, the controller reduces a part of the plurality of loads by the switches (see par. [n0038], [n0081]).
Therefore, 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 Varadarajan with the teachings of Jin by having a plurality of switches connecting the plurality of loads to the bus; and when the state of charge is lower than the second threshold value, the controller reduces a part of the plurality of loads by the switches in order to prevent total system blackouts, avoids deep battery discharge, and protects sensitive equipment from low-voltage strain.
Regarding claim 18, the combination teaches wherein the first threshold value (L2) is greater than the second threshold (L1) value (see figure 6 and par. [0063], ““Too Low” (L1), “Low” (L2); Varadarajan).
Regarding claim 19, the combination teaches wherein when the state of charge is lower than the first threshold value, and the power generator is determined to be abnormal, opening a switch of the power generator and determining whether the state of charge is lower than the second threshold value by the controller, wherein when the state of charge is greater than the second threshold value, providing a power to the plurality of loads by the energy storage system (see figure 3 and par. [n0081]; Jin).
Claims 2 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Varadarajan et al. (US 2017/0288413) in view of Jin et al. (CN115800374) and further in view of Masumoto et al. (JP2014056766).
Regarding claim 2, the combination teaches the method above, but does not explicitly teach wherein determining whether the power generator is abnormal including: determining whether a fuel of the power generator is sufficient, wherein when the fuel of the power generator is not sufficient, determining the power generator to be abnormal.
Masumoto teaches wherein determining whether the power generator is abnormal including: determining whether a fuel of the power generator is sufficient, wherein when the fuel of the power generator is not sufficient, determining the power generator to be abnormal (see par. [0015-0019] and [0033], an abnormality detection means that detects abnormal conditions in the fuel).
Therefore, 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 Varadarajan and Jin with the teachings of Masumoto by having determining whether the power generator is abnormal including: determining whether a fuel of the power generator is sufficient, wherein when the fuel of the power generator is not sufficient, determining the power generator to be abnormal in order to identifying a fuel shortage before the engine runs dry prevents air introduction into the fuel injection pump (in diesel engines) and avoids damage to moving parts.
Regarding claim 12, the combination teaches the power system above, but does not explicitly teach wherein determining whether the power generator is abnormal including: determining whether a fuel of the power generator is sufficient, wherein when the fuel of the power generator is not sufficient, determining the power generator to be abnormal.
Masumoto teaches wherein determining whether the power generator is abnormal including: determining whether a fuel of the power generator is sufficient, wherein when the fuel of the power generator is not sufficient, determining the power generator to be abnormal, (see par. [0015-0019] and [0033], an abnormality detection means that detects abnormal conditions in the fuel).
Therefore, 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 Varadarajan and Jin with the teachings of Masumoto by having determining whether the power generator is abnormal including: determining whether a fuel of the power generator is sufficient, wherein when the fuel of the power generator is not sufficient, determining the power generator to be abnormal in order to identifying a fuel shortage before the engine runs dry prevents air introduction into the fuel injection pump (in diesel engines) and avoids damage to moving parts.
Claims 10 and 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Varadarajan et al. (US 2017/0288413) in view of Jin et al. (CN115800374) and further in view of Bacque et al. (US 2018/0013286).
Regarding claim 10, the combination teaches the method above, but does not explicitly teach further including: when the state of charge is lower than the first threshold value, and the power generator is determined to be normal, synchronizing a voltage and a frequency of the power generator to a voltage and a frequency of the energy storage system.
Bacque teaches when the state of charge is lower than the first threshold value, and the power generator is determined to be normal, synchronizing a voltage and a frequency of the power generator to a voltage and a frequency of the energy storage system (see Abstract and par. [0005-0007] and [0087]).
Therefore, 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 Varadarajan and Jin with the teachings of Bacque by having when the state of charge is lower than the first threshold value, and the power generator is determined to be normal, synchronizing a voltage and a frequency of the power generator to a voltage and a frequency of the energy storage system in order to prevents high current surges that occur when connecting out-of-sync sources, protecting both the generator and the ESS from electrical damage.
Regarding claim 20, the combination teaches the power system above, but does not explicitly teach wherein when the state of charge is lower than the first threshold value, and the power generator is determined to be normal, synchronizing a voltage and a frequency of the power generator to a voltage and a frequency of the energy storage system by the controller.
Bacque teaches when the state of charge is lower than the first threshold value, and the power generator is determined to be normal, synchronizing a voltage and a frequency of the power generator to a voltage and a frequency of the energy storage system by the controller (see Abstract and par. [0005-0007] and [0087]).
Therefore, 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 Varadarajan and Jin with the teachings of Bacque by having when the state of charge is lower than the first threshold value, and the power generator is determined to be normal, synchronizing a voltage and a frequency of the power generator to a voltage and a frequency of the energy storage system by the controller in order to prevents high current surges that occur when connecting out-of-sync sources, protecting both the generator and the ESS from electrical damage.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-7 and 13-17 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.
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to XUAN LY whose telephone number is (571)272-9885. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am-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, Rexford Barnie can be reached at 571-272-7492. 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.
/XUAN LY/Examiner, Art Unit 2836
/REXFORD N BARNIE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2836
Prosecution Insights