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 .
Claim Objections
Claims 2-7 are objected to because of the following informalities: Applicant wrote “claim 1” within claims 2-7 when it would appear as though Applicant may have meant to write --claim 1,--. Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-7 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.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "to said utility power source" in Line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For purposes of examination the limitation will be interpreted as –a utility power source--.
Claim 1 recites the limitation " to said electrical load " in Line 8. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For purposes of examination the limitation will be interpreted as –an electrical load--.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the conditioned utility power source" in Line 16. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For purposes of examination the limitation will be interpreted as –a conditioned utility power source--.
Regarding claim 5, the phrase " if necessary" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Regarding claim 6, the phrase " if necessary” renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Dependent Claims 2-7 are rejected as they inherit the deficiencies of their base claim.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 3, & 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kempton et al. (US 2011/0202418).
In regard to claim 1:
A power conversion system (Figs. 1-3 Item 100) for supplying multi-phase electrical power (Figs. 1-3 Items 100 & Par. [0058] i.e. multiphase) to an electrical load (Figs. 1-3 Items 104 and 102 i.e. many loads found), comprising: a. a utility service connection providing electrical power (Figs. 1-3 Item 108 i.e. grid power); b. a conditioning system (Figs. 1-3 Items 104, 302, 304 and 306 & Par. [0058] i.e. multiphase items within 104) coupled to said utility power source (Figs. 1-3 Item 108) for providing multi-phase power (Figs. 1-3 Items 104, 302, 304 and 306 & Par. [0058] i.e. multiphase); c. an energy storage device and corresponding bi-directional charge controller (Figs. 1-3 Items 102, 202, 204 & Par. [0043] i.e. receive/provide),
d. a utility power interface (Figs. 1-3 Item 106 & Par. [0026]) coupled to said electrical load, conditioning system (Figs. 1-3 Item 104 i.e. items within), and energy storage device (Figs. 1-3 Items 102, 202, 204), controlling said conditioning system (Figs. 1-3 Item 104 & Par. [0026-0027]) for delivery of power required by the electrical load (Figs. 1-3 Items 104 and 102 i.e. many loads found), and coupled to said energy storage device (Figs. 1-3 Items 102, 104, 202, 204 i.e. all electrically coupled) and controlling the conditioned utility power source to store energy in the energy storage device (Figs. 1-3 Items 106, 108, 104, 102 & Par. [0026-0027]), or to augmenting the power output of said conditioning system by drawing stored energy from the energy storage device (Figs. 1-3 Items 106, 108, 104, 102 & Par. [0026-0027]);
e. the utility power interface (Figs. 1-3 Item 106 & Par. [0026]) controlling energy flow between the conditioned utility power source (Figs. 1-3 Items 104, 302), energy storage device (Figs. 1-3 Items 102, 202, 204) and electrical load (Figs. 1-3 Items 104 and 102) based on the sufficiency of the utility power source (Figs. 1-3 Items 106 & 108 & Par. [0026-0027] i.e. based upon hi-low demand on grid), charge level of the energy storage device (Figs. 1-3 Items 106, 103, & 102 & Par. [0026-0027]), demand from the electrical load (Figs. 1-3 Items 104 and 102 & Par. [0026-0027] I.e. based on demand made on the grid), and economic factors relating to the utility power source (Figs. 1-3 Items 106, 108 & Par. [0039] i.e. charging at off-peak times interpreted as economic factors relating to utility power source).
In regard to claim 3:
The system of claim 1 wherein the utility power interface (Figs. 1-3 Item 106 & Par. [0026]) operates in a sufficient power state, in which energy is provided from the conditioned utility power source (Figs. 1-3 Items 104, 302) to electrical load (Figs. 1-3 Items 104 and 102 i.e. components within Item 104 or components withing 102), and when the energy storage device is discharged below a threshold (Figs. 1-3 and 8 Items 102, 202, 204, 800 & Par. [0150] i.e. battery threshold determines if powering grid or requiring power), energy is also provided to the energy storage device (Figs. 1-3 and 8 Items 102, 202, 204, 800 & Par. [0150] i.e. battery threshold determines if powering grid or requiring power).
In regard to claim 7:
The system of claim 1 wherein the utility power interface (Figs. 1-3 Item 106 & Par. [0026]) operates in a bi- directional mode (Figs. 1-3 Item 106, 112b, and 112c & Par. [0027] i.e. bi-directional arrow), in which, during periods when return of power to a power utility is economically advantageous, energy is provided from the conditioned utility power source (Figs. 1-3 Items 104, 302) and delivered through the conditioned utility power source (Figs. 1-3 and 8 Items 102, 104, 108, and 800) to the power utility (Figs. 1-3 and 8 Items 108, 800).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kempton et al. (US 2011/0202418) in view of Carr (US 2021/0362614).
In regard to claim 2:
Kempton discloses the system of claim 1 including that the electrical load (Figs. 1-3 Items 104 and 102 i.e. components within Item 104 or components within 102) is an electric vehicle charging station (Figs. 1-3 Items 104 and 102 i.e. 104 charges electric vehicle 102).
However Kempton does not explicitly disclose that the vehicle charging station is a rapid charging station.
Carr teaches three vehicle charging stations (Fig. 1 Items 20A-C) with at least one of the three being an electric vehicle charging stations being capable of rapid charging (Fig. 1 Items 20A-C & Par. [0005] i.e. level 3 allows for “quick” re-charge).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have substituted the known equivalent rapid charging station of Carr with the known charging stating of Kempton because these two charging stations were art-recognized equivalents at the time the invention was filed.
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kempton et al. (US 2011/0202418) in view of Carr (US 2021/0362614).
In regard to claim 4:
Kempton discloses the system of claim 1 wherein the utility power interface (Figs. 1-3 Item 106 & Par. [0026]) operates in an insufficient power state (Figs. 1-3 Item 106 & Pars. [0146-0147]), in which energy is provided from the conditioned utility power source (Figs. 1-3 Items 104, 302) and the energy storage device (Figs. 1-3 and 8 Items 102, 202, 204) to the electrical load (Figs. 1-3 Items 104 and 102 i.e. components within Item 104 or components within 102), and when the energy storage device is discharged below a threshold (Figs. 1-3 and 8 Items 102, 202, 204, 800 & Par. [0150] i.e. battery threshold determines if powering grid or requiring power), and the electrical load (Figs. 1-3 Items 104 and 102 i.e. components within Item 104 or components within 102).
However Kempton does not explicitly disclose that the electrical load is caused to de-rate its requirements such that the power available from the conditioned utility power source is sufficient to supply the electrical load.
Carr teaches an electric vehicle charging station (Fig. 1 Item 10), with a storage system (Fig. 1 Item 14), grid power line (Fig. 1 Item 16) and electric vehicle (Fig. 1 Item 21) charging station (Fig. 1 Items 20A-C), where an electrical load (Fig. 1 Item 21) is caused to de-rate its requirements such that the power available from the conditioned utility power source (Figs. 1& 5 Items 16 & 12) is sufficient to supply the electrical load (Fig. 1 & 5 Items 63, 64, 65, 21 and Par. [0047] i.e. an adjustable power restriction limit).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the known restriction of power draw from the grid to be limited to an amount sufficient to supply an electrical load with the known electric vehicle station equipment for grid integrated vehicles as doing so would have yielded the predictable result of preventing local brown outs (Par. [0047]).
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kempton et al. (US 2011/0202418) in view of Carr (US 2021/0362614).
In regard to claim 5:
Kempton discloses the system of claim 1 wherein the utility power interface (Figs. 1-3 Item 106 & Par. [0026]) operates in a time of use mode (Figs. 1-3 Item 106 & Par. [0026] i.e. periods of low and high demand), in which, during high cost time of use periods (Figs. 1-3 Item 106 & Par. [0026] i.e. high demand), power obtained from the conditioned utility power source is reduced (Figs. 1-3 Item 104 & Par. [0026-0027]), and if necessary energy is provided from the conditioned utility power source (Figs. 1-3 Item 104 & Par. [0026-0027]) and the energy storage device (Figs. 1-3 Items 102, 202, 204) to the electrical load (Figs. 1-3 Items 104 and 102 i.e. components within Item 104 or components within 102 as illustrated by two sided arrows), and when the energy storage device is discharged below a threshold (Figs. 1-3 Items 104 and 102 i.e. components within Item 104 or components within 102), and the electrical load (Figs. 1-3 Items 104 and 102 i.e. components within Item 104 or components within 102).
However Kempton does not explicitly disclose that the electrical load is caused to de-rate its requirements such that the power available from the conditioned utility power source is sufficient to supply the electrical load.
Carr teaches an electric vehicle charging station (Fig. 1 Item 10), with a storage system (Fig. 1 Item 14), grid power line (Fig. 1 Item 16) and electric vehicle (Fig. 1 Item 21) charging station (Fig. 1 Items 20A-C), where an electrical load (Fig. 1 Item 21) is caused to de-rate its requirements such that the power available from the conditioned utility power source (Figs. 1& 5 Items 16 & 12) is sufficient to supply the electrical load (Fig. 1 & 5 Items 63, 64, 65, 21 and Par. [0047] i.e. an adjustable power restriction limit).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the known restriction of power draw from the grid to be limited to an amount sufficient to supply an electrical load with the known electric vehicle station equipment for grid integrated vehicles as doing so would have yielded the predictable result of preventing local brown outs (Par. [0047]).
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kempton et al. (US 2011/0202418) in view of Carr (US 2021/0362614).
In regard to claim 6:
Kempton discloses the system of claim 1 wherein the utility power interface (Figs. 1-3 Item 106 & Par. [0026]) operates in a peak shaving mode (Figs. 1-3 Item 106 & Par. [0026] i.e. high demand and Par. [0039] i.e. peak and off peak consumption), in which, during periods of peak power consumption (Figs. 1-3 Item 106 & Par. [0026] i.e. high demand and Par. [0039] i.e. peak and off peak consumption), the power obtained from the conditioned utility power source is reduced (Figs. 1-3 Item 104 & Par. [0026-0027]), and if necessary energy is provided from the conditioned utility power source (Figs. 1-3 Item 104 & Par. [0026-0027]) and the energy storage device (Figs. 1-3 Items 102, 202, 204) to the electrical load (Figs. 1-3 Items 104 and 102 i.e. components within Item 104 or components within 102 as illustrated by two sided arrows), and when the energy storage device is discharged below a threshold (Figs. 1-3 Items 104 and 102 i.e. components within Item 104 or components within 102), and the electrical load (Figs. 1-3 Items 104 and 102 i.e. components within Item 104 or components within 102).
However Kempton does not explicitly disclose that the electrical load is caused to de-rate its requirements such that the reduced power available from the conditioned utility power source is sufficient to supply the electrical load.
Carr teaches an electric vehicle charging station (Fig. 1 Item 10), with a storage system (Fig. 1 Item 14), grid power line (Fig. 1 Item 16) and electric vehicle (Fig. 1 Item 21) charging station (Fig. 1 Items 20A-C), where an electrical load (Fig. 1 Item 21) is caused to de-rate its requirements such that the power available from the conditioned utility power source (Figs. 1& 5 Items 16 & 12) is sufficient to supply the electrical load (Fig. 1 & 5 Items 63, 64, 65, 21 and Par. [0047] i.e. an adjustable power restriction limit).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the known restriction of power draw from the grid to be limited to an amount sufficient to supply an electrical load with the known electric vehicle station equipment for grid integrated vehicles as doing so would have yielded the predictable result of preventing local brown outs (Par. [0047]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. *Please See attached form PTO-892*.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL J WARMFLASH whose telephone number is (571)270-1434. The examiner can normally be reached 8AM-6PM EST M-Th.
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, Menna Youssef can be reached at (571) 270-3684. 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.
MW 1/30/2026
/Menatoallah Youssef/SPE, Art Unit 2849