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 .
Claims 18-26 are pending.
Claims 18-26 are rejected below.
Examiner’s Note
The independent claim uses the term “energy generator” where it appears that some of the dependents use the term “power generator”. See claims 20, 21, 24, 25, 26. If not corrected this has antecedent basis issues.
Double Patenting
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 18-26 rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-9 of U.S. Patent No. 12,261,432. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the current application is broader version of the claims patented.
Current application
U.S. Patent 12,261,432
18. An electrical load management system for controlling a plurality of electrical loads, comprising:a local energy generator;a main electrical energy service panel being electrically coupled to the local energy generator, a local energy storage, a utility company power grid, and a plurality of electrical loads;
a load management computer being operably coupled to each electrical load of said plurality of electrical loads, to a local energy storage charge controller of said local energy storage system, said load management computer determining electrical load priority of each of said plurality of electrical loads relying on electrical load records of said plurality of electrical loads;
said load management computer directing electrical energy from at least one of said local energy generator, said utility company energy grid and said local energy storage system through said electrical energy service panel to meet electrical requirement of said plurality of electrical loads;
and said load management computer identifying a maximum demand of electrical energy from said electrical load records of at least one of said electrical loads and increasing the maximum demand of energy of the at least one of said electrical loads based upon a hierarchy of electric load priorities stored in said load management computer for transferring excess electrical energy to at least one of said electrical loads in excess of said maximum demand of electrical energy identified in said electrical load records.
1. An electrical load management system for controlling a plurality of electrical loads, comprising: a local energy generator; a main electrical energy service panel being electrically coupled to the local energy generator, a battery, and a utility company power grid; to each electrical load of said plurality of electrical loads
a load management computer being operably coupled to said first energy meter and to each electrical load of said plurality of electrical loads, to a battery charge controller of said battery system and said utility company computer server, said load management computer determining electrical load priority of each of said plurality of electrical loads relying on electrical load records of said plurality of electrical loads
said load management computer directing electrical energy from at least one of said local energy generator, said utility company energy grid and said battery system through said electrical energy service panel to meet electrical requirement of each of said plurality of electrical loads;
and said load management computer identifying a maximum demand of electrical energy from said electrical load records of at least one of said electrical loads and increasing the maximum demand of energy of at least one of said electrical loads based upon a hierarchy of electric load priorities stored in said load management computer for transferring excess electrical energy to at least one of said electrical loads in excess of said maximum demand of electrical energy identified in said electrical load records.
19.
2.
20.
3.
21.
4.
22.
5.
23.
6.
24.
7.
25.
8.
26.
9.
The dependent claims are substantially similar and were not placed in the table above to save space. One of ordinary skill in the art can compare with relative ease to see they are substantially the same as patented claims 2-9.
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) 18-22 and 24-28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ruiz (U.S. PG Pub. 20110204720) in view of Dent (U.S. PG Pub. 2014/0084687).
As to claim 18, Ruiz teaches an electrical load management system for controlling a plurality of electrical loads, comprising: a local power generator(Element 50/54 wind or solar for example); a main electrical power service panel (Fig. 6 elements 200) being electrically coupled to the local energy generator (element 50/54) a local energy storage (elements 46 or 38) and a utility company power grid (element 40); and a plurality of electrical loads (element 204); a load management computer being operably coupled to each electrical load of said plurality of electrical loads, to a local energy storage charge controller of said local energy storage system, (fig. 6 element 26), said load management computer determining electrical load priority of each of said plurality of electrical loads relying on electrical load records of said plurality of electrical loads [0049, 0052, 0074, 0084]; said load management computer directing electrical energy from at least one of said local energy generator, said utility company energy grid and said local energy storage system through said electrical energy service panel to meet electrical requirement of said plurality of electrical loads [0063, 0074].
Ruiz teaches most of the claimed invention, but fails to teach andsaid load management computer identifying a maximum demand of electrical energy from said electrical load records of at least one of said electrical loads and increasing the maximum demand of energy of the at least one of said electrical loads based upon a hierarchy of electric load priorities stored in said load management computer for transferring excess electrical energy to at least one of said electrical loads in excess of said maximum demand of electrical energy identified in said electrical load records as claimed in claim 18. However, this is an obvious variation and is taught by Dent as follows:
As to claim 18, Dent teaches said load management computer identifying a maximum demand of electrical energy from said electrical load records of at least one of said electrical loads and increasing the maximum demand of energy of the at least one of said electrical loads based upon a hierarchy of electric load priorities stored in said load management computer for transferring excess electrical energy to at least one of said electrical loads in excess of said maximum demand of electrical energy identified in said electrical load records. [0130, 0134]. Dent teaches using excess solar power to use in to a thermal product or other diversionary loads and using a priority scheme. Examiner notes that Ruiz also teaches using a priority scheme (hierarchy).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to include the teachings of Dent into the system and methods of Ruiz. The motivation to combine is that Dent teaches to derive benefit from much larger solar arrays, it can either be arranged to power some of the heavier house loads such as HVAC to beneficially absorb excess solar power, or else a grid-tie inverter can be added to return excess power to the grid. [0171].
As to claim 19, Ruiz teaches wherein said load management computer is electronically connected to a controllable power switch of each of said electrical loads via said main electrical service panel for selectively allocating electrical energy[0073, 0075].
As to claim 20, Ruiz teaches wherein said load management computer signals said main electrical service panel to selectively allocate electrical energy generated by said local power generator to at least one of said plurality of electrical loads, a local energy storage and a utility company power grid[0061, 0074].
As to claim 21, Ruiz teaches wherein said load management computer adjusts at least some of said electrical loads in response to an amount of electrical energy generated by said local power generator[0075].
As to claim 22, Ruiz teaches wherein said load management computer includes a memory device for storying a load priority table and said electrical load records thereby enabling said load management computer to optimize allocation of electrical energy based upon load priorities and electrical load records[0052, 0084].
As to claim 23, Ruiz teaches further including a battery charge controller being electronically connected to said load management computer thereby enabling said battery charge controller to at least one of direct charge of said local energy storage and allocated electrical energy from said local energy storage to said main electrical service panel for providing electrical energy to said plurality of electrical loads from said local energy storage[0076].
As to claim 24, Ruiz teaches wherein said load management computer via said electrical service panel simultaneously allocates energy directed from said local power source to the utility company power grid and to said plurality of electrical power loads[0056].
As to claim 25, Ruiz teaches wherein said load management computer via said main electrical service panel simultaneously allocated electrical energy to said plurality of electrical loads from said local power generator and said local energy storage[0078].
As to claim 26, Ruiz teaches wherein said load management computer via said main electrical service panel increases and decreases electrical load of any of said responsive to said electrical load records stored in said memory device and to an amount of electrical energy generated by said local power generator[0075].
Other Art of Record
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Poon (U.S. PG Pub. 2019/0020196) teaches a priority system for using excess energy [0081].
Carlson (U.S. PG Pub. 2018/0066860) teaches controlling an HVAC system with renewable energy systems.
Yano (U.S. Pat. 8,963,493) teaches prioritizing charging an EV based on energy needed.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NATHAN L LAUGHLIN whose telephone number is (571)270-1042. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8AM-4PM.
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, Mohammad Ali can be reached on 571-272-4105. 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.
/NATHAN L LAUGHLIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2119
Prosecution Insights