DETAILED ACTION
Status of the Application
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Status of the Claims
This action is in response to the applicant’s filing on March 31, 2025. Claims 1 – 17 are pending and examined below.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on March 31, 2025 and April 18, 2025 have been considered by the Examiner.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers submitted under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a)-(d), which papers have been placed of record in the file.
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in The Republic of Germany on September 30, 2022.
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 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1 – 5, 7, and 9 – 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by German Patent No. DE10 2020/133118 A1 to WAGNER PHILIPP et al. (herein after "Wagner"), already of record from IDS).
(Note: Claim language is in bold typeface, and the Examiner’s comments and cited passages from the prior art reference(s) are in normal typeface.)
As to Claim 1,
Wagner’s method for providing a storage capacity reserve in a vehicle’s traction battery for an upcoming downhill drive discloses a method for planning an operating strategy for an electrically drivable vehicle having an energy storage device (see at least ¶0009 ~ "a prediction or estimate is made as to whether and which downhill section(s)… for continuing the journey after the external charging process… of recuperated energy that will be recuperated by the motor vehicle along each of the specified gradient sections, and determining... a reduction of a maximum battery charge level of the traction battery for the charging process") and
an electric drive capable of regenerative braking (see at least ¶0011 ~ "the energy recovery potential… exploited… through regenerative continuous braking"),
wherein the energy storage device is configured to be charged during regenerative braking and to be charged at charging stations external to the vehicle (see ¶0010 ~ "in… anticipating the energy... be recuperated during down hill driving... to which the traction battery... be maximally charged during the next external charging process", ¶0011 ~ "the maximum permissible state of charge… set… leaves sufficient storage capacity reserve in the traction battery for the necessary continuous braking during the upcoming downhill drive and the energy recuperated", and Abstract), the method comprising:
determining a position along a route which is travelable by the vehicle and which has a first charging station (see at least ¶0010, ¶0036 ~ "each gradient section… can be determined based on topographical data… c) the beginning of the gradient section is within a distance of a charging position where the electric charging… is carried out and has a gradient above a predetermined limit value", and ¶0074 ~ "electric charging process can be detected… by means of… navigation system 14… correspond[ing] to a location category suitable for an electric charging process… a suitable location category could be... a charging station or a loading and unloading terminal""; thus teaching position determining along a route where the vehicle has a first charging station / geolocation);
identifying a first permitted state of charge for charging the energy storage device at the first charging station for driving on the route (see at least ¶0087 ~ "maximum battery state of charge is determined depending on the highest amount" and ¶0089 ~ wherein a permissible state of charge "is not normally exceeded" is taught) and
a second permitted state of charge for charging the energy storage device at the first charging station to travel along a worst-case route that is travelable from the first charging station (see at least ¶0087 ~ "the highest amount of recuperated energy is selected from the predicted amounts"; therein corresponding to the recitation of the worst case route);
identifying a limitation of the first permitted state of charge when traveling along the route, the limitation being based on the second permitted state of charge (see at least ¶0087 ~ "maximum battery state of charge is determined depending on the highest amount"); and,
planning the operating strategy taking the limitation into account. (See at least ¶0017 ~ "the maximum battery charge level of the traction battery for the next charging process using the external charging source indicates a limit up to which the traction battery can be charged during the charging process using the external charging source... the adjustment of the battery charge level… applies… to the next charging process using the external charging source").
As to Claim 2,
Wagner discloses the method of claim 1 further comprising
determining a plurality of routes between the position and a common target point of the plurality of routes,
with more than one of the plurality of routes having at least one of the charging stations arranged therealong. (See at least Fig. 3 ~ illustrating a plurality of route sections comprising charging stations 60 arranged on each of the plurality of route sections -- configured such that the sections between the charging stations 60 and downhill sections can be viewed as part of the same,
PNG
media_image1.png
634
670
media_image1.png
Greyscale
see ¶0087, ¶0074, ¶0088, ¶0091 ~ wherein the ending of the electrical charging procedure when the maximum battery state of charge is reached comprises planning the charging; similarly, manual adjustments, for example with regard to the future route section and in particular being interpreted as route planning. Additionally, see ¶0049 - ¶0050 ~ regarding a normally fixed maximum charge may not be exceeded, e.g. to avoid "a forced break due to a short remaining distance" which represents planning of the operating strategy taking into account the range and wherein further in ¶0049 ~ "within a predetermined time and/or distance" defines a threshold condition).
As to Claim 3,
Wagner disclose the method of claim 1, wherein a plurality of charging stations is arranged along the route and
said determining the limitation is carried out for more than one of the plurality of charging stations. (See Fig. 3; Wagner ~ illustrating a plurality of route sections comprising charging stations 60 arranged on each of the plurality of route sections and Abstract).
As to Claim 4,
Wagner discloses the method of claim 1,
wherein the position is determined such that the position is at least one of
a position of the vehicle and a position of the first charging station. (See ¶0010, ¶0036, and ¶0074; Wagner).
As to Claim 5,
Wagner discloses the method of claim 1,
wherein the limitation includes a difference between the first permitted state of charge and the second permitted state of charge. (See ¶0009 - ¶0010, ¶0074, ¶0087, ¶0089, and Abstract; Wagner).
As to Claim 7,
Wagner discloses the method of claim 1,
wherein said planning the operating strategy includes at least one of
route planning, planning the charging of the energy storage device at the first charging station, and planning a payload. (See ¶0009 - ¶0010, ¶0036; Wagner ~ "each gradient section… can be determined based on topographical data… c) the begin inning of the gradient section is within a distance of a charging position where the electric charging… is carried out and has a gradient above a predetermined limit value", and ¶0074; Wagner ~ "electric charging process can be detected… by means of… navigation system 14… correspond[ing] to a location category suitable for an electric charging process… a suitable location category could be... a charging station or a loading and unloading terminal""; thus teaching position determining along a route where the vehicle has a first charging station / geolocation).
As to Claim 9,
Wagner discloses the method of claim 1 further comprising
identifying a proposal for charging the energy storage device at a second charging station. (See ¶0017, ¶0087, and ¶0089, and Abstract; Wagner).
As to Claim 10,
Wagner discloses the method of claim 1,
wherein said planning the operating strategy takes at least one of a threshold condition relating to the limitation and a range reduction,
determined on the basis of the limitation, into account. (See ¶0087, and ¶0089, and Abstract; Wagner).
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 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 of this title, 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 6, 8, and 11 – 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over German Patent No. DE10 2020/133118 A1 to WAGNER PHILIPP et al. (herein after "Wagner") as to claim 1 above, in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. US 2020/0182642 A1 to ELLISON et al. (herein after "Ellison”).
(Note: Claim language is in bold typeface, and the Examiner’s comments and cited passages from the prior art reference(s) are in normal typeface.)
As to Claim 6,
As shown above Wagner teaches an electric drive capable of regenerative braking (see ¶0011; Wagner) and performing an operating strategy wherein the vehicle energy storage device is charged at charging stations external to the vehicle (see ¶0010 - ¶0011; Wagner) disclosing the method of claim 1.
However, Wagner does not teach arranging the output of the limitation to at least one of
a user of the vehicle, a driver of the vehicle, and a fleet management system.
Ellison is relied upon to teach arranging the output of the limitation to a user of the vehicle. (See ¶0050; Ellison ~ “presenting a user with a recommended optimal route based on a route cost determination may allow for a shorter, more efficient, and/or less expensive journey to the desired destination 200 by vehicle 100).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide Wagner with the user focused optimal route cost calculator, as taught by Ellison, which would successfully provide user curated determination of a path and/or route (e.g., an optimal route) to a desired destination that accounts for vehicle charging and/or refueling requirements for a wider diversity of vehicles across a larger diversity of vehicle traveling terrains and doing so at longer driving ranges.
As to Claim 8,
As shown above Wagner teaches an electric drive capable of regenerative braking (see ¶0011; Wagner) and performing an operating strategy wherein the vehicle energy storage device is charged at charging stations external to the vehicle (see ¶0010 - ¶0011; Wagner) disclosing the method of claim 1.
However, Wagner does not teach wherein said planning the operating strategy is carried out taking at least one of
a total range, a driving time, and charging costs into account.
On the other hand, Ellison’s vehicle charging path optimization system discloses planning the operating strategy is carried out taking at least one of a total range, a driving time, and charging costs into account. (See ¶0008 and ¶0050; Ellison ~ “an optimal route may be automatically selected and/or recommended to a user based on the calculated cost associated with the route. Calculated costs or routes may account for a variety of factors including, without limitation, some or all of travel time along the route, predicted energy usage along the route, pricing at recharging and/or refueling stations along the route”).
Consequently, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide Wagner with the optimal route cost calculator, as taught by Ellison, which would successfully provide determination of a path and/or route (e.g., an optimal route) to a desired destination that accounts for vehicle charging and/or refueling requirements for a wider diversity of vehicles across a larger diversity of vehicle traveling terrains and doing so at longer driving ranges.
As to Claim 11,
As shown above Wagner teaches an electric drive capable of regenerative braking (see ¶0011; Wagner) and performing an operating strategy wherein the vehicle energy storage device is charged at charging stations external to the vehicle (see ¶0010 - ¶0011; Wagner) disclosing the method of claim 1.
However, Wagner does not teach wherein the vehicle is a utility vehicle.
Conversely, Ellison’s vehicle charging path optimization system discloses wherein the vehicle is a utility vehicle. (See ¶0021; Ellison ~ "vehicle 100 may comprise a passenger or transport vehicle, a marine vehicle, an aircraft, and/or any other type of vehicle suitable for implementing the systems and methods disclosed herein").
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide Wagner with the utility vehicle configuration, as taught by Ellison, would successfully provide determination of a path and/or route (e.g., an optimal route) to a desired destination that accounts for vehicle charging and/or refueling requirements for a wider diversity of vehicles across a larger diversity of vehicle traveling terrains and doing so at longer driving ranges.
As to Claim 12,
Wagner discloses a computer (see Fig. 1; Wagner ~ control unit 14) to carry out the method of claim 1.
PNG
media_image2.png
1060
764
media_image2.png
Greyscale
However, Wagner does not explicitly disclose a computer program stored on a non-transitory computer-readable medium, the computer program comprising commands configured, when executed by a computer.
Ellison, on the other hand, discloses a computer program stored on a non-transitory computer-readable medium, the computer program comprising commands configured, when executed by a computer. (See Fig. 8 and ¶0079; Ellison ~ telematics system 800 comprises "a processing unit 802 system memory 804" consisting of non-transitory computer readable medium).
PNG
media_image3.png
672
432
media_image3.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Wagner’s control unit 14 with non-transitory computer readable medium, as taught by Ellison, to provide facility wherein embedded code exists excluding wired, wireless, or other communication links that transport transitory electrical or other signals, thereby enabling benefits, including but not limited to: distinguishing the system such that program code may be executed apart from a transitory, propagating signal, and performed from a permanently stored medium / media and media where data can be stored and later overwritten.
As to Claim 13,
Wagner discloses a computer (see Fig. 1; Wagner ~ control unit 14) to carry out the method of claim 1.
However, Wagner is silent in disclosing a non-transitory computer-readable medium comprising commands configured, when executed by a computer.
On the contrary, Ellison discloses a non-transitory computer-readable medium comprising commands configured, when executed by a computer. (See Fig. 8 and ¶0079; Ellison ~ telematics system 800 comprises "a processing unit 802 system memory 804" consisting of non-transitory computer readable medium).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Wagner’s control unit 14 with non-transitory computer readable medium, as taught by Ellison, to provide facility wherein embedded code exists excluding wired, wireless, or other communication links that transport transitory electrical or other signals, thereby enabling benefits, including but not limited to: distinguishing the system such that program code may be executed apart from a transitory, propagating signal, and performed from a permanently stored medium / media and media where data can be stored and later overwritten.
As to Claim 14,
Wagner’s method for providing a storage capacity reserve in a vehicle’s traction battery for an upcoming downhill drive discloses a controller for an electrically drivable vehicle having an energy storage device (see Fig. 1; Wagner ~ control unit 14, ¶0009 ~ "a prediction or estimate is made as to whether and which downhill section(s)… for continuing the journey after the external charging process… of recuperated energy that will be recuperated by the motor vehicle along each of the specified gradient sections, and determining... a reduction of a maximum battery charge level of the traction battery for the charging process") and an electric drive capable of regenerative braking (see ¶0011 ~ "the energy recovery potential… exploited… through regenerative continuous braking"),
wherein the energy storage device (see ¶0045 ~ vehicle 100 is configured with an energy storage that acquires energy from external charging stations 128) is configured to
be charged during regenerative braking and be charged at charging stations external to the vehicle (see ¶0010 ~ "in… anticipating the energy... be recuperated during down hill driving... to which the traction battery... be maximally charged during the next external charging process", ¶0011 ~ "the maximum permissible state of charge… set… leaves sufficient storage capacity reserve in the traction battery for the necessary continuous braking during the upcoming downhill drive and the energy recuperated", and Abstract), wherein the controller (see Fig. 1; Wagner ~ control unit 14) comprises:
determine a position along a route travelable by the vehicle and which has a first charging station (see ¶0010, ¶0036 ~ "each gradient section… can be determined based on topographical data… c) the begin inning of the gradient section is within a distance of a charging position where the electric charging… is carried out and has a gradient above a predetermined limit value", and ¶0074 ~ "electric charging process can be detected… by means of… navigation system 14… correspond[ing] to a location category suitable for an electric charging process… a suitable location category could be... a charging station or a loading and unloading terminal""; thus teaching position determining along a route where the vehicle has a first charging station / geolocation);
identify a first permitted state of charge for charging the energy storage device at the first charging station for driving on the route (see ¶0087 ~ "maximum battery state of charge is determined depending on the highest amount" and ¶0089 ~ wherein a permissible state of charge "is not normally exceeded" is taught) and
a second permitted state of charge for charging the energy storage device at the first charging station in order to travel along a worst-case route that is travelable from the first charging station (see ¶0087 ~ "the highest amount of recuperated energy is selected from the predicted amounts"; therein corresponding to the recitation of the worst case route);
identify a limitation of the first permitted state of charge when traveling along the route, the limitation being based on the second permitted state of charge (see ¶0087 ~ "maximum battery state of charge is determined depending on the highest amount"); and,
plan the operating strategy taking the limitation into account. (See ¶0017 ~ "the maximum battery charge level of the traction battery for the next charging process using the external charging source indicates a limit up to which the traction battery can be charged during the charging process using the external charging source... the adjustment of the battery charge level… applies… to the next charging process using the external charging source").
PNG
media_image4.png
528
704
media_image4.png
Greyscale
However, Wager’s control unit 14 (see Fig. 1; Wagner) does not explicitly disclose a processor; and
a non-transitory computer readable medium having program code stored thereon; said program code being configured, when executed by said processor.
Ellison discloses a processor (see ¶0079; Ellison ~ telematics system 800 comprises "a processing unit 802"); a non-transitory computer readable medium having program code stored thereon (see ¶0079; Ellison ~ telematics system 800 comprises "a processing unit 802 system memory 804" consisting of non-transitory computer readable medium); said program code being configured, when executed by said processor. (See ¶0079 and ¶0082; Ellison ~ computer program code that performs vehicle charging path optimization through telematics system 800).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Wagner’s control unit 14 with non-transitory computer readable medium, as taught by Ellison, to provide facility wherein embedded code exists excluding wired, wireless, or other communication links that transport transitory electrical or other signals, thereby enabling benefits, including but not limited to: distinguishing the system such that program code may be executed apart from a transitory, propagating signal, and performed from a permanently stored medium / media and media where data can be stored and later overwritten.
As to Claim 15,
Wagner/Ellison discloses the controller of claim 14, wherein the vehicle is a utility vehicle. (See ¶0021; Ellison ~ "The vehicle 100 may comprise a passenger or transport vehicle, a marine vehicle, an aircraft, and/or any other type of vehicle suitable for implementing the systems and methods").
As to Claim 16,
Wagner discloses an electrically drivable vehicle (see Abstract ~ “an electrically driven motor vehicle 50”) comprising:
an energy storage device (see ¶0009 ~ "a prediction or estimate is made as to whether and which downhill section(s)… for continuing the journey after the external charging process… of recuperated energy that will be recuperated by the motor vehicle along each of the specified gradient sections, and determining... a reduction of a maximum battery charge level of the traction battery for the charging process");
an electric drive capable of regenerative braking (see ¶0011 ~ "the energy recovery potential… exploited… through regenerative continuous braking");
determine a position along a route travelable by the vehicle and which has a first charging station (see ¶0010, ¶0036 ~ "each gradient section… can be determined based on topographical data… c) the begin inning of the gradient section is within a distance of a charging position where the electric charging… is carried out and has a gradient above a predetermined limit value", and ¶0074 ~ "electric charging process can be detected… by means of… navigation system 14… correspond[ing] to a location category suitable for an electric charging process… a suitable location category could be... a charging station or a loading and unloading terminal""; thus teaching position determining along a route where the vehicle has a first charging station / geolocation);
identify a first permitted state of charge for charging the energy storage device at the first charging station for driving on the route (see ¶0087 ~ "maximum battery state of charge is determined depending on the highest amount" and ¶0089 ~ wherein a permissible state of charge "is not normally exceeded" is taught) and
a second permitted state of charge for charging the energy storage device at the first charging station in order to travel along a worst-case route that is travelable from the first charging station (see ¶0087 ~ "the highest amount of recuperated energy is selected from the predicted amounts"; therein corresponding to the recitation of the worst case route);
identify a limitation of the first permitted state of charge when traveling along the route, the limitation being based on the second permitted state of charge (see ¶0087 ~ "maximum battery state of charge is determined depending on the highest amount"); and,
plan the operating strategy taking the limitation into account. said energy storage device (see ¶0017 ~ "the maximum battery charge level of the traction battery for the next charging process using the external charging source indicates a limit up to which the traction battery can be charged during the charging process using the external charging source... the adjustment of the battery charge level… applies… to the next charging process using the external charging source") being configured to
be charged during regenerative braking and to be charged at charging stations external to the vehicle. (See ¶0017 and Abstract).
However, Wager’s control unit 14 falls short of disclosing a controller including a processor and a non-transitory computer readable medium having program code stored thereon;
said program code being configured, when executed by said processor, to:
Ellison discloses a controller including a processor and a non-transitory computer readable medium having program code stored (see ¶0079; Ellison ~ telematics system 800 comprises "a processing unit 802 system memory 804" consisting of non-transitory computer readable medium) thereon; said program code being configured, when executed by said processor. (See ¶0079 and ¶0082; Ellison ~ computer program code that performs vehicle charging path optimization through telematics system 800).
To that end, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Wagner’s control unit 14 with non-transitory computer readable medium, as taught by Ellison, to provide facility wherein embedded code exists excluding wired, wireless, or other communication links that transport transitory electrical or other signals, thereby enabling benefits, including but not limited to: distinguishing the system such that program code may be executed apart from a transitory, propagating signal, and performed from a permanently stored medium / media and media where data can be stored and later overwritten.
As to Claim 17,
Wagner/Ellison discloses the electrically drivable vehicle of claim 16, wherein the vehicle is a utility vehicle. (See ¶0021; Ellison ~ "The vehicle 100 may comprise a passenger or transport vehicle, a marine vehicle, an aircraft, and/or any other type of vehicle suitable for implementing the systems and methods").
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the Examiner should be directed to ASHLEY L. REDHEAD, JR. whose telephone number is (571) 272 - 6952. The Examiner can normally be reached on weekdays, Monday through Thursday, between 7 a.m. and 5 p.m.
If attempts to reach the Examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the Examiner’s Supervisor, Peter Nolan can be reached Monday through Friday, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. at (571) 270 – 7016. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/ASHLEY L REDHEAD JR./Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3661
Prosecution Insights