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 .
This is a Non-Final rejection on the merits of this application. Claims 1-12 are currently pending, as discussed below.
Examiner Notes that the fundamentals of the rejections are based on the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim language. Applicant is kindly invited to consider the reference as a whole. References are to be interpreted as by one of ordinary skill in the art rather than as by a novice. See MPEP 2141. Therefore, the relevant inquiry when interpreting a reference is not what the reference expressly discloses on its face but what the reference would teach or suggest to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) filed on 3/10/2025 has been considered by examiner.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
a route acquisition unit in claims 1 and 12
a route division unit in claims 1 and 12
a speed model acquisition unit in claims 1 and 12
a power consumption estimation unit in claims 1 and 12
a required supplemental power amount calculation unit in claims 1 and 12
a chargeable power amount estimation unit in claims 1 and 12
a planned charge amount calculation unit in claims 1 and 12
a charger search unit in claims 1 and 12
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Upon reviewing of the specification, the following appears to be the corresponding structure for a route acquisition unit:
" (12) A computer program according to another aspect of the present disclosure causes a computer to function as: a route acquisition unit ", [¶ 35]
“As shown in FIG. 4, the charger search device 5 includes a control unit 50 including a CPU”, [¶ 84]
" The control unit 50 includes a route search unit 54", [Fig. 4, ¶ 89]
Upon reviewing of the specification, the following appears to be the corresponding structure for a route division unit:
" (12) A computer program according to another aspect of the present disclosure causes a computer to function as: …; a route division unit ", [¶ 35]
“As shown in FIG. 4, the charger search device 5 includes a control unit 50 including a CPU”, [¶ 84]
“The control unit 50 includes a route search unit 54, an information acquisition unit 55, a route division unit 56” [Fig. 4, ¶ 89]
Upon reviewing of the specification, the following appears to be the corresponding structure for a speed model acquisition unit:
“As shown in FIG. 4, the charger search device 5 includes a control unit 50 including a CPU”, [¶ 84]
"The control unit 50 includes a route search unit 54, an information acquisition unit 55, a route division unit 56, a speed correction unit 57, a speed model calculation unit 58", [Fig. 4, ¶ 89]
Upon reviewing of the specification, the following appears to be the corresponding structure for a power consumption estimation unit:
“As shown in FIG. 4, the charger search device 5 includes a control unit 50 including a CPU”, [¶ 84]
" The control unit 50 includes …, a travel energy estimation unit 60 ", [Fig. 4, ¶ 89]
Upon reviewing of the specification, the following appears to be the corresponding structure for a required supplemental power amount calculation unit:
“As shown in FIG. 4, the charger search device 5 includes a control unit 50 including a CPU”, [¶ 84]
" The control unit 50 includes …, a required supplemental power amount calculation unit 61 ", [Fig.4, ¶ 89]
Upon reviewing of the specification, the following appears to be the corresponding structure for a chargeable power amount estimation unit:
“As shown in FIG. 4, the charger search device 5 includes a control unit 50 including a CPU”, [¶ 84]
" The control unit 50 includes …, a chargeable power amount estimation unit 62", [Fig.4, ¶ 89]
Upon reviewing of the specification, the following appears to be the corresponding structure for a planned charge amount calculation unit:
“As shown in FIG. 4, the charger search device 5 includes a control unit 50 including a CPU”, [¶ 84]
" The control unit 50 includes …, a planned charge amount calculation unit 64", [Fig.4, ¶ 89]
Upon reviewing of the specification, the following appears to be the corresponding structure for a charger search unit:
“As shown in FIG. 4, the charger search device 5 includes a control unit 50 including a CPU”, [¶ 84]
" The control unit 50 includes …, a charger search unit 65", [Fig.4, ¶ 89]
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 1-20 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 5 is unclear because it is not clear where the predetermined distance from the second route is being measured from. For example it is not clear if the predetermined distance is measured from the start, end or somewhere in the middle of the second route.
Claim(s) depending from claims expressly noted above are also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112 by/for reason of their dependency from a noted claim that is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112, for the reasons given.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
101 Analysis – Step 1 – No
Claim 1 is directed to a device, Claim 11 is directed toward a method and Claim 12 is directed toward a computer program. Therefore, claims 1 and 11 are within at least one of the four statutory categories and claim 12 is directed to a computer program which is not under one of the four statutory categories. Therefore claim 12 is not patent eligible under 101.
101 Analysis – Step 2A, Prong I
Regarding Prong I of the Step 2A analysis in the 2019 PEG, the claims are to be analyzed to determine whether they recite subject matter that falls within one of the follow groups of abstract ideas: a) mathematical concepts, b) certain methods of organizing human activity, and/or c) mental processes.
Independent claims 1, 11 and 12 include limitations that recite an abstract idea (emphasized below) and will be used as a representative claim for the remainder of the 101 rejection. Claims 1, 11 and 12 are analogous to each other so claim 11 and 12 is rejected for the same reasons as the representative claim 1 as discussed here.
Claim 1 recites:
A charger search device, comprising:
a route acquisition unit configured to acquire a first route that is composed of a road link on which an electric vehicle equipped with a battery is planned to travel from a first point to a second point;
a route division unit configured to divide the first route into one or more sections, each section including a speed change prediction point at which a change in a travel speed of the electric vehicle is expected, each section being composed of one or a plurality of road links;
a speed model acquisition unit configured to acquire a speed model for each section, the speed model indicating a temporal transition of the travel speed of the electric vehicle;
a power consumption estimation unit configured to estimate, based on the speed model acquired for each section, power consumption in a case where the electric vehicle travels on the section;
a required supplemental power amount calculation unit configured to calculate a required supplemental power amount that is an amount of power expected to be insufficient when the electric vehicle travels on the first route, based on an amount of remaining power of the battery at the first point, and the power consumption;
a chargeable power amount estimation unit configured to estimate, based on the power consumption, a chargeable power amount to the battery at a time point when the electric vehicle passes through the speed change prediction point on the first route;
a planned charge amount calculation unit configured to calculate a planned charge amount to the battery, based on the required supplemental power amount and a margin of a predetermined power amount; and
a charger search unit configured to search for a charger capable of charging the battery, based on the chargeable power amount and the planned charge amount.
The examiner submits that the foregoing bolded limitation(s) constitute a “mental process” because under its broadest reasonable interpretation, the claim covers performance of the limitation in the human mind. For example, acquire a first route that is composed of a road link on which an electric vehicle equipped with a battery is planned to travel from a first point to a second point involves looking at a map of roads between a first point and a second point and planning a route to drive between them either mentally or using a pen and paper on a physical paper map.
Examiner notes that MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III): The courts consider a mental process (thinking) that "can be performed in the human mind, or by a human using a pen and paper" to be an abstract idea. CyberSource Corp. v. Retail Decisions, Inc., 654 F.3d 1366, 1372, 99 USPQ2d 1690, 1695 (Fed. Cir. 2011). As the Federal Circuit explained, "methods which can be performed mentally, or which are the equivalent of human mental work, are unpatentable abstract ideas the ‘basic tools of scientific and technological work’ that are open to all.’" 654 F.3d at 1371, 99 USPQ2d at 1694 (citing Gottschalk v. Benson, 409 U.S. 63, 175 USPQ 673 (1972)). See also Mayo Collaborative Servs. v. Prometheus Labs. Inc., 566 U.S. 66, 71, 101 USPQ2d 1961, 1965 ("‘[M]ental processes[] and abstract intellectual concepts are not patentable, as they are the basic tools of scientific and technological work’" (quoting Benson, 409 U.S. at 67, 175 USPQ at 675)); Parker v. Flook, 437 U.S. 584, 589, 198 USPQ 193, 197 (1978) (same). Accordingly, the "mental processes" abstract idea grouping is defined as concepts performed in the human mind, and examples of mental processes include observations, evaluations, judgments, and opinions. Here, the determination is a form of making evaluation and judgement based on observation.
Accordingly, the claim recites at least one abstract idea.
101 Analysis – Step 2A, Prong II
Regarding Prong II of the Step 2A analysis in the 2019 PEG, the claims are to be analyzed to determine whether the claim, as a whole, integrates the abstract into a practical application. As noted in the 2019 PEG, it must be determined whether any additional elements in the claim beyond the abstract idea integrate the exception into a practical application in a manner that imposes a meaningful limit on the judicial exception. The courts have indicated that additional elements merely using a computer to implement an abstract idea, adding insignificant extra solution activity, or generally linking use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use do not integrate a judicial exception into a “practical application.”
In the present case, there are no additional limitations beyond the above-noted abstract idea,
Thus, taken alone, since there are no additional elements to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. Accordingly, the lack of additional limitation(s) do/does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impost any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea.
101 Analysis – Step 2B
Regarding Step 2B of the 2019 PEG, representative independent claims 1, 11 and 12 do not include additional elements (considered both individually and as an ordered combination) that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception for the same reasons to those discussed above with respect to determining that the claim does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application.
Dependent Claims
Dependent claims 2-10, do not recite any further limitations that causes the claims to be patent eligible. Rather, the limitations of dependent claims are directed toward additional aspects of the judicial exception and/or additional elements that do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. Therefore, dependent claims 2-10 are not patent eligible under the same rationale as provided for in the rejection of claims 1, 11 and 12.
Therefore, claims 1-12 are ineligible under 35 USC §101.
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 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, 3-7, and 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over MURAMATSU; Satoru et al. (US 20120290506 A1) in view of TOKURA; Takaaki et al. (US 20220153272 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Muramatsu teaches, a charger search device, comprising: a route acquisition unit configured to acquire a first route that is composed of a road link on which an electric vehicle equipped with a battery is planned to travel from a first point to a second point (a route finding unit for determining a route to a destination from a departure place for a vehicle with a battery, see at least, ¶10, 60, Muramatsu); a route division unit configured to divide the first route into one or more sections (first area setting unit sets the plurality of reachable areas by determining a first battery charge spot and a destination side reachable area, the route is divided into sections based on reachable areas based off battery charge levels, Fig. 6A depicts two reachable areas and an overlapping area C which are interpreted as sections, see at least, ¶11, 90, Muramatsu), each section including a speed change prediction point at which a change in a travel speed of the electric vehicle is expected, each section being composed of one or a plurality of road links; a speed model acquisition unit configured to acquire a speed model for each section, the speed model indicating a temporal transition of the travel speed of the electric vehicle; a power consumption estimation unit configured to estimate, based on the speed model acquired for each section, power consumption in a case where the electric vehicle travels on the section (the battery charge spot search unit estimates a required power amount for the travel of the vehicle to the searched battery charge spot, see at least, ¶16, Muramatsu); a required supplemental power amount calculation unit configured to calculate a required supplemental power amount that is an amount of power expected to be insufficient when the electric vehicle travels on the first route, based on an amount of remaining power of the battery at the first point, and the power consumption (a number of charge operations for reaching the destination is calculated based on the travelable distance with the remaining charge amount is subtracted from the distance between the current vehicle position and the destination, the remaining distance is calculated (supplemental distance that is not covered by the current battery charge), see at least, ¶90, Muramatsu); a chargeable power amount estimation unit configured to estimate, based on the power consumption, a chargeable power amount to the battery at a time point when the electric vehicle passes through the speed change prediction point on the first route (a cost calculation unit for calculating a cost or charging the battery to a full charge at respective battery charging spots based on an expected remaining charge amount of battery at a time of arriving at the respective battery charge spots must be calculating the chargeable power amount in order to calculate the cost for the power, see at least, ¶21, Muramatsu); a planned charge amount calculation unit configured to calculate a planned charge amount to the battery, based on the required supplemental power amount and a margin of a predetermined power amount (Fig. 4 depicts block T2 and T3 a reachable area is calculated that can be reached by the vehicle such that the remaining charge amount of the battery is at least equal to the required charge threshold X of remaining charge amount (the margin of a predetermined power). This operation must be calculating a planned charge amount to the battery to be within the quick-charge range, see at least, ¶83, Muramatsu); and a charger search unit configured to search for a charger capable of charging the battery, based on the chargeable power amount and the planned charge amount (Fig. 4 T5 the control unit identifies the charge spots in the reachable area A where the quick charge is performable based on the chargeable power amount, where the quick charge is a planned charge amount (see at least, ¶82-84, Muramatsu).
Muramatsu does not explicitly teach each section including a speed change prediction point at which a change in a travel speed of the electric vehicle is expected, each section being composed of one or a plurality of road links; a speed model acquisition unit configured to acquire a speed model for each section, the speed model indicating a temporal transition of the travel speed of the electric vehicle; a power consumption estimation unit configured to estimate, based on the speed model acquired for each section, power consumption in a case where the electric vehicle travels on the section; a chargeable power amount estimation unit configured to estimate, based on the power consumption, a chargeable power amount to the battery at a time point when the electric vehicle passes through the speed change prediction point on the first route.
Tokura, directed to a traveling control apparatus mounted on a vehicle teaches, each section including a speed change prediction point at which a change in a travel speed of the electric vehicle is expected, each section being composed of one or a plurality of road links (Fig. 8 depicts estimated speed changing at each section boundary, see at least, ¶88, Tokura); a speed model acquisition unit configured to acquire a speed model for each section, the speed model indicating a temporal transition of the travel speed of the electric vehicle (the creation unit 11 creates a speed profile which is information representing the speed of the vehicle predicted at teach time point, see at least, ¶65, Tokura); a power consumption estimation unit configured to estimate, based on the speed model acquired for each section, power consumption in a case where the electric vehicle travels on the section (based on the speed profile created by the creation unit 11 a predicted amount of regenerative energy is estimated (power consumption) and based on the predicted amount of regenerative energy, determines which electric motor and internal combustion engine is to be used for traveling, see at least, ¶57, Tokura); a chargeable power amount estimation unit configured to estimate, based on the power consumption, a chargeable power amount to the battery at a time point when the electric vehicle passes through the speed change prediction point on the first route (regenerative energy is estimated at each speed change which is a chargeable amount to the battery, see at least, ¶134, Tokura).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to have modified Muramatsu to incorporate the teachings of Tokura which teaches each section including a speed change prediction point at which a change in a travel speed of the electric vehicle is expected, each section being composed of one or a plurality of road links; a speed model acquisition unit configured to acquire a speed model for each section, the speed model indicating a temporal transition of the travel speed of the electric vehicle; a power consumption estimation unit configured to estimate, based on the speed model acquired for each section, power consumption in a case where the electric vehicle travels on the section; a chargeable power amount estimation unit configured to estimate, based on the power consumption, a chargeable power amount to the battery at a time point when the electric vehicle passes through the speed change prediction point on the first route since they are both related to routing of vehicles and incorporation of the teachings of Tokura would increase the fuel efficiency by utilizing regenerative braking with use of the electric motor.
Regarding Claim 3, Muramatsu in view of Tokura teaches, the charger search device according to claim 1, wherein the charger search unit searches for the charger when the planned charge amount exceeds 0 (charge count unit counts the number of battery charge operations that are needed along the route, and when the charge count is greater than 0 searches for a charger, the planned charge amount must exceed 0 requiring charging, see at least, ¶10, Muramatsu).
Regarding Claim 4, Muramatsu in view of Tokura teaches,
The charger search device according to claim 1, wherein the charger search unit searches for the charger, based on a second route on which the electric vehicle is planned to travel, the second route being a part of the first route, and ranging from the speed change prediction point at which the chargeable power amount becomes equal to or larger than the planned charge amount, to the second point (Fi.g 8A and 8B depicts a route R on area C2 which is a first destination side area which contains a second route as being part of the first route R and ranges from a point at which the chargeable power becomes equal or larger than the planned charge amount, see at least, ¶99-104, Muramatsu).
Tokura, directed to a traveling control apparatus mounted on a vehicle teaches, ranging from the speed change prediction point at which the chargeable power amount becomes equal to or larger than the planned charge amount, to the second point (regenerative energy is estimated at each speed change which is a chargeable amount to the battery, see at least, ¶97 - 100, 134, Tokura).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to have modified Muramatsu in view of Tokura to further incorporate the teachings of Tokura which teaches ranging from the speed change prediction point at which the chargeable power amount becomes equal to or larger than the planned charge amount, to the second point since they are both related to Routing vehicles incorporation of the teachings of Tokura would increase the fuel efficiency by utilizing regenerative braking with use of the electric motor.
Regarding Claim 5, Muramatsu in view of Tokura teaches, the charger search device according to claim 4, wherein the charger search unit searches for the charger capable of charging the battery from among chargers located within a predetermined distance from the second route (Fig. 13 depicts block Y4, which searches for charge spot that is close to the current position (which is along the second route) within a travelable range (predetermined distance), see at least, ¶121, Muramatsu).
Regarding Claim 6, Muramatsu in view of Tokura teaches, the charger search device according to claim 1, further comprising a charger selection unit configured to, assuming that chargers having been found by the charger search unit are candidates for the charger for charging the battery, calculate, for each candidate, a total time of a loss time due to the electric vehicle passing through the position of the candidate, and a charging time for the planned charge amount to the battery at the candidate, and select a candidate having the shortest total time, as the charger for charging the battery (Fig. 23 depicts a process for planning a route that prioritizes the charge wait time, see at least, ¶164-176, Muramatsu).
Regarding Claim 7, Muramatsu in view of Tokura teaches, the charger search device according to claim 6, wherein the charger selection unit calculates the loss time, based on at least one of: information on traffic jams on a travel route to the position of the candidate; and information on regulations that regulate traveling on the travel route (the control unit 2 of the navigation device takes the predicted traffic congestion into consideration, see at least, ¶196, Muramatsu).
Regarding Claim 11, Muramatsu teaches, a charger search method, comprising: acquiring a first route that is composed of a road link on which an electric vehicle equipped with a battery is planned to travel from a first point to a second point (a route finding unit for determining a route to a destination from a departure place for a vehicle with a battery, see at least, ¶10, 60, Muramatsu); dividing the first route into one or more sections (first area setting unit sets the plurality of reachable areas by determining a first battery charge spot and a destination side reachable area, the route is divided into sections based on reachable areas based off battery charge levels, Fig. 6A depicts two reachable areas and an overlapping area C which are interpreted as sections, see at least, ¶11, 90, Muramatsu), each section including a speed change prediction point at which a change in a travel speed of the electric vehicle is expected, each section being composed of one or a plurality of road links; acquiring a speed model for each section, the speed model indicating a temporal transition of the travel speed of the electric vehicle; estimating, based on the speed model acquired for each section, power consumption in a case where the electric vehicle travels on the section (the battery charge spot search unit estimates a required power amount for the travel of the vehicle to the searched battery charge spot, see at least, ¶16, Muramatsu); calculating a required supplemental power amount that is an amount of power expected to be insufficient when the electric vehicle travels on the first route, based on an amount of remaining power of the battery at the first point, and the power consumption (a number of charge operations for reaching the destination is calculated based on the travelable distance with the remaining charge amount is subtracted from the distance between the current vehicle position and the destination, the remaining distance is calculated (supplemental distance that is not covered by the current battery charge), see at least, ¶90, Muramatsu); estimating, based on the power consumption, a chargeable power amount to the battery at a time point when the electric vehicle passes through the speed change prediction point on the first route (a cost calculation unit for calculating a cost or charging the battery to a full charge at respective battery charging spots based on an expected remaining charge amount of battery at a time of arriving at the respective battery charge spots must be calculating the chargeable power amount in order to calculate the cost for the power, see at least, ¶21, Muramatsu); calculating a planned charge amount to the battery, based on the required supplemental power amount and a margin of a predetermined power amount (Fig. 4 depicts block T2 and T3 a reachable area is calculated that can be reached by the vehicle such that the remaining charge amount of the battery is at least equal to the required charge threshold X of remaining charge amount (the margin of a predetermined power). This operation must be calculating a planned charge amount to the battery to be within the quick-charge range, see at least, ¶83, Muramatsu); and searching for a charger capable of charging the battery, based on the chargeable power amount and the planned charge amount (Fig. 4 T5 the control unit identifies the charge spots in the reachable area A where the quick charge is performable based on the chargeable power amount, where the quick charge is a planned charge amount (see at least, ¶82-84, Muramatsu).
Muramatsu does not explicitly teach each section including a speed change prediction point at which a change in a travel speed of the electric vehicle is expected, each section being composed of one or a plurality of road links; acquiring a speed model for each section, the speed model indicating a temporal transition of the travel speed of the electric vehicle; estimating, based on the speed model acquired for each section, power consumption in a case where the electric vehicle travels on the section and estimating, based on the power consumption, a chargeable power amount to the battery at a time point when the electric vehicle passes through the speed change prediction point on the first route.
Tokura, directed to a traveling control apparatus mounted on a vehicle teaches, each section including a speed change prediction point at which a change in a travel speed of the electric vehicle is expected, each section being composed of one or a plurality of road links (Fig. 8 depicts estimated speed changing at each section boundary, see at least, ¶88, Tokura); a speed model acquisition unit configured to acquire a speed model for each section, the speed model indicating a temporal transition of the travel speed of the electric vehicle (the creation unit 11 creates a speed profile which is information representing the speed of the vehicle predicted at teach time point, see at least, ¶65, Tokura); a power consumption estimation unit configured to estimate, based on the speed model acquired for each section, power consumption in a case where the electric vehicle travels on the section (based on the speed profile created by the creation unit 11 a predicted amount of regenerative energy is estimated (power consumption) and based on the predicted amount of regenerative energy, determines which electric motor and internal combustion engine is to be used for traveling, see at least, ¶57, Tokura); a chargeable power amount estimation unit configured to estimate, based on the power consumption, a chargeable power amount to the battery at a time point when the electric vehicle passes through the speed change prediction point on the first route (regenerative energy is estimated at each speed change which is a chargeable amount to the battery, see at least, ¶134, Tokura).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to have modified Muramatsu to incorporate the teachings of Tokura which teaches each section including a speed change prediction point at which a change in a travel speed of the electric vehicle is expected, each section being composed of one or a plurality of road links; a speed model acquisition unit configured to acquire a speed model for each section, the speed model indicating a temporal transition of the travel speed of the electric vehicle; a power consumption estimation unit configured to estimate, based on the speed model acquired for each section, power consumption in a case where the electric vehicle travels on the section; a chargeable power amount estimation unit configured to estimate, based on the power consumption, a chargeable power amount to the battery at a time point when the electric vehicle passes through the speed change prediction point on the first route since they are both related to routing of vehicles and incorporation of the teachings of Tokura would increase the fuel efficiency by utilizing regenerative braking with use of the electric motor.
Regarding Claim 12, Muramatsu in view of Tokura teaches, a computer program configured to cause a computer to function as: a route acquisition unit configured to acquire a first route that is composed of a road link on which an electric vehicle equipped with a battery is planned to travel from a first point to a second point (a route finding unit for determining a route to a destination from a departure place for a vehicle with a battery, see at least, ¶10, 60, Muramatsu); a route division unit configured to divide the first route into one or more sections (first area setting unit sets the plurality of reachable areas by determining a first battery charge spot and a destination side reachable area, the route is divided into sections based on reachable areas based off battery charge levels, Fig. 6A depicts two reachable areas and an overlapping area C which are interpreted as sections, see at least, ¶11, 90, Miramatsu), each section including a speed change prediction point at which a change in a travel speed of the electric vehicle is expected, each section being composed of one or a plurality of road links; a speed model acquisition unit configured to acquire a speed model for each section, the speed model indicating a temporal transition of the travel speed of the electric vehicle; a power consumption estimation unit configured to estimate, based on the speed model acquired for each section, power consumption in a case where the electric vehicle travels on the section (the battery charge spot search unit estimates a required power amount for the travel of the vehicle to the searched battery charge spot, see at least, ¶16, Miramatsu); a required supplemental power amount calculation unit configured to calculate a required supplemental power amount that is an amount of power expected to be insufficient when the electric vehicle travels on the first route, based on an amount of remaining power of the battery at the first point, and the power consumption (a number of charge operations for reaching the destination is calculated based on the travelable distance with the remaining charge amount is subtracted from the distance between the current vehicle position and the destination, the remaining distance is calculated (supplemental distance that is not covered by the current battery charge), see at least, ¶90, Miramatsu); a chargeable power amount estimation unit configured to estimate, based on the power consumption, a chargeable power amount to the battery at a time point when the electric vehicle passes through the speed change prediction point on the first route (a cost calculation unit for calculating a cost or charging the battery to a full charge at respective battery charging spots based on an expected remaining charge amount of battery at a time of arriving at the respective battery charge spots must be calculating the chargeable power amount in order to calculate the cost for the power, see at least, ¶21, Miramatsu); a planned charge amount calculation unit configured to calculate a planned charge amount to the battery, based on the required supplemental power amount and a margin of a predetermined power amount (Fig. 4 depicts block T2 and T3 a reachable area is calculated that can be reached by the vehicle such that the remaining charge amount of the battery is at least equal to the required charge threshold X of remaining charge amount (the margin of a predetermined power). This operation must be calculating a planned charge amount to the battery to be within the quick-charge range, see at least, ¶83, Miramatsu); and a charger search unit configured to search for a charger capable of charging the battery, based on the chargeable power amount and the planned charge amount (Fig. 4 T5 the control unit identifies the charge spots in the reachable area A where the quick charge is performable based on the chargeable power amount, where the quick charge is a planned charge amount (see at least, ¶82-84, Miramatsu).
Muramatsu does not explicitly teach each section including a speed change prediction point at which a change in a travel speed of the electric vehicle is expected, each section being composed of one or a plurality of road links; a speed model acquisition unit configured to acquire a speed model for each section, the speed model indicating a temporal transition of the travel speed of the electric vehicle; a power consumption estimation unit configured to estimate, based on the speed model acquired for each section, power consumption in a case where the electric vehicle travels on the section and a chargeable power amount estimation unit configured to estimate, based on the power consumption, a chargeable power amount to the battery at a time point when the electric vehicle passes through the speed change prediction point on the first route.
Tokura, directed to a traveling control apparatus mounted on a vehicle teaches, each section including a speed change prediction point at which a change in a travel speed of the electric vehicle is expected, each section being composed of one or a plurality of road links (Fig. 8 depicts estimated speed changing at each section boundary, see at least, ¶88, Tokura); a speed model acquisition unit configured to acquire a speed model for each section, the speed model indicating a temporal transition of the travel speed of the electric vehicle (the creation unit 11 creates a speed profile which is information representing the speed of the vehicle predicted at teach time point, see at least, ¶65, Tokura); a power consumption estimation unit configured to estimate, based on the speed model acquired for each section, power consumption in a case where the electric vehicle travels on the section (based on the speed profile created by the creation unit 11 a predicted amount of regenerative energy is estimated (power consumption) and based on the predicted amount of regenerative energy, determines which electric motor and internal combustion engine is to be used for traveling, see at least, ¶57, Tokura); a chargeable power amount estimation unit configured to estimate, based on the power consumption, a chargeable power amount to the battery at a time point when the electric vehicle passes through the speed change prediction point on the first route (regenerative energy is estimated at each speed change which is a chargeable amount to the battery, see at least, ¶134, Tokura).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to have modified Muramatsu to incorporate the teachings of Tokura which teaches each section including a speed change prediction point at which a change in a travel speed of the electric vehicle is expected, each section being composed of one or a plurality of road links; a speed model acquisition unit configured to acquire a speed model for each section, the speed model indicating a temporal transition of the travel speed of the electric vehicle; a power consumption estimation unit configured to estimate, based on the speed model acquired for each section, power consumption in a case where the electric vehicle travels on the section; a chargeable power amount estimation unit configured to estimate, based on the power consumption, a chargeable power amount to the battery at a time point when the electric vehicle passes through the speed change prediction point on the first route since they are both related to routing of vehicles and incorporation of the teachings of Tokura would increase the fuel efficiency by utilizing regenerative braking with use of the electric motor.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over MURAMATSU; Satoru et al. (US 20120290506 A1) in view of TOKURA; Takaaki et al. (US 20220153272 A1) as applied to claims 1, 3-7, and 11-12 and further in view of LUNDQVIST; Henrik et al. (US 20230324462 A1).
Regarding Claim 2, Muramatsu in view of Tokura teaches,
The charger search device according to claim 1, wherein the planned charge amount calculation unit calculates the planned charge amount, based on the required supplemental power amount, the margin (Fig. 4 depicts block T2 and T3 a reachable area is calculated that can be reached by the vehicle such that the remaining charge amount of the battery is at least equal to the required charge threshold X of remaining charge amount (the margin of a predetermined power). This operation must be calculating a planned charge amount to the battery to be within the quick-charge range, see at least, ¶83, Muramatsu), and the allowable power supply amount
Muramatsu in view of Tokura does not explicitly teach, further comprising an allowable power supply amount acquisition unit configured to acquire an allowable power supply amount that is an amount of power allowed to be supplied from the battery to a power supply target after the electric vehicle has arrived at the second point, wherein the planned charge amount calculation unit calculates the planned charge amount, based on the required supplemental power amount, the margin, and the allowable power supply amount.
Lundqvist, directed to a method for performing state of charge calibration for an electrical energy storage system of an electrified vehicle teaches, further comprising an allowable power supply amount acquisition unit configured to acquire an allowable power supply amount that is an amount of power allowed to be supplied from the battery to a power supply target (electrical energy storage system capacity Q, see at least, ¶60, Lundqvist) after the electric vehicle has arrived at the second point (during parking or predicted downtime, see at least, ¶13, Lundqvist).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to have modified Muramatsu and Tokura to incorporate the teachings of Lundqvist which teaches further comprising an allowable power supply amount acquisition unit configured to acquire an allowable power supply amount that is an amount of power allowed to be supplied from the battery to a power supply target since they are both related to battery maintenance on electric vehicles and incorporation of the teachings Lundqvist would improve the accuracy of the battery state of charge by performing state of charge calibration on the battery. Further it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to add the allowable power supply amount of the discharge circuit to the margin in the remaining power amount calculation of Muramatsu so that the SOC can be accurately calibrated at the destination charging site.
Claims 8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over MURAMATSU; Satoru et al. (US 20120290506 A1) in view of TOKURA; Takaaki et al. (US 20220153272 A1) as applied to claims 1, 3-7 and 11-12 and further in view of Cox; Jonathan A. et al. (US 20190107406 A1).
Regarding Claim 8, Muramatsu in view of Tokura teaches, the charger search device according claim 1.
Muramatsu in view of Tokura does not explicitly teach wherein the charger search unit searches for the charger, based on business hours of a charging station where the charger is installed.
Cox, directed to methods of smart electric vehicle trip planning teaches, wherein the charger search unit searches for the charger, based on business hours of a charging station where the charger is installed (the computer system can configure or calculate a route of travel based on factors such as available times and hours of operation, see at least, ¶143-145, Cox).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to have modified Muramatsu to incorporate the teachings of Cox which teaches wherein the charger search unit searches for the charger, based on business hours of a charging station where the charger is installed since they are both related to trip planning for charging electric vehicles and incorporation of the teachings of Cox would find an optimal route through a network of charging stations.
Regarding Claim 9, Muramatsu in view of Tokura teaches, the charger search device according to claim 1.
Muramatsu in view of Tokura does not explicitly teach wherein the charger selection unit calculates the loss time, based on at least one of: information on traffic jams on a travel route to the position of the candidate; and information on regulations that regulate traveling on the travel route.
Cox, directed to methods of smart electric vehicle trip planning teaches, wherein the charger selection unit calculates the loss time, based on at least one of: information on traffic jams on a travel route to the position of the candidate; and information on regulations that regulate traveling on the travel route (see at least, ¶182-188, Cox).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to have modified Muramatsu in view of Tokura to incorporate the teachings of Cox which teaches wherein the charger selection unit calculates the loss time, based on at least one of: information on traffic jams on a travel route to the position of the candidate; and information on regulations that regulate traveling on the travel route since they are both related to trip planning for charging electric vehicles and incorporation of the teachings of Cox would find an optimal route through a network of charging stations.
Regarding Claim 10, Muramatsu in view of Tokura and Cox teaches, the charger search device according to claim 9, wherein the charger search unit searches for the quick charger in preference to the normal charger (Fig. 4 depicts block T5 where the control unit 2 makes a list W1 of quick charge spots in reachable area A, see at least, ¶82-83, Muramatsu).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to IRENE C KHUU whose telephone number is (703)756-1703. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 0900-1730.
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, Rachid Bendidi can be reached on (571)272-4896. 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.
/IRENE C KHUU/
Examiner, Art Unit 3664
/RACHID BENDIDI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3664
