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 .
Status of the Claims
Claims 1 and 15 are amended. Claim 14 is canceled. Claims 1-13 and 15 are pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 05/06/2026 regarding 35 U.S.C. 101 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The Claims Recite An Abstract Idea Under Step 2A Prong One
Applicant argues that the claims are not directed to certain methods of organizing human activity nor mental processes. Examiner disagrees.
Step 2A Prong One of the Alice/Mayo framework evaluates whether a abstract idea is set forth or described in the claim. The Federal Circuit has explained that "the 'directed to' inquiry applies a stage-one filter to claims, considered in light of the specification, based on whether 'their character as a whole is directed to excluded subject matter."' Enfish, LLC v. Microsoft Corp., 822 F.3d 1327, 1335 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (quoting Internet Patents Corp. v. Active Network, Inc., 790 F.3d 1343, 1346 (Fed. Cir. 2015)). It asks whether the focus of the claims is on a specific improvement in relevant technology or on a process that itself qualifies as an "abstract idea" for which computers are invoked merely as a tool. Here, it is clear from the Specification (including the claim language) that claim 1 focuses on an abstract idea, and not on an improvement to technology and/or a technical field. Applicant’s specification recites in [0002]: When new charging stations are deployed, multiple configurations and settings need to be done for a charging station. This process is called commissioning. Commissioning tasks may be time-consuming and complicated. Hence, there is a need to alleviate at least some of the drawbacks. Specification [0004] recites: Example embodiments may enable more efficient commissioning processes. The time required for setting up a new charging station may be decreased, and customer experience may be improved when the user may only need to identify themselves at the new charging station when using it for the first time in order to have needed settings ready at the charging station. The cited portions of the specification are highlighted to show that the claimed invention is drawn towards automating commissioning tasks, which are done by users/operators, in order to save time in setting up the new charging station and the simplified process improving user experience. Throughout the specification, the claimed invention discloses various aspects of commissioning including authorization, etc. “such that less manual work may be required from at least one of a party that gets the charging station or an operator that manages the charging station.” (Specification [0033]). Claim 1 recites the process or steps such as “receive an authorization request from a charging station, the authorization request comprising a unique identifier of the charging station and a unique identifier associated to a user; determine if the identifier of the charging station belongs to the unique list of identifiers of any of the plurality of commissioning groups; determine if the identifier associated to the user belongs to the unique list of identifiers of any of the plurality of commissioning groups; determine, based on at least one commissioning group comprising the identifier of the charging station or the identifier associated to the user, which settings are to be performed and where for automatic commissioning; determine whether the charging station which sent the authorization request has been previously configured according to the settings of at least one associated commissioning group and thereby already commissioned; and if the commissioning for the charging station has not yet been performed, perform commissioning of the charging station which sent the authorization request by configuring at least one of the charging station which sent the authorization request, the charging station management system or the one or more third party systems according to the determined settings.” The invention and claims are drawn towards commissioning electric vehicle charging stations, and the claims recite limitations that correspond to certain methods of organizing human activity (managing personal interactions, behavior, relationships; commercial interactions; business relations; following rules or instructions). Additionally, the claims directly correspond to mental processes (observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion) since the claim limitations describe the observation and evaluation of data, and making a judgment or opinion based on the observed and evaluated data. The claims considered in light of the specification, indicate that their character as a whole is directed to excluded subject matter. The mere characterization of a claim by its field of use (i.e., commissioning a charging station) or intended technical application does not remove it from the abstract idea groupings if the claim, when viewed as a whole, is directed to managing personal interactions, behavior, commercial interactions, following rules or instructions, observation, evaluation, judgment, or opinion. Under Step 2A Prong One, the claim must be analyzed based on what it actually recites and not the label the applicant assigns to it. Although styled as “commissioning a charging station” the claim recites a series of steps for receiving authorization requests, analyzing identifiers, determine commissioning groups, etc. which is a process of collecting, analyzing, and using information to authorize or configure a device. This is activity that falls within the enumerated abstract ideas as certain methods of organizing human activity and mental processes. Further, MPEP §2106.04(a)(2)(II) provides that, regarding certain methods of organizing human activity, the sub-groupings encompass both activity of a single person (for example, a person following a set of instructions) and activity that involves multiple people (such as a commercial interaction), and thus, certain activity between a person and a computer may fall within the "certain methods of organizing human activity" grouping. Additionally, regarding mental processes, MPEP §2106.04(a)(2)(III) provides that claims can recite a mental process even if they are claimed as being performed on a computer. If the claimed invention is described as a concept that is performed in the human mind and applicant is merely claiming that concept performed 1) on a generic computer, or 2) in a computer environment, or 3) is merely using a computer as a tool to perform the concept, the claim is considered to recite a mental process. Thus, the claim recitation, at high-level of generality, of the processor and memory comprising instructions executed by the processor to perform the limitations detailing receipt of the authorization request, determining if the identifier of the station belongs to identifiers of the commissioning groups, determining if the identifier associated with the user belongs to the commissioning groups, and the remaining “determining” steps of the claim, does not take the claim out of the mental processes grouping.
Applicant’s argument that the claim is directed to “checking whether the charging station has already been commissioned, determining the applicable commissioning-group settings based on charging-station and user identifiers, and configuring the relevant charging station, CSMS, and/or third-party systems only when commissioning has not yet been performed” (Remarks, pg. 10) further indicates that the claims are directed to certain methods of organizing human activity and mental processes. Checking whether the charging station has already been commissioned, determining the applicable commissioning-group settings based on charging-station and user identifiers, and configuring the relevant charging station, CSMS, and/or third-party systems only when commissioning has not yet been performed is something that may be performed mentally, and also directly corresponds to managing personal interactions, behaviors, and following rules or instructions. The same applies to applicant’s dependent claims 2 and 7. Applicant’s argument is not persuasive.
For the reasons set forth above, the claims recite an abstract idea under Step 2A Prong One.
The Claims Do Not Include Additional Elements That Are Sufficient To Amount To Significantly More Than The Judicial Exception Under Step 2B.
Applicant argues that the amended claims recite significantly more than the judicial exception. Examiner disagrees.
Limitations that the courts have found not to be enough to qualify as "significantly more" when recited in a claim with a judicial exception include: Adding the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer; Generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use (see MPEP §2106.05).
The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. Claim 1 recites the additional elements of: a processor, memory, charging station, charging station management system or third party systems. The additional elements of the processor, memory, and charging station management system or third party system are computer components recited at a high-level of generality performing the above-mentioned limitations. The combination of the additional elements are no more than mere instructions to apply the judicial exception using a generic computer. The additional element of the charging station amounts to generally linking the judicial exception to a particular field of use (electric vehicle charging). The additional elements amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer, and generally linking the judicial exception to a particular field of use. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer cannot provide an inventive concept. Thus, when viewed as an ordered combination, nothing in the claims add significantly more (i.e. an inventive concept) to the abstract idea. The limitations that applicant argues (i.e., authorization requests, commissioning groups defining configuration settings, associating charging station identifiers with commissioning groups, etc.), which have been analyzed above, are directed to the judicial exception itself. The claim is not patent eligible.
Regarding Claim 15:
Dependent claim 15 recites the limitation of a non-transitory computer readable medium comprising instructions which, when executed by a computer, cause the computer to carry out the method. The limitation is further directed to the abstract idea analyzed above. The claim also recites the additional element of the computer readable medium and a computer. The additional element(s) amount to “apply it” or merely using a computer as tool to implement the abstract idea. Accordingly, in combination, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. Further, when viewed as an ordered combination, nothing in the claim adds significantly more (i.e. an inventive concept) to the abstract idea. The claim is not patent eligible.
The 35 U.S.C. 101 rejection is maintained.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 2, 4, 5, and 6 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged/amended in the argument.
Applicant's arguments filed 05/06/2026 regarding claims 8, 9, 11, 12, and 15 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that Solomon ‘292 does not disclose the applicant’s claims because the applicant’s claims are related to a commissioning mechanism for charging station deployment and to authorizing or managing charging stations during ordinary operations. This argument that Solomon is non-analogous art is not persuasive. It has been held that a prior art reference must either be in the field of the inventor’s endeavor or, if not, then be reasonably pertinent to the particular problem with which the inventor was concerned, in order to be relied upon as a basis for rejection of the claimed invention. See In re Oetiker, 977 F.2d 1443, 24 USPQ2d 1443 (Fed. Cir. 1992). In this case, Solomon ‘292 is in the field of the inventor’s endeavor, and under broadest reasonable interpretation, Solomon ‘292 reads on the applicant’s claims as drafted. “Commissioning” in the context or charging stations is the process of getting a charger or a fleet charging depot up and running, and the process may involve testing, configuring, and activating hardware so it can communicate with the vehicles. This may include activation/initialization, operationalization (bringing the device into an active status), validation/verification, or deployment. For vehicles, commissioning is putting electric vehicles into service or authorizing a group of vehicles for active fleet duty, and may include authorization, onboarding, operational readiness or preparing the vehicles for their charging session, or integrating the EVs and their charging infrastructure. Solomon ‘292 covers at least some of these steps for “commissioning”, and directly reads on claim 8 under the broadest reasonable interpretation.
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 1-13 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e. an abstract idea) without significantly more.
Claims 1-7 recite an apparatus (i.e. machine), claims 8-13 recite a method (i.e. process), claim 15 recites a non-transitory computer readable medium (i.e. machine). Therefore claims 1-13 and 15 fall within one of the four statutory categories of invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitations of: storing a plurality of commissioning groups, each commissioning group comprising information on different settings for configuring at least one of a [charging station], a [charging station management system] or one or more [third party systems] associated with the [charging station] when the [charging station] is deployed and a unique list of identifiers; receive an authorization request from a [charging station], the authorization request comprising a unique identifier of the [charging station] and a unique identifier associated to a user; determine if the identifier of the [charging station] belongs to the unique list of identifiers of any of the plurality of commissioning groups; determine if the identifier associated to the user belongs to the unique list of identifiers of any of the plurality of commissioning groups; determine, based on at least one commissioning group comprising the identifier of the [charging station] or the identifier associated to the user, which settings are to be performed and where for automatic commissioning; determine whether the [charging station] which sent the authorization request has been previously configured according to the settings of at least one associated commissioning group and thereby already commissioned; and if the commissioning for the [charging station] has not yet been performed, perform commissioning of the charging station which sent the authorization request by configuring at least one of the [charging station] which sent the authorization request, the [charging station management system] or the one or more [third party systems] according to the determined settings. The invention and claims are drawn towards commissioning electric vehicle charging stations, and the claims recite limitations that correspond to certain methods of organizing human activity (managing personal interactions, behavior, relationships; commercial interactions; business relations; following rules or instructions) as evidenced by the invention and its objectives being to enable the performance of commissioning charging stations, and the limitations disclosing receiving a request comprising a unique identifier of the [charging station] and a unique identifier associated to a user; determining if the identifier of the [charging station] belongs to the unique list of identifiers of any of the plurality of commissioning groups; determining if the identifier associated to the user belongs to the unique list of identifiers of any of the plurality of commissioning groups; determining, based on at least one commissioning group comprising the identifier of the [charging station] or the identifier associated to the user, which settings are to be performed and where for automatic commissioning; determine whether the [charging station] which sent the authorization request has been previously configured according to the settings of at least one associated commissioning group and thereby already commissioned; if the commissioning for the [charging station] has not yet been performed, performing commissioning of the [charging station] which sent the authorization request by configuring at least one of the [charging station] which sent the authorization request, the [charging station management system] or the [one or more third party systems] according to the determined settings. Additionally, the claims directly correspond to mental processes (observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion) since the claim limitations describe the observation and evaluation of data, and making a judgment or opinion based on the observed and evaluated data. The claims recite an abstract idea.
Note: the features or elements in brackets in the above section are inserted for reading clarity, but are analyzed as “additional elements” under Step 2A Prong Two and Step 2B below.
The judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application simply because the claim recites the additional elements of: a processor, memory, charging station, charging station management system or third party systems. The additional elements of the processor, memory, and charging station management system or third party system are computer components recited at a high-level of generality performing the above-mentioned limitations. The combination of the additional elements are no more than mere instructions to apply the judicial exception using a generic computer. The additional element of the charging station amounts to generally linking the judicial exception to a particular field of use (electric vehicle charging). Accordingly, in combination, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claim is directed to an abstract idea.
The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional elements amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer, and generally linking the judicial exception to a particular field of use. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer cannot provide an inventive concept. Thus, when viewed as an ordered combination, nothing in the claim adds significantly more (i.e. an inventive concept) to the abstract idea. The claim is not patent eligible.
Independent claim 8 recites the limitations: storing a plurality of commissioning groups, each commissioning group comprising information on different settings for configuring at least one of a [charging station], a [charging station management system] or one or more [third party systems] associated with the [charging station] and a unique list of identifiers; receiving an authorization request from a [charging station], the authorization request comprising a unique identifier of the charging station and a unique identifier associated to a user; determining if the identifier of the [charging station] belongs to the unique list of identifiers of any of the plurality of commissioning groups; determining if the identifier associated to the user belongs to the unique list of identifiers of any of the plurality of commissioning groups; determining, based on the at least one commissioning group comprising the identifier of the [charging station] or the identifier associated to the user, which settings are to be performed and where for automatic commissioning; and performing commissioning of the [charging station] which sent the authorization request by configuring at least one of the [charging station] which sent the authorization request, the [charging station management system] or the one or more [third party systems] according to the determined settings. The invention and claims are drawn towards commissioning electric vehicle charging stations, and the claims recite limitations that correspond to certain methods of organizing human activity (managing personal interactions, behavior, relationships; commercial interactions; business relations; following rules or instructions) as evidenced by the invention and its objectives being to enable the performance of commissioning charging stations, and the limitations disclosing receiving a request comprising a unique identifier of the [charging station] and a unique identifier associated to a user; determining if the identifier of the [charging station] belongs to the unique list of identifiers of any of the plurality of commissioning groups; determining if the identifier associated to the user belongs to the unique list of identifiers of any of the plurality of commissioning groups; determining, based on at least one commissioning group comprising the identifier of the [charging station] or the identifier associated to the user, which settings are to be performed and where for automatic commissioning; performing commissioning of the [charging station] which sent the authorization request by configuring at least one of the [charging station] which sent the authorization request, the [charging station management system] or the [one or more third party systems] according to the determined settings. Additionally, the claim limitations directly correspond to mental processes (observation, evaluation, judgement, opinion) since the claim limitations describe the observation and evaluation of data, and making a judgement or opinion based on the observed and evaluated data. The claims recite an abstract idea.
Note: the features or elements in brackets in the above section are inserted for reading clarity, but are analyzed as “additional elements” under Step 2A Prong Two and Step 2B below.
The judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application simply because the claim recites the additional elements of: a processor, memory, charging station, charging station management system or third party systems. The additional elements of the processor, memory, and charging station management system or third party system are computer components recited at a high-level of generality performing the above-mentioned limitations. The combination of the additional elements are no more than mere instructions to apply the judicial exception using a generic computer. The additional element of the charging station amounts to generally linking the judicial exception to a particular field of use (electric vehicle charging). Accordingly, in combination, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claim is directed to an abstract idea.
The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional elements amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer, and generally linking the judicial exception to a particular field of use. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer cannot provide an inventive concept. Thus, when viewed as an ordered combination, nothing in the claim adds significantly more (i.e. an inventive concept) to the abstract idea. The claim is not patent eligible.
Dependent claim 4 recites the limitation that the one or more third party systems comprise at least one of a management system of a leasing company or an internet connectivity solution management system. The limitation is further directed to the abstract idea analyzed above. The claim also recites the additional element of the third part system comprising a management system of a leasing company or an internet connectivity solution management system. The additional element(s) amount to “apply it” or merely using a computer as tool to implement the abstract idea. Accordingly, in combination, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. Further, when viewed as an ordered combination, nothing in the claim adds significantly more (i.e. an inventive concept) to the abstract idea. The claim is not patent eligible.
Dependent claim 15 recites the limitation of a non-transitory computer readable medium comprising instructions which, when executed by a computer, cause the computer to carry out the method. The limitation is further directed to the abstract idea analyzed above. The claim also recites the additional element of the computer readable medium and a computer. The additional element(s) amount to “apply it” or merely using a computer as tool to implement the abstract idea. Accordingly, in combination, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. Further, when viewed as an ordered combination, nothing in the claim adds significantly more (i.e. an inventive concept) to the abstract idea. The claim is not patent eligible.
Dependent claims 2, 3, 5-7, and 9-13 recite additional limitations that are further directed to the abstract idea analyzed in the rejected claims above and/or recite additional elements that have been analyzed in the rejected claims above. Thus, claims 2, 3, 5-7, and 9-13 are also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(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.
Claim(s) 8, 11, and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Solomon (2012/0173292).
Claim 8: A method for commissioning of a charging station, the method comprising:
storing a plurality of commissioning groups, each commissioning group comprising information on different settings for configuring at least one of a charging station, a charging station management system or one or more third party systems associated with the charging station and a unique list of identifiers; (Solomon ‘292 ¶0031 reservation data store stores information that defines the charging group reservations; the reservation information stored in the reservation data store includes, for each charging group reservation, one or more of the date and time of the reservation, an identifier of the charging reservation group, an identifier associated with the electric vehicle operator belonging to the reservation, the pricing to apply to the reservation, and whether the reservation includes come-and-go privileges; further ¶0018 and ¶0019 indicates the groups are commissioned)
receiving an authorization request from a charging station, the authorization request comprising a unique identifier of the charging station and a unique identifier associated to a user; determining if the identifier of the charging station belongs to the unique list of identifiers of any of the plurality of commissioning groups; determining if the identifier associated to the user belongs to the unique list of identifiers of any of the plurality of commissioning groups; (Solomon ‘292 ¶0052 receives a request from one of the electric vehicle operators for a charging session to be established to allow that electric vehicle operator to use an available charging port of that charging station, then ¶0056 the server determines whether the electric vehicle operator is currently associated with a valid charging group reservation; the charging session request is transmitted to the server (e.g., by the charging station) (authorization request) and the reservation module determines whether the electric vehicle operator is currently associated with a valid charging group reservation based on an electric vehicle operator identifier included or derived from the charging session request, an identification of the charging station and/or charging port, and the reservation information stored in the reservation data store; based on the charging station identification and/or charging port identification, the reservation module determines the charging reservation group of which the charging port is a member; the reservation module then determines, based on the electric vehicle operator identifier included or derived from the charging session request, whether that electric vehicle operator is currently (e.g., substantially at the time of the request) associated with an outstanding charging group reservation for that charging group)
determining, based on the at least one commissioning group comprising the identifier of the charging station or the identifier associated to the user, which settings are to be performed and where for automatic commissioning; and (Solomon ‘292 ¶0031 reservation data store stores information that defines the charging group reservations; the reservation information stored in the reservation data store includes, for each charging group reservation, one or more of the date and time of the reservation, an identifier of the charging reservation group, an identifier associated with the electric vehicle operator belonging to the reservation, the pricing to apply to the reservation, and whether the reservation includes come-and-go privileges; the server transmits reservation information to the appropriate charging stations; reservation information allows the charging stations in the reservation group to, among other things, determine whether to grant a charging session request received from an electric vehicle operator; see also ¶0056; ¶0066 further discloses that the charging session is automatically established assuming that the electric vehicle operator is otherwise authorized to use that charging port and/or charging station and the reservation can be supported; this is effectively treated as a reservation for the charging group)
performing commissioning of the charging station which sent the authorization request by configuring at least one of the charging station which sent the authorization request, the charging station management system or the one or more third party systems according to the determined settings. (Solomon ‘292 ¶0057 the charging station determines whether the electric vehicle operator is currently associated with a valid charging group reservation; ¶0058 if the electric vehicle operator is currently associated with a valid charging group reservation, then flow moves to operation and a charging session is established; establishing the charging session includes energizing the charging port to allow energy to be transferred between an electric vehicle and a power grid via the charging port)
Claim 11: The method of claim 8, wherein the unique list of identifiers comprises at least one identifier associated with a user and the settings of the respective commissioning group or sub-commissioning group comprise parameters to set at least one user-specific setting at least one of at the charging station, the charging station management system or the one or more third party systems. (Solomon ‘292 ¶0044 the reservation module determines whether the reservation can be fulfilled based on the input received from the electric vehicle operator, the parameters of any charging reservation groups that have been configured that include charging station(s) near the provided location, and the availability of those charging reservation groups for the requested time/date; ¶0041 charging reservation group configuration information may include one or more of the following: the pricing for the charging reservation group, a list of identifiers (e.g., charging station serial numbers) for those charging stations that are part of the charging reservation group, information that indicates how to communicate with the charging stations that are part of the charging reservation group (e.g., the IP addresses of the charging stations), and a list of identifiers that indicate which electric vehicle operators are allowed to use the charging station(s) of the charging reservation group)
Claim 15: A non-transitory computer readable medium comprising instructions which, when executed by a computer, cause the computer to carry out the method of claim 8. (Solomon ‘292 ¶0090 software instructions stored in memory embodied in a non-transitory computer readable medium; one or more processors coupled to one or more other components, such as one or more storage devices (non-transitory machine-readable storage media)); implemented using code and data stored and executed on one or more electronic devices (e.g., a charging station, a charging station network server, etc.); electronic devices typically include a set of one or more processors coupled to one or more other components, such as one or more storage devices (non-transitory machine-readable storage media))
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.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 4, and 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Solomon (2012/0173292) in view of Khoo (2021/0090141).
Claim 1: Solomon ‘292 discloses: An apparatus for commissioning of charging stations, the apparatus comprising:
at least one processor; and at least one memory comprising instructions which, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the apparatus to: (Solomon ‘292 ¶0090 software instructions stored in memory embodied in a non-transitory computer readable medium; one or more processors coupled to one or more other components, such as one or more storage devices (non-transitory machine-readable storage media))
store a plurality of commissioning groups, each commissioning group comprising information on different settings for configuring at least one of a charging station, a charging station management system or one or more third party systems associated with the charging station when the charging station is deployed and a unique list of identifiers; (Solomon ‘292 ¶0031 reservation data store stores information that defines the charging group reservations; the reservation information stored in the reservation data store includes, for each charging group reservation, one or more of the date and time of the reservation, an identifier of the charging reservation group, an identifier associated with the electric vehicle operator belonging to the reservation, the pricing to apply to the reservation, and whether the reservation includes come-and-go privileges; reservation information allows the charging stations in the reservation group to, among other things, determine whether to grant a charging session request received from an electric vehicle operator (thus charging station is deployed); also ¶0037 disclosing at operation (thus the charging station is deployed), the reservation group configuration module receives input from the host to configure a charging reservation group ( e.g., create a charging reservation group or edit an existing charging reservation group); The input may indicate one or more of the following: information that indicates which electric vehicle operators are allowed to use the electric vehicle charging station(s) of the reservation group ( e.g., a list of electric vehicle operator identifier(s) that are allowed to use the charging station(s) and/or a list of electric vehicle operator identifier( s) that are not allowed to use the charging station(s)); and whether the reservation group supports come-and-go privileges; further ¶0018 and ¶0019 indicates the groups are commissioned)
receive an authorization request from a charging station, the authorization request comprising a unique identifier of the charging station and a unique identifier associated to a user; determine if the identifier of the charging station belongs to the unique list of identifiers of any of the plurality of commissioning groups; determine if the identifier associated to the user belongs to the unique list of identifiers of any of the plurality of commissioning groups; (Solomon ‘292 ¶0052 receives a request from one of the electric vehicle operators for a charging session to be established to allow that electric vehicle operator to use an available charging port of that charging station, then ¶0056 the server determines whether the electric vehicle operator is currently associated with a valid charging group reservation; the charging session request is transmitted to the server (e.g., by the charging station) (authorization request) and the reservation module determines whether the electric vehicle operator is currently associated with a valid charging group reservation based on an electric vehicle operator identifier included or derived from the charging session request, an identification of the charging station and/or charging port, and the reservation information stored in the reservation data store; based on the charging station identification and/or charging port identification, the reservation module determines the charging reservation group of which the charging port is a member; the reservation module then determines, based on the electric vehicle operator identifier included or derived from the charging session request, whether that electric vehicle operator is currently (e.g., substantially at the time of the request) associated with an outstanding charging group reservation for that charging group)
determine, based on at least one commissioning group comprising the identifier of the charging station or the identifier associated to the user, which settings are to be performed and where for automatic commissioning; (Solomon ‘292 ¶0031 reservation data store stores information that defines the charging group reservations; the reservation information stored in the reservation data store includes, for each charging group reservation, one or more of the date and time of the reservation, an identifier of the charging reservation group, an identifier associated with the electric vehicle operator belonging to the reservation, the pricing to apply to the reservation, and whether the reservation includes come-and-go privileges; the server transmits reservation information to the appropriate charging stations; reservation information allows the charging stations in the reservation group to, among other things, determine whether to grant a charging session request received from an electric vehicle operator; see also ¶0056; ¶0066 further discloses that the charging session is automatically established assuming that the electric vehicle operator is otherwise authorized to use that charging port and/or charging station and the reservation can be supported; this is effectively treated as a reservation for the charging group)
Solomon ‘292 in view of Khoo discloses:
determine whether the charging station which sent the authorization request has been previously configured according to the settings of at least one associated commissioning group and thereby already commissioned; and
Solomon ‘292 discloses identifying the charging station that sent the authorization request, but does not explicitly disclose determining whether the charging station which sent the authorization request has been previously configured according to the settings of at least one associated commissioning group and thereby already commissioned. Khoo suggests or discloses this limitation/concept: (Khoo ¶0090 disclosing the charging station sends an identification and request for charging the electric vehicle to the cloud server; the identification corresponds to the specific charging station; ¶0091 request for charging the electric vehicle 130 may be a general request or may contain specific parameters describing the charge transfer; ¶0101 disclosing details of charging parameters sent by the cloud server and used throughout the charging system; ¶0103 charging station may adjust the electric vehicle's charge transfer based on the received charging parameters (thus, configuring according to settings), e.g., the charging station may adjust the default charge settings using the new charging parameters or simply replace old parameters values with the new ones; charging station may adjust the charge transfer throughout the actual charging process or before charging begins). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Solomon ‘292 to include determining whether the charging station which sent the authorization request has been previously configured according to the settings of at least one associated commissioning group and thereby already commissioned as taught by Khoo. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to modify Solomon ‘292 in order to provide the infrastructure necessary for supporting numerous electric vehicles (see ¶0006 of Khoo).
if the commissioning for the charging station has not yet been performed, perform commissioning of the charging station which sent the authorization request by configuring at least one of the charging station which sent the authorization request, the charging station management system or the one or more third party systems according to the determined settings.
Solomon ‘292 discloses performing commissioning of the charging station which sent the authorization request by configuring at least one of the charging station which sent the authorization request, the charging station management system or the one or more third party systems according to the determined settings, but does not explicitly disclose if the commissioning for the charging station has not yet been performed, perform commissioning of the charging station which sent the authorization request by configuring at least one of the charging station which sent the authorization request, the charging station management system or the one or more third party systems according to the determined settings. Khoo suggests or discloses this limitation/concept: (Khoo ¶0090 disclosing the charging station sends an identification and request for charging the electric vehicle to the cloud server; the identification corresponds to the specific charging station; ¶0091 request for charging the electric vehicle 130 may be a general request or may contain specific parameters describing the charge transfer; ¶0101 disclosing details of charging parameters sent by the cloud server and used throughout the charging system; ¶0103 charging station may adjust the electric vehicle's charge transfer based on the received charging parameters (thus, configuring according to settings), e.g., the charging station may adjust the default charge settings using the new charging parameters or simply replace old parameters values with the new ones; charging station may adjust the charge transfer throughout the actual charging process or before charging begins). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Solomon ‘292 to include if the commissioning for the charging station has not yet been performed, perform commissioning of the charging station which sent the authorization request by configuring at least one of the charging station which sent the authorization request, the charging station management system or the one or more third party systems according to the determined settings as taught by Khoo. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to modify Solomon ‘292 in order to provide the infrastructure necessary for supporting numerous electric vehicles (see ¶0006 of Khoo).
Claim 4: The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the one or more third party systems comprise at least one of a management system of a leasing company or an internet connectivity solution management system. (Solomon ‘292 ¶0020 disclosing the hosts may be an apartment/condo owner (leasing company))
Claim 5: The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the unique list of identifiers comprises at least one identifier associated with a user and the settings of the respective commissioning group or sub-commissioning group comprise parameters to set at least one user-specific setting at least one of at the charging station, the charging station management system or the one or more third party systems. (Solomon ‘292 ¶0044 the reservation module determines whether the reservation can be fulfilled based on the input received from the electric vehicle operator, the parameters of any charging reservation groups that have been configured that include charging station(s) near the provided location, and the availability of those charging reservation groups for the requested time/date; ¶0041 charging reservation group configuration information may include one or more of the following: the pricing for the charging reservation group, a list of identifiers (e.g., charging station serial numbers) for those charging stations that are part of the charging reservation group, information that indicates how to communicate with the charging stations that are part of the charging reservation group (e.g., the IP addresses of the charging stations), and a list of identifiers that indicate which electric vehicle operators are allowed to use the charging station(s) of the charging reservation group)
Claim(s) 2 and 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Solomon (2012/0173292) in view of Khoo (2021/0090141) further in view of Solomon (2010/0315197).
Claim 2: The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the at least one memory further comprises instructions which, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the apparatus to:
store at least one sub-commissioning group, wherein each sub-commissioning group is associated to one commissioning group and comprises further settings for configuring at least one of the charging station, the charging station management system or the one or more third party systems and at least one identifier from the unique list of identifiers of the commissioning group; (Solomon’292 ¶0031 reservation data store stores information that defines the charging group reservations; the reservation information stored in the reservation data store includes, for each charging group reservation, one or more of the date and time of the reservation, an identifier of the charging reservation group, an identifier associated with the electric vehicle operator belonging to the reservation, the pricing to apply to the reservation, and whether the reservation includes come-and-go privileges (sub-group; see also ¶0019); other sub-groups aside from those with come-and-go-privileges include ¶0018 charging reservation group to include one or more electric vehicle charging stations, which typically belong to that host, and their respective charging ports; the charging station host specifies the electric vehicle charging station(s) that are to be part of the charging reservation group and the charging port(s) of those charging station(s) are automatically part of the charging reservation group; another subgroup being the group that has an active reservation (¶0055))
Solomon ‘292 in view of Solomon ‘197 discloses the following limitations:
activate the at least one sub-commissioning group for a predetermined time period after the configuration according to the associated commissioning group has been performed by setting an authorization mode of the charging station which sent the authorization request to public for the predetermined time period;
Solomon ‘292 discloses activating a sub-commission group, but does not explicitly disclose activating the at least one sub-commissioning group for a predetermined time period after the configuration according to the associated commissioning group has been performed by setting an authorization mode of the charging station which sent the authorization request to public for the predetermined time period. Solomon ‘197 suggests or discloses this limitation/concept: (Solomon ‘197 ¶0091 disclosing the charging stations can be configured to operate as a public charging station (available to any subscriber) during certain time periods of the day and operate as a private charging station (available only to certain subscribers) during other time periods of the day; charging stations may be configured as operating in private mode during the day (e.g., during the workday) and public mode during evening and overnight hours, or vice versa; set of restricted lists can identify whether a requesting vehicle operator is authorized to use the charging station during those times). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Solomon ‘292 in view of Khoo to include activating the at least one sub-commissioning group for a predetermined time period after the configuration according to the associated commissioning group has been performed by setting an authorization mode of the charging station which sent the authorization request to public for the predetermined time period as taught by Solomon ‘197. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to modify Solomon ‘292 in view of Khoo in order to identify whether a vehicle operator is authorized to use the charging station during those times (see ¶0091 of Solomon ‘197).
receive an authorization request within the predetermined time period comprising the identifier of the charging station and another identifier associated to a user; and
Solomon ‘292 discloses receiving an authorization request, but does not explicitly disclose receiving an authorization request within the predetermined time period comprising the identifier of the charging station and another identifier associated to a user. Solomon ‘197 discloses this limitation/concept: (Solomon ‘197 ¶0050 authorization module receives charging session authorization requests and determines whether to authorize the charging session based on the subscriber profiles, which include operator account information (e.g., operator identifiers, account standing, type of account (e.g., privilege of account including any time of day restrictions); ¶0067 the charging session authorization request can include the identifier that was included in the charging session request; charging session authorization request can also include additional information (e.g., date and time of the received charging session request, etc.); ¶0098 determine whether the operator can potentially use the charging station at the time of the request, e.g., assume that the charging station is currently operating in a private mode and only identifiers that belong to certain group(s) are allowed to use the charging station at this time (if otherwise authorized to use the charging station); if the identifier that is included in the charging session request does not belong to those certain group(s), then the request will be rejected). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Solomon ‘292 in view Khoo to include receive an authorization request within the predetermined time period comprising the identifier of the charging station and another identifier associated to a user as taught by Solomon ‘197. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to modify Solomon ‘292 in view of Khoo in order to identify whether a vehicle operator is authorized to use the charging station during those times (see ¶0091 of Solomon ‘197).
configure at least one of the charging station which sent the authorization message, the charging station management system or the one or more third party systems according to the settings of the at least one sub-commissioning group.
Solomon ‘292 discloses configuring a charging station, but does not explicitly disclose configuring at least one of the charging station which sent the authorization message, the charging station management system or the one or more third party systems according to the settings of the at least one sub-commissioning group. Solomon ‘197 suggests or discloses this limitation/concept: (Solomon ‘197 if the identifier included in the charging session request belongs to those certain group(s) (i.e., the identifier passes the restricted list authorization procedure), then the authorization procedure continues at operation 11.3 where the charging station generates and transmits a charging session authorization request to the DCU to begin the profile based authorization procedure). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Solomon ‘292 to include configuring at least one of the charging station which sent the authorization message, the charging station management system or the one or more third party systems according to the settings of the at least one sub-commissioning group as taught by Solomon ‘197. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to modify Solomon ‘292 in order to identify whether a vehicle operator is authorized to use the charging station during those times (see ¶0091 of Solomon ‘197).
Claim 6: The apparatus of claim 1,
wherein the unique list of identifiers comprises an identifier of at least one charging station and the settings of the respective commissioning group or sub-commissioning group comprise parameters to at least one of set a maximum current of the charging station, set a heartbeat interval of the charging station, update a data communication plan of an internet connectivity solution at the charging station, set the authorization mode at the charging station to public or set the authorization mode at the charging station to private.
Solomon ‘292 discloses a unique list of identifiers comprises an identifier of at least one charging station and the settings of the respective commissioning group or sub-commissioning group, but does not explicitly disclose that the unique list of identifiers comprises an identifier of at least one charging station and the settings of the respective commissioning group or sub-commissioning group comprise parameters to at least one of set a maximum current of the charging station, set a heartbeat interval of the charging station, update a data communication plan of an internet connectivity solution at the charging station, set the authorization mode at the charging station to public or set the authorization mode at the charging station to private. Solomon ‘197 suggests or discloses this limitation/concept: (Solomon ‘197 ¶0050 authorization module receives charging session authorization requests and determines whether to authorize the charging session based on the subscriber profiles, which include operator account information (e.g., operator identifiers, account standing, type of account (e.g., privilege of account including any time of day restrictions); ¶0067 the charging session authorization request can include the identifier that was included in the charging session request; charging session authorization request can also include additional information (e.g., date and time of the received charging session request, etc.); ¶0091 the charging stations can be configured to operate as a public charging station (available to any subscriber) during certain time periods of the day and operate as a private charging station (available only to certain subscribers) during other time periods of the day. For example, charging stations may be configured as operating in private mode during the day (e.g., during the workday) and public mode during evening and overnight hours, or vice versa. The set of restricted lists can identify whether a requesting vehicle operator is authorized to use the charging station during those times; ¶0092-¶0093 disclosing a restricted authorizations procedure; ¶0094 the charging station 120 determines whether the received identifier belongs to a group that can currently use the charging station. For example, the charging station 120 accesses the set of restricted lists to compare the received identifier with the restricted lists. If the identifier is not associated with a group that can currently use the charging station (e.g., the charging station is currently in a private mode and the identifier is one that is not authorized to use the charging station in the private mode), then flow moves to block 1050 where the request is rejected; if the identifier is associated with a group that can currently use the charging station (e.g., the charging station is currently in public mode or the charging station is in private mode and the identifier is one that is authorized to use the charging station in private mode), then flow moves to block 1060 where authorization is performed; ¶0095 if the identifier belongs to a group that currently can use the charging station, the charging station 120 grants the request and allows a charging session to be established without requiring additional authorization of the block 1060). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Solomon ‘292 in view of Khoo to include that the unique list of identifiers comprises an identifier of at least one charging station and the settings of the respective commissioning group or sub-commissioning group comprise parameters to at least one of set a maximum current of the charging station, set a heartbeat interval of the charging station, update a data communication plan of an internet connectivity solution at the charging station, set the authorization mode at the charging station to public or set the authorization mode at the charging station to private as taught by Solomon ‘197. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to modify Solomon ‘292 in view of Khoo in order to identify whether a vehicle operator is authorized to use the charging station during those times (see ¶0091 of Solomon ‘197).
Claim(s) 9 and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Solomon (2012/0173292) in view of Solomon (2010/0315197).
Claim 9: The method of claim 8, further comprising:
storing at least one sub-commissioning group, wherein each sub-commissioning group is associated to one commissioning group and comprises further settings for configuring at least one of the charging station, the charging station management system or the one or more third party systems and at least one identifier from the unique list of identifiers; (Solomon’292 ¶0031 reservation data store stores information that defines the charging group reservations; the reservation information stored in the reservation data store includes, for each charging group reservation, one or more of the date and time of the reservation, an identifier of the charging reservation group, an identifier associated with the electric vehicle operator belonging to the reservation, the pricing to apply to the reservation, and whether the reservation includes come-and-go privileges (sub-group; see also ¶0019); other sub-groups aside from those with come-and-go-privileges include ¶0018 charging reservation group to include one or more electric vehicle charging stations, which typically belong to that host, and their respective charging ports; the charging station host specifies the electric vehicle charging station(s) that are to be part of the charging reservation group and the charging port(s) of those charging station(s) are automatically part of the charging reservation group; another subgroup being the group that has an active reservation (¶0055))
Solomon ‘292 in view of Solomon ‘197 discloses the following limitations:
activating a configuration according to the at least one sub-commissioning group for a predetermined time period after the configuration according to the associated commissioning group has been performed by setting an authorization mode of the charging station which sent the authorization request to public for the predetermined time period;
Solomon ‘292 discloses activating a sub-commission group, but does not explicitly disclose activating the at least one sub-commissioning group for a predetermined time period after the configuration according to the associated commissioning group has been performed by setting an authorization mode of the charging station which sent the authorization request to public for the predetermined time period. Solomon ‘197 suggests or discloses this limitation/concept: (Solomon ‘197 ¶0091 disclosing the charging stations can be configured to operate as a public charging station (available to any subscriber) during certain time periods of the day and operate as a private charging station (available only to certain subscribers) during other time periods of the day; charging stations may be configured as operating in private mode during the day (e.g., during the workday) and public mode during evening and overnight hours, or vice versa; set of restricted lists can identify whether a requesting vehicle operator is authorized to use the charging station during those times). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Solomon to include activating the at least one sub-commissioning group for a predetermined time period after the configuration according to the associated commissioning group has been performed by setting an authorization mode of the charging station which sent the authorization request to public for the predetermined time period as taught by Solomon ‘197. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to modify Solomon ‘292 in order to identify whether a vehicle operator is authorized to use the charging station during those times (see ¶0091 of Solomon ‘197).
receiving an authorization request from the charging station within the predetermined time period comprising the identifier of the charging station and another identifier associated to a user; and
Solomon ‘292 discloses receiving an authorization request, but does not explicitly disclose receiving an authorization request within the predetermined time period comprising the identifier of the charging station and another identifier associated to a user. Solomon ‘197 discloses this limitation/concept: (Solomon ‘197 ¶0050 authorization module receives charging session authorization requests and determines whether to authorize the charging session based on the subscriber profiles, which include operator account information (e.g., operator identifiers, account standing, type of account (e.g., privilege of account including any time of day restrictions); ¶0067 the charging session authorization request can include the identifier that was included in the charging session request; charging session authorization request can also include additional information (e.g., date and time of the received charging session request, etc.); ¶0098 determine whether the operator can potentially use the charging station at the time of the request, e.g., assume that the charging station is currently operating in a private mode and only identifiers that belong to certain group(s) are allowed to use the charging station at this time (if otherwise authorized to use the charging station); if the identifier that is included in the charging session request does not belong to those certain group(s), then the request will be rejected). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Solomon ‘292 to include receive an authorization request within the predetermined time period comprising the identifier of the charging station and another identifier associated to a user as taught by Solomon ‘197. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to modify Solomon ‘292 in order to identify whether a vehicle operator is authorized to use the charging station during those times (see ¶0091 of Solomon ‘197).
configuring at least one of the charging station which sent the authorization message, the charging station management system or the one or more third party systems according to the settings of the at least one sub-commissioning group.
Solomon ‘292 discloses configuring a charging station, but does not explicitly disclose configuring at least one of the charging station which sent the authorization message, the charging station management system or the one or more third party systems according to the settings of the at least one sub-commissioning group. Solomon ‘197 suggests or discloses this limitation/concept: (Solomon ‘197 if the identifier included in the charging session request belongs to those certain group(s) (i.e., the identifier passes the restricted list authorization procedure), then the authorization procedure continues at operation 11.3 where the charging station generates and transmits a charging session authorization request to the DCU to begin the profile based authorization procedure). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Solomon ‘292 to include configuring at least one of the charging station which sent the authorization message, the charging station management system or the one or more third party systems according to the settings of the at least one sub-commissioning group as taught by Solomon ‘197. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to modify Solomon ‘292 in order to identify whether a vehicle operator is authorized to use the charging station during those times (see ¶0091 of Solomon ‘197).
Claim 12: The method of claim 8,
wherein the unique list of identifiers comprises at least one identifier of a charging station and the settings of the respective commissioning group or sub-commissioning group comprise parameters to at least one of set a maximum current of the charging station, set a heartbeat interval of the charging station, update a data communication plan of an internet connectivity solution at the charging station, set the authorization mode at the charging station to public or set the authorization mode at the charging station to private.
Solomon ‘292 discloses a unique list of identifiers comprises an identifier of at least one charging station and the settings of the respective commissioning group or sub-commissioning group, but does not explicitly disclose that the unique list of identifiers comprises an identifier of at least one charging station and the settings of the respective commissioning group or sub-commissioning group comprise parameters to at least one of set a maximum current of the charging station, set a heartbeat interval of the charging station, update a data communication plan of an internet connectivity solution at the charging station, set the authorization mode at the charging station to public or set the authorization mode at the charging station to private. Solomon ‘197 suggests or discloses this limitation/concept: (Solomon ‘197 ¶0050 authorization module receives charging session authorization requests and determines whether to authorize the charging session based on the subscriber profiles, which include operator account information (e.g., operator identifiers, account standing, type of account (e.g., privilege of account including any time of day restrictions); ¶0067 the charging session authorization request can include the identifier that was included in the charging session request; charging session authorization request can also include additional information (e.g., date and time of the received charging session request, etc.); ¶0091 the charging stations can be configured to operate as a public charging station (available to any subscriber) during certain time periods of the day and operate as a private charging station (available only to certain subscribers) during other time periods of the day. For example, charging stations may be configured as operating in private mode during the day (e.g., during the workday) and public mode during evening and overnight hours, or vice versa. The set of restricted lists can identify whether a requesting vehicle operator is authorized to use the charging station during those times; ¶0092-¶0093 disclosing a restricted authorizations procedure; ¶0094 the charging station 120 determines whether the received identifier belongs to a group that can currently use the charging station. For example, the charging station 120 accesses the set of restricted lists to compare the received identifier with the restricted lists. If the identifier is not associated with a group that can currently use the charging station (e.g., the charging station is currently in a private mode and the identifier is one that is not authorized to use the charging station in the private mode), then flow moves to block 1050 where the request is rejected; if the identifier is associated with a group that can currently use the charging station (e.g., the charging station is currently in public mode or the charging station is in private mode and the identifier is one that is authorized to use the charging station in private mode), then flow moves to block 1060 where authorization is performed; ¶0095 if the identifier belongs to a group that currently can use the charging station, the charging station 120 grants the request and allows a charging session to be established without requiring additional authorization of the block 1060). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Solomon ‘292 to include that the unique list of identifiers comprises an identifier of at least one charging station and the settings of the respective commissioning group or sub-commissioning group comprise parameters to at least one of set a maximum current of the charging station, set a heartbeat interval of the charging station, update a data communication plan of an internet connectivity solution at the charging station, set the authorization mode at the charging station to public or set the authorization mode at the charging station to private as taught by Solomon ‘197. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to modify Solomon ‘292 in order to identify whether a vehicle operator is authorized to use the charging station during those times (see ¶0091 of Solomon ‘197).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3, 7, 10, and 13 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 101, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
No prior art is applied to the following claims:
Claim 3: The apparatus of claim 2, wherein the at least one memory further comprises instructions which, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the apparatus to: determine if the charging station which sent the authorization request has been previously configured according to the settings of at least one associated commissioning group; determine if the at least one commissioning group is associated to at least one sub- commissioning group; determine if the at least one sub-commissioning group has been previously activated and that the predetermined time period has elapsed; and cause an authorization process to continue based on the authorization request if the configurations based on at least one of the commissioning group or the sub-commissioning group have been already done.
Claim 7: The apparatus of claim 2, wherein the at least one identifier associated to a user of at least one sub-commissioning group is associated with maintenance personnel and the settings comprise parameters to at least one of set an authorization mode at a charging station to public, set the authorization mode at a charging station to private, set a logging level of a charging station to a debug level for maintenance or set the logging level of a charging station to a normal level; and wherein the at least one memory further comprises instructions which, when executed by the processor, cause the apparatus to: receive an authorization request from the charging station after the predetermined time period has elapsed, the authorization request comprising the identifier of the charging station and an identifier associated to a user; determine if the identifier associated with the user is comprised in the sub-commissioning group associated with the maintenance personnel; and configure the charging station which sent the authorization request and the charging station management system according to the settings of the sub-commissioning group.
Claim 10: The method of claim 9, comprising: determining if the charging station which sent the authorization request has been previously configured according to the settings of at least one associated commissioning group; determining if the at least one commissioning group is associated to at least one sub- commissioning group; determining if the at least one sub-commissioning group has been previously activated and that the predetermined time period has elapsed; and causing an authorization process to continue based on the authorization request if the configurations based on at least one of the commissioning group or the sub-commissioning group have been already done.
Claim 13: The method of claim 8, wherein the at least one identifier associated with a user of at least one sub-commissioning group is associated with maintenance personnel and the settings comprise parameters to at least one of set the authorization mode at a charging station to public, to set the authorization mode at a charging station to private, set a logging level of a charging station to a debug level for maintenance or set a logging level of a charging station to a normal level; and the method further comprises receiving an authorization request from the charging station after the predetermined time period has elapsed, the authorization request comprising the identifier of the charging station and an identifier associated to a user; determining if the identifier associated with the user is comprised in the sub- commissioning group associated with the maintenance personnel; and configuring the charging station which sent the authorization request and the charging station management system according to the settings of the sub-commissioning group.
The closest patent or patent application prior art reference found that is relevant to the applicant’s invention includes Solomon (2012/0173292) which discloses an electric vehicle charging network server that establishes electric vehicle charging reservation groups. The electric vehicle charging network server is coupled with multiple electric vehicle charging stations that each include one or more charging ports and are owned by a charging station host. The server receives input from the charging station host to configure an electric vehicle charging reservation group, the charging ports are configured to the settings of the group. The server also configures the electric vehicle charging reservation group according to the received input. The reference does not appear to disclose the limitations of the dependent claims. The dependent claims appear to overcome the prior art.
The closest non-patent literature prior art reference found that is relevant to the applicant’s invention includes the publication “ Installing EVgo Charging Stations is as Easy as One, Two, Three” (evgo.com; 2021) which discloses the commissioning process of the EV charging stations including the utility provides power to the site, the EVgo commissioning team making the chargers ready to charge, and making the site available on all the various apps. The reference does not appear to disclose the limitations of the dependent claims. The dependent claims appear to overcome the prior art.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DIONE N SIMPSON whose telephone number is (571)272-5513. The examiner can normally be reached M-F; 7:30 a.m.-4:30 p.m..
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, Sarah Monfeldt can be reached at (571) 270-1833. 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.
DIONE N. SIMPSON
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3628
/DIONE N. SIMPSON/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3629
Prosecution Insights