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 .
Status of Claims
Claims 1-19 are presented for examination.
Claims 1-19 are rejected.
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 1-7, 8-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to abstract idea without significantly more.
101 Analysis – Step 1 – YES
Claim 1 is directed to “A method…”, claim 9 is directed to “A scheduling system…”, and claim 10 is directed to “An industrial site…”. Therefore, claims 1, 9-10 are within at least one of the four statutory categories.
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 claim 1 includes limitations that recite an abstract idea (emphasized below) and will be used as a representative claim for the remainder of the 101 rejection. The other analogous claims 9-10 are rejected for the same reasons as the representative claim 1 as discussed here.
Claim 1 recites:
“A method for controlling a mining vehicle of a plurality of mining vehicles, wherein: at least two of the plurality of mining vehicles are electrically connectable to a power delivery infrastructure, each of the plurality of mining vehicles has a power status while traveling along a target path, the power status comprises a power demand or a power surplus, and the method comprises: determining fleet status data, wherein the fleet status data comprises a position of each of the plurality of mining vehicles; and based on input data including the fleet status data, generating a driving schedule comprising instructions to control a movement of the vehicle along the target path, wherein generating the driving schedule comprises optimizing the driving schedule according to penalties, wherein the penalties comprise a penalty term indicative of a power surplus of the plurality of mining vehicles.”
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, “determine, fleet status data” steps in the context of the claims encompasses a driver, an operator, or a person observing, checking, examining, analyzing, determining, evaluating, and judging, calculating performance of vehicles on roads.
Examiner would also note 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 by a driver, an operator, or a bystander.
Accordingly, the claim 1 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 idea 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, the additional limitations beyond the above-noted abstract idea are as follows (where the underlined portions are the “additional limitations” while the bolded portions continue to represent the “abstract idea”):
“A method for controlling a mining vehicle of a plurality of mining vehicles, wherein: at least two of the plurality of mining vehicles are electrically connectable to a power delivery infrastructure, each of the plurality of mining vehicles has a power status while traveling along a target path, the power status comprises a power demand or a power surplus, and the method comprises: determining fleet status data, wherein the fleet status data comprises a position of each of the plurality of mining vehicles; and based on input data including the fleet status data, generating a driving schedule comprising instructions to control a movement of the vehicle along the target path, wherein generating the driving schedule comprises optimizing the driving schedule according to penalties, wherein the penalties comprise a penalty term indicative of a power surplus of the plurality of mining vehicles.”
These “a mining vehicle of a plurality of mining vehicles, wherein: at least two of the plurality of mining vehicles are electrically connectable to a power delivery infrastructure, each of the plurality of mining vehicles has a power status while traveling along a target path, the power status comprises a power demand or a power surplus” steps are insignificant extra-solution activities that merely use a processor to perform the process. In particular, the “generating a driving schedule comprising instructions to control a movement of the vehicle along the target path, wherein generating the driving schedule comprises optimizing the driving schedule according to penalties, wherein the penalties comprise a penalty term indicative of a power surplus of the plurality of mining vehicles.…” steps amount to mere data gathering which is a form of insignificant extra-solution activities. The “…optimizing the driving schedule according to penalties, wherein the penalties comprise a penalty term indicative of a power surplus of the plurality of mining vehicles…” step amounts to mere post solution activities and/or instructions to apply the recited abstract ideas (e.g., making evaluation and judgement based on observation by a driver, an operator, or a bystander). Lastly, “vehicle”, i.e. with sensors, ECUs, controllers, and processors merely describes how to generally “apply” the otherwise mental judgements in a generic or general-purpose computer environment, where processor is recited as generic processor performing a generic computer function of processing data. This generic processor limitation is no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component and merely automates a determining step.
Thus, taken alone, the additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. Further, looking at the additional limitation(s) as an ordered combination or as a whole, the limitation(s) add nothing that is not already present when looking at the elements taken individually. For instance, there is no indication that the additional elements, when considered as a whole, reflect an improvement in the functioning of a computer or an improvement to another technology or technical field, apply or use the above-noted judicial exception to effect a particular treatment or prophylaxis for a disease or medical condition, implement/use the above-noted judicial exception with a particular machine or manufacture that is integral to the claim, effect a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing, or apply or use the judicial exception in some other meaningful way beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment, such that the claim as a whole is not more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception (MPEP § 2106.05). Accordingly, the 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 claim 1 does 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. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional element of using “…power status… the fleet status data… generating the driving schedule… a power surplus…” amounts to nothing more than applying the exception using a generic computer component. Generally applying an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept.
Further, a conclusion that an additional element is insignificant extra-solution activity in Step 2A should be re-evaluated in Step 2B to determine if they are more than what is well-understood, routine, conventional activity in the field. The additional limitations “…power status… the fleet status data… generating the driving schedule… a power surplus…” are well-understood, routine, and conventional activities using conventional sensors. As explained, the additional elements are recited at a high level of generality to simply implement the abstract idea and are not themselves being technologically improved. See, e.g., MPEP §2106.05; Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank, 573 U.S., 208,223 (“[T]he mere recitation of a generic computer cannot transform a patent-ineligible abstract idea into a patent-eligible invention”). Electric Power Group, LLC v, Alstom S.A., 830 F.3d 1350, 1354-55, 119 USPQ2d 1739, 1742 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (Selecting information for collection, analysis and display constitute insignificant extra-solution activity). Apple, Inc. v. Ameranth, Inc., 842 F.3d 1229, 1243-44, 120 USPQ2d 1844, 1855-57 (Fed. Cir. 2016)(…at least two of the plurality of mining vehicles are electrically connectable to a power delivery infrastructure, each of the plurality of mining vehicles has a power status while traveling along a target path, the power status comprises a power demand or a power surplus…optimizing the driving schedule according to penalties, wherein the penalties comprise a penalty term indicative of a power surplus of the plurality of mining vehicles.). Hence, the claim 1 is not patent eligible.
Dependent Claims
Dependent claims 2-7, 11-19 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 well-understood, routine and conventional additional elements that do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. Dependent claims 2-7, 11-19 recite the limitation of “…wherein the at least one processor is operable to classify each zone of the plurality of zones by determining, using map data, a water content of each zone of the plurality of zones…” are furthered directed toward an abstract idea. The “…wherein the power delivery infrastructure includes a trolley line configured to provide electric power along at least a portion of the target path…wherein the penalties further comprise production constraints, production targets, and/or cost parameters…wherein the driving schedule includes instructions to stop the vehicle for a predefined amount of time and/or to enter a section of the target path at a defined time.” are furthered directed toward an insignificant extra-solution activities. Therefore, dependent claims 2-7, 11-19 are not patent eligible under the same rationale as provided in the rejection of independent claims 1, 9-10.
As such, claims 1-19 are rejected under 35 USC § 101 as being drawn to an abstract idea without significant more, and thus are ineligible.
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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lammers (US Pub. No.: 2013/0158827 A1: hereinafter “Lammers”) in view of CHEVALIER et al. (US Pub. No.: 20220371574 A1: hereinafter “CHEVALIER”).
Consider claims 1, 9-10:
Lammers teaches an industrial site (Fig. 3 elements 101-510), a scheduling system (Figs. 1-3 elements 100-510), a method for controlling a mining vehicle of a plurality of mining vehicles (See Lammers, e.g., “…mining truck having a regenerative braking mechanism and a friction braking mechanism includes receiving data indicative of a change in demand in an electrical power grid for regenerated electrical power from the mining truck, and commanding braking the mining truck such that application of the retarding torque is allocated to the regenerative braking mechanism in a manner responsive to the data. A mining truck and methodology relating to harvesting electrical power regenerated via application of retarding torque is also disclosed…”, of ¶ [0006]-¶ [0008], ¶ [0015]-¶ [0033], and Figs. 1-3 elements 100-510, Figs. 4-6 steps 600-670), wherein: at least two of the plurality of mining vehicles are electrically connectable to a power delivery infrastructure (See Lammers, e.g., “…Trolley line 100 may be a trolley line segment of a local electrical power grid 102, where the subject trolley line segment coincides with a downhill section 114 of a haul road 110…an electrical energy storage subsystem 106 connected with local grid 102 and having an electrical energy storage medium 10…data received via control system 62 may be indicative of a change in demand for electrical power in a power grid…truck 10 may be operating such that a first proportion of a retarding torque applied to wheels 14 and/or 16 is provided by friction braking subsystems 52 and 54, while a second proportion of the retarding torque is applied via motor 46…local power grid 102 may have a first demand for electrical power, based at least in part upon the electrical power demand of trucks 410 and 510. When truck 310 connects with trolley line segment 101, the power demand in grid 102 may change…a magnitude of the power demand may change, typically increasing. Upon or prior to electrically connecting truck 310 with trolley line segment 101, truck 10 may be adjusted such that the proportion of retarding torque applied to wheels 14 and/or 16 via motor 46 is increased and the proportion applied via subsystems 52 and 54 is decreased, thus allowing grid 102 to compensate for the increased demand…”), of ¶ [0006]-¶ [0008], ¶ [0015]-¶ [0033], and Figs. 1-3 elements 100-510, Figs. 4-6 steps 600-670), each of the plurality of mining vehicles has a power status while traveling along a target path (See Lammers, e.g., “…truck 310 electrically connecting with trolley line segment 101, truck 10 may be operated to begin feeding an increased amount of regenerated electrical power into grid 102, and such that upon electrically connecting truck 310 with trolley line segment 101 the increased demand for electrical power is satisfied…control unit 70 may command braking truck 10 such that truck 10 transitions between a first braking mode at which the retarding torque on wheels 14 and/or 16 is applied at least predominantly by friction braking subsystems 52 and 54, and a second braking mode at which the retarding torque is applied at least predominantly by motor 46 operating in its regenerative mode…”, of ¶ [0006]-¶ [0008], ¶ [0015]-¶ [0033], and Figs. 1-3 elements 100-510, Figs. 4-6 steps 600-670), the power status comprises a power demand or a power surplus (See Lammers, e.g., “…the increased power demand from time T.sub.1 to time T.sub.2 might, for instance, be the result of a demand for electrical power in grid 102 which results from an increased demand for electrical power from regional grid 104. Signal 205 shows a corresponding increase in the magnitude of electrical power fed to local grid 102. Accordingly, it will be understood that at time T.sub.1 braking may be commanded in truck 10 such that electrical power regenerated via truck 10 is fed to local grid 102 via trolley line 100 in a manner which is commensurate with the change in demand. As used herein, the term "commensurate" means that the power provided is of a magnitude, or otherwise has properties, which are demanded. Another way to understand this principle is that local grid 102 is receiving what it asks for, not just a roughly correlated "on" or "off" condition. A truck which simply begins regenerative braking because it perceives a need for more electrical power in the grid, without consideration of how that power is to be provided…”, of ¶ [0006]-¶ [0008], ¶ [0015]-¶ [0033], and Figs. 1-3 elements 100-510, Figs. 4-6 steps 600-670).
Lammers further teaches and the method comprises: determining fleet status data (See Lammers, e.g., “…the increased power demand from time T.sub.1 to time T.sub.2 might, for instance, be the result of a demand for electrical power in grid 102 which results from an increased demand for electrical power from regional grid 104. Signal 205 shows a corresponding increase in the magnitude of electrical power fed to local grid 102…will be understood that at time T.sub.1 braking may be commanded in truck 10 such that electrical power regenerated via truck 10 is fed to local grid 102 via trolley line 100 in a manner which is commensurate with the change in demand. As used herein, the term "commensurate" means that the power provided is of a magnitude, or otherwise has properties, which are demanded…local grid 102 is receiving what it asks for, not just a roughly correlated "on" or "off" condition. A truck which simply begins regenerative braking because it perceives a need for more electrical power in the grid, without consideration of how that power is to be provided…”, of ¶ [0006]-¶ [0008], ¶ [0015]-¶ [0033], and Figs. 1-3 elements 100-510, Figs. 4-6 steps 600-670), wherein the fleet status data comprises a position of each of the plurality of mining vehicles (See Lammers, e.g., “…Each of the mining trucks…may be configured with similar hardware and software to enable controllably receiving power from local grid 102 or feeding regenerated electrical power into local grid 102 in a similar manner. To this end, each of trucks 10, 310, 410 and 510 will typically include an antenna for receiving wireless control signals and/or data specific to the mine site, global positioning data, and for transmitting signals to other mine vehicles and/or computers…Upon or prior to electrically connecting truck 310 with trolley line segment 101, truck 10 may be adjusted such that the proportion of retarding torque applied to wheels 14 and/or 16 via motor 46 is increased and the proportion applied via subsystems 52 and 54 is decreased, thus allowing grid 102 to compensate for the increased demand. As noted above, each of trucks 10, 310, 410 and 510 may be equipped with a position monitoring system such as a global or local positioning system, enabling each truck to communicate and/or determine its location relative to other features of the mine site…”, of ¶ [0006]-¶ [0008], ¶ [0015]-¶ [0033], and Figs. 1-3 elements 100-510, Figs. 4-6 steps 600-670). However, Lammers does not explicitly teach and based on input data including the fleet status data, generating a driving schedule comprising instructions to control a movement of the vehicle along the target path, wherein generating the driving schedule comprises optimizing the driving schedule according to penalties, wherein the penalties comprise a penalty term indicative of a power surplus of the plurality of mining vehicles.
In an analogous field of endeavor, CHEVALIER teaches and based on input data including the fleet status data, generating a driving schedule comprising instructions to control a movement of the vehicle along the target path (See CHEVALIER, e.g., “…The mining dump truck can easily be reconfigured for another task by modifying its modular power pack units and electric energy storage unit as well as selecting new trajectories in the digital terrain map that need to be covered by the mining dump truck. The optimization of these modes of operation is performed by the cyber-physical system (CPS)…”, of Abstract, ¶ [0040]-¶ [0062], ¶ [0072]-¶ [0090], ¶ [0140]-¶ [0144], and Figs. 1-3 elements 3-10, Figs. 6-10), wherein generating the driving schedule comprises optimizing the driving schedule according to penalties, wherein the penalties comprise a penalty term indicative of a power surplus of the plurality of mining vehicles (See CHEVALIER, e.g., “…the control system is configured to select the rates of change of power of the energy storage unit and/or charging and discharging time intervals such that the overall energy consumption is minimized…rates of change of power during autonomous driving of the hybrid dump truck are adjusted during driving along said closed travel path such as to minimize the difference in energy levels of the electric energy storage unit at the reference point of the closed cycle path…the control system is configured to control the rates of change of power based at least on the amount of payload carried by the dump truck along the predetermined closed cycle path…”, of Abstract, ¶ [0040]-¶ [0062], ¶ [0072]-¶ [0090], ¶ [0140]-¶ [0144], and Figs. 1-3 elements 3-10, Figs. 6-10).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine “…mining truck having a regenerative braking mechanism and a friction braking mechanism includes receiving data indicative of a change in demand in an electrical power grid for regenerated electrical power from the mining truck, and commanding braking the mining truck such that application of the retarding torque is allocated to the regenerative braking mechanism in a manner responsive to the data. A mining truck and methodology relating to harvesting electrical power regenerated via application of retarding torque is also disclosed…”, as disclosed in Lammers with “and based on input data including the fleet status data, generating a driving schedule comprising instructions to control a movement of the vehicle along the target path, wherein generating the driving schedule comprises optimizing the driving schedule according to penalties, wherein the penalties comprise a penalty term indicative of a power surplus of the plurality of mining vehicles.”, as taught in CHEVALIER with a reasonable expectation of success to yield a system, method for efficiently, robustly, and seamlessly optimizing the throughput performance of haulage process, as disclosed in ¶ [0014] .
Consider claims 2, 11:
The combination of Lammers, CHEVALIER teaches everything claimed as implemented above in the rejection of claims 1, 10. In addition, Lammers teaches wherein the power delivery infrastructure includes a trolley line configured to provide electric power along at least a portion of the target path (See Lammers, e.g., “…Trolley line 100 may be a trolley line segment of a local electrical power grid 102, where the subject trolley line segment coincides with a downhill section 114 of a haul road 110…an electrical energy storage subsystem 106 connected with local grid 102 and having an electrical energy storage medium 10…data received via control system 62 may be indicative of a change in demand for electrical power in a power grid…truck 10 may be operating such that a first proportion of a retarding torque applied to wheels 14 and/or 16 is provided by friction braking subsystems 52 and 54, while a second proportion of the retarding torque is applied via motor 46…local power grid 102 may have a first demand for electrical power, based at least in part upon the electrical power demand of trucks 410 and 510. When truck 310 connects with trolley line segment 101, the power demand in grid 102 may change…a magnitude of the power demand may change, typically increasing. Upon or prior to electrically connecting truck 310 with trolley line segment 101, truck 10 may be adjusted such that the proportion of retarding torque applied to wheels 14 and/or 16 via motor 46 is increased and the proportion applied via subsystems 52 and 54 is decreased, thus allowing grid 102 to compensate for the increased demand…”, of ¶ [0006]-¶ [0008], ¶ [0015]-¶ [0033], and Figs. 1-3 elements 100-510, Figs. 4-6 steps 600-670).
Consider claims 3:
The combination of Lammers, CHEVALIER teaches everything claimed as implemented above in the rejection of claim 1. In addition, Lammers teaches wherein the penalties further comprise production constraints, production targets, and/or cost parameters (See Lammers, e.g., “…Trolley line 100 may be a trolley line segment of a local electrical power grid 102, where the subject trolley line segment coincides with a downhill section 114 of a haul road 110…an electrical energy storage subsystem 106 connected with local grid 102 and having an electrical energy storage medium 10…data received via control system 62 may be indicative of a change in demand for electrical power in a power grid…truck 10 may be operating such that a first proportion of a retarding torque applied to wheels 14 and/or 16 is provided by friction braking subsystems 52 and 54, while a second proportion of the retarding torque is applied via motor 46…local power grid 102 may have a first demand for electrical power, based at least in part upon the electrical power demand of trucks 410 and 510. When truck 310 connects with trolley line segment 101, the power demand in grid 102 may change…a magnitude of the power demand may change, typically increasing. Upon or prior to electrically connecting truck 310 with trolley line segment 101, truck 10 may be adjusted such that the proportion of retarding torque applied to wheels 14 and/or 16 via motor 46 is increased and the proportion applied via subsystems 52 and 54 is decreased, thus allowing grid 102 to compensate for the increased demand…”, of ¶ [0006]-¶ [0008], ¶ [0015]-¶ [0033], and Figs. 1-3 elements 100-510, Figs. 4-6 steps 600-670).
Consider claims 4:
The combination of Lammers, CHEVALIER teaches everything claimed as implemented above in the rejection of claim 3. In addition, Lammers teaches wherein a production constraint includes a power limit of the power delivery infrastructure (See Lammers, e.g., “…Trolley line 100 may be a trolley line segment of a local electrical power grid 102, where the subject trolley line segment coincides with a downhill section 114 of a haul road 110…an electrical energy storage subsystem 106 connected with local grid 102 and having an electrical energy storage medium 10…data received via control system 62 may be indicative of a change in demand for electrical power in a power grid…truck 10 may be operating such that a first proportion of a retarding torque applied to wheels 14 and/or 16 is provided by friction braking subsystems 52 and 54, while a second proportion of the retarding torque is applied via motor 46…local power grid 102 may have a first demand for electrical power, based at least in part upon the electrical power demand of trucks 410 and 510. When truck 310 connects with trolley line segment 101, the power demand in grid 102 may change…a magnitude of the power demand may change, typically increasing. Upon or prior to electrically connecting truck 310 with trolley line segment 101, truck 10 may be adjusted such that the proportion of retarding torque applied to wheels 14 and/or 16 via motor 46 is increased and the proportion applied via subsystems 52 and 54 is decreased, thus allowing grid 102 to compensate for the increased demand…”), of ¶ [0006]-¶ [0008], ¶ [0015]-¶ [0033], and Figs. 1-3 elements 100-510, Figs. 4-6 steps 600-670).
Consider claims 5:
The combination of Lammers, CHEVALIER teaches everything claimed as implemented above in the rejection of claim 1. CHEVALIER teaches wherein the driving schedule includes instructions to control a speed of the vehicle along the target path (See CHEVALIER, e.g., “…the control system is configured to select the rates of change of power of the energy storage unit and/or charging and discharging time intervals such that the overall energy consumption is minimized…rates of change of power during autonomous driving of the hybrid dump truck are adjusted during driving along said closed travel path such as to minimize the difference in energy levels of the electric energy storage unit at the reference point of the closed cycle path…the control system is configured to control the rates of change of power based at least on the amount of payload carried by the dump truck along the predetermined closed cycle path…”, of Abstract, ¶ [0040]-¶ [0062], ¶ [0072]-¶ [0090], ¶ [0140]-¶ [0144], and Figs. 1-3 elements 3-10, Figs. 6-10). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Lammers the teachings of CHEVALIER so as to efficiently taking advantage of the mining haulage system without any mishaps.
Consider claims 6:
The combination of Lammers, CHEVALIER teaches everything claimed as implemented above in the rejection of claim 1. CHEVALIER teaches wherein the driving schedule includes instructions to stop the vehicle for a predefined amount of time and/or to enter a section of the target path at a defined time (See CHEVALIER, e.g., “…The mining dump truck can easily be reconfigured for another task by modifying its modular power pack units and electric energy storage unit as well as selecting new trajectories in the digital terrain map that need to be covered by the mining dump truck. The optimization of these modes of operation is performed by the cyber-physical system (CPS)…”, of Abstract, ¶ [0040]-¶ [0062], ¶ [0072]-¶ [0090], ¶ [0140]-¶ [0144], and Figs. 1-3 elements 3-10, Figs. 6-10). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Lammers the teachings of CHEVALIER so as to efficiently taking advantage of the mining haulage system without any mishaps.
Consider claims 7:
The combination of Lammers, CHEVALIER teaches everything claimed as implemented above in the rejection of claim 1. CHEVALIER teaches wherein generating the driving schedule includes: generating a model of the plurality of mining vehicles moving along the target path (See CHEVALIER, e.g., “…The mining dump truck can easily be reconfigured for another task by modifying its modular power pack units and electric energy storage unit as well as selecting new trajectories in the digital terrain map that need to be covered by the mining dump truck. The optimization of these modes of operation is performed by the cyber-physical system (CPS)…”, of Abstract, ¶ [0040]-¶ [0062], ¶ [0072]-¶ [0090], ¶ [0140]-¶ [0144], and Figs. 1-3 elements 3-10, Figs. 6-10), estimating penalties based on the model, and optimizing the driving schedule according to the penalties (See CHEVALIER, e.g., “…the control system is configured to select the rates of change of power of the energy storage unit and/or charging and discharging time intervals such that the overall energy consumption is minimized…rates of change of power during autonomous driving of the hybrid dump truck are adjusted during driving along said closed travel path such as to minimize the difference in energy levels of the electric energy storage unit at the reference point of the closed cycle path…the control system is configured to control the rates of change of power based at least on the amount of payload carried by the dump truck along the predetermined closed cycle path…”, of Abstract, ¶ [0040]-¶ [0062], ¶ [0072]-¶ [0090], ¶ [0140]-¶ [0144], and Figs. 1-3 elements 3-10, Figs. 6-10). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Lammers the teachings of CHEVALIER so as to efficiently increasing the efficiency of the mining haulage system.
Consider claims 8:
The combination of Lammers, CHEVALIER teaches everything claimed as implemented above in the rejection of claim 1. CHEVALIER teaches further comprising: controlling the mining vehicle in a mine es: generating a model of the plurality of mining vehicles moving along the target path (See CHEVALIER, e.g., “…The mining dump truck can easily be reconfigured for another task by modifying its modular power pack units and electric energy storage unit as well as selecting new trajectories in the digital terrain map that need to be covered by the mining dump truck. The optimization of these modes of operation is performed by the cyber-physical system (CPS)…”, of Abstract, ¶ [0040]-¶ [0062], ¶ [0072]-¶ [0090], ¶ [0140]-¶ [0144], and Figs. 1-3 elements 3-10, Figs. 6-10); and driving the mining vehicle in the mine according to the driving schedule (See CHEVALIER, e.g., “…the control system is configured to select the rates of change of power of the energy storage unit and/or charging and discharging time intervals such that the overall energy consumption is minimized…rates of change of power during autonomous driving of the hybrid dump truck are adjusted during driving along said closed travel path such as to minimize the difference in energy levels of the electric energy storage unit at the reference point of the closed cycle path…the control system is configured to control the rates of change of power based at least on the amount of payload carried by the dump truck along the predetermined closed cycle path…”, of Abstract, ¶ [0040]-¶ [0062], ¶ [0072]-¶ [0090], ¶ [0140]-¶ [0144], and Figs. 1-3 elements 3-10, Figs. 6-10). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Lammers the teachings of CHEVALIER so as to efficiently increasing the efficiency of the mining haulage system.
Consider claims 12:
The combination of Lammers, CHEVALIER teaches everything claimed as implemented above in the rejection of claim 10. In addition, Lammers teaches wherein a vehicle of the plurality of mining vehicles generating surplus energy is configured to supply the surplus energy to the power delivery infrastructure (See Lammers, e.g., “…the increased power demand from time T.sub.1 to time T.sub.2 might, for instance, be the result of a demand for electrical power in grid 102 which results from an increased demand for electrical power from regional grid 104. Signal 205 shows a corresponding increase in the magnitude of electrical power fed to local grid 102. Accordingly, it will be understood that at time T.sub.1 braking may be commanded in truck 10 such that electrical power regenerated via truck 10 is fed to local grid 102 via trolley line 100 in a manner which is commensurate with the change in demand. As used herein, the term "commensurate" means that the power provided is of a magnitude, or otherwise has properties, which are demanded. Another way to understand this principle is that local grid 102 is receiving what it asks for, not just a roughly correlated "on" or "off" condition. A truck which simply begins regenerative braking because it perceives a need for more electrical power in the grid, without consideration of how that power is to be provided…”, of ¶ [0006]-¶ [0008], ¶ [0015]-¶ [0033], and Figs. 1-3 elements 100-510, Figs. 4-6 steps 600-670).
Consider claims 13:
The combination of Lammers, CHEVALIER teaches everything claimed as implemented above in the rejection of claim 10. In addition, Lammers teaches wherein the power delivery infrastructure is disconnected from any external power supplies (See Lammers, e.g., “…the increased power demand from time T.sub.1 to time T.sub.2 might, for instance, be the result of a demand for electrical power in grid 102 which results from an increased demand for electrical power from regional grid 104. Signal 205 shows a corresponding increase in the magnitude of electrical power fed to local grid 102. Accordingly, it will be understood that at time T.sub.1 braking may be commanded in truck 10 such that electrical power regenerated via truck 10 is fed to local grid 102 via trolley line 100 in a manner which is commensurate with the change in demand. As used herein, the term "commensurate" means that the power provided is of a magnitude, or otherwise has properties, which are demanded. Another way to understand this principle is that local grid 102 is receiving what it asks for, not just a roughly correlated "on" or "off" condition. A truck which simply begins regenerative braking because it perceives a need for more electrical power in the grid, without consideration of how that power is to be provided…”, of ¶ [0006]-¶ [0008], ¶ [0015]-¶ [0033], and Figs. 1-3 elements 100-510, Figs. 4-6 steps 600-670).
Consider claims 14:
The combination of Lammers, CHEVALIER teaches everything claimed as implemented above in the rejection of claim 10. In addition, Lammers teaches wherein the industrial site comprises a plurality of segments, and wherein each segment comprises a power delivery infrastructure (See Lammers, e.g., “…Each of the mining trucks…may be configured with similar hardware and software to enable controllably receiving power from local grid 102 or feeding regenerated electrical power into local grid 102 in a similar manner. To this end, each of trucks 10, 310, 410 and 510 will typically include an antenna for receiving wireless control signals and/or data specific to the mine site, global positioning data, and for transmitting signals to other mine vehicles and/or computers…Upon or prior to electrically connecting truck 310 with trolley line segment 101, truck 10 may be adjusted such that the proportion of retarding torque applied to wheels 14 and/or 16 via motor 46 is increased and the proportion applied via subsystems 52 and 54 is decreased, thus allowing grid 102 to compensate for the increased demand. As noted above, each of trucks 10, 310, 410 and 510 may be equipped with a position monitoring system such as a global or local positioning system, enabling each truck to communicate and/or determine its location relative to other features of the mine site…”, of ¶ [0006]-¶ [0008], ¶ [0015]-¶ [0033], and Figs. 1-3 elements 100-510, Figs. 4-6 steps 600-670).
Consider claims 15:
The combination of Lammers, CHEVALIER teaches everything claimed as implemented above in the rejection of claim 10. In addition, Lammers teaches wherein the mining vehicle is an electric mining truck (See Lammers, e.g., “…Upon or prior to electrically connecting truck 310 with trolley line segment 101, truck 10 may be adjusted such that the proportion of retarding torque applied to wheels 14 and/or 16 via motor 46 is increased and the proportion applied via subsystems 52 and 54 is decreased, thus allowing grid 102 to compensate for the increased demand. As noted above, each of trucks 10, 310, 410 and 510 may be equipped with a position monitoring system such as a global or local positioning system, enabling each truck to communicate and/or determine its location relative to other features of the mine site…”, of ¶ [0006]-¶ [0008], ¶ [0015]-¶ [0033], and Figs. 1-3 elements 100-510, Figs. 4-6 steps 600-670).
Consider claims 16:
The combination of Lammers, CHEVALIER teaches everything claimed as implemented above in the rejection of claim 1. In addition, Lammers teaches wherein the fleet status data further comprises target path data of each of the plurality of mining vehicles (See Lammers, e.g., “…Trolley line 100 may be a trolley line segment of a local electrical power grid 102, where the subject trolley line segment coincides with a downhill section 114 of a haul road 110…an electrical energy storage subsystem 106 connected with local grid 102 and having an electrical energy storage medium 10…data received via control system 62 may be indicative of a change in demand for electrical power in a power grid…truck 10 may be operating such that a first proportion of a retarding torque applied to wheels 14 and/or 16 is provided by friction braking subsystems 52 and 54, while a second proportion of the retarding torque is applied via motor 46…local power grid 102 may have a first demand for electrical power, based at least in part upon the electrical power demand of trucks 410 and 510. When truck 310 connects with trolley line segment 101, the power demand in grid 102 may change…a magnitude of the power demand may change, typically increasing. Upon or prior to electrically connecting truck 310 with trolley line segment 101, truck 10 may be adjusted such that the proportion of retarding torque applied to wheels 14 and/or 16 via motor 46 is increased and the proportion applied via subsystems 52 and 54 is decreased, thus allowing grid 102 to compensate for the increased demand…”, of ¶ [0006]-¶ [0008], ¶ [0015]-¶ [0033], and Figs. 1-3 elements 100-510, Figs. 4-6 steps 600-670).
Consider claims 17:
The combination of Lammers, CHEVALIER teaches everything claimed as implemented above in the rejection of claim 9. In addition, Lammers teaches wherein the fleet status data further comprises target path data of each of the plurality of mining vehicles (See Lammers, e.g., “…Trolley line 100 may be a trolley line segment of a local electrical power grid 102, where the subject trolley line segment coincides with a downhill section 114 of a haul road 110…an electrical energy storage subsystem 106 connected with local grid 102 and having an electrical energy storage medium 10…data received via control system 62 may be indicative of a change in demand for electrical power in a power grid…truck 10 may be operating such that a first proportion of a retarding torque applied to wheels 14 and/or 16 is provided by friction braking subsystems 52 and 54, while a second proportion of the retarding torque is applied via motor 46…local power grid 102 may have a first demand for electrical power, based at least in part upon the electrical power demand of trucks 410 and 510. When truck 310 connects with trolley line segment 101, the power demand in grid 102 may change…a magnitude of the power demand may change, typically increasing. Upon or prior to electrically connecting truck 310 with trolley line segment 101, truck 10 may be adjusted such that the proportion of retarding torque applied to wheels 14 and/or 16 via motor 46 is increased and the proportion applied via subsystems 52 and 54 is decreased, thus allowing grid 102 to compensate for the increased demand…”, of ¶ [0006]-¶ [0008], ¶ [0015]-¶ [0033], and Figs. 1-3 elements 100-510, Figs. 4-6 steps 600-670).
Consider claims 18:
The combination of Lammers, CHEVALIER teaches everything claimed as implemented above in the rejection of claim 10. In addition, Lammers teaches wherein the fleet status data further comprises target path data of each of the plurality of mining vehicles (See Lammers, e.g., “…Trolley line 100 may be a trolley line segment of a local electrical power grid 102, where the subject trolley line segment coincides with a downhill section 114 of a haul road 110…an electrical energy storage subsystem 106 connected with local grid 102 and having an electrical energy storage medium 10…data received via control system 62 may be indicative of a change in demand for electrical power in a power grid…truck 10 may be operating such that a first proportion of a retarding torque applied to wheels 14 and/or 16 is provided by friction braking subsystems 52 and 54, while a second proportion of the retarding torque is applied via motor 46…local power grid 102 may have a first demand for electrical power, based at least in part upon the electrical power demand of trucks 410 and 510. When truck 310 connects with trolley line segment 101, the power demand in grid 102 may change…a magnitude of the power demand may change, typically increasing. Upon or prior to electrically connecting truck 310 with trolley line segment 101, truck 10 may be adjusted such that the proportion of retarding torque applied to wheels 14 and/or 16 via motor 46 is increased and the proportion applied via subsystems 52 and 54 is decreased, thus allowing grid 102 to compensate for the increased demand…”, of ¶ [0006]-¶ [0008], ¶ [0015]-¶ [0033], and Figs. 1-3 elements 100-510, Figs. 4-6 steps 600-670).
Consider claims 19:
The combination of Lammers, CHEVALIER teaches everything claimed as implemented above in the rejection of claim 12. In addition, Lammers teaches wherein a respective vehicle of the plurality of mining vehicles has a power demand and is configured to receive the surplus energy (See Lammers, e.g., “…Upon or prior to electrically connecting truck 310 with trolley line segment 101, truck 10 may be adjusted such that the proportion of retarding torque applied to wheels 14 and/or 16 via motor 46 is increased and the proportion applied via subsystems 52 and 54 is decreased, thus allowing grid 102 to compensate for the increased demand. As noted above, each of trucks 10, 310, 410 and 510 may be equipped with a position monitoring system such as a global or local positioning system, enabling each truck to communicate and/or determine its location relative to other features of the mine site…”, of ¶ [0006]-¶ [0008], ¶ [0015]-¶ [0033], and Figs. 1-3 elements 100-510, Figs. 4-6 steps 600-670).
Obviousness Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the claims at issue are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); and In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on a nonstatutory double patenting ground provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with this application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
Effective January 1, 1994, a registered attorney or agent of record may sign a terminal disclaimer. A terminal disclaimer signed by the assignee must fully comply with 37 CFR 3.73(b).
The USPTO internet Web site contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit http://www.uspto.gov/forms/. The filing date of the application will determine what form should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to http://www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
Claims 1-19 are rejected on the ground of non-statutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of Co-pending application No.: 19/135,475. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other. This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented/issued, take an example of claims 1, 9-10 of the instant application and claims 1, 12-13 of the Co-pending application No.: 19/135,475 (Please see the Table below):
Claims of pending Application 19/135,524
Claims of co-pending Application 19/135,475
A method for controlling a mining vehicle of a plurality of mining vehicles, wherein: at least two of the plurality of mining vehicles are electrically connectable to a power delivery infrastructure, each of the plurality of mining vehicles has a power status while traveling along a target path, the power status comprises a power demand or a power surplus, and the method comprises: determining fleet status data, wherein the fleet status data comprises a position of each of the plurality of mining vehicles; and based on input data including the fleet status data, generating a driving schedule comprising instructions to control a movement of the vehicle along the target path, wherein generating the driving schedule comprises optimizing the driving schedule according to penalties, wherein the penalties comprise a penalty term indicative of a power surplus of the plurality of mining vehicles.
9. A scheduling system for generating a driving schedule for a mining vehicle of a plurality of mining vehicles, wherein: at least two of the plurality of mining vehicles are electrically connectable to a power delivery infrastructure, each of the plurality of mining vehicles has a power status while traveling along a target path, the power status comprising a power demand or a power surplus, and the scheduling system comprises: a communication device configured to receive fleet status data comprising a position, and a modelling engine, wherein the scheduling system is configured to, based on input data including the fleet status data: generate a driving schedule comprising instructions to control a movement of the vehicle along the target path, wherein the generation of the driving schedule comprises optimizing the driving schedule according to penalties, wherein the penalties include a penalty term indicative of a power surplus of at least one of the plurality of mining vehicles.
10. An industrial site comprising: a scheduling system configured to generate a driving schedule for a mining vehicle of a plurality of mining vehicles, wherein: at least two of the plurality of mining vehicles are electrically connectable to a power delivery infrastructure, and each of the plurality of mining vehicles has a power status while traveling along a target path, the power status comprising a power demand or a power surplus; the scheduling system comprises: a communication device configured to receive fleet status data comprising a position, and a modelling engine, wherein the scheduling system is configured to, based on input data including the fleet status data: generate a driving schedule comprising instructions to control a movement of the vehicle along the target path, wherein the generation of the driving schedule comprises optimizing the driving schedule according to penalties, wherein the penalties include a penalty term indicative of a power surplus of at least one of the plurality of mining vehicles.
1. A method of generating a driving schedule for a battery electric mining vehicle, the method comprising: obtaining a current state of charge of the vehicle; obtaining a target path of the vehicle, the target path comprising: a charging section provided in a section of the target path, the charging section having a charging infrastructure configured to provide a charging power to the vehicle; and a road section suitable for the vehicle to regenerate electrical energy; based on target path data and the current state of charge of the vehicle, generating the driving schedule comprising instructions to control a movement of the vehicle along the target path, wherein: generating the driving schedule comprises optimizing the driving schedule according to penalties, and the penalties comprise a penalty term indicative of an amount of energy wasted when the vehicle travels along the road section.
12. A method of controlling a battery electric mining vehicle in a mine, the method comprising: generating a driving schedule, wherein generating the driving schedule comprises: obtaining a current state of charge of the vehicle; obtaining a target path of the vehicle, the target path comprising: a charging section provided in a section of the target path, the charging section having a charging infrastructure configured to provide a charging power to the vehicle; and a road section suitable for the vehicle to regenerate electrical energy; based on target path data and the current state of charge of the vehicle, generating the driving schedule comprising instructions to control a movement of the vehicle along the target path, wherein: generating the driving schedule comprises optimizing the driving schedule according to penalties, and the penalties comprise a penalty term indicative of an amount of energy wasted when the vehicle travels along the road section; and driving the vehicle according to the driving schedule.
13. A scheduling system for generating a driving schedule for a battery electric mining vehicle, the scheduling system comprising: a communication device configured to receive vehicle parameters indicative of a current state of charge of the vehicle; and a modeling engine, wherein the scheduling system is configured to obtain a target path of the vehicle, the target path comprising: a charging section suitable for providing a charging power to the vehicle; and a road section configured to regenerate electrical energy with the vehicle; wherein the modeling engine is configured to, based on target path data and vehicle parameters, generate the driving schedule comprising instructions to control a movement of the vehicle along the target path, wherein: to generate the driving schedule, the modeling engine is configured to optimize the driving schedule according to penalties, and the penalties comprise a penalty term indicative of an amount of energy wasted when the vehicle travels along the road section.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Huber et al. (US Pub. No.: 2013/0140121 A1) teaches “A trolley capable mining truck includes a pantograph supported on a machine frame for electrically connecting the truck with an overhead trolley line. A power system includes an onboard electrical power source providing electrical power to electric drive propulsion motors along a first electrical path in a first configuration of the power system. The pantograph provides electrical power from the overhead trolley line to the electric drive propulsion motors along a second electrical path, which includes a transient damping reactor, in a second configuration of the power system. The power system also includes a third configuration in which, during a braking mode of the trolley capable mining truck, the electric drive propulsion motors provide regenerative electrical power to the overhead trolley line through the pantograph along a third electrical path including a regenerative power converter, wherein the regenerative power converter includes the transient damping reactor.
Mazumdar (US Pub. No.: 2015/0090554 A1) teaches “A mining haul truck driven by electrical wheel motors is operated with all electrical power sources; that is, without a diesel engine. While travelling on the loading site, the mining haul truck is powered by an on-board energy storage system, which can comprise a bank of ultracapacitors. The mining haul truck then moves to the bottom of a trolley ramp and is coupled to trolley lines. While travelling uphill, the mining haul truck is powered by the trolley lines, and the on-board energy storage system is charged by the trolley lines. When the mining haul truck reaches the top of the trolley ramp, the mining haul truck is uncoupled from the trolley lines. While travelling on the unloading site, the mining haul truck is powered by the on-board energy storage system. The on-board energy storage system can also be charged by retard energy generated by the wheel motors during braking.”
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BABAR SARWAR whose telephone number is (571)270-5584. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Fri 9:00 AM-5:00 PM.
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, Faris S. Almatrahi can be reached on (313)446-4821. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free)? If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/BABAR SARWAR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3667
Prosecution Insights