DETAILED ACTION
The following is a Non-Final Office Action per the Response to the Election/Restriction Requirement received on 3 December 2025. Claim 2 has been withdrawn. Claims 1-8 are pending in this application. Claims 1 and 3-8 have been examined on their merits.
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 .
Claim Interpretation
Claim 1 recites “An electronic safety response hardware/software interface (EsRi) system for increasing reliability and limiting power outages to a relevant electric grid …” in lines 1-2. The limitation of “… increasing reliability and limiting power outages to a relevant electric grid …” is functional claim language directed to the intended use of “An electronic safety response hardware/software interface (EsRi) system …”.
Claim 1 recites “the hardware/software EsRi control processor, when notified of current risk bucket conditions by the SaRa node, when required, initiates preprogramed control sequences” in lines 10-11. The recitations of “when” do not positively recite the subsequent limitations of “notified” and “initiates” as occurring.
Claim 1 recites “wherein power outages in a relevant electric grid can be reduced or eliminated by the EsRi control processor …” in lines 21-22. The recitation of “can be” does not positively recite the limitation of “… power outages … reduced or eliminated” as occurring.
Claim 2 recites “programmed to generate an updated prediction when a new reading differs from a previous reading by a margin exceeding a pre-set threshold value
in lines 10-11. The recitation of “when” does not positively recite the limitation of “… generate an updated prediction” as occurring.
Claim 7 recites “… the control processor can be reprogrammed …” in lines 1-2. The recitation of “can be” does not positively recite the limitation of “the control processor … reprogrammed” as occurring.
Examiner’s Note - Objections to the Specification:
The objections to the specification are too numerous to list; however, several examples have been provided to the Applicant as a sample of the outstanding issues with the specification, as well as, suggested language for several of the examples. The Examiner respectfully asserts these samples are not an all-inclusive list of the outstanding issues with the specification filed on 17 April 2025. In addition, if the Applicant requires further clarification, the Applicant is invited to contact the Examiner for an interview prior to filing a future response.
The Applicant is respectfully requested to thoroughly assess any subsequent claim amendments for any issues (e.g. antecedent, grammatical, and punctuation issues) and make the necessary corrections prior to submission to obviate future objections in the interest of advancing prosecution.
Specification
For the purpose of providing examples of outstanding specification objections, the disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
“used-by” in the abstract; suggested language: “used by”
“The resulting SaRa vector is used-by EsRi Control processor directing pre-programmed control sequences corresponding to failures using electric energy grid sensory and attached electric generation and/or storage systems data reliably controlling electric energy flow while isolating the electric system flaw.” in the abstract
“AI (ML, (Machine Learning)) predictive model” in par. [0002]. The language is unclear with respect to “ML, (Machine Learning)”.
“… the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or Commission) …” in par. [0013]
“Accordingly, -Esri Control” in par. [0014]; suggested language: “According, EsRi Control”
“Electric energy grid is the entire electric energy delivery system, including generation, transmission, distribution and load supplying and consuming electricity.” in par. [0016]; suggested language: “Electric energy grid is the entire electric energy delivery system, including generation, transmission, distribution and load supplying, and consumption of electricity.”
“Local electric energy grid is the regional or smaller subset of the electric energy grid that impacts the movement of electricity around the interconnected electric point of interest. (point of interconnection)” in par. [0017]
“… available reserve energy (Storage) …” in par. [0021]; suggested language: “… available reserve energy (storage) …”
“Thr EsRi controller and EsRi control can be positioned …” in par. [0025]; suggested language: “The EsRi controller and EsRi control can be positioned …”
“… with ISO(s) input …” in par. [0071]; suggested language: “… with an ISO(s) input …”
“Combined these EsRi features make it easier to model the interconnection interfaces reducing analysis time and improving reliability.” in par. [0074]
… the EsRi System is to maintain a safe, reliable interface …” in par. [0077]; suggested language: … the EsRi System is to maintain a safe and reliable interface …”
“The EsRi Intelligence server node 102 is configured to host an AI predictive model 107.” in par. [0078] and “The EsRi Intelligence server node 102 is configured to host an AI/ML module 107.” The disclosure recites two different terms for the same reference character (i.e. “107”). To avoid any ambiguity in the specification, the same term should be recited for each reference character.
“At block 324, processor 204 may, being responsive to at least one reading deviating from the previous reading by the margin exceeding a pre-set threshold value, …” in par [0163]
“… the AIpredictive model 110 …” in par. [0168]; suggested claim language: “the AI predictive model 110”
Appropriate correction is required.
Examiner’s Note - Objections to the Claims:
The objections to the claims are too numerous to list; however, several examples have been provided to the Applicant as a sample of the outstanding issues with the claims, as well as, suggested language for several of the examples. The Examiner respectfully asserts these samples are not an all-inclusive list of the outstanding issues with the claims filed on 03 December 2025. In addition, if the Applicant requires further clarification, the Applicant is invited to contact the Examiner for an interview prior to filing a future response.
The Applicant is respectfully requested to thoroughly assess any subsequent claim amendments for any issues (e.g. grammatical, punctuation, and formatting issues) and make the necessary corrections prior to submission to obviate future objections in the interest of advancing prosecution.
Claim Objections
For the purpose of providing examples of outstanding claim objections, claims 1 and 3-8 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1 includes the spacing issue of “and limiting power outages” in line 2. Suggested claim language: “and limiting power outages”; and has been interpreted as such for the purpose of examination.
Claim 1 includes the grammatical and punctuation issues in the limitation of “… the relevant electric grid being an electric grid that has the EsRi system installed, comprising;” in lines 2-3. Suggested claim language: “… the relevant electric grid is an electric grid with the EsRi system, comprising:”; and has been interpreted as such for the purpose of examination.
Claim 1 includes the grammatical and punctuation issues in the limitation of “… that stores collects and analyzes data to predict probable results …” in lines 4-5. Suggested claim language: “… that stores, collects and analyzes to predict results …”; and has been interpreted as such for the purpose of examination.
Claim 1 recites “… a hardware/software EsRi intelligence node that stores collects and analyzes data to predict probable results …” in lines 4-5 and “the ESRI intelligence node predictions” in lines 7-8. The claim recites two different terms for the same limitation of “predict probable results” and two different written forms for the same limitation of “EsRi. To avoid any ambiguity in the claims the same term and written form should be used for the same limitation. Suggested claim limitation: ‘EsRi” and “predicted results” (in light of bullet point three above).
Claim 1 recites spelling error of “preprogramed” line 11. Suggested claim language: “programmed”; and has been interpreted as such for the purpose of examination.
Claim 1 recites “the relevant electricgrid” in line 8 and “the electric grid” in lines 12, 18, and 26 (for example). The claim recites two different terms for the same limitation of “the relevant grid”. To avoid any ambiguity in the claims the same term should be used for the same limitation.
Claim 1 recites “electric grid hardware” in line 15. The limitation fails to indicate the limitation is directed to the “relevant electric grid”. Suggested claim language: “relevant electric grid hardware”; and has been interpreted as such for the purpose of examination.
Claim 1 recites the grammatical issue of the missing conjunction “and” at the end of lines 19 and 23.
Claim 1 recites “programed control sequences” in line 11 and “programmed sequences” in line 22. The claim recites two different terms for the same limitation. To avoid any ambiguity in the claims the same term should be used for the same limitation. Further, the limitation of “programmed sequences” in claim 22 includes an antecedent issue since it has support from the limitation of “programed control sequences” in line 11. Suggested claim language: “the programmed control sequences” in line 22
Claim 1 recites “a relevant electric grid” in line 2 and claim 3 recites “the grid” in line 15. The claims recites two different terms for the same limitation. To avoid any ambiguity in the claims the same term should be used for the same limitation.
Claims 4-7 include the capitalization error of “Claim” in line 1. Suggested claim language: “claim”; and has been interpreted as such for the purpose of examination.
Claim 4 includes an extra space between “SaRa” and “node” in line 1. Suggested claim language: “SaRa node”.
Claim 4 includes the spelling error “liable storage” in line 2.
Claim 1 recites “a risk bucket” in line 9 and claim 4 recites “a risk bucket” in line 6. The limitation of “a risk bucket” in claim 4 includes an antecedent issue since it has support from the limitation of “a risk bucket” in claim 1.
Claim 1 recites “the hardware/software EsRi control processor” in line 10 and claims 5 and 7 recites “the hardware/software EsRi control computer processor” in line 1. The claims recites two different terms for the same limitation. To avoid any ambiguity in the claims the same term should be used for the same limitation.
Claim 1 recites “control positioning” in line 25 and claim 5 recites “control positioning” in lines 1-2. The limitation of “control positioning” in claim 5 includes an antecedent issue since it has support from the limitation of “control positioning” in claim 1.
Claim 5 includes the grammatical issue in the limitation of “The EsRi control computer processor of Claim 1 for control positioning comprises: … a method for an automated reprogramming of an electronic safety response interface (EsRi) controller through after owner approvals” in lines 1-2 and 10-11).
Claim 5 includes punctuation and grammatical issues in the limitation of “wherein control positioning determines, synchronizes, the application of control signals, setpoints, and device states that define how grid components and associated energy storage and generation assets are configured and operated at any given time, this includes, , switching states, charge and discharge commands, power flow setpoints, and other control outputs issued by the EsRi control system including response to abnormal conditions to isolate failures and maintain electricity flow” in lines 12-17.
Claim 1 recites “electric grid hardware to open and shut circuits” in line 17 and claim 6 recites “electric grid hardware to open and shut circuits” in lines 5-6. The limitation of “electric grid hardware to open and shut circuits” in claim 6 includes an antecedent issue since it has support from the limitation of “electric grid hardware to open and shut circuits” in claim 1.
Claim 1 recites “a relevant electric grid” in line 2 and claim 6 recites “the grid” in line 7. The claims recites two different terms for the same limitation. To avoid any ambiguity in the claims the same term should be used for the same limitation.
Claim 6 includes punctuation and grammatical issues in the limitation of “The EsRi controllers of claim 1 comprising; … they are individual hardware units, sensors, gate hardware, connection points, electric generation units, electricity storage units and electric grid hardware for opening and closing circuits at facilities the point they are connected to the grid.
Claim 1 recites “a sensory array” in line 19 and claim 7 recites “a sensory array” in line 3. The limitation of “a sensory array” in claim 7 includes an antecedent issue since it has support from the limitation of “a sensory array” in claim 1.
Claim 1 recites “a relevant electric grid” in line 2 and claim 7 recites “the electric grid” in lines 7 and 8-9. The claims recites two different terms for the same limitation. To avoid any ambiguity in the claims the same term should be used for the same limitation.
Claim 1 recites “a relevant electric grid” in line 2 and claim 7 recites “the electric grid” in lines 7 and 8-9. The claims recites two different terms for the same limitation. To avoid any ambiguity in the claims the same term should be used for the same limitation.
Claim 1 recites “a relevant electric grid” in line 2 and claim 8 recites “the electric grid” in lines 3-4. The claims recites two different terms for the same limitation. To avoid any ambiguity in the claims the same term should be used for the same limitation.
Examiner’s Note – 35 U.S.C. 112(a) and (b) Rejections to the Claims:
The following 35 U.S.C. 112(a) and 112(b) claim rejections (i.e. new matter and indefiniteness issues) are too numerous to list; however, several examples have been provided to the Applicant as a sample of the outstanding issues with the claims, as well as, suggested language for several of the examples. The Examiner respectfully asserts these samples are not an all-inclusive list of the outstanding issues with the claims filed on 03 December 2025. In addition, if the Applicant requires further clarification, the Applicant is invited to contact the Examiner for an interview prior to filing a future response.
The Applicant is respectfully requested to thoroughly assess any subsequent claim amendments for new matter and indefiniteness issues and make the necessary corrections prior to submission to obviate future objections in the interest of advancing prosecution.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1 and 3-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 1 recites:
Wherein the EsRi control system will synchronize the status of the hardware, the content, and the data using a variety of methods to ensure that data and control positioning remain consistent across the electric grid and the energy storage and generation systems controlled by the EsRi control system in real time (lines 24-27)
The Examiner respectfully notes the Applicant has not specifically pointed out support from the specification for the preceding limitation in amended claim 1 filed on 3 December 2026 (see MPEP 2163 (II)(3)(b)); and the Examiner could not find support in the specification as filed on 17 April 2025. Hence, the only support for the newly presented limitation is found in claim 1 as filed on 3 December 2026 (i.e. the specification as filed on 17 April 2025 does not support the newly presented limitation)
Claims 3-8, dependent from claim 1, stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) for the same rationale as set forth in claim 1.
Claim 5 recites:
“wherein control positioning determines, synchronizes, the application of control signals, setpoints, and device states that define how grid components and associated energy storage and generation assets are configured and operated at any given time, this includes, , switching states, charge and discharge commands, power flow setpoints, and other control outputs issued by the EsRi control system including response to abnormal conditions to isolate failures and maintain electricity flow” (lines 12-17).
The Examiner respectfully notes the Applicant has not specifically pointed out support from the specification for the preceding limitation in amended claim 1 filed on 3 December 2026 (see MPEP 2163 (II)(3)(b)); and the Examiner could not find support in the specification as filed on 17 April 2025. Hence, the only support for the newly presented limitation is found in claim 5 as filed on 3 December 2026 (i.e. the specification as filed on 17 April 2025 does not support the newly presented limitation)
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1 and 3-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
The following claims recite limitations that lack sufficient antecedent basis for the limitations in the claims:
Claim 1 recites “the hardware/software EsRi control processor” in line 10 and “… the status of the hardware, the content, and the data …” in lines 24-25
Claim 3 recites “the status of grid hardware” in lines 8-9 and “the local electric grid database” in line 14
Claim 4 recites “the risk conditions from the ESRI Intelligence mode” in lines 5-6 and “the risk bucket information” in line 8
Claim 5 recites “the application of control signals, setpoints, and device states …” in lines 12-13
Claim 6 recites “the point they are connected …” in line 6
Claim 7 recites “the ML module” in line 12
Claim 8 recites “the EsRi Intelligence and machine learning (ML) predictions” in lines 1-2, “the SaRa risk assessment module” in line 2, and “the ML and AI predictive operation and decision-making processes” in lines 2-3.
Claims 3-8, dependent from claim 1, stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) for the same rationale as set forth in claim 1.
Claim 1 recites “synchronize the status of the hardware, the content, and the data using a variety of methods …”. The claim is rendered indefinite since the claim is unclear as to how synchronization of the status of the hardware, the content, and the data is performed per “a variety of methods”.
Claims 3-8, dependent from claim 1, stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) for the same rationale as set forth in claim 1.
The term “low” in claim 1 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “low” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Hence, the limitation of “risk” in line 9 has been rendered indefinite by use of “low”.
Claims 3-8, dependent from claim 1, stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) for the same rationale as set forth in claim 1.
The term “robust” in claim 4 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “robust” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Hence, the limitation of “risk bucket” in line 6 has been rendered indefinite by use of “robust”.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
The following references are cited to further show the state of the art with respect to grid systems and risk assessment systems and methods.
U.S. Patent Publication No. 2009/0138306 A1 discloses risk management systems for facilities (e.g., buildings).
U.S. Patent Publication No. 2012/0041696 A1 discloses a method and system that monitors electrical load characteristics of electrical loads and communicates identification information related to each of a plurality of loads to a system operator or a third party for review, analysis and possible direct communication to an owner/operator of an electrical load.
U.S. Patent Publication No. 2018/0196092 A1 discloses methods and systems to estimate energy losses due to partial equipment failure in photovoltaic (PV) systems based on measured power and energy data, weather data, PV system configuration information, and modeled power and energy generation data.
U.S. Patent Publication No. 2023/0283063 A1 discloses enables cost-effective, accurate and scalable detection, prediction, and mitigation of component failure or non-nominal operation in a power system.
U.S. Patent Publication No. 2024/0313534 A1 discloses systems and methods for monitoring an energy grid and energy usage of one or more buildings, and automatically adjusting a status of appliances energy-consuming components associated with the one or more buildings based on a status of the energy grid.
U.S. Patent Publication No. 11,860,212 B1 discloses a computer monitors a status of grid devices using sensor measurements.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JENNIFER L NORTON whose telephone number is (571)272-3694. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9:00 am - 5:30 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, Robert Fennema can be reached at 571-272-2748. 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.
/JENNIFER L NORTON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2117