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 the Claims
The amendment received on 31 August 2026 has been acknowledged and entered.
Claim 1, 4, 8, 12, 14-16, and 19-20 have been amended.
Claim 3 has been canceled. No new claims have been added.
Claims 1-2 and 4-20 are currently pending.
Response to Amendments and Arguments
Applicant's amendments filed 31 August 2026 with respect to the Interpretation of claims 1, 7-8, 10, 13-16, 18 and 20 under 35 U.S.C, 112(f) have been fully considered and are persuasive. Thus, the Interpretation of claims 1, 7-8, 10, 13-16, 18 and 20 under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) has been withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments filed 31 August 2026 with regards to the rejection of claims 1, 2, and 4-20 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues (in REMARKS/ARGUMENTS, page 8) that as explained below in the rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 102 and § 103, the features as a whole in each of claims 1-20 would not have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art in view of the cited references, which would add significantly more (i.e., inventive concept) to the abstract idea. Thus, the claims are patent eligible. Accordingly, withdrawal of the 35 U.S.C. § 101 rejections of claims 1-20 is respectfully requested.
In response to Applicant’s argument, the Examiner respectfully disagrees and notes that first, novelty and nonobviousness of the claims under 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 does not bear on whether the claims are directed to patent-eligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. 101 (e.g. eligibility and novelty are separate inquiries). Secondly, the Examiner suggests that Applicant show a teaching in the specification on how the invention improves a technology or establishes a clear nexus between the claim language and the improvement to technology where both the claims and the specification support the asserted technical improvement. The Examiner maintains the claims are patent ineligible.
Applicant argues (in REMARKS/ARGUMENTS, pages 8-9) that in regards to the rejection of claims 1-2 and 4-20 under 35 USC 102 and 103, to the extent the Examiner considers them still applicable to the amended claims, are respectfully traversed as explained below. The Office Action cited paragraph [0030] of Shroeder in the rejections to claim 3. However, paragraph [0030] of Shroeder merely discloses:
[0030] Provided is an arrangement of a vehicle rental system in one or multiple properties of an owners' community, wherein all arrangements contained in the properties are made available exclusively to a user group (circle of users) consisting of residents and/or renters. Properties of this type are, by way of example, living quarters, particularly with services provided therein, such as property managers and doormen (in general: serviced apartments). The user group of the vehicle rental system therefore is composed exclusively of the residents-meaning private persons-of apartments/houses, and/or tenants, particularly offices and retail units. In such property, there are typically parking spaces, commonly in a parking garage, which are only accessible for the residents and/or renters. A portion of these parking spaces is provided for vehicles of the vehicle rental system, wherein only vehicles of the vehicle rental system are allowed to be parked there. The rental vehicles provided in each property can be used by the residents and/or renters for short periods, for example by the hour. The vehicles provided can be, in addition to conventional motor vehicles with combustion engines, electric vehicles, electric bicycles, or bicycles. The selection of which types of vehicles to provide in a property as part of the vehicle rental system is up to the operator of the vehicle rental system, and is based on the user structure and the environment of the property, and the desires of the users, by way of example.
The above portion merely focuses on what type of vehicles (such as combustion engines, electric vehicles, electric bicycles, or bicycles) are provided/deployed in a property. On the other hand, claim 3 recites that "the characteristics of the plurality of reservation targets are types of power of the vehicles." Also, amended claim 1 recites that "the characteristics of the plurality of reservation targets are types of power of the plurality of reservation targets." As defined in claim 1, the characteristics of the plurality of reservation targets are taken into account for processing the reservations of the plurality of reservation targets. Shroeder fails to teach taking into account the types of power of the vehicles as characteristics of the plurality of reservation targets.
In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, the Examiner respectfully notes that first, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). Secondly, specification-as-originally-filed teaches in [0046] that ”The plurality of reservation targets may be the vehicles 10. The characteristics of the plurality of reservation targets are types of power of the vehicles 10.” Further, the specification-as-originally-filed teaches in [0025] that “The vehicle 10a, the vehicle 10b, the vehicle 10c, and the vehicle 10e are electric vehicles including a battery 12a, a battery 12b, a battery 12c, and a battery 12e which accumulate drive electric power for vehicle travel, respectively. The electric vehicle is an example of an electrically-driven vehicle. The electric vehicle is an example of a movable body. The vehicle 10d is a vehicle having an internal combustion engine. The vehicle 10d is a vehicle which travels by power generated by the internal combustion engine. The vehicle 10d may be a vehicle which travels mainly by the power generated by the internal combustion engine”. Ide teaches electric vehicles and Shroeder teaches types of vehicles, such as combustion engines, electric vehicles, electric bicycles, or bicycles in [0030]. Therefore, the Examiner is unpersuaded by Applicant’s argument.
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 1-2 and 4-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention recites an abstract idea without significantly more.
Step 1
Claims 1-2 and 4-18 are directed to a control system (i.e., a machine); Claim 19 is directed to a method (i.e., a process); and Claim 20 is directed to a non-transitory computer-readable medium (i.e., a manufacture). Therefore, Claims 1-2 and 4-20 all fall within the one of the four statutory categories of invention.
Step 2A Prong 1
Independent claims 1, 19, and 20 substantially recite:
stores/storing/stores characteristic information which indicates a characteristic of each of the plurality of reservation targets;
accepts/accepting/accepts control information for processing the reservations of the plurality of reservation targets by taking into account the characteristics of the plurality of reservation targets;
accepts/accepting/accepts a reservation request related to at least any of the plurality of reservation targets; and
allows/allowing/allows, when the control information is first information, a reservation of a reservation target having a first characteristic based on the characteristic information and does not allow/not allowing/not allows, when the control information is second information, the reservation of the reservation target having the first characteristic. The aforementioned limitations recite a method or organizing human activity. Processing a reservation request is the “Managing Personal Behavior or Relationships or Interactions Between People” which includes social activities, teaching, and following rules or instructions and/or “Commercial Interactions” which includes agreements in the form of contracts, legal obligations, advertising, marketing or sales activities or behaviors, and business relations.
Step 2A Prong 2
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, claim 1 recites the additional elements: “a control system,” “at least one processor,” “a storage,” “a control information acceptance unit,” “a reservation request acceptance unit,” and “a reservation processing unit”; claim 20 recites the additional elements: “a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium,” “a program,” “a computer,” “a storage,” “a control information acceptance unit,” “a reservation request acceptance unit,” and “a reservation processing unit” to perform the “stores/stores,” “accepts/accepts,” “accepts/accepts,” and “allows” and “not allows”/ “allows” and “not allows” steps. The claimed computer components in the steps of claims 1 and 20 are recited at a high-level of generality and are merely invoked as a tool to perform the abstract idea (i.e., “a control system,” “a storage,” “at least one processor,” “a control information acceptance unit,” “a reservation request acceptance unit,” and “a reservation processing unit” in claim 1; and “a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium,” “a program,” “a computer,” “a storage,” “a control information acceptance unit,” “a reservation request acceptance unit,” and “a reservation processing unit” in claim 20 to perform the generic functions of “stores/stores,” “accepts/accepts,” “accepts/accepts,” and “allows” and “not allows”/ “allows” and “not allows”) such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Each of the additional limitations is no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using the generic computer components recited above. The combination of these additional elements is no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component as recited above. Accordingly, even 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. Thus, the claims are not patent eligible.
Step 2B
The independent claims do 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 element of using the (“control system,” “storage,” “control information acceptance unit,” “reservation request acceptance unit,” and “reservation processing unit” in claim 1; and “non-transitory computer-readable storage medium,” “program,” “computer,” “storage,” “control information acceptance unit,” “reservation request acceptance unit,” and “reservation processing unit” to perform the “stores/stores,” “accepts/accepts,” “accepts/accepts,” and “allows” and “not allows”/“allows” and “not allows”) steps amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Thus, even when viewed as a whole, nothing in the claims add significantly more (i.e. inventive concept) to the abstract idea. The claims are patent ineligible.
As per dependent claims 2, 4, 9, and 17, the limitations merely narrow the previously recited abstract idea limitations. Dependent claim 2 recites the plurality of reservation targets are vehicles. Dependent claim 4 recites the reservation request includes at least a planned use time of the vehicle. wherein each cost grid contains one or more cost-reduction time windows, wherein each of the cost-reduction time window has a predicted cost for the subscriber if the subscriber stays in one of the first data plan and the second data plan. Dependent claim 9 recites wherein the energy request information includes information indicating an energy amount and information indicating a time at which the energy is requested. Dependent claim 17 recites wherein the energy request information includes information indicating an energy amount and information indicating a time at which the energy is requested. For the reasons described above with respect to claims 2-4, 9, and 17, this judicial exception is not meaningfully integrated into a practical application, or significantly more than the abstract idea.
As per Dependent claim 5, the recitation of “when a vehicle to be used cannot be decided in response to the reservation request, in a case where the control information is the second information…’decides a vehicle to be used in response to the reservation request by performing at least a change of the planned use time of the vehicle’” is further directed to a method of organizing human activity as described in claim 1. Further, the “decides” step is also directed to a mental process. Therefore, this judicial exception is not meaningfully integrated into a practical application, or significantly more than the abstract idea.
As per Dependent claim 6, the recitation of “to decide a vehicle to be used in response to the reservation request…’holds held information including information indicating a vehicle to be used, information indicating a use time of the vehicle to be used, and information indicating at least one of: a starting point and a destination; a planned travel distance; a planned travel time; or a planned energy use amount of the vehicle to be used’ “is further directed to a method of organizing human activity as described in claim 1. Therefore, this judicial exception is not meaningfully integrated into a practical application, or significantly more than the abstract idea.
As per Dependent claim 7, the recitation of “predicts a transition of an energy amount available for travel of the vehicle based on the held information and decides the vehicle to be used in response to the reservation request based on the transition that is predicted of the energy amount available for the travel of the vehicle” “is further directed to a method of organizing human activity as described in claim 1. Further, “predicts” and “decides” steps are also directed to a mental process. Therefore, this judicial exception is not meaningfully integrated into a practical application, or significantly more than the abstract idea.
As per Dependent claim 8, the recitation of “accept energy request information related to a request of energy that is to be provided from the vehicle” and “decides the vehicle to be used in response to the reservation request by taking into account the energy request information” “is further directed to a method of organizing human activity as described in claim 1. The “decides” step is also directed to a mental process. Therefore, this judicial exception is not meaningfully integrated into a practical application, or significantly more than the abstract idea. Further, the recitation of “an energy request acceptance unit” is another computer components recited at a high-level of generality and is merely invoked as a tool to perform the abstract idea. Similar to claim 1, the recitation does not provide a practical application of the abstract idea, or significantly more than the abstract idea.
As per Dependent claims 10 and 18, the recitation of “sets a reservation of a vehicle to be used to perform energy transfer in at least one vehicle based on the energy request information” is further directed to a method of organizing human activity as described in claim 1. Therefore, this judicial exception is not meaningfully integrated into a practical application, or significantly more than the abstract idea.
As per Dependent claim 11, the recitation of “wherein when the vehicle to be used in response to the reservation request and the vehicle to be used to perform the energy transfer cannot be decided…’decides the vehicle to be used in response to the reservation request further based on the control information” is further directed to a method of organizing human activity as described in claim 1. The “decides” step is also directed to a mental process. Therefore, this judicial exception is not meaningfully integrated into a practical application, or significantly more than the abstract idea.
As per Dependent claim 12, the recitation of “perform control for a user to input the control information” “is further directed to a method of organizing human activity as described in claim 1. Therefore, this judicial exception is not meaningfully integrated into a practical application, or significantly more than the abstract idea. Further, the recitation of “an input control unit” is another computer components recited at a high-level of generality and is merely invoked as a tool to perform the abstract idea. Similar to claim 1, the recitation does not provide a practical application of the abstract idea, or significantly more than the abstract idea.
As per Dependent claim 13, the recitation of “performs control to input the control information…” is further directed to a method of organizing human activity as described in claim 1. Therefore, this judicial exception is not meaningfully integrated into a practical application, or significantly more than the abstract idea. Further, the recitation of “a user interface” and “a user interface” are other computer components recited at a high-level of generality and is merely invoked as a tool to perform the abstract idea. Similar to claim 1, the recitation does not provide a practical application of the abstract idea, or significantly more than the abstract idea.
As per Dependent claim 14, the recitations of “acquire identification information of a user…” , and “determines whether or not an input of the control information is allowed based on the identification information of the user which is acquired…” are further directed to a method of organizing human activity as described in claim 1. The “decides” step is also directed to a mental process; and the “acquires” step . Therefore, this judicial exception is not meaningfully integrated into a practical application, or significantly more than the abstract idea. Further, the recitation of “a user identification information acquisition unit” is another computer components recited at a high-level of generality and is merely invoked as a tool to perform the abstract idea. Similar to claim 1, the recitation does not provide a practical application of the abstract idea, or significantly more than the abstract idea.
As per Dependent claim 15, the recitations of “accept energy request information related to a request of energy that is to be provided from the vehicle” and ”decides the vehicle to be used in response to the reservation request by taking into account the energy request information” are further directed to a method of organizing human activity as described in claim 1. The “decides” step is also directed to a mental process. Therefore, this judicial exception is not meaningfully integrated into a practical application, or significantly more than the abstract idea. Further, the recitation of “an energy request acceptance unit” is another computer components recited at a high-level of generality and is merely invoked as a tool to perform the abstract idea. Similar to claim 1, the recitation does not provide a practical application of the abstract idea, or significantly more than the abstract idea.
As per Dependent claim 16, the recitations of “accept energy request information related to a request of energy that is to be provided from the vehicle” and “decides the vehicle to be used in response to the reservation request by taking into account the energy request information” are further directed to a method of organizing human activity as described in claim 1. The “decides” step is also directed to a mental process. Therefore, this judicial exception is not meaningfully integrated into a practical application, or significantly more than the abstract idea. Further, the recitation of “an energy request acceptance unit” is another computer components recited at a high-level of generality and is merely invoked as a tool to perform the abstract idea. Similar to claim 1, the recitation does not provide a practical application of the abstract idea, or significantly more than the abstract idea.
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.
Claims 1-2, 4-12, and 15-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ide et al. (US PG Pub. 20250217722 A1) in view of Shroeder (US PG Pub. 20140149156 A1).
As per claim 1, Ide et al. discloses a control system which processes reservations of a plurality of reservation targets, the control system (Abstract) comprising:
at least one processor (Ide et al.: [0030], FIG. 2);
a storage in which the at one processor stores characteristic information which indicates a characteristic of each of the plurality of reservation targets (Ide et al.: Abstract: [0032][0039][0094] a storage unit that stores the selection condition and the importance information in correspondence with the selection condition);
a control information acceptance unit that uses the at least one processor to accept control information for processing the reservations of the plurality of reservation targets by taking into account the characteristics of the plurality of reservation targets (Ide et al.: [0032],[0094] The processing unit 200 includes an accepting unit 210 and a plan unit 220. The accepting unit 210 accepts reservation information of a reservation target. The reservation information includes a selection condition for selecting a vehicle 10 to be used by a user from vehicles 10 and importance information that designates importance of the selection condition. For example, the selection condition includes at least one of a condition for selecting a usage period of the vehicle 10, a condition for selecting a vehicle type, or a condition for selecting the particular vehicle 10);
a reservation request acceptance unit that uses the at least one process to accept a reservation request related to at least any of the plurality of reservation targets (Ide et al.: [0032][0094] The processing unit 200 includes an accepting unit 210 and a plan unit 220. The accepting unit 210 accepts reservation information of a reservation target ( Ide et al.: [0039] The accepting unit 310 may acquire the reservation information input to the vehicle management apparatus 60 through the vehicle management apparatus 60 and the communication unit 390); and
a reservation processing unit that uses the at least one processor to allow, when the control information is first information, a reservation of a reservation target having a first characteristic based on the characteristic information and does not allow, when the control information is second information, the reservation of the reservation target having the first characteristic (Ide et al.: [0045],[0060][0094] The reservation information may further include mandatory information indicating whether the reservation is mandatory. When the reservation information includes the mandatory information indicating a fact that a reservation is not mandatory, the reservation arbitration unit 320 may not assign a vehicle 10 to a user if a vehicle 10 that satisfies the selection condition is not among vehicles 10),
Ide et al. does not explicitly disclose, however, Shroeder discloses:
wherein the characteristics of the plurality of reservation targets are types of power of the vehicles (Shroeder: [0030] A portion of these parking spaces is provided for vehicles of the vehicle rental system, wherein only vehicles of the vehicle rental system are allowed to be parked there. The rental vehicles provided in each property can be used by the residents and/or renters for short periods, for example by the hour. The vehicles provided can be, in addition to conventional motor vehicles with combustion engines, electric vehicles, electric bicycles, or bicycles. The selection of which types of vehicles to provide in a property as part of the vehicle rental system is up to the operator of the vehicle rental system, and is based on the user structure and the environment of the property, and the desires of the users, by way of example). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the rental system of Ide et al. to include the ability to select the type of power a vehicle uses as taught by Shroeder in order to provide a variety of vehicles based on the user structure and the environment of the property, and the desires of the users (Shroeder [0030]).
As per claim 2, Ide et al. in view of Shroeder discloses the control system according to claim 1. Ide et al. further discloses wherein the plurality of reservation targets are vehicles (Ide et al.: [0032] In the present embodiment, the vehicle 10 is an example of the reservation target candidate and the reservation target).
As per claim 4, Ide et al. in view of Shroeder discloses the control system according to claim 2. Ide et al. further discloses wherein the reservation request includes at least a planned use time of the vehicle (Ide et al.: [0043] The selection condition may include a condition for selecting a usage period of the vehicle. The usage period may be one of a first period during which the battery 12 is used for exchanging electrical power with a power grid or a second period during which the vehicle is in operation).
As per claim 5, Ide et al. in view of Shroeder discloses the control system according to claim 4. Ide et al. further discloses wherein when a vehicle to be used cannot be decided in response to the reservation request, in a case where the control information is the second information, the reservation processing unit decides a vehicle to be used in response to the reservation request by performing at least a change of the planned use time of the vehicle (Ide et al.: [0061] The “time change” is information indicating whether the selection condition regarding the usage period is allowed to be changed. The selection condition regarding the usage period is the “departure time”, the “arrival time”, and the “stay time” to be described later. “Not allowed” of the “time change” indicates that the selection condition regarding the usage period is not allowed to be changed. “Allowed” of the “time change” indicates that the selection condition regarding the usage period is allowed to be changed. The “time change” is an example of importance information for designating an importance of the selection conditions related to the usage period; FIG. 5, see user C where time change is allowed); and [0071] In the example of FIG. 5, according to the reservation information of the user C, it is reserved to use the vehicle 10d to depart from the business office at 15:45, arrive at the place of a customer 2 location at 15:55, then stay at the place of the customer 2 location for 10 minutes, depart from the place of the customer 2 location at 16:05, and arrive at the business office 30 at 16:15. This reservation designates that time change is allowed, that vehicle change is allowed, and that vehicle type change is not allowed. In addition, in this reservation, it is designated that the priority of the selection conditions related to vehicle designation is higher than the priority of the selection conditions related to time designation. In this reservation, because the mandatory level “high” is designated for the user C, a fact is that the assignment of the vehicle 10 to the user C is mandatory is designated).
As per claim 6, Ide et al. in view of Shroeder discloses the control system according to claim 4. Ide et al. further discloses wherein to decide a vehicle to be used in response to the reservation request, the reservation processing unit holds held information including information indicating a vehicle to be used, information indicating a use time of the vehicle to be used, and information indicating at least one of: a starting point and a destination; a planned travel distance; a planned travel time; or a planned energy use amount of the vehicle to be used (Ide et al.: [0051]) The reservation information includes, for example, a departure place and a destination, a departure time and an arrival time to the destination, and a type, a capacity, a weight, and the like of a load on the vehicle 10. Depending on the departure place and the destination, it is determined from which place to which place the vehicle 10 needs to travel. The departure time may be, for example, the moment at which the vehicle 10 departs from the business office 30, and the arrival time may be, for example, the moment at which the vehicle 10 returns to the business office 30); Also see FIG. 5).
As per claim 7, Ide et al. in view of Shroeder discloses the control system according to claim 6. Ide et al. further discloses wherein the reservation processing unit predicts a transition of an energy amount available for travel of the vehicle based on the held information and decides the vehicle to be used in response to the reservation request based on the transition that is predicted of the energy amount available for the travel of the vehicle (Ide et al. [0056] In S4213, the plan unit 220 determines an operation route of the vehicle 10, and determines the feasible vehicle dispatch plan by determining whether the departure time and the arrival time which are designated by the reservation information can be kept, and also the vehicle 10 can arrive back to the business office 30 without running out of electric power based on the SOC and a power consumption rate of the vehicle 10).
As per claim 8, Ide et al. in view of Shroeder discloses the control system according to claim 2. Ide et al. further discloses further comprising: an energy request acceptance unit that uses the at least one processor to accept energy request information related to a request of energy that is to be provided from the vehicle, wherein the reservation processing unit decides the vehicle to be used in response to the reservation request by taking into account the energy request information (Ide et al. :[0043][0094] The selection condition may include a condition for selecting a usage period of the vehicle. The usage period may be one of a first period during which the battery 12 is used for exchanging electrical power with a power grid or a second period during which the vehicle is in. operation. The power grid is, for example, a power grid in the business office 30 and/or a power grid 90. The reservation arbitration unit 320 determines, in a case where the first period and the second period conflict for a first vehicle, the first vehicle as a vehicle for exchanging electrical power with the power grid, together with a second vehicle as the vehicle in operation. This allows the battery 12 to be actively assigned for peak cut and other energy management purposes at the business office 30).
As per claim 9, Ide et al. in view of Shroeder discloses the control system according to claim 8. Ide et al. further discloses wherein the energy request information includes information indicating an energy amount and information indicating a time at which the energy is requested (Ide et al.: [0043] The selection condition may include a condition for selecting a usage period of the vehicle. The usage period may be one of a first period during which the battery 12 is used for exchanging electrical power with a power grid or a second period during which the vehicle is in operation. The power grid is, for example, a power grid in the business office 30 and/or a power grid 90. The reservation arbitration unit 320 determines, in a case where the first period and the second period conflict for a first vehicle, the first vehicle as a vehicle for exchanging electrical power with the power grid, together with a second vehicle as the vehicle in operation. This allows the battery 12 to be actively assigned for peak cut and other energy management purposes at the business office 30).
As per claim 10, Ide et al. in view of Shroeder discloses the control system according to claim 8. Ide et al. further discloses wherein the reservation processing unit sets a reservation of a vehicle to be used to perform energy transfer in at least one vehicle based on the energy request information (Ide et al.: [0023] The vehicle management apparatus 60 manages the vehicle 10 based on the schedule of the vehicle 10 adjusted by the integrated management apparatus 50. The power control apparatus 40 controls charging and discharging of the battery 12 included in the vehicle 10 based on the schedule of the vehicle 10 adjusted by the integrated management apparatus 50)
As per claim 11, Ide et al. in view of Shroeder discloses the control system according to claim 10. Ide et al. further discloses wherein when the vehicle to be used in response to the reservation request and the vehicle to be used to perform the energy transfer cannot be decided, the reservation processing unit decides the vehicle to be used in response to the reservation request further based on the control information (Ide et al. [0043] The selection condition may include a condition for selecting a usage period of the vehicle. The usage period may be one of a first period during which the battery 12 is used for exchanging electrical power with a power grid or a second period during which the vehicle is in operation. The power grid is, for example, a power grid in the business office 30 and/or a power grid 90. The reservation arbitration unit 320 determines, in a case where the first period and the second period conflict for a first vehicle, the first vehicle as a vehicle for exchanging electrical power with the power grid, together with a second vehicle as the vehicle in operation. This allows the battery 12 to be actively assigned for peak cut and other energy management purposes at the business office 30)[0021]).
As per claim 12, Ide et al. in view of Shroeder discloses the control system according to claim 1. Ide et al. further discloses: an input control unit that uses the at least one processor to perform control for a user to input the control information (Ide et al.: [0048],[0051],[0094] Note that the user is a person or a system that inputs, to the power control apparatus 40, information regarding power management in the business office 30).
As per claim 15, Ide et al. in view of Shroeder discloses the control system according to claim 4. Ide et al. further discloses: an energy request acceptance unit that uses the at least one processor to accept energy request information related to a request of energy that is to be provided from the vehicle, wherein the reservation processing unit decides the vehicle to be used in response to the reservation request by taking into account the energy request information (Ide et al.: [0043],[0094] The selection condition may include a condition for selecting a usage period of the vehicle. The usage period may be one of a first period during which the battery 12 is used for exchanging electrical power with a power grid or a second period during which the vehicle is in operation. The power grid is, for example, a power grid in the business office 30 and/or a power grid 90. The reservation arbitration unit 320 determines, in a case where the first period and the second period conflict for a first vehicle, the first vehicle as a vehicle for exchanging electrical power with the power grid, together with a second vehicle as the vehicle in operation. This allows the battery 12 to be actively assigned for peak cut and other energy management purposes at the business office 30).
As per claim 16, Ide et al. in view of Shroeder discloses the control system according to claim 5. Ide et al. further discloses: an energy request acceptance unit that uses the at least one processor to accept energy request information related to a request of energy that is to be provided from the vehicle, wherein the reservation processing unit decides the vehicle to be used in response to the reservation request by taking into account the energy request information (Ide et al.: [0043],[0053],[0094] The selection condition may include a condition for selecting a usage period of the vehicle. The usage period may be one of a first period during which the battery 12 is used for exchanging electrical power with a power grid or a second period during which the vehicle is in operation. The power grid is, for example, a power grid in the business office 30 and/or a power grid 90. The reservation arbitration unit 320 determines, in a case where the first period and the second period conflict for a first vehicle, the first vehicle as a vehicle for exchanging electrical power with the power grid, together with a second vehicle as the vehicle in operation. This allows the battery 12 to be actively assigned for peak cut and other energy management purposes at the business office 30).
As per claim 17, Ide et al. in view of Shroeder discloses the control system according to claim 15. Ide et al. further discloses wherein the energy request information includes information indicating an energy amount and information indicating a time at which the energy is requested (Ide et al.: [0043] The selection condition may include a condition for selecting a usage period of the vehicle. The usage period may be one of a first period during which the battery 12 is used for exchanging electrical power with a power grid or a second period during which the vehicle is in operation. The power grid is, for example, a power grid in the business office 30 and/or a power grid 90. The reservation arbitration unit 320 determines, in a case where the first period and the second period conflict for a first vehicle, the first vehicle as a vehicle for exchanging electrical power with the power grid, together with a second vehicle as the vehicle in operation. This allows the battery 12 to be actively assigned for peak cut and other energy management purposes at the business office 30).
As per claim 18, Ide et al. in view of Shroeder discloses the control system according to claim 15. Ide et al. further discloses wherein the reservation processing unit sets a reservation of a vehicle to be used to perform energy transfer in at least one vehicle based on the energy request information (Ide et al. [0043],[0053] The selection condition may include a condition for selecting a usage period of the vehicle. The usage period may be one of a first period during which the battery 12 is used for exchanging electrical power with a power grid or a second period during which the vehicle is in operation. The power grid is, for example, a power grid in the business office 30 and/or a power grid 90. The reservation arbitration unit 320 determines, in a case where the first period and the second period conflict for a first vehicle, the first vehicle as a vehicle for exchanging electrical power with the power grid, together with a second vehicle as the vehicle in operation. This allows the battery 12 to be actively assigned for peak cut and other energy management purposes at the business office 30).
As per claim 19, Ide et al. discloses a control method for processing reservations of a plurality of reservation targets (Ide et al.: Abstract), the control method comprising:
storing characteristic information which indicates a characteristic of each of the plurality of reservation targets (Ide et al.: Abstract: [0032][0039];
accepting control information for processing the reservations of the plurality of reservation targets by taking into account the characteristics of the plurality of reservation targets (Ide et al.: [0032]) ;
accepting a reservation request related to at least any of the plurality of reservation targets (Ide et al.: [0032],[0039]); and
allowing, when the control information is first information, a reservation of a reservation target having a first characteristic based on the characteristic information and not allowing, when the control information is second information, the reservation of the reservation target having the first characteristic (Ide et al.: [0045],[0060]).
Ide et al. does not explicitly disclose, however, Shroeder discloses:
wherein the characteristics of the plurality of reservation targets are types of power of the vehicles (Shroeder: [0030] A portion of these parking spaces is provided for vehicles of the vehicle rental system, wherein only vehicles of the vehicle rental system are allowed to be parked there. The rental vehicles provided in each property can be used by the residents and/or renters for short periods, for example by the hour. The vehicles provided can be, in addition to conventional motor vehicles with combustion engines, electric vehicles, electric bicycles, or bicycles. The selection of which types of vehicles to provide in a property as part of the vehicle rental system is up to the operator of the vehicle rental system, and is based on the user structure and the environment of the property, and the desires of the users, by way of example). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the rental system of Ide et al. to include the ability to select the type of power a vehicle uses as taught by Shroeder in order to provide a variety of vehicles based on the user structure and the environment of the property, and the desires of the users (Shroeder [0030]).
As per claim 20, Ide et al. discloses a non-transitory computer readable storage medium storing a program (Ide et al.: [0087],[0091]) for causing a computer (Ide et al.: [0030]-[0031] )to function as a control system which processes reservations of a plurality of reservation targets (Ide et al.: Abstract), the program causing the computer to function as:
a storage in which the computer stores characteristic information which indicates a characteristic of each of the plurality of reservation targets (Ide et al.: Abstract: [0032][0039]);
a control information acceptance unit that uses the computer to accept control information for processing the reservations of the plurality of reservation targets by taking into account the characteristics of the plurality of reservation targets (Ide et al.: [0032]);
a reservation request acceptance unit that uses the computer to accept a reservation request related to at least any of the plurality of reservation targets (Ide et al.: [0032],[0039]); and
a reservation processing unit that uses the computer to allow, when the control information is first information, a reservation of a reservation target having a first characteristic based on the characteristic information and does not allow, when the control information is second information, the reservation of the reservation target having the first characteristic (Ide et al.: [0045],[0060]).
Ide et al. does not explicitly disclose, however, Shroeder discloses:
wherein the characteristics of the plurality of reservation targets are types of power of the vehicles (Shroeder: [0030] A portion of these parking spaces is provided for vehicles of the vehicle rental system, wherein only vehicles of the vehicle rental system are allowed to be parked there. The rental vehicles provided in each property can be used by the residents and/or renters for short periods, for example by the hour. The vehicles provided can be, in addition to conventional motor vehicles with combustion engines, electric vehicles, electric bicycles, or bicycles. The selection of which types of vehicles to provide in a property as part of the vehicle rental system is up to the operator of the vehicle rental system, and is based on the user structure and the environment of the property, and the desires of the users, by way of example). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the rental system of Ide et al. to include the ability to select the type of power a vehicle uses as taught by Shroeder in order to provide a variety of vehicles based on the user structure and the environment of the property, and the desires of the users (Shroeder [0030]).
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ide et al. (US PG Pub. 20250217722 A1) in view of Shroeder as applied to claim 12 above and in further view of Hyde et al. (JP 2013511764 A).
As per claim 13, Ide et al. in view of Shroeder discloses the control system according to claim 12. Ide et al. in view of Shroeder does not explicitly disclose, however, Hyde et al. discloses wherein the input control unit performs control to input the control information through a user interface which is different from a user interface through which the reservation request is accepted (Hyde et al.: page 19, paragraph 4, Different types of user interfaces facilitate two-way communication by different types of users associated with the vehicle (drivers, operators, owners, passengers, lessors, lessees, or office managers) Embedded in the communication module 1000 including, but not limited to, a keyboard 1052, a voice receiver 1053, an acoustic speaker 1054, a mouse 1055, a touch screen 1056, a data status display unit 1062, and a message display unit 1064). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the rental system of Ide et al. in view of Shroeder to include different interfaces as taught by Hyde et al. in order to receive different input from different users such as, a renters vs an administrator.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ide et al. (US PG Pub. 20250217722 A1) in view of Hyde et al. (JP 2013511764 A) as applied to claim 13 above and in further view of Official Notice.
As per claim 14, Ide et al. in view of Shroeder and Hyde et al. discloses the control system according to claim 13. Ide et al. in view of Shroeder and Hyde et al. does not further disclose a user identification information acquisition unit which acquires identification information of a user, wherein the input control unit determines whether or not an input of the control information is allowed based on the identification information of the user which is acquired by the user identification information acquisition unit.
However, the Examiner takes Official Notice that it is old and well known for a rental system to receive identification information, such as a license, login information (a username and password), a user ID, a personal identification number (PIN), a passcode, an email address, and fingerprint to grant or deny further input based on the identification to make sure the user is an authorized user. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the rental system of Ide et al. in view of Shroeder and Hyde et al. to include receive a user ID and deny/grant further input to make a reservation based on the ID to determine each user is an authorized user of the system.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
1) Murakami et al. (US Patent No. 7181409 B1) discloses a shared vehicle system and method involving reserving vehicles with highest state of charge rate, wherein the vehicles in a shared system may be of many types, such as, conventional petroleum based gasoline or diesel fuel type vehicles, methanol or propane powered vehicles, vehicles powered by hydrogen stored as a gas or metal hydride, the electric vehicles may draw energy from batteries, fuel cells, generators driven by internal combustion engines, or combinations of different energy sources, electric vehicles powered by both lead acid and nickel metal hydride batteries.
2) Garay, Elissa, “Yes, You Can Rent an EV for Your Next Trip—Here’s How”, July 23, 2023, afar.com, 16 pages discloses “Renting is a great way to test-drive an EV and experience all they have to offer,” says Laura Smith, executive vice president of global and customer experience at Hertz. Despite an evolving marketplace, EV rental inventory remains relatively scarce, however, luckily, an increasing number of car rental aggregator websites, such as Kayak, RentalCars, and Priceline, now feature filters for EV-specific results to help make them easier to find, aside from visiting the car rental agencies’ websites directly.
3) Yokoyama et al. (WO 2019130930 A1) discloses a vehicle management system wherein when making a reservation for a parking lot, the car type information records the car type of the user; and based on the vehicle type information, it is possible to identify the type of power source, such as whether the vehicle is an electric vehicle, and in the case of an electric vehicle, the battery capacity and, for example, the time required to fully charge is based on the vehicle type information. It can be identified.
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 FREDA A. NELSON whose telephone number is (571)272-7076. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 10:00am - 6:30pm.
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, Shannon Campbell can be reached at 571-272-5587. 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.
/F.A.N/Examiner, Art Unit 3628
/SHANNON S CAMPBELL/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3628
Prosecution Insights