DETAILED ACTION
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 conflicting claims 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); 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 nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) 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 www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-59 of U.S. Patent No. 9,207,698 (hereinafter: ‘698).
Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the differences would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made.
The following claim comparison chart shows how the pending claims are adequately disclosed by the patented claims. The left column represents the pending claims and the right column represents the patented claimed features that adequately correspond to features of the pending claim(s):
1. A system for managing an electric power grid, comprising:
‘698 claim 1 preamble “A system for managing power on an electric power grid…”
at least one server, including a processor and a memory, in communication with a plurality of active load clients, which are connected with a plurality of grid elements at a service point;
‘698 claim 1; server with command processor; event manager, client manager, device control manager; plurality of controllable devices associated with power consuming devices at customer locations
wherein the at least one server is operable to construct individual power profiles for each of the plurality of grid elements based on baseline power measurement for each of the plurality of grid elements;
‘698 claim 1 + 40-41; database storing information relating to power consumed by plurality of devices and load management preferences per device
wherein the at least one server aggregates the individual power profiles to generate a service point power profile;
‘698 claims 17, 20 and 46-47; power control commands use usage information and corresponding PSV values; aggregation of PSV values associated with operating reserves and PTB units
wherein the at least one server dispatches power control events to the service point based on the service point power profile;
‘698 claim 1; event manager receives power control event messages; client device manager selects devices requiring reduction in specific amount; device control manager issues power control instructions
wherein the at least one server generates operating reserves based on the power control events; and
‘698 claim 1; system operable for providing operating reserves for grid stability; and for providing operating reserves by enabling/disabling devices to provide at least one PTB unit; also see claims 17-20
wherein the operating reserves include spinning reserves, load resources, responsive reserves, and/or other reserves dispatchable by an energy management system (EMS).
‘698 claim 1 + 17-20 and 46-49’ generic “operating reserves” with PSV’s and PTB’s, used for grid stability and compensated/market pricing
8. A method for managing an electric power grid, comprising:
‘698; claim 56; preamble “A method for managing power on an electric power grid…”
at least one server, including a processor and a memory, communicating with a plurality of active load clients, which are connected with a plurality of grid elements at a service point;
‘698 claim 56; step(s) referencing server issuing power control commands and messages by controllable devices associated with power consuming devices
the at least one server constructing individual power profiles for each of the plurality of grid elements based on baseline power measurement for each of the plurality of grid elements;
‘698 claim 56; step of storing in a database information relating to power consumed by plurality of devices and PSV information
the at least one server aggregating the individual power profiles to generate a service point power profile;
‘698 claim 56 + 17, 20 and 46-47; using usage information and PSVs to form PTB units and total operating reserves
the at least one server dispatching power control events to the service point based on the service point power profile; and
‘698 claim 56; initiating power control commands; selecting devices from database based on required reduction; issuing power control instructions
the at least one server generating operating reserves based on the power control events;
‘698 claim 56; “thereby generating operating reserves for grid stability based on reduction of power consumed…”; providing PTB units
wherein the operating reserves include spinning reserves, load resources, responsive reserves, and/or other reserves dispatchable by an energy management system (EMS).
‘698 claim 56 + 17-20 and 46-49; generic operating reserves via PTBs with PSVs and market/compensation aspects
15. A system for managing an electric power grid, comprising:
‘698 claim 1 preamble “A system for managing power on an electric power grid…”
at least one server, including a processor and a memory, in communication with a plurality of active load clients, which are connected with a plurality of grid elements at a service point;
‘698; claim 1; server with command processor; event manager, client device manager, device control manager; controllable devices associated with power-consuming devices at customer locations
wherein the at least one server is operable to construct individual power profiles for each of the plurality of grid elements based on baseline power measurement for each of the plurality of grid elements;
‘698 claim 1 + 40-41; database storing information relating to power consumed by plurality of devices and load management preferences per device
wherein the at least one server aggregates the individual power profiles to generate a service point power profile;
‘698 claims 17, 20 and 46-47; usage information + PSVs aggregated into PTB units and total operating reserves with market pricing
wherein the at least one server dispatches power control events to the service point based on the service point power profile;
‘698 claim 1; event manager receives event message; client device manager selects devices based on required reduction; device control manager issues power control instructions
wherein a value corresponding to each of the power control events is generated based on measurement and verification of power supply or power consumption by the plurality of grid elements during the power control events;
‘698 claims 15, 17, 20, 46-49; definition of PSV corresponding to curtailment event amount; power control commands include usage information and PSV; PSV’s determined subject to market/regulatory requirements
wherein the at least one server generates operating reserves based on the power control events; and
‘698 claim 1 and 17-20; operating reserves for grid stability via curtailment/PTB units
wherein the at least one server is operable to facilitate market settlement for the power control events.
‘698 claims 46-49; PSV associated with operating reserves; aggregation of PSV’s and market pricing; compensation for each PSV; operating reserves
The features of pending claims 2 and 9 appear to be adequately disclosed by ‘698, claim 41.
The features of pending claims 3 and 10 appear to adequately algin with ‘698, claims 17 and 20.
Pending claims 4 and 11 appears to adequately align with ‘698, claims 1 and 56.
Claims 5 and 12 adequately align with ‘698, claim 3.
Claims 6 and 13 adequately align with ‘698, claims 15, 17 and 46-49.
Claims 7 and 14 adequately align with ‘698, claims 46-49.
Claim 16 adequately aligns with ‘698, claims 46-69.
Claim 17 adequately aligns with ‘698, claims 17 and 20.
Claim 19 adequately aligns with ‘698, claim 3.
Claim 20 adequately aligns with ‘698, claims 46-49.
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.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Forbes JR., et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2009/0062970 A1 (hereinafter: ‘970) in view of Forbes JR. et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2010/0222935 A1 (hereinafter: ‘935).
As per claim 1, ‘970 discloses a system for managing an electric power grid, comprising:
at least one server, including a processor and a memory, in communication with a plurality of active load clients, which are connected with a plurality of grid elements at a service point (e.g., Interpreted to correspond to a server communicating with plural controller clients which are connected with plural devices at respective service location points; See ‘970; [0032], [0068] and [0071);
wherein the at least one server is operable to construct individual power profiles for each of the plurality of grid elements based on baseline power measurement for each of the plurality of grid elements (e.g., Interpreted to correspond to the server generating a profile for each device based on each device’s normal power use; See ‘970; [0042] and [0076]);
wherein the at least one server aggregates the individual power profiles to generate a service point power profile (e.g., Interpreted to correspond to the server combining all of the profiles into one total profile; See ‘970; [0047] and [0080]); and
wherein the at least one server dispatches power control events to the service point based on the service point power profile (e.g., Interpreted to correspond to the server sending control event commands to the service location using the total profile; See ‘970; [0072] and [0077]).
However, ‘970 does not explicitly disclose:
(1) wherein the at least one server generates operating reserves based on the power control events; or
(2) wherein the operating reserves include spinning reserves, load resources, responsive reserves, and/or other reserves dispatchable by an energy management system (EMS).
In analogous art, ‘935 discloses these features. (1) is interpreted to correspond to the server turning the control event commands into extra available operating capacity; See ‘935; [0044] and [0045]); and (2) is interpreted to correspond to reserves managed by an EMS; See ‘935; [0006], [0007] and [0047]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have incorporated the teachings of ‘935 into ‘970 for the purpose of letting the server’s load controls appears as standard reserves that the utility EMS can dispatch, thereby improving overall reliability and avoiding the need to construct new control infrastructure.
As per claim 2, ‘970’s combined system further discloses that the service point power profile includes a geodetic location (e.g., See ‘970; [0026]).
As per claim 3, ‘970’s combined system further discloses that the plurality of grid elements includes at least one battery and at least one heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) system (e.g., See ‘970; [0026]- [0027] for battery, and [0005] and [0049] for the disclosure of HVAC).
As per claim 4, ‘970’s combined system further discloses that one or more of the power control events only dispatch a subset of the plurality of grid elements at the service point (e.g., Interpreted to correspond to the server being able to specifically choose which devices to control; See ‘970; [0047]).
As per claim 5, ‘970’s combined system further discloses that at least one of the plural grid elements is integrated directly with a corresponding at least one of the active load clients (e.g., Interpreted to correspond to at least one device having its controller built into the device itself; See ‘935; [0051], disclosing a smart appliance that includes a power control module integrated directly into the appliance).
As per claim 6, ‘970’s combined system further discloses that a value corresponding to each of the power control events is generated based on measurement and verification of power supply or power consumption by the plurality of grid elements during the power control events (e.g., Interpreted to correspond to that for each event, the system computes a value using measured and confirmed power usage during the event; See ‘970; [0010] and [0080]).
As per claim 7, ‘970’s combined system further discloses that the at least one server is operable to facilitate market settlement for the power control events (e.g., Interpreted to correspond to the server assisting in settling power market transactions based on the power control events and the resulting operating reserves; See ‘935; [0100] – [0101]).
As per claims 8-14, the rejections and the rationales set forth above with respect to the rejections of claims 1-7, respectively, are incorporated herein by reference and are relied upon for the rejection of claims 8-14.
As per claim 15, this claim recites, in combination, the limitations of claims 1 and 6-7. Accordingly, the rationale as set forth above with respect to the rejections of claims 1 and 6-7 is incorporated herein by reference and is relied upon for the rejection of claim 15.
As per claim 16, ‘970’s combined system further discloses a meter configured to measure power for the plurality of grid elements at the service point, and wherein the measurement is sufficient for market settlement (e.g. The rejections and rationale as set forth above with respect to the rejections of claims 6 and 7 are incorporated herein by reference, and further it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to add a power meter to grid operators can settle markets using accurate, verified measurements of device energy consumption and needs).
As per claim 17, the rejection and the rationale set forth above with respect to the rejection of claim 3 is incorporated herein by reference and are relied upon for the rejection of claim 17.
As per claim 18, the rejection and the rationale set forth above with respect to the rejection of claim 4 is incorporated herein by reference and are relied upon for the rejection of claim 18.
As per claim 19, the rejection and the rationale set forth above with respect to the rejection of claim 5 is incorporated herein by reference and are relied upon for the rejection of claim 19.
As per claim 20, ‘970’s combined system further discloses that the at least one server receives power control messages from at least one market participant via an energy management system, and wherein the power control events are dispatched based on the power control messages (e.g., Interpreted to correspond to the server getting power control instructions from energy market participants through an EMS and using the instructions to send matching control event commands to the devices; See ‘970; [0038] and [0076]; also see ‘935; [0044] and [0100]).
References Considered but Not Relied Upon
The following references were considered but were not relied upon with respect o any prior art rejections:
(1) US 7,333,880 B2, which discloses a central platform that monitors and remotely controls customer side devices as one aggregated resource for utilities, and includes the use of metering, alarms, cost allocation and report generation;
(2) US 2002/0019758 A1, which discloses a dispatcher that monitors real time energy process and automatically informs market participants or energy generators when to cut load or to produce more to save money;
(3) US 2002/0019802 A1, which discloses an aggregator that collects many customers load reduction capabilities into trade-able “curtailment” blocks that can be sold or settled in power markets;
(4) US 8,234,876 B2, which discloses a utility run “virtual power plant” coordinating many ice storage HVAC units, which shifts building cooling loads to provide grid support and capacity services;
(5) US 2012/0029720 A1, which discloses a hierarchical control system coordinating many distributed energy resources, wherein aggregate information is passed between nodes to the grid to support operations and services and
(6) US 2009/0200988 A1, which discloses a central service that talks to many small power devices and controls them together so they act like one big power plant for the grid.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RONALD D HARTMAN JR whose telephone number is (571)272-3684. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30 - 4:30 EST.
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, Mohammad Ali can be reached at (571) 272-4105. 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.
/RONALD D HARTMAN JR/
Primary Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2119
December 8, 2025
/RDH/
Prosecution Insights