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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 7/20/2026 and 8/7/2025 were in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Status of Claims
This action is in reply to the application filed on 8/7/2025, wherein:
Claims 1-6 are currently pending and have been examined.
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 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The claims recite a device and method for providing financial services which is considered a judicial exception because it falls under Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity such as commercial or legal interactions, including sales activities or behaviors and business relations. This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application as discussed below and the claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception as discussed below.
This rejection follows the 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility guidance, 84 Fed Reg 4, January 7, 2019, pp. 50-57 (“2019 PEG”)(MPEP 2106).
Analysis
Step 1 (Statutory Categories) – 2019 PEG pg. 53 (See MPEP 2106.03)
Claims 1-6 are directed to the statutory category of a process, machine, or manufacture.
Step 2A, Prong 1 (Do the claims recite an abstract idea?) – 2019 PEG pg. 54 (See MPEP 2106.04(a)-(c))
For independent claims 1 and 4, the claims recite an abstract idea of: providing a financial service. The steps of independent claim 1 recite the abstract idea (in bold below) of: A method of providing a financial service based on electric energy in an electric vehicle (EV) ecosystem, comprising: receiving, by an EV ecosystem management device, EV eco data from EV ecosystem participation devices; and providing, by the EV ecosystem management device, a financial service to the EV ecosystem participation device on the basis of the EV eco data. Independent claim 4 recites similar steps that recite the abstract idea. Independent claims 1 and 4, as drafted, are a process that, under the broadest reasonable interpretation, covers Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity, since they recite commercial or legal interactions, including sales activities or behaviors, and business relations. If the claim limitations, under the broadest reasonable interpretation, covers methods of organizing human activity but for the recitation of additional elements including generic computer components, then it falls within the “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity” grouping of abstract ideas. Other than reciting the abstract idea, the independent claims recite additional elements including generic computer components such as “EV ecosystem management device, and an EV ecosystem participation devices”, and nothing in the claims precludes the steps from being performed as a method of organizing human activity. Accordingly, the independent claims recite an abstract idea.
Dependent claims 2, 3, 5, and 6 recite similar limitations as independent claims 1 and 4; and when analyzed as a whole are held to be patent ineligible under 35 U.S.C 101 because the additional recited limitations only refine the abstract idea further. Other than reciting the abstract idea, the dependent claims recite similar additional elements including generic computer components as the independent claims, such as “the EV ecosystem management device, the EV ecosystem participation devices, an EV charging station, and an EV power plant”. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers commercial or legal interactions, but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity” grouping of abstract ideas.
Step 2A, Prong 2 (Does the claim recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application?) – 2019 PEG pg. 54 (See MPEP 2106.04(d)-(c))
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, independent claims 1, and 4 only recite the additional elements of “EV ecosystem management device, and an EV ecosystem participation devices”. A plain reading of the Figures and associated descriptions in the specification reveals that generic processors may be used to execute the claimed steps. The additional elements are recited at a high level of generality (i.e., as a generic processor performing generic computer functions) such that it amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components (See MPEP 2106.05(f)) and limits the judicial exception to a particular environment (See MPEP 2106.05(h)). Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component and limiting the judicial exception to a particular environment doesn’t integrate the abstract idea into a practical application in Step 2A. Accordingly, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. Hence, independent claims 1 and 4 are directed to an abstract idea.
Dependent claims 2, 3, 5, and 6, recite similar additional elements as the independent claims including generic computer components, such as “the EV ecosystem management device, the EV ecosystem participation devices, an EV charging station, and an EV power plant”. The judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the additional elements in the dependent claims are also recited at a high-level of generality such that it amounts to more no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components. Therefore, the additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they also do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. Also, the claims do not affect an improvement to another technology or technical field; the claims do not amount to an improvement of the functioning of a computer system itself; the claims do not effect a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing; and the claims do not move beyond a general link of the use of an abstract idea to a particular technological environment.
Step 2B (Does the claim recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception?) – 2019 PEG pg. 56 (See MPEP 2106.05)
Independent claims 1 and 4 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 recited additional elements amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component (See MPEP 2106.05(f)) and limits the judicial exception to the particular environment of computers (See MPEP 2106.05(h)). The additional elements of the instant underlying process, when taken in combination, together do not offer substantially more than the sum of the function of the elements when each is taken alone. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept in Step 2B.
In addition, the dependent claims 2, 3, 5, and 6 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 elements of the dependent claims to perform the claimed limitations, amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component (See MPEP 2106.05(f)). Similar to the independent claims, mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept. Also, for the same reasoning as the independent claims, the additional elements of the limitations of the dependent claims, when considered individually and as an ordered combination, together do not offer significantly more than the sum of the functions of the elements when each is taken alone and the dependent claims as a whole, do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea itself. For these reasons, the dependent claims also are not patent eligible.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by WO 2020/003202A1 to Tian et al. (hereinafter referred to as Tian).
In regards to claim 1, Tian discloses a method of providing a financial service (method, a device, a computer-readable medium and a computer program product for blockchain-based carbon trading, para. 0001; carbon trading method 200 may further include issuing, distributing, circulating, charging and burning the carbon token, para. 0065) based on electric energy (carbon trading system 100 processor acquires identification data and carbon behavior data of the transport devices, determines the carbon emission reduction equivalent, and publishes the carbon trading associated with the carbon emission reduction equivalent in the account as a blockchain transaction, paras. 0031-0035; distribution amount of carbon tokens for a user associated with the transport device is determined based on the carbon behavior data of the transport device and the carbon tokens are transferred to the carbon token wallet of the user, paras. 0074-0075) in an electric vehicle (EV) ecosystem (transport devices include Battery Electric Vehicles (BEV) 110, and Hybrid Electric Vehicles (HEV) 112, para. 0025), comprising: receiving, by an EV ecosystem management device, EV eco data (carbon trading system 100 processor acquires identification data, carbon behavior data, and carbon emission reduction behavior of the transport devices such as traveled distance, fuel consumption and electricity consumption, paras. 0031-0035) from EV ecosystem participation devices (on-board intelligent terminal records and transmits the ID and carbon behavior of the transport device to the blockchain platform 160, para. 0025); and providing, by the EV ecosystem management device, a financial service to the EV ecosystem participation device on the basis of the EV eco data (processor determines a distribution amount of carbon tokens for a user associated with the transport device based on the carbon behavior data of the transport device and the carbon tokens are transferred to the carbon token wallet of the user, paras. 0073-0075).
In regards to claim 4, Tian discloses an electric vehicle (EV) ecosystem management device for providing a financial service (method, a device, a computer-readable medium and a computer program product for blockchain-based carbon trading, para. 0001; carbon trading method 200 may further include issuing, distributing, circulating, charging and burning the carbon token, para. 0065) based on electric energy (carbon trading system 100 processor acquires identification data and carbon behavior data of the transport devices, determines the carbon emission reduction equivalent, and publishes the carbon trading associated with the carbon emission reduction equivalent in the account as a blockchain transaction, paras. 0031-0035; distribution amount of carbon tokens for a user associated with the transport device is determined based on the carbon behavior data of the transport device and the carbon tokens are transferred to the carbon token wallet of the user, paras. 0074-0075) in an EV ecosystem (transport devices include Battery Electric Vehicles (BEV) 110, and Hybrid Electric Vehicles (HEV) 112, para. 0025), which is implemented to: receive EV eco data (carbon trading system 100 processor acquires identification data, carbon behavior data, and carbon emission reduction behavior of the transport devices such as traveled distance, fuel consumption and electricity consumption, paras. 0031-0035) from EV ecosystem participation devices (on-board intelligent terminal records and transmits the ID and carbon behavior of the transport device to the blockchain platform 160, para. 0025); and provide a financial service to the EV ecosystem participation device on the basis of the EV eco data (processor determines a distribution amount of carbon tokens for a user associated with the transport device based on the carbon behavior data of the transport device and the carbon tokens are transferred to the carbon token wallet of the user, paras. 0073-0075).
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 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 2 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tian, in view of US 8,725,617 to Allderdice et al. (hereinafter referred to as Allderdice).
In regards to claim 2, Tian discloses the method of claim 1, but fails to disclose wherein the providing of the financial service includes: predicting, by the EV ecosystem management device, E-points and carbon emission rights that will be generated in the future on the basis of the EV eco data; and providing, by the EV ecosystem management device, the financial service using the E- points and the carbon emission rights as collateral.
Allderdice, in the related field of aggregating carbon reduction credits from finance loans, teaches wherein the providing of the financial service (loans to borrowers to finance the purchase of intervention technologies by the borrowers, col. 4, lines 5-27, figs. 1-3) includes: predicting, by the EV ecosystem management device (credit calculator engine 204 determines estimate parameters regarding the intervention technology including: technical data, specifications for models, baseline technology being replaced, energy related economic conditions, energy usage patterns, carbon intensities of the location, and energy consumption, col. 9, lines 8-44, figs. 1-3), E-points (credit calculator engine determines number of credits (carbon and otherwise), non-carbon credits, social carbon credits, MDG credits, biodiversity credits, etc., col. 9, lines 7-67, figs. 1-3) and carbon emission rights (estimate parameter templates may be specific to credit types (e.g., carbon offset, MDG, etc.) intervention technology types, geographic locations, and defined by treaties, rules, and or commercial agreements, col. 8, lines 42-67, figs. 1-3) that will be generated in the future on the basis of the EV eco data (carbon reduction credits are generated when MFI's finance the purchase of intervention technology that reduces greenhouse gas emissions relative to existing baseline technology, col. 3, lines 46-67, figs. 1-3); and providing, by the EV ecosystem management device, the financial service using the E-points and the carbon emission rights as collateral (When an installation has been booked, the credit aggregator 102 may direct payment to the MFI 104 for any credits associated with the installation, col. 13, lines 43-65, figs. 1-3). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide the method of Tian with the ability to determine available credits for intervention technology as taught by the system of Allderdice. The motivation for doing so would have been to facilitate microfinance lending for the purchase of socially desirable intervention technology or other items by providing microfinance institutions (MFI' s) and their borrowers with access to markets for carbon reduction credits and/or other types of social credits (Allderdice, col. 2, lines 40-45).
In regards to claim 5, Tian discloses the EV ecosystem management device of claim 4, but fails to disclose configured to: predict E-points and carbon emission rights that will be generated in the future on the basis of the EV eco data; and provide the financial service using the E-points and the carbon emission rights as collateral.
Allderdice, in the related field of aggregating carbon reduction credits from finance loans, teaches configured to (loans to borrowers to finance the purchase of intervention technologies by the borrowers, col. 4, lines 5-27, figs. 1-3): predict (credit calculator engine 204 determines estimate parameters regarding the intervention technology including: technical data, specifications for models, baseline technology being replaced, energy related economic conditions, energy usage patterns, carbon intensities of the location, and energy consumption, col. 9, lines 8-44, figs. 1-3) E-points (credit calculator engine determines number of credits (carbon and otherwise), non-carbon credits, social carbon credits, MDG credits, biodiversity credits, etc., col. 9, lines 7-67, figs. 1-3) and carbon emission rights (estimate parameter templates may be specific to credit types (e.g., carbon offset, MDG, etc.) intervention technology types, geographic locations, and defined by treaties, rules, and or commercial agreements, col. 8, lines 42-67, figs. 1-3) that will be generated in the future on the basis of the EV eco data (carbon reduction credits are generated when MFI's finance the purchase of intervention technology that reduces greenhouse gas emissions relative to existing baseline technology, col. 3, lines 46-67, figs. 1-3); and provide the financial service using the E-points and the carbon emission rights as collateral (When an installation has been booked, the credit aggregator 102 may direct payment to the MFI 104 for any credits associated with the installation, col. 13, lines 43-65, figs. 1-3). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide the method of Tian with the ability to determine available credits for intervention technology as taught by the system of Allderdice. The motivation for doing so would have been to facilitate microfinance lending for the purchase of socially desirable intervention technology or other items by providing microfinance institutions (MFI' s) and their borrowers with access to markets for carbon reduction credits and/or other types of social credits (Allderdice, col. 2, lines 40-45).
Claims 3 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tian, in view of Allderdice, and further in view of US 20150213567 to Lopez (hereinafter referred to as Lopez).
In regards to claim 3, modified Tian discloses the method of claim 2, and further discloses wherein the EV ecosystem participation devices include a user (transport devices include Battery Electric Vehicles (BEV) 110, and Hybrid Electric Vehicles (HEV) 112, para. 0025), but fails to disclose an EV charging station, and an EV power plant, and the EV ecosystem management device provides different financial services to new EV charging stations and new EV power plants, which will be newly installed, and existing EV charging stations and existing EV power plants that have been installed.
Lopez, in the related field of determining energy savings and incentive credits for a transit system, teaches an EV charging station and an EV power plant (green construction project may include a solar panel 904 that may be configured to provide power to a power module 912 for a real property 906 and the power module 912 may direct additional electrical power to the transit system 910 for charging a battery 908 of the transit system 910, para. 0105;), and the EV ecosystem management device provides different financial services (correlation module 29 may be configured to correlate all green incentives that are available to the green construction project such as national tax credits, national tax deductions, state tax credits, state tax deductions, local tax credits, local tax deductions, municipal bonds, utility company buy backs, carbon credits, renewable energy credits, or the like, para. 0115) to new EV charging stations and new EV power plants (various energy generation device produce electrical energy and the electrical energy may be used to charge batteries in a fleet of electric vehicles, para. 0119), which will be newly installed (a mortgager module 62 may be configured to set terms of a loan, and apply a portion of a green incentive to repay the loan, para. 0118), and existing EV charging stations and existing EV power plants that have been installed (a drop-down box may provide a selection to a user, where the user may select between a retrofit for an existing real property and a new construction model for energy performance measures, para. 0089). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide the method of Tian with the ability to as taught by the system of Lopez. The motivation for doing so would have been to provide an apparatus, system, and method for determining energy savings and/or incentive credit(s) and applying those savings and/or credit(s) to a financial transaction involving a transit system for a real property (Lopez, para. 0008).
In regards to claim 6, modified Tian discloses the EV ecosystem management device of claim 5, and further discloses wherein the EV ecosystem participation devices include a user (transport devices include Battery Electric Vehicles (BEV) 110, and Hybrid Electric Vehicles (HEV) 112, para. 0025), but fails to disclose an EV charging station, and an EV power plant, and the EV ecosystem management device provides different financial services to new EV charging stations and new EV power plants, which will be newly installed, and existing EV charging stations and existing EV power plants that have been installed.
Lopez, in the related field of determining energy savings and incentive credits for a transit system, teaches an EV charging station and an EV power plant (green construction project may include a solar panel 904 that may be configured to provide power to a power module 912 for a real property 906 and the power module 912 may direct additional electrical power to the transit system 910 for charging a battery 908 of the transit system 910, para. 0105;), and the EV ecosystem management device provides different financial services (correlation module 29 may be configured to correlate all green incentives that are available to the green construction project such as national tax credits, national tax deductions, state tax credits, state tax deductions, local tax credits, local tax deductions, municipal bonds, utility company buy backs, carbon credits, renewable energy credits, or the like, para. 0115) to new EV charging stations and new EV power plants (various energy generation device produce electrical energy and the electrical energy may be used to charge batteries in a fleet of electric vehicles, para. 0119), which will be newly installed (a mortgager module 62 may be configured to set terms of a loan, and apply a portion of a green incentive to repay the loan, para. 0118), and existing EV charging stations and existing EV power plants that have been installed (a drop-down box may provide a selection to a user, where the user may select between a retrofit for an existing real property and a new construction model for energy performance measures, para. 0089). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide the method of Tian with the ability to as taught by the system of Lopez. The motivation for doing so would have been to provide an apparatus, system, and method for determining energy savings and/or incentive credit(s) and applying those savings and/or credit(s) to a financial transaction involving a transit system for a real property (Lopez, para. 0008).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Paul Schwarzenberg whose telephone number is (313) 446-6611. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Thursday (7:30-6:30).
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, Christine Behncke, can be reached on (571) 272-8103. 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.
/PAUL S SCHWARZENBERG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3695 7/25/2026
Prosecution Insights