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 .
Claim Objections
Claims 17, 19 objected to because of the following informalities:
Re claim 17, the claim should be amended to recite: “…to
Re claim 19, it is advised that claim 12 upon which it depends does not actually require operation for the DER to discontinue the power output which claim 19 is meant to respond to. It is recommended that the claim be amended to depend on claim 18 which appears to be the required context, or otherwise be amended to recited the required context if intended to be required.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim(s) 1-7, 12-15, 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu (US2025/0337249).
Re claim 1. Xu teaches a home energy management system (HEMS) (see Xu: Figs. 1-2), comprising:
a controller (monitoring unit, and respective converter control circuitry, see Xu: [0017-0018], [0023-0025], Figs. 1-2 regarding monitoring of grid connected state and AC bus voltage for control of the converters) configured to monitor a line (AC bus) coupled to a distributed energy resource (DER) (N-M converters <PCS2-N> and respective sources, see Xu: [0015], Figs. 1-2 regarding converters coupling PV arrays and/or batteries to AC bus); and
an inverter (M converters <PCS1>) electrically connected to the line and operable to generate an alternating current (AC) voltage on the line (see Xu: [0023-0024], Figs. 1-2 regarding M converters outputting AC voltage to the AC bus), wherein the controller is further configured to, after a DER shutdown trigger (power grid disconnection or failure and N-M converters continuing operating in current-source mode, see Xu: [0023], [0028], [0033-0034], Figs. 1-2 regarding N-M converters meant to stop current-source mode after power grid disconnection/failure) and the DER producing an output after an interval (see Xu: [0033-0034], Figs. 1-2 regarding situation where the N-M converters continue to operate in current-source mode, necessarily after some interval since the grid disconnection/failure), command the inverter to change the AC voltage on the line to a level that induces a shutdown response from the DER (see Xu: [0033-0035], Figs. 1-2 regarding controlling M converter outputting voltage to change amplitude of the voltage to a value that the N-M converters detect as failing/fault and stopping the N-M converters from continuing to normally operate in current-source operation mode, i.e. shutdown response). See Xu: [0013-0015], [0017-0018], [0023-0025], [0028], [0033-0035], Figs. 1-3.
Although Xu discloses the inverter changing the AC voltage to a level that would be considered a failure/fault (see Xu: [0033-0034], Figs. 1-2), Xu does not explicitly disclose the embodiment changing the AC voltage by increasing it. However, Xu: [0040-0041] discloses further embodiments which can change the voltage by gradually increasing it, suggesting the inverter is capable of changing the voltage amplitude by increasing it. Additionally, one of ordinary skill would appreciate that the disclosure of Xu: [0033-0034] to change the voltage amplitude such that it is detected as a voltage fault necessarily presents limited choices including increasing or decreasing the voltage level in a manner that may be predictably detected as a failure/fault. It would therefore have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the system of Xu such that the inverter is controlled to increase the AC voltage in order to induce shutdown response as recited as suggested by Xu and given that it would be obvious to choose having the voltage increased as one of the two ways for the system of Xu to change the voltage amplitude such it is detected as a voltage fault (see Xu: [0033-0034]).
Re claim 2. Xu teaches the HEMS of claim 1, wherein the DER shutdown trigger comprises a relay condition associated with the DER (state of switch <Q1> for power grid disconnection from the converters/DER, see Xu: [0017], [0023], [0028], Figs. 1-2; note the claim does not recite further details of relay condition or associated operations).
Re claim 3. Xu teaches the HEMS of claim 1, wherein the DER shutdown trigger includes a loss of grid voltage detected at a relay (<Q1>) electrically coupling the DER to a utility power source (power grid, see Xu: [0017], [0023], [0028], Figs. 1-2 regarding power grid disconnection/failure at switch <Q1>).
Re claim 4. Xu teaches the HEMS of claim 1, wherein the DER shutdown trigger comprises an operational abnormality associated with the DER including at least one of loss of communication between the controller and the DER, unstable power output from the DER, or DER-induced power quality issues (see Xu: [0033-0034], Figs. 1-2 regarding N-M converters continuing to operate in current-source mode generally resulting in unstable power/quality due to mismatch unless addressed).
Re claim 5. Xu teaches the HEMS of claim 1, and teaches increasing the AC voltage to a level that is detected as a fault/failure (see Xu: [0033-0034], Figs. 1-2 and discussion of claim 1 above), which is implied to be above 1.0 pu (i.e. greater than 100% nominal/starting voltage), but does not specify the per unit increase amount being less than 1.5 pu. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to design the system of Xu such that the increase voltage level comprises a fixed per unit (pu) voltage greater than 1.0 pu and less than 1.5 pu since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. See also MPEP: 2144.05, II. One of ordinary skill would find it obvious to select the level of voltage increase to be between 1-1.5pu depending on voltage limits, safety regulations, or other optimal working conditions for the power system while still being predictably being detectable by the converter units as taught by Xu.
Re claim 6. Xu teaches the HEMS of claim 1, wherein the inverter comprises a DC/AC inverter operatively coupled to a DC voltage source and configured to generate the AC voltage using stored energy (see Xu: [0015], [0022-0023] regarding converters converting DC side sources including batteries/stored energy to AC bus, i.e. DC/AC inverters).
Re claim 7. Xu teaches the HEMS of claim 1, wherein the inverter is a component of a grid- forming system configured to inject voltage onto the line during grid outage conditions (see Xu: [0023-0024], Figs. 1-2 regarding M converters outputting AC voltage to the AC bus in voltage source mode after grid failure/disconnection).
Re claim 12. Xu teaches a method of operating a home energy system (see Xu: Figs. 1-2), comprising:
in response to a distributed energy resource (DER) (N-M converters <PCS2-N> and respective sources, see Xu: [0015], Figs. 1-2 regarding converters coupling PV arrays and/or batteries to AC bus) not discontinuing a power output to an AC line (AC bus) within an interval beginning with a condition (power grid disconnection or failure and N-M converters continuing operating in current-source mode, see Xu: [0023], [0028], [0033-0034], Figs. 1-2 regarding N-M converters meant to stop current-source mode after power grid disconnection/failure) under which the DER is expected to discontinue the power output (see Xu: [0033-0034], Figs. 1-2 regarding situation where the N-M converters continue to normally operate in current-source mode, necessarily for some interval since the grid disconnection/failure and continued current-source mode), increasing, by an inverter electrically coupled to the AC line, a voltage on the AC line (see Xu: [0033-0035], Figs. 1-2 regarding controlling M converter outputting voltage to change amplitude of the voltage to a value that the N-M converters detect as failing/fault; see discussion of claim 1 above regarding obviousness of changing the voltage by increasing it). See Xu: [0013-0015], [0017-0018], [0023-0025], [0028], [0033-0035], Figs. 1-3, and discussion of claim 1 above regarding similar limitations.
Re claim 13. Xu teaches the method of claim 12, wherein the condition comprises an absence of voltage on a grid-side connection (power grid connection, see Xu: [0017], [0023], [0028], Figs. 1-2 regarding power grid disconnection/failure at switch <Q1>).
Re claim 14. Xu teaches the method of claim 12, wherein the condition comprises a shutdown command (commands from monitoring unit/converter control circuitry after grid disconnection/failure, see Xu: [0017], [0023], [0025], [0028], Figs. 1-2 regarding control commands to change modes due to power grid disconnection/failure).
Re claim 15. Xu teaches the method of claim 12, wherein the condition comprises an abnormal operating condition associated with the DER (see Xu: [0033-0034], Figs. 1-2 regarding N-M converters continuing to operate undesirably in current-source mode generally resulting in unstable power/quality).
Re claim 17. Xu teaches the method of claim 12, and teaches increasing the AC voltage to a level that is detected as a fault/failure (see Xu: [0033-0034], Figs. 1-2 and discussion of claim 1 above), which is implied to be above 1.0 pu (i.e. greater than 100% nominal/starting voltage), but does not specify the per unit increase amount being 1.2 pu. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to design the system of Xu such that the increase voltage level comprise 1.2 pu since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. See also MPEP: 2144.05, II. One of ordinary skill would find it obvious to select the level of voltage increase to be 1.2pu depending on voltage limits, safety regulations, or other optimal working conditions for the power system while still being predictably being detectable by the converter units as taught by Xu.
Claim(s) 8, 10-11, 18-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu (US2025/0337249) in view of Fornage (US2010/0195357).
Re claim 8. Xu teaches a home energy system (see Xu: Figs. 1-2), comprising:
a distributed energy resource (DER) (N-M converters <PCS2-N> and respective sources, see Xu: [0015], Figs. 1-2 regarding converters coupling PV arrays and/or batteries to AC bus) configured to output electrical power for an alternating current (AC) line (AC bus) and to cease an operation when a voltage on the AC line is outside normal values (see Xu: [0033-0035], Figs. 1-2 regarding N-M converters detecting a changed AC bus voltage amplitude as failing/fault and stopping the N-M converters from continuing to operate in current-source operation mode);
an inverter (M converters <PCS1>) electrically connected to the AC line and operable to generate an AC voltage on the AC line (see Xu: [0023-0024], Figs. 1-2 regarding M converters outputting AC voltage to the AC bus); and
a controller (monitoring unit, and respective converter control circuitry, see Xu: [0017-0018], [0023-0025], Figs. 1-2 regarding monitoring of grid connected state and AC bus voltage for control of the converters) operatively coupled to the inverter and configured to command the inverter to change the AC voltage on the AC line such that the distributed energy resource ceases the operation (see Xu: [0033-0035], Figs. 1-2 regarding controlling M converter outputting voltage to change amplitude of the voltage to a value that the N-M converters detect as failing/fault and stopping the N-M converters from continuing to operate in current-source operation mode, i.e. shutdown response). See Xu: [0013-0015], [0017-0018], [0023-0025], [0028], [0033-0035], Figs. 1-3.
Although Xu discloses the inverter changing the AC voltage to a level that the N-M converters would detect a failure/fault before stopping current-source operation mode and subsequently changing modes (see Xu: [0033-0034], Figs. 1-2), Xu does not explicitly disclose the embodiment changing the AC voltage by increasing it such that it exceeds a value and that the N-M converters cease outputting electrical power in response to the detected fault. Xu: [0040-0041] discloses further embodiments which can change the voltage by gradually increasing it, suggesting the inverter is capable of changing the voltage amplitude by increasing it. Additionally, one of ordinary skill would appreciate that the disclosure of Xu: [0033-0034] to change the voltage amplitude such that it is detected as a voltage fault necessarily presents limited choices including increasing or decreasing the voltage to a level that may be predictably detected as a failure/fault. Additionally, Fornage teaches that it is known in the art of power systems having DERs coupled to AC bus by respective inverters for inverters to be designed to monitor the AC bus voltage and deactivate/cease power production when it is detected that the voltage is over a required safety limit (see Fornage: [0050], Fig. 1). One of ordinary skill would appreciate that Fornage teaches a known standard inverter response to voltage exceeding allowed limit value that is predictably applicable to the artificially produced voltage fault taught by Xu. It would therefore have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Xu to incorporate the teachings of Fornage to design the system such that the inverter is controlled to increase the AC voltage on the AC line such that the DER ceases outputting the electrical power when a voltage on the AC line exceeds a value for purposes of providing known and obvious choice of manner to create a detectable voltage fault which would predictably result in the N-M converters temporarily ceasing current-source mode and outputting of power as suggested by Xu and Fornage (see Xu: [0033-0034], Figs. 1-2; Fornage: [0050], Fig. 1).
Re claim 10. Xu in view of Fornage teaches the home energy system of claim 8. Fornage further teaches design such that the DER includes an interface configured to receive a shutdown command, and the DER is further configured to cease the outputting in response to receiving the shutdown command (see Fornage: [0024-0025], [0027], Figs. 1-2 regarding system designed to allow control module to control deactivation of inverters by communicated commands). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the system of Xu in view of Fornage to include communication interface for shutdown commands as recited for purposes of providing known means to predictably allow central control of converters for convenience or coordination (see Fornage: [0024-0025], [0027], Figs. 1-2).
Re claim 11. Xu in view of Fornage teaches the home energy system of claim 8, further comprising a controllable relay switch (switches <S1-SN>) electrically coupled between the inverter and the DER, wherein the controllable relay switch is operable under control of the controller to selectively isolate or connect the DER (see Xu: [0013], [0032], Figs. 1-2 regarding control of switch connection by monitoring unit and/or corresponding control circuitry).
Re claim 18. Xu teaches the method of claim 12. Xu in view of Fornage teaches further comprising: discontinuing, by the DER, the power output to the AC line in response to the voltage on the AC line exceeding a value (see discussion of claim 8 above regarding obviousness of DER stopping power output in response to AC line voltage above a value).
Re claim 19. Xu teaches the method of claim 12. Xu in view of Fornage teaches further comprising: in response to the DER discontinuing the power output, ceasing the increasing (see Xu: [0034], Figs. 1-2 regarding M converters returning AC voltage to normal values after the N-M converters have stopped and changed modes; see also Objection above regarding lack of context for the DER discontinuing power output as currently drafted).
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu (US2025/0337249) in view of Fornage (US2010/0195357), further in view of Mohamed (US2025/0070561).
Re claim 9. Xu in view of Fornage teaches the home energy system of claim 8, wherein the DER comprises a battery (see Xu: [0015], Figs. 1-2), but does not explicitly disclose using a vehicle battery and bidirectional EVSE. Mohamed, however teaches that it is known in the art of AC microgrid systems to use a vehicle battery coupled to the AC line through a bidirectional electric vehicle supply equipment (EVSE) interface as a known battery capable of supplying loads of the AC bus (see Mohamed: [0003], [0017-0019], Fig. 1 regarding bidirectional EV charger <20> for vehicle battery allowing supply of AC bus). 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 system of Xu in view of Fornage to incorporate the teachings of Mohamed by having one of the DER converters of Xu be implemented as bidirectional EVSE and vehicle battery as recited for purposes of providing known arrangement and application to home systems where an EV battery is an available energy source predictably able to be controlled to supply power to AC bus (see Mohamed: [0003], [0017-0019], Fig. 1).
Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu (US2025/0337249) in view of Laaksonen (US2015/0015302).
Re claim 16. Xu teaches the method of claim 12, and generally implies some time occurs during transition to off-grid mode (see Xu: see Xu: [0023], [0028], [0033-0034], Figs. 1-2 regarding general starting of converter modes after grid disconnection/failure), but does not explicitly disclose initiating a timer upon detection of the condition. Laaksonen, however, teaches that it is known in the art of distributed generation systems detecting loss of grid power to initiate a timer upon detection of the grid loss for purposes of ensuring the conditions continue for a sufficient time and are not temporary (see Laaksonen: [0086-0090], Figs. 1-3). 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 system of Xu to incorporate the teachings of Laaksonen by including initiating timer after detection of condition before taking further action for purposes of ensuring that the loss of grid condition is not temporary and to prevent nuisance tripping of subsequent off-grid operations (see Laaksonen: [0086-0090], Figs. 1-3).
Conclusion
In summary, it is recommended Applicant consider the cited prior art of record, Xu, which appears to be the closest prior art to Applicant’s invention and teaching the limitations as they are currently recited under broadest reasonable interpretation. It is recommended that Applicant amend the claims to provide more context for terms which are currently undefined/not limited and/or recite further distinguishing features of the invention compared to the prior art. For example, the claims could potentially be distinguished by specifying how the inverter and DER behaves if the DER stops output in response to the shutdown trigger before elapse of the interval, and the inverter only increasing AC voltage if the DER continues to produce output after the interval elapses. For example, the claims could potentially be distinguished by specifying particular kinds of shutdown triggers aside from loss of grid and the further context for how the trigger is detected/determined and subsequent increasing of the AC voltage to cause the DER to stop outputting power in response to voltage exceeding a value. Applicant is cautioned claims are given broadest reasonable interpretation, and may contact the examiner to discuss possible amendments and the office action as needed.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID A SHIAO whose telephone number is (571)270-7265. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri: 8:30AM-5:00PM.
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, Rexford Barnie can be reached at (571) 272-7492. 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.
/DAVID A SHIAO/Examiner, Art Unit 2836
/REXFORD N BARNIE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2836
Prosecution Insights