Ex Parte Uckun

Patent Trial and Appeal Board

Mar 3, 2016

12732545 (P.T.A.B. Mar. 3, 2016)

UNITED STA TES p A TENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE FIRST NAMED INVENTOR
121732,545 03/26/2010 Serdar Uckun
35699 7590 03/07/2016
PVF--PARC
c/o PARK, VAUGHAN, FLEMING & DOWLER LLP
2820 FIFTH STREET
DAVIS, CA 95618-7759
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
United States Patent and Trademark Office
Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
P.O. Box 1450
Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
www .uspto.gov
ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. CONFIRMATION NO.
PARC-20090861-US-NP 3355
EXAMINER
MOONEYHAM, JANICE A
ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER
3689
NOTIFICATION DATE DELIVERY MODE
03/07/2016 ELECTRONIC
Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
Notice of the Office communication was sent electronically on above-indicated "Notification Date" to the
following e-mail address( es):
sy _incoming@parklegal.com
PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
NITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
Ex parte SERDAR UCKUN
Appeal2013-005334
Application 12/732,545
Technology Center 3600
Before HUBERT C. LORIN, ANTON W. PETTING, and
BRADLEY B. BAY AT, Administrative Patent Judges.
PETTING, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
STATEMENT OF THE CASE1
Serdar Uckun (Appellant) seeks review under 35 U.S.C. § 134 of a final
rejection of claims 1-18, the only claims pending in the application on
appeal. We have jurisdiction over the appeal pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 6(b).
The Appellant invented a way for "aggregating one or more participants
in an electric power system in order to provide an energy service."
Specification para. 2.
1 Our decision will make reference to the Appellant's Appeal Brief ("Br.,"
filed August 13, 2012) and the Examiner's Answer ("Ans.," mailed
December 4, 2012), and Final Action ("Final Act.," mailed March 14, 2012).
Appeal2013-005334
Application 12/732,545
An understanding of the invention can be derived from a reading of
exemplary claim 1, which is reproduced below (bracketed matter and some
paragraphing added).
1. A method for aggregating an energy service from one or
more participants, comprising:
[l] sending, by an aggregator, a plurality of price points to a
respective participant, wherein each price point indicates a price
that corresponds to a particular range of phase angles between a
voltage waveform and a current waveform;
[2] receiving, at the aggregator, a price point selected by the
participant, wherein the selected price point corresponds to a
phase angle to which the participant agrees to adjust;
[3] calculating, by a computing device, a purchase price to
charge the participant based on the phase angle that the
participant agrees to provide;
and
[ 4] aggregating from the one or more participants an energy
service with reactive- power reduction.
The Examiner relies upon the following prior art:
Weiss US 2004/0167677 Al
DiMartini US 2008/0177678 Al
Aug. 26, 2004
Jul. 24, 2008
Anderson, E. J., and A. B. Philpott, "Using Supply Functions for
Offering Generation Into an Electricity Market", Operations Research,
Vol. 50, N0.3 (May- Jun., 2002), pp.477-489).
2
Appeal2013-005334
Application 12/732,545
Claims 2, 8, and 14 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second
paragraph, as failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the
invention. 2
Claims 1, 2, 5-8, 11-14, 17, and 18 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) as unpatentable over DiMartini and Weiss.
Claims 3, 4, 9, 10, 15, and 16 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
unpatentable over DiMartini, Weiss, and Anderson.
ISSUES
The issue of obviousness turns primarily on whether the references
describe or show predictable performing the second and third limitations
based on a phase angle the participant agrees to provide.
FACTS PERTINENT TO THE ISSUES
The following enumerated Findings of Fact (FF) are believed to be
supported by a preponderance of the evidence.
Facts Related to the Prior Art
DiMartini
01. DiMartini is directed to communicating between a utility and
individual customer locations. DiMartini para. 1.
02.DiMartini describes providing each individual customer location
with an advanced utility meter and using each such individual
2 The Examiner withdrew a similar rejection against claims 1, 7, and 13.
Ans. 2.
3
Appeal2013-005334
Application 12/732,545
utility meter to communicate between the utility and the advanced
utility meter, between the advanced utility meter and individual
customers and between the advanced utility meter and equipment
located at each individual customer location. The system
comprises (a) individual input and output portals disposed at each
individual customer location; (b) a data center aggregator for
gathering data from each individual customer location and for
retransmission to the utility, and for disseminating data and
instructions from the utility to each customer location; ( c) a data
management system for sorting data from the data center
aggregator, for transmitting data to individual back office systems
within the utility and for transmitting data and instructions from
individual back office systems to each individual customer
location; and ( d) means for communicating between the utility, the
data center aggregator, the data management system and the input
and output portals disposed at individual customer locations.
DiMartini para. 2.
03.DiMartini supports customer awareness of their instantaneous
kWhr electricity pricing and it can support the utilities in the
achievement of its load reduction needs. DiMartini helps facilitate
load reduction at the customer's site by communicating
instantaneous kWhr pricing and voluntary load reduction program
events to the customer and to various enabling devices at the
customer's site. DiMartini para. 88.
04.DiMartini describes how, under normal operating conditions, the
utility provides from two to twenty four hours notice to the
4
Appeal2013-005334
Application 12/732,545
customer that load reduction is required and will occur. In a
system emergency only a few minutes notice is provided.
DiMartini provides mechanisms to deliver the signal to the
customer's equipment. DiMartini para. 97.
05. DiMartini' s customer notification system conveys critical pricing
information associated with existing and anticipated new tariff
offerings designed to reward customer response behavior.
DiMartini notifies customers when they are approaching or are in
critical pricing periods, giving them the opportunity to react
accordingly. DiMartini para. 129.
06.DiMartini's network optimizing involves feeder loading, voltage
profile, efficiency, reliability and quality. DiMartini's outputs
include average voltage at customer site, voltage variations seen
by the customer, power consumption by time interval, harmonics
(voltage and/or current), power production by customer-supplied
distributed generation, and customer power factor. DiMartini
para. 179.
07.DiMartini's utility signals may consist of power factor
modifications. DiMartini para. 193.
08.DiMartini's customer's distributed generation (DG) unit helps
control real or reactive power imbalance on a distribution circuit.
DiMartini para. 203.
09. DiMartini describes how load management for economic dispatch
purposes is a process wherein customers have agreed to allow the
utility to directly, modify or curtail energy use associated with
5
Appeal2013-005334
Application 12/732,545
Weiss
equipment or systems beyond the customer meter for a specified
price. DiMartini para. 203.
10. Weiss is directed to planning energy supply and, more
particularly, to negotiating an energy supply specification with
one or more energy suppliers for energy consumers. Weiss para.
2.
11. Weiss describes an energy coordinating body or bodies, such as
energy management systems of an energy alliance, and energy
suppliers connected therewith provided with an interface for the
exchange of planning data and also with an algorithm for
controlling power plant output and/or the selection of partial
energy services, in order to provide a total energy supply service
package. This algorithm works roughly like an "exchange" and
negotiates energy supply and demand in a format that enables
automated optimization starting from a mixture of local
optimization (within each of the energy suppliers) and global
optimization (within the alliance of energy management systems).
Weiss para. 18.
12.Weiss describes how reactive power is created by inductive loads
in power distribution networks. Reactive power loads generators
and transmission equipment of the energy supplier, but does not
do any real work. Parties might commit to a certain percentage
limit of the power factor (i.e., the ratio of true power or watts to
6
Appeal2013-005334
Application 12/732,545
apparent power or volt amps) in terms of a minimum phase limit
value (e.g., 0.9). For example, a low power factor is usually
associated with motors and transformers. An incandescent bulb
has a power factor of about 1.0, while a one HP motor has a power
factor of about 0.80. Thus, the parties might negotiate a limit of
reactive power in the energy supplied by the energy supplier to the
energy consumer. Alternatively, the parties might employ a
power factor price curve, plot or table of price versus various
power factor values. Weiss para. 116.
ANALYSIS
We summarily affirm the rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second
paragraph as it is uncontested.
As to the art rejections, we find first that as a matter of terminology in
the electric power arts, the terms phase angle and power factor, at least in the
context of the claims and disclosure, are essentially synonymous. They are
two ways of expressing the same thing, namely the difference in phase
between voltage and current in alternating current induced by reactive loads,
such as inductors. The Examiner takes notice of this at Answer 9-10. This
issue of terminology arises because the claims refer to phase angle whereas
both references refer to the same thing as a power factor.
Appellant does not appear to dispute that the references describe sending
price points, receiving a selected price point, calculating a purchase price
based on the agreed phase angle, and providing the energy service with
reactive power reduction. The sole issue is whether the references describe
7
Appeal2013-005334
Application 12/732,545
or show predictable doing so based on a phase angle the participant agrees to
provide. The only limitations that refer to the participant agreement are the
second and third limitations. The first and fourth limitations are
uncontested.
As the Examiner found, DiMartini describes load management as a
process of modifying the customer's equipment usage beyond the power
meter, which is a process that alters the phase angle the customer provides.
DiMartini describes doing so by sending signals to customer equipment. As
no implementation is recited or narrowed, allowing the utility to direct this
management is still within the scope of having the phase angle alteration
provided by the customer's circuits, and so by the customer.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
The rejection of claims 2, 8, and 14 under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second
paragraph, as failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the
invention is proper.
The rejection of claims 1, 2, 5-8, 11-=14, 17, and 18 under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) as unpatentable over DiMartini and Weiss is proper.
The rejection of claims 3, 4, 9, 10, 15, and 16 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a)
as unpatentable over DiMartini, Weiss, and Anderson is proper.
DECISION
The rejection of claims 1-18 is affirmed.
8
Appeal2013-005334
Application 12/732,545
No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with this
appeal may be extended under 37 C.F.R. § l.136(a). See 37 C.F.R.
§ l.136(a)(l)(iv) (2011).
AFFIRMED
9