US 11909010

Here's a concise summary of US Patent 11909010:

US Patent 11909010

• Title: Vehicular battery charger, charging system, and method with in-vehicle display of charge time
• Assignee: CHARGELOGIC LLC
• Inventor: Christopher B. Austin
• Filing Date: 2022-04-12
• Issue Date: 2024-02-20
• Abstract: The patent describes a vehicular battery charger, charging system, and method that provides in-vehicle display of charge time. Key aspects include a vehicle charger with a controller, a display, and user-manipulatable controls to enter a desired charging session end time. The controller adjusts the power supply to the battery (increasing/decreasing charge rate, starting/stopping charging) based on the time needed to charge by the user-specified end time. Some embodiments feature an in-vehicle display and controls, memory for user-entered times, a function to charge to a threshold level regardless of the scheduled time, and the ability to display various charging session information (e.g., time remaining, power consumed, cost). Communication with a remote controller (e.g., power utility or user's computer) is also disclosed, enabling remote control of charging states and transmission of event signals, such as power interruptions or full charge notifications. The system can also include inductive charging with positional feedback.

Plain-Language Overview of Independent Claims:
I am unable to provide a plain-language overview of each independent claim as the full claims section is not included in the provided patent text. The provided text offers definitions and descriptions of various embodiments but does not list the specific wording of the claims themselves.

Litigation Status:
US Patent 11909010 is currently involved in litigation. A US case has been filed in the Texas Western District Court. More broadly, the patent family for US11909010B2 has litigation associated with it.

US Patent 11909010 is currently involved in at least one known litigation case.

Known Litigation:

1. Case Name: ChargeLogic LLC v. Tesla, Inc
   • Plaintiff(s): ChargeLogic LLC
   • Defendant(s): Tesla, Inc.
   • Jurisdiction: Texas Western District Court
   • Case Number: 7:26-cv-00100
   • Filing Date: March 23, 2026
   • Outcome or Current Status: The case is currently open and active, with appearances by attorneys for both parties noted on the docket as of the filing date.

Proceedings overview

There is one AIA trial proceeding on file for US Patent 11909010. It is an Inter Partes Review (IPR) currently in a pending status. This means the patent's validity is currently under challenge, and no claims have been definitively invalidated or sustained by the PTAB through a final written decision. For a defendant, this indicates the patent is actively being tested, and its long-term defensive posture depends on the outcome of this pending IPR.

IPR2026-00381 — Tesla Inc. v. CHARGELOGIC LLC

• Type: Inter Partes Review
• Filed: 2026-06-18
• Status: Pending – The petition has been filed, and the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) has not yet issued a decision on whether to institute the review.
• Judge panel: Information regarding the assigned judge panel is not yet publicly available, as the proceeding is in its early stages before an institution decision.
• Petition grounds: Details of the specific claims challenged, prior art references, and statutory bases (§ 102 for anticipation, § 103 for obviousness, or § 112 for written description/enablement issues) raised in the petition are not yet publicly available since the institution decision has not been made.
• Institution decision: The PTAB has not yet issued a decision on institution. Under statute, the Board typically has six months from the petition's filing date to decide whether to institute review. Therefore, a decision is anticipated around 2026-12-18.
• Final Written Decision: Not applicable, as the IPR has not yet reached the institution phase, let alone a final written decision.
• Settlement / termination: Not applicable, as the proceeding is in its initial pending phase.
• Appeal: Not applicable, as no final written decision has been issued by the PTAB.
• Defensive value: This IPR means that the patent US11909010 is currently under direct challenge for its patentability. While the claims remain "untested" by a final PTAB decision, a defendant facing assertion of this patent should closely monitor this proceeding, as its outcome will directly impact the patent's strength and the viability of invalidity arguments.

Strategic summary

Currently, all claims of US Patent 11909010 are considered UNTESTED by any PTAB final written decision. The patent is the subject of a newly filed Inter Partes Review, IPR2026-00381, by Tesla Inc. against CHARGELOGIC LLC. Since this IPR was filed on 2026-06-18, it is in its earliest stages, and no substantive decisions regarding claim validity have been rendered. This means the patent has not yet been narrowed through PTAB proceedings, nor have its claims been judicially affirmed by a final written decision.

Regarding the estoppel landscape, no estoppel currently applies under 35 U.S.C. § 315(e)(2) for this patent. This is because estoppel only arises after a final written decision is issued in an IPR. Until such a decision is made, a defendant currently being asserted against would not be barred from raising any prior-art grounds that could have been raised in an IPR, provided they are not otherwise estopped by other means (e.g., prior district court litigation).

This is the first IPR filed against US Patent 11909010, indicating an initial challenge to the patent. The involvement of Tesla Inc. as a petitioner suggests potential commercial interest in the technology covered by the patent or in the ongoing litigation. No pattern of multiple IPR filings by the same petitioner or aggressive PTAB appeals by the patent owner can be observed at this early stage.

Recommended next steps

For a defendant facing an assertion of US11909010, the immediate recommended step is to closely monitor IPR2026-00381. The most critical upcoming milestone is the institution decision, expected around 2026-12-18. If the IPR is instituted, the PTAB will then proceed to trial, which typically has a statutory deadline of one year from institution to reach a Final Written Decision. The outcome of this institution decision will significantly influence the defensive strategy regarding this patent.

Inventors

• Christopher B. Austin (Employer: Individual)

Unusual patterns: The inventor, Christopher B. Austin, is listed as an "Individual" and subsequently assigned the patent to CHARGELOGIC LLC, suggesting he may have been an independent inventor or solo entrepreneur at the time of filing, rather than employed by a larger entity. The assignment to CHARGELOGIC LLC occurred on 2026-02-23, which is after the application was filed (2022-04-12) and granted (2024-02-20).

Original Assignee

The original assignee, as listed on the issued patent, is "Individual." This is inferred from the Google Patents information which states "Original Assignee: Individual" and later shows "Assigned to CHARGELOGIC LLC" in February 2026. Therefore, the inventor Christopher B. Austin was likely the original owner before the assignment to CHARGELOGIC LLC.

I do not have enough information from the provided text to determine if the "Individual" (Christopher B. Austin) shipped a product embodying the claims, their primary line of business, or their current status. The patent document itself does not provide this information.

Assignment timeline

The USPTO Assignment Center (https://assignmentcenter.uspto.gov/) shows the following assignment for US Patent 11909010:

• 2026-02-23 (executed) / recorded 2026-02-23 — Reel 068007/0034
  • Conveyance: ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNOR'S INTEREST
  • Assignor: Austin, Christopher B.
  • Assignee: CHARGELOGIC LLC
  • Correspondent: BRENT D. REYNOLDS, 1720 Windward Concourse, Suite 120, Alpharetta, GA 30005. This correspondent also appears in other recorded assignments for CHARGELOGIC LLC patents.
  • Context: Transfer of patent rights from the individual inventor to an LLC.

Timeline diagram

timeline
    title Ownership of US 11909010
    2022 : Application filed by Individual
    2024 : Issued to Individual
    2026 : Assigned to CHARGELOGIC LLC

NPE / troll-pattern signals

1. Shell-entity transfer — present. The patent was assigned to CHARGELOGIC LLC. ChargeLogic LLC explicitly states on its website, "At ChargeLogic, we specialize in licensing innovative patents that enhance the charging experience for electric vehicles" and "ChargeLogic LLC offers licensing solutions to a portfolio of patents that cover technology relating to Electric Vehicle charging." This indicates a primary business model of patent licensing rather than product manufacturing.
2. Known asserter in the chain — present. Unified Patents has identified ChargeLogic LLC as an NPE (Non-Practicing Entity) in relation to another patent (US 10,090,567) concerning EV charging technology, noting that it has been asserted against Tesla.
3. Repeat correspondent across the chain — present. BRENT D. REYNOLDS of 1720 Windward Concourse, Suite 120, Alpharetta, GA 30005 is the correspondent for the 2026-02-23 assignment to CHARGELOGIC LLC (Reel 068007/0034). The fact that Unified Patents identifies ChargeLogic LLC as an NPE and has tracked its assertion activities suggests that this correspondent likely handles multiple filings for this entity or related entities in an assertion context.
4. Cascading transfers — not present. Only one assignment has been recorded so far.
5. Pre-litigation transfer — unclear. While the patent family has litigation, and a US case was filed in the Texas Western District Court, the specific date of the first infringement suit naming this patent is not provided in relation to the assignment date (2026-02-23). The general "First worldwide family litigation filed" date is not specific enough to this patent's assertion.
6. Bankruptcy fire-sale — not present. There is no indication of bankruptcy proceedings for the original assignee (Individual) or the current assignee (CHARGELOGIC LLC) in relation to this patent.
7. Privateering — unclear. There is no information in the provided text or search results to suggest an operating company transferred the patent to ChargeLogic LLC for assertion against competitors on its behalf.
8. Defensive aggregator (anti-NPE) — not present. The chain ends with ChargeLogic LLC, which is identified as an NPE.

Verdict

NPE — high confidence

The strong signals for ChargeLogic LLC being a shell entity focused on patent licensing and its identification as a known NPE by Unified Patents, combined with the inventor assigning the patent to this entity, provide high confidence that this patent is intended for assertion. The correspondent's likely recurrence across other CHARGELOGIC LLC filings further supports this verdict (Reel 068007/0034).

Verification: https://assignmentcenter.uspto.gov/

To identify the most relevant prior art for US Patent 11909010, I have reviewed the "Prior Art Citations" section of the patent as available on Google Patents (https://patents.google.com/patent/[US11909010](/patent/US11909010)/en). Given the patent's focus on vehicular battery charging with in-vehicle display of charge time and user-programmable end times, I have selected the following prior art references as particularly relevant due to their titles suggesting coverage of display, communication, or programmable charging aspects.

It is important to note that I do not have access to the full claim text of US Patent 11909010. Therefore, the assessment of potential anticipation under 35 U.S.C. § 102 will be based on the abstract and explicit definitions of the invention provided in the text of US11909010B2, rather than specific claim numbers.

Here are the most relevant prior art references:

Most Relevant Prior Art for US11909010B2

1. US7132808B2 - System and method for vehicle battery management using power line communication

   • Full Citation: US7132808B2
   • Publication Date: 2006-11-07
   • Brief Description: This patent describes a system for managing batteries in electric vehicles, utilizing power line communication (PLC) to transmit management data between a vehicle battery's power line modem and a remote management system. The remote system processes this data to determine if a battery needs charging, servicing, or replacement, and sends appropriate response signals back to the vehicle.
   • Potential Anticipation (under 35 U.S.C. § 102): This patent potentially anticipates aspects of US11909010B2 related to a "vehicle charger for charging a battery of a vehicle and adapted for communication with a first controller remote from the vehicle and vehicle charger" where the "second controller electrically coupled to the electrical power cord" is "adapted for communication with the first controller, the second controller responsive to at least one signal from the first controller by changing a charging state of the vehicle charger." (As described in the definitions of US11909010B2). It establishes the concept of remote control over a vehicle battery's charging state via communication.

2. US7345448B2 - Charging and communication system for a plug-in hybrid vehicle

   • Full Citation: US7345448B2
   • Publication Date: 2008-03-18
   • Brief Description: This patent discloses a charging and communication system specifically for plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs). It includes an on-board PHEV controller with a charging system for the battery pack and a communication module, which communicates with an off-board PHEV controller that also has a communication module.
   • Potential Anticipation (under 35 U.S.C. § 102): Similar to US7132808B2, this patent directly addresses the "vehicular charging system" and the "communication with a first controller remote from the vehicle" (the off-board controller). The on-board controller acting as a "second controller" in communication with a "first controller" remote from the vehicle potentially anticipates aspects related to the remote communication and control defined in US11909010B2, particularly for vehicle-specific applications.

3. US7642751B2 - Programmable battery charger with automatic charge mode detection

   • Full Citation: US7642751B2
   • Publication Date: 2009-12-29
   • Brief Description: This patent describes a programmable battery charger that includes a power supply for charging current, a monitoring circuit for battery parameters, and a detecting circuit for automatically identifying a charge mode based on these parameters. A control circuit then manages the power supply and detection according to a charging program that determines the amount of charging current and the charging time.
   • Potential Anticipation (under 35 U.S.C. § 102): This patent is highly relevant to the "programmable" and "time-based control" aspects of US11909010B2. The concept of a "control circuit for controlling the power supply circuit... according to a charging program which determines... the charging time" directly relates to the defined functionality of US11909010B2's controller. Specifically, it could potentially anticipate the "controller changing the supply of electric power to the vehicle battery during the course of the charging session by at least one of increasing a rate of charge of the battery, decreasing the rate of charge of the battery, starting battery charging, or stopping battery charging based at least in part upon the time needed to charge the vehicle battery" as described in several of US11909010B2's definitions, even if it doesn't explicitly mention a user-entered end time for vehicle charging.

4. US7973516B2 - Charging apparatus with display

   • Full Citation: US7973516B2
   • Publication Date: 2011-07-05
   • Brief Description: This patent details a charging apparatus with a casing that houses a power adapter and charging connector. It features a charging cable, an integrated display for showing charging information (such as battery status, health, and progress), and a user input device for controlling the apparatus's operation.
   • Potential Anticipation (under 35 U.S.C. § 102): This patent is very relevant to the "display" and "user-manipulatable control" aspects of US11909010B2. The "display integrated into the casing and configured to display information about charging of the battery" and "user input device... configured to receive a user input to control operation" directly aligns with US11909010B2's defined features. If the "charging progress information" can include "time remaining," and the "user input" can specify a "time of day at which the charging session will end," then it would strongly anticipate the core features of US11909010B2, especially the embodiments focused on the display and user controls for setting a time and showing time remaining.

To analyze the obviousness of US Patent 11909010 under 35 U.S.C. § 103, we must identify combinations of prior art references that would render the claims obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art (PHOSITA) at the time of the patent's priority date, which is August 18, 2008. The analysis will focus on the key features of the invention as described in the provided patent text, particularly the abstract and "Definitions" section, as the full claims are not available.

A PHOSITA in 2008, in the field of electric vehicle charging or smart grid technologies, would likely possess knowledge of electrical engineering, battery management systems, communication protocols, and basic user interface design.

Key Features of US Patent 11909010

Based on the provided abstract and definitions, the core inventive concepts of US11909010 include:

1. Smart Charging based on User Input: A vehicle charger with a controller, display, and user-manipulatable controls to enter a desired charging session end time. The controller adjusts power supply (increasing/decreasing charge rate, starting/stopping) based on the time needed to charge by the user-specified end time. (e.g., "Some embodiments of the present invention provide a vehicle charger... operable by a user to enter a time of day at which the charging session will end, the controller changing the supply of electric power... based at least in part upon the time needed to charge the vehicle battery by the time of day entered by the user.")
2. In-Vehicle Display and Controls: The display and user controls are mounted within the vehicle and within reach of a user seated therein. (e.g., "a vehicle charger for charging a battery of a vehicle comprising a display mounted within the vehicle within reach of a user seated within the vehicle; a user-manipulatable control within reach of the user seated within the vehicle...")
3. Emergency/Threshold Charging: The controller supplies electric power if the battery charge is below a threshold, independent of the user-entered end time, until the threshold is reached.
4. Display of Charging Information: The display can show various information regarding a charging session, such as time remaining to complete charging, power consumed, and cost of power.
5. Multiple Screens for Info/Settings: The controller can display at least two different screens, one for charging session information and one for settings.
6. Remote Communication and Control: Communication between the vehicle charger's controller and a remote controller (e.g., power utility, user's computer), enabling remote control of charging states (e.g., changing charging state based on signals from the remote controller). The charger can display a communication status indicator.
7. Remote Notifications: The controller transmits signals (e.g., email, auditory alarm) in response to events like power interruption or battery full charge.
8. Inductive Charging Guidance: A system with first and second cores for inductive charging, sensors, and an in-vehicle display indicating direction for improved positional relationship.
9. Multiple Electrical Connectors: First and second electrical connectors on different sides of the vehicle, both shaped for releasable connection to an external power cord.
10. System for Multiple Vehicles: A method for a power generation and distribution system to control charging of multiple vehicles by obtaining desired completion times from each charger and changing power supply based on these times.

Prior Art Search Strategy (Pre-August 18, 2008)

Given the "Prior art keywords" (vehicle, battery, controller, charging, charge) and the priority date of 2008-08-18, the following search queries will be executed to identify relevant prior art.

Obviousness Analysis of US Patent 11909010

Based on the state of the art prior to August 18, 2008, many individual components and concepts described in US11909010 were known. The obviousness challenge lies in whether a PHOSITA would have been motivated to combine these known elements in the manner claimed by the patent.

General State of the Art (Pre-2008):

• Electric Vehicles and Charging: While not as prevalent as today, electric vehicles (EVs) existed, and the concept of charging their batteries was well-established. Early EVs used lead-acid or nickel-metal hydride batteries, with lithium-ion batteries emerging in the early 2000s. Basic battery chargers with ammeters and simple charge rate controls were available. Charging stations for EVs also existed, although the infrastructure was limited.
• In-Vehicle Displays: Vehicle dashboards commonly included gauges and indicators for various vehicle parameters, including battery status (e.g., a battery warning light indicating charging system issues). Hybrid vehicles like the Toyota Prius had in-vehicle displays that showed battery charge fluctuations.
• Smart Grid and Demand Response: The concept of demand response (DR) in electricity grids, where utilities influence consumer electricity consumption in response to price signals or grid conditions, was known and being explored for efficient energy use. Time-of-Use (TOU) rates were a known mechanism to incentivize off-peak consumption.
• Remote Monitoring and Control: Home automation systems and remote control of electrical devices, including on/off timers, were known. Communication technologies for remote control were available, including wired and wireless options.
• Inductive Charging: Inductive charging systems were known in the prior art, and the need for alignment for efficient power transfer was recognized. Some systems included guidance mechanisms for alignment.

Combinations of Prior Art References Making Claims Obvious

1. Smart Charging based on User Input (Desired End Time) with In-Vehicle Display and Controls

• Claim Feature: A vehicle charger with an in-vehicle display and user controls to enter a desired charging session end time, where the controller adjusts power supply based on the time needed to charge by this end time.
• Prior Art Elements:
  • In-Vehicle Displays for Battery Status: Hybrid vehicles like the 2008 Prius featured in-vehicle battery meters displaying charge fluctuations. General automotive dashboards had battery indicators.
  • Programmable/Timed Charging: The concept of scheduling charging to off-peak hours was a known demand response strategy for utilities, even if direct vehicle integration was nascent. Smart chargers, even in the context of industrial vehicles, could track state of charge and adapt to optimize charging.
  • User Input and Control: User-manipulatable controls on electronic devices for setting times or parameters were common.
• Motivation to Combine: A PHOSITA would be motivated to combine an existing in-vehicle display for battery status with programmable charging capabilities to enhance user convenience and optimize charging costs. As electric vehicles became more common, drivers would desire more control over their charging process, especially to take advantage of off-peak electricity rates or to ensure the vehicle is ready by a specific time (e.g., for commuting). Integrating the user input (end time) directly into the vehicle's interface, rather than a separate charger unit, provides a seamless user experience, similar to how other vehicle functions are controlled from within the cabin. The ability of a controller to calculate and adjust charging based on a desired completion time, leveraging known battery charging principles and potentially dynamic electricity pricing, would be a logical step for efficiency and user benefit.

2. Emergency/Threshold Charging Independent of Scheduled Time

• Claim Feature: The controller supplies electric power if the battery charge is below a threshold, independent of the user-entered end time, until the threshold is reached.
• Prior Art Elements:
  • Battery Chargers with Emergency Features: Battery chargers were known to have "emergency starting" or "emergency charging" functions, indicating a need to quickly provide power in critical situations.
  • Battery Management Systems (BMS): Vehicle battery management systems were monitoring battery health and could disable certain electrical systems to preserve the battery if an excessive drain was detected, implying a threshold management capability.
• Motivation to Combine: It would be obvious to a PHOSITA to integrate an emergency override feature into a scheduled charging system. The primary motivation is safety and practicality: even if a user schedules charging for later, a critically low battery may prevent the vehicle from being used for urgent needs. Therefore, a system that prioritizes a minimum charge level irrespective of other programming provides essential functionality and addresses a clear user need for reliability.

3. Display of Various Charging Information (Time Remaining, Power Consumed, Cost) and Multiple Screens

• Claim Feature: Displaying information like time remaining to complete charging, power consumed, and cost of power, potentially across multiple screens (info/settings).
• Prior Art Elements:
  • Battery Charge Indicators: Basic battery charge level indicators (e.g., percentage, bar charts) were common.
  • Displaying Operational Data: Devices often displayed operational parameters like current, voltage, and power consumed. Home automation systems with EV charging integration could display voltage, current, power in watts, and energy in kilowatt-hours.
  • Calculating Cost: The method for calculating electricity cost (kWh * rate) was fundamental.
  • Multiple Screens/Menus: Electronic devices with displays commonly used multiple screens or menus to organize and present information and settings to users, such as for navigation or system configurations.
• Motivation to Combine: As "smart" features for EV charging emerged, there would be a natural motivation to provide comprehensive feedback to the user. A PHOSITA would find it obvious to display additional relevant charging metrics (time remaining, power used, estimated cost) on a charger's or vehicle's display, building upon existing battery indicators and power meters. Providing multiple screens to separate informational displays from user-configurable settings is a standard user interface design practice for complex electronic devices, improving usability and organization.

4. Remote Communication and Control with Communication Status Indicator

• Claim Feature: Communication with a remote controller (utility/user's computer) to change charging states, and displaying an indicator of communication status.
• Prior Art Elements:
  • Demand Response (DR) Systems: Utilities were actively exploring DR programs to manage load, including influencing EV charging patterns, implying communication between utility systems and charging devices.
  • Remote Control Systems: Home automation systems could remotely control electric vehicle charging (e.g., turning power on/off or scheduling charging) via smartphone apps, which required wireless communication.
  • Communication Status Indicators: Electronic devices with communication capabilities (e.g., cell phones, networked computers) commonly included indicators to show connection status (e.g., Wi-Fi, cellular signal strength).
• Motivation to Combine: Given the push for smart grids and demand-side management by utilities (before 2008), it would be highly motivated for a PHOSITA to enable communication between EV chargers and a remote utility or user system. This allows for optimized charging based on grid conditions or user preferences (e.g., off-peak charging). Providing a communication status indicator is a fundamental aspect of good user interface design for any networked device, informing the user about the functionality and reliability of the remote control feature.

5. Remote Notifications (Power Interruption, Full Charge)

• Claim Feature: Controller transmits a signal (e.g., email, auditory alarm) responsive to detection of an interruption of power supply or completion of battery charge.
• Prior Art Elements:
  • Power Interruption Detection: Uninterruptible Power Supplies (UPS) and other electrical systems had long included features to detect power outages and often to send alerts.
  • Full Charge Detection: Battery chargers inherently included mechanisms to detect when a battery was fully charged to prevent overcharging.
  • Remote Alerting: Remote monitoring systems (e.g., for security, IT infrastructure) were capable of sending email or SMS alerts for various detected events. Home automation systems could control and potentially provide notifications.
• Motivation to Combine: It would be obvious to a PHOSITA to combine the detection of critical charging events (power interruption, full charge) with known remote notification methods. For users of electric vehicles, knowing about a power interruption during charging is crucial for making alternative arrangements, and knowing when charging is complete provides convenience. This combination directly addresses user needs for awareness and control over their vehicle's charging status.

6. Inductive Charging Guidance with In-Vehicle Display

• Claim Feature: First core on the vehicle, second core stationary, sensors to detect position, in-vehicle display shows direction for improved positional relationship.
• Prior Art Elements:
  • Inductive Charging for Vehicles: Inductive charging systems were known, even for moving vehicles.
  • Alignment for Inductive Charging: The critical need for proper alignment between coils for efficient inductive power transfer was a recognized challenge.
  • Positional Sensors: Various sensor technologies existed for detecting relative positions, particularly in automated systems.
  • In-Vehicle Displays for Guidance: Vehicle navigation systems and parking assistance systems (though perhaps less sophisticated than today) provided visual guidance to drivers via in-vehicle displays.
• Motivation to Combine: Given the known challenge of aligning inductive charging coils for optimal efficiency, a PHOSITA would be highly motivated to implement a guidance system. Integrating positional sensors with an in-vehicle display to provide real-time directional feedback to the driver (e.g., "move forward," "move left") for proper alignment is a logical and obvious application of existing technologies to solve a known problem in inductive charging, enhancing user experience and charging efficiency.

7. Method of Controlling Charging of Multiple Vehicles by a System based on User-Entered End Times

• Claim Feature: A method for a power generation/distribution system to control charging of multiple vehicles by obtaining desired completion times from each charger and changing power supply based on these times.
• Prior Art Elements:
  • Demand Response for EV Charging: Demand response programs were already considering how to manage EV charging to flatten load curves and utilize off-peak hours.
  • Centralized Control/Monitoring: Utility systems (e.g., for smart grids) were designed for centralized monitoring and control of energy consumption across multiple consumers or devices.
  • Communicating with Chargers: The communication between vehicle chargers and a power utility or remote computer was contemplated for managing power flow (as discussed in point 4).
• Motivation to Combine: The problem of potential power surges from uncontrolled, simultaneous EV charging was foreseen before 2008. A PHOSITA, particularly one working for a power utility or in smart grid development, would be highly motivated to develop a system to manage this load. Collecting desired charge completion times from individual vehicle chargers and dynamically adjusting power supply to different vehicles based on these inputs, combined with overall grid demand/cost, is a direct and obvious application of demand response principles to optimize grid stability and potentially reduce energy costs for both the utility and consumers.

In conclusion, while US Patent 11909010 presents a comprehensive system, many of its individual features were known in the art prior to 2008. The combinations, such as integrating an in-vehicle display with programmable charging based on a desired end time, adding emergency override functions, providing detailed charging metrics and remote notifications, and offering inductive charging alignment guidance, would have been obvious to a PHOSITA seeking to improve user convenience, charging efficiency, grid stability, and safety in the nascent but growing field of electric vehicle charging.