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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed September 3, 2025 has been entered. Claims 8-12 and 14 remain pending in the application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed September 3, 2025 regarding 35 U.S.C. § 103 rejections have been fully considered but are not persuasive.
[1] For the independent claims, Applicant argued that the geared-neutral transmissions of Polenz is not suitable to disclose the claimed invention citing paragraph [0011] and Fig. 1 of Polenz.
Examiner respectfully disagrees.
Abstract of Polenz is cited to show that Polenz discloses a transmission of a work machine. Examiner points out that prior art must be considered in its entirety, including disclosures that teach away from the claims (MPEP § 2141.02(V)).
[2] Applicant further argued that Polenz is totally silent with respect to entering a first driving speed, with a defined wheel slip, which is initially set higher (e.g., by a defined value) than a target driving speed, and starting off the working machine at the first driving speed with the defined wheel slip, as presently claimed.
Examiner respectfully disagrees.
For the limitation in issue, “with a defined wheel slip such that a theoretical driving speed is initially set higher than a target driving speed by a defined value, c) driving at least one of the vehicle axles (7, 9) to start off the working machine at the first driving speed with the defined wheel slip”, reasonings for how Polenz discloses the initially set higher speed are provided in the office action..
[3] Applicant further argued that Polenz is totally silent with respect to the amended limitation of calculating a current wheel slip by comparing the actual driving speed with the target driving speed.
Examiner respectfully disagrees.
Paragraph [0013] of Polenz discloses calculating wheel slip by comparing the actual driving speed with the target driving speed.
[4] Applicant further argued that neither Polenz nor Fairgrieve discloses the amened limitations: if the actual driving speed is higher than or the same as the target driving speed, then at least one of reducing a drive output rotational speed of the transmission (3), reducing the rotational speed of the drive unit (2), and/or adapting a gear ratio of the transmission (3) thereby reducing the wheel slip of the driven wheels, and when the actual driving speed is lower than the target driving speed, then increasing at least one of the drive output rotational speed of the transmission, increasing the rotational speed of the drive unit (2), and/or adapting a gear ratio of the transmission (3) thereby increasing the wheel slip of the driven wheels, as presently claimed.
Specifically, Applicant argued that Fairgrieve is more specifically directed at automatically adjusting a rate of change of at least one component of a net torque being applied to one or more wheels of the vehicle to compensate for the accelerating or decelerating effect of the external force on the vehicle. The presently claimed invention is not concerned with net torque or accelerating or decelerating effects of the external force on a vehicle. As such, it is respectfully submitted that Fairgrieve et al. '092 is not relevant to the presently claimed invention or particularly relevant to the applied art of Polenz et al. '750. Accordingly, Fairgrieve et al. '092 is non-analogous prior art and thus is not properly combinable with Polenz et al. '750.
Examiner respectfully disagrees.
In the office action, the abstract and paragraphs [0065], [0092], [0034], [0079], [0128] of
Fairgrieve are cited to reject the above limitations. Examiner notes that accelerating or decelerating effects of the external force on a vehicle may include the case of a work machine with the attachment, which may produce accelerating or decelerating effects for the work machine depending on the load applied to the attachment from the work surface. For example, if the attachment plows a hard work surface or a surface having obstacles such as rocks or tree roots, the work load applied to the attachment increases thereby creating a decelerating effect. On the other hand, if the attachment plows a soft work surface which is easily plowed, the work load applied to the attachment decreases thereby creating an accelerating effect.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 8-12, 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20110054750 A1 to Polenz et al. (hereinafter, Polenz) in view of US 20150232092 A1 to Fairgrieve et al. (hereinafter, Fairgrieve).
Regarding claim 8, Polenz discloses:
A method (A) for continuously checking traction-related control of a drive-train of a working machine (1) having a drive unit (2), a transmission (3), a control unit (10) and first and second vehicle axles (7, 9) with wheels (6, 8), with at least one of the first and the second vehicle axles (7, 9) being driven by the drive unit (2) over ground or a roadway, the method comprising: a) initiating a working operation of the working machine, b) entering a drive requirement relating to a first driving speed {abstract: A method and a device for controlling the slip of a tractor vehicle or the like, in which the drive wheel slip is determined and, if the actual slip is different from a specified nominal slip, the gear ratio of a controllable transmission in the drivetrain is adjusted in the direction of slip optimization. [the drive train components are implied] / paragraph [0006]: a method and a device for implementing the method which, during a working process (above all at low driving speeds [entering a drive requirement relating to a first driving speed is implied] of less than 10 km/h), which enable traction forces up to a maximum value that can be reached by virtue of the installed power to be produced, whereas an uncontrolled increase of slippage due to wheel slip of the wheel or wheels is avoided. / Examiner notes that front-wheel drive and rear-wheel drive are well known in the art. That is, the limitation, at least one of the first and the second vehicle axles being driven by the drive unit, is well known in the art}.
Examiner notes that “during a working process” means a working operation of the working machine is already initiated and checking traction is continuous.
with a defined wheel slip such that a theoretical driving speed is initially set higher than a target driving speed by a defined value, c) driving at least one of the vehicle axles (7, 9) to start off the working machine at the first driving speed with the defined wheel slip {[0008] a method for controlling slippage in a tractor vehicle or the like, in which the slip of the drive wheels is determined and, if the actual slip differs from a specified nominal slip, the drivetrain is adjusted for slip optimization. [0013] the drive wheel slip is determined by the simultaneous measurement of the drive wheel rotation speed and the actual speed of the vehicle over the ground, by comparing the values obtained. The drive wheel slip is usually given as a percentage ratio of the slip speed (i.e. the relative speed of a tire profile element over the ground) and the absolute speed of the vehicle.}.
Examiner construes the specified nominal slip as the claimed defined wheel slip. The theoretical driving speed of the working machine is derived from the drive wheel rotation speed by multiplying the circumference of the wheel. The disclosure of Polenz that if the actual slip differs from a specified nominal slip, the drivetrain is adjusted for slip optimization implies that a specification of a defined wheel slip (specified nominal slip) is set as a slip compensation; that the working machine is started off with the defined wheel slip. Examiner notes that it is the effect of the slip compensation that a theoretical driving speed is set higher than a target driving speed by a defined value. That is, theoretical driving speed (the first driving speed) is set higher to compensate wheel slip, which commonly occurs in the work machine driving.
d) measuring an actual driving speed of the working machine over the ground or the roadway, e) calculating a current wheel slip by comparing the actual driving speed with the target driving speed {[0013]: the drive wheel slip is determined by the simultaneous measurement of the drive wheel rotation speed and the actual speed of the vehicle over the ground, by comparing the values obtained.}.
Polenz does not explicitly disclose: f) if the actual driving speed is higher than or the same as the target driving speed, then at least one of reducing a drive output rotational speed of the transmission (3), reducing the rotational speed of the drive unit (2), and/or adapting a gear ratio of the transmission (3) thereby reducing the wheel slip of driven wheels, g) if the actual driving speed is lower than the target driving speed, then increasing at least one of the drive output rotational speed of the transmission, increasing the rotational speed of the drive unit (2), and/or adapting a gear ratio of the transmission (3) thereby increasing the wheel slip of the driven wheels, and h) continuously repeating steps d-g, during the working operation of the working machine, to iteratively reduce wheel slip between the wheels (6, 8) and the ground or the roadway by adapting a rotational speed of the wheels (6, 8) of the driven vehicle axle (7, 9) in order to maintain the driving speed of the working machine over the ground or the roadway at the target driving speed while reducing slip and minimizing power loss between the wheels (6, 8) and the ground or the roadway.
Fairgrieve teaches using iterative process in in the abstract vehicle wheel slip control: A method for operating a speed control system of a vehicle is provided. The method comprises detecting an external force acting on the vehicle wherein the external force has an accelerating or decelerating effect on the vehicle. The method further comprises automatically adjusting a rate of change of at least one component of a net torque being applied to one or more wheels of the vehicle to compensate for the accelerating or decelerating effect of the external force on the vehicle. Examiner notes that wheel slip means f) if the actual driving speed is higher than or the same as the target driving speed, and the rate of change of torque applying components means change of parameters of the drive unit and transmission. [0065] teaches controlling rotational speed of the drive unit and output of transmission: powertrain subsystem 121 may be configured to gather information relating to operating parameters, for example, torque output, engine or motor speed. [0092] teaches controlling the gear ratio of the transmission: gear ratio of the vehicle driveline (e.g., transmission). [0034]: The off-road speed control system may be provided in respect of wheel speed / [0079]: during a wheel slip event, VCU 16 continues to compare the measured vehicle speed with the desired set-speed, and continues to control automatically the torque applied across the vehicle wheels so as to maintain vehicle speed at the desired set-speed and manage the slip event. Examiner notes that managing slip event means reducing slip thereby minimizing the power loss, and continuing to control to maintain the vehicle speed at the desired set-speed means reducing wheel slip by either reducing or increasing the drive unit speed and adapting transmission gear ratio. / [0128]: method 100 ends following that adjustment and is repeated when, for example, another change in the target set-speed is commanded in step 102; in another embodiment, however, method 100 is iterative. In an embodiment wherein method 100 is iterative, following step 108 method 100 loops back to step 104 and the methodology is repeated as described above.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the iterative slip management feature of Fairgrieve with the described invention of Polenz in order to obtain desired traction control by repeated adjusting parameters thereby maintaining the speed of the working machine under varying load.
Similar reasoning applies to claim 14.
Regarding claim 9, which depends from claim 8, Polenz discloses: further comprising reducing or increasing the rotational speed of the wheels (6, 8) depending on a difference between the actual driving speed of the working machine over the ground or the roadway and the target driving speed of the working machine, the target driving speed of the working machine being set by a rotational speed of the drive unit, a gear ratio of the transmission, a fixed gear ratio of the at least one of the first and the second vehicle axles and a diameter of the wheels {abstract discloses the drive train components. claim 9: A method for controlling slip of a tractor vehicle in which drive wheel slip is determined, the drive wheel slip being determined by simultaneous measuring a drive wheel rotational speed and an actual driving speed of the vehicle over ground and comparing the measured values [difference between an actual driving speed and a target driving speed] and, if the actual slip is different from a specified nominal slip, a gear ratio of a controllable transmission in the drivetrain is adjusted in a direction of slip optimization, and the optimization objective being selected by a driver of the vehicle, the method comprising the steps of: regulating the gear ratio such that the drive wheel rotation speed is controlled [reducing or increasing the rotational speed of the wheels] by adjusting the gear ratio}.
Examiner notes that the target driving speed, which is related to the drivetrain components and the wheel diameter, is determined based on measuring a drive wheel rotational speed.
Regarding claim 10, Polenz discloses:
A method (A) for continuously checking traction-related control of a drive-train of a working machine (1) having a drive unit (2), a transmission (3), a control unit (10) and first and second vehicle axles (7, 9) with wheels (6, 8) with at least one of the first and the second vehicle axles (7, 9) being driven by the drive unit (2), the method comprising: a) initiating a working operation of the working machine, b) entering a drive requirement relating to a first driving speed and setting a defined wheel slip such that a theoretical driving speed is initially set by about 5% higher than a target driving speed, the target driving speed being set by setting a rotation speed of the drive unit and a gear ratio of the transmission and based on a fixed gear ratio of the at least one of the first and the second vehicle axles being driven a diameter of the wheels, c) driving at least one of the vehicle axles (7, 9) to start off the working machine at the first driving speed with the defined wheel slip, d) measuring an actual driving speed of the working machine over ground or a roadway, e) calculating a current wheel slip by comparing the actual driving speed to the theoretical driving speed, monitoring a change of the actual driving speed of the working machine, in reaction to an adaptation of the rotational speed of the wheels (6, 8) {Abstract, [0006], [0008], [0013], claim 9}.
Fairgrieve teaches:
[1] f) if the actual driving speed is higher than or the same as the target driving speed, then at least one of reducing a drive output rotational speed of the transmission (3), reducing the rotational speed of the drive unit (2), and/or adapting a gear ratio of the transmission (3) thereby reducing the wheel slip of driven wheels, g) if the actual driving speed is lower than the target driving speed, then increasing at least one of the drive output rotational speed of the transmission, increasing the rotational speed of the drive unit (2), and/or adapting a gear ratio of the transmission (3) thereby increasing the wheel slip of the driven wheels h) continuously repeating steps d-g, during the working operation of the working machine, to iteratively reduce wheel slip between the wheels (6, 8) and the ground or the roadway by adapting a rotational speed of the wheels (6, 8) of the driven vehicle axle (7, 9) in order to maintain the driving speed of the working machine at the target driving speed and minimize power loss between the wheels (6, 8) and the ground or the roadway, during the working operation of the working machine, to iteratively reduce wheel slip between the wheels (6, 8) and the ground or the roadway by adapting a rotational speed of the wheels (6, 8) of the driven vehicle axle (7, 9) in order to maintain the driving speed of the working machine at the target driving speed and minimize power loss between the wheels (6, 8) and the ground or the roadway.
[2] if an expected speed increase of the actual driving speed has not occurred, reversing a most recent adaptation of the rotational speed of the wheels (6, 8) to remove the most recent adaptation of the rotational speed of the wheels (6, 8) in order to maintain the driving speed of the working machine at the target driving speed with a least possible wheel slip and minimum of power loss between the wheels (6, 8) and the ground or the roadway.
[1] Fairgrieve {abstract, [0065], [0092], [0034], [0079], [0128]}.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the iterative slip management feature of Fairgrieve with the described invention of Polenz in order to obtain desired traction control by repeated adjusting parameters thereby maintaining the speed of the working machine under varying load.
[2] Examiner notes that the meaning of “reversing” is consistent with Fig. 2 and paragraph [0031] of the present application, which discloses: If not, in an eighth process step A8 the increase of the rotational speed of the wheels 6, 8 is reversed and the process reverts to the second process step A2. That is, reversing means undoing because a subsequent process of adapting rotational speed means undoing of the most recent adapting and implement a new adapting.
Fairgrieve teaches that a most recent adapting of the rotational speed of the wheels is reversed (undone) if an expected change of the actual driving speed has not occurred in paragraph [0102]: the longitudinal acceleration of the vehicle and the net torque applied, to the wheels are monitored… if the longitudinal acceleration of the is not as expected, then it can be determined that an external force affecting vehicle acceleration may be acting on the vehicle. and paragraph [0104]: When it is detected in step 104 that an external force is acting on vehicle 10, method 100 moves to step 106 which adjusts a torque applied to the vehicle wheels. [0102] teaches determining if an expected change of the actual driving speed has not occurred as a result of adapting the rotational speed of the wheels. [0102] also describes an external force, which commonly occurs to a work machine due to rough terrain or different types (sand, mud) of terrain as described in [0025]. Due to the external force, expected change of actual driving speed as a result of adapted rotational wheel speed may not occur. [0104] teaches adjusting torque, that is adapting the wheel rotational speed, when the an expected change of the actual driving speed has not occurred, which means reversing or undoing the most recent adapting of the rotational speed of the wheels.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the wheel rotation speed reversing feature of Fairgrieve with the described invention of Polenz in order to prepare subsequent attempt of adjusting wheel rotational speed thereby improving performance of a work machine.
Regarding claim 11, which depends from claim 8, Polenz does not explicitly disclose: further comprising; during a first process step (A1), entering the drive requirement of the working machine and setting the slip compensation as a specification for the defined wheel slip; during a second process step (A2), the working machine (1) driving off at the first driving speed and with the defined wheel slip; during a third process step (A3), measuring the actual driving speed of the working machine (1) and calculating the corresponding actual wheel slip; during a fourth process step (A4), comparing the actual driving speed with the target driving speed, and, if the actual driving speed is higher than or equal to the target driving speed, then during a fifth process step (A5), reducing the rotational speed of the wheels (6, 8) and returning back to the third process step (A3), and, during a sixth process step (A6), increasing the rotational speed of the wheels (6, 8) if, during the comparison during the fourth process step (A4), the actual driving speed is found to be lower than the target driving speed.
In relation to these limitations, Polenz discloses claim 9: a method for controlling slip of a tractor vehicle in which drive wheel slip is determined, the drive wheel slip being determined by simultaneous measuring a drive wheel rotational speed [entering the drive requirement, starting at the first driving speed] and an actual driving speed of the vehicle over ground and comparing the measured values [comparing the actual driving speed with the target driving speed] and, if the actual slip is different from a specified nominal slip [defined wheel slip], a gear ratio of a controllable transmission in the drivetrain is adjusted in a direction of slip optimization.
Fairgrieve teaches iterative adjusting vehicle shaft rotation rate in the abstract and paragraphs [0034], [0128].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the iterative control of Fairgrieve with the described invention of Polenz in order to obtain desired traction control by repeated adjusting parameters.
Regarding claim 12, which depends from claim 11, Polenz does not explicitly disclose:
further comprising, during a seventh process step (A7), during the working operation of the working machine, monitoring the actual driving speed, checking whether the actual driving speed has increased in response to the increase of the rotational speed of the wheels (6, 8) during the sixth process step (A6), and then either maintaining the increase of the rotational speed in accordance with a ninth process step (A9) and returning to the second process step (A2) if the actual driving speed has increased in response to the increase of the rotational speed of the wheels during the sixth process step (A6), or reversing the increase of the rotational speed of the wheels (6, 8) during an eighth process step (A8) and then returning back to the second process step (A2) if the actual driving speed has not increased in response to the increase of the rotational speed of the wheels during the sixth process step (A6).
Fairgrieve teaches monitoring the driving speed and either maintaining or reversing a most recent adapting of the rotational speed of the wheels in abstract, [0034], [0079], [0128], [0015], [0102], [0104], [0025].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the driving speed monitoring and wheel speed adaptation reversing feature of Fairgrieve with the described invention of Polenz in order to prepare subsequent attempt of adjusting wheel rotational speed thereby improving performance of a work machine.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Hendryx (US 20090112415 A1) discloses wheel slip control for a work machine.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHANMIN PARK whose telephone number is (408)918-7555. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday and alternate Fridays, 7:30-4:30 PT.
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, Ramya P Burgess can be reached at (571)272-6011. 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.
/C.P./Examiner, Art Unit 3661
/RAMYA P BURGESS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3661