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 .
STATUS OF CLAIMS
This action is in response to the Applicant’s arguments and amendments filed on 12/26/2025. Applicant amended claims 1 and 14. Claims 1-5, 8-17 and 20 are pending and are examined below.
RESPONSE TO REMARKS AND ARGUMENTS
In regards to the claim rejections under 103, Applicant’s arguments and amendments filed on 12/26/2025 have been fully considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
CLAIM REJECTIONS—35 U.S.C. § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. §§ 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. §§ 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. § 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1, 2, 5, 8, 10, 11, 14, 15 and 20 are rejected under § 103 as being unpatentable under Marshall et al. (US20190300105A1; “Marshall”) in view of Lee et al. (US20110001442A1; “Lee ’442”), in view of Kurotobi et al. (US20180037294A1; “Kurotobi”), in view of Komatsu et al. (US20190009771A1; “Komatsu”) and in view of Tanaka (US6015021A; “Tanaka”)
As to claim 1, Marshall discloses a method for controlling an electric vehicle's electric motor output, said method comprising:
obtaining electric vehicle data, said electric vehicle including a battery (“The state of charge … of the battery pack 30 and/or a remaining voltage capacity of the battery pack 30”—i.e., electric vehicle data—is obtained. Emphases added; see at least ¶ 37 and FIG. 3.);
obtaining user-related data (A rider may provide a “desired e-assist objective … to command the e-assist torque.” Emphasis added; see at least ¶ 20.);
receiving input from at least one sensor (See at least ¶ 37, showing that at least electric vehicle data is inputted from a sensor.);
utilizing a controller to evaluate said electric vehicle data, said user-related data, and said input from said at least one sensor, and automatically tailoring an output power curve of an electric motor of said electric vehicle for a given rate of conservation of a battery-provided source of power (“Upon receiving the route destination (P2) and the e-assist objectives of the rider 12, the controller 50 regulates the present operating state of the traction motor 18 by automatically allocating energy from the battery pack 30 to the traction motor 18, i.e., regulating the discharge rate of the battery pack 30 via power flow control actions to energize the traction motor 18 at a particular e-assist level.” Emphasis added; see at least ¶ 27. Continuing, said tailoring of the output power curve may take into consideration a given rate of conservation of a battery-provided source of power to, e.g., end a trip at a desired “remaining state of charge.” See at least ¶¶ 47–48.); and
utilizing a controller to provide a level of assistance provided by an electronic motor (“The controller uses an energy cost function, and in response to input signals including a travel route and a desired e-assist objective, commands the e-assist torque [i.e., assistance] via the motor control signals to augment the rider torque while satisfying the e-assist objective.” Emphasis added; see at least Abstract; see also ¶ 27.).
Marshall fails to explicitly disclose automatically operating at least one valve, wherein said at least one valve is comprised of at least one switch which controls power flow between said battery and said electric motor of said electric vehicle.
Nevertheless, Lee ’442 teaches an electric vehicle comprising at least one valve, wherein said at least one valve is comprised of at least one switch which controls power flow between a battery and an electric motor (See at least ¶ 6 and FIG. 3. which showcase that a battery 10 supplies electricity to a motor 12 via a switch 15. Here, Examiner notes that the switch 15 meets the BRI of a valve as Applicant has defined a “valve” as a switch – See Applicant’s PGPUB, ¶ 37.)
Marshall discloses a method for automatically tailoring an output power curve of an electric motor to for an electric vehicle for a given rate of conservation of a battery-provided source of power. Lee ’442 teaches an electric vehicle comprising at least one valve, wherein said at least one valve is comprised of at least one switch which controls power flow between a battery and an electric motor.
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 invention of Marshall to include the feature of: an electric vehicle comprising at least one valve, wherein said at least one valve is comprised of at least one switch which controls power flow between a battery and an electric motor, as taught by Lee ’442, with a reasonable expectation of success because (i) the utilization of switches to control power flow is well-known and routine in the electric vehicle arts; and (ii) Lee ‘442’s configuration is useful for directing and managing voltage from a battery to a target electronic component (e.g., an electric motor).
The combination of Marshall and Lee ’442 fails to explicitly disclose: adjusting an active valve damper suspension of said electric vehicle using an active valve to adjust said active valve damper suspension to correspond to said output power curve of said electric motor of said electric vehicle.
Nevertheless, Kurotobi teaches: automatically adjusting a damper suspension of said electric vehicle using an active valve to adjust said damper suspension to correspond to said output power curve of said electric motor of said electric vehicle, said automatically adjusting of said suspension of said electric vehicle further based upon operating parameters of said electric vehicle (“The electronic controller is configured to control the operational state of the electric suspension. The operational state of the electric suspension is automatically changed based on the operational state of the bicycle electric assist unit” – see at least ¶ 8. “[T]he operational state of the electric suspension includes … damping force” – see at least ¶ 9. Continuing, in accordance with an “assist ratio”—i.e., an output power curve—the operational states of the front electric suspension and the rear electric suspension are automatically changed – see at least ¶ 16. See also ¶¶ 18, 19, 21, 22 which further discuss how the “assist ratio” relates to control of the suspension. See also ¶ 70 which provides further discussion pertaining to the controller 44. Examiner note: The controller 44 meets the BRI of an active valve as the controller effectively functions as a switch for activating (or deactivating) control of the suspension corresponding to an output power curve.).
Marshall discloses a method for automatically tailoring an output power curve of an electric motor to for an electric vehicle for a given rate of conservation of a battery-provided source of power. Lee ’442 teaches an electric vehicle comprising at least one valve, wherein said at least one valve is comprised of at least one switch which controls power flow between a battery and an electric motor. Kurotobi teaches adjusting a suspension of an electric vehicle using an active valve to adjust said suspension to correspond to an output power curve of an electric motor of said electric vehicle.
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 combination of Marshall and Lee ’442 with the feature of: automatically adjusting a damper suspension of said electric vehicle using an active valve to adjust said damper suspension to correspond to said output power curve of said electric motor of said electric vehicle, said automatically adjusting of said suspension of said electric vehicle further based upon operating parameters of said electric vehicle, as taught by Kurotobi, with a reasonable expectation of success because this feature is useful for optimizing operation of an electric bicycle. For instance, based on a given “assist ratio,” control may be optimized such that “driving power is efficiently transmitted to the wheels of the bicycle” or “the electric suspension absorbs shocks applied to the bicycle.” (See at least Kurotobi, ¶ 13.)
The combination of Marshall, Lee ’442, and Kurotobi fails to explicitly disclose: adjusting an active valve damper suspension of said electric vehicle using an active valve to adjust said active valve damper suspension to correspond to said output power curve of said electric motor of said electric vehicle.
Nevertheless, Komatsu teaches: an active valve damper suspension of an electric vehicle which may be adjusted through an active valve (“The valve structure FS3 is configured to change the damping characteristic of the electric suspension FS.” See at least ¶ 79 and FIG. 4.).
Marshall discloses a method for automatically tailoring an output power curve of an electric motor to for an electric vehicle for a given rate of conservation of a battery-provided source of power. Lee ’442 teaches an electric vehicle comprising at least one valve, wherein said at least one valve is comprised of at least one switch which controls power flow between a battery and an electric motor. Kurotobi teaches adjusting a suspension of an electric vehicle using an active valve to adjust said suspension to correspond to an output power curve of an electric motor of said electric vehicle. Komatsu teaches: an active valve damper suspension of an electric vehicle which may be adjusted through an active valve.
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 combination of Marshall, Lee ’442, and Kurotobi with the feature of: an active valve damper suspension of an electric vehicle which may be adjusted through an active valve, as taught by Komatsu, to yield the claim limitation at issue with a reasonable expectation of success because one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that Komatsu’s active valve damper suspension may function as a simple substitution for Kurotobi’s suspension as the two suspensions perform similar functions, especially in regards to damping. The simple substitution would have a reasonable expectation of success because Kurotobi’s control scheme already considers utilizing an active valve (i.e., a controller) to adjust a damper suspension; Komatsu provides the direct teaching that an active valve mechanically adjusts the suspension. Hence, arriving at the claimed invention would require a mere reconfiguring of Kurotobi’s control scheme to control Komatsu’s active valve rather than Kurotobi’s active valve.
The combination of Marshall, Lee ’442, Kurotobi, and Komatsu fails to explicitly disclose:
setting an assist threshold based on a wattage input generated by a user turning a crank on said electric vehicle;
monitoring a wattage input generated by said user turning said crank on said electric vehicle;
determining that said assist threshold has been met during said user turning said crank on said electric vehicle;
utilizing said controller to increase a level of assistance provided by said electric motor when said assist threshold has been met during said user turning said crank, wherein said electric motor provides said level of assistance at a ratio of 100% compared to the amount by which said user exceeds said assist threshold;
determining that said assist threshold is no longer being met during said user turning said crank on said electric vehicle; and
utilizing said controller to decrease said level of assistance provided by said electric motor.
Nevertheless, Tanaka teaches:
setting an assist threshold based on a wattage input generated by a user turning a crank on said electric vehicle (“In the economy mode, the assist ratio is gradually raised with increase of the human power torque until the human power torque reaches a predetermined value, and then, when the human power torque exceeds the predetermined value, the assist ratio is maintained at a constant value.” Col. 3, ll. 39-46 and FIG. 6.);
monitoring a wattage input generated by said user turning said crank on said electric vehicle (“The torque detection section detects the presence of the human driving power, i.e., when the torque detection section detects that the human power torque such as pedaling power … is applied to the driving power applying section such as the pedals of a bicycle.” Col. 3, ll. 51-58 and FIG. 6. Note: One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that watts is the standard unit for measuring power in the context of measuring mechanical power output in cycling applications. Hence, Tanaka necessarily monitors a wattage input in its monitoring of a human power input.)
determining that said assist threshold has been met during said user turning said crank on said electric vehicle (“In the economy mode, the assist ratio is gradually raised with increase of the human power torque until the human power torque reaches a predetermined value, and then, when the human power torque exceeds the predetermined value, the assist ratio is maintained at a constant value.” Col. 3, ll. 39-46 and FIG. 6.);
utilizing said controller to increase a level of assistance provided by said electric motor when said assist threshold has been met during said user turning said crank, wherein said electric motor provides said level of assistance at a ratio of 100% compared to the amount by which said user exceeds said assist threshold (“When the human power torque is larger than the predetermined value, the assist ratio is set to 1 so that only the same magnitude of electric driving power as the human power torque is outputted.” Col. 8, ll. 38-42 and FIG. 6.);
determining that said assist threshold is no longer being met during said user turning said crank on said electric vehicle (“When the torque detection section does not detect the human driving power, i.e, when the torque detection section does not detect that the human power torque such as the pedaling power or push rim rotating power is applied while the driving wheel is rotating,--the motor can be controlled in another desired assist mode (for example, in a mode to reduce the assist ratio to 0).” Col. 3, ll. 58-65 and FIG. 6.); and
utilizing said controller to decrease said level of assistance provided by said electric motor (“When the torque detection section does not detect the human driving power, i.e, when the torque detection section does not detect that the human power torque such as the pedaling power or push rim rotating power is applied while the driving wheel is rotating,--the motor can be controlled in another desired assist mode (for example, in a mode to reduce the assist ratio to 0).” Col. 3, ll. 58-65 and FIG. 6.).
Marshall discloses a method for automatically tailoring an output power curve of an electric motor to for an electric vehicle for a given rate of conservation of a battery-provided source of power. Lee ’442 teaches an electric vehicle comprising at least one valve, wherein said at least one valve is comprised of at least one switch which controls power flow between a battery and an electric motor. Kurotobi teaches adjusting a suspension of an electric vehicle using an active valve to adjust said suspension to correspond to an output power curve of an electric motor of said electric vehicle. Komatsu teaches: an active valve damper suspension of an electric vehicle which may be adjusted through an active valve. Tanaka teaches: increasing or decreasing a level of assistance based on whether a user meets a predefined assist threshold, wherein when the user exceeds the assist threshold, a level of assistance is provided at a ratio of 100%.
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 combination of Marshall, Lee ’442, Kurotobi and Komatsu with the above features taught by Tanaka with a reasonable expectation of success because these features are useful for “provid[ing] suitable assistance power” to a user in the context of electric cycling applications. (See Tanaka, col. 10, ll. 6-30.)
Independent claim 14 is rejected for at least the same reason as claim by virtue of similar subject matter but for minor differences.
As to claims 2 and 15, Marshall discloses wherein said at least one sensor is selected from a group of sensors consisting of: an inclinometer (Inclinometer – see at least ¶ 31.).
As to claim 5, Marshall discloses:
obtaining route information (Route information pertaining to “a travel route having a total ride distance (D)” is obtained – see at least ¶ 26 and FIG. 2.); and
utilizing said controller to evaluate said electric vehicle data, said user-related data, said input from said at least one sensor, and said route information to automatically tailor said output power curve of said electric motor of said electric vehicle for said given rate of conservation of said battery power (“Upon receiving the route destination (P2) and the e-assist objectives of the rider 12, the controller 50 regulates the present operating state of the traction motor 18 by automatically allocating energy from the battery pack 30 to the traction motor 18, i.e., regulating the discharge rate of the battery pack 30 via power flow control actions to energize the traction motor 18 at a particular e-assist level.” – emphasis added; see at least ¶ 27.).
As to claim 8, Marshall discloses:
determining, based on said input received from said sensor, that said electric vehicle is ascending a hill (The presence of “hills” may be determined – see at least ¶ 30. Continuing, the “grade” of a road surface may be obtained through “an inclinometer or other grade sensor” – see at least ¶ 31.); and
utilizing said controller to automatically increase a level of assistance provided by said electric motor (“e-assist or torque boost” is activated “on all hills along a travel route which the e-bike 10 negotiates over a ride time (t).” See at least ¶ 28.).
As to claims 10 and 20, Marshall fails to explicitly disclose utilizing said controller to control a switch between said electric motor and said battery, wherein said switch will allow said controller to control a power output of said electric motor.
Nevertheless, Lee ’442 teaches utilizing said controller to control a switch between said electric motor and said battery, wherein said switch will allow said controller to control a power output of said electric motor (See at least ¶ 6 and FIG. 3. which teach that a battery 10 supplies electricity to a motor 12 via a switch 15.).
Marshall discloses a method for automatically tailoring an output power curve of an electric motor to for an electric vehicle for a given rate of conservation of a battery-provided source of power. Lee ’442 teaches an electric vehicle comprising at least one valve, wherein said at least one valve is comprised of at least one switch which controls power flow between a battery and an electric motor.
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 invention of Marshall to include the feature of: utilizing said controller to control a switch between said electric motor and said battery, wherein said switch will allow said controller to control a power output of said electric motor, as taught by Lee ’442, with a reasonable expectation of success because (i) the utilization of switches to control power flow is well-known and routine in the electric vehicle arts; and (ii) Lee ‘442’s configuration is useful for directing and managing voltage from a battery to a target electronic component (e.g., an electric motor).
As to claim 11, Marshall discloses:
utilizing said controller to evaluate said electric vehicle data, said user-related data, and said input from said at least one sensor, and automatically tailor said output power curve for an electric motor of said electric vehicle for said given rate of conservation of said battery (See at least ¶ 27.).
Marshall fails to explicitly disclose:
utilizing said controller to evaluate said electric vehicle data, said user-related data, and said input from said at least one sensor, and automatically tailor said output power curve for a plurality of electronic motors for said electric vehicle for said given rate of conservation of said battery; and
said controller utilizing a plurality of switches between said plurality of electric motors and said battery to control a power output of one or more of said plurality of said electric motors.
Nevertheless, Lee ’442 teaches:
a plurality of electric motors (Two “motor[s] 46” – see at least ¶ 79 and FIGS. 4, 8.); and
a plurality of switches between said plurality of electric motors and said battery to control a power output of one or more of said plurality of said electric motors (Two “PWM switches 59” are provided for two “motor[s] 46” – see at least ¶ 79 and FIGS. 4, 8.).
Marshall discloses a method for automatically tailoring an output power curve of an electric motor to for an electric vehicle for a given rate of conservation of a battery-provided source of power. Lee ’442 teaches a plurality of switches between a plurality of electric motors and a battery to control a power output of one or more of said plurality of said electric motors.
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 invention of Marshall to include the features of: a plurality of electric motors; and a plurality of switches between said plurality of electric motors and said battery to control a power output of one or more of said plurality of said electric motors, as taught by Lee ’442, with a reasonable expectation of success because switches are useful for directing and managing voltage from a battery to one or more target electronic components (e.g., a plurality of electronic motors). Furthermore, a mere duplication of parts (e.g., duplication of an electronic motor) which does not produce a new and unexpected result is considered obvious. (See MPEP 2144.04(VI.)(B.).)
Claims 3, 4, 16 and 17 are rejected under § 103 as being unpatentable over Marshall in view of Lee ’442, in view of Kurotobi, in view of Komatsu and in view of Tanaka as applied to claim 1 — further in view of Tikhonov (US7489106B1; “Tikhonov”).
As to claims 3 and 16, Marshall discloses wherein said obtaining said electric vehicle data comprises: a size of said electric motor, a size of said battery, and a voltage of said battery (“[P]eak power and speed of the electric traction motor” may be obtained – see at least ¶ 9. “[V]oltage capacity information” of the battery pack 30 may be obtained – see at least ¶ 37. Examiner notes that “size” is a broad term in the art with a BRI that encompasses the power capacity of an electrical component.).
The combination of Marshall, Lee ’442, Kurotobi, Komatsu and Tanaka fails to explicitly disclose wherein said obtaining said electric vehicle data comprises an amperage of said battery.
Nevertheless, Tikhonov teaches wherein said obtaining said electric vehicle data comprises an amperage of said battery (Maximizing battery capacity in battery optimization considers “ampere-hours (AH)” of a battery – see at least col. 1, ll. 19–39).
Marshall discloses a method for automatically tailoring an output power curve of an electric motor to for an electric vehicle for a given rate of conservation of a battery-provided source of power. Lee ’442 teaches an electric vehicle comprising at least one valve, wherein said at least one valve is comprised of at least one switch which controls power flow between a battery and an electric motor. Kurotobi teaches adjusting a suspension of an electric vehicle using an active valve to adjust said suspension to correspond to an output power curve of an electric motor of said electric vehicle. Tanaka teaches: increasing or decreasing a level of assistance based on whether a user meets a predefined assist threshold, wherein when the user exceeds the assist threshold, a level of assistance is provided at a ratio of 100%. Tikhonov teaches wherein said obtaining said electric vehicle data comprises an amperage of said battery.
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 combination of Marshall, Lee ’442, Kurotobi, Komatsu and Tanaka to include the feature of: wherein said obtaining said electric vehicle data comprises an amperage of said battery, as taught by Tikhonov, with a reasonable expectation of success because this feature is useful to consider battery amperage in “battery optimization system[s] … intended for use with electric powered mobile devices such as cars, motorcycles, scooters, bikes.” (Tikhonov, col. 4, ll. 6–18.)
As to claims 4 and 17, Marshall discloses:
monitoring said performance of said battery while said electric vehicle is operating (“[T]he discharge rate of the battery pack 30” is monitored while the electric vehicle is operating – see at least ¶ 27.);
obtaining at least one updated set of data for said battery based on said monitoring (See at least ¶ 27. Examiner notes that the successful operation of the invention requires that the monitoring is continuously performed to provide current (i.e., updated) discharge rates of the battery pack 30.); and
automatically updating said tailored output power curve of said electric motor of said electric vehicle for said given rate of conservation of said battery based on said at least one updated set of data for said battery (“Upon receiving the route destination (P2) and the e-assist objectives of the rider 12, the controller 50 regulates the present operating state of the traction motor 18 by automatically allocating energy from the battery pack 30 to the traction motor 18, i.e., regulating the discharge rate of the battery pack 30 via power flow control actions to energize the traction motor 18 at a particular e-assist level.” Emphasis added; see at least ¶ 27. Continuing, said tailoring of the output power curve may take into consideration a given rate of conservation of a battery-provided source of power to, e.g., end a trip at a desired “remaining state of charge.” See at least ¶¶ 47–48.).
Claim 9 is rejected under § 103 as being unpatentable over Marshall in view of Lee ’442, in view of Kurotobi, in view of Komatsu and in view of Tanaka as applied to claim 1 — further in view of Katsuki et al. (US20190248444A1; “Katsuki”).
As to claim 9, the combination of Marshall, Lee ’442, Kurotobi, Komatsu and Tanaka fails to explicitly disclose:
determining, based on said input received from said sensor, that said electric vehicle is going around a corner and has slowed down while going around said corner; and
utilizing said controller to automatically increase a level of assistance provided by said electric motor as said electric vehicle exits said corner until said electric vehicle has returned to a pre-corner speed.
Nevertheless, Katsuki teaches:
determining, based on said input received from said sensor, that said electric vehicle is going around a corner and has slowed down while going around said corner (“[I]n a case where the turning state of the human-powered vehicle 10 is a state in which the human-powered vehicle 10 is performing cornering, the human-powered vehicle 10 is sufficiently decelerated before entering the curve (corner) of the road, a constant speed is maintained without accelerating or decelerating during cornering, and then the human-powered vehicle 10 is accelerated at a timing exiting the curve (corner). The ideal speed during the cornering based on the operation of such a human-powered vehicle 10 is set as an assist upper limit speed (predetermined speed VA).” See at least ¶ 128.); and
utilizing said controller to automatically increase a level of assistance provided by said electric motor as said electric vehicle exits said corner until said electric vehicle has returned to a pre-corner speed (“[I]n a case where the turning state of the human-powered vehicle 10 is a state in which the human-powered vehicle 10 is performing cornering, the human-powered vehicle 10 is sufficiently decelerated before entering the curve (corner) of the road, a constant speed is maintained without accelerating or decelerating during cornering, and then the human-powered vehicle 10 is accelerated at a timing exiting the curve (corner). The ideal speed during the cornering based on the operation of such a human-powered vehicle 10 is set as an assist upper limit speed (predetermined speed VA).” See at least ¶ 128. “In a case where the vehicle speed V is less than the predetermined speed VA (step S12: YES), the electronic controller 52 controls the motor 36 in correspondence with the acquired human drive force H in step S13.” See at least ¶ 95 and FIG. 3. Furthermore, see at least FIG. 10. which illustrates an embodiment in which a “to that set before being varied [i.e., changed]” after predetermined speed is changed performing turning (e.g., while cornering).).
Marshall discloses a method for automatically tailoring an output power curve of an electric motor to for an electric vehicle for a given rate of conservation of a battery-provided source of power. Lee ’442 teaches an electric vehicle comprising at least one valve, wherein said at least one valve is comprised of at least one switch which controls power flow between a battery and an electric motor. Kurotobi teaches adjusting a suspension of an electric vehicle using an active valve to adjust said suspension to correspond to an output power curve of an electric motor of said electric vehicle. Komatsu teaches: an active valve damper suspension of an electric vehicle which may be adjusted through an active valve. Tanaka teaches: increasing or decreasing a level of assistance based on whether a user meets a predefined assist threshold, wherein when the user exceeds the assist threshold, a level of assistance is provided at a ratio of 100%. Katsuki teaches increasing a level of assistance when an electric vehicle exits a corner and has slowed down to return the electric vehicle to its pre-corner speed.
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 combination of Marshall, Lee ’442, Kurotobi, Komatsu and Tanaka to include the features of: determining, based on said input received from said sensor, that said electric vehicle is going around a corner and has slowed down while going around said corner; and utilizing said controller to automatically increase a level of assistance provided by said electric motor as said electric vehicle exits said corner until said electric vehicle has returned to a pre-corner speed, as taught by Katsuki, with a reasonable expectation of success because these features are useful for enabling an electronic vehicle to return to its pre-corner speed due to a slow down induced by cornering; such is useful for achieving “a predetermined speed suitable for the state of the human-powered vehicle.” (Katsuki, ¶ 14.)
Claim 12 is rejected under § 103 as being unpatentable over Marshall in view of Lee ’442, in view of Kurotobi, in view of Komatsu and in view of Tanaka as applied to claim 1 — further in view of Lee (US20120133310A1; “Lee ’310”).
As to claim 12, Marshall discloses utilizing said controller to evaluate said electric vehicle data, said user-related data, and said input from said at least one sensor, and automatically tailor said output power curve for an electric motor of said electric vehicle for said given rate of conservation of said battery (“Upon receiving the route destination (P2) and the e-assist objectives of the rider 12, the controller 50 regulates the present operating state of the traction motor 18 by automatically allocating energy from the battery pack 30 to the traction motor 18, i.e., regulating the discharge rate of the battery pack 30 via power flow control actions to energize the traction motor 18 at a particular e-assist level.” See at least ¶ 27.).
The combination of Marshall, Lee ’442, Kurotobi, Komatsu, and Tanaka fails to explicitly disclose:
utilizing said controller to evaluate said electric vehicle data, said user-related data, and said input from said at least one sensor, and automatically tailor said output power curve for at least one electronic motor to obtain a best performance for said electric vehicle for said given rate of conservation of a plurality of batteries; and
said controller utilizing a plurality of switches between said at least one electric motor and said plurality of batteries to control a power output of said at least one electric motor.
Nevertheless, Lee ’310 teaches:
a plurality of batteries (A battery 42 and a backup battery 56 are provided – see at least ¶¶ 77–78 and FIG. 5a.); and
a controller utilizing a plurality of switches between said at least one electric motor and said plurality of batteries to control a power output of said at least one electric motor (A “controller 50” may control a “[s]witch 59 … between the motor 46 and the battery 42.” See at least ¶ 77 and FIG. 5A. Additionally, A “backup battery 56” is associated with an “additional switch 55.” See at least ¶ 78 and FIG. 5a. See also FIGS. 5b–8.).
Marshall discloses a method for automatically tailoring an output power curve of an electric motor to for an electric vehicle for a given rate of conservation of a battery-provided source of power. Lee ’442 teaches an electric vehicle comprising at least one valve, wherein said at least one valve is comprised of at least one switch which controls power flow between a battery and an electric motor. Kurotobi teaches adjusting a suspension of an electric vehicle using an active valve to adjust said suspension to correspond to an output power curve of an electric motor of said electric vehicle. Komatsu teaches: an active valve damper suspension of an electric vehicle which may be adjusted through an active valve. Tanaka teaches: increasing or decreasing a level of assistance based on whether a user meets a predefined assist threshold, wherein when the user exceeds the assist threshold, a level of assistance is provided at a ratio of 100%. Lee ’310 teaches a plurality of switches between a plurality of batteries and an electric motor to control a power output of one or more of the electric motor.
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 combination of Marshall, Lee ’442, Kurotobi, Komatsu, and Tanaka to include the features of: a plurality of batteries; and a controller utilizing a plurality of switches between said at least one electric motor and said plurality of batteries to control a power output of said at least one electric motor, as taught by Lee ’310, with a reasonable expectation of success because switches are useful for directing and managing voltage from a plurality of batteries to one or more target electronic components (e.g., an electronic motor). Furthermore, a mere duplication of parts (e.g., duplication of a battery) which does not produce a new and unexpected result is considered obvious. (See MPEP 2144.04(VI.)(B.).)
Claim 13 is rejected under § 103 as being unpatentable over Marshall in view of Lee ’442, in view of Kurotobi, in view of Komatsu and in view of Tanaka as applied to claim 1 — further in view of Nicoson (US20120065825A1; “Nicoson”).
As to claim 13, Marshall discloses:
determining a forward ground speed of said electric vehicle (“Additional input signals … to the controller 50 may include the present speed of the e-bike 10” – see at least ¶ 35.); and
utilizing said controller to automatically adjust a level of assistance provided by said electric motor (See at least ¶ 27.)
The combination of Marshall, Lee ’442, Kurotobi, Komatsu, and Tanaka fails to explicitly disclose:
determining, based on said input received from said sensor, that said electric vehicle is in a freefall condition; and
utilizing said controller to automatically adjust a level of assistance provided by said electric motor such that a drive wheel is rotating at a speed that is equivalent to a rotational speed said drive wheel would be moving if said electric vehicle was moving forward across said ground at said determined forward ground speed.
Nevertheless, Nicoson teaches:
determining, based on said input received from a sensor, that the electric vehicle is in a freefall condition (“[A]n accelerometer … detect[s] when the motorcycle has left the ground.” See at least ¶ 21.); and
utilizing a controller to automatically adjust a level of assistance provided by an electric motor such that a drive wheel is rotating at a speed that is equivalent to a rotational speed said drive wheel would be moving if said electric vehicle was moving forward across said ground at said determined forward ground speed (“The rotational inertia from accelerating a motorcycle's front wheel while airborne can [b]e dangerous for an unfamiliar rider. This invention reduces or eliminates the effect of rotational inertia by using an accelerometer to detect when the motorcycle has left the ground (large vertical acceleration), then maintaining a steady power level to the front wheel motor-generator.” See at least ¶ 21 and FIG. 3. Here, maintaining a steady power level to the front wheel motor-generator causes the front wheel to maintain a steady speed congruent with its forward ground speed as to avoid acceleration of said front wheel.).
Marshall discloses a method for automatically tailoring an output power curve of an electric motor to for an electric vehicle for a given rate of conservation of a battery-provided source of power. Lee ’442 teaches an electric vehicle comprising at least one valve, wherein said at least one valve is comprised of at least one switch which controls power flow between a battery and an electric motor. Kurotobi teaches adjusting a suspension of an electric vehicle using an active valve to adjust said suspension to correspond to an output power curve of an electric motor of said electric vehicle. Komatsu teaches: an active valve damper suspension of an electric vehicle which may be adjusted through an active valve. Tanaka teaches: increasing or decreasing a level of assistance based on whether a user meets a predefined assist threshold, wherein when the user exceeds the assist threshold, a level of assistance is provided at a ratio of 100%. Nicoson teaches determining that an electric vehicle is in a freefall condition and subsequently automatically adjusting a level of assistance provided by an electric motor such that a drive wheel’s velocity remains constant with its hitherto ground speed.
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 combination of Marshall, Lee ’442, Kurotobi, Komatsu and Tanaka to include the features of: determining, based on said input received from a sensor, that the electric vehicle is in a freefall condition; and utilizing a controller to automatically adjust a level of assistance provided by an electric motor such that a drive wheel is rotating at a speed that is equivalent to a rotational speed said drive wheel would be moving if said electric vehicle was moving forward across said ground at said determined forward ground speed, as taught by Nicoson, with a reasonable expectation of success because such is useful for preventing acceleration of an electronic vehicle’s wheel while airborne, which can be dangerous for riders. (See Nicoson, ¶ 21.)
CONCLUSION
Applicant’s amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, this action is 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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the Examiner should be directed to Mario C. Gonzalez whose telephone number is (571) 272-5633. The Examiner can normally be reached M–F, 10:00–6:00 ET.
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, Fadey S. Jabr, can be reached on (571) 272-1516. 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.
/M.C.G./Examiner, Art Unit 3668
/Fadey S. Jabr/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3668