Detailed Action
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
Response to Amendment
This Non-Final Office action is responsive to the request for continued examination filed on June 17, 2025 (hereafter “Response”). The amendments to the claims are acknowledged and have been entered.
Claims 21, 39, and 40 are now amended.
Claims 21–40 are pending in the application, of which claims 22, 29, 30, and 32–35 are withdrawn from consideration.
Response to Arguments
Anticipation by Ghoneim
The rejection of claims 21, 36, and 39–40 under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) as anticipated by U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2007/0032913 A1 (“Ghoneim”) are hereby withdrawn in response to the Applicant’s narrowing of the claim scope in a way that requires elements or functions not expressly disclosed in the reference.
Anticipation by Bellinger
Claims 21, 23–28, 36, and 38–40 stand rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2003/0216847 A1 (“Bellinger”), and now claim 37 joins the rejection in light of the new interpretation made available via the amendment to the independent claims. The Applicant’s arguments have been considered in light of the amendments to the claims, but are unpersuasive, because they do not account for portions of the Bellinger reference that are cited for the first time in this Office Action, as necessitated by the amendment’s change in scope.
Specifically, the rejection involves the MIN block (among other components) described in FIG. 7 of the reference. Unlike the FIG. 3 version of the MIN block 58 argued on page 4 of the Applicant’s remarks, Bellinger’s MIN block 110 depicted in FIG. 7 performs every function now claimed for the mission configuration control for the reasons given in the new ground of rejection below. Additionally, in this ground of rejection, the newly claimed mode control monitor corresponds to the RPM limit calculation block 116, and the claimed system security and diagnostics process corresponds to engine speed governing block 112.
Just as the claim requires, engine speed governing block 112 has feedback paths to both the RPM limit calculation block 116 and the MIN block 110. Engine speed governing block 112’s feedback path to RPM limit calculation block 116 comprises engine speed governing block 112’s sending a copy of its fuel signal traveling to one of PLOAD calculation block 114’s inputs, which then provides the claimed feedback to RPM limit calculation block 116. See Bellinger ¶ 119. And engine speed governing block 112’s feedback path to MIN block 110 comprises engine speed governing block 112’s sending a copy of its fuel signal to the PLOAD calculation block 114, which uses the fuel signal to calculate a PLOAD signal for RPM limit calculation block 116, which uses the PLOAD signal to perform yet another calculation whose result is fed back to MIN block 110 as engine speed limit value ESL. Bellinger ¶¶ 118–119.
For these reasons, and for the additional reasons given in the new ground of rejection below, claims 21, 23–28, 36, and 38–40 stand rejected as anticipated by Bellinger.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 C.F.R. § 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “138” has been used to designate a mission configuration control, mission configuration control process, mission configuration control processor, and mission configuration controller.
The drawings are also objected to as failing to comply with 37 C.F.R. § 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “146” has been used to designate a software component and a software process.
The drawings are also objected to as failing to comply with 37 C.F.R § 1.84(p)(4) for the similar reasons as above, but with respect to part numbers 14, 18, 20, 32, 206, 208, 126, 144—each of which are used to label inconsistently named parts.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 C.F.R. § 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. (An amendment to the specification making each of the component names consistent will also suffice). Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
PNG
media_image1.png
301
592
media_image1.png
Greyscale
The Office objects to claim 39 for having the following informalities. Reference is made to the following portion of the amended claim:
The line introducing the mission controller is missing a connecting word or phrase (e.g., “operative to” or “to”).
The line that starts with “…to establish control information” needs to be updated to reflect that it is now a subordinate clause of “implement a mission controller.”
The Examiner therefore recommends the following change:
implement a mission controller operative to:
receive an operator entered parameter that identifies an operator designated operating mode; and
[[to]] establish control information based upon the designated operating mode, wherein the control information is loaded into two or more vehicle-installed electronic components to coordinate performance characteristics thereof, and to affect operation of the vehicle in the designated operating mode,
implement a mode controller operative to:
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections – 35 U.S.C. § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. § 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. § 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 37 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. § 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which applicant regards as the invention.
As a reminder, claim 37 includes all of the text of its parent claim 21 by reference, and therefore, claim 37 recites a vehicle control system comprising both a “system security and diagnostics processor” and a “system security and diagnostics process” (incorporated from claim 21 by reference). The presence of these two components together in the same claim raises several questions about the scope of claim 37, and certain inconsistencies in the Specification regarding this/these component(s) further obfuscate the scope of the claim.
Specifically, it is unclear whether the system security and diagnostics processor and the system security and diagnostics process are intended to refer to the same component, or to two entirely distinct components, or to a hierarchy of components (e.g., where the system security and diagnostics processor is a circuit that executes the system security and diagnostics process).
Furthermore, if they do refer to the same component (or to a hierarchy of components), the scope of that same component is unclear, because the functionality recited for this component in claim 21 is narrower than the functionality recited in claim 37. That is, dependent claim 37 recites a broad category of functionality performed by the system security and diagnostics processor (it “verifies that a specific configuration requested by or required by a select one of the vehicle-installed electronic components is authorized and configured to execute properly within the vehicle control system”), while the parent claim 21 already recites a narrower specific example of that functionality (supplying feedback to a select one of the mission configuration control and the mode control monitor to change the dynamically modified control information where expected vehicle operation in view of the dynamically modified control information falls outside of predetermined operating characteristics).
The specification exacerbates this problem by using inconsistent terminology for this component: paragraphs 138–140 refer to it as a “process,” paragraph 142 refers to a “processor,” paragraph 144 doesn’t use any term at all (“system security and diagnostics 144”), and then paragraph 167 switches back to “processor.” On the other hand, the specification uses the same reference numeral 144 for all three versions, raising further questions about the correspondence between the different versions of that component in the claims to the different versions of the same/similar component in the specification. “A claim, although clear on its face, may also be indefinite when a conflict or inconsistency between the claimed subject matter and the specification disclosure renders the scope of the claim uncertain as inconsistency with the specification disclosure.” MPEP § 2173.03. Accordingly, claim 37 is indefinite.
Claim Rejections – 35 U.S.C. § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. § 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
…
(b) the invention was patented or described in a printed publication in this or a foreign country or in public use or on sale in this country, more than one year prior to the date of application for patent in the United States.
Claims 21, 23–28, and 36–40 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2003/0216847 A1 (“Bellinger”).
Claim 21
Bellinger discloses:
A vehicle control system, comprising:
“Referring now to FIG. 2, one preferred embodiment of a system 25 for controlling engine operation, in accordance with the present invention, is shown.” Bellinger ¶ 96.
This rejection will also make reference system 200, which includes all of the same components as system 25, but also includes additional components and detail. See Bellinger ¶ 131 and FIG. 12. The rejection makes reference to both systems because system 200 omits repeating its discussion of several elements from system 25 that are common to both systems.
For reasons that will be discussed herein, claim 21 is anticipated by either embodiment.
a vehicle interface that enables communication with vehicle-installed electronic components of a vehicle; and a vehicle system supervisor that communicates with the vehicle-installed electronic components via the vehicle interface to implement a customized vehicle configuration,
“Central to system 25 is a control computer 20 which interfaces with various engine and/or vehicle components as will be discussed more fully hereinafter. Control computer 20 is preferably microprocessor-based and includes at least a memory portion 42, digital I/O and a number of analog-to-digital (A/D) inputs.” Bellinger ¶ 96. The claimed vehicle system supervisor corresponds to the Bellinger’s control computer 20, while the claimed interface corresponds to its digital I/O and a number of analog-to-digital (A/D) inputs.
the vehicle system supervisor programmed to:
“The microprocessor portion of control computer 20 runs software routines and manages the overall operation of system 25.” Bellinger ¶ 96. Some of those routines are illustrated as various modules internal to the computer 20 in FIG. 7, Bellinger ¶ 118, which will now be discussed.
implement a mission configuration control operative to:
As shown in FIG. 7, the control computer 20 implements a “MIN block 110.” Bellinger ¶ 118.
receive an operator entered parameter that identifies an operator designated operating mode; and
MIN block 110 receives, via one of its inputs, a “requested engine speed value REQ,” which is based on “requested torque signal from accelerator pedal sensor 36.” Bellinger ¶ 118. Additionally, in more complex embodiments that fully encompass the functionality of control computer 20, these signals may be indicative of an operator-requested cruise control mode. For example, a cruise control system 226 may be electrically connected to an input of the control computer, Bellinger ¶ 142, and those signals are “indicative of driver requested road speed,” see Bellinger ¶ 41, including modes for “cruise on/off, set/coast, resume/accelerate, and the like.” Bellinger ¶ 142.
generate control information associated with the designated operating mode to control two or more vehicle-installed electronic components to coordinate performance characteristics thereof, and to affect operation of the vehicle according to the designated operating mode;
MIN block “produces a reference engine speed value REF at an output thereof.” Bellinger ¶ 118. “The engine speed reference value REF is provided to a known engine speed governing block 112 which is responsive to REF and the engine speed signal on signal path 28 to produce the commanded fuel signal on signal path 46.” Bellinger ¶ 119.
“Fueling system 44 is responsive to fueling signals (e.g. commanded fuel) provided by control computer 20 on signal path 46 to supply fuel to engine 22.” Bellinger ¶ 101. The engine 22 “is operatively connected to a main transmission 24 as is known in the art. A propeller shaft, or tailshaft, 30 extends from transmission 24, whereby transmission 24 is operable to rotatably actuate propeller shaft 30 and thereby provide driving power to one or more vehicle wheels via a drive axle (not shown) as is known in the art.” Bellinger ¶ 97.
Hence, the signal provided along line 46 is operative to control fuel system 44 (by commanding more fuel), engine 22 (by causing the engine to operate under more or less fuel responsive to the controlled fuel system 44), and transmission 24 (which necessarily responds at least mechanically to the increased or decreased torque provided by engine 22). Note that even in this embodiment, the engine falls within the scope of “electronic” because it has an engine speed sensor 26. The FIG. 2 embodiment of control computer 20 thus controls two or more vehicle-installed electronic components to coordinate performance characteristics thereof using signal 46, which is all that claim 21 currently requires.
That said, even if claim 21 were narrowly construed to require independent signals controlling the two or more vehicle-installed electronic components independently, such a narrow interpretation would still read on the more complex embodiment of Bellinger’s system (FIG. 12). Specifically, in the more complex version of system 25 (illustrated as 200 in FIG. 12), the control computer follows a more detailed algorithm 300 that “is operable to limit engine speed such that engine operation is maintained” on various boundary conditions, Bellinger ¶ 158, and for controlling transmission control module 242 to shift between a plurality of selectable gear ratios as needed, Bellinger ¶ 163, according to the current conditions.
implement a mode control monitor operative to:
Control computer 20 also implements an “RPM limit calculation block 116.” Bellinger ¶ 120.
detect a change in an operating condition; and
As shown in FIG. 7, RPM limit calculation block 116 obtains information about changes in the vehicle’s operating conditions via “the PLOAD value produced by block 114, the vehicle speed signal on signal path 33 and the disable signal produced by block 62.” Bellinger ¶ 120.
generate dynamically modified control information based upon the detected change in the operating condition;
RPM limit calculation block 116 “is preferably responsive to” those three signals, “to produce an engine speed limit value ESL.” Bellinger ¶ 120.
implement a system security and diagnostics process
Finally, control computer 20 also implements an “engine speed governing block 112.” Bellinger ¶ 119.
with feedback paths to the mode control monitor
Engine speed governing block 112’s feedback path to RPM limit calculation block 116 comprises engine speed governing block 112’s sending a copy of its fuel signal traveling to one of PLOAD calculation block 114’s inputs, which then provides the claimed feedback to RPM limit calculation block 116. See Bellinger ¶ 119.
and the mission configuration control,
Likewise, engine speed governing block 112’s feedback path to MIN block 110 comprises engine speed governing block 112’s sending a copy of its fuel signal to the PLOAD calculation block 114, which uses the fuel signal to calculate a PLOAD signal for RPM limit calculation block 116, which uses the PLOAD signal to perform yet another calculation whose result is fed back to MIN block 110 as engine speed limit value ESL. Bellinger ¶¶ 118–119.
supply feedback to a select one of the mission configuration control and the mode control monitor to change the dynamically modified control information where expected vehicle operation in view of the dynamically modified control information falls outside of predetermined operating characteristics, wherein the change to the dynamically modified control information is configured to bring the expected vehicle operation within the predetermined operating characteristics; and
“MIN block 110 is responsive to the GL, REQ and ESL values to provided the minimum thereof as the engine speed reference value REF provided to the engine speed governor block 112, wherein block 112 is operable to . . . control engine fueling based on the minimum of the GL, REQ and ESL values.” Bellinger ¶ 120.
load the modified control information into at least one of the two or more vehicle-installed electronic components to change the operation thereof, while maintaining operation of the vehicle according to the designated operating mode.
Block 112 is operable to control the engine fueling because “provide[s] the commanded fuel value” to the fuel system, as requested by the user—hence loading the modified control information into at least one electronic component to change its operation, while maintaining operation of the vehicle according to the driver’s request to accelerate. Bellinger ¶ 120.
Additionally, in the more complex embodiments, the control computer 200 modifies engine performance according, e.g., to horsepower boundary curves, and does so “without interrupting vehicle operation.” Bellinger ¶ 153.
Claim 23
Bellinger discloses the vehicle control system of claim 21, wherein:
the designated operating mode comprises over the road driving;
Several of the values that control computer 202 considers and controls involve the vehicle’s travel of a road surface in particular. See, e.g., Bellinger ¶¶ 26, 113, and 122 (each describing different measurements and responses to road surface grade) and ¶ 276 (control computer 202 sensing a condition “indicative of, for example, the vehicle traversing a curve in the road that is perceptively less than a right angle yet great enough to warrant speed reduction for safety purposes”).
a select one of the two or more vehicle-installed electronic components comprise an electronic vehicle subsystem controlling a vehicle powertrain;
“In accordance with the present invention, a number of engine load/engine speed (load/speed) boundaries are defined in relation to curve 262 to form a region ‘U’ of undesirable engine operation, whereby control computer 202 is operable to control the operation of engine 206, particularly while upshifting through at least some of the gear ratios of transmission 208, to thereby maintain or encourage engine operation outside of the undesirable engine operation region U.” Bellinger ¶ 146.
the operating condition is sensed by a GPS system coupled to the controller designating a change in grade;
“The control computer 202 may alternatively or additionally utilize one or more other sensors or systems included within system 200' to determine, or assist in determining, the road grade values. For example, in embodiments of system 200' including GPS receiver 250, the GPS information may be used by computer 202 to determine known road grade values associated with discernable geographical locations of the vehicle carrying engine 206.” Bellinger ¶ 253; see also Bellinger ¶¶ 153 and 168.
the modified control information is loaded into the electronic vehicle subsystem controlling the vehicle powertrain to adjust torque.
“[A]lgorithm execution continues from step 372 at step 374 where control computer 202 is operable to determine boundaries B1 and B2, and optionally B3, as a function of current vehicle position. In one embodiment, control computer 202 is operable to execute step 374 by comparing current vehicle position to geographical position data stored in memory, and defining boundaries B1 and B2, and optionally B3, as a function thereof.” Bellinger ¶ 153. The boundaries B1–B3 refer to boundaries set for the horsepower curve 262 of the engine (e.g., FIG. 13), although “such a control strategy may alternatively be used to control the operation of engine 206 in relation to an engine output torque vs. engine speed curve, wherein engine output torque is related to engine output horsepower as is well known in the art.” Bellinger ¶ 146.
Claim 24
Bellinger discloses the vehicle control system of claim 23,
wherein the modified control information is loaded when the GPS system detects that the vehicle is approaching the change in grade.
Claim 24 requires the modified control information to be loaded when the vehicle is “approaching” the change in grade (as opposed to loading it upon arrival at the grade), but neither claim 24 nor the rest of the specification specify a minimum or maximum amount of distance between the current location of the vehicle and the change in grade. To that end, in addition to or instead of directly modifying B1 and B2 as a dynamic function of road grade, Bellinger discloses that process box 370 may “modify the location and shape of the undesirable engine operation region U relative to the horsepower curve 262 depending upon . . . the topography of the region (e.g., flat vs. hilly terrain) in which the vehicle is traveling.” Bellinger ¶ 153. In other words, rather than waiting until reaching a particular grade to implement the new boundaries, control computer 202 may instead preemptively change the engine operation strategy simply because the vehicle has entered a region where it is expected the vehicle will encounter changes in grade or hills to climb.
Claim 25
Bellinger discloses the vehicle control system of claim 23,
wherein the modified control information is loaded when the GPS system detects that the vehicle is approaching a hill that the vehicle must climb.
Claim 25 requires the modified control information to be loaded when the vehicle is “approaching” the change in grade (as opposed to loading it upon arrival at the grade), but neither claim 25 nor the rest of the specification specify a minimum or maximum amount of distance between the current location of the vehicle and the change in grade. To that end, in addition to or instead of directly modifying B1 and B2 as a dynamic function of road grade, Bellinger further discloses that process box 370 may “modify the location and shape of the undesirable engine operation region U relative to the horsepower curve 262 depending upon . . . the topography of the region (e.g., flat vs. hilly terrain) in which the vehicle is traveling.” Bellinger ¶ 153. In other words, rather than waiting until reaching a particular grade to implement the new boundaries, control computer 202 may instead preemptively change the engine operation strategy simply because the vehicle has entered a region where it is expected the vehicle will encounter changes in grade or hills to climb.
Claim 26
Bellinger discloses the vehicle control system of claim 21, wherein:
the designated operating mode comprises over the road driving;
Several of the values that control computer 202 considers and controls involve the vehicle’s travel of a road surface in particular. See, e.g., Bellinger ¶¶ 26, 113, and 122 (each describing different measurements and responses to road surface grade) and ¶ 276 (control computer 202 sensing a condition “indicative of, for example, the vehicle traversing a curve in the road that is perceptively less than a right angle yet great enough to warrant speed reduction for safety purposes”).
a select one of the two or more vehicle-installed electronic components comprise an electronic vehicle subsystem controlling a vehicle powertrain;
“In accordance with the present invention, a number of engine load/engine speed (load/speed) boundaries are defined in relation to curve 262 to form a region ‘U’ of undesirable engine operation, whereby control computer 202 is operable to control the operation of engine 206, particularly while upshifting through at least some of the gear ratios of transmission 208, to thereby maintain or encourage engine operation outside of the undesirable engine operation region U.” Bellinger ¶ 146.
the operating condition is sensed by a GPS system coupled to the controller designating a change in grade;
“The control computer 202 may alternatively or additionally utilize one or more other sensors or systems included within system 200' to determine, or assist in determining, the road grade values. For example, in embodiments of system 200' including GPS receiver 250, the GPS information may be used by computer 202 to determine known road grade values associated with discernable geographical locations of the vehicle carrying engine 206.” Bellinger ¶ 253; see also Bellinger ¶¶ 153 and 168.
the modified control information is loaded into the electronic vehicle subsystem controlling the vehicle powertrain to adjust energy consumption.
“[A]lgorithm execution continues from step 372 at step 374 where control computer 202 is operable to determine boundaries B1 and B2, and optionally B3, as a function of current vehicle position. In one embodiment, control computer 202 is operable to execute step 374 by comparing current vehicle position to geographical position data stored in memory, and defining boundaries B1 and B2, and optionally B3, as a function thereof.” Bellinger ¶ 153. The boundaries B1–B3 refer to boundaries set for the horsepower curve 262 of the engine (e.g., FIG. 13), “and by using a control strategy of the type just described, the operation of engine 206, in relation to engine output horsepower curve 262, may be optimized to thereby achieve fuel efficiency goals.” Bellinger ¶ 146.
Claim 27
Bellinger discloses the vehicle control system of claim 26,
wherein the modified control information is loaded when the GPS system detects that the vehicle is approaching the change in grade.
Claim 27 requires the modified control information to be loaded when the vehicle is “approaching” the change in grade (as opposed to loading it upon arrival at the grade), but neither claim 27 nor the rest of the specification specify a minimum or maximum amount of distance between the current location of the vehicle and the change in grade. To that end, in addition to or instead of directly modifying B1 and B2 as a dynamic function of road grade, Bellinger discloses that process box 370 may “modify the location and shape of the undesirable engine operation region U relative to the horsepower curve 262 depending upon . . . the topography of the region (e.g., flat vs. hilly terrain) in which the vehicle is traveling.” Bellinger ¶ 153. In other words, rather than waiting until reaching a particular grade to implement the new boundaries, control computer 202 may instead preemptively change the engine operation strategy simply because the vehicle has entered a region where it is expected the vehicle will encounter changes in grade or hills to climb.
Claim 28
Bellinger discloses the vehicle control system of claim 26,
wherein the modified control information is loaded when the GPS system detects that the vehicle is approaching a hill that the vehicle must climb.
Claim 28 requires the modified control information to be loaded when the vehicle is “approaching” the change in grade (as opposed to loading it upon arrival at the grade), but neither claim 28 nor the rest of the specification specify a minimum or maximum amount of distance between the current location of the vehicle and the change in grade. To that end, in addition to or instead of directly modifying B1 and B2 as a dynamic function of road grade, Bellinger discloses that process box 370 may “modify the location and shape of the undesirable engine operation region U relative to the horsepower curve 262 depending upon . . . the topography of the region (e.g., flat vs. hilly terrain) in which the vehicle is traveling.” Bellinger ¶ 153. In other words, rather than waiting until reaching a particular grade to implement the new boundaries, control computer 202 may instead preemptively change the engine operation strategy simply because the vehicle has entered a region where it is expected the vehicle will encounter changes in grade or hills to climb.
Claim 36
Bellinger discloses the vehicle control system of claim 21, wherein the operating condition comprises at least one of
a sensed environmental condition,
“System 200' may further include a road grade sensor 241 suitably attached to or otherwise arranged relative to, a vehicle carrying the engine 206, and electrically connected to an input IN10 of control computer 202 via signal path 243. In one embodiment, sensor 241 may be or include an inclinometer of known construction and operable to produce a road grade signal on signal path 243 indicative of the grade, relative to horizontal or other suitable reference, of the road being traversed by the vehicle carrying engine 206.” Bellinger ¶ 253.
an inferred environmental condition,
“In embodiments of system 200' wherein sensor 241 is an ambient pressure sensor, control computer 202 is operable to determine the road grade values by continually monitoring the rate of change of the ambient air pressure signal, and computing the road grade values as a function of the rate of change of the ambient air pressure signal over a measured distance traveled by the vehicle carrying engine 206. The control computer 202 may alternatively or additionally utilize one or more other sensors or systems included within system 200' to determine, or assist in determining, the road grade values. For example, in embodiments of system 200' including GPS receiver 250, the GPS information may be used by computer 202 to determine known road grade values associated with discernable geographical locations of the vehicle carrying engine 206.” Bellinger ¶ 253.
It should be understood that both of these examples fall within the scope of “inferred environmental condition” because they are inferring the environmental condition of grade by measuring proxies for grade, such as altitude or location combined with a table of known grades per location.
a sensed vehicle operating condition,
“A number of sensors and actuators permit control computer 202 to interface with some of the various components of system 200 as well as other vehicle and/or engine systems. For example, engine 206 includes an engine speed sensor 218, which is electrically connected to input IN3 of control computer 202 via signal path 220.” Bellinger ¶ 133. Similarly, “vehicle speed sensor 230 is preferably positioned about propeller shaft 210 adjacent to transmission 208, and is electrically connected in input IN4 of control computer 202 via signal path 232.” Bellinger ¶ 134.
Bellinger also discloses several other examples of directly-sensed vehicle operating conditions, and it not limited to those quoted for this rejection.
an inferred vehicle operating condition,
“[C]ontrol computer 202 is operable to determine an engine acceleration value (FA) preferably as a function of engine speed (ES) in accordance with well-known equations.” Bellinger ¶ 171.
and a measured vehicle performance characteristic.
“[C]ontrol computer 202 is operable to determine current engine output conditions (EOC).” Bellinger ¶ 156.
Claim 37
Bellinger discloses the vehicle control system of claim 21 further comprising
a system security and diagnostics processor that verifies that a specific configuration requested by or required by a select one of the vehicle-installed electronic components is authorized and configured to execute properly within the vehicle control system.
“MIN block 110 is responsive to the GL, REQ and ESL values to provided the minimum thereof as the engine speed reference value REF provided to the engine speed governor block 112, wherein block 112 is operable to . . . control engine fueling based on the minimum of the GL, REQ and ESL values.” Bellinger ¶ 120.
Claim 38
Bellinger discloses the vehicle control system of claim 21, wherein the system further comprises:
a two-way communication device communicably coupled to the system controller,
“System 200 further optionally includes a signal transceiver 254 that is electrically connected to an input/output port I/04 of control computer 202 via signal path 256 (shown in phantom), wherein signal path 256 may include any number of signal conduction paths.” Bellinger ¶ 141.
and the system controller is further programmed to: receive via the two-way communication device, from a data center, a set of travel related services that are specific to an individual, where the set of travel related services include trip information for a trip and are received into the control system;
During step 304 of algorithm 300 (FIG. 14), the control computer executes algorithm 350 (FIG. 15) to determine boundary conditions for the vehicle, and, as part of algorithm 350 “control computer may be operable at step 374 to transmit via signal transceiver 254 the current vehicle position to a remote computer, whereby the remote computer is operable to make appropriate boundary determinations based thereon and transmit either boundary information, or other information from which such boundary information can be determined, back to control computer 202 via signal transceiver 254.” Bellinger ¶ 153.
The boundary information falls within the scope of a set of travel related services that are “specific to an individual” because the boundary information is based on this particular vehicle’s position. The data in the boundary information includes “trip information for a trip” within the meaning of the claim language because the information controls the operation of the vehicle’s engine, which propels the vehicle along the trip.
communicate with the vehicle-installed electronic components to identify operational characteristics of the vehicle based upon the loaded set of travel related services and at least one vehicle sensor; and
Returning back to algorithm 300 (FIG. 14), having used learned the appropriate boundary conditions from the remote computer, “algorithm 300 advances from step 304 to step 306 where control computer 202 is operable to determine current engine output conditions (EOC). The purpose of step 306 is to determine sufficient engine operating conditions that will allow for subsequent determination of current engine operating conditions relative to the undesirable engine operating region U; i.e., whether the engine is currently operating inside, outside or on a border, of region U.” Bellinger ¶ 156.
periodically perform an operation to modify at least one vehicle subsystem in response to receiving the personalized information, while the vehicle is active during the trip.
Having determined the current engine output conditions relative to the boundary conditions, execution eventually advances to step 314, where “control computer 202 is operable to execute an engine control routine (EC), in accordance with the present invention, to thereby maintain or encourage engine operation in regions under, and on, the horsepower curve 262 that are outside of the undesirable engine operation region U.” Bellinger ¶ 158.
With respect to the “periodically” requirement, FIG. 14 illustrates that “control computer 202 is operable to determine whether any new or updated load/speed boundary information is available,” and, “[i]f such new or updated load/speed data is available, algorithm execution loops back to step 304. Otherwise, algorithm execution loops back to step 306.” Bellinger ¶ 178. As a loop, all operations are necessarily performed periodically.
Claim 39
Claim 39 is patentably indistinct from claim 21, except that some of the components are renamed, and claim 39 further recites a function that was inherent to claim 21, namely “communicate dynamically modified control information based upon the designated operating mode and the detected change in the operating condition, via the vehicle interface.”
For each of the elements identified as patentably indistinct from claim 21, the Examiner hereby incorporates the findings from Bellinger that were mapped to those elements in the rejection of claim 21.
To the extent claim 39 further recites “communicate dynamically modified control information based upon the designated operating mode and the detected change in the operating condition, via the vehicle interface,” Bellinger further discloses directly modifying the engine speed boundaries B1–B3, Bellinger ¶ 153, and/or activating a “grade indicator feature,” e.g., “in geographical regions wherein road grade changes are prevalent.” Bellinger ¶ 168.
Claim 40
Claim 40 is directed to the same method that the system of claim 21 performs during the course of its normal operation, and is therefore rejected according to all of the same findings and rationale as provided above for claim 21. “Under the principles of inherency, if a prior art device, in its normal and usual operation, would necessarily perform the method claimed, then the method claimed will be considered to be anticipated by the prior art device.” MPEP § 2112.02.
Claim Rejections – 35 U.S.C. § 103
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim 31 is rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over Bellinger as applied to claim 21 above, and further in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2005/0010350 A1 (“Hiwatashi”).
Claim 31
Bellinger teaches the vehicle control system of claim 21, wherein:
the designated operating mode comprises over the road driving;
Several of the values that control computer 202 considers and controls involve the vehicle’s travel of a road surface in particular. See, e.g., Bellinger ¶¶ 26, 113, and 122 (each describing different measurements and responses to road surface grade) and ¶ 276 (control computer 202 sensing a condition “indicative of, for example, the vehicle traversing a curve in the road that is perceptively less than a right angle yet great enough to warrant speed reduction for safety purposes”).
a select one of the two or more vehicle-installed electronic components comprise a vehicle dynamics controller;
The vehicle includes a controllable transmission 208 whose torque performance is adjusted by the control computer’s 202 commands. See Bellinger ¶ 146. The transmission 208 (and/or any other part of the powertrain) falls within the scope of vehicle dynamics controller because acceleration is a component of vehicle dynamics, according to its customary meaning in the art.
the operating condition comprises an alarm transmitted by a
“The control computer 202 may alternatively or additionally utilize one or more other sensors or systems included within system 200' to determine, or assist in determining, the road grade values. For example, in embodiments of system 200' including GPS receiver 250, the GPS information may be used by computer 202 to determine known road grade values associated with discernable geographical locations of the vehicle carrying engine 206.” Bellinger ¶ 253; see also Bellinger ¶¶ 153 and 168.
and the modified control information is loaded into the vehicle dynamics controller to compensate for possible
“[A]lgorithm execution continues from step 372 at step 374 where control computer 202 is operable to determine boundaries B1 and B2, and optionally B3, as a function of current vehicle position. In one embodiment, control computer 202 is operable to execute step 374 by comparing current vehicle position to geographical position data stored in memory, and defining boundaries B1 and B2, and optionally B3, as a function thereof.” Bellinger ¶ 153. The boundaries B1–B3 refer to boundaries set for the horsepower curve 262 of the engine (e.g., FIG. 13), “and by using a control strategy of the type just described, the operation of engine 206, in relation to engine output horsepower curve 262, may be optimized to thereby achieve fuel efficiency goals.” Bellinger ¶ 146.
In view of the foregoing, the only differences between Bellinger and the invention of claim 31 is that Bellinger’s vehicle does not receive information from roadside transmitter, and the information it receives is not necessarily related to icy conditions.
Hiwatashi, however, teaches a vehicle control system 10 with a control unit 20 that detects
the operating condition comprises an alarm transmitted by a roadside transmitter and received by the controller,
As shown in FIGS. 1 and 2, a road-surface μ estimating device 1 (the claimed controller) within vehicle C receives a short-range radio signal transmitted by road-side infrastructure 20. Hiwatashi ¶¶ 17–19.
the alarm informing the controller of potential icy road conditions;
The information transmitted by the road-side infrastructure 20 includes “road-surface information” for a “target section” of road, describing “five stages of dry, wet, water film, snow and ice.” Hiwatashi ¶ 20.
and the modified control information is loaded into the vehicle dynamics controller
The μ estimating unit 12 uses the information it received from the road-side infrastructure to calculate an “estimation value E as the road surface μ (a present value) corresponding to the present road-surface condition, and outputs this value to a driving-force-distribution controlling unit 13.” Hiwatashi ¶ 30.
to compensate for possible slippery conditions.
“The driving-force-distribution controlling unit 13 determines a clamping torque of a transfer clutch 14 formed between two output parts of a center differential device (not shown) based on the road surface μ.” Hiwatashi ¶ 30.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the claimed invention to supplement and/or substitute the information used by Bellinger’s vehicle with the road surface conditions provided by Hiwatashi’s road-side infrastructure 20. One would have been motivated to supplement or substitute Bellinger’s data with Hiwatashi’s road-side infrastructure information, because such information enhances the precision with which the vehicle can estimate road conditions. See Hiwatashi ¶ 7.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Justin R. Blaufeld whose telephone number is (571)272-4372. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00am - 4:00pm 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, James K Trujillo can be reached at (571) 272-3677. 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.
Justin R. Blaufeld
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2151
/Justin R. Blaufeld/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2151