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
Claims 1-11, 13 were previously cancelled.
Claims 12 and 21 are amended.
Claims 12 and 14- 26 are pending.
Response to Arguments/Remarks
Claim Rejections - 35 U.S.C. § 103
Applicant argues: “The Examiner bears the initial burden of establishing a prima facie case of obviousness.“
Examiner respectively disagrees. Obviousness is a question of law based on underlying factual inquiries. The factual inquiries enunciated by the Court are as follows:
(A) Determining the scope and content of the prior art;
(B) Ascertaining the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art; and
(C) Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
The Examiner has use analogous Art and they clearly show obviousness as indicated above.
Applicant further argues:
The Art of record does not disclose/teach very specific features in the limitations.
Examiner respectfully disagrees, the claims have been examined and rejected under the concept of Broadest reasonable Interpretation of the claims. Note that under a broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI), words of the claim must be given their plain meaning, unless such meaning is inconsistent with the specification. The plain meaning of a term means the ordinary and customary meaning given to the term by those of ordinary skill in the art at the relevant time. The ordinary and customary meaning of a term may be evidenced by a variety of sources, including the words of the claims themselves, the specification, drawings, and prior art. However, the best source for determining the meaning of a claim term is the specification - the greatest clarity is obtained when the specification serves as a glossary for the claim terms. The words of the claim must be given their plain meaning unless the plain meaning is inconsistent with the specification. 2111.01 (I). See also In re Marosi, 710 F.2d 799, 802, 218 USPQ 289, 292 (Fed. Cir. 1983) ("'[C]laims are not to be read in a vacuum, and limitations therein are to be interpreted in light of the specification in giving them their ‘broadest reasonable interpretation.'"2111.01 (II)
With respect to the interpretation of claim terms, MPEP 2111 states:
The Patent and Trademark Office ("PTO") determines the scope of claims in patent applications not solely on the basis of the claim language, but upon giving claims their broadest reasonable construction "in light of the specification as it would be interpreted by one of ordinary skill in the art." In re Am. Acad. of Sci. Tech. Ctr., 367 F.3d 1359, 1364[, 70 USPQ2d 1827, 1830] (Fed. Cir. 2004). Indeed, the rules of the PTO require that application claims must "conform to the invention as set forth in the remainder of the specification and the terms and phrases used in the claims must find clear support or antecedent basis in the description so that the meaning of the terms in the claims may be ascertainable by reference to the description." 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1).
The words of the claim must be given their plain meaning unless the plain meaning is inconsistent with the specification In re Zletz, 893 F.2d 319, 13 USPQ2d 1320 (Fed. Cir. 1989).
"Though understanding the claim language may be aided by explanations contained in the written description, it is important not to import into a claim limitations that are not part of the claim. For example, a particular embodiment appearing in the written description may not be read into a claim when the claim language is broader than the embodiment." Superguide Corp. v. DirecTV Enterprises, Inc., 358 F.3d 870, 875, 69 USPQ2d 1865, 1868 (Fed. Cir. 2004).(see MPEP 2111.01).
During patent examination, the pending claims must be "given their broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the specification." The broadest reasonable interpretation does not mean the broadest possible interpretation. Rather, the meaning given to a claim term must be consistent with the ordinary and customary meaning of the term (unless the term has been given a special definition in the specification), and must be consistent with the use of the claim term in the specification and drawings. Further, the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claims must be consistent with the interpretation that those skilled in the art would reach. In re Cortright, 165 F.3d 1353, 1359, 49 USPQ2d 1464, 1468 (Fed. Cir. 1999) (see PMEP 2111).
Accordingly, the claims herein will be interpreted in accordance with the MPEP 2111.
Applicant further argues that Stanek “ nowhere apparent where Stanek discloses anything other than an actual recognition stage. The cited portions from Stanek explicitly refer to the use of "real-time data," captured "during the normal operation of the vehicle." While Stanek discloses analysis of vehicle vibration at one or more "target frequency bands" that are pre-calculated by reference to a model during normal operation, this is objectively distinguishable from a process for constructing such a model for associating a standard deviation of a vertical acceleration acquired during performed tests in relation to irregularities on a road pavement.” Examiner respectfully disagrees, Saneck teaches in ¶ 0080 (“Various embodiments of the present disclosure contemplate, for example, systems comprising a controller, such as, for example, a controller 26 that is operatively associated with a plurality of vehicle sensors that may produce signals indicative of a vibration of the vehicle 10, wherein the controller 26 is configured to determine whether or not a sensed vibration falls into a target frequency range (i.e., a target frequency band) that is indicative of a vehicle component (e.g., tire/wheel, driveline, or engine) or location. Various additional embodiments of the present disclosure contemplate that the controller 26 is further configured to test and/or confirm the initial correlation between the vehicle component or location and the sensed vehicle vibration. In this manner, as will be described further below, the controller 26 (running the diagnostic) can be used to rule out known vibration sources (i.e., faults). For example, if the conditions surrounding the vibration are not consistent with those required for a known fault (e.g., tire/wheel, driveline, or engine), that source of fault must be ruled out. This approach to eliminating (or confirming) the most common and known sources of concerns may save diagnostic time and reduce come-backs (customers returning for additional service) by directing efforts past components that have already been eliminated. And, if all available tests for known faults have been eliminated without finding the root cause, the technician can then be directed to revert to traditional diagnostic techniques to further explore a customer complaint (but without spending additional time diagnosing the already eliminated sources).”). And in Claim 22 states “ The system of claim 16, wherein the controller is configured to extract a vibration signature based on at least one of a model based calculation, a frequency based calculation, and a statistics based calculation” which is doing a similar action to your limitations taken in their Broadest Reasonable Interpretation.
Applicant further argues that “Wagner is specifically cited by the Office as disclosing "a minimum filtering threshold of the high-pass filter is less than or equal to 0.1 Hz." However, the cited portion in Wagner appears to disclose high-pass filtering which "causes the useful part of the signal, which is typically in the range of between 0 to 5Hz, to be removed." As best understood by Applicant, a minimum filtering threshold of 0 Hz for a high-pass filter would not be a high-pass filter at all, as all signals would effectively pass the filter, and Wagner appears to actually be disclosing a cut-off threshold for the high-pass filter of about 5 Hz. Accordingly, Wagner does not appear to teach or reasonably suggest a high-pass filtering threshold of less than or equal to 0.1 Hz.” Wagner in ¶ 0019 also indicated that in some cases the “determined vertical acceleration can also be used in an analogous manner to determine the road condition variable.”
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. Wagner in ¶ 0019 also indicated that in some cases the “determined vertical acceleration can also be used in an analogous manner to determine the road condition variable.”
The applicant continues to argue specific language and not the ART that interprets the claims as they are interpreted under BRI and the general concepts which are well known in the ART.
Please see the 35 U.S.C. § 103 below.
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
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.
Claims 12, 14, and 16 - 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Toro [JP1996132841, now Toro]; with Stanek et al. [US 20180082492, now Stanek; with Carmona et al. [US20160161251]; with Laermer et al. [US 20090210111, now Laermer]; with Kyrtsos [US6202020, now Kyrtsos], further with Wagner [DE102015203062, now Wagner].
Claim 12
Toro discloses a method for recognition of irregularities of a road pavement [see at least Toro, ¶ 0002-0003 (“irregular road surface”)], the method comprising:
during a preliminary test stage: performing respective tests wherein pneumatic tires drive over and/or impact different irregularities at different speeds of a motor vehicle having a suspension system [see at least Toro, ¶ 0001 (“Model road surface information providing means for a prediction control device of a suspension for predicting and controlling a suspension including an actuator such as a fluid pressure cylinder interposed between a control wheel and a vehicle body on the basis of the road surface information.”); 0009 (“Therefore, as shown in the basic configuration diagram of FIG. 1, the unsprung vibration input detection means provided in the vibration input detection means detects unsprung vibration input such as unsprung vertical acceleration or unsprung longitudinal acceleration generated under the spring Therefore, it is relatively easily affected by the vibration input to the vehicle due to the road surface shape such as road surface unevenness to that extent. On the other hand, the correlation between the maximum value and / or minimum value of such an unsprung vibration input detection value and the height and width of the road surface shape can be regressed with a high correlation coefficient using the vehicle speed as a variable as a matter of momentum, and the difference between the maximum value and the minimum value of the unsprung vibration input detection value can be returned to the height and width of the road surface shape with a higher correlation coefficient. Therefore, based on the experimental value between the height and width of the road surface shape and the difference between the maximum and minimum value of the unsprung vibration input of the unsprung vibration input, a regression equation with the vehicle speed as a variable is set. If the large-minimum value difference is substituted into a regression equation corresponding to the vehicle speed detection value detected by the vehicle speed detection means, the road surface shape calculation means provided in the road surface shape estimation means The height and width of the road surface shape can be calculated with a higher degree of accuracy.”); 0017 (“before the spring lower acceleration conversion circuit 50 is described, the principle of the height and width calculation of the road surface shape in the present embodiment will be described. First, when the front wheels 11 FL and 11 FR with the pneumatic tire having a normal conveyor suspension ride over the road surface protrusions of the side view height X 1 and the width X 2 as shown in FIG. 6a”)];
acquiring a vertical acceleration during the respective tests [see at least Toro, ¶ 0009; 0012; 0017]; and
construction, based on one or more results of the respective tests, of at least one first model for associating a standard deviation of the vertical acceleration in relation to the tests performed with the irregularities on the road pavement [see at least Toro, ¶ 0017-0018 (pneumatic tire…”); 0086- 0087 (“dynamics model”]; and
during an actual recognition stage: acquiring a vertical acceleration [see at least Toro, ¶ 0009];
implementing high-pass filtering of the vertical acceleration, wherein the filtering is performed on a reference section of the road pavement of variable length having a length of between 2 and 25 linear meters [see at least Toro, ¶ 0023 (“When the action of the spring lower acceleration conversion circuit 50 is simply described, the spring lower vertical direction acceleration ZGi and/or the spring lower longitudinal acceleration X Gi until getting over the road surface projection is zero or substantially zero, and at the same time, the spring lower vertical acceleration Z Gi and/or the spring lower longitudinal acceleration X Gi are increased in the positive region, and the increase in the negative region is repeated to increase in the positive region, It is assumed that the normal attenuation curve shown in FIG. 6 b gradually attenuates and converges. Therefore, the band pass spring lower acceleration signal S B P G, which is a frequency band equivalent to or substantially equivalent to the spring lower resonance frequency by the bandpass filter 51, becomes a positive value spring lower acceleration signal S+ H by the one half wave rectifier 52 a, and becomes a negative value spring lower acceleration signal S-H by the other half wave rectifier 52 b, and the negative value spring lower acceleration signal S-H is inverted by the inverter 53 to be a negative value spring lower acceleration inversion signal S-HR. Here, in order to increase the lower vertical acceleration Z Gi and/or the unsprung direction acceleration X Gi due to the road surface protrusion riding over in the positive region, the positive-value spring lower acceleration signal S + H can be said to have a higher phase than the negative-value spring lower acceleration signal S-H or the negative-value spring lower acceleration inversion signal S-HR. Therefore, the positive value spring lower acceleration maximum value signal S + P output from the one peak hold circuit 54 a rises earlier than the negative value spring lower acceleration minimum value signal S-P output from the other peak hold circuit 54 b, held at a certain peak value corresponding to the maximum value of the sprung lower vertical acceleration Z Gi and/or the spring lower longitudinal acceleration X Gi, and is held at a certain peak value corresponding to the minimum value of the lower vertical acceleration Z Gi and/or the spring lower longitudinal acceleration X Gi after the negative value spring lower acceleration minimum value signal S-P rises. Therefore, the spring lower vibration maximum-minimum value difference conversion signal S P-P output from the adder 55 increases in two stages with the lapse of time as illustrated in FIG. 5, and the spring lower vibration maximum-minimum value difference conversion signal S P-P of the second stage becomes the spring lower vibration maximum-minimum value difference A P-P, B P-P.”)].
Stanek clarifies and teaches a method for recognition of irregularities of a road pavement [see at least Stanek, ¶ 0002 -0003] , the method comprising:
performing respective tests wherein pneumatic tires drive over and/or impact different irregularities at different speeds of a motor vehicle having a suspension system [see at least Stanek, ¶ 0030 (“a diagnostic system and method in accordance with the present teachings take a systematic approach. In particular, the present disclosure provides systems that may receive real-time data from several existing sensors, for example, the wheel speed sensor measurements from all wheels or the suspension height sensors for all the suspensions, during the normal operation of the vehicle. For example, a system and method in accordance with the present disclosure can differentiate between repetitive or persistent vibration signatures due to tire imbalance or due to drivetrain vibrations, which may be indicative of an ongoing vehicle issue, and temporary or short-term vibration signatures, which may be indicative of road conditions. In addition, the current disclosure presents teachings which may further parse the vibrations to locate the origin of the vibrations. For example, the system may be configured to distinguish between different frequencies of vibrations, wherein different frequencies of vibrations may be associated with different vehicle systems such as wheels, tires, driveshaft, engine combustions, engine cylinder imbalance, and/or engine mount problems.”); 0061 (“A vehicle load sensor 58 to sense the amount of weight or payload (e.g., passengers) within the vehicle 10 may also be operationally coupled to the controller 26. The vehicle load sensor 58 may be one of various types of sensors within the vehicle 10, including, for example, a suspension sensor. For example, one load sensor may be located at each suspension component of the vehicle 10. In various exemplary embodiments, in vehicles equipped with an air suspension, the load sensor 58 may be a pressure sensor. In various additional exemplary embodiments, the load sensor 58 may be a load cell. In any case, the vehicle load sensor 58 may generate an electrical signal corresponding to the load on the vehicle 10. One sensor or preferably one sensor for each corner of the vehicle 10 may be used. The vehicle load may, for example, be the normal load at each corner of the vehicle 10. By knowing the normal load at each corner of the vehicle 10, the total amount of loading on the vehicle 10 may be determined.”)];
acquiring a vertical acceleration [see at least Stanek, ¶ 0042 (“ A vertical acceleration sensor may be mounted on the vehicle 10 located, for example, at the center of gravity CG, with its sensing direction, for example, along b3-axis, whose output is denoted as a.sub.z.”)];
construction of at least one first model for associating a standard deviation of the vertical acceleration in relation to the tests performed with the irregularities on the road pavement [see at least Stanek, ¶ 0086-0088 (“The controller 26 may then determine whether or not the vehicle vibration is associated with one or more wheels 12a, 12b, 13a and 13b of the vehicle 10 based on the magnitude of the vehicle vibration at the one or more target frequency bands. As would be understood by those of ordinary skill in the art, the target frequency bands are determined by the physics of the system, the component (i.e., tire/wheel, driveline, or engine), the material characteristics of the vehicle's components (e.g., spring rates and tire stiffness), and other engineered-in properties that must be established for each system being diagnosed. Accordingly, the target frequency bands are pre-calculated via model based calculation (i.e., a vehicle dynamics model), frequency based calculation, and/or statistics based calculation. [0087] In the case of wheel diagnostics, the rotation of the wheel may generate an excitation, which creates a resonance of the natural frequency of the wheel that produces a strong vibration signal. A first-order wheel vibration, for example, will excite this natural frequency when the rotational velocity of the wheel matches the natural frequency of the tire-hop subsystem. This natural frequency can be pre-calculated from a vehicle dynamics model, and is, for example, generally in a range of about 10 Hz to about 15 Hz. Therefore, if the vibration occurs at a velocity where the wheel speed matches the 10-15 Hz frequency, it is indicative of a first-order problem with that wheel. A second order vibration in the wheel is still exciting the same natural frequency of the tire-hop subsystem, but is doing so with two vibrations per revolution of the wheel instead of one. Therefore, the vibration will occur at half the rotational velocity of the wheel, compared with a first-order wheel problem. If the vibration signature is observed at this half-wheel-velocity, it is therefore indicative of a second order problem with the wheel instead of a first order problem. [0088] Accordingly, a target frequency band indicative of a first order wheel vibration would be about 10 Hz to about 15 Hz. And, a target frequency band indicative of a second order wheel vibration would be about 20 Hz to about 30 Hz. In various additional embodiments, for example, one of the target frequency bands may be indicative of a second order drivetrain vibration, which reflects a pre-calculated drivetrain imbalance vibration calculated from a drivetrain dynamics model.”)];
implementing high-pass filtering of the vertical acceleration, wherein the filtering is performed on a reference section of the road pavement of variable length having a length of between 2 and 25 linear meters [see at least Stanek, ¶ 0009; 0029 (“As another example, each of the RR, RF, LR, and LF wheels may be properly balanced already, but there may still be vibration signatures showing up when the vehicle is driven extensively in a rough terrain such as an unpaved road segment. It is, therefore, also desirable to eliminate such road roughness-induced vibration signatures as a possible source or indication of a tire imbalance.”); 0108 (“Although FIG. 10 essentially details the same process as FIG. 9, except that it demonstrates the use of a second order test in addition to a first order test (where such a test is applicable and desired) the input sampling rate has changed in order to adequately support the two tests. While a second order wheel vibration will excite the natural frequency at a lower rotational velocity than the first order, there may be some direct effects visible in the sensor signal, and other diagnostic problems may have similar characteristics. Adequate oversampling may therefore be required, per the Nyquist theorem, in order to detect the desired effect in the measured signal. In such cases, it may therefore be necessary to increase the available sampling rate of the input signals in order to implement such a higher-order detection filter, as indicated in the exemplary process flow of FIG. 10.”)];
processing the vertical acceleration via a Fast Fourier Transform [see at least Stanek, Claim 18; ¶ 0085 (“In accordance with various embodiments, after receiving signals indicative of a vehicle vibration, the controller 26 may determine a magnitude of the sensed vehicle vibration at one or more target frequency bands. In accordance with various embodiments, for example, the controller 26 is configured to determine a frequency range associated with the signals (indicative of vehicle vibration) through processing the sensor measurements using real-time Fast Fourier Transform or spectrum analysis, as would be understood by those of ordinary skill in the art.”)]; and
recognizing a presence and dimensions of the irregularities on the road pavement based on a comparison between said first model and the standard deviation of the processed vertical acceleration via a Fast Fourier Transform at the relevant frequencies [see at least Stanek, ¶ 0002].
Therefore, it would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify/combine, with a reasonable expectation of success, the “model road surface information providing means [0001]” of Toro with the “road surface information providing means [abstract] and sensors and ability to determine the road surface at any instant of Stanek. Providing a more efficient and effective technique to determine irregularities in the road surface for safer operation of vehicles.
Carmona more clearly teaches construction, based on one or more results of the respective tests, of at least one first model [see at least Carmona, Title (“METHOD FOR CHARACTERIZING THE MECHANICAL PARAMETERS OF A ROADWAY”); ¶ 0003 (“There exist methods for characterizing mechanical parameters of a pavement which use a falling weight deflectometer. These methods typically comprise: a) the application, with the aid of the deflectometer, of a load to the pavement in order to deform it, b) in response, the measurement of the deformation of the surface of the pavement at various points with the aid of displacement sensors situated at each of these points, on the surface of the pavement, c) the determination of the mechanical parameters of the pavement on the basis of the measurements of the various sensors and of a predetermined model relating the displacements measured by each sensor to the characteristics of the load applied during step a), this model being parametrized by the known position of the various sensors with respect to the pavement and by the mechanical parameters to be characterized.”): 0006 (“Prior art is also known from: Database Compendex, Engineering Information, Inc, New York, September 2012, Gonzalez A et Al: “Elastic strains, modulus and permanent deformation of foamed bitumen pavements in accelerated testing facility”. Road and Transport research September 2012 ARRB Transport Research LTD, AUS, vol. 21, No.3, September 2012, pages 64-76, Database Compendex, Engineering Information, Inc, New York, CHEN S-X et Al: “Analysis of asphalt pavement structural response from an accelerated loading test”. Journal of Harbin Institute of technology, August 2007, Harbin Institute of Technology, Department of scientific research CN, Vol. 14, N)4, August 2007, pages 50-505, BENEDETTO A et Al: “Elliptic model for prediction of deflections induced by a light falling weight deflectometer”, Journal of terrmachanics, Peragmon Press, Headington Hill Hall, Oxford, GB, Vol. 49, No.1, 26 October 2011, pages 1-12; WO2012/012903 A1.”)].
Therefore, it would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify/combine, with a reasonable expectation of success, the “model road surface information providing means [0001]” of Toro with the “road surface information providing means [abstract] and sensors and ability to determine the road surface at any instant of Stanek, further with the “The determination of the mechanical parameters of the pavement on the basis of the measurements of the various sensors and of a predetermined model relating the displacements measured by each sensor to the characteristics of the load applied during step a), this model being parametrized by the known position of the various sensors with respect to the pavement and by the mechanical parameters to be characterized [0003]” of Carmona. Providing a more efficient and effective technique to determine irregularities in the road surface for safer operation of vehicles.
Laermer further clarifies and teaches a method for recognition of irregularities of a road pavement [see at least Laermer, ¶ 0011 (“The road characteristics, in particular irregularities, are able to be determined on the basis of low-frequency signal components recorded by the acceleration sensor.”)], the method comprising:
construction of at least one first model for associating a standard deviation of the vertical acceleration in relation to the tests performed with the irregularities on the road pavement [see at least Laermer, ¶ 0011];
implementing high-pass filtering [see at least Laermer, ¶ 0010]
calculating a standard deviation of the processed vertical acceleration via a Fast Fourier Transform at relevant frequencies comprising a first range of vibration frequencies of the motor vehicle suspension system [see at least Laermer, ¶ 0010; 0025 (“In a device according to the exemplary embodiments and/or exemplary methods of the present invention, the use of one or a plurality of acceleration sensors, which may be embodied as piezoelectric transformer element, makes it possible to obtain not only information about critical tire and roadway characteristics, but also to monitor the correct tire pressure and to obtain the energy required by the system within the meaning of "power harvesting". There is additional expense only with regard to the evaluation electronics, in that during the rolling phases of the acceleration sensor on the road, the particular frequency components that are characteristic of the tire behavior and certain pavement characteristics must be evaluated individually and according to their spectral strength with the aid of spectral filters or a Fourier analysis.]; and
recognizing a presence and dimensions of the irregularities on the road pavement based on a comparison between said first model and the standard deviation of the processed vertical acceleration via a Fast Fourier Transform at the relevant frequencies [see at least Laermer, Abstract; ¶ 0008; 0021; 0024; 0025 (“In a device according to the exemplary embodiments and/or exemplary methods of the present invention, the use of one or a plurality of acceleration sensors, which may be embodied as piezoelectric transformer element, makes it possible to obtain not only information about critical tire and roadway characteristics, but also to monitor the correct tire pressure and to obtain the energy required by the system within the meaning of "power harvesting". There is additional expense only with regard to the evaluation electronics, in that during the rolling phases of the acceleration sensor on the road, the particular frequency components that are characteristic of the tire behavior and certain pavement characteristics must be evaluated individually and according to their spectral strength with the aid of spectral filters or a Fourier analysis.”)].
Therefore, it would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify/combine, with a reasonable expectation of success, the “model road surface information providing means [0001]” of Toro with the “road surface information providing means [abstract] and sensors and ability to determine the road surface at any instant of Stanek, with the “The determination of the mechanical parameters of the pavement on the basis of the measurements of the various sensors and of a predetermined model relating the displacements measured by each sensor to the characteristics of the load applied during step a), this model being parametrized by the known position of the various sensors with respect to the pavement and by the mechanical parameters to be characterized [0003]” of Carmona further with the detecting state of a roadway [abstract]” of Laermer. Providing a more efficient and effective technique to determine irregularities in the road surface for safer operation of vehicles.
Kyrtsos more specifically teaches calculating a standard deviation of the processed vertical acceleration via a Fast Fourier Transform at relevant frequencies comprising a first range of vibration frequencies of the motor vehicle suspension system [see at least Kyrtsos, Col. 4, lines 1-14 (“Thus, the mean vertical acceleration is then compared to the high acceleration threshold, as shown at conditional block 116. If the high acceleration limit is exceeded, then the road profile corresponds to rough road conditions, as shown at block 118. At this time, an appropriate notification can be provided to the driver of the vehicle and the suspension system is controlled accordingly. If the high acceleration limit is not exceeded, then the mean acceleration is compared to the low acceleration threshold value, as shown at conditional block 120. If the current acceleration is less than the minimum limit, then the road profile corresponds to smooth road conditions, as shown at block 122. Again, appropriate notification is provided to the driver and the suspension system is controlled accordingly.”); Col. 4, lines 15-44 (“(13) If the mean vertical acceleration falls within the high and low acceleration values, then a standard deviation (STD) of the vertical acceleration may be compared to appropriate maximum and minimum values, as shown at conditional block 124, to further identify the condition of the road. As with the high and low acceleration values, the maximum and minimum standard deviation limits are also empirically determined and are representative of the maximum and minimum vertical acceleration distributions corresponding to rough and smooth roads, respectively. Preferably, the ratio between the allowed STD's is proportional to the ratio between the allowed vertical accelerations. The STDmax and STDmin values may be determined in one of several ways including, but not limited to, determining characteristic forcing functions for different roads, vehicle weights and vehicle speeds, and determining a mathematical model that models the road characteristics/profiles as forcing functions to the vehicle. (14) Continuing with block 126, if the standard deviation exceeds the maximum value, then a determination is made that the road is rough. If the vertical accelerations are inconsistent, the standard deviation will be high. This occurs when input to the accelerometer 18 is varied, which in turn occurs when the road is very rough. On the other hand, if the standard deviation is less than the minimum value, as shown at conditional block 128, a determination is made that the road is smooth. That is, if the vertical accelerations are within the same values, the standard deviation will be near zero due to the fact that the road is smooth and not inducing any variations on the data collected by the accelerometer 18.”)].
Therefore, it would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify/combine, with a reasonable expectation of success, the “model road surface information providing means [0001]” of Toro with the “road surface information providing means [abstract] and sensors and ability to determine the road surface at any instant of Stanek, with the “The determination of the mechanical parameters of the pavement on the basis of the measurements of the various sensors and of a predetermined model relating the displacements measured by each sensor to the characteristics of the load applied during step a), this model being parametrized by the known position of the various sensors with respect to the pavement and by the mechanical parameters to be characterized [0003]” of Carmona, with the detecting state of a roadway [abstract]” of Laermer, further with the “condition of a road travelled by a vehicle includes a sensor for sensing a speed of the vehicle and an accelerometer for sensing a vertical acceleration of the vehicle [abstract]” of Kyrtsos. Providing a more efficient and effective technique to determine irregularities in the road surface for safer operation of vehicles.
Neither Toro, Stanek Laermer, and Kyrtsos specifically teach but Wagner teaches a minimum filtering threshold of the high- pass filter is less than or equal to 0.1 Hz [see at least Wagner, Claims 2; under Disclosure of invention, ¶ 013 (“The invention is based essentially on the evaluation of the yaw rate signal or another dynamic driving signal in order to obtain information about the presence of a poor road. The basic procedure of an embodiment of the invention is in 1 shown. 1 shows in the left column the basic sequence of an embodiment of the method according to the invention. The yaw rate signal extracted from the inertial sensor system of a vehicle dynamics control 100 will be in block 101 subjected to a high-pass filtering. This causes the useful part of the signal, which is typically in the range between 0 to 5 Hz, to be removed. This useful portion describes the driving dynamics of the vehicle, in particular due to steering movements.”)].
Therefore, it would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify/combine, with a reasonable expectation of success, the “model road surface information providing means [0001]” of Toro with the “road surface information providing means [abstract] and sensors and ability to determine the road surface at any instant of Stanek, with the “The determination of the mechanical parameters of the pavement on the basis of the measurements of the various sensors and of a predetermined model relating the displacements measured by each sensor to the characteristics of the load applied during step a), this model being parametrized by the known position of the various sensors with respect to the pavement and by the mechanical parameters to be characterized [0003]” of Carmona, with the detecting state of a roadway [abstract]” of Laermer, with the “condition of a road travelled by a vehicle includes a sensor for sensing a speed of the vehicle and an accelerometer for sensing a vertical acceleration of the vehicle [abstract]” of Kyrtsos, further with the “detecting the road condition for a vehicle, in which - while driving a driving dynamics of the motor vehicle describing driving dynamics variable is detected, - the vehicle dynamics parameter is subjected to a frequency analysis and - depending on the frequency analysis of the vehicle dynamics size, the current roughness of the road surface descriptive road condition quantity[Abstract]” of Wagner. Providing a more efficient and effective technique to determine irregularities in the road surface for safer operation of vehicles.
Examiners note: There are many references but all disclose/teach/suggest major points as well as overlapping scope of the claims presented. To be sure that all the concepts are fully rejected and clarity of the rejection, the Examiner has included them all.
Claim 13 (cancelled)
Claim 14
Toro, Stanek, Carmora, Laermer, Kyrtsos, and Wagner disclose/teach/suggest the method of Claim 12.
Neither Toro, Stanek Laermer, and Kyrtsos specifically teach but Wagner teaches the filtering is performed on a reference section of the road pavement of variable length having a length of between 5 and 10 linear meters [see at least Wagner, Claim 7 (“that the determined road condition quantity as well as information describing the geographical position of the corresponding road section are transmitted to a vehicle external database.”); under Disclosure of invention, ¶ 009-010]
Note: a section is equal to a length and in Wagner they vary form one section to another.
Therefore, it would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify/combine, with a reasonable expectation of success, the “model road surface information providing means [0001]” of Toro with the “road surface information providing means [abstract] and sensors and ability to determine the road surface at any instant of Stanek, with the detecting state of a roadway [abstract]” of Laermer, further with the “condition of a road travelled by a vehicle includes a sensor for sensing a speed of the vehicle and an accelerometer for sensing a vertical acceleration of the vehicle [abstract]” of Kyrtsos. Providing a more efficient and effective technique to determine irregularities in the road surface for safer operation of vehicles.
Claim 16
Toro, Stanek, Carmora, Laermer, Kyrtsos, and Wagner disclose/teach/suggest the method of Claim 12.
12.
Toro further discloses the relevant frequencies comprise a first range of vibration frequencies of the motor vehicle suspension system between 1.5 Hz and 3 Hz [see at least Toro, ¶ 0002 (“A frequency component corresponding to a spring lower resonance frequency present in a high frequency band of about 12 to 13 Hz and a frequency component corresponding to a spring resonance frequency present in a low frequency band of about 1 to 2 Hz are extracted, and when an amplitude value of a frequency component corresponding to the spring lower resonance frequency is equal to or less than a preset predetermined amplitude value and an amplitude value of a frequency component corresponding to the sprung resonance frequency is equal to or more than a preset predetermined amplitude value, the road surface shape is determined to be a transient unevenness. In the road surface shape detection device, it is also possible to determine whether the road surface shape is, for example, a flat good road, a relatively flat gravel road, or an irregular road surface having a large unevenness, from an energy ratio including the amplitude and an energy ratio including the amplitude, between a frequency component corresponding to the spring lower resonance frequency and a frequency component corresponding to the spring upper resonance frequency.”)].
Claim 17
Toro, Stanek, Carmora, Laermer, Kyrtsos, and Wagner disclose/teach/suggest the method of Claim 16.
Toro and Stanek further disclose/teach the relevant frequencies comprise a second range of vibration frequencies of the chassis of the motor vehicle [see at least Toro, ¶ 0002] and [see at least Stanek, ¶ 0002; 0003; 0037 (“Chassis”); 0098].
Claim 18
Toro, Stanek, Carmora, Laermer, Kyrtsos, and Wagner disclose/teach/suggest the method of Claim 12.
Toro does not specifically disclose but Stanek teaches wherein the actual recognition stage further comprises: acquiring information regarding a position of the motor vehicle via a GPS signal; and locating any irregularities depending upon the position of the vehicle [see at least Stanek, ¶ 0040 (“GPS”); 0051 (“GPS system may be used to locate the vehicle's geographical location in real-time.”); 0068 (“based upon inputs from the sensors and/or cameras, GPS, and/or lidar or radar, controller 26 may also control a safety device 84”);; 0118 (“A more sophisticated algorithm in accordance with the present disclosure may even use additional information to avoid flagging a confirmed diagnostic code in certain situations. As one (rough road considering) example, if the vehicle has experienced a predetermined number of vibrations consistently occurring at a 60 MPH traveling speed, but only at a certain geographical GPS road location, the algorithm may be designed or programmed to assume that the reoccurring vibration is attributable to a rough road section, rather than the vehicle itself, i.e., as examples, the vibration may be attributable to a speed-bump like road bump 632 (FIG. 6) or pothole 634 (FIG. 6) at the GPS road location. In such instances, the algorithm may flag a confirmed vibration diagnostic code (e.g., indicative of a rough road imbalance, and co-relating the suspect GPS coordinates) into the vehicle's historical on-board diagnostic (OBD) record.”)].
Therefore, it would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify/combine, with a reasonable expectation of success, the “model road surface information providing means [0001]” of Toro with the “road surface information providing means [abstract] and sensors and ability to determine the road surface at any instant of Stanek. Providing a more efficient and effective technique to determine irregularities in the road surface for safer operation of vehicles.
Claim 19
Toro, Stanek, Carmora, Laermer, Kyrtsos, and Wagner disclose/teach/suggest the method of Claim 12.
Toro discloses wherein the test stage further comprises: performing the tests by having different types of pneumatic tires on different types of motor vehicle drive over and/or impact the different irregularities; and constructing a number of models in order to associate a standard deviation of the vertical acceleration with a type of pneumatic tire and/or motor vehicle [see at least Toro, ¶ 0017].
Stanek also teaches in more details but for all types of tires, which include pneumatic tires:
wherein the test stage further comprises: performing the tests by having different types of pneumatic tires on different types of motor vehicle drive over and/or impact the different irregularities; and constructing a number of models in order to associate a standard deviation of the vertical acceleration with a type of pneumatic tire and/or motor vehicle [see at least Stanek, ¶ 0086-0088 (“the component (i.e., tire/wheel, driveline, or engine), the material characteristics of the vehicle's components (e.g., spring rates and tire stiffness), and other engineered-in properties that must be established for each system being diagnosed. Accordingly, the target frequency bands are pre-calculated via model based calculation (i.e., a vehicle dynamics model), frequency based calculation, and/or statistics based calculation… pre-calculated from a vehicle dynamics model,..pre-calculated drivetrain imbalance vibration calculated from a drivetrain dynamics model”)].
Therefore, it would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify/combine, with a reasonable expectation of success, the “model road surface information providing means [0001]” of Toro with the “road surface information providing means [abstract] and sensors and ability to determine the road surface at any instant of Stanek. Providing a more efficient and effective technique to determine irregularities in the road surface for safer operation of vehicles.
Claim 20
Toro, Stanek, Carmora, Laermer, Kyrtsos, and Wagner disclose/teach/suggest the method of Claim 12.
Toro does not specifically disclose but Stanek does teach the test stage comprises: during the tests performed, acquiring wheel speeds and the speeds of the motor vehicle, and wherein normalized wheel speeds relating to the tests performed are calculated via a ratio between the wheel speeds and the respective speeds of the motor vehicle [see at least Stanek, ¶ 0030-0031; 0039]; and
construction of at least one second model of the normalized wheel speeds with the irregularities on the road pavement [see at least Stanek, ¶ 0089]; and
the actual recognition stage comprises: acquiring a steering angle of a wheel of said motor vehicle, wherein the steering angle of the wheel of said motor vehicle is acquired via a Fast Fourier Transform; determining a minimum threshold within a frequency content of the steering angle of the wheel processed via the Fast Fourier Transform [see at least Stanek, ¶ 0046; 0071; 0085; 0115 (“steering angle”)];
acquiring wheel speeds and speeds of the motor vehicle;
calculating normalized wheel speeds via a ratio between the wheel speeds and the respective speeds of the motor vehicle [see at least Stanek, ¶ 0028; 0030];
performing high-pass filtering of the wheel speeds or of the normalized wheel speeds in applying said minimum threshold; and calculating a standard deviation of the normalized wheel speeds; wherein recognizing the presence of irregularities on the road pavement comprises using both a comparison between the first model and the standard deviation of the processed vertical acceleration via a Fast Fourier Transform at the relevant frequencies and a comparison between the second model and the standard deviation of the normalized wheel speeds [see at least Stanek, ¶ 0002; 0009; 0029; 0108 (“detection filter”)].
Therefore, it would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify/combine, with a reasonable expectation of success, the “model road surface information providing means [0001]” of Toro with the “road surface information providing means [abstract] and sensors and ability to determine the road surface at any instant of Stanek. Providing a more efficient and effective technique to determine irregularities in the road surface for safer operation of vehicles.
Laermer more specifically teaches calculating normalized wheel speeds; and calculating a standard deviation of the normalized wheel speeds; wherein recognizing the presence of irregularities on the road pavement [see at least Laermer, Abstract; ¶ 0008; 0010; 0021; 0024].
Therefore, it would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify/combine, with a reasonable expectation of success, the “model road surface information providing means [0001]” of Toro with the “road surface information providing means [abstract] and sensors and ability to determine the road surface at any instant of Stanek, further with the detecting state of a roadway [abstract]” of Laermer. Providing a more efficient and effective technique to determine irregularities in the road surface for safer operation of vehicles.
Kyrtsos also clarifies in more detail construction of at least one second model for associating a standard deviation of the normalized wheel speeds with the irregularities on the road pavement [see at least Kyrtsos, Claim 5; Col 1, line 56 – Col 2, line 3 (“ In a preferred embodiment, a second road profile interval having upper and lower threshold values representative of the maximum and minimum vertical acceleration distributions corresponding to rough and smooth roads, respectively, is utilized. The condition of the road is further determined based on a comparison of the vertical acceleration and the second road profile threshold if the vertical acceleration falls within the first road profile interval. In this embodiment, a standard deviation of the vertical acceleration is determined. If the standard deviation of the vertical acceleration exceeds the upper threshold value of the second road profile interval, then a rough road condition is determined. Again, if the standard deviation of the vertical acceleration is less than the lower threshold value of the second road profile interval, a smooth road condition is detected.”)]
Therefore, it would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify/combine, with a reasonable expectation of success, the “model road surface information providing means [0001]” of Toro with the “road surface information providing means [abstract] and sensors and ability to determine the road surface at any instant of Stanek, with the detecting state of a roadway [abstract]” of Laermer, further with the “condition of a road travelled by a vehicle includes a sensor for sensing a speed of the vehicle and an accelerometer for sensing a vertical acceleration of the vehicle [abstract]” of Kyrtsos. Providing a more efficient and effective technique to determine irregularities in the road surface for safer operation of vehicles.
Claim 21
Claim 21 is the system claim for Claim 12, thus has similar limitations to claim12, therefore claim 21 is rejected with the same rationale as claim 12.
Claim 22
Claim 22 is the system claim for Claim 17, thus has similar limitations to claim 22, therefore claim 21 is rejected with the same rationale as claim 17.
Claim 23
Toro, Stanek, Carmora, Laermer, Kyrtsos, and Wagner disclose/teach/suggest the system of Claim 22.
Toro does not specifically disclose a Chassis but all vehicles have a chassis. Stanek does specifically teach acquisition device is fixed/ bound to the chassis of the motor vehicle [see at least Stanek, ¶ 0002; 0003; 0037 (“Chassis”)].
Therefore, it would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify/combine, with a reasonable expectation of success, the “model road surface information providing means [0001]” of Toro with the “road surface information providing means [abstract] and sensors and ability to determine the road surface at any instant of Stanek. Providing a more efficient and effective technique to determine irregularities in the road surface for safer operation of vehicles.
Claim 23
Toro, Stanek, Carmora, Laermer, Kyrtsos, and Wagner disclose/teach/suggest the system of Claim 22.
Toro does not specifically disclose a Chassis but all vehicles have a chassis. Stanek does specifically teach the acquisition device is fixed/ bound to the chassis of the motor vehicle in such a way that the acquisition device is commonly subjected to any vibrations to which the chassis of the motor vehicle is subjected [see at least Stanek, ¶ 0002; 0003; 0037 (“Chassis”)].
Therefore, it would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify/combine, with a reasonable expectation of success, the “model road surface information providing means [0001]” of Toro with the “road surface information providing means [abstract] and sensors and ability to determine the road surface at any instant of Stanek. Providing a more efficient and effective technique to determine irregularities in the road surface for safer operation of vehicles.
Claim 24
Toro, Stanek, Carmora, Laermer, Kyrtsos, and Wagner disclose/teach/suggest the system of Claim 21.
Toro does not specifically disclose but Stanek does specifically teach the acquisition device is placed near an OBD connector of the motor vehicle [see at least Stanek, ¶ 0114; 0117; 0119; 0120 (OBD)].
Therefore, it would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify/combine, with a reasonable expectation of success, the “model road surface information providing means [0001]” of Toro with the “road surface information providing means [abstract] and sensors and ability to determine the road surface at any instant of Stanek. Providing a more efficient and effective technique to determine irregularities in the road surface for safer operation of vehicles.
Claim 25
Toro, Stanek, Carmora, Laermer, Kyrtsos, and Wagner disclose/teach/suggest the system of Claim 21.
Neither Toro, Stanek Laermer, and Kyrtsos specifically teach but Wagner teaches processing device is a cloud-type computing system that is remotely wirelessly connected to the acquisition device [see at least Wagner, under Disclosure of invention, third ¶ from bottom (“using a data cloud”)].
Therefore, it would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify/combine, with a reasonable expectation of success, the “model road surface information providing means [0001]” of Toro with the “road surface information providing means [abstract] and sensors and ability to determine the road surface at any instant of Stanek, with the detecting state of a roadway [abstract]” of Laermer, further with the “condition of a road travelled by a vehicle includes a sensor for sensing a speed of the vehicle and an accelerometer for sensing a vertical acceleration of the vehicle [abstract]” of Kyrtsos. Providing a more efficient and effective technique to determine irregularities in the road surface for safer operation of vehicles.
Claim 26
Toro, Stanek, Carmora, Laermer, Kyrtsos, and Wagner disclose/teach/suggest the system of Claim 21.
Toro does not specifically disclose but both Stanek and Laermer teach wherein the processing device is an electronic control unit installed on board the motor vehicle [see at least Stanek, 0037 (“FIGS. 1-3 illustrate an automotive vehicle 10 with an exemplary embodiment of a control system in accordance with the present disclosure. …”); 0038]: [see at least Laermer, ¶ 0010].
Therefore, it would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify/combine, with a reasonable expectation of success, the “model road surface information providing means [0001]” of Toro with the “road surface information providing means [abstract] and sensors and ability to determine the road surface at any instant of Stanek, further with the detecting state of a roadway [abstract]” of Laermer. Providing a more efficient and effective technique to determine irregularities in the road surface for safer operation of vehicles.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Toro [JP1996132841, now Toro]; with Stanek et al. [US 20180082492, now Stanek; with Carmona et al. [US20160161251]; with Laermer et al. [US 20090210111, now Laermer]; with Kyrtsos [US6202020, now Kyrtsos]; with Wagner [DE102015203062, now Wagner]; further with Yuichi [JP2007245887, now Yuichi].
Claim 15
Toro, Stanek, Carmora, Laermer, Kyrtsos, and Wagner disclose/teach/suggest the method of Claim 12.
Neither Toro, Stanek Laermer, and Kyrtsos specifically teach but Yuichi does teach wherein the sub-step of acquiring the vertical acceleration is performed at a sampling rate of at least 10 Hz but Yuichi does teach this limitation [see at least Yuichi, Under Advantageous-effects ¶ 03 (“when the active stabilizer control means has a predetermined medium frequency range of the fluctuation of the vertical acceleration of the vehicle based on the vertical acceleration of the vehicle in the above-described manner, it is equal to or more than a predetermined first limit value. Even when releasing the active stabilizer, if the strength in the predetermined high frequency region of the fluctuation of the vertical acceleration of the vehicle body is equal to or more than the predetermined second limit value, the active stabilizer is locked. In the predetermined high frequency region, the fluctuation frequency of the vertical acceleration of the vehicle body is not less than the upper limit of the medium frequency region, for example, about 8 Hz or more. Avoid a decrease in the ground load, and ensure that the predetermined frequency range is such that it is more important to secure the wheel's ground load and maintain the running performance of the vehicle. Therefore, when it is more important to secure the wheel ground load and maintain the vehicle's driving performance than to improve the vehicle's riding comfort, the vehicle's driving will be given priority over the improvement of the vehicle's riding comfort. By maintaining the performance, the safety performance of the vehicle can be enhanced. Note that locking the active stabilizer not only completely fixes the movement of the actuator of the active stabilizer, but also suppresses the movement of the actuator so that the movement of the actuator is substantially fixed. It may contain the state.
Therefore, it would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify/combine, with a reasonable expectation of success, the “model road surface information providing means [0001]” of Toro with the “road surface information providing means [abstract] and sensors and ability to determine the road surface at any instant of Stanek, with the “The determination of the mechanical parameters of the pavement on the basis of the measurements of the various sensors and of a predetermined model relating the displacements measured by each sensor to the characteristics of the load applied during step a), this model being parametrized by the known position of the various sensors with respect to the pavement and by the mechanical parameters to be characterized [0003]” of Carmona, with the detecting state of a roadway [abstract]” of Laermer, with the “condition of a road travelled by a vehicle includes a sensor for sensing a speed of the vehicle and an accelerometer for sensing a vertical acceleration of the vehicle [abstract]” of Kyrtsos, with the “detecting the road condition for a vehicle, in which - while driving a driving dynamics of the motor vehicle describing driving dynamics variable is detected, - the vehicle dynamics parameter is subjected to a frequency analysis and - depending on the frequency analysis of the vehicle dynamics size, the current roughness of the road surface descriptive road condition quantity[Abstract]” of Wagner, further with the more specific Hz described in Yuichi. Providing a more efficient and effective technique to determine irregularities in the road surface for safer operation of vehicles.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 JOAN T GOODBODY whose telephone number is (571) 270-7952. The examiner can normally be reached on M-TH 7-3 (US Eastern time).
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 https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated-interview-request-air-form.html.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, VIVEK KOPPIKAR, can be reached at (571) 272-5109. The Fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is (571) 273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspot.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at (866) 217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from the USPTO Customer Serie Representative or access to the automated information system, call (800) 786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or (571) 272-1000.
/JOAN T GOODBODY/
Examiner, Art Unit 3667
(571) 270-7952