DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
This is a non-final Office Action on the merits. Claims 1-2, 4-10, 12-17 and 19-22 are currently pending and are addressed below. Claims 3, 11 and 18 have been cancelled.
Examiner Notes that the fundamentals of the rejections are based on the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim language. Applicant is kindly invited to consider the reference as a whole. References are to be interpreted as by one of ordinary skill in the art rather than as by a novice. See MPEP 2141. Therefore, the relevant inquiry when interpreting a reference is not what the reference expressly discloses on its face but what the reference would teach or suggest to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 31 August 2025 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s amendments and/or arguments with respect to the rejection of Claims 1-22 under 35 USC 103 as set forth in the office action of 31 August 2025 have been considered but are moot because the new ground(s) of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Objections
Claim 12 is objected to because of the following informalities: “the the at least one” in Line 4 should be corrected to –the at least one--. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claims 1, 4-6, 9-10, 14-17 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Barroni-Bird (US 20030164255) in view of Bergstrom (US 20160207418 A1) in view of Stoffel (US 9802638).
Regarding Claim 1, Barroni-Bird teaches A vehicle control system comprising (see at least [¶09-010]):
a steering system comprising a steering device carried outside the housing, and a steering feedback actuator carried within the housing and electromechanically connected to the steering device, the steering device feedback actuator configured to receive input signals from the steering device, and translate input signals into a series of output signals, and transmit the output signals to one or more motor-wheel assemblies of a vehicle such that a direction of the wheel assemblies can be manipulated to direct a position of the vehicle, and an operative electrical connection to connect to the vehicle (A steering system is electromechanically connected to steering actuators that are able to receive input signals from a steering device and output signals to control the direction of the motor wheel assemblies while also having an electrical connection to the vehicle. The steering device/wheel is found outside the housing with the remaining components found in the housing. see at least [¶066-071]);
and a braking system comprising a braking input device carried within the housing, a braking actuator carried within the housing and electromechanically connected to the braking input device, the braking actuator configured to receive an input signal from the braking input device that corresponds to a movement of the braking input device, and electromechanically activate one or more braking components that are connected to a wheel braking mechanism such that when the braking actuator is engaged the wheel braking mechanism engages a wheel rotor causing the vehicle to stop (A braking system has a braking input device that is electromechanically connected to a braking actuator that is able to receive input signal from the braking input device and the actuator is able to activate braking components that cause a wheel rotor in a vehicle to stop. The braking device is carried as part of a housing along with braking actuators found within the housing. see at least [¶077-080]);
Barroni-Bird does not explicitly teach a housing within an interior cabin of a vehicle, the vehicle having at least one vehicle support structure in the interior cabin; at least one mounting bracket configured to engage the at least one vehicle control system support system; …. the interior cabin of the vehicle at different positions along the at least one support structure via the at least one mounting bracket.
However, Bergstrom does teach a housing within an interior cabin of a vehicle, the vehicle having at least one vehicle support structure in the interior cabin (A housing/component within the interior cabin of the vehicle, the vehicle has a support structure inside the cabin for attaching the housing/component. see at least [¶055-056, 0113, 0131, 0137 & FIG 46-47]);
at least one mounting bracket configured to engage the at least one vehicle control system support system (A mounting bracket that allows mounting/engaging of a vehicle control system such as steering or braking components/housing. see at least [¶055-056, 0113, 0131, 0137 & FIG 46-47]);
…. the interior cabin of the vehicle at different positions along the at least one support structure via the at least one mounting bracket (The steering and braking components can be placed at different positions along the support structure in the vehicle cabin via mounting brackets. see at least [¶055-056, 0113, 0131, 0137 & FIG 46-47]).
Bergstrom would be in a similar field as it also deals in the area of configurable electric vehicle. Therefore, it would have been obvious to those having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify Barroni-Bird to use the technique of providing a housing within an interior cabin of a vehicle, the vehicle having at least one vehicle support structure in the interior cabin; at least one mounting bracket configured to engage the at least one vehicle control system support system; …. the interior cabin of the vehicle at different positions along the at least one support structure via the at least one mounting bracket as taught by Bergstrom. Doing so would lead to improved vehicle configuration for standards in different countries (see at least [¶0113]).
Barroni-Bird and Bergstrom do not explicitly teach and wherein the housing, the steering system, and the braking system is collocated within a single modular form factor that is mountable within the interior cabin.
Shall be noted that Barroni-Bird does mention modular components that include steering and braking however it does not explicitly mention the modular components being inside the vehicle cabin but it can be assumed that the components would be found in the vehicle cabin once the vehicle is completely assembled (see at least [¶010 & 0112]).
However, Stoffel does teach and wherein the housing, the steering system, and the braking system is collocated within a single modular form factor that is mountable within the interior cabin (The housing, steering and braking system is placed in a single modular form factor that can be placed inside a vehicle cabin in either the right or left position. The see at least [Column 2, Lines 1-8 & Column 3, Lines 23-34]).
Stoffel would be in a similar field as it also deals in the area of removable vehicle controls. Therefore, it would have been obvious to those having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify Barroni-Bird and Bergstrom to use the technique of providing the housing, the steering system, and the braking system is collocated within a single modular form factor that is mountable within the interior cabin as taught by Stoffel. Doing so would lead to improved safety and usefulness of a removable control system (see at least [Column 10, Lines 29-42]).
Regarding Claim 4, Barroni-Bird, Bergstrom and Stoffel teach all of the limitations of Claim 1 as shown above, Furthermore, Barroni-Bird teaches wherein the single modular form factor is disposed in a location selected from a group consisting of left side, right side, and middle (The modular form factor is able to be placed in different locations such as the top, middle or towards the left or right. see at least [¶0112, 0120, 0126 & FIG 22-24]).
Regarding Claim 5, B Barroni-Bird, Bergstrom and Stoffel teach all of the limitations of Claim 1 as shown above, Furthermore, Barroni-Bird teaches wherein the single modular form factor is removable (The preassembled modules are removable. see at least [¶010, 0112, 0120 & 0126]).
Regarding Claim 6, Barroni-Bird, Bergstrom and Stoffel teach all of the limitations of Claim 1 as shown above, Furthermore, Barroni-Bird wherein the at least one support structure comprises a plurality of support structures; wherein a front portion of the single modular form factor is connected to a first support structure of the plurality thereof and a rear portion of the single modular form factor is connected to a second support structure of the plurality thereof (The preassembled module is able to be mounted towards a chassis at two separate support structures/beams. The chassis has multiple support structures/beams. see at least [¶046, 048, 0110-0112 & Fig 23-26).
Regarding Claim 9, Barroni-Bird, Bergstrom and Stoffel teach all of the limitations of Claim 6 as shown above, Furthermore, Barroni-Bird teaches wherein the at least one support structure comprises a plurality of support structures; and wherein at least one of the plurality of mounting brackets corresponds to and supports the braking system and at least another one of the plurality of mounting brackets corresponds to and supports the steering system; and wherein each of the plurality of mounting brackets connects the single modular form factor to the first support structure (The preassembled module has multiple mounting brackets that belong to both the steering and braking systems and the multiple brackets connect the preassembled module to the first support structure/beam. The chassis has multiple support structures/beams. see at least [¶0109, 0111-0112 & Fig 23]).
Regarding Claim 10, Barroni-Bird, Bergstrom and Stoffel teach all of the limitations of Claim 9 as shown above, Furthermore, Barroni-Bird teaches a third mounting bracket of the plurality thereof corresponds to and supports the braking system; wherein a fourth mounting bracket of the plurality thereof corresponds to and supports the steering system; and wherein the third and fourth mounting brackets are connected to the second support structure (The preassembled module has multiple mounting brackets that belong to both the steering and braking systems and the multiple brackets connect the preassembled module to the second support structure/beam. see at least [¶046, 048, 0119-0112 & Fig 23-26]).
Regarding Claim 14, Barroni-Bird, Bergstrom and Stoffel teach all of the limitations of Claim 1 as shown above, Furthermore, Barroni-Bird teaches wherein the steering device comprises a steering wheel (The steering input device is a steering wheel. see at least [¶069 & 0105]).
Regarding Claim 15, Barroni-Bird, Bergstrom and Stoffel teach all of the limitations of Claim 1 as shown above, Furthermore, Barroni-Bird teaches wherein the braking input device comprises a brake pedal (The brake input device is a brake pedal. see at least [¶069 & 083]).
Regarding Claim 16, Barroni-Bird, Bergstrom and Stoffel teach all of the limitations of Claim 1 as shown above, Furthermore, Stoffel teaches wherein the braking input device is disposed outside of the single modular form factor and electronically connected to the braking input device and braking actuator (The brake pedals are outside of the modular form factor and are electronically connected to the braking system. see at least [Column 7-8, Lines 64-2 & Column 9, Lines 23-38]).
Stoffel would be in a similar field as it also deals in the area of removable vehicle controls. Therefore, it would have been obvious to those having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify Barroni-Bird and Bergstrom to use the technique of having the braking input device is disposed outside of the single modular form factor and electronically connected to the braking input device and braking actuator as taught by Stoffel. Doing so would lead to improved safety and usefulness of a removable control system (see at least [Column 10, Lines 29-42]).
Regarding Claim 17, Barroni-Bird, Bergstrom and Stoffel teach all of the limitations of Claim 15 as shown above, Furthermore, Stoffel teaches wherein the brake pedal comprises a floating brake pedal (The brake pedal is a floating brake pedal. see at least [Column 7-8, Lines 64-2, Column 9, Lines 23-38 & Fig 6]).
Stoffel would be in a similar field as it also deals in the area of removable vehicle controls. Therefore, it would have been obvious to those having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify Barroni-Bird and Bergstrom to use the technique of having the brake pedal comprises a floating brake pedal as taught by Stoffel. Doing so would lead to improved safety and usefulness of a removable control system (see at least [Column 10, Lines 29-42]).
Regarding Claim 19, Barroni-Bird, Bergstrom and Stoffel teach all of the limitations of Claim 1 as shown above, Furthermore, Stoffel teaches wherein each of the steering system and braking system have at least one operative electronic connection to a vehicle platform such that the operative electric connection is not mechanical in nature (The removable steering and braking system have an electrical connection with the vehicle to send commands that is not mechanical in nature. see at least [Column 1, Lines 26-40 & Column 8, Lines 3-17]).
Stoffel would be in a similar field as it also deals in the area of removable vehicle controls. Therefore, it would have been obvious to those having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify Barroni-Bird and Bergstrom to use the technique of having each of the steering system and braking system have at least one operative electronic connection to a vehicle platform such that the operative electric connection is not mechanical in nature as taught by Stoffel. Doing so would lead to improved safety and usefulness of a removable control system (see at least [Column 10, Lines 29-42]).
Regarding Claim 20, Barroni-Bird, Bergstrom and Stoffel teach all of the limitations of Claim 1 as shown above, Furthermore, Stoffel teaches wherein the single modular form factor is removable from the interior cabin of the vehicle (The modular form factor that can be placed inside a vehicle cabin and removed. see at least [Column 2, Lines 1-8 & Column 3, Lines 23-34]).
Stoffel would be in a similar field as it also deals in the area of removable vehicle controls. Therefore, it would have been obvious to those having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify Barroni-Bird and Bergstrom to use the technique of having the single modular form factor is removable from the interior cabin of the vehicle as taught by Stoffel. Doing so would lead to improved safety and usefulness of a removable control system (see at least [Column 10, Lines 29-42]).
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Barroni-Bird (US 20030164255) in view of Bergstrom (US 20160207418 A1) in view of Stoffel (US 9802638) in further view of Yasui (US 20100082216).
Regarding Claim 2, Barroni-Bird, Bergstrom and Stoffel teach all of the limitations of Claim 1 as shown above, Furthermore, Stoffel teaches further comprising a vehicle acceleration input system disposed within the single modular form factor (The modular form factor includes an acceleration input system that is electronically connected to a vehicle. see at least [Column 3, Lines 23-34 & Column 10, Lines 6-28]).
Barroni-Bird, Bergstrom and Stoffel do not explicitly teach wherein the vehicle acceleration input system has an acceleration input device electromechanically connected to an acceleration feedback generator such that the acceleration feedback generator generates a signal sent to a drive system of the vehicle to thereby increase the speed of the vehicle.
However, Yasui does teach wherein the vehicle acceleration input system has an acceleration input device electromechanically connected to an acceleration feedback generator such that the acceleration feedback generator generates a signal sent to a drive system of the vehicle to thereby increase the speed of the vehicle (The acceleration pedal is connected electrically to an actuator that works with an ECU to send signals to an engine to increase the speed and control it if necessary. see at least [¶026 & 033]).
Yasui would be in a similar field as it also deals in the area of vehicle control. Therefore, it would have been obvious to those having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify Barroni-Bird, Bergstrom and Stoffel to use the technique of having the vehicle acceleration input system has an acceleration input device electromechanically connected to an acceleration feedback generator such that the acceleration feedback generator generates a signal sent to a drive system of the vehicle to thereby increase the speed of the vehicle as taught by Yasui. Doing so would lead to improved vehicle control when accelerating (see at least [¶048]).
Claims 7-8 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Barroni-Bird (US 20030164255) in view of Bergstrom (US 20160207418 A1) in view of Stoffel (US 9802638) in further view of Tanaka (US 20150101444).
Regarding Claim 7, Barroni-Bird, Bergstrom and Stoffel teach all of the limitations of Claim 6 as shown above, Barroni-Bird, Bergstrom and Stoffel do not explicitly teach wherein the second support structure is disposed at a location that is lower than the first support structure such that the single modular form factor is disposed at an angle between the first and second support structures.
However, Tanaka does teach wherein the second support structure is disposed at a location that is lower than the first support structure such that the single modular form factor is disposed at an angle between the first and second support structures (The steering system is mounted via a bracket to a higher support structure than a lower bracket that is mounted to a lower support structure and forms an angle between the support structures. see at least [¶025, 029 & 030]).
Tanaka would be in a similar field as it also deals in the area of steering systems. Therefore, it would have been obvious to those having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify Barroni-Bird, Bergstrom and Stoffel to use the technique of having the second support structure is disposed at a location that is lower than the first support structure such that the single modular form factor is disposed at an angle between the first and second support structures as taught by Tanaka. Doing so would lead to improved steering system that is adjustable and easy to assemble (see at least [¶014]).
Regarding Claim 8, Barroni-Bird, Bergstrom, Stoffel and Tanaka teach all of the limitations of claim 7 as shown above, Furthermore, Tanaka teaches wherein the single modular form factor is moveably disposed between the first and second support structures such that the disposed angle can be adjusted (The steering system is able to be moved along the bracket/support structure and side plates to adjust the angle. see at least [¶029 & 037]).
Tanaka would be in a similar field as it also deals in the area of steering systems. Therefore, it would have been obvious to those having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify Barroni-Bird, Bergstrom and Stoffel to use the technique of having the single modular form factor is moveably disposed between the first and second support structures such that the disposed angle can be adjusted as taught by Tanaka. Doing so would lead to improved steering system that is adjustable and easy to assemble (see at least [¶014]).
Regarding Claim 13, Barroni-Bird, Bergstrom and Stoffel teach all of the limitations of Claim 1 as shown above, Barroni-Bird, Bergstrom and Stoffel do not explicitly teach wherein the steering system is extendable such that a portion of the steering system can extend beyond the single modular form factor and adjust to a particular occupant.
However, Tanaka does teach wherein the steering system is extendable such that a portion of the steering system can extend beyond the single modular form factor and adjust to a particular occupant (The steering system is extendable such that the steering system can extend from the form factor based on the preference of a user. see at least [¶014-015, 025 & 029]).
Tanaka would be in a similar field as it also deals in the area of steering systems. Therefore, it would have been obvious to those having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify Barroni-Bird, Bergstrom and Stoffel to use the technique of having the steering system be extendable such that a portion of the steering system can extend beyond the single modular form factor and adjust to a particular occupant as taught by Tanaka. Doing so would lead to improved steering system that is adjustable and easy to assemble (see at least [¶014]).
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Barroni-Bird (US 20030164255) in view of Bergstrom (US 20160207418 A1) in view of Stoffel (US 9802638) in further view of Barroso (US 20100218637).
Regarding Claim 12, Barroni-Bird and Stoffel teach all of the limitations of Claim 1 as shown above, Furthermore, Barron-Bird does teach wherein the steering system and the braking system are collocated on the at least one mounting bracket and wherein the the at least one mounting bracket has a steering portion and a braking portion, and wherein the braking portion has at least one braking mounting point configured to connect with a portion of the braking system to secure the braking system to the at least one mounting bracket such that the braking system remains immoveable (The preassembled module contains steering and braking system which are fixed to the module and the module is mounted to the support structure with fastening elements that fix the module and the components inside. see at least [¶0111-0112 & 0125]).
Barroni-Bird and Stoffel do not explicitly teach the steering portion comprising a plurality of steering mounting points where the steering system can be movably connected to the at least one mounting bracket such that the steering system can be moved within the single modular form factor.
Furthermore, Barroso teaches the steering portion comprising a plurality of steering mounting points where the steering system can be movably connected to the at least one mounting bracket such that the steering system can be moved within the single modular form factor (The steering portion has different mounting points that allow movement of the steering system while also being attached to a single mounting bracket. see at least [¶011-017 & 044]).
Barroso would be in a similar field as it also deals in the area of movable steering systems. Therefore, it would have been obvious to those having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify Barroni-Bird and Stoffel to use the technique of having the steering portion comprising a plurality of steering mounting points where the steering system can be movably connected to the at least one mounting bracket such that the steering system can be moved within the single modular form factor as taught by Barroso. Doing so would lead to improved adjustment of a steering system for the comfort of a user (see at least [¶08-010]).
Claim 21-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Byrnes (US 20160129958) in view of Bergstrom (US 20160207418 A1) in view of Barroni-Bird (US 20030164255) in view of Stoffel (US 9802638).
Regarding Claim 21, Byrnes teaches An electric vehicle comprising: a self-contained electric vehicle platform; and a self-contained vehicle cabin connected to the self-contained electric vehicle platform, wherein the self-contained vehicle cabin further comprises a vehicle control system comprising (An electric vehicle that includes an electric platform along with an operator cabin and that can be modified by interchangeable vehicle modules. see at least [¶01, 07-08, 013, 055 & 058-059]),
and wherein the vehicle control system is connected to the self-contained electric vehicle platform through a disconnectable electronic connection point (A vehicle control system is connected to the electric vehicle through a disconnect able electronic connection point. see at least [¶061-062, 078 & 0100]).
Byrnes does not explicitly teach a housing within an interior cabin of the self-contained vehicle cabin, the electric vehicle having at least one vehicle support structure in the interior; at least one mounting bracket configured to engage the at least one vehicle control system support system; …. the interior cabin of the vehicle at different positions along the at least one support structure via the at least one mounting bracket.
However, Bergstrom does teach a housing within an interior cabin of the self-contained vehicle cabin, the electric vehicle having at least one vehicle support structure in the interior (A housing/component within the interior cabin of the vehicle, the vehicle has a support structure inside the cabin for attaching the housing/component. see at least [¶055-056, 0113, 0131, 0137 & FIG 46-47]);
at least one mounting bracket configured to engage the at least one vehicle control system support system (A mounting bracket that allows mounting/engaging of a vehicle control system such as steering or braking components/housing. see at least [¶055-056, 0113, 0131, 0137 & FIG 46-47]);
…. the interior cabin of the vehicle at different positions along the at least one support structure via the at least one mounting bracket (The steering and braking components can be placed at different positions along the support structure in the vehicle cabin via mounting brackets. see at least [¶055-056, 0113, 0131, 0137 & FIG 46-47]).
Bergstrom would be in a similar field as it also deals in the area of configurable electric vehicle. Therefore, it would have been obvious to those having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify Byrnes to use the technique of providing a housing within an interior cabin of the self-contained vehicle cabin, the electric vehicle having at least one vehicle support structure in the interior; at least one mounting bracket configured to engage the at least one vehicle control system support system; …. the interior cabin of the vehicle at different positions along the at least one support structure via the at least one mounting bracket as taught by Bergstrom. Doing so would lead to improved vehicle configuration for standards in different countries (see at least [¶0113]).
Byrnes does not explicitly teach a steering system comprising a steering device carried outside the housing, and a steering feedback actuator electromechanically connected to the steering device, the steering device feedback actuator configured to receive input signals from the steering device, and translate the input signals into a series of output signals, and transmit the output signals to one or more motor-wheel assemblies of a vehicle such that a direction of the wheel assemblies can be manipulated to direct a position of the vehicle, and an operative electrical connection to connect to the vehicle; and a braking system comprising a braking input device carried within the housing, a braking actuator carried within the housing and electromechanically connected to the braking input device, the braking actuator configured to receive an input signal from the braking input device that corresponds to a movement of the braking input device, and electromechanically activate one or more braking components that are connected to a wheel braking mechanism such that when the braking actuator is engaged the wheel braking mechanism engages a wheel rotor causing the vehicle to stop.
However, Barroni-Bird does teach a steering system comprising a steering device carried outside the housing, and a steering feedback actuator electromechanically connected to the steering device, the steering device feedback actuator configured to receive input signals from the steering device, and translate the input signals into a series of output signals, and transmit the output signals to one or more motor-wheel assemblies of a vehicle such that a direction of the wheel assemblies can be manipulated to direct a position of the vehicle, and an operative electrical connection to connect to the vehicle (A steering system is electromechanically connected to steering actuators that are able to receive input signals from a steering device and output signals to control the direction of the motor wheel assemblies while also having an electrical connection to the vehicle. The steering device/wheel is found outside the housing with the remaining components found in the housing. see at least [¶066-071]);
and a braking system comprising a braking input device carried within the housing, a braking actuator carried within the housing and electromechanically connected to the braking input device, the braking actuator configured to receive an input signal from the braking input device that corresponds to a movement of the braking input device, and electromechanically activate one or more braking components that are connected to a wheel braking mechanism such that when the braking actuator is engaged the wheel braking mechanism engages a wheel rotor causing the vehicle to stop (A braking system has a braking input device that is electromechanically connected to a braking actuator that is able to receive input signal from the braking input device and the actuator is able to activate braking components that cause a wheel rotor in a vehicle to stop. The braking device is carried as part of a housing along with braking actuators found within the housing. see at least [¶077-080]);
Barroni-Bird would be in a similar field as it also deals in the area of a modular vehicle. Therefore, it would have been obvious to those having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify Byrnes and Bergstrom to use the technique of having a steering system comprising a steering device carried outside the housing, and a steering feedback actuator electromechanically connected to the steering device, the steering device feedback actuator configured to receive input signals from the steering device, and translate the input signals into a series of output signals, and transmit the output signals to one or more motor-wheel assemblies of a vehicle such that a direction of the wheel assemblies can be manipulated to direct a position of the vehicle, and an operative electrical connection to connect to the vehicle; and a braking system comprising a braking input device carried within the housing, a braking actuator carried within the housing and electromechanically connected to the braking input device, the braking actuator configured to receive an input signal from the braking input device that corresponds to a movement of the braking input device, and electromechanically activate one or more braking components that are connected to a wheel braking mechanism such that when the braking actuator is engaged the wheel braking mechanism engages a wheel rotor causing the vehicle to stop as taught by Barroni-Bird. Doing so would lead to improved manufacturing efficiency with preassembled modules (see at least [¶013]).
Byrnes, Bergstrom and Barroni-Bird do not explicitly teach and wherein the housing, the steering system, and the braking system is collocated within a single modular form factor that is mountable within the interior cabin.
Shall be noted that Barroni-Bird does mention modular components that include steering and braking however it does not explicitly mention the modular components being inside the vehicle cabin but it can be assumed that the components would be found in the vehicle cabin once the vehicle is completely assembled (see at least [¶010 & 0112]).
However, Stoffel does teach and wherein the housing, the steering system, and the braking system is collocated within a single modular form factor that is mountable within the interior cabin (The housing, steering and braking system is placed in a single modular form factor that can be placed inside a vehicle cabin in either the right or left position. The see at least [Column 2, Lines 1-8 & Column 3, Lines 23-34]).
Stoffel would be in a similar field as it also deals in the area of removable vehicle controls. Therefore, it would have been obvious to those having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify Byrnes, Bergstrom and Barroni-Bird to use the technique of providing the housing, the steering system, and the braking system is collocated within a single modular form factor that is mountable within the interior cabin as taught by Stoffel. Doing so would lead to improved safety and usefulness of a removable control system (see at least [Column 10, Lines 29-42]).
Regarding Claim 22, Byrnes, Bergstrom, Barroni-Bird and Stoffel teach all of the limitations of claim 1 as shown above, Furthermore, Stoffel teaches wherein the single modular form factor is removable from the interior cabin and such that the vehicle platform can be autonomously controlled (When the removable module is removed from the vehicle, the vehicle reverts to autonomous control. see at least [Column 1, Lines 26-40, Column 5, Lines 14-61 & Column 9-10, Lines 57-5]).
Stoffel would be in a similar field as it also deals in the area of removable vehicle controls. Therefore, it would have been obvious to those having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify Byrnes, Bergstrom and Barroni-Bird to use the technique of having the single modular form factor is removable from the interior cabin and such that the vehicle platform can be autonomously controlled as taught by Stoffel. Doing so would lead to improved safety and usefulness of a removable control system (see at least [Column 10, Lines 29-42]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
AUTONOMOUS VEHICLE WITH MODULAR CONTROL INTERFACE (US 20170227960 A1)
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MOISES GASCA ALVA JR whose telephone number is (571)272-3752. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 6:30 - 4:00. 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,
Faris Almatrahi can be reached on (313) 446-4821. 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 866-2
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.
/MOISES GASCA ALVA/Examiner, Art Unit 3667
/FARIS S ALMATRAHI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3667