CTNF 17/797,624 CTNF 98713 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114 07-42-04 AIA 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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 27 January 2026 has been entered. 12-151 AIA 26-51 12-51 Status of Claims This Office Action is in response to the Applicant’s Response filed on 27 January 2026. Claims 1-16 and 20-22 are presently pending and are presented for examination. Claims 17-19 are cancelled. Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments, see Remarks, filed 27 January 2026, have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues, see Remarks, pg. 9-10, that the primary reference, WO-2018185577-A1 (“Oshida”), does not teach nor suggest the subject matter in the amended limitations. Specifically, applicant argues that Oshida does not disclose “travel state information characterizes a motion state and a stability state of the straddle-type vehicle”. Examiner respectfully disagrees. In Oshida’s system and method for determining whether to issue notifications to a rider of a motorcycle (i.e., “ straddle-type vehicle ”), the system acquires travel state information, including motorcycle speed (i.e., a motion state ; see Oshida para. 0031) and posture (including lean angle and steering angle) of the motorcycle (i.e., a stability state ; see Oshida, para. 0049). For these reasons, examiner is unpersuaded and maintains the corresponding rejections. In response to applicant's argument, see Remarks, pg. 10, that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., “trigger information to determine which wheel of the motorcycle 100 braking force should be changed or how the braking force distribution should be change between the wheels.”) are not recited in the rejected claim(s) 1 and 15. Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns , 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993). Furthermore, other references, like EP-1277635-A2 ("Sakamoto"), teach the aforementioned concept. For more information on how the applied references teach the aforementioned concept as recited in the claim limitations, see the 35 U.S.C. 103 section, below. For these reasons, examiner is unpersuaded and maintains the corresponding rejections. Applicant argues, see Remarks, pg. 11, that Oshida does not teach nor suggest “ haptic motion performing section (53) that performs haptic motion at least once, to change an acceleration/deceleration of the straddle-type vehicle (100) only for a moment… " Examiner respectfully disagrees. Oshida discloses a control method that sequentially (i.e., there is a temporal aspect of the control method) acquires information, processes the information, and then determines that an automatic emergency deceleration operation is required (see Oshida para. 0008 and para. 0010: “In the control mode, before the automatic emergency deceleration operation is executed, the first notification and the second notification to notify the driver of the execution of the automatic emergency deceleration operation are sequentially initiated.”). Before the automatic emergency deceleration is executed, the control method first issues a “first notification” to the rider and then a “second notification” (i.e., haptic motion by changing a brake force using the wheel brakes, see Oshida para. 0055, or engine braking, see Oshida para. 0056) to the rider. Additionally, as “ a moment ” is a relative term, with no specific definition given in units of measurable time, the broadest reasonable interpretation is used and one of ordinary skill in the art would understand that the haptic motion disclosed by Oshida teaches the concept of haptic motion claimed in the instant application. Furthermore, prior art, like US-20180208189-A1 (“Ginther”), explicitly teaches a “momentary brake pulse and/or drive power interruption” to “provide haptic indication to the rider” (see Ginther, para. 0037). For these reasons, examiner is unpersuaded and maintains the corresponding rejections. The remaining arguments are essentially the same as those addressed above and/or below and are unpersuasive for at least the same reasons. Therefore, examiner is unpersuaded and maintains the corresponding rejections. Claim Objections 07-29-01 AIA Claim (s) is/are objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 11: “ The controller according to claim1 ” should be “The controller according to claim1 claim 1 ” (space added); and Claim 21: “ a state of a rider of the straddle-type vehicle 100 and a state of each component of the straddle- type vehicle 100 ” should be “a state of a rider of the straddle-type vehicle 100 (100) and a state of each component of the straddle- type vehicle 100 (100) ” . Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 07-30-01 AIA The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a): (a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention. The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112: The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention. Claim(s) 1-16 and 20-22 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Specifically, the amendments to independent claims 1 and 15 and limitations in new claims 20 and 21 appear to introduce new matter. The new matter is as follows: Claim 1 and 15: “ …wherein the travel state information characterizes a motion state and a stability state of the straddle-type vehicle (100)… ”; Claim 1 and 15: “… changes the braking force on at least one of the front and rear wheels based on the set priority ”; Claim 20: “ …the priority relates to a preference given to a wheel of each of the wheels having less impact on the stability state of the straddle- type vehicle (100) than another wheel… ”; and Claim 21: “ …a sensor configured to detect a state of a rider of the straddle-type vehicle 100 and a state of each component of the straddle- type vehicle 100… ”. Regarding independent claims 1 and 15, the original disclosure does not appear to recite travel state information characterizing “ a motion state and a stability state of the straddle-type vehicle .” Additionally, the original disclosure does not support the limitation of changing a braking force based on a “ set priority ”. Furthermore, the limitation of changing a “ braking force on at least one of the front and rear wheels based on the set priority ” was present in the 30 September 2024 claim set and was rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) in the Office Action dated 12 December 2024. Therefore, the aforementioned limitations appear to introduce new matter. As claims 2-14, 16, and 20-22 depend on independent claim 1, they are similarly rejected. Regarding claim 20, the original disclosure does not appear to recite priority relating to “ wheels having less impact on the stability of the straddle-type vehicle”. Therefore, the aforementioned limitation appears to introduce new matter. Regarding claim 21, the original disclosure, see paragraph 0027 of the specification dated 04 August 2022, recites “For example, the determination section 52 may determine the necessity of the warning on the basis of output of various sensors, each of which detects a state of the rider or each component of the straddle-type vehicle 100…” This recitation discloses sensor output for detecting a state of a rider OR each component of the straddle-type vehicle, not sensor output for detecting a state of a rider AND each component of the straddle-type vehicle. Therefore, the aforementioned limitation appears to introduce new matter. 07-30-02 AIA The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. 07-34-01 Claim(s) 1-16 and 20-22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. 07-34-03 AIA The term “ a moment ”, in claim s 1 and 15 , is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “ a moment ” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. The term “ moment ” is undefined in the specification and therefore would be an unknown quantity of time to one of ordinary skill in the art. The term “ moment ” was present in the 04 August 2022 claim set and was rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112 in the Office Action dated 10 July 2024. Examiner is interpreting “ moment ” as any duration of time that is reasonable for a vehicle controller to provide rider-assistance, in the form of acceleration or deceleration control . 07-34-05 Claims 1 and 15 recite the limitation " the set priority ". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. As claims 2-14, 16, and 20-22 depend on independent claim 1, they are similarly rejected. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action: A person shall be entitled to a patent unless – 07-08-aia AIA (a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. 07-15-aia AIA Claim(s) 1-2, 4, 14-16, and 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by WO-2018185577-A1, hereinafter “Oshida” (Translated quotations are sourced from EP-3608181-B1.)(previously of record) . Regarding claim 1 and analogous claim 15 , Oshida discloses a controller (51) for a rider-assistance system (50) that is mounted to a straddle-type vehicle (100) including a front wheel (3) and a rear wheel (4), the controller comprising (Oshida, para. 0001: “The present invention relates to a controller [i.e., controller ] and a control method capable of improving safety by an automatic emergency deceleration operation while preventing a motorcycle [i.e., mounted to a straddle-type vehicle (100) including a front wheel (3) and a rear wheel ] from falling over [i.e., rider-assistance system ], and to a brake system that includes such a controller.”): Regarding analogous claim 15, Oshida discloses a control method … (Oshida, para. 0001: “The present invention relates to a controller and a control method [i.e., control method ] capable of improving safety by an automatic emergency deceleration operation while preventing a motorcycle [i.e., mounted to a straddle-type vehicle (100) including a front wheel (3) and a rear wheel ] from falling over [i.e., rider-assistance system ], and to a brake system that includes such a controller.”) a determination section (52) that determines necessity of a warning that is given to a rider of the straddle-type vehicle (100) during travel of said straddle-type vehicle (100) (Oshida, para. 0038: “In the control mode, the notification control section 64 outputs a command that governs the operation of each of devices in accordance with the determination result by each of the determination sections [i.e., determination section ], so as to notify the driver [i.e., a warning that is given to a rider of the straddle-type vehicle ] of the execution of the automatic emergency deceleration operation [i.e., during travel of said straddle-type vehicle ].”); an acquisition section (54) that acquires travel state information of the straddle-type vehicle (100) during the travel of said straddle-type vehicle (100) (Oshida, para. 0007: “A controller according to the invention is a controller that controls behavior of a motorcycle, and includes: an acquisition section that acquires trigger information [i.e., travel state information ] generated in accordance with peripheral environment of the motorcycle [i.e., acquires travel state information of the straddle-type vehicle ]…”; para. 0031 : “For example, the peripheral environment sensor 46 computes a body speed of the motorcycle 100 [i.e., acquires travel state information of the straddle-type vehicle (100) during the travel of said straddle-type vehicle ] on the basis of the rotational frequencies of the front wheel 3 and the rear wheel 4…”), wherein the travel state information characterizes a motion state and a stability state of the straddle-type vehicle (100) (Oshida, FIG. 5: step S111 [i.e., a motion state ], step S119 [i.e., stability state ]; para. 0031: “For example, the peripheral environment sensor 46 computes a body speed of the motorcycle 100 on the basis of the rotational frequencies of the front wheel 3 and the rear wheel 4 [i.e., the travel state information characterizes a motion state ]…”; para. 0049: “For example, in the case where a change rate of a state amount that is related to the posture of the motorcycle 100 during the turning travel exceeds a change rate reference value, the avoidance intention determination section 66 determines that the driver has the avoidance intention. The state amount that is related to the posture of the motorcycle 100 during the turning travel includes the lean angle, the angular velocity of the lean angle, the steering angle, or the angular velocity of the steering angle, for example [i.e., the travel state information characterizes a motion state and a stability state of the straddle-type vehicle (100) ].”); and a haptic motion performing section (53) that performs haptic motion at least once, to change an acceleration/deceleration of the straddle-type vehicle (100) only for a moment when the determination section (52) determines that the warning is necessary (Oshida, para. 0007: “A controller according to the invention is a controller that controls behavior of a motorcycle [i.e., a haptic motion performing section (53) ], and includes: an acquisition section that acquires trigger information generated in accordance with peripheral environment of the motorcycle; and an execution section that initiates a control mode in response to the trigger information, the control mode making the motorcycle execute an automatic emergency deceleration operation. In the control mode, before the automatic emergency deceleration operation is executed, first notification and second notification to notify a driver of execution of the automatic emergency deceleration operation are sequentially initiated [i.e., when the determination section (52) determines that the warning is necessary ]...In the second notification, the driver is notified of the execution of the automatic emergency deceleration operation by being applied with the external force [i.e., performs haptic motion at least once ], wherein the automatic emergency deceleration operation is initiated after termination of the second notification [i.e., only for a moment ], and the external force is an inertial force that acts on the driver when deceleration is generated in the motorcycle [i.e., performs the haptic motion at least once ], wherein in the second notification, the deceleration is generated by controlling a braking force that is applied to a wheel of the motorcycle [i.e., to change an acceleration/deceleration of the straddle-type vehicle ].”), wherein the haptic motion is performed in a first state of the straddle-type vehicle (100) where braking force is generated on each of the wheels (Oshida, para. 0055: “…in the second notification [i.e., the haptic motion is performed in a first state of the straddle-type vehicle (100) ], the notification control section 64 controls the braking force that is applied to the wheel of the motorcycle 100, so as to cause the generation of the deceleration in the motorcycle 100. More specifically, the notification control section 64 can drive the pump 34 in at least one of the front-wheel brake mechanism 12 and the rear-wheel brake mechanism 14 [i.e., a first state of the straddle-type vehicle (100) where braking force is generated on each of the wheels ] in a state where the inlet valve 31 is opened, the outlet valve 32 is closed, the first valve 35 is closed, and the second valve 36 is opened, so as to cause the generation of the braking force that is applied to the wheel. In this way, the deceleration is generated in the motorcycle 100, and the inertial force that corresponds to the deceleration thereby acts on the driver [i.e., haptic motion ].”) and a second state of the straddle-type vehicle (100) where braking force is generated on none of the wheels (Oshida, para. 0058: “Note that, in the second notification, the notification control section 64 may control both of the braking force applied to the wheel [i.e., a first state of the straddle-type vehicle (100) where braking force is generated on each of the wheels ] and the engine output [i.e., a second state of the straddle-type vehicle (100) where braking force is generated on none of the wheels ], so as to cause the generation of the deceleration in the motorcycle 100. In addition, in the second notification, the external force that is applied to the driver may not be the inertial force that acts on the driver when the deceleration is generated in the motorcycle 100. For example, in the case where the motorcycle 100 is provided with a vibratory device that generates vibrations, in the second notification, the notification control section 64 may drive the vibratory device, so as to apply the vibrations generated by the vibratory device as the external force to the driver.”), wherein the haptic motion performing section (53) changes a priority of each of the wheels at the time of changing a braking force to change the acceleration/deceleration during the haptic motion based on the travel state information that is acquired by the acquisition section (54) (Oshida, FIG. 5; para. 0055: “…the notification control section 64 [i.e., haptic motion performing section (53) ] can drive the pump 34 in at least one of the front-wheel brake mechanism 12 and the rear-wheel brake mechanism…, so as to cause the generation of the braking force that is applied to the wheel [i.e., changes a priority of each of the wheels ]. In this way, the deceleration is generated in the motorcycle 100, and the inertial force that corresponds to the deceleration thereby acts on the driver [i.e., the haptic motion ].”; para. 0042-0043: “Next, in step S113, the trigger determination section 65 determines whether the trigger information has been acquired. If it is determined that the trigger information has been acquired (step S113/Yes) [i.e. , based on the travel state information that is acquired by the acquisition section (54) ], the processing proceeds to step S115.”) and changes the braking force on at least one of the front and rear wheels based on the set priority (Oshida, FIG. 5; para. 0055: “…the notification control section 64 [i.e., haptic motion performing section (53) ] can drive the pump 34 in at least one of the front-wheel brake mechanism 12 and the rear-wheel brake mechanism…, so as to cause the generation of the braking force that is applied to the wheel [i.e., changes the braking force on at least one of the front and rear wheels based on the set priority ]. In this way, the deceleration is generated in the motorcycle 100, and the inertial force that corresponds to the deceleration thereby acts on the driver [i.e., the haptic motion ].”;). Regarding claim 2 , Oshida discloses the controller according to claim 1, wherein the haptic motion is motion that is caused by changes to the braking force of only one of the front wheel (3) and the rear wheel (4) (Oshida, para. 0055: “…the notification control section 64 can drive the pump 34 in at least one of the front-wheel brake mechanism 12 and the rear-wheel brake mechanism [i.e., that changes the braking force of only one of the front wheel (3) and the rear wheel (4) ]…, so as to cause the generation of the braking force that is applied to the wheel. In this way, the deceleration is generated in the motorcycle 100, and the inertial force that corresponds to the deceleration thereby acts on the driver [i.e., haptic motion is motion that is caused by changes to the braking force ].”), and the haptic motion performing section (53) changes the priority of each of the front and rear wheels by selectively changing the braking force of only one of the front wheel (3) and the rear wheel (4), during the haptic motion, according to the travel state information that is acquired by the acquisition section (54) (Oshida, para. 0055: “…the notification control section 64 [i.e., haptic motion performing section ] can drive the pump 34 in at least one of the front- wheel brake mechanism 12 and the rear-wheel brake mechanism [i.e., selectively changing the braking force of only one of the front wheel (3) and the rear wheel (4) ]…, so as to cause the generation of the braking force that is applied to the wheel [i.e., changes the priority of each of the front and rear wheels ]. In this way, the deceleration is generated in the motorcycle 100, and the inertial force that corresponds to the deceleration thereby acts on the driver [i.e., during the haptic motion ].”; para. 0042-0043: “Next, in step S113, the trigger determination section 65 determines whether the trigger information has been acquired. If it is determined that the trigger information has been acquired (step S113/Yes) [i.e. , according to the travel state information that is acquired by the acquisition section ], the processing proceeds to step S115.”). Regarding claim 4 , Oshida discloses the controller according to claim 1, wherein the travel state information that is acquired by the acquisition section (54) includes information on the acceleration/deceleration that is generated in the straddle-type vehicle (100) (Oshida, para. 0050: “…in the case where an operation amount that is related to the operation of the motorcycle 100 by the driver exceeds an operation amount reference value, the avoidance intention determination section 66 determines that the driver has the avoidance intention. The operation of the motorcycle 100 by the driver includes an accelerator pedal operation, a brake operation, and a clutch operation, for example. The operation amount reference value is set to such a value that a determination on whether the driver has operated the motorcycle 100 can be made [i.e., travel state information…includes information on the acceleration/deceleration ].”). Regarding claim 14 , Oshida discloses the controller according to claim 1, wherein in the haptic motion, the haptic motion performing section (53) controls a gearshift system (30) of the straddle-type vehicle (100) so as to change the braking force (Oshida, para. 0055: “For example, in the second notification, the notification control section 64 [i.e., haptic motion performing section ] controls the braking force that is applied to the wheel of the motorcycle 100, so as to cause the generation of the deceleration in the motorcycle 100.”; para. 0056: “Alternatively, for example, in the second notification, the notification control section 64 controls the engine output of the motorcycle 100, so as to cause the generation of the deceleration in the motorcycle 100. More specifically, the notification control section 64 can cause the generation of the deceleration in the motorcycle 100 by using an operational effect of engine brake [i.e., controls a gearshift system (30) ] that is exerted when the engine output is lowered.”). Regarding claim 16 , Oshida discloses the controller according to claim 1 , wherein the haptic motion is performed by generating the braking force on both the front wheel (3) and the rear wheel (4) (Oshida, para. 0055: “…the notification control section 64 can drive the pump 34 in at least one of the front-wheel brake mechanism 12 and the rear-wheel brake mechanism [i.e., generating the braking force on both the front wheel and the rear wheel ]…, so as to cause the generation of the braking force that is applied to the wheel. In this way, the deceleration is generated in the motorcycle 100, and the inertial force that corresponds to the deceleration thereby acts on the driver [i.e., haptic motion ].”). Regarding claim 21 , Oshida discloses The controller according to claim 1 , wherein the determination section (52) determines that the warning is necessary based on an output of a sensor configured to detect a state of a rider of the straddle-type vehicle 100 and a state of each component of the straddle-type vehicle 100 (Oshida, FIG. 5; para. 0048: “Next, in step S119, the avoidance intention determination section 66 determines whether the driver has an avoidance intention that is an intention to avoid the forward obstacle. If it is determined that the driver has the avoidance intention (step S119/Yes) , the processing proceeds to step S133. On the other hand, if it is determined that the driver does not have the avoidance intention (step S119/No) , the processing proceeds to step S121 [i.e., determines that the warning is necessary based on an output of a sensor configured to detect a state of a rider of the straddle-type vehicle 100 and a state of each component of the straddle-type vehicle 100 ].”; para. 0049: “For example, in the case where a change rate of a state amount that is related to the posture of the motorcycle 100 during the turning travel exceeds a change rate reference value, the avoidance intention determination section 66 determines that the driver has the avoidance intention. The state amount that is related to the posture of the motorcycle 100 during the turning travel includes the lean angle, the angular velocity of the lean angle, the steering angle, or the angular velocity of the steering angle, for example [i.e., determines that the warning is necessary based on an output of a sensor configured to detect a state of a rider of the straddle-type vehicle 100 ]. The change rate reference value is set to such a value that a determination on whether a possibility of the driver having the avoidance intention is high can be made.”; para. 0050: “…in the case where an operation amount that is related to the operation of the motorcycle 100 by the driver exceeds an operation amount reference value, the avoidance intention determination section 66 determines that the driver has the avoidance intention. The operation of the motorcycle 100 by the driver includes an accelerator pedal operation, a brake operation, and a clutch operation, for example [i.e., determines that the warning is necessary based on…a state of each component of the straddle-type vehicle 100 ]. The operation amount reference value is set to such a value that a determination on whether the driver has operated the motorcycle 100 can be made.”) . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-23-aia AIA The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 3 and 5 and is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO-2018185577-A1, hereinafter “Oshida” (Translated quotations are sourced from EP-3608181-B1.)(previously of record) , in view of EP-1277635-A2, hereinafter “Sakamoto” (previously of record) . Regarding claim 3 , Oshida discloses the controller according to claim 1, wherein the haptic motion is motion that is caused by changes to the braking force of both of the front wheel (3) and the rear wheel (4) (Oshida, para. 0055: “…the notification control section 64 can drive the pump 34 in at least one of the front-wheel brake mechanism 12 and the rear-wheel brake mechanism [i.e., changes to the braking forces of both of the front wheel (3) and the rear wheel (4) ]…, so as to cause the generation of the braking force that is applied to the wheel. In this way, the deceleration is generated in the motorcycle 100, and the inertial force that corresponds to the deceleration thereby acts on the driver [i.e., haptic motion is motion that is caused by changes to the braking force ].”), and Oshida does not appear to explicitly disclose the following: the haptic motion performing section (53) changes the priority of each of the front and rear wheels by changes to an allocation of an amount of change in the braking force generated on the front wheel (3) and an amount of change in the braking force generated on the rear wheel (4) during the haptic motion, according to the travel state information that is acquired by the acquisition section (54). However, in the same field of endeavor, Sakamoto teaches: the haptic motion performing section (53) changes the priority of each of the front and rear wheels by changes to an allocation of an amount of change in the braking force generated on the front wheel (3) and an amount of change in the braking force generated on the rear wheel (4) during the haptic motion, according to the travel state information that is acquired by the acquisition section (54) (Sakamoto, para. 0028: “Further, according to the embodiment of this invention, an electronic brake force distribution is effected between the front wheel and the rear wheel [i.e., changes the priority of each of the front and rear wheels by changes to an allocation of an amount of change in the braking force generated on the front wheel (3) and an amount of change in the braking force generated on the rear wheel (4) during the haptic motion, ]. The distribution rate of the rear wheel to the front wheel is changed in accordance with the vehicle decelerations [i.e., according to the travel state information that is acquired by the acquisition section (54) ]…The brake force of the rear wheel is equally changed with that of the front wheel below the vehicle deceleration g3, namely at the gradient of 45 degree. Over the deceleration of g3, the distribution rate of the rear brake force to the front brake force is decreased with the deceleration of g4, g5, g6-----. In the end, the brake force of the rear wheel becomes zero.”; Note: Examiner is interpreting “ priority ” as braking one wheel instead of the other or setting a higher distribution/allocation of the combined braking force on one wheel over the other.). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention and with a reasonable likelihood of success to modify the invention disclosed by Oshida, with the concept of changing the priority of braking one wheel versus the other wheel based on travel state information, by changing an allocation of a total braking force across one wheel versus the other, further taught by Sakamoto, in order to control the speed of each wheel to maintain traction and/or rider safety (Sakamoto, para. 0025: “Although not shown, wheel speed sensors are associated with the front wheel and rear wheel, respectively. A not-shown control unit receives output signals from the wheel speed sensors. It judges that the brakes should be relieved, held or increased.”; para. 0027: “The pressurized fluid from the hydraulic pressure pump 30 is supplied through the conduit e, and the inlet valve 23 to the rear wheel cylinder 22. The drive-slip of the rear wheel becomes smaller or optimized. The inlet valve 23 and outlet valve 24 are energized and deenergized to optimize the drive-slip of the rear wheel. Thus, the traction control is effected. As well-known, the rear wheel is a drive wheel in the motorcycle.”). Regarding claim 5 , Oshida discloses the controller according to claim 4, but does not appear to explicitly disclose the following: wherein when the information on the acceleration/deceleration is information on a state where the acceleration/deceleration generated in the straddle-type vehicle (100), in the haptic motion, is below a reference acceleration/deceleration, the haptic motion performing section (53) sets the priority of the front wheel (3) to be higher in comparison with a case where the information on the acceleration/deceleration is information on a state where the acceleration/deceleration generated in the straddle-type vehicle (100) is above the reference acceleration/deceleration. However, in the same field of endeavor, Sakamoto teaches: wherein when the information on the acceleration/deceleration is information on a state where the acceleration/deceleration generated in the straddle-type vehicle (100), in the haptic motion, is below a reference acceleration/deceleration, the haptic motion performing section (53) sets the priority of the front wheel (3) to be higher in comparison with a case where the information on the acceleration/deceleration is information on a state where the acceleration/deceleration generated in the straddle-type vehicle (100) is above the reference acceleration/deceleration (Sakamoto, para. 0028: “Further, according to the embodiment of this invention, an electronic brake force distribution is effected between the front wheel and the rear wheel. The distribution rate of the rear wheel to the front wheel is changed in accordance with the vehicle decelerations…The brake force of the rear wheel is equally changed with that of the front wheel below the vehicle deceleration g3 [i.e., a reference acceleration/deceleration; where the acceleration/deceleration generated in the straddle-type vehicle (100) is above the reference acceleration/deceleration ], namely at the gradient of 45 degree. Over the deceleration of g3 [i.e., a reference acceleration/deceleration ], the distribution rate of the rear brake force to the front brake force is decreased [i.e., sets the priority of the front wheel (3) to be higher ] with the deceleration of g4, g5, g6 [i.e., where the acceleration/deceleration generated in the straddle-type vehicle (100), in the haptic motion, is below a reference acceleration/deceleration ]-----. In the end, the brake force of the rear wheel becomes zero [i.e., sets the priority of the front wheel (3) to be higher ].”). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention and with a reasonable likelihood of success to modify the invention disclosed by Oshida, with the concept of changing the priority of braking one wheel versus the other wheel, based on the acceleration or deceleration of a straddle-type vehicle being above or below a threshold, further taught by Sakamoto, in order to make sure the vehicle maintains stability, traction and rider safety (Sakamoto, para. 0032: “When the motorcycle runs on a narrow bridge or narrow road, the driver applies sometime a little brake to the rear wheel for stabilizing the vehicle posture, because the front brake is so designed to be larger than the rear brake force.”) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oshida, in view of "On the Traction Control of Single-Track Vehicles in Different Trim Conditions", hereinafter “Bonci” (previously of record) . Regarding claim 6 , Oshida discloses the controller according to claim 1, but does not appear to explicitly teach the following: wherein the travel state information that is acquired by the acquisition section (54) includes information on a slip degree that is generated on the front and rear wheels of the straddle-type vehicle (100) . However, in the same field of endeavor, Bonci teaches: wherein the travel state information that is acquired by the acquisition section (54) includes information on a slip degree that is generated on the front and rear wheels of the straddle-type vehicle (100) (Bonci, pg. 1, col. 2, 3 rd full paragraph : “When the longitudinal rear wheel slip exceeds a certain predetermined threshold, the controller brings it back to its optimal value [i.e., travel state information that is acquired…includes information on a slip degree ]. When the vehicle is in the bend, the longitudinal and lateral forces generated between the tyre and the ground are coupled and the reduction of the longitudinal slip allows to reduce at the same time the lateral slip.”; Note: Wheel slip degree acquisition is inherent to a system with a controller that compares the current wheel slip degree to a threshold and is capable of bringing the current wheel slip degree back to its optimal value. Acquiring wheel slip in the front wheel would be an obvious variant of acquiring wheel slip in the rear wheel, to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the application.). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention and with a reasonable likelihood of success to modify the invention disclosed by Oshida, with the concept of acquiring wheel slip degree information, taught by Bonci, in order to use wheel slip degree information in a rider-assistance system, to increase the traction and the control of each wheel, and therefore increase the safe travel of the rider of a straddle-type vehicle. (Bonci, pg. 1, col. 1, 3 rd paragraph: “For example devices such as the Electronic Brakeforce Distribution (EBD) and the Electronic Stability Control (ESC) have made the Anti-lock Braking System (ABS) even more capable in helping the driver to control and maneuver the vehicle faster and safer. The ABS also sends data to the Traction Control System (TCS), another important car safety device that prevent the wheel’s loss of traction provoked by a sudden acceleration.”) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 7 and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oshida, in view of Bonci and WO-2013146907-A1, hereinafter “Mizutani” (previously of record) . Regarding claim 7 , Oshida and Bonci teach the controller according to claim 6 , but do not appear to explicitly teach the following: wherein when the information on the slip degree is information on a state where a first slip degree is generated on the front wheel (3) when compared to the rear wheel (4), in the haptic motion, the haptic motion performing section (53) sets the priority of the rear wheel (4) to be higher than the front wheel (3) in comparison with a case where the information on the slip degree is information on a state where a second slip degree when compared to the rear wheel (4) is generated on the front wheel (3), wherein the first slip degree is greater than the second slip degree. However, in the same field of endeavor, Mizutani teaches: wherein when the information on the slip degree is information on a state where a first slip degree is generated on the front wheel (3) when compared to the rear wheel (4), in the haptic motion, the haptic motion performing section (53) sets the priority of the rear wheel (4) to be higher than the front wheel (3) in comparison with a case where the information on the slip degree is information on a state where a second slip degree when compared to the rear wheel (4) is generated on the front wheel (3), wherein the first slip degree is greater than the second slip degree. (translated document of Mizutani, para. 84: “Whether or not the front wheel slip amount is greater than or equal to the first threshold value is determined (step S 6). When the front wheel slip amount is not equal to or larger than the first threshold value (NO in step S 6), the process returns to step 3. [i.e., a second slip degree when compared to the rear wheel (4) is generated on the front wheel (3) ]. On the other hand, when the front wheel slip amount is equal to or larger than the first threshold value [i.e., a first slip degree is generated on the front wheel (3) when compared to the rear wheel (4); wherein the first slip degree is greater than the second slip degree ] (YES in step S6), the inclination angle detection unit 573 detects the inclination angle of the motorcycle 1 (step S 7). The reduction ratio determination unit 579 determines a reduction ratio (step S 8). When the vehicle body is not inclined, the reduction ratio determination unit 579 determines the decrease ratio to be the decrease reference ratio. When the vehicle body is inclined, the reduction ratio determination unit 579 corrects the decrease reference ratio using the decrease correction relationship to determine the reduction ratio. When the reduction ratio is determined, the front wheel hydraulic pressure control unit 59 decreases the braking force of the front wheel brake 51 based on the decrease ratio [i.e., sets the priority of the rear wheel (4) to be higher than the front wheel (3) ] (step S9).”). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention and with a reasonable likelihood of success to modify the invention disclosed by Oshida, as modified by Bonci, with the concept of increasing the braking force or braking priority of a wheel with controllable, available traction, as determined by the difference in wheel rotational speed and the speed of the straddle-type vehicle (slip), taught by Mizutani, in order to provide rider-assistance in restoring controllable, available, traction on both wheels, thus increasing rider control of the vehicle and safety (Mizutani, para. 3: “Motorcycles are known as one type of straddle-type vehicle. The motorcycle includes a front wheel brake for applying a braking force to the front wheel and a rear wheel brake for applying a braking force to the rear wheel. If the wheel stops rotating (wheel lock) while the motorcycle is moving, it becomes difficult for an occupant to steer the vehicle.”; para. 4: “For example, when a motorcycle turns, an occupant sometimes tilts the motorcycle. In the state where the motorcycle is tilted, the centrifugal force and the lateral frictional force of the wheel are balanced. When the brake is operated with the motorcycle tilted, when the wheel stops rotating, the frictional force in the lateral direction of the wheel decreases. For this reason, the motorcycle is in an unstable state, such as skidding. Therefore, in a state where the vehicle body is inclined, the necessity of preventing the rotation stop of the wheel is higher than in a state where the vehicle body is not inclined.”). Regarding claim 8 , Oshida and Bonci teach the controller according to claim 6 , but do not appear to explicitly teach the following: wherein when the information on the slip degree is information on a state where a first slip degree is generated on the rear wheel (4) when compared to the front wheel (3), in the haptic motion, the haptic motion performing section (53) sets the priority of the front wheel (3) to be higher than the rear wheel (4) in comparison with a case where the information on the slip degree is information on a state where a second slip degree when compared to the front wheel (3) is generated on the rear wheel (4), wherein the first slip degree is greater than the second slip degree. However, in the same field of endeavor, Mizutani teaches: wherein when the information on the slip degree is information on a state where a first slip degree is generated on the rear wheel (4) when compared to the front wheel (3), in the haptic motion, the haptic motion performing section (53) sets the priority status of the front wheel (3) to be higher than the rear wheel (4) in comparison with a case where the information on the slip degree is information on a state where a second slip degree when compared to the front wheel (3) is generated on the rear wheel (4), wherein the first slip degree is greater than the second slip degree (Mizutani, para. 147: “…when the rear wheel slip amount exceeds the first threshold value [i.e., a first slip degree is generated on the rear wheel (4) when compared to the front wheel ], the braking force of the rear wheel brake 52 is lowered [i.e., sets the priority of the front wheel (3) to be higher than the rear wheel (4) ] based on the reduction ratio corrected according to the inclination angle of the motorcycle 1.”; para. 126: “…when the rear wheel slip amount becomes equal to or less than the second threshold value [i.e., a state where a second slip degree when compared to the front wheel (3) is generated on the rear wheel (4); wherein the first slip degree is greater than the second slip degree ] after the rear wheel slip amount exceeds the first threshold value, based on the increase ratio corrected according to the inclination angle of the motorcycle 1 The braking force is increased [i.e., priority of the front wheel is lower than the rear wheel].”). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention and with a reasonable likelihood of success to modify the invention disclosed by Oshida, as modified by Bonci, with the concept of increasing the braking force or braking priority of a wheel with controllable, available traction, as determined by the difference in wheel rotational speed and the speed of the straddle-type vehicle (slip), taught by Mizutani, in order to provide rider-assistance in restoring controllable, available, traction on both wheels, thus increasing rider control of the vehicle and safety (Mizutani, para. 3: “Motorcycles are known as one type of straddle-type vehicle. The motorcycle includes a front wheel brake for applying a braking force to the front wheel and a rear wheel brake for applying a braking force to the rear wheel. If the wheel stops rotating (wheel lock) while the motorcycle is moving, it becomes difficult for an occupant to steer the vehicle.”; para. 4: “For example, when a motorcycle turns, an occupant sometimes tilts the motorcycle. In the state where the motorcycle is tilted, the centrifugal force and the lateral frictional force of the wheel are balanced. When the brake is operated with the motorcycle tilted, when the wheel stops rotating, the frictional force in the lateral direction of the wheel decreases. For this reason, the motorcycle is in an unstable state, such as skidding. Therefore, in a state where the vehicle body is inclined, the necessity of preventing the rotation stop of the wheel is higher than in a state where the vehicle body is not inclined.”) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 9, 10, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oshida, in view of US-10668903-B2, hereinafter “Ono” (previously of record) (citations from US-20180178768-A1) . Regarding claim 9 , Oshida discloses the controller according to claim 1 , but do not appear to explicitly teach the following: wherein the travel state information that is acquired by the acquisition section (54) includes information on an up/down grade of a road on which the straddle-type vehicle (100) travels However, in the same field of endeavor, Ono teaches: wherein the travel state information that is acquired by the acquisition section (54) includes information on an up/down grade of a road on which the straddle-type vehicle (100) travels (Ono, para. 0007: “According to the vehicle body behavior control device and the method of controlling behavior of a vehicle body of the present invention, an operation of the behavior control mechanism is controlled based on an axle load applied to the wheel calculated using a gradient value of a road surface and hence, even in a case where a condition of the road surface changes or the like, it is possible to make the behavior of the vehicle body stable.”; Note: Acquisition of the up/down grade of a road , or “gradient value of a road surface”, is inherent to a vehicle body behavior control device that controls the vehicle “based on an axle load applied to the wheel calculated using a gradient value of a road surface.”). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention and with a reasonable likelihood of success to modify the invention disclosed by Oshida, with the concept of acquiring information about the gradient value of a road surface [i.e., up/down grade of a road ] on which a straddle-type vehicle travels, taught by Ono, in order to take into account the conditions of the road surface because they will directly affect the stability, control, braking strategy and safety of the rider of the straddle-type vehicle (Ono, para. 0003: “Accordingly, for example, there may be a case where a braking force applied to each wheel becomes excessively large or small so that behavior of the vehicle body becomes unstable. Further, also in an ABS control and a traction control which do not accompany an interlocking brake operation, there is a case where behavior of a vehicle body becomes unstable due to a reason of a condition of a road surface not being taken into account.”). Regarding claim 10 , Oshida and Ono teach the controller according to claim 9 , and Ono further teaches the following: wherein when the information on the up/down grade is information on a state where the road has an up/down grade that is above a reference up/down grade, in the haptic motion, the haptic motion performing section (53) sets the priority of the rear wheel (4) to be higher than the front wheel (3) in comparison with a case where the information on the up/down grade is below the reference up/down grade (Ono, para. 0049: “A gradient value θ of the road surface is an angle with reference to a horizontal plane [i.e., a reference up/down grade ], wherein a gradient value takes a positive value when a road surface has an uphill gradient [i.e., above a reference up/down grade ] and a gradient value takes a negative value when a road surface has a downhill gradient [i.e., below the reference up/down grade ].”; para. 0084: “For example, in a state where a road surface has an uphill gradient [i.e., above a reference up/down grade ], the vehicle body behavior control execution part 7B5 executes a control such that the larger an axle load applied to the rear wheel 30 (the larger a gradient value θ of a road surface), the larger a ratio of a braking force distributed to the rear wheel 30 becomes [i.e., priority of the rear wheel (4) to be higher than the front wheel (3) ]. On the other hand, in a state where a road surface has a downhill gradient [i.e., below the reference up/down grade ], the vehicle body behavior control execution part 7B5 executes a control such that the larger an axle load applied to the front wheel 20 (the smaller a gradient value θ of a road surface), the larger a ratio of a braking force distributed to the front wheel 20 becomes [i.e., priority status of the rear wheel is lower than the front wheel].”). Regarding claim 20 , Oshida discloses The controller according to claim 1 , but does not appear to explicitly disclose the following: wherein the priority relates to a preference given to a wheel of each of the wheels having less impact on the stability state of the straddle-type vehicle (100) than another wheel when performing the haptic motion to deliver the warning. However, in the same field of endeavor, Ono teaches: wherein the priority relates to a preference given to a wheel of each of the wheels having less impact on the stability state of the straddle-type vehicle (100) than another wheel when performing the haptic motion to deliver the warning (Ono, para. 0055: “By applying a larger braking force to the wheel W having the larger axle load than the wheel W having the small axle load, behavior of the vehicle body can be made stable.”; para. 0071: “Axle loads applied to the respective wheels W change corresponding to a gradient value θ of a road surface. Accordingly, the vehicle body behavior control execution part 7B5 performs a braking force distribution flow described later so as to change a ratio of braking forces applied to the respective wheels W corresponding to the axle load applied to each wheel W thus reducing unstable behavior of the motorcycle [i.e., priority relates to a preference given to a wheel of each of the wheels having less impact on the stability state of the straddle-type vehicle (100) than another wheel when performing the haptic motion to deliver the warning ].”). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention and with a reasonable likelihood of success to modify the invention disclosed by Oshida, with the concept of distributing a brake force across one wheel or the other wheel of a straddle-type vehicle, based on vehicle stability, taught by Ono, in order to maintain vehicle stability and rider safety when rider-assistance systems control braking forces (Ono, para. 0056: “In the vehicle body behavior control device 1, a gradient value θ of a road surface is calculated, and an axle load applied to each wheel W is acquired using the gradient value θ of the road surface. Then, the vehicle body behavior control device 1 performs an interlocking brake operation based on the axle load thus making behavior of the vehicle body stable.”) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 11, 12, and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oshida, in view of US-8046130-B2, hereinafter “Takahara” (previously of record) (citations from US-20100168975-A1) . Regarding claim 11 , Oshida discloses the controller according to claim 1 , but do not appear to explicitly teach the following: wherein the travel state information that is acquired by the acquisition section (54) includes information on a suspension damping degree that is generated on the front and rear wheels of the straddle-type vehicle (100) . However, in the same field of endeavor, Takahara teaches: wherein the travel state information that is acquired by the acquisition section (54) includes information on a suspension damping degree that is generated on the front and rear wheels of the straddle-type vehicle (100) (Takahara, para. 0048: “The vehicle motion control system 10 further includes an electronic controller 50. The controller 50 is a microcomputer that includes a CPU 51, a ROM 52, a RAM 53, a backup RAM 54 and an interface 55 [i.e., acquisition section ], which are interconnected with each other through a bus line. The interface 55 is connected to the wheel speed sensors 41 fl , 41 fr , 41 rl , 41 rr , [i.e., front and rear wheels ] the pressing force sensor 42 and the pitch angle sensor 43 to supply signals [i.e., travel state information ] therefrom to the CPU 51.”; para. 0047: “The pitch angle sensor 43 outputs a signal, which indicates a pitch angle θp of the vehicle body [i.e., suspension damping degree ]. The pitch angle θp becomes a positive value at the time of tilting the vehicle body forward (i.e., at the time of tilting the front side of the vehicle body downward) and becomes a negative value at the time of tilting the vehicle body backward (i.e., at the time of tilting the rear side of the vehicle body downward).”). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention and with a reasonable likelihood of success to modify the invention disclosed by Oshida, with the concept of a vehicle driver- or rider-assistance controller receiving travel state information that includes information on a suspension damping degree , taught by Takahara, in order to assist the rider in maintaining control of a vehicle through maintaining contact between the tires and the road and limiting vehicle pitch, so as to maintain rider comfort and safety (Takahara, para. 0004: “However, when the anti-pitching geometry, which shows an excessively large anti-pitching effect, is adapted, a degree of conducting a vehicle's front-to-rear directional force, which is initially applied to ground contact points of the vehicle wheels (tires) at the time of driving the vehicle on, for example, a rough road, to the vehicle body is increased as a vertical force. This may result in deterioration of the ride feeling of an occupant(s) of the vehicle. In other words, the ride feeling of the occupant(s) is deteriorated during the time of driving the vehicle without applying the brakes (non-braking period).”). Regarding claim 12 , Oshida and Takahara teach the controller according to claim 11 , and Takahara further teaches the following: wherein when the information on the suspension damping degree is information on a state where the suspension damping degree generated on the front wheel (3) is above a reference suspension damping degree, in the haptic motion, the haptic motion performing section (53) sets the priority of the rear wheel (4) to be higher than the front wheel (3) in comparison with a case where the information on the suspension damping degree is information on a state where the suspension damping degree generated on the front wheel (3) is below the reference suspension damping degree (Takahara, para. 0008: “The brake control apparatus is operable to independently apply and control the front wheel brake force and the rear wheel brake force [i.e., sets the priority ].”; para. 0047: “The pitch angle θp [i.e., suspension damping degree with a reference suspension damping degree of θp = zero] becomes a positive value at the time of tilting the vehicle body forward (i.e., at the time of tilting the front side of the vehicle body downward) [i.e., above a reference suspension damping degree ] and becomes a negative value at the time of tilting the vehicle body backward (i.e., at the time of tilting the rear side of the vehicle body downward) [i.e., below the reference suspension damping degree ].”; para. 0010: “In contrast, in the state where the increasing rate of the amount of operation of the brake operating member (e.g., an amount of an operational force or an operational stroke) at the time of starting the operation of the brake operating member by the driver is larger than the predetermined rate, i.e., in the state where the pitch angle shows a large disorder at the time of starting abrupt application of brakes [i.e., suspension damping degree generated on the front wheel (3) is above a reference suspension damping degree ]…That is, in the first distribution, a portion of the brake force to be respectively applied to the plurality of front wheels is transferred to the brake force to be respectively applied to the plurality of rear wheels [i.e., sets the priority of the rear wheel (4) to be higher than the front wheel (3) ]. Thus, the brake force respectively applied to the plurality of front wheels is decreased, and the brake force respectively applied to the plurality of rear wheels is increased by the amount, which is equal to the amount of decrease in the brake force respectively applied to the plurality of front wheels.”) . Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention and with a reasonable likelihood of success to modify the invention disclosed by Oshida, with the concept of a rider-assistance controller with a haptic motion performing section that uses data about a suspension damping degree of a front wheel and a rear wheel to prioritize braking forces to the front wheel or the rear wheel, taught by Takahara, in order to assist the rider in maintaining control of a vehicle through haptic alerts and maintaining contact between the tires and the road and limiting vehicle pitch, so as to maintain rider comfort and safety (Takahara, para. 0004: “However, when the anti-pitching geometry, which shows an excessively large anti-pitching effect, is adapted, a degree of conducting a vehicle's front-to-rear directional force, which is initially applied to ground contact points of the vehicle wheels (tires) at the time of driving the vehicle on, for example, a rough road, to the vehicle body is increased as a vertical force. This may result in deterioration of the ride feeling of an occupant(s) of the vehicle. In other words, the ride feeling of the occupant(s) is deteriorated during the time of driving the vehicle without applying the brakes (non-braking period).”). Regarding claim 13 , Oshida and Takahara teach the controller according to claim 11 , and Takahara further teaches the following: wherein when the information on the suspension damping degree is information on a state where the suspension damping degree generated on the rear wheel (4) is above a reference suspension damping degree, in the haptic motion, the haptic motion performing section (53) sets the priority of the front wheel (3) to be higher than the rear wheel (4) in comparison with a case where the information on the suspension damping degree is information on a state where the suspension damping degree generated on the rear wheel (4) is below the reference suspension damping degree (Takahara , para. 0008: “The brake control apparatus is operable to independently apply and control the front wheel brake force and the rear wheel brake force [i.e., sets the priority ].”; para. 0016: “Furthermore, with the second distribution control means, in the state where the decreasing rate of the amount of operation of the brake operating member (e.g., an amount of an operational force or an operational stroke) during the operation of the brake operating member by the driver is smaller than the predetermined rate, i.e., in the state where the pitch angle shows a large disorder at the time of starting abrupt release of the brakes [i.e., suspension damping degree generated on the rear wheel (4) is above a reference suspension damping degree ]…Specifically, in the state of the second distribution, a portion of the brake force to be respectively applied to the plurality of rear wheels is transferred to the brake force to be respectively applied to the plurality of front wheels [i.e., sets the priority of the front wheel (3) to be higher than the rear wheel (4) ]. Thus, the brake force respectively applied to the plurality of rear wheels is decreased, and the brake force respectively applied to the plurality of front wheels is increased by the amount [i.e., sets the priority status of the front wheel (3) to be higher than the rear wheel (4) ], which is equal to the amount of decrease in the brake force respectively applied to the plurality of rear wheels.”). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention and with a reasonable likelihood of success to modify the invention disclosed by Oshida, with the concept of a rider-assistance controller with a haptic motion performing section that uses data about a suspension damping degree of a front wheel and a rear wheel to prioritize braking forces to the front wheel or the rear wheel, taught by Takahara, in order to assist the rider in maintaining control of a vehicle through haptic alerts and maintaining contact between the tires and the road and limiting vehicle pitch, so as to maintain rider comfort and safety (Takahara, para. 0004: “However, when the anti-pitching geometry, which shows an excessively large anti-pitching effect, is adapted, a degree of conducting a vehicle's front-to-rear directional force, which is initially applied to ground contact points of the vehicle wheels (tires) at the time of driving the vehicle on, for example, a rough road, to the vehicle body is increased as a vertical force. This may result in deterioration of the ride feeling of an occupant(s) of the vehicle. In other words, the ride feeling of the occupant(s) is deteriorated during the time of driving the vehicle without applying the brakes (non-braking period).”) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oshida, in view of "On the Traction Control of Single-Track Vehicles in Different Trim Conditions", hereinafter “Bonci” (previously of record), US-10668903-B2, hereinafter “Ono” (previously of record) (citations from US-20180178768- A1) , and US-8046130-B2, hereinafter “Takahara” (previously of record) (citations from US-20100168975-A1) . Regarding claim 22 , Oshida discloses The controller according to claim 1 , wherein the travel state information includes information on the acceleration/deceleration that is generated in the straddle-type vehicle (100) (Oshida, para. 0050: “…in the case where an operation amount that is related to the operation of the motorcycle 100 by the driver exceeds an operation amount reference value, the avoidance intention determination section 66 determines that the driver has the avoidance intention. The operation of the motorcycle 100 by the driver includes an accelerator pedal operation, a brake operation, and a clutch operation, for example [i.e., the travel state information includes information on the acceleration/deceleration that is generated in the straddle-type vehicle (100) ]. The operation amount reference value is set to such a value that a determination on whether the driver has operated the motorcycle 100 can be made.”) … Oshida does not appear to disclose the following: …on a slip degree that is generated on the front and rear wheels of the straddle-type vehicle (100), an up/down grade of a road on which the straddle-type vehicle (100) travels, and a suspension damping degree that is generated on the front and rear wheels of the straddle-type vehicle (100). However, in the same field of endeavor, Bonci teaches: on a slip degree that is generated on the front and rear wheels of the straddle-type vehicle (100) (Bonci, pg. 1, col. 2, 3 rd full paragraph : “When the longitudinal rear wheel slip exceeds a certain predetermined threshold, the controller brings it back to its optimal value [i.e., travel state information that is acquired…includes information on a slip degree ]. When the vehicle is in the bend, the longitudinal and lateral forces generated between the tyre and the ground are coupled and the reduction of the longitudinal slip allows to reduce at the same time the lateral slip.”) … Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention and with a reasonable likelihood of success to modify the invention disclosed by Oshida, with the concept of acquiring wheel slip degree information, taught by Bonci, in order to use wheel slip degree information in a rider-assistance system, to increase the traction and the control of each wheel, and therefore increase the safe travel of the rider of a straddle-type vehicle. (Bonci, pg. 1, col. 1, 3 rd paragraph: “For example devices such as the Electronic Brakeforce Distribution (EBD) and the Electronic Stability Control (ESC) have made the Anti-lock Braking System (ABS) even more capable in helping the driver to control and maneuver the vehicle faster and safer. The ABS also sends data to the Traction Control System (TCS), another important car safety device that prevent the wheel’s loss of traction provoked by a sudden acceleration.”). Oshida and Bonci do not appear to disclose the following: …an up/down grade of a road on which the straddle-type vehicle (100) travels, and a suspension damping degree that is generated on the front and rear wheels of the straddle-type vehicle (100). However, in the same field of endeavor, Ono teaches: …an up/down grade of a road on which the straddle-type vehicle (100) travels (Ono, para. 0007: “According to the vehicle body behavior control device and the method of controlling behavior of a vehicle body of the present invention, an operation of the behavior control mechanism is controlled based on an axle load applied to the wheel calculated using a gradient value of a road surface [i.e., an up/down grade of a road on which the straddle-type vehicle (100) travels ] and hence, even in a case where a condition of the road surface changes or the like, it is possible to make the behavior of the vehicle body stable.”) , and… Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention and with a reasonable likelihood of success to modify the invention disclosed by Oshida, as modified by Bonci, with the concept of acquiring information about the gradient value of a road surface [i.e., up/down grade of a road ] on which a straddle-type vehicle travels, taught by Ono, in order to take into account the conditions of the road surface because they will directly affect the stability, control, braking strategy and safety of the rider of the straddle-type vehicle (Ono, para. 0003: “Accordingly, for example, there may be a case where a braking force applied to each wheel becomes excessively large or small so that behavior of the vehicle body becomes unstable. Further, also in an ABS control and a traction control which do not accompany an interlocking brake operation, there is a case where behavior of a vehicle body becomes unstable due to a reason of a condition of a road surface not being taken into account.”). Oshida, Bonci, and Ono do not appear to disclose the following: …a suspension damping degree that is generated on the front and rear wheels of the straddle-type vehicle (100). However, in the same field of endeavor, Takahara teaches: …a suspension damping degree that is generated on the front and rear wheels of the straddle-type vehicle (100) (Takahara, para. 0048: “The vehicle motion control system 10 further includes an electronic controller 50. The controller 50 is a microcomputer that includes a CPU 51, a ROM 52, a RAM 53, a backup RAM 54 and an interface 55 [i.e., acquisition section ], which are interconnected with each other through a bus line. The interface 55 is connected to the wheel speed sensors 41 fl , 41 fr , 41 rl , 41 rr , [i.e., front and rear wheels ] the pressing force sensor 42 and the pitch angle sensor 43 to supply signals [i.e., travel state information ] therefrom to the CPU 51.”; para. 0047: “The pitch angle sensor 43 outputs a signal, which indicates a pitch angle θp of the vehicle body [i.e., suspension damping degree ]. The pitch angle θp becomes a positive value at the time of tilting the vehicle body forward (i.e., at the time of tilting the front side of the vehicle body downward) and becomes a negative value at the time of tilting the vehicle body backward (i.e., at the time of tilting the rear side of the vehicle body downward).”). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention and with a reasonable likelihood of success to modify the invention disclosed by Oshida, as modified by Bonci and Ono, with the concept of a vehicle driver- or rider-assistance controller receiving travel state information that includes information on a suspension damping degree , taught by Takahara, in order to assist the rider in maintaining control of a vehicle through maintaining contact between the tires and the road and limiting vehicle pitch, so as to maintain rider comfort and safety (Takahara, para. 0004: “However, when the anti-pitching geometry, which shows an excessively large anti-pitching effect, is adapted, a degree of conducting a vehicle's front-to-rear directional force, which is initially applied to ground contact points of the vehicle wheels (tires) at the time of driving the vehicle on, for example, a rough road, to the vehicle body is increased as a vertical force. This may result in deterioration of the ride feeling of an occupant(s) of the vehicle. In other words, the ride feeling of the occupant(s) is deteriorated during the time of driving the vehicle without applying the brakes (non-braking period).”). Additional Relevant Art 07-96 AIA The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure : US-20110054756-A1 (2011-03-03) | ”A driving assistance system for motor vehicles, having a hazard sensor, is described that uses the brake system of the motor vehicle for the haptic warning of a driver, in that selected brake actuators of the vehicle are activated and deactivated according to a predetermined pattern. In this manner, depending on the pattern, a vibration of a steering wheel of the vehicle may be generated, as well as a response of the vehicle which simulates driving on an uneven roadway or a “washboard” roadway, or driving over an obstacle. In addition, a haptically perceivable warning signal may also be provided for a given deflection direction of the steering wheel via the difference in braking force between left and the right front wheels.” US-20180208189-A1 (2018-07-26) | Momentary brake pulse to create a haptic indication for the rider. Para. 0037: “It is also noted that, in the interest of getting the rider's attention at step 222, subsequent to a “yes” result at step 206, the controller 64 may also trigger one or both of: actuating a momentary pulse of the brake 48 or momentarily interrupting the delivery of drive power (e.g., throttle reduction, fuel and/or spark interruption to the engine 14). In other constructions, the momentary brake pulse and/or drive power interruption can be triggered by the controller 64 immediately in response to the identification of the autonomous braking event trigger such as detection of imminent front end collision at step 206. The momentary brake pulse and/or drive power interruption can provide haptic indication to the rider by a small but perceptible pitching forward motion, but neither is operable to be significant enough in amount or duration to remedy the adverse riding situation or other condition serving as an autonomous braking event trigger.” Relevant to claims 1 and 15. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Leah N Miller whose telephone number is (703)756-1933. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 8:30am - 5:30pm ET. Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Abby Flynn can be reached on (571) 272-9855. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /L.N.M./Examiner, Art Unit 3663 /JAMES M MCPHERSON/Examiner, Art Unit 3663 Application/Control Number: 17/797,624 Page 2 Art Unit: 3663 Application/Control Number: 17/797,624 Page 3 Art Unit: 3663 Application/Control Number: 17/797,624 Page 4 Art Unit: 3663 Application/Control Number: 17/797,624 Page 5 Art Unit: 3663 Application/Control Number: 17/797,624 Page 6 Art Unit: 3663 Application/Control Number: 17/797,624 Page 7 Art Unit: 3663 Application/Control Number: 17/797,624 Page 8 Art Unit: 3663 Application/Control Number: 17/797,624 Page 9 Art Unit: 3663 Application/Control Number: 17/797,624 Page 10 Art Unit: 3663 Application/Control Number: 17/797,624 Page 11 Art Unit: 3663 Application/Control Number: 17/797,624 Page 12 Art Unit: 3663 Application/Control Number: 17/797,624 Page 13 Art Unit: 3663 Application/Control Number: 17/797,624 Page 14 Art Unit: 3663 Application/Control Number: 17/797,624 Page 15 Art Unit: 3663 Application/Control Number: 17/797,624 Page 16 Art Unit: 3663 Application/Control Number: 17/797,624 Page 17 Art Unit: 3663 Application/Control Number: 17/797,624 Page 18 Art Unit: 3663 Application/Control Number: 17/797,624 Page 19 Art Unit: 3663 Application/Control Number: 17/797,624 Page 20 Art Unit: 3663 Application/Control Number: 17/797,624 Page 21 Art Unit: 3663 Application/Control Number: 17/797,624 Page 22 Art Unit: 3663 Application/Control Number: 17/797,624 Page 23 Art Unit: 3663 Application/Control Number: 17/797,624 Page 24 Art Unit: 3663 Application/Control Number: 17/797,624 Page 25 Art Unit: 3663 Application/Control Number: 17/797,624 Page 26 Art Unit: 3663 Application/Control Number: 17/797,624 Page 27 Art Unit: 3663 Application/Control Number: 17/797,624 Page 28 Art Unit: 3663 Application/Control Number: 17/797,624 Page 29 Art Unit: 3663 Application/Control Number: 17/797,624 Page 30 Art Unit: 3663 Application/Control Number: 17/797,624 Page 31 Art Unit: 3663 Application/Control Number: 17/797,624 Page 32 Art Unit: 3663 Application/Control Number: 17/797,624 Page 33 Art Unit: 3663 Application/Control Number: 17/797,624 Page 34 Art Unit: 3663 Application/Control Number: 17/797,624 Page 35 Art Unit: 3663 Application/Control Number: 17/797,624 Page 36 Art Unit: 3663 Application/Control Number: 17/797,624 Page 37 Art Unit: 3663 Application/Control Number: 17/797,624 Page 38 Art Unit: 3663 Application/Control Number: 17/797,624 Page 39 Art Unit: 3663
Prosecution Insights