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 .
In view of the appeal brief filed on 3/23/2026, PROSECUTION IS HEREBY REOPENED. A new ground of rejection is set forth below.
To avoid abandonment of the application, appellant must exercise one of the following two options:
(1) file a reply under 37 CFR 1.111 (if this Office action is non-final) or a reply under 37 CFR 1.113 (if this Office action is final); or,
(2) initiate a new appeal by filing a notice of appeal under 37 CFR 41.31 followed by an appeal brief under 37 CFR 41.37. The previously paid notice of appeal fee and appeal brief fee can be applied to the new appeal. If, however, the appeal fees set forth in 37 CFR 41.20 have been increased since they were previously paid, then appellant must pay the difference between the increased fees and the amount previously paid.
A Supervisory Patent Examiner (SPE) has approved of reopening prosecution by signing below:
/JOHN OLSZEWSKI/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3617
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Appeal Brief filed - 03/23/2026, with respect to the rejections of claims 1-20 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new grounds of rejection is made in view of Miano (DE 102019129032). With regards to claim 10, applicant’s arguments towards Park were towards the claim limitations of claim 1 and Park is being used to teach the limitations of separate claim 10. The rejection under 35 U.S.C. in view of Park is maintained in view of the new grounds of rejection.
Claim Objections
Claim 11 is objected to because of the following informalities: “using the vehicle systems to manipulate at least one the brake set” should read “using the vehicle systems to manipulate at least one of the brake set”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 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 –
(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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-4, 6-9, 11-15, and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being clearly anticipated by Miano (DE 102019129032; For purposes of this examination, examiner will refer to US 20230001929).
Regarding claim 1, Miano teaches a method comprising:
determining an availability of a brake-to-steer system within a vehicle ([0006]-[0007]); communicating the availability of the brake-to-steer system to a controller within the vehicle ([0009]-[0013]);
determining an availability of an electronic steering system within the vehicle ([0007]);
communicating the availability of the electronic steering system to the controller ([0007]);
wherein the determining of the availability of the electronic steering system within the vehicle includes identifying at least one of: an inoperable communication between a handwheel actuator and a road wheel actuator, or a failure of a road wheel actuator ([0014]);
receiving steering requests ([0042]);
wherein the steering requests are received from a steering wheel input control by a driver, via a handwheel actuator ([0042]);
converting steering requests to brake pressure requests ([0009]-[0012]);
wherein converting the steering requests comprises converting a steering wheel angle and a steering torque into yaw rate requests, and mapping the yaw rate requests to brake pressure ([0043])
applying brake pressure to at least one individual brake caliper within the vehicle according to the brake pressure requests to steer the vehicle ([0010]-[0011]); and
wherein a vehicle propulsion system is concurrently controlled to maintain or change vehicle velocity ([0013]).
Regarding claim 11, Miano teaches a method for use in a vehicle having a plurality of vehicle systems comprising a braking system configured to manipulate a brake set (Abstract), a steering system configured to adjust a roadwheel direction (Abstract), a propulsion system configured to deliver driving power to at least one roadwheel (Abstract, [0013]), a brake-to-steer system ([0008]-[0012]), and a controller in operable communication with the braking system, steering system, and propulsion system (Claims 11-12), the method comprising:
determining availability of the brake-to-steer system within the vehicle ([0006]-[0007]);
determining availability of the steering system within the vehicle ([0007])
wherein determining availability of the steering system within the vehicle comprises identifying at least partial failure or loss of communication between steering system components ([0007] and [0014]);
using the controller to generate and communicate commands from the steering system to the controller and braking system (Claims 11-12), comprising:
receiving steering requests ([0042]);
wherein the steering requests to be generated based upon steering wheel input from a driver received via a handwheel actuator ([0042]);
generating an adjustment signal based upon steering requests ([0031]);
using the vehicle systems to manipulate at least one of the brake set, the steering system, or the propulsion system based upon the adjustment signal ([0008]-[0013]); and wherein the controller determines yaw rate commands from steering input ([0010]) and translates the yaw rate commands to differential braking pressure for individual wheels ([0011]).
Regarding claims 2 and 12 (same limitations, different dependencies), Miano teaches wherein the receiving steering requests comprises receiving the steering requests from a handwheel and handwheel actuator system controlled by a driver ([0042]).
Regarding claims 3 and 14 (same limitations, different dependencies), Miano teaches wherein the receiving steering requests comprises receiving steering requests from a handwheel actuator system ([0042] and [0009]-[0013]).
Regarding claims 4 and 15 (same limitations, different dependencies), Miano teaches:
further comprising utilizing an external steering column sensor to determine driver intent of lateral travel of the vehicle ([0002] and [0004]); and
wherein the using the controller to generate and communicate commands from the steering system to the controller comprises utilizing an external steering column sensor to determine driver intent of lateral travel of a vehicle prior to determine steering requests ([0002] and [0004], Miano teaches a steer-by-wire steering system and that in steer-by wire steering systems: the driver's steering demand is picked up by a steering angle sensor, and the position of the steered wheels is controlled by means of a steering actuator in a manner dependent on the driver's steering demand; [0008]-[0013], Miano teaches that a controller generates steering commands in dependence on an input from a steering wheel).
Regarding claims 6 and 17 (same limitations, different dependencies), Miano teaches wherein the determining the availability of electronic steering system within the vehicle comprises identifying an inoperable communication (or partial faulty communication) between a handwheel actuator system and a roadwheel actuator system (0007] and [0014], Claim 11; a failure of the steering system would encompass inoperable communication between a handwheel actuator and a roadwheel actuator).
Regarding claims 7 and 18 (same limitations, different dependencies), Miano teaches wherein the determining the availability of the electronic steering system within the vehicle comprises identifying at least partial failure of a roadwheel actuator system (0007] and [0014], Claim 11; a failure of the steering system encompasses a failure of the roadwheel actuator system).
Regarding claim 8, Miano teaches further comprising manipulating a propulsion system within the vehicle to maintain a vehicle velocity while applying brake pressure to at least one individual brake caliper within the vehicle according to the brake pressure requests to steer the vehicle ([0013]).
Regarding claim 9, Miano teaches wherein the converting steering requests to brake pressure requests comprises converting steering requests to the yaw rate requests ([0010]) and subsequently converting the yaw rate requests to brake pressure requests ([0011]).
Regarding claim 19, Miano teaches wherein the using the plurality of vehicle systems to manipulate the at least one brake set, the steering system, or the propulsion system based upon the adjustment signal comprises:
manipulating the propulsion system within the vehicle to maintain a vehicle velocity while applying brake pressure to at least one individual brake caliper within the vehicle according to the brake pressure request ([0013]).
Regarding claim 20, Miano teaches a method for use in a vehicle having a plurality of vehicle systems comprising a braking system configured to manipulate a brake set (Abstract), a steering system configured to adjust a roadwheel direction (Abstract), a propulsion system configured to deliver driving power to at least one roadwheel (Abstract, [0013]), a brake-to-steer system ([0008]-[0012]), and a controller in operable communication with the braking system, steering system, and propulsion system (Claims 11-12), the method comprising:
determining an availability of a brake-to-steer system within the vehicle ([0007]);
communicating the availability of the brake-to-steer system to a controller within the vehicle ([0007] and [0014], Claim 11);
determining availability of an electronic steering system within the vehicle ([0007]); communicating the availability of the electronic steering system to the controller ([0007] and [0014], Claim 11);
and implementing brake-to-steer by:
receiving steering requests from a portion of the steering system ([0042]);
wherein the steering requests originate from driver input to a steering wheel ([0042]);
converting the steering requests to brake pressure requests ([0009]-[0012]);
wherein conversion is based upon a mapping from driver-intended yaw rate ([0010]) to calibrated differential brake pressure ([0011]);
manipulating the propulsion system and the braking system within the vehicle to maintain or change vehicle velocity while applying brake pressure to at least one individual brake caliper within the vehicle according to the brake pressure requests to steer the vehicle ([0013]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 5 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Miano in view of Demerly (US 20020189889).
Regarding claims 5 and 16 (same limitations, different dependencies), Miano does not teach wherein the determining the availability of the brake-to-steer system within a vehicle comprises factoring in a vehicle velocity.
However, Demerly teaches a backup steering system using differential braking in the event of a failure in the steering system (Abstract of Demerly) which factors in vehicle velocity when determining the availability of the brake-to-steer system within the vehicle ([0009] of Demerly).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Miano to determine the availability of the system by factoring in vehicle velocity as Demerly teaches in order to advantageously provide the vehicle with a reliable alternative for emergency directional control ([0005] of Demerly).
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park (KR 20120139909).
Regarding claim 10, Miano teaches a method comprising converting steering requests to the brake pressure requests ([0008]-[0013]) does not teach using a lookup table to convert steering requests to brake pressure requests.
However, Park teaches wherein desired steering requests can be mapped to brake pressure values through a lookup table (Pg. 3, Paragraph 4 of Park).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Miano to convert steering requests to brake pressure requests using a lookup table as Park does in order to advantageously provide a cruise control system for a vehicle which can accurately drive in the direction required by the driver during turning (Pg. 2, Paragraph 5 of Park).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
US 20140190759 teaches a vehicle steering system utilizing differential braking.
WO 2020182480 teaches a differential braking system that acquires a yaw rate which is converted to braking distribution rates.
EP 2998175 teaches a backup brake-to-steer system for a vehicle which determines that an error has occurred within the steering system.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NATHANIEL WILLIAM WATKINS whose telephone number is (703)756-4744. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday, 8:30 am -6:00 pm EST; Friday 8:30 am - 2:00 pm EST.
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, John Olszewski can be reached at 5712722706. 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.
/N.W.W./Examiner, Art Unit 3617
/JOHN OLSZEWSKI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3617
Prosecution Insights