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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 10/14/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. In regards to the independent claims, the applicant argues that the references, taken alone or in combination, do not teach the limitation “compare the received friction data to a plurality of traction control setting profiles, each traction control setting profile comprising a plurality of traction control settings for at least anti-slip regulation, electronic stability control, and an axle load optimization, each traction control setting profile directed to a unique combination of the plurality of traction control settings”, as recited in independent claim 1. Upon further consideration of the amended claims and the prior art of record, the examiner respectfully disagrees.
Specifically, Prakah teaches “compare the received friction data to a plurality of traction control setting profiles” (Para. 0053 and 0056 – where a decision maker of the system will use the LTA and LRA value and select a “traction mode”, or setting profile, based on the LTA and LRA values, such that it compares the values to the modes; where the modes include “a low-traction (LT) mode” and a “normal traction mode”, such that there are two modes, or profiles), but Prakah does not teach the full amended limitation recited above. However, Prakah in view of Bird teaches a plurality of “control modes” which adjust settings for “subsystem control mode[s]”, including different configurations based on the current surface to “suit different driving conditions” (Bird, Para. 0003 and 0033), where Bird further teaches control modes for a “traction control system” which is part of a “slip control system”, as well as control modes “dynamic stability control system”, or electronic stability control system (Bird, Para. 0042, 0089, 0137, and 0171). It is known in the art that a “traction control system”, as taught in Bird, is also known as an anti-slip regulation system, as shown evidentiarily in newly cited prior art Hilgers, such that Bird teaches the ASR limitation of the pending claims. Furthermore, Bird teaches a system which initiates “control of the or each of the vehicle subsystems in a selected one of a plurality of subsystem control modes, each of which corresponds to one or more different driving conditions for the vehicle”, for example a “control mode”, corresponding to “motion of the vehicle over sand”, which controls the various subsystems, or settings, to be suitable for sand (and similarly for other modes, such as an ice mode or mud mode) such that each traction control setting profile is directed to a unique combination of a the plurality of traction control settings (Bird, Para. 0015-0019, 0075, 0112-0114, 0129). Additionally, as cited previously, Eberling teaches “various operating modes” directed towards axle load optimization (Eberling, Para. 0032-0034), such that it would be obvious to combine the traction control modes taught by Prakah and Bird to include axle load control settings as another method to improve traction and improve wheel to surface friction.
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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 4-6, 8, 11-17, and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Prakah-Asante, et al., hereinafter Prakah (U.S. Patent Application Pub. No. 2017/0341654) in view of Bird, et al., hereinafter Bird (U.S. Patent Application Pub. No. 2015/0203119) and further in view of Eberling, et al., hereinafter Eberling (U.S. Patent Application Pub. No. 2002/0074746), and Hilgers, et al., hereinafter Hilgers (Electrical Systems and Mechatronics, 10 March 2021, Springer Vieweg Berlin, Heidelberg, 1st Edition [Evidentiary]).
Regarding Claim 1, Prakah teaches: A computer system (Prakah, Para. 0004-0006 – “a system” for computing), comprising:
at least one computing device comprising a processor device (Prakah, Para. 0006 and 0017 – one or more processors of a vehicle controller) configured to:
receive friction data relating to at least one friction condition experienced by a vehicle (Prakah, Para. 0026-0031 and 0041 – collecting data and calculating “a longitudinal tracking accumulation (LTA)”, which is related to traction/friction, and “a lateral response accumulation (LRA)”, which indicates likelihoods of low traction conditions; for example an LTA value “closer to 1 reflecting a greater likelihood of longitudinal slippery conditions, and values closer to 0 reflecting relatively lesser likelihood of longitudinally slippery conditions”);
compare the received friction data to a plurality of traction control setting profiles (Prakah, Para. 0053 and 0056 – where a decision maker of the system will use the LTA and LRA value and select a “traction mode”, or setting profile, based on the LTA and LRA values, such that it compares the values to the modes; where the modes include “a low-traction (LT) mode” and a “normal traction mode”, such that there are two modes, or profiles),
determine a recommended traction control setting profile where the “adaptive drive control (ADC)”, on an auto mode, will “automatically adapt to mode selection for particular driving contexts” based on traction data (i.e. LTA and LRA values and environmental data) or where the ADC controller “may be used to automatically select from or make recommendations to select from operational modes”); and
communicate a recommended traction control setting of the plurality of traction control settings for the recommended traction control setting profile to a display, to be displayed (Prakah, Fig. 3-4 and Para. 0056-0062 – where the ADC controller is in communication with “a head unit or other display” of the vehicle which displays “an ADC controller 106 recommendation”, as well as other options regarding the ADC, such as “automatic traction mode”, etc.).
PNG
media_image1.png
400
545
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
395
543
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Prakah, Figs. 3 and 4
While Prakah teaches compare the received friction data to a traction control setting profile and a normal control setting comprising one or more traction control settings, and determine a recommended traction control setting profile corresponding to the received friction data based on the best fit of the friction data to a traction control setting profile, Prakah does not teach a plurality of traction control setting profiles, each traction control setting profile comprising a plurality of traction control settings for at least anti-slip regulation, electronic stability control, and axle load optimization, each traction control setting profile directed to a unique combination of a the plurality of traction control settings, and determining a traction control setting profile of the plurality of traction control setting profiles corresponding to the received friction data based on the best fit of the friction data to a traction control setting profile of the plurality of traction control setting profiles.
However, Bird teaches a plurality of traction control setting profiles (Bird, Para. 0054, 0064, 0074-0075, 0151 – a plurality of “operating modes”, or “control modes”, including various modes for reducing wheel spin, thus improving traction, such as “off-road mode”, “low friction mode”, which includes a “mud mode” and “another low friction mode suitable for driving in snow, on grass, or on gravel”, “high friction mode”, a “sand mode”, etc.),
each traction control setting profile comprising a plurality of traction control settings (Bird, Para. 0003 and 0033 – where the plurality of “control modes” adjust settings for “subsystem control mode[s]”, including different configurations based on, for example, the current surface to “suit different driving conditions”) for at least anti-slip regulation (Bird, Para. 0042 and 0089 – “operating modes include control modes of a traction control system” as part of “slip control”; Hilgers [evidentiary], Page 45-46 – “traction control” (TCS) is also known as “anti-slip regulation (ASR)”, such that TCS and ASR are interchangeable) and electronic stability control (Bird, Para. 0089, 0137, and 0171 – a “dynamic stability control system” which may also be activated in different configurations, separate from a “TC (Traction Control) function”; where both the “stability control system” and “traction control system” are part of a “slip control system”),
each traction control setting profile directed to a unique combination of a the plurality of traction control settings (Bird, Para. 0015-0019, 0075, 0112-0114, 0129 – where the system may initiate “control of the or each of the vehicle subsystems in a selected one of a plurality of subsystem control modes, each of which corresponds to one or more different driving conditions for the vehicle”, for example a “control mode”, corresponding to “motion of the vehicle over sand”, which controls the various subsystems, or settings, to be suitable for sand, and similarly for ice, mud, etc.), and
determining a traction control setting profile of the plurality of traction control setting profiles corresponding to the received friction data based on the best fit of the friction data to a traction control setting profile of the plurality of traction control setting profiles (Bird, Para. 0128-0136, 0141-0145, 0152 – where a “vehicle control unit”, or “VCU”, collects “continuous sensor outputs” to derive “terrain indicators”, where the “terrain indicators” include “the torque at which wheel slip occurs”, “surface rolling resistance”, “wheel longitudinal slip”, “lateral friction”, etc., which constitute friction data; and where based on the “terrain indicators”, the vehicle may select a “control mode” most suitable “based on the terrain indicators”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the computer system of Prakah to include a plurality of traction control setting profiles, each traction control setting profile comprising a plurality of traction control settings for at least anti-slip regulation and electronic stability control, and determining a traction control setting profile of the plurality of traction control setting profiles corresponding to the received friction data based on the best fit of the friction data to a traction control setting profile of the plurality of traction control setting profiles, as taught by Bird, in order to provide a larger number of traction control setting profiles depending on a variety of terrain types and friction data conditions to prevent loss of traction.
Prakah in view of Bird does not specifically teach traction control settings for at least axle load optimization.
However, Eberling teaches traction control settings for at least axle load optimization (Eberling, Para. 0032-0034 – “various operating modes”, or profiles, intended to “distribute the weight of a load on the drive and tag axles in a predetermined and controlled manner” when a “traction control event” occurs; where each operating mode includes controlling pistons, springs, etc. in order to shift weight between the axles, where the control can be set to evenly distribute weight, shift more weight onto a drive axle, etc. in order to improve traction, such that there are different load distribution settings).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified the computer system including the above limitations of Prakah in view of Bird and Hilgers to include traction control settings for at least axle load optimization, as taught by Eberling, in order to improve the traction of the vehicle using axle load optimization to distribute the load and improve wheel to surface friction (Eberling, Abstract).
In regards to Claim 2, Prakah in view of Bird, Hilgers, and Eberling teaches the computing system of Claim 1, and Prakah teaches friction data (Prakah, Para. 0026-0031 and 0041 – collecting data and calculating “a longitudinal tracking accumulation (LTA)”, which is related to traction/friction (i.e. slippery conditions)), but Prakah does not teach wherein the friction data comprises a rolling resistance of the vehicle.
However, Bird teaches wherein the friction data comprises a rolling resistance of the vehicle (Bird, Para. 0128-0136, 0141-0145, 0152 – where a “vehicle control unit”, or “VCU”, collects “continuous sensor outputs” to derive “terrain indicators”, where the “terrain indicators” include “surface rolling resistance”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the computing system including the above limitations of Prakah in view of Bird, Hilgers, and Eberling to include wherein the friction data comprises a rolling resistance of the vehicle, as taught by Bird in order to account for forces resisting the motion of the wheels of the vehicle rolling which are caused by deformations of the wheels, the road material, etc.
In regards to Claim 4, Prakah in view of Bird, Hilgers, and Eberling teaches the computing system of Claim 1, and Prakah teaches the friction data (Prakah, Para. 0026-0031 and 0041 – collecting data and calculating “a longitudinal tracking accumulation (LTA)”, which is related to traction/friction (i.e. slippery conditions)), but Prakah does not teach wherein the friction data comprises a friction coefficient relating to friction of the vehicle.
However, Bird teaches wherein the friction data comprises a friction coefficient relating to friction of the vehicle (Bird, Para. 0191 – “a coefficient of friction between the vehicle wheel and the surface”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the computing system including the above limitations of Prakah in view of Bird, Hilgers, and Eberling to further include wherein the friction data comprises a friction coefficient relating to friction of the vehicle, as taught by Bird, in order to account for non-ideal friction circumstances caused by the interaction of the vehicle with roads.
In regards to Claim 5, Prakah in view of Bird, Hilgers, and Eberling teaches the computing system of Claim 1, and Prakah teaches the friction data (Prakah, Para. 0026-0031 and 0041 – collecting data and calculating “a longitudinal tracking accumulation (LTA)”, which is related to traction/friction (i.e. slippery conditions)), but Prakah does not teach wherein the friction data comprises a type of ground that the vehicle is disposed on.
However, Bird teaches wherein the friction data comprises a type of ground that the vehicle is disposed on (Bird, Para. 0054, 0064, 0074-0075, 0151 – a plurality of “operating modes”, or “control modes”, including various modes for reducing wheel spin, thus improving traction, such as “off-road mode”, “low friction mode”, which includes a “mud mode” and “another low friction mode suitable for driving in snow, on grass, or on gravel”, “high friction mode”, a “sand mode”, etc.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the computing system including the above limitations of Prakah in view of Bird, Hilgers, and Eberling to further include wherein the friction data comprises a type of ground that the vehicle is disposed on, as taught by Bird, in order to account for different road conditions that may affect the traction of the vehicle and cause a change in settings.
In regards to Claim 6, Prakah in view of Bird, Hilgers, and Eberling teaches the computer system of Claim 1, and Prakah further teaches wherein the processor device (Prakah, Para. 0006 and 0017 – one or more processors of a vehicle controller) is further configured to:
receive an activation selection of a selected traction control setting of the recommended at least one traction control setting (Prakah, Para. 0056-0062 – where after the recommendation is displayed, the driver may select a “change mode” button to apply, or activate, the traction mode; where the driver may select to enable an automatic traction mode); and
cause the activation selection of the selected traction control setting to be activated as an activated traction control setting for the vehicle (Prakah, Fig. 3 and Para. 0056-0062 – where after the “change mode” button is selected, the ADC controller will “apply the suggested mode”, such that it is activated; where the mode is a traction mode; and where if the automatic traction mode is enable, the automatic traction mode will be “ON” as shown on Fig. 3).
In regards to Claim 8, Prakah in view of Bird, Hilgers, and Eberling teaches the computer system of Claim 6, and Prakah teaches wherein the processor device (Prakah, Para. 0006 and 0017 – one or more processors of a vehicle controller) is further configured to:
receive a deactivation selection of the activated traction control setting (Prakah, Para. 0056-0062 – where after the recommendation is displayed, the driver may select a “dismiss” button to dismiss, or deactivate, the recommended traction mode; where the driver may select to disable an automatic traction mode); and
cause the deactivation selection of the activated traction control setting to be deactivated as deactivated a traction control setting for the vehicle (Prakah, Fig. 3 and Para. 0056-0062 – where after the “dismiss” button is selected, the ADC controller will “dismiss the recommendation 402 without adjusting the operational mode”, where the mode is a traction mode; and where if an automatic traction mode is disabled, the mode will be shown as OFF).
In regards to Claim 12, Prakah in view of Bird, Hilgers, and Eberling teaches the computing system of Claim 1, and Prakah in view of Bird, Hilgers, and Eberling further teaches wherein the processor device (Prakah, Para. 0006 and 0017 – one or more processors of a vehicle controller) is further configured to:
receive second friction data relating to a second at least one friction condition experienced by the vehicle (Prakah, Para. 0031-0038 and 0058 – where the vehicle is, for example, in a second option mode, the controller will calculate and “may result in a recommendation to the driver to engage the LT mode”; where to make this recommendations while in a different mode, the ADC system must receive LTA, or friction condition, data, where the value of the LTA relates to “a greater likelihood of longitudinal slippery conditions” or the opposite);
compare the received second friction data to the plurality of traction control setting profiles (Prakah, Para. 0053 and 0056 – where a decision maker of the system will use the LTA and LRA value and select a “traction mode”, or setting profile, based on the LTA and LRA values, such that it compares the values to the modes; where the modes include “a low-traction (LT) mode” and a “normal traction mode”);
determine if the second friction data has a better fit to a different traction control setting profile of the plurality of traction control setting profiles than the recommended traction control setting profile (Prakah, Para. 0058 – where, for example, the vehicle is in a second option mode and the ADC controller may recommend “to engage the LT mode”, such that the recommended one is better); and
communicate a second recommended at least one traction control setting of the plurality of traction control settings (Bird, Para. 0003 and 0033 – where the plurality of “control modes” adjust settings for “subsystem control mode[s]”, including different configurations based on, for example, the current surface to “suit different driving conditions”) for the different traction control setting profile to the display to be displayed, in response to the processor device determining the second friction data has a better fit to the different traction control setting profile than the recommended traction control setting profile (Prakah, Para. 0058-0062 – where “the decision-maker 218 of the ADC controller 106 may be used to automatically select from or make recommendations to select from operational modes 220 of the vehicle systems 222”; where recommendations are displayed to the driver to change or dismiss and where the recommendation is made when a traction mode is better suited than a current option mode).
In regards to Claim 13, Prakah in view of Bird, Hilgers, and Eberling teaches the computer method Claim 1, and Prakah teaches wherein the processor device (Prakah, Para. 0006 and 0017 – one or more processors of a vehicle controller) is further configured to:
receive second friction data relating to a second at least one friction condition experienced by the vehicle (Prakah, Para. 0031-0038 and 0058 – where the vehicle is, for example, in a second option mode, the controller will calculate and “may result in a recommendation to the driver to engage the LT mode”; where to make this recommendations while in a different mode, the ADC system must receive LTA, or friction condition, data, where the value of the LTA relates to “a greater likelihood of longitudinal slippery conditions” or the opposite);
determine if the second friction data indicates a sufficient traction for the vehicle (Prakah, Para. 0058 – where, for example, the vehicle is in a second option mode and the ADC controller may recommend “to engage the LT mode”, such that the recommended one is better); and
communicate a second recommended traction control setting of the recommended traction control setting profile to the display to be displayed, in response to determining the second friction data indicates an insufficient traction for the vehicle (Prakah, Para. 0058-0062 – where “the decision-maker 218 of the ADC controller 106 may be used to automatically select from or make recommendations to select from operational modes 220 of the vehicle systems 222”; where recommendations are displayed to the driver to change or dismiss and where the recommendation is made when a traction mode is better suited than a current option mode).
In regards to Claim 14, Prakah in view of Bird, Hilgers, and Eberling teaches the computer method Claim 1, and Prakah teaches wherein the processor device (Prakah, Para. 0006 and 0017 – one or more processors of a vehicle controller) is further configured to:
receive second friction data relating to a second at least one friction condition experienced by the vehicle (Prakah, Para. 0031-0038 and 0058 – where the vehicle is, for example, in a second option mode, the controller will calculate and “may result in a recommendation to the driver to engage the LT mode”; where to make this recommendations while in a different mode, the ADC system must receive LTA, or friction condition, data, where the value of the LTA relates to “a greater likelihood of longitudinal slippery conditions” or the opposite);
determine if the second friction data indicates a sufficient traction for the vehicle (Prakah, Para. 0058 – where, for example, the vehicle is in a second option mode and the ADC controller may recommend “to engage the LT mode”, such that the recommended one is better); and
communicate the recommended at least one traction control setting to be deactivated to the display to be displayed, in response to determining the second friction data indicates a sufficient traction for the vehicle, (Prakah, Para. 0058-0062 – where “the decision-maker 218 of the ADC controller 106 may be used to automatically select from or make recommendations to select from operational modes 220 of the vehicle systems 222”; where recommendations are displayed to the driver to change or dismiss and where the recommendation is made when a traction mode is better suited than a current option mode).
In regards to Claim 15, Prakah in view of Bird, Hilgers, and Eberling teaches the computing system of Claim 1, and Prakah in view of Bird, Hilgers, and Eberling teaches wherein the plurality of traction control settings comprise a plurality of traction control settings comprising the axle load optimization (Eberling, Para. 0032-0034 – “various operating modes”, or profiles, intended to “distribute the weight of a load on the drive and tag axles in a predetermined and controlled manner” when a “traction control event” occurs; where each operating mode includes controlling pistons, springs, etc. in order to shift weight between the axles, where the control can be set to evenly distribute weight, shift more weight onto a drive axle, etc. in order to improve traction, such that there are different load distribution settings) and at least one of muddy site (Bird, Para. 0074 – “a mud mode”), offroad mode (Bird, Para. 0077 – “off-road mode”), anti-slip regulation (ASR) off (Bird, Para. 0042, 0089, 0223, 0270, Claim 1 – “operating modes include control modes of a traction control system” as part of “slip control”, including a case where “a vehicle slip control system is not permitted to take action”, such that it is inactive; Hilgers [evidentiary], Page 45-46 – “traction control” (TCS) is also known as “anti-slip regulation (ASR)”, such that TCS and ASR are interchangeable), and differential lock (Bird, Para. 0048 – “a plurality of levels of differential lock”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the computer system including the above limitations of Prakah in view of Bird, Hilgers, and Eberling to include wherein the at least one traction control setting comprises a plurality of traction control settings comprising muddy site, offroad mode, anti-slip regulation (ASR) off, and differential lock, as taught by Bird, in order to provide different settings for the vehicle to optimize traction under different terrain situations.
Regarding Claim 16, Prakah teaches: A method (Prakah, Para. 0004-0006 – “a method”), comprising:
receiving, by a processor of at least one computing device (Prakah, Para. 0006 and 0017 – “computing devices including hardware processors”), friction data relating to at least one friction condition experienced by a vehicle (Prakah, Para. 0026-0031 and 0041 – collecting data and calculating “a longitudinal tracking accumulation (LTA)”, which is related to traction/friction, and “a lateral response accumulation (LRA)”, which indicates likelihoods of low traction conditions; for example an LTA value “closer to 1 reflecting a greater likelihood of longitudinal slippery conditions, and values closer to 0 reflecting relatively lesser likelihood of longitudinally slippery conditions”);
comparing, by the processor, the received friction data to a plurality of traction control setting profiles (Prakah, Para. 0053 and 0056 – where a decision maker of the system will use the LTA and LRA value and select a “traction mode”, or setting profile, based on the LTA and LRA values, such that it compares the values to the modes; where the modes include “a low-traction (LT) mode” and a “normal traction mode”, such that there are two modes, or profiles),
determining, by the processor, a recommended traction control setting profile where the “adaptive drive control (ADC)”, on an auto mode, will “automatically adapt to mode selection for particular driving contexts” based on traction data (i.e. LTA and LRA values and environmental data) or where the ADC controller “may be used to automatically select from or make recommendations to select from operational modes”); and
communicating, by the processor, a recommended at least one traction control setting of the one or more traction control settings where the ADC controller is in communication with “a head unit or other display” of the vehicle which displays “an ADC controller 106 recommendation”, as well as other options regarding the ADC, such as “automatic traction mode”, etc.).
PNG
media_image1.png
400
545
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
395
543
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Prakah, Figs. 3 and 4
While Prakah teaches comparing, by the processor, the received friction data to a traction control setting profile and a normal control setting comprising one or more traction control settings, and determining a recommended traction control setting profile corresponding to the received friction data based on the best fit of the friction data to a traction control setting profile, Prakah does not teach a plurality of traction control setting profiles, each traction control setting profile comprising a plurality of traction control settings for at least anti-slip regulation, electronic stability control, and axle load optimization, each traction control setting profile directed to a unique combination of a the plurality of traction control settings, and determining a traction control setting profile of the plurality of traction control setting profiles corresponding to the received friction data based on the best fit of the friction data to a traction control setting profile of the plurality of traction control setting profiles.
However, Bird teaches a plurality of traction control setting profiles (Bird, Para. 0054, 0064, 0074-0075, 0151 – a plurality of “operating modes”, or “control modes”, including various modes for reducing wheel spin, thus improving traction, such as “off-road mode”, “low friction mode”, which includes a “mud mode” and “another low friction mode suitable for driving in snow, on grass, or on gravel”, “high friction mode”, a “sand mode”, etc.),
each traction control setting profile comprising a plurality of traction control settings (Bird, Para. 0003 and 0033 – where the plurality of “control modes” adjust settings for “subsystem control mode[s]”, including different configurations based on, for example, the current surface to “suit different driving conditions”) for at least anti-slip regulation (Bird, Para. 0042 and 0089 – “operating modes include control modes of a traction control system” as part of “slip control”; Hilgers [evidentiary], Page 45-46 – “traction control” (TCS) is also known as “anti-slip regulation (ASR)”, such that TCS and ASR are interchangeable) and electronic stability control (Bird, Para. 0089, 0137, and 0171 – a “dynamic stability control system” which may also be activated in different configurations, separate from a “TC (Traction Control) function”; where both the “stability control system” and “traction control system” are part of a “slip control system”),
each traction control setting profile directed to a unique combination of a the plurality of traction control settings (Bird, Para. 0015-0019, 0075, 0112-0114, 0129 – where the system may initiate “control of the or each of the vehicle subsystems in a selected one of a plurality of subsystem control modes, each of which corresponds to one or more different driving conditions for the vehicle”, for example a “control mode”, corresponding to “motion of the vehicle over sand”, which controls the various subsystems, or settings, to be suitable for sand, and similarly for ice, mud, etc.), and
determine a traction control setting profile of the plurality of traction control setting profiles corresponding to the received friction data based on the best fit of the friction data to a traction control setting profile of the plurality of traction control setting profiles (Bird, Para. 0128-0136, 0141-0145, 0152 – where a “vehicle control unit”, or “VCU”, collects “continuous sensor outputs” to derive “terrain indicators”, where the “terrain indicators” include “the torque at which wheel slip occurs”, “surface rolling resistance”, “wheel longitudinal slip”, “lateral friction”, etc., which constitute friction data; and where based on the “terrain indicators”, the vehicle may select a “control mode” most suitable “based on the terrain indicators”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method of Prakah to include a plurality of traction control setting profiles, each traction control setting profile comprising a plurality of traction control settings for at least anti-slip regulation and electronic stability control, and determine a traction control setting profile of the plurality of traction control setting profiles corresponding to the received friction data based on the best fit of the friction data to a traction control setting profile of the plurality of traction control setting profiles, as taught by Bird, in order to provide a larger number of traction control setting profiles depending on a variety of terrain types and friction data conditions to prevent loss of traction.
Prakah in view of Bird does not specifically teach traction control settings for at least axle load optimization.
However, Eberling teaches traction control settings for at least axle load optimization (Eberling, Para. 0032-0034 – “various operating modes”, or profiles, intended to “distribute the weight of a load on the drive and tag axles in a predetermined and controlled manner” when a “traction control event” occurs; where each operating mode includes controlling pistons, springs, etc. in order to shift weight between the axles, where the control can be set to evenly distribute weight, shift more weight onto a drive axle, etc. in order to improve traction, such that there are different load distribution settings).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified the method including the above limitations of Prakah in view of Bird to include traction control settings comprising at least an axle load optimization, as taught by Eberling, in order to improve the traction of the vehicle using axle load optimization to distribute the load and improve wheel to surface friction (Eberling, Abstract).
In regards to Claim 17, Prakah in view of Bird, Hilgers, and Eberling teaches the method of Claim 16, and Prakah further teaches further comprising:
receiving, by the processor (Prakah, Para. 0006 and 0017 – “computing devices including hardware processors”), an activation selection a selected traction control setting of the recommended at least one traction control setting (Prakah, Para. 0056-0062 – where after the recommendation is displayed, the driver may select a “change mode” button to apply, or activate, the traction mode; where the driver may select to enable an automatic traction mode); and
causing, by the processor, the activation selection of the selected traction control setting to be activated as a traction control setting for the vehicle (Prakah, Fig. 3 and Para. 0056-0062 – where after the “change mode” button is selected, the ADC controller will “apply the suggested mode”, where the mode is a traction mode; and where if the automatic traction mode is enable, the automatic traction mode will be “ON” as shown on Fig. 3).
Regarding Claim 19, Prakah in view of Bird, Hilgers, and Eberling teaches: A vehicle comprising a processor device (Prakah, Para. 0006 and 0017 – “one or more processors of a vehicle controller”) configured to perform the method of claim 16 (See Claim 16).
Regarding Claim 20, Prakah teaches: A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium comprising programming instructions (Prakah, Para. 0006 – “non-transitory computer-readable medium embodying instructions” which are executed), which, when executed by a processor device of a computing system (Prakah, Para. 0004-0006 and 0017 – one or more processors of a vehicle controller in a system), cause the processor device to:
receive friction data relating to at least one friction condition experienced by a vehicle (Prakah, Para. 0026-0031 and 0041 – collecting data and calculating “a longitudinal tracking accumulation (LTA)”, which is related to traction/friction, and “a lateral response accumulation (LRA)”, which indicates likelihoods of low traction conditions; for example an LTA value “closer to 1 reflecting a greater likelihood of longitudinal slippery conditions, and values closer to 0 reflecting relatively lesser likelihood of longitudinally slippery conditions”);
compare the received friction data to where a compare the received friction data to a plurality of traction control setting profiles (Prakah, Para. 0053 and 0056 – where a decision maker of the system will use the LTA and LRA value and select a “traction mode”, or setting profile, based on the LTA and LRA values, such that it compares the values to the modes; where the modes include “a low-traction (LT) mode” and a “normal traction mode”, such that there are two modes, or profiles),
determine a recommended traction control setting profile where the “adaptive drive control (ADC)”, on an auto mode, will “automatically adapt to mode selection for particular driving contexts” based on traction data (i.e. LTA and LRA values and environmental data) or where the ADC controller “may be used to automatically select from or make recommendations to select from operational modes”); and
communicate a recommended at least one traction control setting of the one or more traction control settings where the ADC controller is in communication with “a head unit or other display” of the vehicle which displays “an ADC controller 106 recommendation”, as well as other options regarding the ADC, such as “automatic traction mode”, etc.).
PNG
media_image1.png
400
545
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
395
543
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Prakah, Figs. 3 and 4
While Prakah teaches compare the received friction data to a traction control setting profile and a normal control setting comprising one or more traction control settings, and determine a recommended traction control setting profile corresponding to the received friction data based on the best fit of the friction data to a traction control setting profile, Prakah does not teach a plurality of traction control setting profiles, each traction control setting profile comprising a plurality of traction control settings for at least anti-slip regulation, electronic stability control, and axle load optimization, each traction control setting profile directed to a unique combination of a the plurality of traction control settings, and determining a traction control setting profile of the plurality of traction control setting profiles corresponding to the received friction data based on the best fit of the friction data to a traction control setting profile of the plurality of traction control setting profiles.
However, Bird teaches a plurality of traction control setting profiles (Bird, Para. 0054, 0064, 0074-0075, 0151 – a plurality of “operating modes”, or “control modes”, including various modes for reducing wheel spin, thus impr a plurality of traction control setting profiles (Bird, Para. 0054, 0064, 0074-0075, 0151 – a plurality of “operating modes”, or “control modes”, including various modes for reducing wheel spin, thus improving traction, such as “off-road mode”, “low friction mode”, which includes a “mud mode” and “another low friction mode suitable for driving in snow, on grass, or on gravel”, “high friction mode”, a “sand mode”, etc.),
each traction control setting profile comprising a plurality of traction control settings (Bird, Para. 0003 and 0033 – where the plurality of “control modes” adjust settings for “subsystem control mode[s]”, including different configurations based on, for example, the current surface to “suit different driving conditions”) for at least anti-slip regulation (Bird, Para. 0042 and 0089 – “operating modes include control modes of a traction control system” as part of “slip control”; Hilgers [evidentiary], Page 45-46 – “traction control” (TCS) is also known as “anti-slip regulation (ASR)”, such that TCS and ASR are interchangeable) and electronic stability control (Bird, Para. 0089, 0137, and 0171 – a “dynamic stability control system” which may also be activated in different configurations, separate from a “TC (Traction Control) function”; where both the “stability control system” and “traction control system” are part of a “slip control system”),
each traction control setting profile directed to a unique combination of a the plurality of traction control settings (Bird, Para. 0015-0019, 0075, 0112-0114, 0129 – where the system may initiate “control of the or each of the vehicle subsystems in a selected one of a plurality of subsystem control modes, each of which corresponds to one or more different driving conditions for the vehicle”, for example a “control mode”, corresponding to “motion of the vehicle over sand”, which controls the various subsystems, or settings, to be suitable for sand, and similarly for ice, mud, etc.), and
determining a traction control setting profile of the plurality of traction control setting profiles corresponding to the received friction data based on the best fit of the friction data to a traction control setting profile of the plurality of traction control setting profiles (Bird, Para. 0128-0136, 0141-0145, 0152 – where a “vehicle control unit”, or “VCU”, collects “continuous sensor outputs” to derive “terrain indicators”, where the “terrain indicators” include “the torque at which wheel slip occurs”, “surface rolling resistance”, “wheel longitudinal slip”, “lateral friction”, etc., which constitute friction data; and where based on the “terrain indicators”, the vehicle may select a “control mode” most suitable “based on the terrain indicators”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of Prakah to include a plurality of traction control setting profiles, each traction control setting profile comprising a plurality of traction control settings for at least anti-slip regulation and electronic stability control, and determining a traction control setting profile of the plurality of traction control setting profiles corresponding to the received friction data based on the best fit of the friction data to a traction control setting profile of the plurality of traction control setting profiles, as taught by Bird, in order to provide a larger number of traction control setting profiles depending on a variety of terrain types and friction data conditions to prevent loss of traction.
Prakah in view of Bird does not teach traction control settings for at least axle load optimization.
However, Eberling teaches traction control settings for at least axle load optimization (Eberling, Para. 0032-0034 – “various operating modes”, or profiles, intended to “distribute the weight of a load on the drive and tag axles in a predetermined and controlled manner” when a “traction control event” occurs; where each operating mode includes controlling pistons, springs, etc. in order to shift weight between the axles, where the control can be set to evenly distribute weight, shift more weight onto a drive axle, etc. in order to improve traction, such that there are different load distribution settings).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified the storage medium including the above limitations of Prakah in view of Bird to include traction control settings for at least axle load optimization, as taught by Eberling, in order to improve the traction of the vehicle using axle load optimization to distribute the load and improve wheel to surface friction (Eberling, Abstract).
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Prakah in view of Bird, Hilgers, and Eberling, and further in view of Laine, et al., hereinafter Laine (U.S. Patent Application Pub. No. 2024/0383339).
In regards to Claim 3, Prakah in view of Bird, Hilgers, and Eberling teaches the computing system of Claim 2, and but Prakah does not teach wherein the rolling resistance of the vehicle is based on at least one of amount of deformation of a wheel of the vehicle, an amount of deformation of a road surface, and an amount of movement below the road surface.
However, Laine teaches wherein the rolling resistance of the vehicle is based on at least one of amount of deformation of a wheel of the vehicle (Laine, Para. 0052 – “Rolling resistance is the resistance to rolling caused by deformation of the tire in contact with the road surface”), an amount of deformation of a road surface, and an amount movement below the road surface.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the computing system including wherein the friction data comprises a rolling resistance of the vehicle of including the above limitations of Prakah in view of Bird, Hilgers, and Eberling to further include wherein the rolling resistance of the vehicle is based on an amount of deformation of a wheel of the vehicle, as taught by Laine, in order to account for forces resisting the motion of the wheels of the vehicle rolling which are caused by deformations of the wheels.
Claims 7, 9-10, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Prakah, in view of Bird, Hilgers, and Eberling, and further in view of Yamada (U.S. Patent Application Pub. No. 2014/0210608).
In regards to Claim 7, Prakah in view of Bird, Hilgers, and Eberling teaches the computer system of Claim 6, and Prakah teaches processor device (Prakah, Para. 0006 and 0017 – “one or more processors of a vehicle controller”) and a graphical user interface (GUI) (Prakah, Fig. 3-4 and Para. 0056-0062 – where the ADC controller is in communication with “a head unit or other display” of the vehicle) but Prakah does not teach wherein the processor device is further configured to: communicate an activation status for the activated traction control setting to the display to be displayed as a visual indicator on at least one traction control button on a display.
However, Yamada teaches wherein the processor device is further configured to: communicate an activation status for the activated traction control setting to the display to be displayed as a visual indicator on at least one traction control button on a display (Yamada, Para. 0005, 0018, and 0021-0022 – a “plurality of drive modes can be associated with a distinct visual indicator”, where drive modes are changes using a dial button which select the drive modes; where the button can be a “touch system that can have a touch pad or screen, where the operator simply touches the pad or screen to shift between drive modes”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the computer system including the above limitations of Prakah in view of Bird, Hilgers, and Eberling to include wherein the processor device is further configured to: communicate an activation status for the activated traction control setting to the display to be displayed as a visual indicator on at least one traction control button on a display, as taught by Yamada, in order to indicate to the driver what mode the vehicle is currently in.
In regards to Claim 9, Prakah in view of Bird, Eberling and Yamada teaches the computer system of Claim 8, and Prakah in view of Yamada further teaches wherein the processor device (Prakah, Para. 0006 and 0017 – “one or more processors of a vehicle controller”) is further configured to: communicate a deactivation status for the deactivated selection of the at least one traction control setting to the display to be displayed, as a visual indicator on at least one traction control button (Yamada, Para. 0005, 0020-0022, and 0027-0029 – a “plurality of drive modes can be associated with a distinct visual indicator”, where drive modes are changes using a dial button which select the drive modes; where drive mode changes are indicated, such that a deactivation is indicated) on a graphical user interface (GUI) displayed on the display (Prakah, Fig. 3-4 and Para. 0056-0062 – where the ADC controller is in communication with “a head unit or other display” of the vehicle).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the computer system including the above limitations of the Prakah in view of Bird, Eberling and Yamada, to further include communicate a deactivation status for the deactivated selection of the at least one traction control settings to the display to be displayed, as a visual indicator on at least one traction control button, as taught by Yamada, in order to indicate to the driver what mode the vehicle is currently not in, so that the driver may know to switch to them.
In regards to Claim 10, Prakah in view of Bird, Hilgers, and Eberling teaches the computer system of Claim 6, and Prakah teaches wherein the processor device (Prakah, Para. 0006 and 0017 – “one or more processors of a vehicle controller”) is further configured to:
receive a second activation selection of a second selected traction control setting not included in the recommended at least one traction control setting (Prakah, Para. 0058 – where the vehicle is, for example, in a second option mode, the controller will calculate and “may result in a recommendation to the driver to engage the LT mode”);
cause the second selected traction control setting to be activated as a second activated traction control setting for the vehicle (Prakah, Para. 0058 – where the vehicle is, for example, in a second option mode, and the controller may suggest “a recommendation to the driver to engage the LT mode” which “may result in a recommendation to the driver to engage the LT mode”); and
communicate a second activation status of the second activated traction control setting to the display to be displayed, as a visual indicator on a traction control button on a graphical user interface (GUI) displayed on the display (Prakah, Fig. 3-4 and Para. 0056-0062 – where the ADC controller is in communication with “a head unit or other display” of the vehicle).
Prakah does not teach communicate a second activation status of the second activated traction control setting to the display to be displayed, as a visual indicator on a traction control button.
However, Yamada teaches communicate an activation status of the second traction control setting to the display to be displayed, as a visual indicator on a traction control button (Yamada, Para. 0005-0006 and 0021-0022 – “plurality of drive modes can be associated with a distinct visual indicator” which “can display the current drive mode”, including “providing one or more indicators associated with the second drive mode to the driver”; where drive modes are changes using a dial button which select the drive modes).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the computer system including the above limitations of Prakah in view of Bird, Hilgers, and Eberling to include communicate an activation status of the second traction control setting to the display to be displayed, as a visual indicator on a traction control button, as taught by Yamada, in order to indicate to the driver what mode the vehicle is currently in.
In regards to Claim 18, Prakah in view of Bird, Hilgers, and Eberling teaches the method of Claim 17, and Prakah teaches the processor (Prakah, Para. 0006 and 0017 – “computing devices including hardware processors”) and a graphical user interface (GUI) (Prakah, Fig. 3-4 and Para. 0056-0062 – where the ADC controller is in communication with “a head unit or other display” of the vehicle) but Prakah does not teach further comprising: communicating, an activation status for the selected recommended at least one traction control settings to the display to be displayed as a visual indicator on at least one traction control button on a display.
However Yamada teaches communicating, an activation status for the activated traction control setting to the display to be displayed as a visual indicator on at least one traction control button on a display (Yamada, Para. 0005, 0018, and 0021-0022 – a “plurality of drive modes can be associated with a distinct visual indicator”, where drive modes are changes using a dial button which select the drive modes; where the button can be a “touch system that can have a touch pad or screen, where the operator simply touches the pad or screen to shift between drive modes”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method including the above limitations of Prakah in view of Bird, Hilgers, and Eberling to include communicating, an activation status of the selected recommended at least one traction control setting to the display to be displayed; and communicating, an activation status for the selected recommended at least one traction control settings to the display to be displayed as a visual indicator on at least one traction control button on display, as taught by Yamada, in order to in order to indicate to the driver what mode the vehicle is currently in.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Van Hoecke, et al. (U.S. Patent Application Pub. No. 2019/0322290) teaches a processor configured to determine that measured vehicle variable values match a predefined set of vehicle variable values associated with recommending vehicle feature engagement, for example, a prompt displaying “current conditions indicate possible slippery travel, transition to snow-traction mode is recommended”.
Rafferty, et al. (U.S. Patent Application Pub. No. 2020/0247427) teaches an electronic control unit which is configured to receive a drive mode shifting signal from the one or more driving mode paddle shifter indicative of a desire to change a driving mode of the vehicle, change one or more parameters of the one or more vehicle drive systems in order to change the driving mode in response to the driving mode shifting signal, and provide a notification related to the change in the driving mode with the output device.
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HELEN LI whose telephone number is (703)756-4719. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday, from 9am to 5pm eastern.
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, Hunter Lonsberry can be reached at (571) 272-7298. 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.
/H.L./Examiner, Art Unit 3665
/HUNTER B LONSBERRY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3665