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 .
Status of Claims
This action is in reply to the amendments filed on 06/26/2025 for Application No. 17/949,913
Claims 1 – 4, 6 – 16 and 18 – 20 are currently pending and have been examined. Claims 1 – 3, 6, 8, 9, 11, 12, 15 and 18 have been amended. Claims 5 and 17 have been cancelled.
This action is made NON-FINAL
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 06/26/2025 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
Claims 1-4, 6-16, and 18-20 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.
Claims 1, 8, and 11 state a “vibration-induced portion generated by torsion of a drivetrain” however they omit what the vibration-induced portion is. The claims state determining “a vibration-induced portion based on the actual motor speed and the corrected model speed or the corrected motor speed”, thus indefinite on what a vibration-induced portion is. For example, is this referencing to a physical component of the vehicle, and if so, how is it determining that is the vibration-induced portion purely based on the motor speeds? Furthermore, claim 1 states to generate “the anti-jerk compensation torque by applying a predetermined gain value to the vibration-induced portion delayed in the phase.”, and claims 8 and 11 state to generate “an anti-jerk torque by applying a predetermined gain value to the vibration-induced portion”, thus the vibration-induced portion can also be interpreted as a number with an unknown unit as it also utilized to generate an anti-jerk compensation torque. The claims should further clarify what this vibration-induced portion is structurally representing.
Claim 4 states: “wherein the model speed is determined based on a motor torque command, a load torque, gear shifting information, a traveling status, a wheel speed, a transmission input/output speed, and an electric vehicle mode, and wherein the load torque includes a road slope and an aerodynamic drag, the traveling status includes tip-in/tip-out and brake shift, and the electric vehicle mode includes an EV mode, an HEV mode, and engine clutch slip mode.”. Claim 1, which claim 4 is dependent on states: “wherein the model speed is obtained through a computational model in which it is assumed that there is no vibration generated in a motor”. Claim 4 is indefinite in how it states these various variables without stating their relationship to the computational model and how these variables are used to calculate a speed when there is no vibration generated in the motor. Claim 1 states that this is done through a computational model however it is missing from claim 4 entirely.
Claim 8 recites the limitation "the model speed" in line 8. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim, and it is unclear which speed is being referenced.
Claims 10 and 13 state: “reducing, by the processor, noise due to a drivetrain torsion from the vibration-induced portion; and generating, by the processor, a phase-delayed vibration-induced portion by delaying a phase of the vibration-induced portion from which the noise is reduced.”, however it is indefinite how the noise from a vibration-induced portion is identified. For example, is there a microphone which captures sounds? What is the noise threshold the processor is to reduce the noises to? The claims do not state how the noise level is being measured and by how much the reduction in the noise is happening.
Claims 16 states: “wherein the model speed is determined based on a motor torque command, a load torque, gear shifting information, a traveling status, a wheel speed, a transmission input/output speed, and an electric vehicle mode, and wherein the load torque includes a road slope and an aerodynamic drag, the traveling status includes tip-in/tip-out and brake shift, and the electric vehicle mode includes an EV mode, an HEV mode, and engine clutch slip mode.”. The claim however does not state how all of these variables are used to determine the model speed. Is there a formula or algorithm utilized by the processor that is programmed to calculate the model speed? Without any relationship between the model speed and the variables, it is indefinite in how the model speed is to be determined just by these variables.
Claims 2-4, 6, 7, 9, 10, 12-16, and 18-20 are rejected as being dependent upon a rejected base claim.
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 1 – 4, 6 – 10, 14 – 16, 18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oono et al. (US 9315114 B2) in view of Park et al. (KR 101117970 B1).
Regarding claim 1, Oono teaches an apparatus of reducing vibration of an electric vehicle (EV), (Oono: Abstract: “A device for controlling an electric vehicle includes:”: Col. 1, lines 42 – 44: “An object of the present invention is to achieve both the acquisition of the stability of a control system and a vibration suppression function.”)
the apparatus comprising a processor configured to: (Oono: Col. 2, lines 39 – 46 :“An electric motor controller 2 inputs, as digital signals, signals indicating the state of the vehicle such as a vehicle speed V, an accelerator opening θ, the rotor phase α of an electric motor 4 and the currents iu, iv and iw of the electric motor 4, and generates, based on the input signals, a PWM signal for controlling the electric motor 4. The electric motor controller 2 also generates a drive signal for an inverter 3 according to the generated PWM signal.”; Claim 1: “A device for controlling an electric vehicle that is configured to set a motor torque instruction value based on vehicle information and control a torque of a motor connected to a drive wheel, the device comprising: a feedforward computation unit that is configured to input the motor torque instruction value without inputting a detection value of a sensor provided in the electric vehicle and compute a first torque target value by feedforward computation; and a motor torque control unit that is configured to control the motor torque according to the first torque target value, wherein the feedforward computation unit includes: a vehicle model which is configured to input the motor torque instruction value to model a characteristic from the motor torque to a drive shaft torsional angular velocity; and a drive shaft torsional angular velocity feedback model which is configured to feed back the drive shaft torsional angular velocity output from the vehicle model to the motor torque instruction value to compute the first torque target value.”,
Supplemental Note: the device for controlling the vehicle components is interpreted as a processor)
determine an actual motor speed, (Oono: “The rotor phase α (rad) of the electric motor 4 is acquired from the rotation sensor 6. The rotation rate Nm (rpm) of the electric motor 4 is determined as follows: the angular velocity ω (electric angle) of the rotor is divided by the number of pole pairs in the electric motor 4, and thus the motor rotation speed ωm (rad/s) that is the mechanical angular velocity of the electric motor 4 is determined, and the determined motor rotation speed ωm is multiplied by 60/(2π). The angular velocity ω (rad/s) of the rotor is determined by differentiating the rotor phase α.”; Col. 3, lines 44 – 48: “In step S202, a first torque instruction value Tm1* is set. Specifically, based on the accelerator opening θ and the vehicle speed V input in step S201, an accelerator opening-torque table shown in FIG. 3 is referenced, and thus the first torque instruction value Tm1* is set.”)
… and a drivetrain torsion speed which is a speed of a torsion angle of a driveshaft and generated when the electric vehicle is accelerated or decelerated, (Oono: Col. 5, lines 11 – 37
PNG
media_image1.png
701
592
media_image1.png
Greyscale
,
Supplemental Note: Td represents the driveshaft torque which is found by the torsional angle of the drive shaft that encompasses velocity (speed) into its calculation)
… determine a corrected motor speed of the motor of the electric vehicle or a corrected model speed of the motor, wherein the corrected motor speed is obtained by subtracting the drivetrain torsion speed to the actual motor speed, the corrected model speed obtained by adding the drivetrain torsion speed to the model speed;
determine a vibration-induced portion based on the actual motor speed and the corrected model speed or the corrected motor speed and the model speed; and (Oono: Col. 4, lines 26 – 39: “FIG. 4 is an example of a control block diagram for performing processing that sets a final torque instruction value Tm2*. A vibration suppression control computation unit 400 that sets the final torque instruction value Tm2* includes a feedforward compensator 401 (hereinafter referred to as an “F/F compensator 401”), a feedback compensator 402 (hereinafter referred to as an “F/B compensator 402”) and an adder 403. The F/F compensator 401 inputs the first torque instruction value Tm1*, and outputs a first torque target value and a motor rotation rate estimation value for the first torque target value. The F/B compensator 402 inputs the motor rotation rate estimation value for the first torque target value and a motor rotation rate detection value, and outputs a second torque target value. The adder 403 adds the first torque target value output from the F/F compensator 401 and the second torque target value output from the F/B compensator 402, and outputs the final torque instruction value Tm2*.”)
generate an anti-jerk compensation torque based on the vibration-induced portion. (Oono: Col. 10, lines 1 – 21: “As described above, in the device for controlling the vehicle according to the first embodiment, the F/F compensator 401 that inputs the motor torque instruction value and that computes the first torque target value by feedforward computation and the electric motor controller 2 (motor torque control unit) that controls the motor torque according to the first torque target value are provided. The F/F compensator 401 includes: the vehicle model 501 that inputs the motor torque instruction value to model the characteristic from the motor torque to the drive shaft torsional angular velocity; and the drive shaft torsional angular velocity feedback model 502 that feeds back the drive shaft torsional angular velocity output from the vehicle model 501 to the motor torque instruction value and that thereby computes the first torque target value. In this way, since it is not necessary to set the gain of the drive shaft torsional angular velocity feedback model 502 low with consideration given to safety, it can be set at a feedback gain that satisfies vibration suppression performance. When there is no lag or disturbance in the control system, with the first torque target value, which is a feedforward compensation value, it is possible to reduce drive shaft torsional vibrations.”,
Supplemental Note: a gain is applied to reduce the corresponding vibrations)
In sum, Oono teaches an apparatus of reducing vibration of an electric vehicle (EV), the apparatus comprising a processor configured to: determine an actual motor speed and a drivetrain torsion speed which is a speed of a torsion angle of a driveshaft and generated when the electric vehicle is accelerated or decelerated, determine a corrected motor speed of the motor of the electric vehicle or a corrected model speed of the motor, wherein the corrected motor speed is obtained by subtracting the drivetrain torsion speed to the actual motor speed, the corrected model speed obtained by adding the drivetrain torsion speed to the model speed; determine a vibration-induced portion based on the actual motor speed and the corrected model speed or the corrected motor speed and the model speed; and generate an anti-jerk compensation torque based on the vibration-induced portion. Oono however does not teach a model speed wherein the model speed is obtained through a computational model in which it is assumed that there is no vibration generated in a motor; and wherein the actual motor speed includes a vibration-induced portion generated by torsion of a drivetrain whereas Park does.
Park teaches a model speed (Park: Page 3, Paragraph 4: “The present invention for achieving the above object is a model speed calculation unit for calculating the model speed of the motor in the state that the vibration of the drive shaft is ignored”)
… wherein the actual motor speed includes a vibration-induced portion generated by torsion of a drivetrain, (Park: Page 3, Paragraph 3: “The present invention has been made to solve the above problems, and after determining whether the vibration occurs through the speed deviation between the actual speed of the drive shaft”)
wherein the model speed is obtained through a computational model in which it is assumed that there is no vibration generated in a motor; (Park: Page 3, Paragraph 4: “The present invention for achieving the above object is a model speed calculation unit for calculating the model speed of the motor in the state that the vibration of the drive shaft is ignored”)
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the invention disclosed by Oono with the teachings of Park with a reasonable expectation of success. Both Oono and Park teaches various methods of reducing the vibrations of the vehicle caused by the vehicle components when driving. Park teaches the ability to gather a model speed when the vibrations to the drive shaft are ignored and an actual motor speed which includes the vibrations of the drivetrain. Oono teaches the use of vehicle speed and acceleration to identify the first torque instruction value (Oono: Col. 3, lines 44 – 48) and sets a final torque instruction value with the vibrations to the vehicle reduced (Oono: Col. 3, lines 49 – 55). One with knowledge in the art would find both of these techniques as a use of known techniques to improve similar devices in the same way. For example, the first torque instruction value and the actual motor speed both represent the speed of the motor as the vehicle is currently driving including vibrations from the different components. The final torque instruction value and the model speed both represent the speed of the motor with reduced or no vibrations. These two variables are both utilized to calculate a gain to apply which reduces the vibrations of vehicle components, thus both teach to improve similar devices (vehicles) in the same way (reducing vibrations by applying gain utilizing similar vehicle parameters).
Regarding claim 2, Oono, as modified, teaches wherein the processor is further configured to: remove error component included in the vibration-induced portion by passing the vibration-induced portion through a filter;
delay a phase of the vibration-induced portion passed through the filter; and (Oono: Col. 9, lines 43 – 59 : “FIG. 7 is a block diagram showing the detailed configuration of the F/B compensator 402. The F/B compensator 402 adds a motor rotation rate estimation value for the second torque target value calculated by inputting the second torque target value and using the transmission characteristic Gp(s) which is a control target and a motor rotation rate estimation value for the first torque target value calculated by the vehicle model of the F/F compensator 401, and thereby determines a final motor rotation rate estimation value. Then, a deviation between the determined final motor rotation rate estimation value and the motor rotation rate detection value is passed through a filter H(s)/Gp(s) formed with the inverse characteristic of the transmission characteristic Gp(s) which is a control target and a bandpass filter H(s), and the second torque target value is calculated. In the bandpass filter H(s), a center frequency agrees with the drive system torsional resonance frequency of the vehicle.”
generate the anti-jerk compensation torque by applying a predetermined gain value to the vibration-induced portion delayed in the phase. (Oono: Col. 9, lines 59 – 61: “The gain K is arranged in order to adjust a stability margin (a gain margin, a phase margin) in an F/B system control system, and is a value equal to or less than 1.”; Col. 13, lines 38 – 48: “On the other hand, in the device for controlling the electric vehicle according to the first embodiment, even when the gain K of the F/B compensator 402 is set so as to acquire the same stability margin, since it is possible to prevent almost all of torsional vibrations by the feedforward compensation, it is possible to obtain a smooth response without the shock shown in FIG. 11. Likewise, in the device for controlling the electric vehicle according to the second to fourth embodiments, even when the gain of the F/B compensator 402 is added so as to acquire the stability margin, it is possible to obtain a smooth response without the shock shown in FIG. 11.”)
Regarding claim 3, Oono, as modified, teaches wherein the drivetrain torsion speed is determined by a differential of an output torque of the motor and a torsion coefficient of the driveshaft. (Oono: Col. 5, lines 11 – 37
PNG
media_image1.png
701
592
media_image1.png
Greyscale
,
Supplemental Note: Td represents the driveshaft torque which is found by the torsional angle of the drive shaft that encompasses velocity (speed) into its calculation)
Regarding claim 4, Oono, as modified, does not teach wherein the model speed is determined based on a motor torque command, a load torque, gear shifting information, a traveling status, a wheel speed, a transmission input/output speed, and an electric vehicle mode, and wherein the load torque includes a road slope and an aerodynamic drag, the traveling status includes tip-in/tip-out and brake shift, and the electric vehicle mode includes an EV mode, an HEV mode, and engine clutch slip mode whereas Park does.
Park teaches wherein the model speed is determined based on a motor torque command, a load torque, gear shifting information, a traveling status, a wheel speed, a transmission input/output speed, and an electric vehicle mode, and wherein the load torque includes a road slope and an aerodynamic drag, the traveling status includes tip-in/tip-out and brake shift, and the electric vehicle mode includes an EV mode, an HEV mode, and engine clutch slip mode (Park: Page 6, Paragraph 1: “The present invention has been made to solve the above problems, and after determining whether the vibration occurs through the speed deviation between the actual speed of the drive shaft and the model speed in the state that jerking is ignored, the correction for the motor torque By controlling the speed difference between the actual speed and the model speed to zero, the hybrid vehicle anti-vibration can be prevented from occurring when the clutch is released, shifting, and tip-in / out. It is an object of the present invention to provide a jerk control apparatus and method.”,
Supplemental Note: Please refer to the 112(b) indefiniteness rejection regarding the model speed. The current citation teaches a vehicle able to prevent vibrations in the listed scenarios which are not applied to the model speed as it is calculated without any vibrations)
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the invention disclosed by Oono with the teachings of Park with a reasonable expectation of success. As stated for claim 1, both Oono and Park teaches various methods of reducing the vibrations of the vehicle caused by the vehicle components when driving. Park teaches the ability to gather a model speed when the vibrations to the drive shaft are ignored and an actual motor speed which includes the vibrations of the drivetrain. Parks specifically teaches using the model speed with no vibrations to provide anti-vibration occurrences from the clutch, shifting and tip-in/out along with the speed of the vehicle and the vibrations from the drive shaft. Oono teaches the use of vehicle speed and acceleration to identify the first torque instruction value (Oono: Col. 3, lines 44 – 48) and sets a final torque instruction value with the vibrations to the vehicle reduced (Oono: Col. 3, lines 49 – 55). In regards to the model speed as taught by Park, one with knowledge in the art would find it obvious to try to implement this method with the vehicle system of Oono. The model speed of Park when applied to the final torque instruction value does not include vibrations from the situations stated above, thus will improve the calculation of Oono’s vehicle in applying a more efficient gain in those situations to reduce vehicle vibrations.
Regarding claim 6, Oono, as modified, teaches wherein the vibration-induced portion is obtained using a difference between the actual motor speed and the corrected model speed or a difference between the corrected motor speed and the model speed. (Oono: Col. 4, lines 26 – 39: “FIG. 4 is an example of a control block diagram for performing processing that sets a final torque instruction value Tm2*. A vibration suppression control computation unit 400 that sets the final torque instruction value Tm2* includes a feedforward compensator 401 (hereinafter referred to as an “F/F compensator 401”), a feedback compensator 402 (hereinafter referred to as an “F/B compensator 402”) and an adder 403. The F/F compensator 401 inputs the first torque instruction value Tm1*, and outputs a first torque target value and a motor rotation rate estimation value for the first torque target value. The F/B compensator 402 inputs the motor rotation rate estimation value for the first torque target value and a motor rotation rate detection value, and outputs a second torque target value. The adder 403 adds the first torque target value output from the F/F compensator 401 and the second torque target value output from the F/B compensator 402, and outputs the final torque instruction value Tm2*.”)
Regarding claim 7, Oono, as modified, does not teach wherein the gain value is generated based on a traveling mode, gear shifting information, and a traveling status of the electric vehicle whereas Park does.
Park teaches wherein the gain value is generated based on a traveling mode, gear shifting information, and a traveling status of the electric vehicle. (Park: Page 6, Paragraph 6: “In particular, the gain is characterized in that it is previously set to a different value depending on the clutch release, the gear shift, the tip-in / out, the braking time that requires anti-jerk.”)
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the invention disclosed by Oono with the teachings of Park with a reasonable expectation of success. As stated for claim 1, both Oono and Park teaches various methods of reducing the vibrations of the vehicle caused by the vehicle components when driving. Both teach the reduction in the vibrations are due to an applied gain. Parks further teaches the gain value adjusts depending on the clutch release, gear shift, the tip-in/out and the braking time as to reduce jerk. One with knowledge in the art would find both of the gains from Oono and Parks to be simple substitution as both apply gain to the vehicle to obtain the predictable result of reducing the vibrations of the vehicle.
Regarding claim 8, Oono teaches a method of reducing vibration of an electric vehicle (EV) (Oono: Abstract: “A device for controlling an electric vehicle includes:”: Col. 1, lines 42 – 44: “An object of the present invention is to achieve both the acquisition of the stability of a control system and a vibration suppression function.”)
by being executed by a processor in the electric vehicle, the method including: (Oono: Col. 2, lines 39 – 46 :“An electric motor controller 2 inputs, as digital signals, signals indicating the state of the vehicle such as a vehicle speed V, an accelerator opening θ, the rotor phase α of an electric motor 4 and the currents iu, iv and iw of the electric motor 4, and generates, based on the input signals, a PWM signal for controlling the electric motor 4. The electric motor controller 2 also generates a drive signal for an inverter 3 according to the generated PWM signal.”; Claim 1: “A device for controlling an electric vehicle that is configured to set a motor torque instruction value based on vehicle information and control a torque of a motor connected to a drive wheel, the device comprising: a feedforward computation unit that is configured to input the motor torque instruction value without inputting a detection value of a sensor provided in the electric vehicle and compute a first torque target value by feedforward computation; and a motor torque control unit that is configured to control the motor torque according to the first torque target value, wherein the feedforward computation unit includes: a vehicle model which is configured to input the motor torque instruction value to model a characteristic from the motor torque to a drive shaft torsional angular velocity; and a drive shaft torsional angular velocity feedback model which is configured to feed back the drive shaft torsional angular velocity output from the vehicle model to the motor torque instruction value to compute the first torque target value.”,
Supplemental Note: the device for controlling the vehicle components is interpreted as a processor)
determining, by the processor, an actual motor speed of the electric vehicle (Oono: “The rotor phase α (rad) of the electric motor 4 is acquired from the rotation sensor 6. The rotation rate Nm (rpm) of the electric motor 4 is determined as follows: the angular velocity ω (electric angle) of the rotor is divided by the number of pole pairs in the electric motor 4, and thus the motor rotation speed ωm (rad/s) that is the mechanical angular velocity of the electric motor 4 is determined, and the determined motor rotation speed ωm is multiplied by 60/(2π). The angular velocity ω (rad/s) of the rotor is determined by differentiating the rotor phase α.”; Col. 3, lines 44 – 48: “In step S202, a first torque instruction value Tm1* is set. Specifically, based on the accelerator opening θ and the vehicle speed V input in step S201, an accelerator opening-torque table shown in FIG. 3 is referenced, and thus the first torque instruction value Tm1* is set.”)
… determining, by the processor, a drivetrain torsion speed which is a speed of a torsion angle of a driveshaft and generated when the electric vehicle is accelerated or decelerated; (Oono: Col. 5, lines 11 – 37
PNG
media_image1.png
701
592
media_image1.png
Greyscale
,
Supplemental Note: Td represents the driveshaft torque which is found by the torsional angle of the drive shaft that encompasses velocity (speed) into its calculation)
determining, by the processor, a corrected model speed by adding the drivetrain torsion speed to the model speed;
determining, by the processor, a vibration-induced portion based on the actual motor speed and the corrected model speed; and (Oono: Col. 4, lines 26 – 39: “FIG. 4 is an example of a control block diagram for performing processing that sets a final torque instruction value Tm2*. A vibration suppression control computation unit 400 that sets the final torque instruction value Tm2* includes a feedforward compensator 401 (hereinafter referred to as an “F/F compensator 401”), a feedback compensator 402 (hereinafter referred to as an “F/B compensator 402”) and an adder 403. The F/F compensator 401 inputs the first torque instruction value Tm1*, and outputs a first torque target value and a motor rotation rate estimation value for the first torque target value. The F/B compensator 402 inputs the motor rotation rate estimation value for the first torque target value and a motor rotation rate detection value, and outputs a second torque target value. The adder 403 adds the first torque target value output from the F/F compensator 401 and the second torque target value output from the F/B compensator 402, and outputs the final torque instruction value Tm2*.”)
generating, by the processor, an anti-jerk torque by applying a predetermined gain value to the vibration-induced portion. (Oono: Col. 10, lines 1 – 21: “As described above, in the device for controlling the vehicle according to the first embodiment, the F/F compensator 401 that inputs the motor torque instruction value and that computes the first torque target value by feedforward computation and the electric motor controller 2 (motor torque control unit) that controls the motor torque according to the first torque target value are provided. The F/F compensator 401 includes: the vehicle model 501 that inputs the motor torque instruction value to model the characteristic from the motor torque to the drive shaft torsional angular velocity; and the drive shaft torsional angular velocity feedback model 502 that feeds back the drive shaft torsional angular velocity output from the vehicle model 501 to the motor torque instruction value and that thereby computes the first torque target value. In this way, since it is not necessary to set the gain of the drive shaft torsional angular velocity feedback model 502 low with consideration given to safety, it can be set at a feedback gain that satisfies vibration suppression performance. When there is no lag or disturbance in the control system, with the first torque target value, which is a feedforward compensation value, it is possible to reduce drive shaft torsional vibrations.”,
Supplemental Note: a gain is applied to reduce the corresponding vibrations)
In sum, Oono teaches a method of reducing vibration of an electric vehicle (EV) by being executed by a processor in the electric vehicle, the method including: determining, by the processor, an actual motor speed of the electric vehicle determining, by the processor, a drivetrain torsion speed which is a speed of a torsion angle of a driveshaft and generated when the electric vehicle is accelerated or decelerated; determining, by the processor, a corrected model speed by adding the drivetrain torsion speed to the model speed determining, by the processor, a vibration-induced portion based on the actual motor speed and the corrected model speed; and generating, by the processor, an anti-jerk torque by applying a predetermined gain value to the vibration-induced portion. Oono however does not teach the actual motor speed which includes a vibration-induced portion generated by torsion of a drivetrain whereas Park does.
Park teaches which includes a vibration-induced portion generated by torsion of a drivetrain; (Park: Page 3, Paragraph 3: “The present invention has been made to solve the above problems, and after determining whether the vibration occurs through the speed deviation between the actual speed of the drive shaft”)
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the invention disclosed by Oono with the teachings of Park with a reasonable expectation of success. Please refer to the rejection of claim 1 as both claim the same functional language and therefore rejected under the same pretenses.
Regarding claim 9, Oono, as modified, teaches wherein the determining the drivetrain torsion speed includes determining the drivetrain torsion speed by use of an output torque of a motor of the electric vehicle, a torsion coefficient of the driveshaft of the vehicle, and a torsion angle of the driveshaft. (Oono: Col. 5, lines 11 – 37
PNG
media_image1.png
701
592
media_image1.png
Greyscale
,
Supplemental Note: Td represents the driveshaft torque which is found by the torsional angle of the drive shaft that encompasses velocity (speed) into its calculation)
Regarding claim 10, Oono, as modified, teaches further including: reducing, by the processor, noise due to a drivetrain torsion from the vibration-induced portion; and
generating, by the processor, a phase-delayed vibration-induced portion by delaying a phase of the vibration-induced portion from which the noise is reduced. (Oono: Col. 3, lines 49 – 55: “In step S203, the first torque instruction value Tm1* set in step S202 and the motor rotation speed ωm are input, and without waste of the response of a drive shaft torque, a final torque instruction value Tm2* for reducing drive force transmission system vibrations (such as torsional vibrations of the drive shaft 8) is set. A method of setting the final torque instruction value Tm2* will be described in detail later.”,
Supplemental Note: vibrations produce noises)
Regarding claim 14, Oono, as modified, teaches further including generating a final output torque by adding the anti-jerk torque to a driver demand torque. (Oono: Col. 3, lines 44 – 48: “In step S202, a first torque instruction value Tm1* is set. Specifically, based on the accelerator opening θ and the vehicle speed V input in step S201, an accelerator opening-torque table shown in FIG. 3 is referenced, and thus the first torque instruction value Tm1* is set.”; Col. 4, lines 17 – 38: “FIG. 4 is an example of a control block diagram for performing processing that sets a final torque instruction value Tm2*. A vibration suppression control computation unit 400 that sets the final torque instruction value Tm2* includes a feedforward compensator 401 (hereinafter referred to as an “F/F compensator 401”), a feedback compensator 402 (hereinafter referred to as an “F/B compensator 402”) and an adder 403. The F/F compensator 401 inputs the first torque instruction value Tm1*, and outputs a first torque target value and a motor rotation rate estimation value for the first torque target value. The F/B compensator 402 inputs the motor rotation rate estimation value for the first torque target value and a motor rotation rate detection value, and outputs a second torque target value. The adder 403 adds the first torque target value output from the F/F compensator 401 and the second torque target value output from the F/B compensator 402, and outputs the final torque instruction value Tm2*.”)
Regarding claim 15, Oono, as modified, teaches wherein the drivetrain torsion speed is determined by use of a differential of an output torque of the motor and a torsion coefficient of the driveshaft. (Oono: Col. 5, lines 11 – 37
PNG
media_image1.png
701
592
media_image1.png
Greyscale
,
Supplemental Note: Td represents the driveshaft torque which is found by the torsional angle of the drive shaft that encompasses velocity (speed) into its calculation)
Regarding claim 16, Oono, as modified, does not teach wherein the model speed is determined based on a motor torque command, a load torque, gear shifting information, a traveling status, a wheel speed, a transmission input/output speed, and an electric vehicle mode, and wherein the load torque includes a road slope and an aerodynamic drag, the traveling status includes tip-in/tip-out and brake shift, and the electric vehicle mode includes an EV mode, a hybrid EV mode, and an engine clutch slip mode whereas Park does.
Park teaches wherein the model speed is determined based on a motor torque command, a load torque, gear shifting information, a traveling status, a wheel speed, a transmission input/output speed, and an electric vehicle mode, and wherein the load torque includes a road slope and an aerodynamic drag, the traveling status includes tip-in/tip-out and brake shift, and the electric vehicle mode includes an EV mode, a hybrid EV mode, and an engine clutch slip mode. (Park: Page 6, Paragraph 1: “The present invention has been made to solve the above problems, and after determining whether the vibration occurs through the speed deviation between the actual speed of the drive shaft and the model speed in the state that jerking is ignored, the correction for the motor torque By controlling the speed difference between the actual speed and the model speed to zero, the hybrid vehicle anti-vibration can be prevented from occurring when the clutch is released, shifting, and tip-in / out. It is an object of the present invention to provide a jerk control apparatus and method.”,
Supplemental Note: Please refer to the 112(b) indefiniteness rejection regarding the model speed. The current citation teaches a vehicle able to prevent vibrations in the listed scenarios which are not applied to the model speed as it is calculated without any vibrations)
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the invention disclosed by Oono with the teachings of Park with a reasonable expectation of success. Please refer to the rejection of claim 4 as both claim the same functional language and therefore rejected under the same pretenses.
Regarding claim 18, Oono, as modified, teaches wherein the vibration-induced portion is obtained by use of a difference between the actual motor speed and the corrected model speed. (Oono: Col. 4, lines 26 – 39: “FIG. 4 is an example of a control block diagram for performing processing that sets a final torque instruction value Tm2*. A vibration suppression control computation unit 400 that sets the final torque instruction value Tm2* includes a feedforward compensator 401 (hereinafter referred to as an “F/F compensator 401”), a feedback compensator 402 (hereinafter referred to as an “F/B compensator 402”) and an adder 403. The F/F compensator 401 inputs the first torque instruction value Tm1*, and outputs a first torque target value and a motor rotation rate estimation value for the first torque target value. The F/B compensator 402 inputs the motor rotation rate estimation value for the first torque target value and a motor rotation rate detection value, and outputs a second torque target value. The adder 403 adds the first torque target value output from the F/F compensator 401 and the second torque target value output from the F/B compensator 402, and outputs the final torque instruction value Tm2*.”)
Regarding claim 20, Oono, as modified, does not teach wherein the gain value is generated based on a traveling mode, gear shifting information, and a traveling status of the electric vehicle whereas Park does.
Park teaches wherein the gain value is generated based on a traveling mode, gear shifting information, and a traveling status of the electric vehicle. (Park: Page 6, Paragraph 6: “In particular, the gain is characterized in that it is previously set to a different value depending on the clutch release, the gear shift, the tip-in / out, the braking time that requires anti-jerk.”)
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the invention disclosed by Oono with the teachings of Park with a reasonable expectation of success. Please refer to the rejection of claim 7 as both claim the same functional language and therefore rejected under the same pretenses.
Claims 11 – 13 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oono et al. (US 9315114 B2) in view of Park et al. (KR 101117970 B1), further in view of Suzuki et al. (US 20180264947 A1).
Regarding claim 11, Oono teaches a method of reducing vibration of an electric vehicle (EV) (Oono: Abstract: “A device for controlling an electric vehicle includes:”: Col. 1, lines 42 – 44: “An object of the present invention is to achieve both the acquisition of the stability of a control system and a vibration suppression function.”)
by being executed by a processor in the electric vehicle, the method including: (Oono: Col. 2, lines 39 – 46 :“An electric motor controller 2 inputs, as digital signals, signals indicating the state of the vehicle such as a vehicle speed V, an accelerator opening θ, the rotor phase α of an electric motor 4 and the currents iu, iv and iw of the electric motor 4, and generates, based on the input signals, a PWM signal for controlling the electric motor 4. The electric motor controller 2 also generates a drive signal for an inverter 3 according to the generated PWM signal.”; Claim 1: “A device for controlling an electric vehicle that is configured to set a motor torque instruction value based on vehicle information and control a torque of a motor connected to a drive wheel, the device comprising: a feedforward computation unit that is configured to input the motor torque instruction value without inputting a detection value of a sensor provided in the electric vehicle and compute a first torque target value by feedforward computation; and a motor torque control unit that is configured to control the motor torque according to the first torque target value, wherein the feedforward computation unit includes: a vehicle model which is configured to input the motor torque instruction value to model a characteristic from the motor torque to a drive shaft torsional angular velocity; and a drive shaft torsional angular velocity feedback model which is configured to feed back the drive shaft torsional angular velocity output from the vehicle model to the motor torque instruction value to compute the first torque target value.”,
Supplemental Note: the device for controlling the vehicle components is interpreted as a processor)
determining, by the processor, an actual motor speed of the electric vehicle (Oono: “The rotor phase α (rad) of the electric motor 4 is acquired from the rotation sensor 6. The rotation rate Nm (rpm) of the electric motor 4 is determined as follows: the angular velocity ω (electric angle) of the rotor is divided by the number of pole pairs in the electric motor 4, and thus the motor rotation speed ωm (rad/s) that is the mechanical angular velocity of the electric motor 4 is determined, and the determined motor rotation speed ωm is multiplied by 60/(2π). The angular velocity ω (rad/s) of the rotor is determined by differentiating the rotor phase α.”; Col. 3, lines 44 – 48: “In step S202, a first torque instruction value Tm1* is set. Specifically, based on the accelerator opening θ and the vehicle speed V input in step S201, an accelerator opening-torque table shown in FIG. 3 is referenced, and thus the first torque instruction value Tm1* is set.”)
… determining, by the processor, a drivetrain torsion speed which is a speed of a torsion angle of a driveshaft and generated when the electric vehicle is accelerated or decelerated; (Oono: Col. 5, lines 11 – 37
PNG
media_image1.png
701
592
media_image1.png
Greyscale
,
Supplemental Note: Td represents the driveshaft torque which is found by the torsional angle of the drive shaft that encompasses velocity (speed) into its calculation)
In sum, Oono teaches a method of reducing vibration of an electric vehicle (EV) by being executed by a processor in the electric vehicle, the method including: determining, by the processor, an actual motor speed of the electric vehicle determining, by the processor, a drivetrain torsion speed which is a speed of a torsion angle of a driveshaft and generated when the electric vehicle is accelerated or decelerated; whereas Park does.
Park teaches which includes a vibration-induced portion generated by torsion of a drivetrain; (Park: Page 3, Paragraph 3: “The present invention has been made to solve the above problems, and after determining whether the vibration occurs through the speed deviation between the actual speed of the drive shaft”)
… determining, by the processor, a model speed of the electric vehicle; (Park: Page 3, Paragraph 4: “The present invention for achieving the above object is a model speed calculation unit for calculating the model speed of the motor in the state that the vibration of the drive shaft is ignored”)
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the invention disclosed by Oono with the teachings of Park with a reasonable expectation of success. Please refer to the rejection of claim 1 as both claim the same functional language and therefore rejected under the same pretenses. Oono in view of Park however still do not teach determining, by the processor, a corrected motor speed by subtracting the drivetrain torsion speed to the actual motor speed; determining, by the processor, a vibration-induced portion based on the corrected motor speed and the model speed; and generating, by the processor, an anti-jerk torque by applying a predetermined gain value to the vibration-induced portion.
Suzuki teaches determining, by the processor, a corrected motor speed by subtracting the drivetrain torsion speed to the actual motor speed; (Suzuki: Abstract: “The present invention provides a control apparatus capable of acquiring a sufficient effect of eliminating or reducing a torsional vibration generated on a drive shaft in an electric vehicle including a drive wheel configured to be driven by an electric motor via the drive shaft. The control apparatus calculates a first damping control torque for canceling out a vibration component based on a difference between a motor rotational speed and a vehicle body speed,”; Paragraph 0038: “The control apparatus, which is used for the electric vehicle including the electric motor 1 configured to drive the drive wheel (the front wheels FL and FR) via the drive shaft 4, includes the driver request drive torque calculation portion 601 configured to calculate the driver request torque for controlling the electric motor 1 based on the state of the driver's operation, the first damping control torque calculation portion 603 configured to input the vehicle body speed estimated based on the state of the vehicle and calculate the damping control torque based on the difference between the motor rotational speed and the estimated vehicle body speed, and the drive torque instruction value calculation portion 606 configured to calculate the drive torque instruction value for driving the electric motor 1 based on the calculated driver request torque and the calculated damping control torque.”,
Supplemental Note: the motor rotational speed is linked to the drive shaft as it is operating. This value is subtracted by the vehicle body speed)
… determining, by the processor, a vibration-induced portion based on the corrected motor speed and the model speed; and
generating, by the processor, an anti-jerk torque by applying a predetermined gain value to the vibration-induced portion. (Suzuki: Paragraph 0020: “A first damping control torque calculation portion 603 calculates a first damping control torque based on the vehicle body speed estimated by the vehicle body speed estimation portion 602 and the motor rotational speed detected by the revolver 8. A multiplication portion 603a multiplies the vehicle body speed by a total speed reduction rate (a speed reduction rate of the speed reduction mechanism 2×a speed reduction rate of the differential gear 3). A subtraction portion 603b extracts a vibration component contained in the motor rotational speed by subtracting the motor rotational speed from an output of the multiplication portion 603a. A high-pass filter 603c gradually subtracts a steady-state deviation component (a deviation due to a difference between a calculated value and an actual value of a tire dynamic radius) from an output of the subtraction portion 603b. A cutoff frequency of the high-pass filter 603c is set to a value that allows a slip of a wheel to be detected (for example, lower than 1 Hz). A gain multiplication portion 603d outputs a value calculated by multiplying the vibration component that has passed through the high-pass filter 603c by a predetermined control gain K as a first damping control torque. A limiter processing portion 603e limits upper and lower limit values of the first damping control torque within a predetermined range.”)
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the invention disclosed by Oono with the teachings of Suzuki with a reasonable expectation of success. Oono and Suzuki both teach the ability to reduce drive shaft vibrations from the motor by applying a counter gain. Oono teaches this method by the use of vehicle speed and acceleration to identify the first torque instruction value (Oono: Col. 3, lines 44 – 48) and sets a final torque instruction value with the vibrations to the vehicle reduced (Oono: Col. 3, lines 49 – 55) to then calculate a gain to apply which will reduce the vibrations of the vehicle. Suzuki teaches a similar method of determining motor rotational speed and the actual vehicle speed to calculate the gain to be applied. One with knowledge in the art would find both of these methods as a use of a known technique (applying gain based off the vehicle speed and the driveshaft torsion speed) to improve similar devices in the same way (reduce the vibrations in the vehicle).
Regarding claim 12, Oono, as modified, teaches wherein the determining of the drivetrain torsion speed includes determining the drivetrain torsion speed by use of an output torque of a motor of the electric vehicle, a torsion coefficient of the driveshaft of the vehicle, and a torsion angle of the driveshaft. (Oono: Col. 5, lines 11 – 37
PNG
media_image1.png
701
592
media_image1.png
Greyscale
,
Supplemental Note: Td represents the driveshaft torque which is found by the torsional angle of the drive shaft that encompasses velocity (speed) into its calculation)
Regarding claim 13, Oono, as modified, teaches further including:
reducing, by the processor, noise due to a drivetrain torsion from the vibration-induced portion; and
generating, by the processor, a phase-delayed vibration-induced portion by delaying a phase of the vibration-induced portion from which the noise is reduced. (Oono: Col. 3, lines 49 – 55: “In step S203, the first torque instruction value Tm1* set in step S202 and the motor rotation speed ωm are input, and without waste of the response of a drive shaft torque, a final torque instruction value Tm2* for reducing drive force transmission system vibrations (such as torsional vibrations of the drive shaft 8) is set. A method of setting the final torque instruction value Tm2* will be described in detail later.”,
Supplemental Note: vibrations produce noises)
Regarding claim 19, Oono, as modified, does not teach wherein the vibration-induced portion is obtained by use of a difference between the corrected motor speed and the model speed whereas Suzuki does.
Suzuki teaches wherein the vibration-induced portion is obtained by use of a difference between the corrected motor speed and the model speed. (Suzuki: Abstract: “The present invention provides a control apparatus capable of acquiring a sufficient effect of eliminating or reducing a torsional vibration generated on a drive shaft in an electric vehicle including a drive wheel configured to be driven by an electric motor via the drive shaft. The control apparatus calculates a first damping control torque for canceling out a vibration component based on a difference between a motor rotational speed and a vehicle body speed,”; Paragraph 0038: “The control apparatus, which is used for the electric vehicle including the electric motor 1 configured to drive the drive wheel (the front wheels FL and FR) via the drive shaft 4, includes the driver request drive torque calculation portion 601 configured to calculate the driver request torque for controlling the electric motor 1 based on the state of the driver's operation, the first damping control torque calculation portion 603 configured to input the vehicle body speed estimated based on the state of the vehicle and calculate the damping control torque based on the difference between the motor rotational speed and the estimated vehicle body speed, and the drive torque instruction value calculation portion 606 configured to calculate the drive torque instruction value for driving the electric motor 1 based on the calculated driver request torque and the calculated damping control torque.”,
Supplemental Note: the motor rotational speed is linked to the drive shaft as it is operating. This value is subtracted by the vehicle body speed)
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the invention disclosed by Oono with the teachings of Suzuki with a reasonable expectation of success. Please refer to the rejection of claim 11 as both claim the same functional language and therefore rejected under the same pretenses.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see section Rejections under 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 of the REMARKS, filed 06/26/2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1 – 20 under Zaisheng in view of Ravichandran and Sawada have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Oono in view of Park and Suzuki.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHIVAM SHARMA whose telephone number is (703)756-1726. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00-5:00.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Erin Bishop can be reached at 571-270-3713. 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.
/SHIVAM SHARMA/Examiner, Art Unit 3665
/Erin D Bishop/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3665
Prosecution Insights