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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 12 May 2026 has been entered.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “target value setting unit” in claim 8.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
The disclosure fails to describe the corresponding structure of “target value setting unit.” See corresponding rejections under 35 U.S.C. 1121(a) and (b), below.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 8-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Claim 8 still recites the limitation “target value setting value,” interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), for which no corresponding structure was disclosed in the original disclosure..
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 8-12 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.
Claim limitation “target value setting unit” in claim 8 invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
Applicant may:
(a) Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph;
(b) Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what structure, material, or acts perform the entire claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(c) Amend the written description of the specification such that it clearly links the structure, material, or acts disclosed therein to the function recited in the claim, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)).
If applicant is of the opinion that the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts and clearly links them to the function so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either:
(a) Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(b) Stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-6 and 8-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception without significantly more.
Claim 1 recites the following abstract control steps:
create a target setting value in consideration of energy efficiency in response to inputted environmental condition information;
create a target control value for tracking the target setting value on the basis of the target setting value created by the target value setting unit (100); and
determine whether the target control value is included in a safety control range of a preset vehicle integrated thermal management system, and set an output control value on the basis of a determination result,
wherein to create the target control value comprises to:
create the target control value by applying two or more artificial intelligence (AI) learning models; and
calculate the target control value,
wherein to determine whether the target control value is included in the safety control range and set the output control value comprises, to:
determine whether the target control value, is included in the safety control range of the preset vehicle integrated thermal management system; and
set the target control value to a first output control value as the output control value when the determination result indicates that the target control value deviates from the safety control range, or to a second output control value as the output control value when the determination result indicates that the target control value, is included in the safety control range.
The judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to more than the judicial exception for the following reasons:
utilizing memory to store code and a processor to execute the code are well-understood routine elements in the field, specified at a high level of generality (see MPEP 2106.05(d) for guidance).
Further, the recitation that the control system is “for an artificial intelligence-based vehicle integrated thermal management system, which optimally controls the vehicle integrated thermal management system” is simple intended use within the preamble and does not breathe life or meaning to the body of claim in a manner to render the claim statutory.
As per claim 2, the recitation that
the one or more processors are further configured to: receive, data server (10), collected data including environmental condition information collected under various experimental conditions, information on control of variables matched with the collected environmental condition information, and information on energy consumption by the control information, and to extract main control variables having most optimal energy efficiency in response to the environmental condition information; receive the main control variables matched with the environmental condition information, make a database based on the main control variables, and store and manage the database
Are directed to simple collection of data, constituting insignificant pre-solution activity(see MPEP 2106.05(g) for guidance).
The limitation:
create the target setting value by extracting the main control variables having the most optimal energy efficiency in response to the inputted environmental condition information by matching the inputted environmental condition information with information stored in the database.
is directed to further abstract calculations.
As per claim 3, the limitation:
wherein to receive the collected data from the data server (10) includes to receive the collected data at predefined intervals, renew the main control variables extracted in response to the environmental condition information and inputted current vehicle state information, and update the database.
is directed to simple collection of data, constituting insignificant pre-solution activity (see MPEP 2106.05(g) for guidance).
As per claim 4, the limitation:
wherein to create the target control value by applying the two or more AI learning models comprises outputting a most optimal tracking control value for tracking the target setting value on the basis of information on current states of the variables by applying the two or more AI learning models;
is directed to simple output of data, constituting insignificant post-solution activity (see MPEP 2106.05(g) for guidance).
The limitation:
wherein to calculate the target control value comprises to calculate the target control value for tracking the target setting value created on the basis of the information of the current states of the variables.
is directed to further abstract calculations.
As per claim 5, the limitations:
. wherein to create the target control value includes using two or more Al learning engines,
wherein each of the AI learning engines learns input parameters including the environmental condition information, the main control variable having the most optimal energy efficiency in response to the environmental condition information, the target setting value for control to the main control variable having the most optimal energy efficiency on the basis of the environmental condition information, and the tracking control value to the target setting value based on the information on the states of the variables, and creates and applies an AI learning model for outputting the most optimal tracking control value as determined by the created AI learning model, and
wherein the one or more processors are further configured to update the AI learning model by repeatedly performing learning by the AI learning engine at predefined intervals.
are directed to further abstract calculations.
As per claim 6, the limitations:
wherein to update the AI learning model includes to analyze the input parameters, organize[[s]] the input parameters into large groups on the basis of the main control variable, and organize[[s]] the input parameters into small groups on the basis of a connection factor, which affects the corresponding main control variable, for each of the main control variables, and
wherein each of the AI learning engines learns the small group of the input parameters, and the corresponding connection factor creates the AI learning model that outputs the most optimal tracking control value for controlling the main control variable.
are directed to further abstract calculations.
As per claim 8,
Again, the recitation that the method is directed to “an artificial intelligence-based vehicle integrated thermal management system, which optimally controls the vehicle integrated thermal management system” is simple intended use within the preamble and does not breathe life or meaning to the body of claim in a manner to render the claim statutory.
The limitation:
receiving, by a target value setting unit from a data server, collected data including environmental condition information collected under various experimental conditions, information on control of variables matched with the collected environmental condition information, and information on energy consumption by the control information,
is directed to simple collection of data, constituting insignificant pre-solution activity (see MPEP 2106.05(g) for guidance).
The limitations:
extracting main control variables having most optimal energy efficiency in response to the environmental condition information, receiving the main control variables matched with the extracted environmental condition information, making a database based on the main control variables, and storing and managing the database;
creating, by the target value setting unit, a target setting value in consideration of energy efficiency in response to inputted environmental condition information;
creating, by a control value computation unit, a target control value for tracking the target setting value on the basis of information on current states of the variables;
determining, by a control value output unit, whether the target control value is included in a safety control range of a preset vehicle integrated thermal management system; and
setting, by the control value output unit, the target control value to the output control value on the basis of the determining, wherein setting the control value comprises:
creating the target control value by applying two or more artificial intelligence (AI) learning models; and
calculating the target control value,
wherein setting the target control value to the output control value includes setting the target control value to a first output control value when the determining indicates that the target control value is included in the safety control range, and
wherein setting the target control value to the output control value includes setting the target control value to a second output control value when the determining indicates that the target control value deviates from the safety control range.
are directed to further abstract calculations.
As per claim 9, the limitation:
receiving the collected data from the data server at predefined intervals
is directed to simple collection of data, constituting insignificant pre-solution activity (see MPEP 2106.05(g) for guidance).
The limitations:
renewing the main control variables extracted in response to the environmental condition information and inputted current vehicle state information,
are directed to further abstract calculations.
The limitation:
updating the database.
is directed to simple output of data, constituting insignificant post-solution activity (see MPEP 2106.05(g) for guidance).
are directed to further abstract calculations.
As per claim 10, the limitations:
wherein creating the target control value comprises creating the target control value by outputting a most optimal tracking control value for tracking the target setting value created on the basis of the information on the current states of the variables by applying the two or more AI learning models; and
wherein the calculating the target control value comprises calculating the target control value for tracking the target setting value created on the basis of the information on the current states of the variables.
are directed to further abstract calculations.
As per claim 11, the limitations:
wherein creating the target control value includes using two or more AI learning engines, wherein each of the AI learning engines learns input parameters including the environmental condition information, the main control variable having the most optimal energy efficiency in response to the environmental condition information, the target setting value for control to the main control variable having the most optimal energy efficiency on the basis of the environmental condition information, and the tracking control value to the target setting value based on the information on the states of the variables, and creates and applies an AI learning model for outputting the most optimal tracking control value as determined by the created AI learning model, and
wherein creating the target control value comprises updating the AI learning model by repeatedly performing learning by the AI learning engine at predefined intervals.
are directed to further abstract calculations.
As per claim 12, the limitations:
wherein updating the AI learning model includes the analyzing the input parameters, organizing the input parameters into large groups on the basis of the main control variable, and organizing the input parameters into small groups on the basis of a connection factor, which affects the corresponding main control variable, for each of the main control variables, and
wherein each of the AI learning engines learns the small group of the input parameters, and the corresponding connection factor creates the AI learning model that outputs the most optimal tracking control value for controlling the main control variable.
are directed to further abstract calculations.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed 12 May 2026 are acknowledged. However, the claims remain rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 for the reasons set forth above.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 MARC E NORMAN whose telephone number is (571)272-4812. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00-4:30 M-F.
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, Frantz Jules can be reached at 571-272-6681. 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.
/MARC E NORMAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763
Prosecution Insights