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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 13-14 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and (a)(2) as being anticipated by Tseng et al. (PG Pub 2014/0195114).
Regarding claim 13, Tseng teaches a method of controlling an active suspension system of a vehicle (figure 6, all; figure 1, element 12; paragraph 14), the method comprising:
determining that vehicle movement is impeded at a leading wheel of the vehicle (paragraphs 49-51); and
in dependence on the determination:
transmitting a transient force request to the active suspension system to transiently unload the leading wheel (paragraphs 63-69), and
control the active suspension system to reduce a spring rate at the leading wheel so that the suspension of the leading wheel provides less vertical restoring force (paragraphs 55-68; figure 6, steps 330-360).
Regarding claim 14, Tseng teaches a non-transitory computer readable medium having stored thereon software that, when executed, is arranged to perform the method according to claim 13 (paragraph 25; figure 1, element 12).
Regarding claim 20, Tseng teaches a control system for controlling an active suspension system of a vehicle (paragraphs 14 and 27; figure 1, element 45),
the control system comprising one or more controllers (figure 1, elements 12 and 99, e.g.; paragraph 25),
wherein the control system is configured to:
determine a transient suspension unloading request indicating a selected lateral side of the vehicle (paragraphs 63-69; figures 4, 7a, and 7b); and
in dependence on the determination, transmit a transient force request to the active suspension system to cause: (i) transient unloading of a wheel of the vehicle at the selected lateral side of the vehicle (paragraphs 63-69; figures 4, 7a, and 7b), and (ii) reduction of a spring rate at the wheel so that the suspension of the wheel provides less vertical restoring force (paragraphs 55-68; figure 6, steps 330-360).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 7-8, filed December 29, 2025, with respect to the rejection of claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. 102 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection of claim 1 has been withdrawn.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-12, 15, 17-18, and 21-22 are allowed. The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Regarding claim 1, the prior art of record fails to teach or render obvious transmitting a transient force request to the active suspension system to transiently unload the leading wheel, wherein the transient force request is maintained until no longer than the earlier of a predetermined timeout time and a feedback indication that an obstacle has been climbed, the feedback indication comprising one or more of: increasing vehicle speed over ground, and an indication that the vehicle is no longer climbing the obstacle in dependence on any of a wheel-to-wheel body displacement, wheel hub or body acceleration data, and a driveline torque sensor measurement. Claims 2-12, 15, 17-18, and 21-22 contain allowable subject matter based on their dependence on an allowable claim.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
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 SUSAN E SCHARPF whose telephone number is (571)270-5304. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7:30am-4:30pm.
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, Pat Wongwian can be reached at 571-270-5426. 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.
/Susan E Scharpf/Examiner, Art Unit 3747
/LINDSAY M LOW/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3747