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 Office Action is in response to the response to the Appeal Brief, filed June 15, 2026. Claims 1-20 are presently pending and presented for examination.
Priority
Acknowledgement is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority based on Korean Patent Application No. KR10-2022-0068710, filed June 7, 2022.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on July 20, 2026, is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed September 22, 2025, have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that Kumazawa teaches away from the claimed invention. Specifically, applicant states that paragraph [0036] of Kumazawa teaches away from the self-diagnosis system of FIG. 4 described in paragraph [0035] of Kumazawa, as cited in the previous office action.
Examiner respectfully disagrees. Applicant states that paragraph [0036] of Kumazawa teaches away from the intended invention of the claim. However, Examiner initially notes that said paragraph was never cited in the previous office action as teaching the aforementioned feature. Paragraph [0035] makes reference to relevant art that teaches the features as previously cited. As noted in the rejection under 35 USC 103, it would be obvious for one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the short-circuit detection system of Niimi, with short circuit detection for sub-systems configured to do the same function of Kumazawa (as disclosed in paragraph 0035), for the benefit of providing a short-circuit detecting circuit device which can be miniaturized and reduce cost. (Kumazawa: Paragraph [0007]).
Applicant goes on to argue that the term “short-circuit” is not mentioned anywhere in Paragraph [0035] of Kumazawa and therefore Kumazawa does not teach any form of short-circuit detection.
Examiner agrees that “short-circuit” does not appear specifically in Paragraph [0025], however, Examiner respectfully disagrees that this fact proves that Kumazawa teaches away for the limitations of the claims and that it is not proper to use Kumazawa as prior art for the rejection. Examiner would like to point out that Paragraph [0025] of Kumazawa, which was also cited as teaching the aforementioned limitation, states that “...the present invention is applied to a self-diagnosis circuit of a G sensor used in an SRS air bag device for a vehicle. FIGS. 1 and 2 are block diagrams showing a short-circuit detecting circuit device of this embodiment. The short-circuit detecting circuit device comprises a self-diagnosis signal generator 1, Gx and Gy sensors 20 and 30, a self-diagnosis circuit 2 (first circuit), a self-diagnosis circuit 3 (second circuit), A/D converters 41 and 42, and a signal processor 5.” The system of Kumazawa clearly describes a short-circuit detection system which is designed to detect short-circuits that occur between the Gx and Gy sensors equipped on the vehicle. Both the Gx and Gy sensors are configured to sense the deceleration of the vehicle and are therefore sub-systems of the vehicle that are configured to perform the same function. Therefore, Examiner states that Kumazawa does not teach away from the limitations of the instant application and does indeed teach the limitations of the claims as currently written.
Applicant argues that Niimi, in view of Kumazawa does not teach the limitation of “wherein the first ECU is configured to, when executing a periodic function performed periodically, calculate a difference value between a current system timer value when receiving a current sensor signal through the first sensor signal line and a previous system timer value when receiving a previous sensor signal through the first sensor signal line, and detect a short-circuit between the first sensor signal line and the second sensor signal line based on the difference value between the current system timer value and the previous system timer value” from independent claim 10. Specifically Applicant states that paragraphs [0064]-[0096] and [0110] of Niimi, as previously cited in the previous office action, do not teach the aforementioned limitation.
Applicant's arguments fail to comply with 37 CFR 1.111(b) because they amount to a general allegation that the claims define a patentable invention without specifically pointing out how the language of the claims patentably distinguishes them from the references. Applicant’s arguments are conclusory. Examiner respectfully disagrees and re-directs Applicant to the rejection of the claims under 35 USC 103 below.
Applicant argues that the cited prior art does not teach the limitations of independent claim 17.
Examiner would like to formally apologize for their misunderstanding of Applicant’s arguments for Claim 17. The rejection of claim 17 has been updated below to contain the rejection for the limitations of Claim 17 that were previously omitted.
An updated and detailed rejection follows below.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1, 10-11, and 17, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Niimi et al. (US 20160250947; hereinafter Niimi, already of record), in view of Kumazawa et al. (US 20050165529; hereinafter Kumazawa, already of record).
Regarding Claim 1,
Niimi teaches
A device for detecting a short-circuit of a sub-system in a distribution system including a plurality of sub-systems performing vehicle control, (Niimi: Abstract and Paragraph [0002]) the device comprising:
a sensor; (Niimi: Paragraph [0091]; “...the hybrid vehicle 1 is equipped with sensors for detecting the power supply voltage VB of the DC power supply B, reactor current Ir that, flows through the reactor L1 of the boost converter 200, output voltage VH of the boost converter 200, and each-phase currents (v-phase current, w-phase current Iw, and u-phase current Iu) of the inverter 300.”)
an electronic control unit (ECU) electrically connected to the sensor; (Niimi: Paragraph [0069]; “The controller 100 consists of two or more ECUs (Electronic Control Units) including an HVECU 110 and an MGECU 120. The ECUs that constitute the controller 100 are electrically connected via a control bus 11.” and [0090]; “...the controller 100 receives sensor outputs, from various sensors included in the hybrid vehicle 1, via the control bus 11.”) and
a signal line connecting the sensor and the ECU, (Niimi: Paragraph [0090]; Control Bus 11)
wherein the ECU is configured to:
perform initialization for initial configuration setting when receiving a sensor signal through the signal line, (Niimi: Paragraph [0094]; “...it is initially determined whether a short-circuit detection flag is OFF (step S101). The short-circuit detection flag is a control flag that is set to ON when it is determined that short circuit occurs in the inverter 300. This flag is OFF in the initial state.”) and
when executing a periodic function performed periodically, (Niimi: Paragraph [0094]; “The short-circuit detection process is repeatedly executed at given intervals.”) detect a short-circuit ... by using a difference value between a current system timer value when receiving a current sensor signal and a previous system timer value when receiving a previous sensor signal. (Niimi: Paragraph [0110])
Niimi does not teach
...
...detect a short-circuit between one sub-system and with another sub-system, configured to perform the same function as each other and included in the distribution system,...
However in the same field of endeavor, Kumazawa teaches
...
...detect a short-circuit between one sub-system and with another sub-system, configured to perform same function as each other and included in the distribution system,... (Kumazawa: Paragraph [0025]-[0026]; “The short-circuit detecting circuit device comprises a self-diagnosis signal generator 1, Gx and Gy sensors 20 and 30, a self-diagnosis circuit 2 (first circuit), a self-diagnosis circuit 3 (second circuit), A/D converters 41 and 42, and a signal processor 5. The short-circuit detecting circuit device is disposed in ECU. The signal processor 5 constitutes a signal processor and a short-circuit monitoring unit.”; [0029]-[0031]; “according to the short-circuit detecting circuit device of this embodiment, the presence or absence of the short-circuit between the conductive wires of the self-diagnosis circuits 2, 3 and the A/D converters 41, 42 can be detected by directly using self-diagnosis devices for diagnosing the abnormality of the Gx sensor 20 and the Gy sensor 30, respectively.”)
It would be obvious for one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the short-circuit detection system of Niimi, with short circuit detection for sub-systems configured to do the same function of Kumazawa, for the benefit of providing a short-circuit detecting circuit device which can be miniaturized and reduce cost. (Kumazawa: Paragraph [0007])
Regarding Claim 10,
Niimi, in view of Kumazawa, teaches
A distribution system (Niimi: Abstract) comprising:
a first sub-system including a first ECU, a first sensor, and a first sensor signal line connecting the first ECU and the first sensor, the first sub-system configured to perform a function related to vehicle control; (Kumazawa: Paragraph [0025]; Gx Sensor 20) and
a second sub-system including a second ECU, a second sensor, and a second sensor signal line connecting the second ECU and the second sensor, the second sub-system configured to perform the function related to the vehicle control in conjunction with the first sub-system, (Kumazawa: Paragraph [0025]; Gy Sensor 30)
wherein the first ECU is configured to, when executing a periodic function performed periodically, calculate a difference value between a current system timer value when receiving a current sensor signal through the first sensor signal line and a previous system timer value when receiving a previous sensor signal through the first sensor signal line, and detect a short-circuit between the first sensor signal line and the second sensor signal line based on the difference value between the current system timer value and the previous system timer value. (Niimi: Paragraph [0094]-[0096], [0110])
The motivation to combine Niimi and Kumazawa is the same as stated for Claim 1 above.
Regarding Claim 11,
Niimi, in view of Kumazawa, teaches
The distribution system of claim 10, wherein the first ECU is configured to perform initialization for initial configuration setting when receiving a first sensor signal through the first sensor signal line. (Niimi: Paragraph [0094]; “...it is initially determined whether a short-circuit detection flag is OFF (step S101). The short-circuit detection flag is a control flag that is set to ON when it is determined that short circuit occurs in the inverter 300. This flag is OFF in the initial state.”)
Regarding Claim 17,
Niimi, in view of Kumazawa, teaches
A method for detecting short-circuit between sub-systems in a distribution system (Niimi: Abstract and Paragraph [0025]) including a first sub-system for performing a function related to vehicle control and a second sub-system for performing the function related to the vehicle control in conjunction with the first sub-system, (Kumazawa: Paragraph [0025]) the method comprising:
performing, by the first sub-system, initialization for initial configuration setting when a first sensor signal is received from a first sensor of the first sub-system through a first sensor signal line connected to the first sensor; (Niimi: Paragraph [0091]; “...the hybrid vehicle 1 is equipped with sensors for detecting the power supply voltage VB of the DC power supply B, reactor current Ir that, flows through the reactor L1 of the boost converter 200, output voltage VH of the boost converter 200, and each-phase currents (v-phase current, w-phase current Iw, and u-phase current Iu) of the inverter 300.”)
when executing a periodic function periodically performed, calculating, by the first sub- system, a difference value between a current system timer value when receiving a current sensor signal from the first sensor and a previous system timer value when receiving a previous sensor signal from the first sensor; (Niimi: Paragraph [0094]; “The short-circuit detection process is repeatedly executed at given intervals.”) and
performing, by the first sub-system, a determination of a short-circuit between the first sensor signal line of the first sub-system and a second sensor signal line of the second sub-system. (Kumazawa: Paragraph [0025]-[0026]; “The short-circuit detecting circuit device comprises a self-diagnosis signal generator 1, Gx and Gy sensors 20 and 30, a self-diagnosis circuit 2 (first circuit), a self-diagnosis circuit 3 (second circuit), A/D converters 41 and 42, and a signal processor 5. The short-circuit detecting circuit device is disposed in ECU. The signal processor 5 constitutes a signal processor and a short-circuit monitoring unit.”; [0029]-[0031]; “according to the short-circuit detecting circuit device of this embodiment, the presence or absence of the short-circuit between the conductive wires of the self-diagnosis circuits 2, 3 and the A/D converters 41, 42 can be detected by directly using self-diagnosis devices for diagnosing the abnormality of the Gx sensor 20 and the Gy sensor 30, respectively.”)
The motivation to combine Niimi and Kumazawa is the same as stated for Claim 1 above.
Claims 2 and 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Niimi, in view of Kumazawa as applied to claims 1, 10-11, and 17, above, further in view of Nishinaka et al. (US 20230030557; hereinafter Nishinaka, already of record), and further in view of Matsubara et al. (US 20220179011; hereinafter Matsubara, already of record).
Regarding Claim 2,
Niimi, in view of Kumazawa, teaches
The device of claim 1, wherein the ECU comprises:
...
an ECU storage configured to store the current system timer value and the previous system timer value. (Niimi: Paragraph [0070]; “The controller 100 includes storage devices, such as a ROM (Read Only Memory) and a RAM (Random Access Memory), for storing information needed for operation of the controller 100. ...the RAM stores various kinds of information to be temporarily stored in the process of execution of the above-mentioned various controls.”)
Niimi, in view of Kumazawa, does not teach
...
a sensor transceiver configured to transmit and receive one or more signals including the sensor signal to and from the sensor;
a system timer configured to generate the current system timer value and the previous system timer value;
a central processing unit configured to perform the initialization and detect the short-circuit;
an ECU transceiver configured to transmit and receive one or more signals to and from another ECU of the another sub- system;
an interrupt router module configured to generate an interrupt for receiving the sensor signal; and
...
However in the same field of endeavor, Nishinaka teaches
...
a sensor transceiver configured to transmit and receive one or more signals including the sensor signal to and from the sensor; (Nishinaka: Paragraph [0025]; CAN Transceiver 22)
...
a central processing unit configured to perform the initialization and detect the short-circuit; (Nishinaka: Paragraph [0019]; Central Gateway ECU 18)
an ECU transceiver configured to transmit and receive one or more signals to and from another ECU of the another sub- system; (Nishinaka: Paragraph [0026]; “...a controller 24 that controls the entire chassis control module 11 while communicating with each of the units of the vehicle via the CAN transceiver 22.”)
It would be obvious for one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the short-circuit detection device of Niimi and Kumazawa, with the various units of Nishinaka for the benefit of reliably detecting a load short-circuit and to protect components that may be located in a flow path through which a short-circuit current flows. (Nishinaka: Paragraph [0008])
Niimi, in view of Kumazawa, and further in view of Nishinaka, does not teach
...
a system timer configured to generate the current system timer value and the previous system timer value;
...
an interrupt router module configured to generate an interrupt for receiving the sensor signal;
However in the same field of endeavor, Matsubara teaches
...
a system timer configured to generate the current system timer value and the previous system timer value; (Matsubara: Paragraph [0038]; Timing Detection Unit 132)
...
an interrupt router module configured to generate an interrupt for receiving the sensor signal; (Matsubara: Paragraph [0034]; “Short Circuit Determination Apparatus 100” which includes a “Short Circuit Interruption Unit 160”) and
...
It would be obvious for one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the short-circuit detection device of Niimi, in view of Kumazawa, and further in view of Nishinaka, with the timer and interrupt router module of Matsubara for the benefit of detecting that an electrical device may be short-circuited as soon as possible. (Matsubara: Paragraph [0007])
Regarding Claim 12,
Niimi, in view of Kumazawa, further in view of Nishinaka, and further in view of Matsubara, teaches
The distribution system of claim 11, wherein the first ECU comprises:
a sensor transceiver configured to transmit and receive one or more signals the first sensor signal to and from the first sensor; (Nishinaka: Paragraph [0025]; CAN Transceiver 22)
a system timer configured to generate the current system timer value and the previous system timer value; (Matsubara: Paragraph [0038]; Timing Detection Unit 132) and
a central processing unit configured to perform the initialization and detect the short-circuit. (Nishinaka: Paragraph [0019]; Central Gateway ECU 18)
The motivation to combine Niimi, Kumazawa, Nishinaka, and Matsubara, is the same as stated for Claim 2 above.
Regarding Claim 13, the claim is analogous to Claim 2 limitations and is therefore rejected under the same premise as Claim 2.
Claims 3-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Niimi, in view of Kumazawa, further in view of Nishinaka, and further in view of Matsubara, as applied to claims 2, 5-7, 12-15, 18-19, above, and further in view of Yamai et al. (US 20120050922; hereinafter Yamai, already of record).
Regarding Claim 3,
Niimi, in view of Kumazawa, further in view of Nishinaka, and further in view of Matsubara, teaches
The device of claim 2,...
...
wherein the interrupt router module is configured to transmit a sensor trigger signal to the sensor, (Matsubara: Paragraph [0038]-[0040]; “...the first determination unit 134 starts the short circuit determination by using, as a trigger, the detection signal being supplied from the timing detection unit 132. In other words, the first determination unit 134 does not perform the short circuit determination until the detection signal is supplied from the timing detection unit 132.”)
the sensor is configured to transmit the sensor signal including sensing data to the ECU in response to receiving the sensor trigger signal, (Matsubara: Paragraph [0035]-[0036]; “...the sensor 110 outputs, to the short circuit determination unit 120, for example, the voltage induced at both ends of the Rogowski coil, that is, the temporal change of the main current flowing between the first main terminal 24 and the second main terminal 26 in the switching device 20.”) and
...
Niimi, in view of Kumazawa, further in view of Nishinaka, and further in view of Matsubara, does not teach
...wherein the ECU further comprises a direct memory access (DMA) module,
...
the DMA module is configured to store the sensing data, the current system timer value, and the previous system timer value in the ECU storage.
However in the same field of endeavor, Yamai teaches
...wherein the ECU further comprises a direct memory access (DMA) module, (Yamai: Paragraph [0092])
...
the DMA module is configured to store the sensing data, the current system timer value, and the previous system timer value in the ECU storage. (Yamai: Paragraph [0093]-[0094])
It would be obvious for one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the short-circuit detection device of Niimi, in view of Kumazawa, further in view of Nishinaka, and further in view of Matsubara, with the DMA module of Yamai for the benefit of transferring data output from the individual captures to predetermined RAM areas. (Yamai: Paragraph [0092])
Regarding Claim 4,
Niimi, in view of Kumazawa, further in view of Nishinaka, further in view of Matsubara, and further in view of Yamai, teaches
The device of claim 3, wherein initialization parameters used for the initial configuration settings comprise at least one of a system timer value or storage location of the system timer value when receiving the sensor signal, (Matsubara: Paragraph [0037]-[0038]) setting information of a transmission period of the sensor trigger signal, processing priority information of the interrupt router module, storage target information to be stored in the ECU storage through the DMA module, and storage location information in the ECU storage for storing the storage target information.
The motivation to combine Niimi, Kumazawa, Nishinaka, Matsubara, and Yamai, is the same as stated for Claim 3 above.
Claims 5-6, 14-15, and 18-19, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Niimi, in view of Kumazawa as applied to claims 1, 10-11, and 17, above, and further in view of Matsubara.
Regarding Claim 5,
Niimi, in view of Kumazawa, teaches
The device of claim 1,...
Niimi, in view of Kumazawa, does not teach
...wherein the ECU is configured to compare the difference value between the current system timer value and the previous system timer value with a threshold value or range, and determine that the short- circuit between the on sub-system and the another sub-system has occurred if the difference value between the current system timer value and the previous system timer value is different from the threshold value or out of the threshold range.
However in the same field of endeavor, Matsubara teaches
...wherein the ECU is configured to compare the difference value between the current system timer value and the previous system timer value with a threshold value or range, (Matsubara: Paragraph [0038]) and determine that the short- circuit between the on sub-system and the another sub-system has occurred if the difference value between the current system timer value and the previous system timer value is different from the threshold value or out of the threshold range. (Matsubara: Paragraph [0039])
It would be obvious for one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the short-circuit detection device of Niimi, in view of Kumazawa with the timer system and timer value consideration of Matsubara for the benefit of detecting that an electrical device may be short-circuited as soon as possible. (Matsubara: Paragraph [0007]).
Regarding Claim 6,
Niimi, in view of Kumazawa, and further in view of Matsubara, teaches
The device of claim 5, wherein the threshold value is a transmission and/or reception period of the sensor signal of the sensor. (Matsubara: Paragraph [0038]-[0039])
The motivation to combine Niimi, Kumazawa, and Matsubara, is the same as stated for Claim 5 above.
Regarding Claim 14, the claim is analogous to Claim 5 limitations and is therefore rejected under the same premise as Claim 5.
Regarding Claim 15, the claim is analogous to Claim 6 limitations and is therefore rejected under the same premise as Claim 6.
Regarding Claim 18, the claim is analogous to Claim 5 limitations and is therefore rejected under the same premise as Claim 5.
Regarding Claim 19, the claim is analogous to Claim 6 limitations and is therefore rejected under the same premise as Claim 6.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Niimi, in view of Kumazawa, and further in view of Matsubara, as applied to claims 5-6, 14-15, and 18-19, above, and further in view of Nishinaka.
Regarding Claim 7,
Niimi, in view of Kumazawa, and further in view of Matsubara, teaches
The device of claim 6,...
Niimi, in view of Kumazawa, and further in view of Matsubara, does not teach
...wherein an execution period of the periodic function is an integer multiple of the transmission and/or reception period of the sensor signal of the sensor.
However in the same field of endeavor, Nishinaka teaches
...wherein an execution period of the periodic function is an integer multiple of the transmission and/or reception period of the sensor signal of the sensor. (Nishinaka: Paragraph [0056])
It would be obvious for one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the short-circuit detection device of Niimi, in view of Kumazawa, and further in view of Matsubara, with the execution period periodic function of Nishinaka for the benefit of reliably detecting a load short-circuit and to protect components that may be located in a flow path through which a short-circuit current flows. (Nishinaka: Paragraph [0008]).
Claims 8, 16, and 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Niimi, in view of Kumazawa, as applied to claims 1, 10-11, and 17, above, and further in view of Klein et al. (US 20190084614; hereinafter Klein, already of record).
Regarding Claim 8,
Niimi, in view of Kumazawa, teaches
The device of claim 1,...
Niimi, in view of Kumazawa, does not teach
...wherein the distribution system is for a steer-by-wire steering system for automatic steering control during autonomous driving,
However in the same field of endeavor, Klein teaches
...wherein the distribution system is for a steer-by-wire steering system (Klein: Paragraph [0006]) for automatic steering control during autonomous driving, (Klein: Paragraph [0018]) and the sensor includes at least one steering torque sensor or a motor position sensor of a steering motor. (Klein: Paragraph [0035])
It would be obvious for one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the short-circuit detection device of Niimi, in view of Kumazawa, with the steer-by-wire system sensors and monitoring system of Klein for the benefit of determining a fault condition with the steer by wire system using the reference tracking error. (Klein: Abstract)
Regarding Claim 16, the claim is analogous to Claim 8 limitations and is therefore rejected under the same premise as Claim 8.
Regarding Claim 20, the claim is analogous to Claim 8 limitations and is therefore rejected under the same premise as Claim 8.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Niimi, in view of Kumazawa, as applied to claims 1, 10-11, and 17, above, and further in view of Mueller et al. (US 20220393904; hereinafter Mueller, already of record).
Regarding Claim 9,
Niimi, in view of Kumazawa, teaches
The device of claim 1,...
Niimi, in view of Kumazawa, does not teach
...wherein the ECU is configured to determine that the short-circuit between the one sub-system and the another sub-system has occurred if a protocol error between the sensor and the ECU or a reception error in which the ECU is unable to receive the sensor signal from the sensor occurs.
However in the same field of endeavor, Mueller teaches
...wherein the ECU is configured to determine that the short-circuit with the another sub- system has occurred if a protocol error between the sensor and the ECU or a reception error in which the ECU is unable to receive the sensor signal from the sensor occurs. (Mueller: Paragraph [0018])
It would be obvious for one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the short-circuit detection device of Niimi, in view of Kumazawa, with the error detection of Mueller for the benefit of improved safety for use in next generation autonomous vehicles. (Mueller: Paragraph [0009])
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PAULO ROBERTO GONZALEZ LEITE whose telephone number is (571)272-5877. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri: 8:00 am - 4:30 pm.
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, Abby Flynn can be reached on 571-272-9855. 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.
/P.R.L./ Examiner, Art Unit 3663
/ABBY J FLYNN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3663
Prosecution Insights