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 .
Response to Arguments/Amendments
The amendment filed January 2nd, 2026 has been entered. Claims 1-20 are currently pending in the Application.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the rejection of claims under 35 U.S.C 103 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 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 1-20, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Publication No. 20230182726, to Nishiura et al. (hereinafter Nishiura), and further in view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 20190012920, to Tamura et al (hereinafter Tamura), and further in view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 20160159327, to Flehmig et al (hereinafter Flehmig)
Regarding claim 1, and commensurate claims 16, Nishiura teaches, An apparatus for controlling a vehicle, the apparatus comprising: (See at least paragraph [0009] “A vehicle control device that controls a vehicle”) a sensor configured to obtain surrounding environment information (See at least paragraph [0039] “an external environment recognition control unit 111,”) and driving information of the vehicle; (See at least paragraph [0049] “A vehicle movement information acquiring unit 202 acquires movement information about a state of movement of the vehicle 100.”)
and a controller configured to divide, into one or more sections, a section of a road in which the vehicle is traveling and in which a steering change occurs due to obstacle avoidance driving of the vehicle, (See at least paragraph [0009] “The avoidance route calculating unit calculates a target point for avoiding the obstacle, divides an avoidance section connecting the position of the vehicle to the target point into a plurality of partial sections, calculates a partial avoidance route in each of the partial sections”). Further, (See at least paragraph [0009] “an avoidance means selecting unit that selects either braking or steering as a means for avoiding the obstacle;”) and when a collision with an obstacle is determined based on the surrounding environment information (See at least paragraph [0039] “an external environment recognition control unit 111,”) and the driving information, (See at least paragraph [0049] “A vehicle movement information acquiring unit 202 acquires movement information about a state of movement of the vehicle 100.”) separately calculate a control amount for each section, among the one or more sections, (See at least paragraph [0009] “calculates a partial avoidance route in each of the partial sections,”) according to a type of the road, (See at least paragraph [0188] “The first embodiment relates to an assumed case where the vehicle 100 traveling in a straight lane avoids its collision with the obstacle H, and therefore, according to the first embodiment, the partial avoidance routes in the first section and second section are straight routes”)
Nishiura fails to explicitly teach, However, Tamura discloses, and determine the type of the road by determining whether the vehicle is traveling on a straight road or a curved road based on the driving information. (See at least paragraph [0041] “the actuation determination section 13 functions as a status determination section that determines, as the traveling status of the own vehicle 40, whether the own vehicle 40 is traveling on the curved road or whether the own vehicle 40 is traveling unsteadily.”)
Further, Flehmig discloses, wherein the one or more sections include an avoidance section in which steering is input, by a driver, to avoid the obstacle (See at least paragraph [0027] “In the example shown in FIG. 2, planning instance 18 has calculated a setpoint trajectory on which the vehicle switches to the left adjacent lane. A first phase of the evasive maneuver begins at an instant t1 with an intervention in the steering system. However, no intervention in the longitudinal dynamics takes place as yet in this phase, so that velocity v of the vehicle still remains constant for the moment. Consequently, the vehicle driver perceives only an intervention in the transverse dynamics, and infers from this that the evasion-assist system is attempting to drive around the obstacle.”). Further, (See at least paragraph [0023] “Alternatively or additionally, the actuator system may also have what is referred to as an active steering system SA, which sets a steering angle independently of the position of the steering wheel. An angle which corresponds to a superposition of the steering angle set by actuator system 12 and the steering angle adjusted manually by the vehicle driver via the steering wheel then ultimately results as the steering angle of the vehicle wheels. In this case, the driver is thus able to override actuator system 12 by setting a larger or smaller steering angle or even a steering angle in the opposite direction via the steering wheel.”). and a stable section in which steering is input, by the driver, to return to a normal state after steering is input to avoid the obstacle, (See at least paragraph [0028] “Only at a later instant t2 does a second phase of the evasive maneuver then commence in which, while the intervention in the transverse dynamics is continued, an intervention in the longitudinal dynamics in the form of a braking procedure is also carried out, e.g., in order to mitigate the consequences of an accident if, in spite of the evasive maneuver initiated, a collision should occur. Accordingly, velocity v decreases as of instant t2. Finally, the evasive maneuver is concluded with a countersteering movement, the result of which, for example, is that the vehicle continues its travel parallel to the original course in the adjacent lane.”). Further, (See at least paragraph [0006] “The invention takes into account the fact that many vehicle drivers during an emergency braking, whether initiated now by the drivers themselves or by the assist system, instinctively attempt to suppress transverse movements of the vehicle by corresponding counter steering, because they fear the vehicle will get out of control.”). and the controller is configured to determine whether the vehicle is travelling on the avoidance section or the stable section based on steering information input by the driver, (See at least paragraph [0030] “During the entire evasive maneuver, planning instance 18 checks, on the basis of the data supplied by sensory system 10, whether the actual dynamics correspond to the setpoint dynamics calculated, or whether a deviation has come about between the actual dynamics and setpoint dynamics owing to interventions by the vehicle driver or because of other factors. With reference to the actual dynamics, planning instance 18 may also determine instant t2, at which the second phase of the evasive maneuver begins. One criterion for the introduction of the second phase—and therefore the intervention in the longitudinal dynamics—may lie in the fact, for example, that the steering angle, the steering wheel angular velocity, the yaw rate, the yaw angle, transverse position y, the distance traveled in the longitudinal direction of the vehicle, the transverse acceleration, the wheel-speed ratios and/or the time passed since instant t1 has exceeded a suitable threshold value. Optionally, a combination of several such criteria may also be used, which then influence the decision with different weights.”). and control the vehicle based on the control amount for each section. (See at least paragraph [0006] “in a first phase of an evasive maneuver, the emergency evasion function intervenes exclusively in the transverse dynamics, and only after this phase, decides whether an intervention in the longitudinal dynamics will also take place.”). Further, (See at least paragraph [0028] “Only at a later instant t2 does a second phase of the evasive maneuver then commence in which, while the intervention in the transverse dynamics is continued, an intervention in the longitudinal dynamics in the form of a braking procedure is also carried out, e.g., in order to mitigate the consequences of an accident if, in spite of the evasive maneuver initiated, a collision should occur. Accordingly, velocity v decreases as of instant t2. Finally, the evasive maneuver is concluded with a countersteering movement, the result of which, for example, is that the vehicle continues its travel parallel to the original course in the adjacent lane. In view of the now lower velocity v of the vehicle, the countersteering movement may be implemented with a smaller radius of curve.”).
Nishiura as modified by Tamura, and Flehmig are analogous art because they are in the same field of endeavor, collision avoidance systems. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system of Nishiura to incorporate the teachings of Tamura such that the “actuation determination section 13” see para. 0041 of Tamura because Tamura improves the collision avoidance of Nishiura by understanding the type of road the vehicle is operating in order to provide accurate maneuvering, and further Flehmig will aid to avoidance/stable of the vehicle phases will aid in the user being able to have control of the vehicle after a emergency collision.
Regarding claim 2, and commensurate claim 17, Nishiura as modified by Tamura, and Flehmig disclose the teachings of claim 1, further Nishiura fails to explicitly teach, However, Tamura discloses, wherein the controller is configured to determine that the vehicle is traveling on the straight road (See at least paragraph [0067-0068] “The above embodiment used the estimated curve rate as the information (turning information) on the turning state of the own vehicle 40, but not limited to this. As the turning information, for example, a steering angle or a yaw rate of the own vehicle 40 may be used. The above embodiment used a configuration which performs the one-side control under the condition that it is determined that the own vehicle 40 is traveling on the curved road or traveling unsteadily”). Further, (See at least paragraph [0041] “the actuation determination section 13 functions as a status determination section that determines, as the traveling status of the own vehicle 40, whether the own vehicle 40 is traveling on the curved road or whether the own vehicle 40 is traveling unsteadily.”) when a steering angle included in the driving information is less than a first threshold value (See at least paragraph [0067-0068] “The above embodiment used the estimated curve rate as the information (turning information) on the turning state of the own vehicle 40, but not limited to this. As the turning information, for example, a steering angle or a yaw rate of the own vehicle 40 may be used. The above embodiment used a configuration which performs the one-side control under the condition that it is determined that the own vehicle 40 is traveling on the curved road or traveling unsteadily”). Further, (See at least paragraph [0036] “the estimated curve rate may be calculated based on a steering angle detected by the steering angle sensor and an own vehicle speed detected by the vehicle speed sensor.”). Further, (See at least paragraph [0047] “Here, it is determined whether a change amount Δθ of a steering angle detected by the steering angle sensor is not less than a predetermined value. Note that, the determination of start of the collision avoidance operation by the driver is not limited to a method based on a change amount Δθ of a steering angle. For example, it may be determined based on whether the steering angle is not less than a predetermined value.”) and when a steering angular velocity is less than a second threshold value. (See at least paragraph [0067-0068] “The above embodiment used the estimated curve rate as the information (turning information) on the turning state of the own vehicle 40, but not limited to this. As the turning information, for example, a steering angle or a yaw rate of the own vehicle 40 may be used. The above embodiment used a configuration which performs the one-side control under the condition that it is determined that the own vehicle 40 is traveling on the curved road or traveling unsteadily”). Further, (See at least paragraph [0054] “Here, the driving assistance device 10 compares a threshold with at least one value of the steering angle and the steering angular speed, and determines the start of the collision avoidance operation by the driver on the basis of the comparison result.”)
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system of Nishiura to incorporate the teachings of Tamura, and Flehmig for the same motivation reasons as stated in claim 1.
Regarding claim 3, and commensurate claim 18, Nishiura as modified by Tamura, and Flehmigdisclose the teachings of claim 2, further Nishiura teaches, wherein the controller is configured to, when it is determined that the vehicle is traveling on the straight road, divide a section of the road in which the vehicle avoids the obstacle into a first avoidance section and a first stable section. (See at least paragraph [0188] “The first embodiment relates to an assumed case where the vehicle 100 traveling in a straight lane avoids its collision with the obstacle H, and therefore, according to the first embodiment, the partial avoidance routes in the first section and second section are straight routes”)
Regarding claim 4, Nishiura as modified by Tamura, and Flehmig disclose the teachings of claim 3, further Nishiura fails to explicitly teach, However, Tamura discloses, wherein the controller is configured to determine whether the vehicle is traveling in the first avoidance section based on the steering angle and the steering angular velocity. (See at least paragraph [0045] “the actuation determination section 13 determines start of a collision avoidance operation (steering operation) by the driver for avoiding collision between the target recognized by the target recognition section 11 and the own vehicle 40 on the basis of information on a traveling status (for example, traveling status information, such as a steering angle and a steering angular speed)”).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system of Nishiura to incorporate the teachings of Tamura, and Flehmig for the same motivation reasons as stated in claim 1.
Regarding claim 5, Nishiura as modified by Tamura, and Flehmig disclose the teachings of claim 4, further Nishiura teaches, wherein the controller is configured to calculate a control amount of a motor providing driving force of the vehicle (See at least paragraph [0045] “The action strategy controller 112 determines whether a possibility of the vehicle 100 colliding with an obstacle exists, based on external environment information acquired by the external environment recognition control unit 111. When determining that the possibility of the vehicle 100 colliding with the obstacle exists, the action strategy controller 112 selects either steering-based avoidance or braking-based avoidance, as an avoidance means. In addition, when having selected steering-based avoidance, the action strategy controller 112 calculates an avoidance route.”) and a control amount of a rear wheel steering device (See at least paragraph [0009] “a steering control value calculating unit that calculates a steering control value for achieving steering to avoid the obstacle, based on a position of the vehicle and on the avoidance route, the steering control value calculating unit outputting the steering control value to a steering actuator control unit that controls steering of the vehicle”). Further, (See at least paragraph [0046] “The movement strategy controller 113 determines the content of control over the wheel cylinder hydraulic control device 109 and the steering device 110, based on movement information on the vehicle 100.”) based on the driving information when it is determined that the vehicle travels in the first avoidance section, (See at least paragraph [0188] “The first embodiment relates to an assumed case where the vehicle 100 traveling in a straight lane avoids its collision with the obstacle H, and therefore, according to the first embodiment, the partial avoidance routes in the first section and second section are straight routes”) control braking of the motor based on the calculated control amount, (See at least paragraph [0057] “The braking-based avoidance determining unit 217 determines whether or not to avoid an obstacle by a braking operation. When avoiding the obstacle by the braking operation, the braking-based avoidance determining unit 217 outputs an instruction on braking control for performing the avoidance”) and control the rear wheel steering device in inverse phase. (See at least paragraph [0009] “a steering control value calculating unit that calculates a steering control value for achieving steering to avoid the obstacle, based on a position of the vehicle and on the avoidance route, the steering control value calculating unit outputting the steering control value to a steering actuator control unit that controls steering of the vehicle”). Further, (See at least paragraph [0046] “The movement strategy controller 113 determines the content of control over the wheel cylinder hydraulic control device 109 and the steering device 110, based on movement information on the vehicle 100.”)
Regarding claim 6, Nishiura as modified by Tamura, and Flehmig disclose the teachings of claim 4, further Nishiura teaches, wherein the controller is configured to, when it is determined that the vehicle is traveling in the first avoidance section, determine whether the vehicle is traveling in the first stable section (See at least paragraph [0188] “The first embodiment relates to an assumed case where the vehicle 100 traveling in a straight lane avoids its collision with the obstacle H, and therefore, according to the first embodiment, the partial avoidance routes in the first section and second section are straight routes”) based on the steering angle, the steering angular velocity, (See at least paragraph [0124] “When starting steering, the movement strategy controller 113 calculates a target steering angle with respect to a point L.sub.START [m] distant ahead of the host vehicle (step S602), and calculates a steering torque instruction value such that an actual steering angle matches the target steering angle (step S603). Specifically, a steering torque instruction value corresponding to a difference (hatched portion) between the target steering angle and the actual steering angle is calculated. Through this process, the vehicle, whose steering angle is controlled, makes a sideways movement.”) and a rear wheel slip angle. (See at least paragraph [0009] “a steering control value calculating unit that calculates a steering control value for achieving steering to avoid the obstacle, based on a position of the vehicle and on the avoidance route, the steering control value calculating unit outputting the steering control value to a steering actuator control unit that controls steering of the vehicle”). Further, (See at least paragraph [0046] “The movement strategy controller 113 determines the content of control over the wheel cylinder hydraulic control device 109 and the steering device 110, based on movement information on the vehicle 100.”)
Regarding claim 7, Nishiura as modified by Tamura, and Flehmig disclose the teachings of claim 6, further Nishiura teaches, wherein the controller is configured to when it is determined that the vehicle is traveling in the first stable section, (See at least paragraph [0188] “The first embodiment relates to an assumed case where the vehicle 100 traveling in a straight lane avoids its collision with the obstacle H, and therefore, according to the first embodiment, the partial avoidance routes in the first section and second section are straight routes”) calculate the control amount of the motor providing driving force of the vehicle (See at least paragraph [0045] “The action strategy controller 112 determines whether a possibility of the vehicle 100 colliding with an obstacle exists, based on external environment information acquired by the external environment recognition control unit 111. When determining that the possibility of the vehicle 100 colliding with the obstacle exists, the action strategy controller 112 selects either steering-based avoidance or braking-based avoidance, as an avoidance means. In addition, when having selected steering-based avoidance, the action strategy controller 112 calculates an avoidance route.”) and the control amount of the rear wheel steering device See at least paragraph [0009] “a steering control value calculating unit that calculates a steering control value for achieving steering to avoid the obstacle, based on a position of the vehicle and on the avoidance route, the steering control value calculating unit outputting the steering control value to a steering actuator control unit that controls steering of the vehicle”). Further, (See at least paragraph [0046] “The movement strategy controller 113 determines the content of control over the wheel cylinder hydraulic control device 109 and the steering device 110, based on movement information on the vehicle 100.”) based on the driving information, , (See at least paragraph [0188] “The first embodiment relates to an assumed case where the vehicle 100 traveling in a straight lane avoids its collision with the obstacle H, and therefore, according to the first embodiment, the partial avoidance routes in the first section and second section are straight routes”) control driving of the motor based on the calculated control amount, and control the rear wheel steering device in phase. (See at least paragraph [0009] “a steering control value calculating unit that calculates a steering control value for achieving steering to avoid the obstacle, based on a position of the vehicle and on the avoidance route, the steering control value calculating unit outputting the steering control value to a steering actuator control unit that controls steering of the vehicle”). Further, (See at least paragraph [0046] “The movement strategy controller 113 determines the content of control over the wheel cylinder hydraulic control device 109 and the steering device 110, based on movement information on the vehicle 100.”)
Regarding claim 8, and commensurate claim 19, Nishiura as modified by Tamura, and Flehmig disclose the teachings of claim 1, Nishiura fails to explicitly teach, However, Tamura discloses, wherein the controller is configured to determine that the vehicle is traveling on the curved road (See at least paragraph [0041] “the actuation determination section 13 functions as a status determination section that determines, as the traveling status of the own vehicle 40, whether the own vehicle 40 is traveling on the curved road or whether the own vehicle 40 is traveling unsteadily.”) when a steering angle included in the driving information exceeds a third threshold value greater than a first threshold value and is less than a fourth threshold value greater than the third threshold value and when a steering angular velocity is less than a second threshold value. (See at least [FIG. 5] paragraph [0067-0068] “The above embodiment used the estimated curve rate as the information (turning information) on the turning state of the own vehicle 40, but not limited to this. As the turning information, for example, a steering angle or a yaw rate of the own vehicle 40 may be used. The above embodiment used a configuration which performs the one-side control under the condition that it is determined that the own vehicle 40 is traveling on the curved road or traveling unsteadily”). Further, (See at least paragraph [0054] “Here, the driving assistance device 10 compares a threshold with at least one value of the steering angle and the steering angular speed, and determines the start of the collision avoidance operation by the driver on the basis of the comparison result.”)
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system of Nishiura to incorporate the teachings of Tamura, and Flehmig for the same motivation reasons as stated in claim 1.
Regarding claim 9, and commensurate claim 20, Nishiura as modified by Tamura, and Flehmig disclose the teachings of claim 8, further Nishiura teaches, divide the section in which the vehicle avoids the obstacle into a second avoidance section, a second stable section, and a third stable section. (See at least paragraph [Abstract] “divides an avoidance section connecting the position of the vehicle to the target point into a plurality of partial sections, calculates a partial avoidance route in each of the partial sections, and calculates the avoidance route made up of the plurality of partial avoidance routes.”).
Nishiura fails to explicitly teach, However, Tamura discloses, wherein the controller is configured to, when it is determined that the vehicle is traveling on the curved road, (See at least paragraph [0067-0068] “The above embodiment used the estimated curve rate as the information (turning information) on the turning state of the own vehicle 40, but not limited to this. As the turning information, for example, a steering angle or a yaw rate of the own vehicle 40 may be used. The above embodiment used a configuration which performs the one-side control under the condition that it is determined that the own vehicle 40 is traveling on the curved road or traveling unsteadily”). Further, (See at least paragraph [0054] “Here, the driving assistance device 10 compares a threshold with at least one value of the steering angle and the steering angular speed, and determines the start of the collision avoidance operation by the driver on the basis of the comparison result.”)
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system of Nishiura to incorporate the teachings of Tamura, and Flehmig for the same motivation reasons as stated in claim 1.
Regarding claim 10, Nishiura as modified by Tamura, and Flehmig disclose the teachings of claim 9, Nishiura fails to explicitly teach, However, Tamura discloses, wherein the controller is configured to determine whether the vehicle is traveling in the second avoidance section based on the steering angle and the steering angular velocity. (See at least paragraph [0067-0068] “The above embodiment used the estimated curve rate as the information (turning information) on the turning state of the own vehicle 40, but not limited to this. As the turning information, for example, a steering angle or a yaw rate of the own vehicle 40 may be used. The above embodiment used a configuration which performs the one-side control under the condition that it is determined that the own vehicle 40 is traveling on the curved road or traveling unsteadily”). Further, (See at least paragraph [0054] “Here, the driving assistance device 10 compares a threshold with at least one value of the steering angle and the steering angular speed, and determines the start of the collision avoidance operation by the driver on the basis of the comparison result.”)
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system of Nishiura to incorporate the teachings of Tamura, and Flehmig for the same motivation reasons as stated in claim 1.
Regarding claim 11, Nishiura as modified by Tamura, and Flehmig disclose the teachings of claim 10, further Nishiura teaches, wherein the controller is configured to calculate a control amount of a motor providing driving force of the vehicle based on the driving information, (See at least paragraph [0045] “The action strategy controller 112 determines whether a possibility of the vehicle 100 colliding with an obstacle exists, based on external environment information acquired by the external environment recognition control unit 111. When determining that the possibility of the vehicle 100 colliding with the obstacle exists, the action strategy controller 112 selects either steering-based avoidance or braking-based avoidance, as an avoidance means. In addition, when having selected steering-based avoidance, the action strategy controller 112 calculates an avoidance route.”). Further, (See at least paragraph [0188] “The first embodiment relates to an assumed case where the vehicle 100 traveling in a straight lane avoids its collision with the obstacle H, and therefore, according to the first embodiment, the partial avoidance routes in the first section and second section are straight routes”). and control braking of the motor based on the calculated control amount when it is determined that the vehicle travels in the second avoidance section. (See at least paragraph [0057] “The braking-based avoidance determining unit 217 determines whether or not to avoid an obstacle by a braking operation. When avoiding the obstacle by the braking operation, the braking-based avoidance determining unit 217 outputs an instruction on braking control for performing the avoidance”). Further, (See at least paragraph [0009] “a collision possibility determining unit that determines whether the vehicle collides with the obstacle; an avoidance means selecting unit that selects either braking or steering as a means for avoiding the obstacle; a braking control value calculating unit that calculates a braking control value for achieving braking to avoid the obstacle, the braking control value calculating unit outputting the braking control value to a braking actuator control unit that controls braking of the vehicle; an avoidance route calculating unit that calculates an avoidance route for avoiding the obstacle; and a steering control value calculating unit that calculates a steering control value for achieving steering to avoid the obstacle, based on a position of the vehicle and on the avoidance route, the steering control value calculating unit outputting the steering control value to a steering actuator control unit that controls steering of the vehicle. The avoidance route calculating unit calculates a target point for avoiding the obstacle, divides an avoidance section connecting the position of the vehicle to the target point into a plurality of partial sections, calculates a partial avoidance route in each of the partial sections, and calculates the avoidance route made up of the plurality of partial avoidance routes.”).
Regarding claim 12, Nishiura as modified by Tamura, and Flehmig disclose the teachings of claim 10, further Nishiura teaches, wherein the controller is configured to, when it is determined that the vehicle is traveling in the second avoidance section, determine whether the vehicle is traveling in the second stable section (See at least paragraph [0188] “The first embodiment relates to an assumed case where the vehicle 100 traveling in a straight lane avoids its collision with the obstacle H, and therefore, according to the first embodiment, the partial avoidance routes in the first section and second section are straight routes”) based on the steering angle, (See at least paragraph [0124] “When starting steering, the movement strategy controller 113 calculates a target steering angle with respect to a point L.sub.START [m] distant ahead of the host vehicle (step S602), and calculates a steering torque instruction value such that an actual steering angle matches the target steering angle (step S603). Specifically, a steering torque instruction value corresponding to a difference (hatched portion) between the target steering angle and the actual steering angle is calculated. Through this process, the vehicle, whose steering angle is controlled, makes a sideways movement.”) the steering angular velocity, and a rear wheel slip angle. (See at least paragraph [0009] “a steering control value calculating unit that calculates a steering control value for achieving steering to avoid the obstacle, based on a position of the vehicle and on the avoidance route, the steering control value calculating unit outputting the steering control value to a steering actuator control unit that controls steering of the vehicle”). Further, (See at least paragraph [0046] “The movement strategy controller 113 determines the content of control over the wheel cylinder hydraulic control device 109 and the steering device 110, based on movement information on the vehicle 100.”) .
Regarding claim 13, Nishiura as modified by Tamura, and Flehmig disclose the teachings of claim 12, further Nishiura teaches, wherein the controller is configured to calculate the control amount of the motor providing driving force of the vehicle, and control driving of the motor based on the calculated control amount when it is determined that the vehicle travels in the second stable section. (See at least paragraph [0124] “the movement strategy controller 113 calculates a target steering angle with respect to a point L.sub.START [m] distant ahead of the host vehicle (step S602), and calculates a steering torque instruction value such that an actual steering angle matches the target steering angle (step S603). Specifically, a steering torque instruction value corresponding to a difference (hatched portion) between the target steering angle and the actual steering angle is calculated. Through this process, the vehicle, whose steering angle is controlled, makes a sideways movement.”).
Regarding claim 14, Nishiura as modified by Tamura, and Flehmig disclose the teachings of claim 13, further Nishiura teaches, wherein the controller is configured to, when it is determined that the vehicle is traveling in the second stable section, determine whether the vehicle is traveling in the third stable section (See at least paragraph [Abstract] “divides an avoidance section connecting the position of the vehicle to the target point into a plurality of partial sections, calculates a partial avoidance route in each of the partial sections, and calculates the avoidance route made up of the plurality of partial avoidance routes.”).
Nishiura fails to explicitly teach, However, Tamura discloses, based on whether a sign of the steering angle changes. (See at least paragraph [0067-0068] “The above embodiment used the estimated curve rate as the information (turning information) on the turning state of the own vehicle 40, but not limited to this. As the turning information, for example, a steering angle or a yaw rate of the own vehicle 40 may be used. The above embodiment used a configuration which performs the one-side control under the condition that it is determined that the own vehicle 40 is traveling on the curved road or traveling unsteadily”). Further, (See at least paragraph [0054] “Here, the driving assistance device 10 compares a threshold with at least one value of the steering angle and the steering angular speed, and determines the start of the collision avoidance operation by the driver on the basis of the comparison result.”)
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system of Nishiura to incorporate the teachings of Tamura, and Flehmig for the same motivation reasons as stated in claim 1.
Regarding claim 15, Nishiura as modified by Tamura, and Flehmig disclose the teachings of claim 14, further Nishiura teaches wherein the controller is configured to calculate the control amount of the motor providing the driving force of the vehicle (See at least paragraph [0046] “The movement strategy controller 113 determines the content of control over the wheel cylinder hydraulic control device 109 and the steering device 110, based on movement information on the vehicle 100, on a host vehicle position obtained from external environment information, and on an avoidance route calculated by the action strategy controller 112.”). and the control amount of the rear wheel steering device (See at least paragraph [0009] “a steering control value calculating unit that calculates a steering control value for achieving steering to avoid the obstacle, based on a position of the vehicle and on the avoidance route, the steering control value calculating unit outputting the steering control value to a steering actuator control unit that controls steering of the vehicle”). Further, (See at least paragraph [0046] “The movement strategy controller 113 determines the content of control over the wheel cylinder hydraulic control device 109 and the steering device 110, based on movement information on the vehicle 100.”) based on the driving information (See at least paragraph [0188] “The first embodiment relates to an assumed case where the vehicle 100 traveling in a straight lane avoids its collision with the obstacle H, and therefore, according to the first embodiment, the partial avoidance routes in the first section and second section are straight routes”) when it is determined that the vehicle travels in the third stable section, control driving of the motor based on the calculated control amount, and control the rear wheel steering device in phase. (See at least paragraph [0009] “a steering control value calculating unit that calculates a steering control value for achieving steering to avoid the obstacle, based on a position of the vehicle and on the avoidance route, the steering control value calculating unit outputting the steering control value to a steering actuator control unit that controls steering of the vehicle”). Further, (See at least paragraph [0046] “The movement strategy controller 113 determines the content of control over the wheel cylinder hydraulic control device 109 and the steering device 110, based on movement information on the vehicle 100.”)
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Wesam Almadhrhi whose telephone number is (571) 270-3844. The examiner can normally be reached on 7:30 AM - 5PM Mon-Fri Eastern Alt Fri.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Anne Antonucci can be reached on (313) 446-6519. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/WESAM NMN ALMADHRHI/Examiner, Art Unit 3666
/ANNE MARIE ANTONUCCI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3666