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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This action is in response to the applicant’s filing on September 17, 2025. Claims 1-20are pending.
Response to Amendment and Arguments
In respond to applicant's arguments based on the filed amendment with respect to 35 U.S.C. 103 rejections of said previous office action have been fully considered; however, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made.
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 of this title, 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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, 3-9, 11-16, 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hajiloo et al. US2023/0166722 (“Hajiloo”) in view of Liang et al. US2015/0251649 (“Liang”).
Regarding claim(s) 1.Hahjillo discloses a method for an electric vehicle having at least two motors providing drive torque, the method comprising: operating with speed damping control (Referring to FIG. 1, a system 10 for supervisory control of electronically-controlled or electric all-wheel drive (eAWD) and electronically controlled or electric limited slip differentials (eLSDs) in a motor vehicle 12 is shown. The system 10 includes the motor vehicle 12 and one or more controllers 14), including determining that a first motor has more power authority than requested and a second motor has a shortage of power authority, and in response, reallocating power authority from the first motor to the second motor to increase usage of authorized power (para. 58, In response to the steering input, torque request, torque transfer, and wheel flare WF, the supervisory control module 200 detects that the front wheels 27 are saturated and stops further increasing torque on the front axle 28. The torque reduction decreases wheel flare WF on the front wheels 27. Thus the supervisory control module 200 mitigates wheel flare WF at the front wheels 27. The controller 14 subsequently sends torque to the rear axle 30 to generate an oversteering yaw moment, but the supervisory control module 200 stops further increases in rear axle 30 torque when the rear wheels 27 are saturated.)
Hajiloo does not explicitly disclose authorized power for speed damping and a first speed damping power request and a second motor has a shortage of power authority to fulfill a second speed damping power request.
Liang teaches an active motor damping control and a first speed damping power request and a second motor has a shortage of power authority to fulfill a second speed damping power request (Fig. 2, [0007] A feedback loop in the damping function may be used to generate a motor torque adjustment, which is subtracted from a desired motor torque resulting in an actual or commanded motor torque. The motor torque adjustment may be based on the difference between a measured motor speed and a desired motor speed. [0036-0041] At step 220 a motor torque adjustment is generated which is a function of the twist speed. The motor torque adjustment is then subtracted from the desired motor torque resulting in an actual motor torque command which is transmitted in step 222.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system and method of Hajiloo by incorporating the applied teaching of Liang to improve electric motors control and to minimize energy losses. Furthermore, the claimed invention is merely a combination of old, well known elements of motor controls using damping methods and as such and one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have recognized that the results of the combination would have been predictable.
Regarding claim(s) 3-6, 9, 15, 16, 19-20. Hajiloo discloses a system for a vehicle, comprising: an electric vehicle battery; a first motor coupled to a first axle of the vehicle; a second motor coupled to the first axle of the vehicle; a third motor coupled to a second axle of the vehicle; a fourth motor coupled to the second axle of the vehicle (abstract, fig. 1, eAWD);
a centralized integrated control system in communication with the electric vehicle battery, the first motor, the second motor, the third motor, and the fourth motor (FIG. 1 is a schematic diagram of a motor vehicle having a system for supervisory control for eAWD and eLSD in a motor vehicle according to an aspect of the present disclosure;); and
a controller including executable instructions stored in non-transitory memory that cause the centralized integrated control system to set an upper threshold and lower threshold for active motor damping (AMD) power authority based on a raw AMD power request of each motor in response to a total AMD power authority exceeding a total raw AMD power request from all motors (par34, The active suspension actuators 46 such as active dampers 50 or the like. In several aspects, the active dampers 50 may be magnetorheological dampers or other such electrically, hydraulically, or pneumatically-adjustable dampers without departing from the scope or intent of the present disclosure. For the sake of simplicity in the description that follows, ICEs 22, electric motors 24, eAWD 34, eLSD 36, the braking system 40, active aerodynamic elements 48, active dampers 46, and the like will be referred to more broadly as actuators 52. Para. 66, When the sensor/estimation module 110 or wheel stability module 110′ determines that the estimated slip ratios of each tire 18 of the motor vehicle 12 indicate that the tires 18 have exceeded the tire 18 stability margins at block 348, the method 300 proceeds to blocks 356 and 358. At block 360, a yaw moment YM is induced by activation of the eLSD 36 and/or eAWD 34 to transfer torque at the front axle 28 to create an understeer yaw moment UYM in situations where understeer is preferable to correct the over-threshold tire 18 stability. Similarly, when the motor vehicle 12 is in a condition where an oversteer yaw moment OYM is preferable to correct the over-threshold tire 18 stability, the eLSD 36 and/or eAWD 34 are engaged in a torque transfer at the front axle 28 induce an oversteer yaw moment OYM at block 362.);
Hajiloo does not explicitly disclose in response to a request for a dynamic adjustment of AMD power authority for a motor, set an adjusted upper threshold and adjusted lower threshold for AMD power authority to the raw AMD power request of the motor if AMD power authority exceeds the raw AMD power request of the motor; and reallocate available total AMD power authority to one or more motors that are in shortage of AMD power authority.
Liang teaches another electric motor control system and method that set an adjusted upper threshold and adjusted lower threshold for AMD power authority to the raw AMD power request of the motor if AMD power authority exceeds the raw AMD power request of the motor; and reallocate available total AMD power authority to one or more motors that are in shortage of AMD power authority ([0015] FIG. 3 illustrates a control for active motor damping of a vehicle powertrain torque according to one embodiment of the present disclosure. [0037-0041] [0039] At step 220 a motor torque adjustment is generated which is a function of the twist speed. The motor torque adjustment is then subtracted from the desired motor torque resulting in an actual motor torque command which is transmitted in step 222.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system and method of Hajiloo by incorporating the applied teaching of Liang to improve electric motors control and to minimize energy losses. Furthermore, the claimed invention is merely a combination of old, well known elements of motor controls using damping methods and as such and one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have recognized that the results of the combination would have been predictable.
Regarding claim(s) 7. Hajiloo in view of Liang further teaches comprising operating with speed damping control responsive to an indication that the electric vehicle is operating in a motor torque control mode, and maintaining power allocation without reallocation for speed damping control responsive to an indication that the electric vehicle is not operating with speed damping control (Heap: para. 104-109).
Regarding claim(s) 8. T Hajiloo in view of Liang further teaches constraining a torque request for speed damping based on an adjusted upper threshold of authorized power and an adjusted lower threshold of authorized power and motor speed of each of the at least two motors and providing the torque request to actuators of the at least two motors to reduce driveline oscillation (Heap: para. 104-109)..
Regarding claim(s) 11. Hajiloo in view of Liang further teaches wherein the reallocating includes determining how many of the one or more motors are in shortage of AMD power authority (Hajiloo: para. 8-12, the wheel stability module sends a positive indicator to the seventh program code portion. In response to a positive indicator the seventh program code portion selectively commands additional torque transfer to one or more of the wheels. In response to a negative indicator the seventh program code portion halts torque transfer to one or more of the wheels., Heap: para. 104-109).
Regarding claim(s) 12. Hajiloo in view of Liang further teaches wherein the reallocating includes retrieving a reference set for the one or more motors in shortage of AMD power authority (Hajiloo: para. 8-12, the wheel stability module sends a positive indicator to the seventh program code portion. In response to a positive indicator the seventh program code portion selectively commands additional torque transfer to one or more of the wheels. In response to a negative indicator the seventh program code portion halts torque transfer to one or more of the wheels., Heap: para. 104-109).
Regarding claim(s) 13. Hajiloo in view of Liang further teaches wherein the reallocating includes proportionally distributing the available total AMD power authority to each of the one or more motors that are in shortage of AMD power authority (Hajiloo: para. 8-12, the wheel stability module sends a positive indicator to the seventh program code portion. In response to a positive indicator the seventh program code portion selectively commands additional torque transfer to one or more of the wheels. In response to a negative indicator the seventh program code portion halts torque transfer to one or more of the wheels., Heap: para. 104-109).
Regarding claim(s) 14, 18. Hajiloo in view of Liang further teaches wherein the available total AMD power authority is proportionally distributed between no more than three motors (Hajiloo: para. 8-12, the wheel stability module sends a positive indicator to the seventh program code portion. In response to a positive indicator the seventh program code portion selectively commands additional torque transfer to one or more of the wheels. In response to a negative indicator the seventh program code portion halts torque transfer to one or more of the wheels., Heap: para. 104-109).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2, 10, 17 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Inquiry
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TRUC M DO whose telephone number is (571)270-5962. The examiner can normally be reached on 9AM-6PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Ramón Mercado, Ph.D. can be reached on (571) 270-5744. 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.
/TRUC M DO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3658