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 application filed on February 18, 2026. Claims 1-2 and 6-11 have been amended. Claims 15 and 16 are newly added. Claims 1-16 are presently pending and are presented for examination.
Response to Amendments
In response to Applicant's Amendments dated February 18, 2026, Examiner withdraws claims objections, claim rejections - 35 USC 101, claim rejections - 35 USC 112, and the previous prior art rejections.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on February 18, 2026 have been fully considered, but they are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejections.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to ATA 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 discloses 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 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:
Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-6, 8, and 10-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Pat. No. 10343658 (hereinafter, "Tober"; previously of record) in view of DE 102017108034 (hereinafter, "Schmitz"; newly of record) and in further view of U.S. Pub. No. 20050065695 (hereinafter, "Grieser"; newly of record).
Regarding claim 1, Tober discloses a system for computer-aided estimation or determination of a value for a total mass of a vehicle system including a towing vehicle (Fig. 1, #12) and a number of trailers coupled to the towing vehicle (Fig. 1, #20, #40, and #60), the system comprising:
a sensor device configured so that sensor signals of the sensor device represent physical data of the vehicle system which varies as a function of a cargo loading of the vehicle system and as a function of the number of trailers coupled to the towing vehicle (“The loads on each of the tractor, dollies and trailers may be measured or otherwise determined in a variety of ways. For example, on vehicles equipped with air suspensions, the loads may be measured using pressure sensors. If the vehicles have mechanical suspensions without load detection sensors (e.g., leaf spring suspension), the load may be measured using ride height sensors. An optical detection system could also be used to detect the number of trailers and dollies in the vehicle train, either by an optical system hosted on the vehicle or by an optical system that is part of yard infrastructure that transmits data to the vehicle” (Col. 2, lines 57-67)) and…
However, Tober does not explicitly teach
…which sensor signals enable a determination whether the cargo loading of the vehicle system and the number of trailers coupled to the towing vehicle has changed or not changed between a first point in time and a second point in time that is later than the first point in time; and
a processing device configured to estimate or determine a first value for the total mass of the vehicle system in a first estimation at the first point in time based on an equilibrium relationship between a propulsion force and a sum of inertial and propulsion resistances of the vehicle system independently from of the physical data,
wherein the processing device is configured to determine from the physical data whether the cargo loading of the vehicle system and the number of trailers coupled to the towing vehicle has changed or has not changed between the first point in time and the second point in time, and
wherein the processing device is configured to
maintain the first value as a valid value for the total mass of the vehicle system or as an initial value for a subsequent determination or estimation of the total mass of the vehicle system if the processing device has determined based on the physical data that no significant change of the cargo loading of the vehicle system exceeding a predetermined limit and no change of the number of the trailers coupled to the towing vehicle has occurred between the first point in time and the second point in time, but
estimate or determine a second value for the total mass of the vehicle system based on the equilibrium relationship between the propulsion force and the sum of the inertial and propulsion resistances of the vehicle system independently from the physical data during a second estimation or determination subsequent to the first estimation or determination and discard the first value if the processing device has determined from the physical data that a change of the cargo loading of the vehicle system and/or a change of the number of the trailers coupled to the towing vehicle has occurred between the first point in time and the second point in time.
Schmitz, in the same field of endeavor, teaches
…which sensor signals enable a determination whether the cargo loading of the vehicle system and the number of trailers coupled to the towing vehicle has changed or not changed (“Determining, i.e., recognizing or recording, the change in load can be done, for example, by means of an evaluation unit in the motor vehicle by evaluating or processing the recorded sensor values” (para 0012)) between a first point in time and a second point in time that is later than the first point in time (“Continuous acquisition within the meaning of the present invention shall also include repeated acquisition of the sensor values provided by the accelerometer at regular time intervals, for example due to technical reasons, such as a clock rate” (para 0018)); and
wherein the processing device (Fig. 1, #5) is configured to determine from the physical data whether the cargo loading of the vehicle system and the number of trailers coupled to the towing vehicle has changed or has not changed (“Determining, i.e., recognizing or recording, the change in load can be done, for example, by means of an evaluation unit in the motor vehicle by evaluating or processing the recorded sensor values” (para 0012) between the first point in time and the second point in time (“Continuous acquisition within the meaning of the present invention shall also include repeated acquisition of the sensor values provided by the accelerometer at regular time intervals, for example due to technical reasons, such as a clock rate” (para 0018)), and
wherein the processing device (Fig. 1, #5) is configured to
maintain the first value as a valid value for the total mass of the vehicle system or as an initial value for a subsequent determination or estimation of the total mass of the vehicle system (“In such situations, there is often no, or at least no significant, change in the load, so that, for example, the specific weight of the vehicle does not need to be discarded and recalculated, and no adjustments to vehicle settings or assistance systems need to be made” (para 0014)) if the processing device has determined based on the physical data that no significant change of the cargo loading of the vehicle system exceeding a predetermined limit and no change of the number of the trailers coupled to the towing vehicle has occurred between the first point in time and the second point in time (“if there is a difference or deviation between the two sensor values that is less than or equal to the specified threshold, it will be determined that no change in load has taken place. In the event that the difference or its amount is smaller than the specified threshold but different from zero, it may be provided that this, i.e. the corresponding change in load, is stored or discarded, but in any case, a signal corresponding to this minor change in load is not output by the evaluation unit, for example.” (para 0017)), but
… discard the first value if the processing device has determined from the physical data that a change of the cargo loading of the vehicle system and/or a change of the number of the trailers coupled to the towing vehicle has occurred between the first point in time and the second point in time (“a weight value previously determined by an automatic learning process and indicating the weight of the motor vehicle is discarded if the change in load is detected or has been detected. The weight value can refer to the total weight of the motor vehicle or to a payload weight, i.e., the weight of a transported load including or excluding the respective vehicle occupants, or specify such a weight” (para 0023) and “It can be particularly advantageous if the weight value is or has been discarded, as a new automatic learning process to determine a current or updated weight value can be automatically initiated or started” (para 0024)).
One of ordinary skill in the art, before the time of filing, would have been motivated to modify the disclosure of Tober with the teachings of Schmitz in order Determine, i.e., recognize or record, the change in load by evaluating or processing the recorded sensor values; see Schmitz at least at (para 0012).
Grieser, in the same field of endeavor, teaches
a processing device configured to estimate or determine a first value for the total mass of the vehicle system in a first estimation at the first point in time based on an equilibrium relationship between a propulsion force and a sum of inertial and propulsion resistances of the vehicle system independently from of the physical data (“determining a driving force and a force of inertia acting instantaneously on a wheel being determined for all wheels of the vehicle; determining at least one of a rolling resistance of the motor vehicle and a braking force acting instantaneously on the wheel for all wheels of the motor vehicle; and adding up the instantaneous driving forces and the forces of inertia of all wheels plus an instantaneous wind resistance of the vehicle to provide a summation result, and dividing the summation result by an instantaneous longitudinal acceleration to determine the estimate of the mass, wherein the at least one of the rolling resistance of the motor vehicle and the braking force acting instantaneously on the wheel determined for all wheels of the motor vehicle are taken into account in the summation” (claim 1)),
estimate or determine a second value for the total mass of the vehicle system based on the equilibrium relationship between the propulsion force and the sum of the inertial and propulsion resistances of the vehicle system independently from the physical data during a second estimation or determination subsequent to the first estimation or determination (“determining a driving force and a force of inertia acting instantaneously on a wheel being determined for all wheels of the vehicle; determining at least one of a rolling resistance of the motor vehicle and a braking force acting instantaneously on the wheel for all wheels of the motor vehicle; and adding up the instantaneous driving forces and the forces of inertia of all wheels plus an instantaneous wind resistance of the vehicle to provide a summation result, and dividing the summation result by an instantaneous longitudinal acceleration to determine the estimate of the mass, wherein the at least one of the rolling resistance of the motor vehicle and the braking force acting instantaneously on the wheel determined for all wheels of the motor vehicle are taken into account in the summation” (claim 1)).
One of ordinary skill in the art, before the time of filing, would have been motivated to modify the disclosure of Tober with the teachings of Grieser in order to determine an estimate of a mass of a motor vehicle for use in controlling a brake system of the motor vehicle; see Grieser at least at (claim 1).
Regarding claim 2, Tober discloses the system according to claim 1. However, Tober does not explicitly teach further comprising:
a non-transitory data memory wherein the processing device is configured to cooperate with the non-transitory data memory so that the processing device writes the first value for the total mass of the vehicle system and current physical data into the non-transitory data memory at the first point in time, and
determines second physical data at the second point in time and compares the second physical data with the first physical data, and
discards the first value and estimates or determines the second value if the second physical data differs from the first physical data by more than a predetermined deviation, but
reads the first value from the non-transitory data memory and maintains the first value as a valid value for the total mass of the vehicle system if the second physical data differs from the first physical data by the permitted deviation or less than the permitted deviation.
Schmitz, in the same field of endeavor, teaches
a non-transitory data memory wherein the processing device is configured to cooperate with the non-transitory data memory so that the processing device writes the first value for the total mass of the vehicle system and current physical data into the non-transitory data memory at the first point in time (“Determining, i.e., recognizing or recording, the change in load can be done, for example, by means of an evaluation unit in the motor vehicle by evaluating or processing the recorded sensor values. This can also include processing other data, sizes, or measurements. These can, for example, be pre-stored in a storage device connected to the evaluation device and/or be provided to the evaluation device by one or more other sensor devices or control units of the motor vehicle or the like.” (para 0024)), and
determines second physical data at the second point in time and compares the second physical data with the first physical data (“the last of the sensor values recorded in process step S4, i.e. during the standstill of the motor vehicle 1, is retrieved and compared with the first sensor value recorded in process step S3.” (para 0044)), and
discards the first value and estimates or determines the second value if the second physical data differs from the first physical data by more than a predetermined deviation (“a weight value previously determined by an automatic learning process and indicating the weight of the motor vehicle is discarded if the change in load is detected or has been detected. The weight value can refer to the total weight of the motor vehicle or to a payload weight, i.e., the weight of a transported load including or excluding the respective vehicle occupants, or specify such a weight” (para 0023) and “If this comparison reveals that there is a difference between these first and last sensor values recorded during the standstill that is greater than a specified threshold, the procedure follows a path 15 to a procedure step S8. In process step S8, the change in loading is then determined based on the comparison result of process step S7.” (para 0045)), but
reads the first value from the non-transitory data memory and maintains the first value as a valid value for the total mass of the vehicle system if the second physical data differs from the first physical data by the permitted deviation or less than the permitted deviation (“In such situations, there is often no, or at least no significant, change in the load, so that, for example, the specific weight of the vehicle does not need to be discarded and recalculated, and no adjustments to vehicle settings or assistance systems need to be made” (para 0014) and “if there is a difference or deviation between the two sensor values that is less than or equal to the specified threshold, it will be determined that no change in load has taken place. In the event that the difference or its amount is smaller than the specified threshold but different from zero, it may be provided that this, i.e. the corresponding change in load, is stored or discarded, but in any case, a signal corresponding to this minor change in load is not output by the evaluation unit, for example.” (para 0017)).
One of ordinary skill in the art, before the time of filing, would have been motivated to modify the disclosure of Tober with the teachings of Schmitz in order Determine, i.e., recognize or record, the change in load by evaluating or processing the recorded sensor values; see Schmitz at least at (para 0012).
Regarding claim 3, Tober discloses the system according to claim 1. However, Tober does not explicitly teach wherein the processing device is configured to maintain or use the first value as the valid value for the total mass of the vehicle system, even if the processing device has detected an occurrence of an event between the first point in time and the second point in time, wherein the event could theoretically have caused a change of the total mass of the vehicle system.
Schmitz, in the same field of endeavor, teaches
wherein the processing device is configured to maintain or use the first value as the valid value for the total mass of the vehicle system, even if the processing device has detected an occurrence of an event between the first point in time and the second point in time, wherein the event could theoretically have caused a change of the total mass of the vehicle system (“In such situations, there is often no, or at least no significant, change in the load, so that, for example, the specific weight of the vehicle does not need to be discarded and recalculated, and no adjustments to vehicle settings or assistance systems need to be made” (para 0014) and “if there is a difference or deviation between the two sensor values that is less than or equal to the specified threshold, it will be determined that no change in load has taken place. In the event that the difference or its amount is smaller than the specified threshold but different from zero, it may be provided that this, i.e. the corresponding change in load, is stored or discarded, but in any case, a signal corresponding to this minor change in load is not output by the evaluation unit, for example.” (para 0017)).
One of ordinary skill in the art, before the time of filing, would have been motivated to modify the disclosure of Tober with the teachings of Schmitz in order Determine, i.e., recognize or record, the change in load by evaluating or processing the recorded sensor values; see Schmitz at least at (para 0012).
Regarding claim 4, Tober discloses the system according to claim 3. However, Tober does not explicitly teach wherein the event is at least one of the following events:
at least one ignition change of the towing vehicle, or an idle period of the vehicle system which exceeds a predetermined idle period of the vehicle system.
Schmitz, in the same field of endeavor, teaches
wherein the event is at least one of the following events:
at least one ignition change of the towing vehicle, or an idle period of the vehicle system which exceeds a predetermined idle period of the vehicle system (“In such situations, any indicators that may be used, such as a standstill duration, the position of the vehicle, or the continuously switched-on state of the vehicle, can conventionally be evaluated to assume that no change in load has taken place” (para 0015)).
One of ordinary skill in the art, before the time of filing, would have been motivated to modify the disclosure of Tober with the teachings of Schmitz in order Determine, i.e., recognize or record, the change in load by evaluating or processing the recorded sensor values; see Schmitz at least at (para 0012).
Regarding claim 5, Tober discloses the system according to claim 1. Additionally, Tober discloses wherein the sensor device includes:
at least one axle load sensor at least at one axle of the towing vehicle and/or at at least one axle of the at least one trailer which provides at least one axle load signal as the sensor signal (“The loads on each of the tractor, dollies and trailers may be measured or otherwise determined in a variety of ways. For example, on vehicles equipped with air suspensions, the loads may be measured using pressure sensors. If the vehicles have mechanical suspensions without load detection sensors (e.g., leaf spring suspension), the load may be measured using ride height sensors” (Col. 2, lines 57-63)), and/or a trailer detection which delivers information regarding the trailers coupled to the towing vehicle as a sensor signal (“An optical detection system could also be used to detect the number of trailers and dollies in the vehicle train, either by an optical system hosted on the vehicle or by an optical system that is part of yard infrastructure that transmits data to the vehicle” (Col. 2, lines 63-67)) and/or by a camera device to the processing device, and/or a camera device including a camera which is arranged at the towing vehicle and/or at the at least one trailer so that the camera device provides an image signal with information regarding the number of trailers coupled with the towing vehicle and/or at least one LIDAR sensor or RADAR sensor which is arranged at the towing vehicle and/or at the at least one trailer so that the LIDAR sensor or the RADAR sensor provides a signal with information regarding the number of trailers coupled with the towing vehicle, and/or at least one ultra sound sensor arranged at the towing vehicle and/or at the at least one trailer so that the ultrasound sensor provides at least one signal with information regarding the number of the trailers coupled with the towing vehicle (“An optical detection system could also be used to detect the number of trailers and dollies in the vehicle train, either by an optical system hosted on the vehicle or by an optical system that is part of yard infrastructure that transmits data to the vehicle” (Col. 2, lines 63-67)).
Regarding claim 6, Tober discloses the system according to claim 1. Additionally, Tober discloses cooperating with a brake system or vehicle control system and/or vehicle regulation system, so that the system provides the first value and/or the second value for the total mass of the vehicle system to the brake and/or vehicle regulation system (“These mass and load estimates are then subjected to a plausibility analysis to determine whether all of the trailers and dollies are communicating with the vehicle controller, and thus whether all of the trailer and dolly braking systems (including their respective anti-lock braking and stability control systems) are available to support full application of the vehicle brakes during subsequent braking events” (Col. 2, lines 22-29)).
Regarding claim 8, Tober discloses the system according to claim 6 of a vehicle system. Additionally, Tober discloses wherein the vehicle system includes:
the towing vehicle and a number of trailers coupled with the towing vehicle (“A braking system of a vehicle comprising a tractor, at least two trailers and at least one trailer dolly and at least one vehicle controller” (claim 8)).
Regarding claim 10, Tober discloses a method for computer-aided estimation or determination of a value for a total mass of a vehicle system including a towing vehicle (Fig. 1, #12) and a number of trailers coupled with the towing vehicle (Fig. 1, #20, #40, and #60), the method comprising:
detecting physical data of the vehicle system by a sensor device which varies as a function of a cargo loading of the vehicle system and as a function of the number of trailers coupled to the towing vehicle (“The loads on each of the tractor, dollies and trailers may be measured or otherwise determined in a variety of ways. For example, on vehicles equipped with air suspensions, the loads may be measured using pressure sensors. If the vehicles have mechanical suspensions without load detection sensors (e.g., leaf spring suspension), the load may be measured using ride height sensors. An optical detection system could also be used to detect the number of trailers and dollies in the vehicle train, either by an optical system hosted on the vehicle or by an optical system that is part of yard infrastructure that transmits data to the vehicle” (Col. 2, lines 57-67)) and…
However, Tober does not explicitly teach
…which enable determination whether the cargo loading of the vehicle system and the number of trailers coupled to the towing vehicle has changed or not changed between a first point in time and a second point in time that is later than the first point in time; and
estimating or determining a first value for the total mass of the vehicle system by a processing device in a first estimation at the first point in time based on an equilibrium relationship between a propulsion force and a sum of inertial and propulsion resistances of the vehicle system independently from of the physical data,
wherein the first value is maintained as a valid value for the total mass of the vehicle system or used as an initial value for a subsequent determination or estimation of the total mass of the vehicle system if it has been determined based on the physical data that no significant change of the cargo loading of the vehicle system exceeding a predetermined limit, and no change of the number of the trailers coupled to the towing vehicle has occurred between the first point in time and the second point in time, but
wherein a second value for the total mass of the vehicle system is estimated or determined based on the equilibrium relationship between the propulsion force and the sum of the inertial and propulsion resistances of the vehicle system independently from the physical data during a second estimation or determination subsequent to the first estimation or determination and the first value is discarded when the processing device has determined from the physical data that a change of the cargo loading of the vehicle system and/or a change of the number of the trailers coupled to the towing vehicle has occurred between the first point in time and the second point in time; and
and using the value for the total mass for controlling an electronic vehicle control system
Schmitz, in the same field of endeavor, teaches
…which enable determination whether the cargo loading of the vehicle system and the number of trailers coupled to the towing vehicle has changed or not changed (“Determining, i.e., recognizing or recording, the change in load can be done, for example, by means of an evaluation unit in the motor vehicle by evaluating or processing the recorded sensor values” (para 0012)) between a first point in time and a second point in time that is later than the first point in time (“Continuous acquisition within the meaning of the present invention shall also include repeated acquisition of the sensor values provided by the accelerometer at regular time intervals, for example due to technical reasons, such as a clock rate” (para 0018)); and
wherein the first value is maintained as a valid value for the total mass of the vehicle system or used as an initial value for a subsequent determination or estimation of the total mass of the vehicle system (“In such situations, there is often no, or at least no significant, change in the load, so that, for example, the specific weight of the vehicle does not need to be discarded and recalculated, and no adjustments to vehicle settings or assistance systems need to be made” (para 0014)) if it has been determined based on the physical data that no significant change of the cargo loading of the vehicle system exceeding a predetermined limit and no change of the number of the trailers coupled to the towing vehicle has occurred between the first point in time and the second point in time (“if there is a difference or deviation between the two sensor values that is less than or equal to the specified threshold, it will be determined that no change in load has taken place. In the event that the difference or its amount is smaller than the specified threshold but different from zero, it may be provided that this, i.e. the corresponding change in load, is stored or discarded, but in any case, a signal corresponding to this minor change in load is not output by the evaluation unit, for example” (para 0017)), but
… the first value is discarded when the processing device has determined from the physical data that a change of the cargo loading of the vehicle system and/or a change of the number of the trailers coupled to the towing vehicle has occurred between the first point in time and the second point in time (“a weight value previously determined by an automatic learning process and indicating the weight of the motor vehicle is discarded if the change in load is detected or has been detected. The weight value can refer to the total weight of the motor vehicle or to a payload weight, i.e., the weight of a transported load including or excluding the respective vehicle occupants, or specify such a weight” (para 0023) and “It can be particularly advantageous if the weight value is or has been discarded, as a new automatic learning process to determine a current or updated weight value can be automatically initiated or started” (para 0024)); and
using the value for the total mass for controlling an electronic vehicle control system (“by the evaluation unit used to detect the change in load and/or transmitted to the driver assistance system via a vehicle network or CAN bus. This offers the advantage that such networking of vehicle components ensures optimal adaptation or adjustment of the vehicle or the driver assistance system depending on the respective load condition, for example with regard to safety, driving comfort, driving dynamics performance, or the like” (para 0025)).
One of ordinary skill in the art, before the time of filing, would have been motivated to modify the disclosure of Tober with the teachings of Schmitz in order Determine, i.e., recognize or record, the change in load by evaluating or processing the recorded sensor values; see Schmitz at least at (para 0012).
Grieser, in the same field of endeavor, teaches
estimating or determining a first value for the total mass of the vehicle system by a processing device in a first estimation at the first point in time based on an equilibrium relationship between a propulsion force and a sum of inertial and propulsion resistances of the vehicle system independently from of the physical data (“determining a driving force and a force of inertia acting instantaneously on a wheel being determined for all wheels of the vehicle; determining at least one of a rolling resistance of the motor vehicle and a braking force acting instantaneously on the wheel for all wheels of the motor vehicle; and adding up the instantaneous driving forces and the forces of inertia of all wheels plus an instantaneous wind resistance of the vehicle to provide a summation result, and dividing the summation result by an instantaneous longitudinal acceleration to determine the estimate of the mass, wherein the at least one of the rolling resistance of the motor vehicle and the braking force acting instantaneously on the wheel determined for all wheels of the motor vehicle are taken into account in the summation” (claim 1)),
…wherein a second value for the total mass of the vehicle system is estimated or determined based on the equilibrium relationship between the propulsion force and the sum of the inertial and propulsion resistances of the vehicle system independently from the physical data during a second estimation or determination subsequent to the first estimation or determination (“determining a driving force and a force of inertia acting instantaneously on a wheel being determined for all wheels of the vehicle; determining at least one of a rolling resistance of the motor vehicle and a braking force acting instantaneously on the wheel for all wheels of the motor vehicle; and adding up the instantaneous driving forces and the forces of inertia of all wheels plus an instantaneous wind resistance of the vehicle to provide a summation result, and dividing the summation result by an instantaneous longitudinal acceleration to determine the estimate of the mass, wherein the at least one of the rolling resistance of the motor vehicle and the braking force acting instantaneously on the wheel determined for all wheels of the motor vehicle are taken into account in the summation” (claim 1)).
One of ordinary skill in the art, before the time of filing, would have been motivated to modify the disclosure of Tober with the teachings of Grieser in order to to determine an estimate of a mass of a motor vehicle for use in controlling a brake system of the motor vehicle; see Grieser at least at (claim 1).
Regarding claim 11, Tober discloses the method according to claim 10. However, Tober does not explicitly teach further comprising:
storing the first value for the total mass of the vehicle system and the first physical data in a non-transitory memory at the first point in time; and
determining second physical data at the second point in time and comparing the second physical data with the first physical data;
if determined that the second physical data deviates from the first physical data by more than a permitted deviation, discarding the first value and estimating or determining the second value;
if determined that the second physical data deviates from the first physical data by the permitted deviation or less than the permitted deviation, reading the first value from the memory and maintaining the first value as the valid value for the total mass of the vehicle system.
Schmitz, in the same field of endeavor, teaches
storing the first value for the total mass of the vehicle system and the first physical data in a non-transitory memory at the first point in time (“Determining, i.e., recognizing or recording, the change in load can be done, for example, by means of an evaluation unit in the motor vehicle by evaluating or processing the recorded sensor values. This can also include processing other data, sizes, or measurements. These can, for example, be pre-stored in a storage device connected to the evaluation device and/or be provided to the evaluation device by one or more other sensor devices or control units of the motor vehicle or the like” (para 0024)); and
determining second physical data at the second point in time and comparing the second physical data with the first physical data (“the last of the sensor values recorded in process step S4, i.e. during the standstill of the motor vehicle 1, is retrieved and compared with the first sensor value recorded in process step S3.” (para 0044));
if determined that the second physical data deviates from the first physical data by more than a permitted deviation, discarding the first value and estimating or determining the second value (“a weight value previously determined by an automatic learning process and indicating the weight of the motor vehicle is discarded if the change in load is detected or has been detected. The weight value can refer to the total weight of the motor vehicle or to a payload weight, i.e., the weight of a transported load including or excluding the respective vehicle occupants, or specify such a weight” (para 0023) and “If this comparison reveals that there is a difference between these first and last sensor values recorded during the standstill that is greater than a specified threshold, the procedure follows a path 15 to a procedure step S8. In process step S8, the change in loading is then determined based on the comparison result of process step S7.” (para 0045));
if determined that the second physical data deviates from the first physical data by the permitted deviation or less than the permitted deviation, reading the first value from the memory and maintaining the first value as the valid value for the total mass of the vehicle system (“In such situations, there is often no, or at least no significant, change in the load, so that, for example, the specific weight of the vehicle does not need to be discarded and recalculated, and no adjustments to vehicle settings or assistance systems need to be made” (para 0014) and “if there is a difference or deviation between the two sensor values that is less than or equal to the specified threshold, it will be determined that no change in load has taken place. In the event that the difference or its amount is smaller than the specified threshold but different from zero, it may be provided that this, i.e. the corresponding change in load, is stored or discarded, but in any case, a signal corresponding to this minor change in load is not output by the evaluation unit, for example.” (para 0017)).
One of ordinary skill in the art, before the time of filing, would have been motivated to modify the disclosure of Tober with the teachings of Schmitz in order Determine, i.e., recognize or record, the change in load by evaluating or processing the recorded sensor values; see Schmitz at least at (para 0012).
Regarding claim 12, Tober discloses the method according to claim 10. However, Tober does not explicitly teach wherein the first value is maintained or used as the valid value for the total mass of the vehicle system, even if the processing device has detected an occurrence of an event between the first point in time and the second point in time, wherein the event could theoretically have caused a change of the total mass of the vehicle system.
Schmitz, in the same field of endeavor, teaches
wherein the first value is maintained or used as the valid value for the total mass of the vehicle system, even if the processing device has detected an occurrence of an event between the first point in time and the second point in time, wherein the event could theoretically have caused a change of the total mass of the vehicle system (“In such situations, there is often no, or at least no significant, change in the load, so that, for example, the specific weight of the vehicle does not need to be discarded and recalculated, and no adjustments to vehicle settings or assistance systems need to be made” (para 0014) and “if there is a difference or deviation between the two sensor values that is less than or equal to the specified threshold, it will be determined that no change in load has taken place. In the event that the difference or its amount is smaller than the specified threshold but different from zero, it may be provided that this, i.e. the corresponding change in load, is stored or discarded, but in any case, a signal corresponding to this minor change in load is not output by the evaluation unit, for example.” (para 0017)).
One of ordinary skill in the art, before the time of filing, would have been motivated to modify the disclosure of Tober with the teachings of Schmitz in order Determine, i.e., recognize or record, the change in load by evaluating or processing the recorded sensor values; see Schmitz at least at (para 0012).
Regarding claim 13, Tober discloses the method according to claim 12. However, Tober does not explicitly teach wherein the event is at least one of the events:
at least one ignition change of the towing vehicle, an idle period of the vehicle system which exceeds a predetermined idle period of the vehicle system..
Schmitz, in the same field of endeavor, teaches
wherein the event is at least one of the events:
at least one ignition change of the towing vehicle, an idle period of the vehicle system which exceeds a predetermined idle period of the vehicle system (“In such situations, any indicators that may be used, such as a standstill duration, the position of the vehicle, or the continuously switched-on state of the vehicle, can conventionally be evaluated to assume that no change in load has taken place” (para 0015)).
One of ordinary skill in the art, before the time of filing, would have been motivated to modify the disclosure of Tober with the teachings of Schmitz in order Determine, i.e., recognize or record, the change in load by evaluating or processing the recorded sensor values; see Schmitz at least at (para 0012).
Regarding claim 14, Tober discloses the method according to claim 10. Additionally, Tober discloses wherein the physical data of the vehicle system is detected by:
at least one axle load sensor at least at one axle of the towing vehicle and/or at at least one axle of the at least one trailer which provides at least one axle load signal as a sensor signal of the processing device (“The loads on each of the tractor, dollies and trailers may be measured or otherwise determined in a variety of ways. For example, on vehicles equipped with air suspensions, the loads may be measured using pressure sensors. If the vehicles have mechanical suspensions without load detection sensors (e.g., leaf spring suspension), the load may be measured using ride height sensors” (Col. 2, lines 57-63)), and/or a trailer detection which provides information regarding the number of trailers coupled to the towing vehicle as a sensor signal to the processing device (“An optical detection system could also be used to detect the number of trailers and dollies in the vehicle train, either by an optical system hosted on the vehicle or by an optical system that is part of yard infrastructure that transmits data to the vehicle” (Col. 2, lines 63-67)), and/or a camera device including at least one camera arranged at the towing vehicle and/or at the at least one trailer, so that the camera provides at least one image signal including information regarding the number of the trailers coupled with the towing vehicle, and/or at least one LIDAR-sensor or RADAR-sensor which is arranged at the towing vehicle and/or at the at least one trailer so that it provides at least one signal including information regarding the number of trailers coupled with the towing vehicle and/or at least one ultrasound sensor which is arranged at the towing vehicle and/or at the at least one trailer so that it delivers at least one signal including information regarding the number of the trailers coupled with the towing vehicle (“An optical detection system could also be used to detect the number of trailers and dollies in the vehicle train, either by an optical system hosted on the vehicle or by an optical system that is part of yard infrastructure that transmits data to the vehicle” (Col. 2, lines 63-67)).
Regarding claim 15, Tober discloses the system according to claim 1. However, Tober does not explicitly teach wherein the sensor device is a single axle load sensor.
Grieser, in the same field of endeavor, teaches
wherein the sensor device is a single axle load sensor (“wherein the instantaneous axle load on one axle of the vehicle is determined via an axle load sensor” (para 0008)).
One of ordinary skill in the art, before the time of filing, would have been motivated to modify the disclosure of Tober with the teachings of Grieser in order to calculate the braking force distribution as a function of axle load; see Grieser at least at (para 0008).
Regarding claim 16, Tober discloses the method according to claim 10. However, Tober does not explicitly teach wherein the sensor device is a single axle load sensor.
Grieser, in the same field of endeavor, teaches
wherein the sensor device is a single axle load sensor (“wherein the instantaneous axle load on one axle of the vehicle is determined via an axle load sensor” (para 0008)).
One of ordinary skill in the art, before the time of filing, would have been motivated to modify the disclosure of Tober with the teachings of Grieser in order to calculate the braking force distribution as a function of axle load; see Grieser at least at (para 0008).
Claim 7 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Pat. No. 10343658 (hereinafter, "Tober"; previously of record) in view of DE 102017108034 (hereinafter, "Schmitz"; newly of record) in further view of U.S. Pub. No. 20050065695 (hereinafter, "Grieser"; newly of record) as applied to claim 6 and 8 above, and in further view of U.S. Pub. No. 20230415713 (hereinafter, "van Thiel"; previously of record).
Regarding claim 7, Tober discloses the system according to claim 6. However, Tober does not explicitly teach wherein the brake system or vehicle control system or vehicle regulation system includes:
an electronically controlled brake system (EBS);
dynamic drive regulation;
a transmission control; and
a control for at least partially autonomous driving and/or a coupling force regulation between the towing vehicle and the at least one trailer.
van Thiel, in the same field of endeavor, teaches
further comprising:
an electronically controlled brake system (EBS); dynamic drive regulation (“modern vehicles usually have electronic brake systems (EBS), driver assistance systems or stability control systems (ABS, ESC, ASR, RSC, et cetera) and emergency brake systems” (para 0005));
a control for at least partially autonomous driving and/or a coupling force regulation between the towing vehicle and the at least one trailer (“the towing vehicle and the trailer can have corresponding automated or semi-automated braking and/or driver assistance systems” (para 0005)).
One of ordinary skill in the art, before the time of filing, would have been motivated to modify the disclosure of Tober with the teachings of van Thiel in order for safe and efficient braking of the vehicle to be ensured; see van Thiel at least at [para 0003]; and
Schmitz, in the same field of endeavor, teaches
a transmission control (“by the evaluation unit used to detect the change in load and/or transmitted to the driver assistance system via a vehicle network or CAN bus. This offers the advantage that such networking of vehicle components ensures optimal adaptation or adjustment of the vehicle or the driver assistance system depending on the respective load condition, for example with regard to safety, driving comfort, driving dynamics performance” (para 0025)).
One of ordinary skill in the art, before the time of filing, would have been motivated to modify the disclosure of Tober with the teachings of Schmitz in order ensure optimal adaptation or adjustment of the vehicle or the driver assistance system depending on the respective load condition; see Schmitz at least at (para 0025).
Regarding claim 9, Tober discloses the system according to claim 8. Additionally, Tober discloses wherein the vehicle system further includes:
the towing vehicle (Fig. 1, #12); and
However, Tober does not explicitly teach
a semi-trailer coupled with the towing vehicle,
wherein the sensor device at a rear axle and/or at a front axle of the towing vehicle includes at least one axle load sensor but no axle load sensor is provided at the semi-trailer; or
the towing vehicle without a coupled trailer,
wherein the sensor device at a rear axle or at a front axle of the towing vehicle includes at least one axle load sensor; or
the towing vehicle; and a semi-trailer coupled with the towing vehicle,
wherein the sensor device includes at least one axle load sensor at least at one axle of the semi-trailer, but the towing vehicle does not include an axle load sensor; or
the towing vehicle with a coupled trailer which is not a semi-trailer but a draw bar trailer.
van Thiel, in the same field of endeavor, teaches
a semi-trailer coupled with the towing vehicle (“the towing vehicle is the towing vehicle of a semi-trailer” (para 0028)),
wherein the sensor device at a rear axle and/or at a front axle of the towing vehicle includes at least one axle load sensor but no axle load sensor is provided at the semi-trailer (Fig. 1, #6e); or
the towing vehicle without a coupled trailer (“for the towing vehicle without a coupled trailer” (para 0041)),
wherein the sensor device at a rear axle or at a front axle of the towing vehicle includes at least one axle load sensor (Fig. 1, #6e); or
the towing vehicle; and a semi-trailer coupled with the towing vehicle,
wherein the sensor device includes at least one axle load sensor at least at one axle of the semi-trailer, but the towing vehicle does not include an axle load sensor; or
the towing vehicle with a coupled trailer which is not a semi-trailer but a draw bar trailer (“a towing vehicle is further provided to which at least one trailer can be coupled and with which a method according to the disclosure can be carried out, wherein the vehicle thus formed may include a variety of configurations or designs. For example, the vehicle can be a semi-trailer with a fifth wheel, a truck-trailer combination with a drawbar coupling or a road train with a large number of the trailers.” (para 0016)).
One of ordinary skill in the art, before the time of filing, would have been motivated to modify the disclosure of Tober with the teachings of van Thiel in order for safe and efficient braking of the vehicle to be ensured; see van Thiel at least at [para 0003].
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ADAM ALHARBI whose telephone number is (313)446-6621. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10am-6:30pm.
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, 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.
/ADAM M ALHARBI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3663