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 .
Introduction
This is a response to applicant’s submissions filed on February 6, 2026. Claims 16-23 and 26-34 are pending.
Examiner' s Note
Examiner has cited particular paragraphs / columns and line numbers or figures in the references as applied to the claims below for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested from the applicant, in preparing the responses, to fully consider the references in their entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the examiner. Applicant is reminded that the Examiner is entitled to give the broadest reasonable interpretation to the language of the claims. Furthermore, the Examiner is not limited to Applicants' definition which is not specifically set forth in the disclosure.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on February 6, 2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
All of applicant’s arguments filed February 6, 2026 have been considered.
Regarding applicant’s argument that Okada does not disclose determining or selecting a “terrain mode” (Applicant’s Response, pg. 6), the examiner respectfully disagrees. In paragraph 0028, Okada discloses using external environment information pieces such as outside air temperature, meteorological information, and road surface conditions into the creep control determination and further gives an example of using the external environment information to determine the possibility of a frozen road. Additionally, in paragraph 0038 Okada discloses using changes in road environment and external environment to realize a creep running which is difficult to slip on a snow-covered road, while on a dry road it is possible to let the creep speed increase rapidly. Okada therefore discloses determining if the road is snow-covered (i.e., slippery) or dry using the road environment and external environment.
Regarding applicant’s argument that Okada does not disclose that distinct relationship is selected based on any such mode (Applicant’s Response, pg. 6), the examiner respectfully disagrees. In paragraph 0038 Okada discloses selecting one of preset plural creep speed patterns based on information pieces as road surface condition, outside air temperature, engine water temperature, road gradient, and meteorological information. Additionally, paragraph 0041 of Okada discloses a set speed pattern data base storing plural target creep-speeds from which a suitable target creep speed is selected according to a running environment. Okada therefore discloses determining a creep speed pattern from a database of speed patterns based on the environment condition (i.e., slippery or dry).
Regarding applicant’s argument that Zhao does not teach how to reinstate the creep control mode in response to the vehicle speed passing below the target speed (Applicant’s Response, pg. 7), the examiner respectfully disagrees. In paragraphs 0051-0052 Zhao discloses judging if the vehicle speed is less than a vehicle creep speed threshold and activating creep mode when it is less then the vehicle creep speed threshold. As modified, the vehicle creep speed threshold is the creep speed determined in Okada.
Regarding applicant’s argument that Zhao contains no teaching of terrain mode determination, terrain mode selection, or creep torque map selection based on terrain (Applicant’s Response, pg. 7). It is noted that Okada was used to meet this limitation. Zhao is used to teach “reinstating creep control mode in response to the vehicle speed passing below the target speed”.
Regarding applicant’s argument that Zhao does not teach or suggest comparing the driver’s torque demand to a selected relationship between speed and torque (Applicant’s Response, pg. 7). It is noted that Okada was used to meet this limitation. Zhao is used to teach “reinstating creep control mode in response to the vehicle speed passing below the target speed”. It is additionally noted that when the driver is not operating the accelerator pedal the torque demand of the driver would be zero which would be less than the relationship between speed and torque as there would have to be an amount of torque to move the vehicle in the creep control mode.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 16-23 and 26-34 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
In claim 16, lines 13-14, the limitation "the torque demand from the driver falling below the selected relationship between speed and torque" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear how to compare a torque to a relationship.
In claim 17, line 2, the limitation "a target speed" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear if it is referring to the target speed previously recited in claim 16, line 8, or a new target speed.
In claim 17, line 2, claim 28, line 3, and claim 29, line 2, the limitation "drive torque" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear if it referring to the drive torque previously recited in claim 16, line 7, or a new drive torque.
In claim 26, line 2, and claim 30, line 2, the limitation "a user" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear if it is the same as the driver previously recited in claim 1, line 9, or a new person. In the specification, the term driver is used to describe the person controlling the vehicle and user is only used in claim language.
In claim 26, lines 2-3, the limitation "the torque demand from the user exceeds the selected relationship between speed and torque" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear how to compare a torque to a relationship.
In claim 32, line 14, the limitation "the torque in the selected relationship between speed and torque" renders the claim indefinite because it lacks antecedent basis and it is unclear if it is referring to the drive torque previously recited on line 7 or a new torque. According to Fig. 6, it appears "the torque in the selected relationship between speed and torque" is referring to a new torque.
Claims 15-23, 26-31, and 33-34 are also rejected as being dependent upon a rejected base claim as they do not clear the deficiencies of the claims from which they depend.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 16-23, 26-27, and 31-34 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Okada (EP 1 342 607) in view of Zhao (US 2021/0024072).
Regarding claim 16, Okada discloses a creep control system for a vehicle, the control system comprising at least one controller (Okada, Fig. 1 regarding a creep control system and multiple controllers), the control system being configured to:
determine a terrain mode of the vehicle, the terrain mode is one of a plurality of terrain modes corresponding to different surface types (Okada, [0028] regarding external environment information pieces such as outside air temperature, meteorological information, and road surface conditions being inputted & [0038] regarding road environment and external environment information being used to determining creep running for a snow-covered road and a dry road);
determine that the vehicle is operating in a creep control mode (Okada, [0030] regarding creep control means occurring when the shift lever is in a running range, the brake pedal is released, and the accelerator pedal not being depressed);
select a relationship between speed and torque based, at least in part, on the terrain mode (Okada, [0041] regarding a suitable target creep speed being selected from stored plural target creep-speeds based on a running environment, [0038] regarding one of preset plural creep speed patterns being selected based on the road surface condition, outside air temperature, engine water temperature, road gradient, and meteorological information & [0039] regarding using the target creep speed to calculate the required drive torque);
control a drive torque of the vehicle in accordance with the selected relationship between speed and torque to control a vehicle speed to a target speed in the selected relationship (Okada, [0058] regarding the throttle opening is adjusted and the target torque is realized in the engine (i.e., by controlling the torque of the vehicle at the calculated required drive torque, the vehicle will be travelling at the target creep speed);
receive a torque demand from a driver, and, in response to the torque demand from the driver, provide control of the drive torque to the driver, such that the vehicle ceases operating in the creep control mode (Okada, Fig. 15 regarding moving to judgment of creep running if the accelerator pedal is being operated (i.e. vehicle is not in creep mode and is receiving a torque demand)); and
after the vehicle ceases operating in the creep control mode (Okada, Fig. 15 regarding the method going from perform creep running to start judgement of creep running to the accelerator being operated (i.e., the vehicle was in creep running, then the user begins using the accelerator so the vehicle is not operating in creep running)), reinstate the creep control mode in response to the torque demand from the driver falling below the selected relationship between speed and torque (Okada, Fig. 15 regarding the method going from the accelerator being operated (i.e., torque demand) to start judgement of creep running to perform creep running (i.e., the user stops using the accelerator so creep running is performed)).
Okada does not explicitly disclose reinstate the creep control mode in response to the vehicle speed passing below the target speed.
Zhao teaches how to reinstate the creep control mode in response to the vehicle speed passing below the target speed (Zhao, [0051-0052] regarding activating creep mode when the vehicle speed is less than a vehicle creep speed threshold).
Okada and Zhao are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of vehicle creep control. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Okada to incorporate activating creep mode when the vehicle speed is below a speed threshold, as disclosed by Zhao, with a reasonable expectation of success because doing so would yield the predictable result of restarting the creep mode to keep the vehicle moving when driver demand ends.
Regarding claim 17, Okada in view of Zhao teaches the control system as claimed in claim 16, wherein the speed of the vehicle is controlled to a target speed while maintaining drive torque at or below a level corresponding to the selected relationship between speed and torque (Okada, [0006] regarding the engine torque being controlled based on a target torque to achieve a target creep speed).
Regarding claim 18, Okada in view of Zhao teaches the control system as claimed in claim 17, wherein the speed of the vehicle is controlled by accelerating the vehicle from stationary to the target speed (Okada, [0066] regarding increasing the vehicle speed from zero gradually up to a predetermined creep speed).
Regarding claim 19, Okada in view of Zhao teaches the control system as claimed in claim 17, further configured to maintain the target speed once said target speed is reached (Okada, [0006] regarding setting the vehicle speed follow the target creep speed).
Regarding claim 20, Okada in view of Zhao teaches the control system as claimed in claim 17, further configured to determine the target speed based on the selected relationship between speed and torque (Okada, [0006] regarding the engine torque being controlled to a target torque required to achieve the target creep speed).
Regarding claim 21, Okada in view of Zhao teaches the control system as claimed in claim 16, wherein the terrain mode is dependent on a determined vehicle terrain based on a manual selection or an automatic selection (Okada, [0028] regarding the external environment conditions being from an external condition detecting means (i.e., automatic selection)).
Regarding claim 22, Okada in view of Zhao teaches the control system as claimed in claim 16, wherein the selected relationship between speed and torque is dependent on an intended direction of travel of the vehicle and/or a current direction of travel of the vehicle (Okada, [0028] regarding the creep control being executed based on the state in which the shift lever position is in (i.e., forward or reverse)).
Regarding claim 23, Okada in view of Zhao teaches the control system as claimed in claim 16, wherein the selected relationship between speed and torque is dependent on a terrain gradient (Okada, [0038], regarding the creep speed pattern being based on the road gradient).
Regarding claim 26, Okada in view of Zhao teaches the control system as claimed in claim 16, further configured to provide control of the drive torque to a user when the torque demand from the user exceeds the selected relationship between speed and torque (Okada, Fig. 15 regarding moving to judgment of creep running if the accelerator pedal is being operated (i.e. the driver is in control when there is a torque demand, therefore the vehicle is not in creep mode)).
Regarding claim 27, Okada in view of Zhao teaches the control system as claimed in claim 16, further configured to control a torque applied to each wheel or each axle of the vehicle based on the selected relationship between speed and torque (Okada, [0026] regarding the rotating torque of the input shaft being transmitted from the driving gears to the output shaft though the drive gear or directly and is then transmitted to an axel through a differential gear to rotate a driving wheel. The amount of torque generated from the creep speed pattern would have been generated and input into the input shaft which is then transferred to the axel to rotate the wheels.).
Regarding claim 30, Okada in view of Zhao teaches the control system as claimed in claim 16, further configured to receive a creep control indication from a user for operating in the creep control mode (Okada, [0028] regarding a creep on-off switch).
Regarding claim 31, Okada in view of Zhao teaches a vehicle comprising the control system according to claim 16 (Okada, [0006] regarding a vehicle).
Regarding claim 32, Okada teaches a method comprising:
determining a terrain mode of a vehicle while the vehicle is operating in a creep control mode, the terrain mode is one of a plurality of terrain modes corresponding to different surface types (Okada, [0028] regarding external environment information pieces such as outside air temperature, meteorological information, and road surface conditions being inputted, [0038] regarding road environment and external environment information being used to determining creep running for a snow-covered road and a dry road & [0030] regarding creep control means occurring when the shift lever is in a running range, the brake pedal is released, and the accelerator pedal not being depressed);
selecting a relationship between torque and a speed of the vehicle based, at least in part, on the terrain mode (Okada, [0041] regarding a suitable target creep speed being selected from stored plural target creep-speeds based on a running environment, [0038] regarding one of preset plural creep speed patterns being selected based on the road surface condition, outside air temperature, engine water temperature, road gradient, and meteorological information & [0039] regarding using the target creep speed to calculate the required drive torque); and
controlling a drive torque of the vehicle in accordance with the selected relationship between speed and torque to control a vehicle speed to a target speed in the selected relationship (Okada, [0058] regarding the throttle opening is adjusted and the target torque is realized in the engine (i.e., by controlling the torque of the vehicle at the calculated required drive torque, the vehicle will be travelling at the target creep speed);
receiving a torque demand from a driver, and, in response to the torque demand from the driver, provide control of the drive torque to the driver, such that the vehicle ceases operating in the creep control mode (Okada, Fig. 15 regarding moving to judgment of creep running if the accelerator pedal is being operated (i.e. vehicle is not in creep mode and is receiving a torque demand)); and
after the vehicle ceases operating in the creep control mode (Okada, Fig. 15 regarding the method going from perform creep running to start judgement of creep running to the accelerator being operated (i.e., the vehicle was in creep running, then the user begins using the accelerator so the vehicle is not operating in creep running)), reinstating the creep control mode in response to the torque demand from the driver falling below the torque in the selected relationship between speed and torque (Okada, Fig. 15 regarding the method going from the accelerator being operated (i.e., torque demand) to start judgement of creep running to perform creep running (i.e., the user stops using the accelerator so creep running is performed)).
Okada does not explicitly disclose reinstate the creep control mode in response to the vehicle speed passing below the target speed.
Zhao teaches how to reinstate the creep control mode in response to the vehicle speed passing below the target speed (Zhao, [0051-0052] regarding activating creep mode when the vehicle speed is less than a vehicle creep speed threshold).
Okada and Zhao are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of vehicle creep control. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Okada to incorporate activating creep mode when the vehicle speed is below a speed threshold, as disclosed by Zhao, with a reasonable expectation of success because doing so would yield the predictable result of restarting the creep mode to keep the vehicle moving when driver demand ends.
Regarding claim 33, Okada in view of Zhao teaches a non-transitory computer readable medium comprising computer readable instructions that, when executed by at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to perform the method of claim 32 (Okada, [0028] regarding an automatic transmission controller. One of ordinary skill would know that the controller is being operated by a computer and that the computer must be disposed upon a device (i.e., a non-transitory computer readable medium).).
Regarding claim 34, Okada in view of Zhao teaches the control system as claimed in claim 16, wherein the relationship between speed and torque is in a creep torque map (Okada, [0039] regarding using the target creep speed to calculate the required drive torque).
Claims 28-29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Okada in view of Zhao and further in view of Ruybal (US 2020/0398844).
Regarding claim 28, Okada in view of Zhao teaches the control system as claimed in claim 16, but fails to explicitly teach the system further configured to implement the selected relationship between speed and torque by applying a braking torque opposing drive torque from an internal combustion engine and/or a traction motor.
Ruybal teaches how to implement the selected relationship between speed and torque by applying a braking torque opposing drive torque from an internal combustion engine and/or a traction motor (Ruybal, [0092] regarding reducing traction motor torque to slow the vehicle down (i.e., applying a braking torque)).
Okada and Ruybal are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of controlling creep in vehicles. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Okada, as modified, to incorporate applying a braking torque from a traction motor, as disclosed by Ruybal, with a reasonable expectation of success because doing so would yield the predictable result of allowing the vehicle to stop in low friction environments.
Regarding claim 29, Okada in view of Zhao and Ruybal teaches the control system as claimed in claim 28. Ruybal further teaches wherein the braking torque is provided by the traction motor opposing drive torque from the internal combustion engine (Ruybal, [0092] regarding reducing traction motor torque to slow the vehicle down (i.e., applying a braking torque)).
Okada and Ruybal are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of controlling creep in vehicles. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Okada, as modified, to incorporate applying a braking torque from a traction motor, as disclosed by Ruybal, with a reasonable expectation of success because doing so would yield the predictable result of allowing the vehicle to stop in low friction environments.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALEX GRIFFIN whose telephone number is (703)756-1516. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 7:30am - 5:30pm.
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, ERIN BISHOP can be reached at (571)270-3713. 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.
/ALEX B GRIFFIN/ Examiner, Art Unit 3665
/Erin D Bishop/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3665
Prosecution Insights