DETAILED ACTION
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
This rejection is withdrawn due to the amendments made to the claims
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.
Claim(s) 12, 14-15, 17-20, 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tseng (U.S. Pat. No. 7,401,870) in view of Hu (U.S. Pub. No. 2022/0258723).
Regarding claim 12 and 22, Tseng discloses a method for operating a control system of a vehicle, the method comprising:
a) controlling, by a drive control system, a drive motor (m1-m4) that drives at least one driven axle (HA) having a first drive wheel and a second drive wheel, the drive control system further including a steering device which is actuatable by a driver of the vehicle (col. 3, lines 30-40 discloses how a differential is able to divert drive power through the axle),
b) driving, via the drive motor, a differential gear (158, col. 3, lines 30-40) mechanism, which is between the first drive wheel and the second drive wheel,
c) controlling, by a brake control system (col. 9, lines 17-25), a brake device that has a first brake actuator for the first drive wheel and a second brake actuator for the second drive wheel,
d) providing a steering brake function (col. 3, lines 28-35), with which a steering action on the vehicle, in accordance with a steering request signal from an autonomous vehicle control system of the vehicle and/or from at least one driver assistance system of the vehicle, is provided by selectively controlling the first brake actuator and/or the second brake actuator of the at least one driven axle (HA) to perform the steering action in accordance with the steering request signal, wherein the steering brake function is automatically activated when it has been established that the steering device has a fault or a defect,
e) wherein the control system includes a traction control system (ASR) (col. 3, lines 45-47 discloses a traction system) which is automatically activated when an inadmissible drive slip at the first drive wheel and/or at the second drive wheel of the at least one driven axle (HA) has been established, and with which the inadmissible drive slip at the first drive wheel and/or at the second drive wheel of the at least one driven axle (HA) is reduced to a permissible drive slip by:
e1) the traction control system engaging in the drive control system of the drive motor, to reduce drive power of the drive motor driving the at least one driven axle (col. 12, lines 41-47 discloses how less motor power are used like at 222) and
e2) the traction control system engaging in the brake control system of the brake device to selectively brake the first drive wheel and/or the second drive wheel having the inadmissible drive slip (col. 12, lines 41-47 discloses this as part of brake steering like at 220) to reduce a drive slip of the first drive wheel and/or second drive wheel to the permissible drive slip;
f) when both of the following condition are simultaneously met (i) the steering brake function is active or has been activated at the at least one driven axle (HA) due to establishing that the steering device has a fault or a defect (The citation uses this at all times including when fault is detected. Where this is triggered by a fault it doesn’t change that the following limitations are “intended use limitations” dealing with which part of the controller is issuing the commands.) and (ii) the traction control system (ASR) is activated at the at least one driven axle (HA) due to an inadmissible drive slip at the first drive wheel and/or at the second drive wheel (the system is able to brake and steer simultaneously) carrying out, by the traction control system (ASR), both: (i) dispensing with, by the traction control system (ASR), the engagement in the brake control system of the brake control device for reducing the drive slip (this is understood as requiring a stop to ASR controller of the brake, not a stop to the use of braking), and (ii) engaging in the drive control system to reduce the drive power of the drive motor driving the at last one driven axle (HA) by the traction control system (ASR) (fig. 10, 220 and 222).
And carrying out the steering action, by the steering brake function, in accordance with the steering request signal from the autonomous vehicle control system and/or the driver assistance system of the vehicle, by selectively controlling the first brake actuator and/or the second brake actuator to implement the steering action in accordance with the steering request signal (‘f’ is delineating a situation where brake steering is needed which can increase wheel slip but also wheel slip reduction is needed. The solution is axle motor power reduction and individual brake control. The fact that ASR is not in control of the brakes is seen as an intended use limitation because the controller is still in active control/application of the braking. This is indistinguishable from a system performing e1 and e2 simultaneously which is disclosed in col. 13, line 61 – col. 14, line 11).
Note: The last 15 lines of the claim are understood as meaning “f) when ‘d’ and ‘e’ are simultaneously required, due to a fault in steering and inadmissible drive slip, then ASR is limited to ‘e1’”.
Note: Broadly speaking part ‘f’ is requiring the controller to operate the motor and the brakes simultaneously to control steering and traction. As addressed above the citation is using the controller to operate the brakes and motor to control traction and steering of the vehicle. The additional limitations of ‘f’ are suggesting a desired outcome of that control, motor will cause slip control and brakes will cause steering. The problem is that both braking and motor operation will affect both slip and steering creating a difference only in intended use of why each device is being used. What is needed is a clear control that occurs when slip control is performed that sets it apart from steering control to delineate the differences between the prior art and this application.
Since it can be argued that the motors of Tseng do not drive the axle another reference is needed
Hu, which deals in torque distribution, teaches one motor (114e) driving the one axle (119r) through differential 30.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have modified Tseng with the one motor of Hu because this cuts down on costs of having multiple motors.
Regarding claim 14 which depends from claim 12, Tseng discloses wherein, in the context of the traction control system (ASR), the engagement in the brake control of the brake device by the traction control system (ASR) is dispensed with only when the travel speed of the vehicle is less than a predetermined limit speed (This limitation is drawn to part of the controller, the traction, no longer using the brakes but not precluding the brakes from still being used. How the controller parses out command from which part of the circuit is a signal inside of a processor and ineligible subject matter for patent under USC 101. What is eligible is that the controller control or not control the brake. Since both this application and cited reference continue to use the brakes at all speeds the reference is seen as addressing this limitation.).
Regarding claim 15 which depends from claim 12, Tseng discloses further comprising: a) a steering device (14a), and/or b) an autonomous vehicle control system (steering option addressed), and/or c) at least one driver assistance system; wherein a steering request signal is generated by which travel of the vehicle round a bend is brought about.
Regarding claim 17 which depends from claim 16, Tseng discloses wherein the steering request signal is converted by steering/braking at least at the driven axle (HA) (braking is occurring on the axle).
Regarding claim 18 which depends from claim 17, Tseng discloses wherein, during steering/braking, of the first drive wheel and the second drive wheel of the drive axle (HA), the drive wheel which constitutes the drive wheel which is on the inside of the bend with respect to the travel of the vehicle round a bend represented by the steering request signal is braked (both wheels are able to be braked independently, col. 9, lines 21-23, and for steering purposes the inside wheel to be braked would be the one that creates a turn towards that wheel making it the inside wheel).
Regarding claim 19 which depends from claim 18, Tseng discloses wherein, during steering/braking, the drive wheel which is on the outside of the bend and which is different from the drive wheel which is on the inside of the bend is not braked (col. 3, lines 30-35 discloses applying differential torques and braking at the same time covering the options of braking on one tire and adding torque on another).
Regarding claim 20 which depends from claim 12, Tseng discloses wherein an electric/pneumatic and electronically controlled brake system with
a two-channel pressure control module or
with two one-channel pressure control modules,
a first one-channel pressure control module and
a second pressure control module, is used as the brake device at the at least one driven axle (HA),
wherein by a first channel of the two-channel pressure control module or the first one-channel pressure control module a first brake pressure can be individually controlled for the first brake actuator and by a second channel of the two-channel pressure control module or the second one-channel pressure control module a second brake pressure for the second brake actuator can be individually controlled (col. 9, lines 19-23 discloses hydraulic independent control of the brakes. This is construed as providing the two channels needed in order to provide the individual control.).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 09/16/25 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues on pages 8 and 9 that the amendments overcome the cited reference. The amendments to the claims are more precisely defining which part of the controller is actuating the brakes. This doesn’t change that the controller is actuating the brakes. Where this control strategy might be considered a different strategy than the reference both application of brakes is affecting wheel slip and steering. For example, if one wheel is slipping (less friction force) and the other wheel is not (more friction force) than the car is pivoting around that one higher friction wheel which is in effect steering, any reduction in the slip will change the amount of pivoting i.e. steering as a result this reduction in slip braking is also brake steering. Neither control strategy is defined in such a way to make clear how the braking differs when steering braking is performed or when ASR is in control of the brakes. Where it can be argued one strategy would perform differently some of the time, there is a lot of overlap which allows the reference to be construed as being equivalent in scope.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GONZALO LAGUARDA whose telephone number is (571)272-5920. The examiner can normally be reached 8-5 M-Th Alt. F.
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, Logan Kraft can be reached at (571) 270-5065. 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.
GONZALO LAGUARDA
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3747 email: gonzalo.laguarda@uspto.gov
/GONZALO LAGUARDA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3747