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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Claim 28 recites, “a data processing unit” and claims 30-33 respectively recite, “a permanent brake”, “a service brake”, “a permanent brake system”, “a permanent brake system, a retarder, a service brake system, a friction brake, or an eddy current brake.”. Therefore, the recited limitations must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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 16-35 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.
The term “overrun mode” in claims 16, 28, 35 each is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “overrun mode” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention.
Applicant’s specification at paragraphs 0006, 0010, 0047 each merely recites the term, “overrun mode” mode, but the meaning thereof is not provided. It is respectfully submitted that the phrase appeared to be conjured by applicant without proving any meaning thereto. As such one could have just replaced the phrase with any meaning less phrase such as “repetitive mode, “reciprocal mode”, “latent mode”, around the edge mode”, etc which are all meaning less and do not help with the prosecution of the claims.
Applicant argues that the meaning of the phrase “overrun mode” is provided in claims 16, 28, and 35 and specification paragraphs 0006. The applicant further explained during the interview dated 8/4/25 that the “an overrun mode” occurs when the electric driving engine is acting as an energy generator that produces an energy output, consistent with the language of claim 16. The examiner respectfully disagrees the specification and claims merely describe what mode the engine is in, that is in the “overrun mode”. However, the meaning of “overrun mode” is not provided. It also could have been a “repetitive mode, “reciprocal mode”, “latent mode”, around the edge mode”, etc which are all meaning less and do not help with the prosecution of the claims.
Applicant was requested to provide prior art to support meaning for the term, “overrun mode”, but no prior art was provided.
Claims 16, 28, 35 are each rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being incomplete for omitting essential steps, such omission amounting to a gap between the steps. See MPEP § 2172.01. The omitted steps are: “providing the generator output adjusted to the required amount.”
The limitation is incomplete. It is not clear what all is meant by and encompassed by “providing the generator output …………..”. It does not indicate who is providing the generator output and it also does not indicate to where the generator output is being provided.
The rest of the claims are rejected for depending on a rejected base claim or for having similar deficiencies.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 16-35 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yamada (US Pub 2004/0245952).
Regarding claim 16, Yamada discloses a method for braking a vehicle at least partially by an electric driving engine (electric driving engine or motor 5 acts as a motor using a voltage to drive wheels of the vehicle, and also acts as a generator to produce regenerative brakes, and also generates a current to charge a battery, etc; fig. 1; sec 0007, 0008, 0010, 0011, 0014, 0019, 0020), the method comprising:
generating a generator output (i.e. generating a current when the motor 5 acts as a generator especially during deceleration; fig. 1; sec 0007, 0008, 0010, 0011, 0014, 0019, 0020) by driving THE electric driving engine (5, fig. 1) of THE vehicle in an overrun mode (overrun mode implies when the driving machine 5 is in generator mode when applying regenerative brakes to produce a current or in a power recuperation mode; also see Yamada sec 0007, 0008, 0010, 0011, 0014, 0019, 0020);
adjusting the generator output (using current/voltage adjustment means 40 to adjust generator output; sec 0018, 0031, 0032) to an amount required for braking (as a generator, motor 5 is configured to produce required amount of regenerative brakes for braking a vehicle, also to generate a required amount of current to charge a battery, etc; fig. 1; sec 0007, 0008, 0010, 0011, 0014, 0019, 0020) the vehicle by increasing a first voltage level (see “boost regulator 20” which increases a voltage level; sec 0018, 0022) at which the electric driving engine (5; fig. 1) is operating; and
providing the generator output (using current/voltage adjustment means 40 to adjust and provide the required amount of the generator output i.e. current; sec 0018, 0031, 0032) adjusted to the required amount.
Regarding claim 17, Yamada discloses the method of Claim 16, wherein increasing the first voltage level causes a lowering of current in the electric driving engine (using current/voltage adjustment means 40 to adjust current and voltage, i.e. when the current is lowered the voltage is increased and vice versa; sec 0018, 0031, 0032).
Regarding claim 18, Yamada discloses the method of Claim 16, wherein adjusting the generator output comprises increasing a current in the electric driving engine (using current/voltage adjustment means 40 to adjust current and voltage, i.e. when the current is lowered the voltage is increased and vice versa; sec 0018, 0031, 0032).
Regarding claim 19, Yamada discloses the method of Claim 16, wherein the generator output is adjusted without changing a current in the electric driving engine (using current/voltage adjustment means 40 to adjust current and voltage, i.e. when the current is lowered the voltage is increased and vice versa; sec 0018, 0031, 0032).
Regarding claim 20, Yamada discloses the method of Claim 16, wherein current in the electric driving engine is kept within a predetermined limit (using current/voltage adjustment means 40 to adjust current and voltage, i.e. when the current is lowered the voltage is increased and vice versa; sec 0018, 0031, 0032).
Regarding claim 21, Yamada discloses the method of Claim 20, wherein the predetermined limit comprises a thermally-admissible limit (units 10, 14, 15, 16, R1, R2, operate with thermally admissible limits; sec 0008, 0011, 0017, 0019, 0022, 0023; citing, sec 0023; “output voltage of the charging circuit 11, or charging voltage of the capacitor 10, is controlled to be constant.”).
Regarding claim 22, Yamada discloses the method of Claim 16, further comprising monitoring a thermal load of the electric driving engine (units 10, 14, 15, 16, R1, R2, operate with thermally admissible limits; sec 0008, 0011, 0017, 0019, 0022, 0023; citing, sec 0023; “output voltage of the charging circuit 11, or charging voltage of the capacitor 10, is controlled to be constant.”).
Regarding claim 23, Yamada discloses the method of Claim 16, wherein the generator output is at least partially supplied to an energy storage (power storage section; sec 0008, 0020) of the vehicle.
Regarding claim 24, Yamada discloses the method of Claim 23, wherein the energy storage is operated at a second voltage level, and wherein the first voltage level and the second voltage level are the same before the generator output is adjusted (using current/voltage adjustment means 40 to adjust current and voltage into first, second , third levels as desired, i.e. when the current is lowered the voltage is increased and vice versa; sec 0018, 0031, 0032).
Regarding claim 25, Yamada discloses the method of Claim 16, wherein the generator output is at least partially supplied to at least one electric consumer of the vehicle (units 10, 14, 15, 16, R1, R2, operate as electric consumers, i.e. Resistors etc; sec 0008, 0011, 0017, 0019, 0022, 0023; citing, sec 0023; “output voltage of the charging circuit 11, or charging voltage of the capacitor 10, is controlled to be constant.”).
Regarding claim 26, Yamada discloses the method of Claim 25, wherein the at least one electric consumer of the vehicle comprises a braking resistor, and wherein the braking resistor is operated at the first voltage level (units 10, 14, 15, 16, R1, R2, operate as electric consumers, i.e. Resistors etc; sec 0008, 0011, 0017, 0019, 0022, 0023; citing, sec 0023; “output voltage of the charging circuit 11, or charging voltage of the capacitor 10, is controlled to be constant.”).
Regarding claim 27, Yamada discloses the method of Claim 16, wherein the generator output at least partially supplied to a braking resistor (units 10, 14, 15, 16, R1, R2, operate as electric consumers, i.e. Resistors etc; sec 0008, 0011, 0017, 0019, 0022, 0023; citing, sec 0023; “output voltage of the charging circuit 11, or charging voltage of the capacitor 10, is controlled to be constant.”) and depends on an actual energy intake capacity (ie. State Of Charge) of of an energy storage, such that no supply of generator output to the energy storage is carried out when the energy storage is full (the electric machine is arranged to generate an electrical output current during regenerative braking of the vehicle, and based on a desired energy absorption capability value i.e. SOC value of the vehicle unit Lc2 energy dissipation from the energy storage is controlled to maintain an energy absorption or intake capability above a desired energy intake or absorption capability; sec 0008, 0011, 0017, 0019, 0022, 0023).
Regarding claim 28, Yamada discloses a vehicle (citing, “A motor driving apparatus applicable to various types of motor driving apparatuses”; abstract; sec 0002, 0007).
comprising:
an electric driving engine (electric driving engine or motor 5 acts as a motor using a voltage to drive wheels of the vehicle, and also acts as a generator to produce regenerative brakes, and also generates a current to charge a battery, etc; fig. 1; sec 0007, 0008, 0010, 0011, 0014, 0019, 0020); and
a data processing unit configured to:
cause the electric driving engine to operate in an overrun mode (overrun mode implies when the driving machine 5 is in generator mode when applying regenerative brakes to produce a current or in a power recuperation mode; also see Yamada sec 0007, 0008, 0010, 0011, 0014, 0019, 0020), which causes the electric driving engine to generate a generator output (i.e. generating a current when the motor 5 acts as a generator especially during deceleration; fig. 1; sec 0007, 0008, 0010, 0011, 0014, 0019, 0020) by driving THE electric driving engine (5, fig. 1); and
adjust the generator output (using current/voltage adjustment means 40 to adjust generator output; sec 0018, 0031, 0032) to an amount required for braking the vehicle by increasing a first voltage level (see “boost regulator 20” which increases a voltage level; sec 0018, 0022) at which the electric driving engine (5; fig. 1) is operating.
Regarding claim 29, Yamada discloses the vehicle of Claim 28, wherein the data processing unit is configured to provide the generator output adjusted to the required amount (using current/voltage adjustment means 40 to adjust generator output; sec 0018, 0031, 0032) to an amount required for braking (as a generator, motor 5 is configured to produce required amount of regenerative brakes for braking a vehicle, also to generate a required amount of current to charge a battery, etc; fig. 1; sec 0007, 0008, 0010, 0011, 0014, 0019, 0020).
Regarding claim 30, Yamada discloses the vehicle of Claim 28, wherein the braking is performed by a permanent brake (deceleration implies the braking relates to a permanent brake case or a service brake case; citing sec 0020, “….. The diode 13 causes the regenerative current, which is produced when the motor 5 is decelerated, to flow into the capacitor 10 through the DC link 3 to store power in the capacitor 10”).
Regarding claim 31, Yamada discloses the vehicle of Claim 28, wherein the braking is performed by a service brake (deceleration implies the braking relates to a permanent brake case or a service brake case; citing sec 0020, “….. The diode 13 causes the regenerative current, which is produced when the motor 5 is decelerated, to flow into the capacitor 10 through the DC link 3 to store power in the capacitor 10”).
Regarding claim 32, Yamada discloses the vehicle of Claim 28, wherein at least one other braking system is used in combination with the electric driving engine for braking the vehicle (deceleration implies the braking relates to a permanent brake case or a service brake case; citing sec 0020, “….. The diode 13 causes the regenerative current, which is produced when the motor 5 is decelerated, to flow into the capacitor 10 through the DC link 3 to store power in the capacitor 10”).
Regarding claim 33, Yamada discloses the vehicle of Claim 32, wherein the at least one other braking system comprises a permanent brake system, a retarder, a service brake system, a friction brake, or an eddy current brake (deceleration implies complementing further systems including braking and further systems; citing sec 0020, “….. The diode 13 causes the regenerative current, which is produced when the motor 5 is decelerated, to flow into the capacitor 10 through the DC link 3 to store power in the capacitor 10”).
Regarding claim 34, Yamada discloses the vehicle of Claim 28, wherein the vehicle comprises a commercial vehicle, tractor, trailer, or truck, and wherein the vehicle is not track-bound or overhead wire- bound (sec 0008, 0011, 0017, 0019, 0022, 0023).
Regarding claim 35, Yamada discloses a vehicle (citing, “A motor driving apparatus applicable to various types of motor driving apparatuses”; abstract; sec 0002, 0007), comprising:
an electric driving engine (electric driving engine or motor 5 acts as a motor using a voltage to drive wheels of the vehicle, and also acts as a generator to produce regenerative brakes, and also generates a current to charge a battery, etc; fig. 1; sec 0007, 0008, 0010, 0011, 0014, 0019, 0020);
means (computer, processor) for causing the electric driving engine to operate in an overrun mode (overrun mode implies when the driving machine 5 is in generator mode when applying regenerative brakes to produce a current or in a power recuperation mode; also see Yamada sec 0007, 0008, 0010, 0011, 0014, 0019, 0020), which causes the electric driving engine to generate a generator output (i.e. generating a current when the motor 5 acts as a generator especially during deceleration; fig. 1; sec 0007, 0008, 0010, 0011, 0014, 0019, 0020) by driving THE electric driving engine (5, fig. 1); and
means (computer, processor) for adjusting the generator output (using current/voltage adjustment means 40 to adjust generator output; sec 0018, 0031, 0032) to an amount required for braking the vehicle by increasing a first voltage level (see “boost regulator 20” which increases a voltage level; sec 0018, 0022) at which the electric driving engine (5; fig. 1) is operating.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 8/13/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant amended the claims, the 112 antecedent basis rejection have been vacated.
Applicant argues that the meaning of the phrase “overrun mode” is provided in claims 16, 28, and 35 and specification paragraphs 0006. The applicant further explained during the interview dated 8/4/25 that the “an overrun mode” occurs when the electric driving engine is acting as an energy generator that produces an energy output, consistent with the language of claim 16. The examiner respectfully disagrees the specification and claims merely describe what mode the engine is in, that is in the “overrun mode”. However, the meaning of “overrun mode” is not provided. It also could have been a “repetitive mode, “reciprocal mode”, “latent mode”, around the edge mode”, etc which are all meaning less and do not help with the prosecution of the claims.
Applicant’s specification at paragraphs 0006, 0010, 0047 each merely recites the term, “overrun mode” mode, but the meaning thereof is not provided. It is respectfully submitted that the phrase appeared to be conjured by applicant without proving any meaning thereto. As such one could have just replaced the phrase with any meaning less phrase such as “repetitive mode, “reciprocal mode”, “latent mode”, around the edge mode”, etc which are all meaning less and do not help with the prosecution of the claims.
Applicant was requested to provide prior art to support meaning for the term, “overrun mode”, but no prior art was provided.
Applicant argues that that 102 rejection is not proper because the prior art does not disclose an, “…..overrun mode…..”. The examiner respectfully disagrees. The claims merely recites “a vehicle in an overrun mode”, but is silent regarding the meaning of, “overrun mode”. The phrase “overrun mode” is provided in claims 16, 28, and 35 and specification paragraphs 0006. The applicant further explained during the interview dated 8/4/25 that the “an overrun mode” occurs when the electric driving engine is acting as an energy generator that produces an energy output, consistent with the language of claim 16. The examiner respectfully disagrees the specification and claims merely describe what mode the engine is in, that is in the “overrun mode”. However, the meaning of “overrun mode” is not provided. It also could have been a “repetitive mode, “reciprocal mode”, “latent mode”, around the edge mode”, etc which are all meaning less and do not help with the prosecution of the claims.
Applicant’s specification at paragraphs 0006, 0010, 0047 each merely recites the term, “overrun mode” mode, but the meaning thereof is not provided. It is respectfully submitted that the phrase appeared to be conjured by applicant without proving any meaning thereto. As such one could have just replaced the phrase with any meaning less phrase such as “repetitive mode, “reciprocal mode”, “latent mode”, around the edge mode”, etc which are all meaning less and do not help with the prosecution of the claims.
The prior art Yamada, teaches of:
a method for braking a vehicle at least partially by an electric driving engine (electric driving engine or motor 5 acts as a motor using a voltage to drive wheels of the vehicle, and also acts as a generator to produce regenerative brakes, and also generates a current to charge a battery, etc; fig. 1; sec 0007, 0008, 0010, 0011, 0014, 0019, 0020), the method comprising:
generating a generator output (i.e. generating a current when the motor 5 acts as a generator especially during deceleration; fig. 1; sec 0007, 0008, 0010, 0011, 0014, 0019, 0020) by driving THE electric driving engine (5, fig. 1) of THE vehicle in an overrun mode (overrun mode implies when the driving machine 5 is in generator mode when applying regenerative brakes to produce a current or in a power recuperation mode; also see Yamada sec 0007, 0008, 0010, 0011, 0014, 0019, 0020);
adjusting the generator output (using current/voltage adjustment means 40 to adjust generator output; sec 0018, 0031, 0032) to an amount required for braking (as a generator, motor 5 is configured to produce required amount of regenerative brakes for braking a vehicle, also to generate a required amount of current to charge a battery, etc; fig. 1; sec 0007, 0008, 0010, 0011, 0014, 0019, 0020) the vehicle by increasing a first voltage level (see “boost regulator 20” which increases a voltage level; sec 0018, 0022) at which the electric driving engine (5; fig. 1) is operating; and
providing the generator output (using current/voltage adjustment means 40 to adjust and provide the required amount of the generator output i.e. current; sec 0018, 0031, 0032) adjusted to the required amount.
It will not be fair for applicant to not discloses the meaning of “overrun mode” and then turn around and ask for the examiner or prior art to provide meaning thereof. It is double standards.
The rejections are proper and will be maintained.
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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 mailing date of this final action.
Communication
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RONNIE MANCHO whose telephone number is (571)272-6984. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs.
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, Adam Mott can be reached at 571 270 5376. 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.
//RONNIE M MANCHO/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3657