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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Claim 1 recites calculating a tire slip rate at the current moment, determining whether the slip rate is less than a threshold value, if the slip rate is less than the threshold value, continuing to correct a tire radius and acceleration, otherwise, stopping a correction process; establishing a relational expression for tire angular acceleration, an acceleration measured value, an acceleration offset and a tire radius at the current moment; building a system prediction model based on the relational expression; building a measurement system model based on the relational expression; substituting the system prediction model and the measurement system model into a Kalman filter prediction model, to acquire a corrected value of the tire radius at the current moment and a corrected value of the acceleration offset at the current moment; and calculating a vehicle velocity at the current moment based on the corrected value of the tire radius at the current moment and the corrected value of the acceleration offset at the current moment. Each of these limitations recite mathematical calculations and mathematical relationships. Claim 1 recites an abstract idea that falls into the mathematical concepts grouping.
Claim 1 does not recite any additional elements.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because no additional elements are recited.
Claim 1 does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because no additional elements are recited in the claim.
Claims 2 recites limitations for acquiring a tire linear velocity, acquiring a center point moving velocity. However, acquiring the tire linear velocity is a mathematical relationship as shown in claim 3. The additional element in claim 2 is acquiring a center point moving velocity. Claim3 recites additional elements for acquiring a tire angular velocity and a tire factory radius. Other limitations in claims 2 and 3 are mathematical calculations that are further details of the abstract idea. The additional elements recited in claims 2 and 3 are data gathering in conjunction with the abstract idea, which is insignificant extra solution activity (See MPEP 2106.05(g)). Therefore the additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. The additional elements are not significantly more than the abstract idea for the same reason. Further, acquiring data or data gathering in various manners has been recognized by the courts as well-understood, routine and conventional (See MPEP 2106.05(d), subsection II).
Claims 4-10 depend from claim 1 and only recite further details of the abstract idea and are therefore rejected for the same reason.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US Patent Application Publication 2022/0203998 to Hosoya teaches vehicle state estimation that includes determining whether a wheel is slipping.
US Patent Application Publication 2022/0153070 teaches determining effective radius for wheels on a vehicle and using a no-slip calculation.
JP 11-286272 to Braun teaches comparing a wheel slip to a threshold value in discussion of step 304 of Figure 3.
The article “Vehicle Velocity Estimation Based on Adaptive Kalman Filter” in the 2010 International Conference on Computer, Mechatronics, Control and Electronic Engineering by Chu et al. teaches estimating vehicle velocity using a Kalman filter with a vehicle model.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MANUEL L BARBEE whose telephone number is (571)272-2212. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9-5:30..
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, Shelby A Turner can be reached at 571-272-6334. 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.
/MANUEL L BARBEE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2857
Prosecution Insights