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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 2/20/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that LeTurneau (US 3633701, Letur from now on) does not mention “wherein at least one connecting means is provided between the at least one sensor of two wheel units to deliver a measured variable that can be detected by the at least one sensor device paired with each wheel unit when the deflection of the wheel units relative to each other exceeds a specified deviation”, however, examiner would like to point out that Letur does mention a programmer 26, comparator 67 and multiplier means 23 , wherein one of them or all of them can be considered to be a connecting means, provided between the sensor 25 and the wheel units (see figure 1) to deliver a measured variable (measured by the sensor) that can be detected by the sensor device paired with each wheel unit when the deflection of the wheel units (steering or turning of the wheels) relative to the each other exceeds a deviation (see Col. 2, lines 48-58 and Col. 4, lines 25-53). Examiner would also like to point out that the entirety of claim 4 was not added to claim 1, the essential phrase “at least one connecting means including at least one flexible connecting means”.
The indefinite rejections are maintained and are repeated below with the adjusted (due to the amendment to the claims) art rejection.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
2. 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 1-17 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 claims 1, 9, and 10 state “at least one sensor device” in line 4 for claim 1, in line 5 for claim 9 and in line 6 for claim 10, then the claims state “the sensor devices” in lines 11 for claim 1, in line 13 for claim 9 and in lines 11 and 13 for claim 10, wherein having “at least one sensor” followed by “the sensor devices” leads to questions on how many sensors are present, one or more than one; appropriate correction is required.
Regarding claims 2-8 and 11-17, they are further rejected as indefinite, as depending from a rejected parent claim, see above.
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.
Claim(s) 1-3,5,7,9-12,14 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by LeTurneau (US 3633701, Letur from now on). Regarding claim 1, Letur discloses a steering system ( see figure 1 and Col. 2, lines 25-27) for a vehicle, comprising:
at least one pair of wheel units (11,13) configured to be actuated and deflected (steering angle) independently of each other;
each wheel unit (11,13) being paired with at least one sensor device (25, see Col. 2, lines 42-48 and Col. 4, lines 25-36 as the sensor device senses a degree of steer or better said an angle) for detecting a deviation from a specified deflection (change of steering angle) of the wheel units relative to each other (see Col. 4, lines 37-42); at least one, wheel unit being paired with at least one actuation device (21,61) for actuating the wheel unit, and
at least one control unit (67,97) configured to actuate the at least one actuation device when the sensor devices detect a specified deviation (steered to a degree) of the specified deflection of the wheel units relative to each other (see Col. 2 lines 16-24, Col. 4 lines 37-53 and Col. 9 lines 46-75 to Col. 10 lines 1-17);
Letur further mentions a programmer 26, comparator 67 and multiplier means 23 , wherein one of them or all of them can be considered to be a connecting means, provided between the sensor 25 and the wheel units (see figure 1) to deliver a measured variable (measured by the sensor) that can be detected by the sensor device paired with each wheel unit when the deflection of the wheel units (steering or turning of the wheels) relative to the each other exceeds a deviation (see Col. 2, lines 48-58 and Col. 4, lines 25-53).
Regarding claim 2, wherein at least one connecting means (frame of vehicle as seen in figure 1) is provided between the sensor devices (25, see figure 1) of two wheel units, which is designed to provide a tensile or compressive load to the sensor devices (as the frame of the vehicle flexes and contracts due to forces acting on the frame itself) when the deflection of the wheel units relative to each other exceeds a specified deviation.
Regarding claim 3, wherein at least two connecting means (multiple frame pieces placed horizontally between the wheel units 11,13, see figure 1) are provided between the sensor device of the wheel units, wherein
Regarding claim 5, ,wherein the sensor devices (25) comprise sensor means configured to detect a respective deflection (steering angle) of a wheel unit and to transmit same by means of at least one of a wireless or wired signal connection (wired as shown in figure 5) to the control unit (67,97, see figure 5).
Regarding claim 7, wherein the wheel units are not connected via a mechanical steering means (as each of them is steered individually, see figure 2).
Regarding claim 9, Letur discloses a steering system ( see figure 1 and Col. 2, lines 25-27) for a vehicle, comprising:
at least one pair of wheel units (11,13) configured to be actuated and deflected (steering angle) independently of each other;
each wheel unit (11,13) being paired with at least one sensor device (25, see Col. 2, lines 42-48 and Col. 4, lines 25-36 as the sensor device senses a degree of steer or better said an angle) for detecting a deviation from a specified deflection (change of steering angle) of the wheel units relative to each other (see Col. 4, lines 37*42); at least one, wheel unit being paired with at least one actuation device (21,61) for actuating the wheel unit, and
at least one control unit (67,97) configured to actuate the at least one actuation device when the sensor devices detect a specified deviation (steered to a degree) of the specified deflection of the wheel units relative to each other (see Col. 2 lines 16-24, Col. 4 lines 37-53 and Col. 9 lines 46-75 to Col. 10 lines 1-17).
Letur further mentions a programmer 26, comparator 67 and multiplier means 23 , wherein one of them or all of them can be considered to be a connecting means, provided between the sensor 25 and the wheel units (see figure 1) to deliver a measured variable (measured by the sensor) that can be detected by the sensor device paired with each wheel unit when the deflection of the wheel units (steering or turning of the wheels) relative to the each other exceeds a deviation (see Col. 2, lines 48-58 and Col. 4, lines 25-53).
Regarding claim 10, the use of the apparatus disclosed by Letur can be seen as the method being performed, Letur discloses a steering system ( see figure 1 and Col. 2, lines 25-27) for a vehicle, comprising:
at least one pair of wheel units (11,13) configured to be actuated and deflected (steering angle) independently of each other;
each wheel unit (11,13) being paired with at least one sensor device (25, see Col. 2, lines 42-48 and Col. 4, lines 25-36 as the sensor device senses a degree of steer or better said an angle) for detecting a deviation from a specified deflection (change of steering angle) of the wheel units relative to each other (see Col. 4, lines 37*42); at least one, wheel unit being paired with at least one actuation device (21,61) for actuating the wheel unit, and
at least one control unit (67,97) configured to actuate the at least one actuation device when the sensor devices detect a specified deviation (steered to a degree) of the specified deflection of the wheel units relative to each other (see Col. 2 lines 16-24, Col. 4 lines 37-53 and Col. 9 lines 46-75 to Col. 10 lines 1-17).
Letur further mentions a programmer 26, comparator 67 and multiplier means 23 , wherein one of them or all of them can be considered to be a connecting means, provided between the sensor 25 and the wheel units (see figure 1) to deliver a measured variable (measured by the sensor) that can be detected by the sensor device paired with each wheel unit when the deflection of the wheel units (steering or turning of the wheels) relative to the each other exceeds a deviation (see Col. 2, lines 48-58 and Col. 4, lines 25-53).
Regarding claim 11, wherein at least one connecting means (frame of vehicle as seen in figure 1) is provided between the sensor devices (25, see figure 1) of two wheel units, which is designed to provide a tensile or compressive load to the sensor devices when the deflection of the wheel units relative to each other exceeds a specified deviation.
Regarding claim 12, wherein at least two connecting means (multiple frame pieces placed horizontally between the wheel units 11,13, see figure 1) are provided between the sensor device of the wheel units, wherein relative to each other exceeds a specified deviation (when a wheel unit has to be corrected, see Col. 4 lines 37-53).
Regarding claim 14, ,wherein the sensor devices (25) comprise sensor means configured to detect a respective deflection (steering angle) of a wheel unit and to transmit same by means of at least one of a wireless or wired signal connection (wired as shown in figure 5) to the control unit (67,97, see figure 5).
Regarding claim 16, wherein the wheel units are not connected via a mechanical steering means (as each of them is steered individually, see figure 2).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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) 6 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Letur in view of Suzuki (US 2020/0114961). Letur fails to show a steer-by-wire steering system without a central control unit. However Suzuki discloses a rotation detector steering system comprising a steer-by-wire system (see Par. 0021) with a couple of control units (40,45,60 and 61, there is no central control unit). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Letur by replacing the wired system for a steer-by-wire system utilizing more than one control unit, in order to modernize the steering system as steer-by-wire system were not available when Letur’s invention was created, additionally a person of ordinary skill in the art would modify Letur by adding a steer-by-wire system in order to prevent malfunction due to wires decaying or wires being cut.
Claim(s) 8 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Letur in view of Sugasawa (US 4778023). Letur shows a second pair of wheel units (15,17), however, the second pair of wheel units does not steer in relation to the first pair of wheel units. However, Sugasawa discloses a steering system with a first pair of steered wheel units (19,20) and a second pair of steered wheel units (22,21, see figures 1 and 2). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Letur by adding a second pair of steered wheel units, in order to be able to provide different steering angles in between one set of wheels and the other, so as to be able to steer the vehicle more efficiently in tight spaces or to provide a steering advantage over other vehicles.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4 and 13 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The prior art of record did not include a “flexible connecting means” which is being interpreted in light of the specification as a wire, rubber band, gas-filled hose or equivalent (see Par. 0016).
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Marlon A Arce whose telephone number is (571)272-1341. The examiner can normally be reached 8AM - 4:30PM.
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, Valentin Neacsu can be reached at 571-272-6265. 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.
/MARLON A ARCE/Examiner, Art Unit 3611 /VALENTIN NEACSU/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3611