DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
This Office Action is in response to RCE and Amendment filed on 4/9/2026.
Claims 1-7, 9, 14, 19 were canceled.
Claims 8, 10-13, 15-18, 20-22 are pending for examination.
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 4/9/2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
(A) Applicant’s arguments, see pages 8-10, filed and “Applicant has amended independent claim 8 to include the limitations of claim 9 (now cancelled), and to further clarify certain aspects. In particular, claim 8 now recites: controlling the torque of the at least one first electric drive motor of the primary electric motor such that a direction of the gradient for adjusting the torque of the at least one first electric drive motor of the primary electric motor in the course of a change in the target all-wheel drive factor does not proceed counter to a direction of the gradient of the driver-input signal” and “Neither Falkenstein nor Bramson, alone or in combination, teaches or suggests controlling the torque of the at least one first electric drive motor of the primary electric motor such that its gradient direction does not proceed counter to the driver-input gradient direction. Accordingly, Applicant respectfully requests withdrawal of the rejection of independent claims 8, 13, and 18, and claims 10-12, 15-17, and 20-22 dependent thereon, and allowance of same” on 4/9/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 8-9, 11, 13-14, 16, 18-19, and 21 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn.
As to point (A), upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Roques (US20230339489A1).
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 8, 11, 13, 16, 18, 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Falkenstein (US20100167869A1) in view of Bramson (US20150298574A1) and Roques (US20230339489A1).
In regards to claim 8, Falkenstein teaches A control device for operating an all-wheel drive vehicle,
wherein the all-wheel drive vehicle has at least one first electric drive motor as a primary electric motor assigned to a primary axle and at least one second electric drive motor as a secondary electric motor assigned to a secondary axle(Falkenstein: Fig. 1 Elements 11 and 19; Para 17 “Internal combustion engine 7 and first electric machine 11 are drive machines 7, 11 of first drive train 5, which is driving first powered axle 3”; Para 18 “A second electric machine 19 is situated in a second drive train 18, which drives second powered axle 4”),
wherein the control device comprises at least one electronic control unit (Falkenstein: Fig. 1 Elements 26; Para 18 “A control unit 26 connected to control devices (not shown) of internal combustion engine 7 and electric machines 11, 19 coordinates their torques and/or torque gradients”) configured to:
carry out a torque gradient limiting function such that, in response to a change in a target all-wheel drive factor due to a defined driver-input signal(Falkenstein: Para 5 “in rapid torque changes or high torque gradients, the torque requested by the driver via the driving pedal is filtered, using a low-pass filter, with the aid of a reference-forming unit, and/or its torque gradient is restricted to a maximum torque gradient”; Para 10 “the total torque of the drive machines of the first drive train is adapted within specified limits of change, by adjusting the torque and/or power of the first electric machine and/or by modifying the ignition angle of the internal combustion engine. The adaptation is preferably implemented by a torque and/or power adaptation of the first electric machine”):
second, in the course of a subsequent adjustment of the all-wheel drive factor, a gradient limitation for a maximum permissible adjustment of a torque of the at least one first electric drive motor of the primary electric motor is limited to be no more than a gradient of a torque request from the driver-input signal(Falkenstein: Para 7 “a restriction of the torque gradient to a maximum torque gradient always refers to the restriction to a maximum amount of the torque gradient. For this purpose, the restriction takes place in particular with the aid of at least one reference forming unit, which in rapid torque changes or at high torque gradients, filters the torque requested by the driver via the driving pedal by means of a low-pass filter, and/or which restricts its torque gradient to a maximum torque gradient”; Para 5 “For comfort-related reasons, this transition should be a “smooth” transition, which is achieved by restricting the gradient of the resulting total torque of the drive machines of the first drive train during its zero crossing. This, too, is the task of the reference-forming element. It coordinates the drive machines, especially the drive torques of the drive machines (internal combustion engine and first electric machine) of the first drive train”; i.e. restricting the gradient of the resulting total torque of the drive machines would encompass the gradient limitation for a maximum permissible adjustment of a torque of the primary motor).
Yet Falkenstein do not explicitly teach first, a new target all-wheel drive factor is abruptly predefined, wherein the target all-wheel drive factor defines a target percentage of a total torque output by the combination of the at least one first electric drive motor of the primary electric motor and the at least one second electric drive motor of the secondary electric motor that is output by the at least one first electric drive motor of the primary electric motor; and
control the torque of the at least one first electric drive motor of the primary electric motor such that a direction of the gradient for adjusting the torque of the at least one first electric drive motor of the primary electric motor in the course of a change in the target all-wheel drive factor does not proceed counter to a direction of the gradient of the driver-input signal.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Bramson teaches first, a new target all-wheel drive factor is abruptly predefined, wherein the target all-wheel drive factor defines a target percentage of a total torque output by the combination of the at least one first electric drive motor of the primary electric motor and the at least one second electric drive motor of the secondary electric motor that is output by the at least one first electric drive motor of the primary electric motor (Bramson: Fig. 8; Para 34 “For any particular value (or range) of total torque demand, different proportional splits of the torque between the two motors can be utilized. The efficiencies obtained at each of the potential relative contributions (i.e., ratios) can be examined in table 53 in order to identify the contribution ratio which corresponds to the highest overall efficiency. For each total torque demand value, the possible combinations of torque contributions appear as a chain running across table 53. For example, a first chain 54 of highlighted cells in table 53 correspond to a total torque generation of 30 N-m. The highest efficiency in chain 54 occurs with a 90.9% efficiency when the first motor/generator contribution is 30 N-m and the second motor/generator contribution is zero. Thus, the corresponding ratio of torque to be contributed by the second motor/generator under these conditions would be 0.0”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the control device for operating an all-wheel drive vehicle of Falkenstein with the feature of first, a new target all-wheel drive factor is abruptly predefined, wherein the target all-wheel drive factor defines a target percentage of a total torque output by the combination of the at least one first electric drive motor of the primary electric motor and the at least one second electric drive motor of the secondary electric motor that is output by the at least one first electric drive motor of the primary electric motor disclosed by Bramson. One would be motivated to do so for the benefit of “provide the requested torque at the best-possible efficiency, which can be higher than the efficiency of the single motor solution for most operating points” (Bramson: Para 22).
Yet the combination of Falkenstein and Bramson do not explicitly teach
control the torque of the at least one first electric drive motor of the primary electric motor such that a direction of the gradient for adjusting the torque of the at least one first electric drive motor of the primary electric motor in the course of a change in the target all-wheel drive factor does not proceed counter to a direction of the gradient of the driver-input signal.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Roques teaches control the torque of the at least one first electric drive motor of the primary electric motor such that a direction of the gradient for adjusting the torque of the at least one first electric drive motor of the primary electric motor in the course of a change in the target all-wheel drive factor does not proceed counter to a direction of the gradient of the driver-input signal (Roques: Fig. 8; Para 83 “The first torque source comprises the engine 202 and optionally, an electric machine such as the first electric machine 216. The second torque source comprises an electric machine such as the second electric machine 212. Alternatively, the vehicle 10 may be an all-electric vehicle, and both torque sources may comprise electric machines”; Para 6 “the control system is configured to: receive a total torque request for total driven wheel torque; produce a first torque request for the first torque source and a second torque request for the second torque source, in dependence on the total torque request for the total driven wheel torque; and when at least one of the first and second torque requests is not satisfiable modify at least one of the first and second torque requests to enable a sum of the first axle wheel torque and the second axle wheel torque to approach or satisfy the total torque request, wherein the modification of at least one of the torque requests is controlled by at least one torque rate modifier configured to increase or decrease a rate of change of at least one of the torque requests”; Para 125 “Line C represents a first torque request for a first torque source, such as an electric machine, without lash crossing protection and without consequent modified torque shaping. Line D represents how the first torque request would look with lash-crossing protection and with consequent modified torque shaping (block 412 of the method 400)”; i.e. the figure indicated that the direction of the gradient for adjusting the torque of the at least one first electric drive motor (Line D First torque request with LCP) does not proceed counter to a direction of the gradient of the driver-input signal (Line A total torque request)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the control device for operating an all-wheel drive vehicle of the combination of Falkenstein and Bramson with the feature of control the torque of the at least one first electric drive motor of the primary electric motor such that a direction of the gradient for adjusting the torque of the at least one first electric drive motor of the primary electric motor in the course of a change in the target all-wheel drive factor does not proceed counter to a direction of the gradient of the driver-input signal disclosed by Roques. One would be motivated to do so for the benefit of “an efficient and effective method of enabling the torque sources to compensate for shortfalls in each other’s torque or their combined torque when attempting to fulfill between them a total torque request” (Roques: Para 7).
In regards to claim 11, the combination of Falkenstein, Bramson, and Roques teaches The control device according to claim 8, and Roques further teaches wherein the at least one electronic control unit is configured to: at a constant driver-input signal the torque of the at least one second electric drive motor of the secondary electric motor with a higher gradient than that of the driver-input signal(Roques: Fig. 8; Para 83 “The first torque source comprises the engine 202 and optionally, an electric machine such as the first electric machine 216. The second torque source comprises an electric machine such as the second electric machine 212. Alternatively, the vehicle 10 may be an all-electric vehicle, and both torque sources may comprise electric machines”; Para 6 “the control system is configured to: receive a total torque request for total driven wheel torque; produce a first torque request for the first torque source and a second torque request for the second torque source, in dependence on the total torque request for the total driven wheel torque; and when at least one of the first and second torque requests is not satisfiable modify at least one of the first and second torque requests to enable a sum of the first axle wheel torque and the second axle wheel torque to approach or satisfy the total torque request, wherein the modification of at least one of the torque requests is controlled by at least one torque rate modifier configured to increase or decrease a rate of change of at least one of the torque requests”; Para 126 “Line E represents the unmodified second torque request for the second torque source, such as the engine 202. Line F represents the modified second torque request, with modified torque shaping (block 412 of the method 400)”; i.e. at a constant driver-input signal (Line A total torque request) the torque of the at least one second electric drive motor with a higher gradient(Line F second torque request with LCP) than that of the driver-input signal).
As per claim 13, it recites A non-transitory computer readable medium having stored thereon a program for an electronic control unit that, when executed by the electronic control unit, causes the electronic control unit to perform a method having limitations similar to those of claim 8 and therefore is rejected on the same basis. Falkenstein further teaches A non-transitory computer readable medium having stored thereon a program for an electronic control unit that, when executed by the electronic control unit , causes the electronic control unit to perform a method(Falkenstein: Para 12 “The present invention also provides a control unit for implementing at least one of the aforementioned methods. The control unit coordinates especially the torques and/or the torque gradients of the drive machines of the first drive train, and the torque and the torque gradient of the second electric machine”; i.e. control unit would have a computer readable medium which stores instruction for the control unit to perform the methods)
As per claim 16, it recites A non-transitory computer readable medium having stored thereon a program for an electronic control unit that, when executed by the electronic control unit, causes the electronic control unit to perform a method having limitations similar to those of claim 11 and therefore is rejected on the same basis. Falkenstein further teaches A non-transitory computer readable medium having stored thereon a program for an electronic control unit that, when executed by the electronic control unit , causes the electronic control unit to perform a method(Falkenstein: Para 12 “The present invention also provides a control unit for implementing at least one of the aforementioned methods. The control unit coordinates especially the torques and/or the torque gradients of the drive machines of the first drive train, and the torque and the torque gradient of the second electric machine”; i.e. control unit would have a computer readable medium which stores instruction for the control unit to perform the methods)
As per claim 18, it recites A method for operating an all-wheel drive vehicle having limitations similar to those of claim 8 and therefore is rejected on the same basis.
As per claim 21, it recites A method for operating an all-wheel drive vehicle having limitations similar to those of claim 11 and therefore is rejected on the same basis.
Claim 10, 12, 15, 17, 20, 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Falkenstein ( US20100167869A1) in view of Bramson (US20150298574A1) and Roques (US20230339489A1) fruther in view of Falkenstein945 (US20090133945A1).
In regards to claim 10, the combination of Falkenstein, Bramson, and Roques teaches The control device according to claim 8.
Yet the combination of Falkenstein, Bramson, and Roques do not explicitly teach wherein the at least one electronic control unit is configured to: hold the torque of the at least one second electric drive motor of the secondary electric motor constant in response to a limiting effect on the adjustment of the torque of the at least one first electric drive motor of the primary electric motor.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Falkenstein945 teaches wherein the at least one electronic control unit is configured to: hold the torque of the at least one second electric drive motor of the secondary electric motor constant in response to a limiting effect on the adjustment of the torque of the at least one first electric drive motor of the primary electric motor (Falkenstein945: Fig. 3 Element tDEl1 and tDEl2; Para 25 “Via an output 18, torque-gradient restricter block 16 outputs a torque-gradient-restricted first electric machine setpoint torque tDEl1 also to second differential block 17 and additionally to a second summing block 19”; Para 26 “Electric machine setpoint torque tDE1 is also denoted as second electric machine setpoint torque tDEl2 for better differentiation from first electric machine setpoint torque tDEl1”; i.e. the figure indicted second electric machine setpoint torque tDEl2 holding constant while first electric machine setpoint torque tDEl1 being adjusted).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the control device for operating an all-wheel drive vehicle of the combination of Falkenstein, Bramson, and Roques with the feature of wherein the at least one electronic control unit is configured to: hold the torque of the at least one second electric drive motor of the secondary electric motor constant in response to a limiting effect on the adjustment of the torque of the at least one first electric drive motor of the primary electric motor disclosed by Falkenstein945. One would be motivated to do so for the benefit of “the combustion engine is operated at the ideal basic torque, for efficiency- and emission-related reasons, in particular, and/or the torque gradient of the setpoint torque of the electric machine is restricted for reasons related to service life” (Falkenstein945: Para 10).
In regards to claim 12, the combination of Falkenstein, Bramson, and Roques teaches The control device according to claim 8, and Falkenstein945 further teaches wherein the at least one electronic control unit is configured to: as the target all-wheel drive factor increases in a negative torque range, hold the torque of the primary motor constant until a negative torque of the secondary motor has been increased in order to reach the new target all-wheel drive factor(Falkenstein945: Fig.3; Para 8 “For example, if the first power unit in a coordination stage is unable to satisfy the demands, then the following coordination stage will be applied. It has a broader operating range than the preceding coordination stage. In order to satisfy the sum of the demands on the power units, one of the other power units, e.g., the second power unit, must satisfy a higher demand. Thus, there results at least one “cross path”, which forwards a torque component unable to be set by the one power unit, to another power unit. If the setpoint torque of the one power unit is restricted because of an operating limit of an operating range in one coordination stage, then the difference of unrestricted and restricted setpoint torque, in particular, is switched to the other power unit in addition”; Para 24 “First differential block 12 outputs this electro-machine torque demand 1DEl to an input 15 of a torque-gradient restricter block 16 and a second differential block 17. Via an output 18, torque-gradient restricter block 16 outputs a torque-gradient-restricted first electric machine setpoint torque tDEl1 also to second differential block 17 and additionally to a second summing block 19”; i.e. Figure 3 indicated the electro-machine torque demand tDEl increases in a negative torque range; i.e. the one power unit is restricted because of an operating limit of an operating range(hold the torque of the primary motor constant) then the difference of unrestricted and restricted setpoint torque, in particular, is switched to the other power unit in addition(a negative torque of the secondary motor has been increased in order to reach the new target all-wheel drive factor)). The Examiner supplies the same rationale for the combination of references Falkenstein, Bramson, Roques, and Falkenstein945 as in Claim 10 above.
As per claim 15, it recites A non-transitory computer readable medium having stored thereon a program for an electronic control unit that, when executed by the electronic control unit, causes the electronic control unit to perform a method having limitations similar to those of claim 10 and therefore is rejected on the same basis. Falkenstein further teaches A non-transitory computer readable medium having stored thereon a program for an electronic control unit that, when executed by the electronic control unit , causes the electronic control unit to perform a method(Falkenstein: Para 12 “The present invention also provides a control unit for implementing at least one of the aforementioned methods. The control unit coordinates especially the torques and/or the torque gradients of the drive machines of the first drive train, and the torque and the torque gradient of the second electric machine”; i.e. control unit would have a computer readable medium which stores instruction for the control unit to perform the methods)
As per claim 17, it recites A non-transitory computer readable medium having stored thereon a program for an electronic control unit that, when executed by the electronic control unit, causes the electronic control unit to perform a method having limitations similar to those of claim 12 and therefore is rejected on the same basis. Falkenstein further teaches A non-transitory computer readable medium having stored thereon a program for an electronic control unit that, when executed by the electronic control unit , causes the electronic control unit to perform a method(Falkenstein: Para 12 “The present invention also provides a control unit for implementing at least one of the aforementioned methods. The control unit coordinates especially the torques and/or the torque gradients of the drive machines of the first drive train, and the torque and the torque gradient of the second electric machine”; i.e. control unit would have a computer readable medium which stores instruction for the control unit to perform the methods)
As per claim 20, it recites A method for operating an all-wheel drive vehicle having limitations similar to those of claim 10 and therefore is rejected on the same basis.
As per claim 22, it recites A method for operating an all-wheel drive vehicle having limitations similar to those of claim 12 and therefore is rejected on the same basis.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Tang (US20170253143A1) disclosed system 400 includes a torque and traction controller 407 that determines the power, i.e., voltage, current, and waveform, that each of the power control modules supplies to their respective motors, and thus the torque and power that each motor applies to the wheel or wheels to which it is coupled. In order to calculate the appropriate power to be supplied to each motor, and thus the torque/power to be supplied to the individual wheels, torque and traction controller 407 is coupled to, and receives data from, a variety of sensors throughout the vehicle.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WENYUAN YANG whose telephone number is (571)272-5455. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 9:00AM-5:00PM EST.
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, Hitesh Patel can be reached at (571) 270-5442. 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.
/W.Y./Examiner, Art Unit 3667
/Hitesh Patel/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3667
6/17/26
Prosecution Insights