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.
Therefore, the claimed:
“…..detection of an expected change in the all-wheel drive factor (Fawn target)”
“a defined signal (AP_raw) that precedes the filtered driver-input signal (AP_int), “
“the torque limits (T_target_1_limit, T target 2 limit) for the individual target torques (T_target_1, T_target_2) of the electric drive motors (1, 2) are abruptly preset “
“the predetermined changed all-wheel drive factor (FAwp target) before the individual target torques (T_target_1, T target _2) per se are set…..”
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.
In addition, applicant’s figures 2 and 3 each appear to show a plot of mixed unrelated values. That is, the drawings each indicates that Toque is plotted against time; however, the same drawings each and the specification are describing battery power, driver input signal (AP-int), distributed power, etc without clearly indicating their relationship.
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 6-10 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.
It is not clear what all is meant be an “all-wheel drive factor (Fawd-target)”. The applicant basically copy-pasted the phrase from the specification without providing a meaning thereof. That is, regarding the limitation, “a filtered driver-input signal (AP-int) it is not clear what all is meant and encompassed by a “a filtered driver-input signal” especially in relation to the claimed, “expected change in an all-wheel drive factor (Fawd-target)”. There is not provided a filter that shows a signal input into it and then filtered.
Also, it is also not clear what all is meant and encompassed by “a defined signal (AP_raw)”
The following limitations are basically copy-pasted from the specification without any explanation thereof:
“…..detection of an expected change in the all-wheel drive factor (Fawn target)”
“a defined signal (AP_raw) that precedes the filtered driver-input signal (AP_int), “
“the torque limits (T_target_1_limit, T target 2 limit) for the individual target torques (T_target_1, T_target_2) of the electric drive motors (1, 2) are abruptly preset “
“the predetermined changed all-wheel drive factor (FAwp target) before the individual target torques (T_target_1, T target _2) per se are set…..”
There is no explanation or a showing how detection is done since no sensors are provided to detect what is unknown such as an “all-wheel drive factor (Fawn target)”
There is no explanation or a showing how a defined signal precedes a filtered driver input signal. How is the filtering done in reference to the signal that precedes?
How are the claimed “target torques….” abruptly preset?
What is, “predetermined changed all-wheel drive factor (FAwp target)”, there is no explanation provided thereof.
The rest of the claims are rejected for depending on a rejected base claim or for having similar deficiencies at the base claim.
A search was conducted for the above limitations and the results show that terms are not consistent in meaning as commonly obvious in the art.
Claims 6-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being incomplete for omitting essential structural cooperative relationships of elements, such omission amounting to a gap between the necessary structural connections. See MPEP § 2172.01. The omitted structural cooperative relationships are as follows:
Claim 6 recites the following limitations;
“…..detection of an expected change in the all-wheel drive factor (Fawn target)”
“a defined signal (AP_raw) that precedes the filtered driver-input signal (AP_int), “
“the torque limits (T_target_1_limit, T target 2 limit) for the individual target torques (T_target_1, T_target_2) of the electric drive motors (1, 2) are abruptly preset “
“the predetermined changed all-wheel drive factor (FAwp target) before the individual target torques (T_target_1, T target _2) per se are set…..”
There is no cooperative relationships of elements in the above limitations, such omission amounting to a gap between the necessary structural connections.
The rest of the claims are rejected for depending on a rejected base claim or for having similar deficiencies at the base claim.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 10/24/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant traverses the drawing objection on the basis of MPEP 1825. According to applicant’s arguments, "[d]rawings newly executed according to national standards may not be required during the national phase if the drawings filed with the international application comply with PCT Rule 11."
Examiner respectfully disagrees, MPEP 1825, rule 11 is directed to the requirement of physical aspects of the drawings to be submitted with the application. Applicant met the drawing requirement by submitting the physical aspects of the drawings as required by MPEP 1825, but applicant did not meet to US requirement which requires that the drawings show all claimed limitations. That is according to MPEP 1825, rule 11 drawings are required to be present in the application and must adhere to certain rules like color, lines, hatching, labelling, etc; these are physical aspects of the drawing. In addition, the drawings MUST also be submitted according to US rules. As such applicant is basing their arguments on a partial rule instead of the rule as a whole.
Contrary to applicant’s argument the drawing objections imposed in the rejection were not directed to the physical aspects of the drawings e.g. the examiner did not request applicant to color or not color the drawings, put or not put hatchings, or request that lines in the drawings must, ordinarily, be drawn with the aid of a drafting instrument and must be executed in black, uniformly thick and well-defined lines or that color drawings are not acceptable.
Rather, the drawing objection in the office action dated 06/02/2025 was directed to DRAWINGS NOT SHOWING CLAIMED LIMITATIONS as required by 37 CFR 1.8(a) rather than on structural issues like color, lines, etc.
According to MPEP 1825, the handling of drawings in national stage applications is governed by PCT Rule 11 AND U.S. drawing requirements.
Applicant is requested to note that the rules are according to PCT rule 11 and US drawing requirements.
If the drawings do not show or the claimed limitations then how is the examiner supposed to understand the invention to examine it?
MPEP 1825, rule 11 is pasted below
37 CFR 1.437 The drawings.
(a) Drawings are required when they are necessary for the understanding of the invention (PCT Art. 7).
(b) The physical requirements for drawings are set forth in PCT Rule 11 and shall be adhered to.
The international application must contain drawings when they are necessary for the understanding of the invention. Moreover where, without drawings being actually necessary for the understanding of the invention, its nature admits of illustration by drawings, the applicant may include such drawings and any designated Office may require the applicant to file such drawings during the national phase. Flow sheets and diagrams are considered drawings.
Drawings must be presented on one or more separate sheets. They may not be included in the description, the claims or the abstract. They may not contain text matter, except a single word or words when absolutely indispensable. Note that if the drawings contain text matter not in English but in a language accepted under PCT Rule 12.1(a) by the International Bureau as a Receiving Office, the international application will be transmitted to the International Bureau for processing in its capacity as a Receiving Office. See 37 CFR 1.412(c)(6)(ii). If the drawings contain text matter not in a language accepted under PCT Rule 12.1(a) by the International Bureau as a Receiving Office, the application will be denied an international filing date.
All lines in the drawings must, ordinarily, be drawn with the aid of a drafting instrument and must be executed in black, uniformly thick and well-defined lines. Color drawings are not acceptable. PCT Rules 11.10 to 11.13 contain detailed requirements as to further physical requirements of drawings. Drawings newly executed according to national standards may not be required during the national phase if the drawings filed with the international application comply with PCT Rule 11. The examiner may require new drawings where the drawings which were accepted during the international phase did not comply with PCT Rule 11. A file reference may be indicated in the upper left corner on each sheet of the drawings.
All of the figures constituting the drawings must be grouped together on a sheet or sheets without waste of space, preferably in an upright position and clearly separated from each other. Where the drawings cannot be presented satisfactorily in an upright position, they may be placed sideways, with the tops of the drawings on the left-hand side of the sheet.
The usable surface of sheets (which must be of A4 size) must not exceed 26.2 cm x 17.0 cm. The sheets must not contain frames around the usable surface. The minimum margins which must be observed are: top and left side: 2.5 cm; right side: 1.5 cm; bottom: 1.0 cm.
All sheets of drawings must be numbered in the center of either the top or the bottom of each sheet but not in the margin in numbers larger than those used as reference signs in order to avoid confusion with the latter. For drawings, a separate series of page numbers is to be used. The number of each sheet of the drawings must consist of two Arabic numerals separated by an oblique stroke, the first being the sheet number and the second being the total number of sheets of drawings. For example, “2/5” would be used for the second sheet of drawings where there are five in all.
Different figures on the sheets of drawings must be numbered in Arabic numerals consecutively and independently of the numbering of the sheets and, if possible, in the order in which they appear. This numbering should be preceded by the expression “Fig.”
In situations where one or more sheets are added, each sheet shall be identified by the number of the preceding sheet followed by a slant and then by another Arabic numeral such that the additional sheets are numbered consecutively, starting always with number one for the first sheet added after an unchanged sheet (e.g., 10/1, 15/1, 15/2, 15/3, etc.). See Administrative Instructions Section 311.
The PCT makes no provision for photographs. Nevertheless, they are allowed by the International Bureau where it is impossible to present in a drawing what is to be shown (for instance, crystalline structures). Where, exceptionally, photographs are submitted, they must be on sheets of A4 size, they must be black and white, and they must respect the minimum margins and admit of direct reproduction. Color photographs are not accepted.
The procedure for rectification of obvious mistakes in the drawings is explained in MPEP § 1836. The omission of an entire sheet of drawings cannot be rectified without affecting the international filing date, except in applications filed on or after April 1, 2007, where, if the application, on its initial receipt date, contained a priority claim and a proper incorporation by reference statement, the original international filing date may be retained if the submitted correction was completely contained in the earlier application. See PCT Rules 4.18 and 20.6. Rectifications of obvious mistakes are not considered to be amendments.
The drawings can be amended during the international phase only if the applicant files a Demand for international preliminary examination. The drawings can also be amended during the national phase. The amendment shall not go beyond the disclosure in the international application as filed. See PCT Article 34(2)(b).
If drawings are referred to in an international application and are not found in the search copy file, the examiner should refer the application to a Quality Assurance Specialist in his or her Technology Center or a PCT Special Program Examiner. See Administrative Instructions Section 310.
In furtherance, applicant argues that the claimed limitations are shown on the drawings. Therefore, the claimed:
“detection of an expected change in the all-wheel drive factor (Fawn target)",
"a defined signal (AP_raw) that precedes the filtered driver-input signal (AP_int), " "the torque limits (T_target_1_limit, T target 2 limit) for the individual target torques (T_target_1, T_target_2) of the electric drive motors (1, 2) are abruptly preset ",
"the predetermined changed all-wheel drive factor (FAwp target) before the individual target torques (T_target_1, T target_2) per se are set....."
must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Applicant’s arguments are pointing to partial aspects of the requested drawing requirements. If the signals are filtered then where is the filter?, where is the, --preceding of the signal --?, where is the “--before the individual torques --" ?
Applicant further traverses the 112 rejections. The antecedent basis rejection has been vacated based on applicant’s arguments. The examiner respectfully disagrees with arguments pertaining to the rest of the invention. The claims are merely copy pasted from the specification to the claims without explanation. In addition, the paragraph below appears to be incomplete. That is claim 6 recites, “wherein the control unit comprises a torque-limiting module which, ………..upon detection of………………………………….., according to the predetermined changed all-wheel drive factor (FAWD target) before the individual target torques (T_target_1, T_target_2) per se are set.” The limitation is incomplete. The claim recites the phrase, “wherein the control unit comprises a torque-limiting module which,…”, which does what ?
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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