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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because many of the figures contain images which are difficult to read (fig. 4) or text which is too small to decipher. Numbers, letters, and reference characters must measure at least .32 cm. (1/8 inch) in height. They should not be placed in the drawing so as to interfere with its comprehension. Therefore, they should not cross or mingle with the lines. They should not be placed upon hatched or shaded surfaces. When necessary, such as indicating a surface or cross section, a reference character may be underlined and a blank space may be left in the hatching or shading where the character occurs so that it appears distinct. See CFR 1.84(p)(3).
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 1-14 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.
Regarding claim 1, 12 and 14, the claims recite the limitation of “assuming actual road driving,” however it is unclear as to what is meant by the limitation of “assuming.” For the purposes of examination, it will be interpreted as based on real driving conditions or similar.
Regarding claim 1, it is not clear if the acquisition step of acquiring response data is in response to the input from the previous step. If not, it is unclear as to what the response would be in relation to. For the purposes of examination, it is assumed that the data is input to the vehicle element and a response is generated.
Regarding claim 2, the claim recites the limitation that the vehicle element is given an input including a parameter “related to an atmospheric pressure assuming actual road driving.” It is not clear if the parameter is atmospheric pressure, or merely just “related to” it and how it would be related. Additionally, similar to claim 1, it is not clear as to what is meant by the limitation of assuming actual road driving.
Regarding claim 3, it is not clear as to what the “variation range” of each of the elements refers to.
Regarding claim 4, the term “given to” is unclear and will be interpreted as -input- or similar.
Regarding claim 5, the term “given to” is unclear and will be interpreted as -input- or similar.
Regarding claim 6, it is unclear if the “environment variation device that is connected to the vehicle element” varies the temperature and pressure of the chamber or of the vehicle element.
Regarding claim 8, the claim recites three different scenarios of when the vehicle element is: 1) a vehicle including an engine or a part of the vehicle, 2) a vehicle including a secondary battery or a part of the vehicle, and 3) a vehicle including at least a fuel battery or a part of the vehicle. These appear to be alternatives for different types of vehicle elements; however, no such elements have been previously disclosed and there is therefore no indication that the vehicle element would be one of the three listed and it is not clear as to what steps would be taken in the instance where it is not. Additionally, it is not clear whether the “or a part of the vehicle” refers to each of the individual vehicle types, or to any generic vehicle. Since claim 1 previously referred to “a part of the vehicle” it is assumed that it refers to the specific vehicle types – for example, a vehicle including an engine or a part thereof.
Regarding claim 10, the claim recites scenarios similar to those of claim 8 and is rejected for the same reasons.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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, 8, 9, 11, 12 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Tsutsui JP 2005291081.1
Regarding claim 1, Tsutsui teaches a vehicle response learning method for generating a trained model related to a response of a vehicle element that is a vehicle element or part of the vehicle, the method comprising:
an input step of giving an input including parameters related to a vehicle speed, a load, and a temperature assuming actual road driving, to the vehicle element [paragraph 0022 discloses the input step including a speed of the vehicle, a load (driving force) while paragraph 0059 teaches the addition of a temperature];
an acquisition step of acquiring response data of the vehicle element and acquiring, as training data, input data representing the input and the response data (paragraph 0017 teaches a step of measuring data for use in the prediction model which would be input data as claimed); and
a generation step of generating the trained model related to the response of the vehicle element (paragraph 0022 teaches generation of a prediction model 14C), from the training data by using machine learning (paragraph 0034 discloses using a neural network to generate the prediction model 14C).
Regarding claim 2, since pressure and temperature are correlated, the method of Tsutsui includes influences which may affect the thermal efficiency of the engine (paragraph 0059) which would be “related to an atmospheric pressure” assuming actual road driving in addition to the vehicle speed, the load and the temperature.
Regarding claim 3, paragraph 0030 of Tsutsui teaches various driving conditions as model inputs which can be calculated based on variables in the system and would therefore be within a variation range depending on the values of the variables at any point in time.
Regarding claim 8, the vehicle element of Tsutsui is an engine and the response data is exhaust gas data as claimed (paragraph 0017).
Regarding claim 9, the exhaust gas of Tsutsui is measured using an exhaust gas analyzer (paragraph 0029 discloses measuring the amount of emissions which would inherently require an analyzer).
Regarding claim 11, Tsutsui teaches performing the method according to data in actual road driving (paragraph 0010 discloses values such as fuel consumption which correspond to actual road driving).
Regarding claim 12, Tsutsui teaches a vehicle response learning system for generating a trained model related to a response of a vehicle element that is a vehicle element or part of the vehicle, the system comprising:
an input unit that gives an input including parameters related to a vehicle speed, a load, and a temperature assuming actual road driving, to the vehicle element [paragraph 0022 discloses the input including a speed of the vehicle, a load (driving force) while paragraph 0059 teaches the addition of a temperature];
an acquisition unit that acquires response data of the vehicle element and acquires, as training data, input data representing the input and the response data (paragraph 0017 teaches a step of measuring data for use in the prediction model which would be input data as claimed); and
a generation unit that generates the trained model related to the response of the vehicle element (paragraph 0022 teaches generation of a prediction model 14C), from the training data by using machine learning (paragraph 0034 discloses using a neural network to generate the prediction model 14C).
Regarding claim 14, Tsutsui teaches computer program which would comprise a non-transitory computer readable medium having instructions stored thereon for a vehicle response learning program that generates a trained model related to a response of a vehicle element that is a vehicle element or part of the vehicle, the program when executed by a computer causing the computer to execute functions comprising:
a function of an input data generation unit that generates input data that is to be given to the vehicle comprising parameters related to a vehicle speed, a load, and a temperature assuming actual road driving [paragraph 0022 discloses the input step including a speed of the vehicle, a load (driving force) while paragraph 0059 teaches the addition of a temperature];
a function of an acquisition unit that acquires response data of the vehicle element and acquiring, as training data, input data representing the input and the response data (paragraph 0017 teaches a step of measuring data for use in the prediction model which would be input data as claimed); and
a generation unit that generates the trained model related to the response of the vehicle element (paragraph 0022 teaches generation of a prediction model 14C), from the training data by using machine learning (paragraph 0034 discloses using a neural network to generate the prediction model 14C).
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(s) 6 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsutsui and Komada et al. US 2015/0332522.
Regarding claim 6, Tsutsui teaches the claimed invention but does not explicitly disclose the test chamber with the temperature and pressure variation as claimed. Komada teaches a vehicle test system including a test chamber 3a in which a vehicle element can be accommodated (fig. 1) and in which a pressure and temperature can be controlled (paragraph 0054). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to have combined the teachings of Komada with those of Tsutsui in order to monitor the system under variable temperatures and pressures to better simulate real-world conditions.
Regarding claim 13, Tsutsui teaches the input unit as further comprising a dynamometer that applies a load to the vehicle and a test facility (page 6 teaches the use of a dynamometer) but does not explicitly disclose the test chamber with the temperature and pressure variation as claimed. Komada teaches a vehicle test system including a test chamber 3a in which a vehicle element can be accommodated (fig. 1) and in which a pressure and temperature can be controlled (paragraph 0054). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to have combined the teachings of Komada with those of Tsutsui in order to monitor the system under variable temperatures and pressures to better simulate real-world conditions.
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsutsui and Kang US 2020/0064229.
Regarding claim 7, Tsutsui teaches the claimed invention but does not explicitly disclose the input step as using a design of experiments (DoE) to generate the parameters. Kang teaches a virtual engine test which uses DoE techniques to provide a variation range of an input and output of input variables during the testing. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to have combined the teachings of Kang with those of Tsutsui in order to use similar DoE techniques to provide multiple inputs to the vehicle element simultaneously.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4, 5 and 10 may 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.
Claims 4 and 5 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior art of record fails to teach the claimed limitations as found in claim 4 including the additional steps of varying the temperature and atmospheric pressure into divided blocks which are given to the vehicle element during the input step, and during the acquisition step, divided input and response data are acquired as divided training data.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Mark A. Shabman whose telephone number is (571)272-8589. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00-4:30 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, Laura Martin can be reached at 571-272-2160. 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.
/MARK A SHABMAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2855
1 An English machine translation has been provided which will be referred to for all references herein.