DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after May 19, 2022, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-5, 10-15 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Shimizu Yasuo (JP 2009280073 A; hereinafter “Yasuo”).
Regarding claim 1, Yasuo discloses: a steer-by-wire steering device (Electric power steering apparatus 100A, figs. 2-18; and [0019]), comprising:
a steering shaft (3a with 7 constitute a steering shaft, fig. 2 and [0019];
a steering column (column housing 15, fig. 2) receiving the steering shaft (3a); and
a reaction force generator ( ‘rotation termination mechanism’ 6A that constitutes torque sensor 110, torsion bar 111 and a slider 115 constitute a reaction force generator ‘A’ as depicted in fig. 2; [0022 and 0027])) coupled to the steering column (15) and including a gear (‘wheel gear 5b; fig. 2 and [0023]) rotated in engagement with the steering shaft (7, fig. 2), a plate (35, fig. 8 and [0022]) having a guide rail (‘groove’ 35c, fig. 8 and [0041]), a pin (33c, para. 0042 discloses: “the protrusion 33c is fitted into the groove 35c”]), moved on the guide rail (35c) as the gear (5b) rotates, and an elastic member (33e) providing a restoring force to a center [ para. 0046 discloses that the radially outer wall and the radially inner wall of the groove 35c are elastically generated (equivalent to elastic member) with a slight pressing force and pressurize each other; para. 0046 further discloses that plate 35 adjacent to each other have a pin 33c having a predetermined angular range “b” (see fig. 8B) in the circumferential direction within the groove 35c; thus, an elastic member providing a restoring force to a center when a pin moved in the guide rail as the gear rotates as depicted in figs. 8 and 10].
of the guide rail (35c) to the pin (33c). See figs. 8-10.
Regarding claim 2, Yasuo further discloses that the reaction force generator (6A; [0022]) further includes a sensor (‘torque sensor’ 110; [0027]) for sensing (‘TP’; [0027]) a steering angle (via slider 115) and of the steering shaft (3a).
Regarding claim 3, Yasuo further discloses that the steer-by-wire steering device further comprising a sensor (‘a sensor’ along with 110; [0029] - and output an angle signal θ) for sensing a steering angle (via 25, [0029]) of the steering shaft (3a).
Regarding claim 4, Yasuo further discloses that the reaction force generator (6A) further includes a first sensor (110) for sensing a steering angle (via ‘TP’) of the steering shaft (3a), wherein the steer-by-wire steering device further comprises a second sensor (‘a sensor via 25; [0029]) for sensing the steering angle (signal θ) of the steering shaft (3a), and wherein the first sensor (110) and the second sensor (‘a sensor’) receive power from power sources (via motor 4; [0029])) independent from each other ( via independent value of ‘TP’ and ‘θ’). See paragraphs 0027 and 0029.
Regarding claim 5, Yasuo further discloses that rotation of the steering shaft (3a) is stopped as the pin (33c, fig. 8) is supported on two opposite ends (137 and 139, fig. 8 and [0042]) of the guide rail (35c; [ para. 0040 discloses: “a groove 35c having groove end portions 137 and 139 is formed on the lower surface of the third plate 35 and ‘Abstract’ discloses that a reaction force generator 6A including a plate 35 for regulating the amounts of leftward and rightward turning operations of the steering handle 3 is disposed; also para 0070 teaches that an increase in the operation amount of the steering handle 3 is prevented by the reaction force generator 6A. thus, rotation of the steering shaft is stopped as the pin is supported on two opposite ends of the guide rail]).
Regarding claim 10, Yasuo further discloses that the reaction force generator (6A) further includes a damper (“a damper compensation signal calculation unit 225”, fig. 11; [0052]) for providing damping to the rotation (via steering rotational speed) of the steering shaft (3a) [para. 0056 discloses: “the damper compensation signal calculation unit 225 is provided to have a steering damper function that compensates for a decrease in convergence when the vehicle travels at a high speed, and the angular velocity signal ωM generates a damper table 225a. By referring to this, the damper compensation value I is obtained. fig. 12B shows a characteristic function for obtaining the compensation value I of the damper table 225a; thus, the reaction force generator includes a damper for providing damping to the rotation of the steering shaft.]
Regarding claim 11, Yasuo discloses: a steer-by-wire steering device (100A; ‘Title’), comprising:
a steering wheel (3, fig. 2); and
a reaction force generator (6A) coupled to a vehicle body (” a steering system of an automobile or a vehicle; [0001]) and including a gear (5b, fig. 2) rotated in engagement (via shaft 3d) with the steering wheel (3), a plate (35, fig. 8 and [0022]) having a guide rail (‘groove’ 35c, fig. 8 and [0041]), a pin moved on the guide rail (33c, para. 0042 discloses: “the protrusion 33c is fitted into the groove 35c”]), as the gear
rotates (5b via motor 4), and an elastic member (33e) providing a restoring force to a center of the guide rail (35c) to the pin (33c) [ para. 0046 discloses that the radially outer wall and the radially inner wall of the groove 35c are elastically generated (equivalent to elastic member) with a slight pressing force and pressurize each other; para. 0046 further discloses that plate 35 adjacent to each other have a pin 33c having a predetermined angular range “b” (see fig. 8B) in the circumferential direction within the groove 35c; thus, an elastic member providing a restoring force to a center of the guide rail to the pin.]
Regarding claim 12, Yasuo further discloses that the reaction force generator (6A) further includes a sensor (‘torque sensor’ 110; [0027]) for sensing (‘TP’; [0027]) a steering angle (via slider 115) of the steering wheel (3; [0037]).
Regarding claim 13, Yasuo further discloses that the steer-by-wire steering device further comprising a sensor (‘a sensor’ along with 110; [0029] - and output an angle signal θ) for sensing a steering angle (via 25, [0029]) of the steering wheel (3).
Regarding claim 14, Yasuo further discloses that the reaction force generator (6A) further includes a first sensor (110) for sensing a steering angle (via ‘TP’) of the steering wheel (3, fig. 2), wherein the steer-by-wire steering device further comprises a second sensor (‘a sensor’ along with 110; [0029] - and output an angle signal θ) for sensing the steering angle (via 25, [0029]) of the steering wheel (3), and wherein the first sensor (110) and the second sensor (“a sensor”) receive power from power sources (via motor 4; [0029]) independent from each other (via independent value of ‘TP’ and ‘θ’). See paragraphs 0027 and 0029.
Regarding claim 15, Yasuo further discloses that the steer-by-wire steering device of claim 11, wherein rotation of the steering wheel (3) is stopped as the pin (33c, fig. 8) is supported on two opposite ends (137 and 139, fig. 8 and [0042]) of the guide rail (35c; [ para. 0040 discloses: “a groove 35c having groove end portions 137 and 139 is formed on the lower surface of the third plate 35 and ‘Abstract’ discloses that a reaction force generator 6A including a plate 35 for regulating the amounts of leftward and rightward turning operations of the steering handle 3 is disposed; also para 0070 teaches that an increase in the operation amount of the steering handle 3 is prevented by the reaction force generator 6A. thus, rotation of the steering wheel is stopped as the pin is supported on two opposite ends of the guide rail]).
Regarding claim 20, Yasuo further discloses that the reaction force generator (6A) further includes a damper (“a damper compensation signal calculation unit 225”, fig. 11; [0052]) for providing damping to the rotation (via steering rotational speed) of the steering wheel (3) [para. 0056 discloses: “the damper compensation signal calculation unit 225 is provided to have a steering damper function that compensates for a decrease in convergence when the vehicle travels at a high speed, and the angular velocity signal ωM generates a damper table 225a. By referring to this, the damper compensation value I is obtained. fig. 12B shows a characteristic function for obtaining the compensation value I of the damper table 225a; thus, the reaction force generator includes a damper for providing damping to the rotation of the steering wheel.]
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4.Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or no obviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 6-8 and 16-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yasuo in view of Hwang et al. (US PUB. 20180162442 A1; hereinafter “Hwang”).
Regarding claim 6, Yasuo further discloses that the plate (35, fig. 8 and [0022]) has a central shaft (3d, fig. 2). Yasuo also teaches guide rail, elastic member, but fails to explicitly teach that the central shaft coupled with one end of the elastic member, wherein another end of the elastic member is coupled to the pin, and wherein the guide rail is formed to be closest to the central shaft in a center thereof and to be away from the central shaft toward two opposite ends thereof; however,
Hwang in another steering feel control device in steer-by-wire system similar to Hwang teaches that that the central shaft (3, fig. 1 and [0048]) coupled with one end of the elastic member (belt 5, fig. 1; [0048]), wherein another end of the elastic member (belt 5) is coupled to the pin (push block 15, [0035]) and wherein the guide rail (rotation path Re of 13, fig. 1) is formed to be closest to the central shaft (9) in a center thereof (fig. 1) and to be away from the central shaft toward two opposite ends ( see fig. 5 configuration) thereof [ para. 0068 teaches that the lock device may permit or limit the rotation of the pin 15, at the position at which the pin 15 is supported by the displacement limitation stopper (opposite end), away from the pressure member 13 depending on variation in the steering angle of the steering wheel 1; thus; the guide rail is formed to be closest to the central shaft in a center thereof and to be away from the central shaft toward two opposite ends thereof.]
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the central shaft coupled with one end of the elastic member, wherein another end of the elastic member is coupled to the pin, and wherein the guide rail is formed to be closest to the central shaft in a center thereof and to be away from the central shaft toward two opposite ends as taught by Hwang’s control device into a known steer-by-wire system invention of Yasuo in order to advantageously integrate a known principle of limiting the steering angle for rotating in a predetermined direction by a driver or an opposite direction within a rotation path depending on the rotation direction of a steering wheel [‘Abstract’ of Hwang]. The claimed configuration doesn’t yield unexpected results but reflects routing engineering design choices based on known principles of driving torque and steering system design.
Regarding claim 7, Yasuo as modified above further teaches that the elastic member (5) is a belt (belt 5; [0048]) connected to the central shaft (3) and the pin (15).
Regarding claim 8, Yasuo as modified above further teaches that the gear (5b, fig. 2) is provided to be coaxial with the central shaft (7; [See fig. 2 where gear 5b is coaxial with shaft 7]).
Regarding claim 16, Yasuo further discloses that the plate (35, fig. 8 and [0022]) has a central shaft (3d, fig. 2). Yasuo also teaches guide rail, elastic member, but fails to explicitly teach that the central shaft coupled with one end of the elastic member, wherein another end of the elastic member is coupled to the pin, and wherein the guide rail is formed to be closest to the central shaft in a center thereof and to be away from the central shaft toward two opposite ends thereof; however,
Hwang in another ‘steering feel control device in steer-by-wire system’ similar to Hwang teaches that the central shaft (3, fig. 1 and [0048]) coupled with one end of the elastic member (belt 5, fig. 1; [0048]), wherein another end of the elastic member (belt 5) is coupled to the pin (push block 15, [0035]) and wherein the guide rail (rotation path ‘Re’ of 13, fig. 1) is formed to be closest to the central shaft (9) in a center thereof (fig. 1) and to be away from the central shaft toward two opposite ends (see fig. 5 configuration) thereof [ para. 0068 teaches that the lock device may permit or limit the rotation of the pin 15, at the position at which the pin 15 is supported by the displacement limitation stopper (opposite end), away from the pressure member 13 depending on variation in the steering angle of the steering wheel 1; thus; the guide rail is formed to be closest to the central shaft in a center thereof and to be away from the central shaft toward two opposite ends thereof.]
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the central shaft coupled with one end of the elastic member, wherein another end of the elastic member is coupled to the pin, and wherein the guide rail is formed to be closest to the central shaft in a center thereof and to be away from the central shaft toward two opposite ends as taught by Hwang’s control device into a known steer-by-wire system invention of Yasuo in order to advantageously integrate a known principle of limiting the steering angle for rotating in a predetermined direction by a driver or an opposite direction within a rotation path depending on the rotation direction of a steering wheel [‘Abstract’ of Hwang]. The claimed configuration doesn’t yield unexpected results but reflects routing engineering design choices based on known principles of driving torque and steering system design.
Regarding claim 17, Yasuo as modified above further teaches that the elastic member (5) is a belt (belt 5; [0048]) connected to the central shaft (3) and the pin (15).
Regarding claim 18, Yasuo as modified above teaches that the gear (5b, fig. 2) is provided to be coaxial with the central shaft (7) [See fig. 2 where gear 5b is coaxial with shaft 7].
Claims 9 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yasuo in view of Hawang and further in view of Bruce Borland (US PAT. 1095373 A1; hereinafter “Bruce”).
Regarding claim 9, Yasuo discloses the gear (5b), but fails to disclose that the gear has a slit that provides a path where the pin is inserted and movable in a radial direction; however,
Bruce in another ‘gearing’ similar to the modified Yasuo above teaches that the gear (fixed gear 20, fig. 4; [page 3, lines 50-55]) has a slit (see annotated fig. 2 and 4 of Bruce below) that provides a path (“radial groove 25, fig. 4; [page 3, lines 60-65])) where the pin (stud 23, figs. 2 and 4) is inserted and movable in a radial direction [ page 3, lines 55-60 teaches: “a spur gear or pinion 22 is revolubly mounted on a stud 23 on the disk 14 and meshes with, and is revolved upon its bearing by, the fixed gear 20 as the disk 14 revolves. The spur gear 22 carries an eccentric pin 24 which takes into the radial grooves 25”; thus, the gear has a slit that provides a path where the pin is inserted and movable in a radial direction; also refer to ‘Geneva drive mechanism’ on the NPL section of the document (attached)].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the gear that has a slit and provides a path where the pin is inserted and movable in a radial direction as taught by Bruce into the invention of the modified Yasuo in order to advantageously accommodate relative movement between the gear and the pin during steering operation, reduce stress concentration, and/or facilitate assembly and tolerance absorption. The use of a gear slit or slot to permit radial movement of a pin is a known ‘Geneva mechanism technique’, and applying such a known technique to the steering gear of Yasuo would have involved nothing more than the predictable use of prior-art elements according to their established function. The claimed configuration doesn’t yield unexpected results but reflects routing engineering design choices based on the known principles of driving torque, limiting steering angle to the predefined range of the steering wheel and into the known steering system design.
PNG
media_image1.png
910
980
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated fig. 2 and 4 of Bruce.
Regarding claim 19, Yasuo further discloses that the gear (5b), but fails to disclose that the gear has a slit that provides a path where the pin is inserted and movable in a radial direction; however,
Bruce in another gearing similar to the modified Yasuo above teaches that the gear (fixed gear 20, fig. 4; [page 3, lines 50-55]) has a slit (see annotated fig. 2 and 4 of Bruce above) that provides a path (“radial groove 25, fig. 4; [page 3, lines 60-65]) where the pin (stud 23, figs. 2 and 4) is inserted and movable in a radial direction [ page 3, lines 55-60 teaches: “a spur gear or pinion 22 is revolubly mounted on a stud 23 on the disk 14 and meshes with, and is revolved upon its bearing by, the fixed gear 20 as the disk 14 revolves. The spur gear 22 carries an eccentric pin 24 which takes into the radial grooves 25”; thus, the gear has a slit that provides a path where the pin is inserted and movable in a radial direction; also refer to ‘Geneva drive mechanism’ on the NPL section of the document (attached)].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the gear that has a slit and provides a path where the pin is inserted and movable in a radial direction as taught by Bruce into the invention of the modified Yasuo in order to advantageously accommodate relative movement between the gear and the pin during steering operation, reducing stress concentration, and/or facilitate assembly and tolerance absorption. The use of a gear slit or slot to permit radial movement of a pin is a known ‘Geneva mechanism technique’ (see NPL), and applying this known technique to the steering gear of Yasuo would have involved nothing more than the predictable use of prior-art elements according to their established function. The claimed configuration doesn’t yield unexpected results but reflects routing engineering design choices based on the known principles of driving torque, limiting steering angle to the predefined range of the steering wheel and into the known steering system design.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 20180141585 to Kim discloses: A stopping mechanism is configured to limit a maximum rotation angle of the steering wheel.
US 8855862 B2 to Tashiro discloses: a vehicle steering system includes a steering angle detecting unit; a reaction force actuator; and a reaction force actuator control unit.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NABIN KUMAR SHARMA whose telephone number is (703)756-4619. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Friday: 8:00am - 5 PM 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, Neacsu Valentin can be reached on (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.
/NABIN KUMAR SHARMA/Examiner, Art Unit 3611
/VALENTIN NEACSU/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3611