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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 9 March 2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 9 March 2026 have been fully considered but they are persuasive only in part.
First, the previous rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) are overcome by applicant’s claim amendments. However, new issues in this regard are apparently precipitated by the amendments to dependent claim 4, as detailed below.
Second, applicant’s arguments as to the amended claims distinguishing over the applied prior art under 35 U.S.C. 103 are not convincing.
In this respect, applicant argues:
In this response, claim 1 has been amended to recite, in part, "at least one of the rear wheel friction braking torque and the rear wheel regenerative braking torque increases when the required deceleration increases from the first reference deceleration to the second reference deceleration." The amendments are supported by, for example, FIGS. 7 and 8 which shows that the rear wheel regenerative braking torque increases in the second section which is from the first reference deceleration to the second reference deceleration, as well as FIGS. 5 and 6.
By contrast, in FIG. 4 of Okuda with the Examiner's annotation below, the alleged rear wheel friction braking torque does not increase when the required deceleration increases from the alleged first reference deceleration to the alleged second reference deceleration. Therefore, Okuda does not disclose, among other things, "at least one of the rear wheel friction braking torque and the rear wheel regenerative braking torque increases when the required deceleration increases from the first reference deceleration to the second reference deceleration" of claim 1.
PNG
media_image1.png
656
592
media_image1.png
Greyscale
The examiner disagrees, with the rear wheel friction braking torque clearly increasing (from zero to a finite, positive level) when the required braking force has increased (obviously from the first brake force/deceleration level) “to the second brake force/deceleration level” (rightmost dashed line in the examiner’s sketch), as sketched below by the examiner by the solid/black triangle overlying a portion of FIG. 4 in Okuda (JP, ‘643):.
PNG
media_image2.png
609
631
media_image2.png
Greyscale
In this respect, the examiner understands from FIG. 4 of Okuda (JP, ‘643) that his rear mechanical/friction braking forces do not increase immediately when the first brake force (deceleration) level (leftmost dashed line in the examiner’s sketch/footnote) is first exceeded, but an immediate increase when the “first reference deceleration” is first exceeded is apparently not required by the claim language. In the examiner’s broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI) of the claim language consistent with the specification, all that is required by the claim language is that e.g., some increase in the rear wheel friction braking force/torque occur when the required deceleration increases from the first reference deceleration all the way “to the second reference deceleration”.
Accordingly applicant’s arguments are not persuasive in this respect.
Claim (Specification) Objections
Claim 8 is objected to because of the following informalities: in claim 8, line 19, “the front and rear wheels” should apparently read “front wheels or the rear wheels” (e.g., “[[the]] front wheels or the [[and]] rear wheels” for grammatical precision, and in claim 8, line 22, “front wheels” should apparently read, “the front wheels” for grammatical precision1. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim 4 is 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.
In claim 4, line 2, "a first reference deceleration" is unclear because "a first reference deceleration" has already been recited in lines 14ff of claim 1, and so it is unclear whether the "first reference deceleration" recited in line2 of claim 4 is the same as, different from, permissively the same as, permissively different from, necessarily the same as, necessarily different from, etc. the "first reference deceleration" recited in lines 14ff of claim 1.
In claim 4, line 9, “the front wheels and the rear wheels” is apparently incorrect in the claim context (e.g., changing torque at rear wheels cannot apparently prevent locking of the front wheels), and should apparently read simply, “the rear wheels”.
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.
Claims 1, 8, and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Okuda (Japan, 2010-154643; EPO machine translation attached) in view of Kim (2011/0074204) and Chae et al. (2022/0009337).
Okuda (JP, ‘643) reveals:
per claim 1, an apparatus for controlling braking torque for a vehicle, comprising:
a regenerative braking apparatus [e.g., 4] configured to apply a regenerative braking torque to rear wheels [e.g., 12L, 12R];
a plurality of electro mechanical brakes (EMBs) generating a friction braking torque using an actuator [e.g., the brake devices 72 for mechanical braking provided on each wheel (left and right front wheels 1L, 1R and left and right rear wheels 12L, 12R), wherein the brake controller 14 (obviously electronic, such as a “brake ECU”, as at paragraph [0005]) controls the operation of each brake device 72]; and
a controller [e.g., 14, 24, 34, etc.] that controls [e.g., at Step S28 in FIG. 6, and as described at paragraphs [0029], [0048], [0049], etc.] the regenerative braking apparatus [e.g., 4] and the plurality of EMBs [e.g., brake devices 72] to apply a front wheel friction braking torque to front wheels [e.g., as shown by the solid line section designated with legend “Front” in FIGS. 4 and 5[2], representing mechanical/friction braking force at the front wheels] and to apply a rear wheel braking torque [e.g., as shown in FIGS. 4 and/or 5, in the dashed line sections below the section designated with the “Front” legend in FIGS. 4 and 5, representing mechanical/friction braking force at the rear wheels], which is a sum of a rear wheel friction braking torque [e.g., in the dashed line section to the right of the regenerative braking force section in FIGS. 4 and/or 5, representing mechanical/friction braking force at the rear wheels] and a rear wheel regenerative braking torque [e.g., in the dashed line section of FIGS. 4 and/or 5 labeled “regenerative braking force” in the Google translated image of FIG. 4 and/or FIG. 5], to the rear wheels [e.g., as shown in FIG. 1],
wherein the plurality of EMBs [e.g., 72, 14, etc.] are respectively provided for each wheel of the vehicle so that a different friction braking torque is generated for each wheel [e.g., paragraphs [0029], [0033], etc.],
the controller changes a distribution ratio between the front wheel friction braking torque and the rear wheel friction braking torque when a required deceleration is greater than a first reference deceleration [e.g., a first reference deceleration level corresponding to the “first brake force level” in the annotated footnote provided by the examiner below[3]; for example, in the normal map as depicted in FIG. 4, the controller 14, 24, 34 changes the distribution ratio between the front wheel mechanical/friction braking force (“Front”) and the rear wheel mechanical/friction braking force (“Rear”), e.g., from an infinite value when only front mechanical braking is being performed to a finite value [e.g., near 21:12 as depicted[4]] when the required brake force is maximum at the right-hand portion of FIG. 4, when the required brake force along the horizontal axis in FIG. 4 becomes greater than the brake force level (depicted by the examiner by a vertical solid line in the footnote) where rear friction braking starts being performed, as depicted by the examiner in the annotated footnote below],
the controller controls only the regenerative braking apparatus, among the regenerative braking apparatus and the plurality of EMBs, to apply the rear wheel regenerative braking torque to the rear wheels when the required deceleration is less than or equal to the first reference deceleration [e.g., only regenerative braking is applied when the required brake force (e.g., shown on the horizontal axis in FIG. 4 and output by the required brake force detecting means 80 based on the information signal output by the brake stroke sensor 70) is less that the (dashed line) first brake force level as depicted by the examiner above in the labeled/annotated version of FIG. 4],
the controller controls [e.g., when the required braking force in FIG. 4 is greater than the (vertical solid line) brake force level and less than or equal to the (dashed line) second brake force level as depicted by the examiner in the labeled/annotated sketch of FIG. 4 above] the regenerative braking apparatus to apply the rear wheel regenerative braking torque only to the rear wheels among the rear wheels and front wheels [e.g., the regenerative braking force in FIG. 4 that is applied only to the rear wheels 12L, 12R (and not to front wheels 1L, 1R)] and controls the plurality of EMBs to apply at least one of the front wheel friction braking torque or the rear wheel friction braking torque to the front and rear wheels [e.g., to apply the front and rear mechanical/friction braking forces according to the relationships shown in FIG. 4] by changing the distribution ratio between the front wheel friction braking torque and the rear wheel friction braking torque [e.g., which would be infinity when the rear mechanical/friction braking force is zero at the (vertical solid line) brake force level as depicted by the examiner in the labeled/annotated sketch of FIG. 4 above, and would be finite (e.g., near 21:12) at the (dashed line) second brake force level as depicted by the examiner in the labeled/annotated sketch of FIG. 4 above] when the required deceleration is greater than the first reference deceleration [e.g., all required brake force levels in FIG. 4 between the (vertical solid line) brake force level and the (dashed line) second brake force level as depicted by the examiner in the labeled/annotated sketch of FIG. 4 above are “greater than” the (dashed line) first brake force level] and is less than or equal to a second reference deceleration [e.g., corresponding to the second brake force level in the examiner’s labeled/annotated sketch of FIG. 4 above] greater than the first reference deceleration [e.g., all required brake force levels in FIG. 4 between the (vertical solid line) brake force level and the (dashed line) second brake force level as depicted by the examiner in the labeled/annotated sketch of FIG. 4 above are “less than or equal to” the (dashed line) second brake force level], wherein at least one of the rear wheel friction braking torque and the rear wheel regenerative braking torque increases when the required deceleration increases from the first reference deceleration to the second reference deceleration [e.g., as shown in FIG. 4, when the required braking force in FIG. 4 is the “first brake force level” depicted by the leftmost vertical dashed line in the examiner’s footnote above, no rear mechanical/friction braking forces are applied to vehicle, and when the required braking force in FIG. 4 is increased to the “second brake force level” depicted by the rightmost vertical dashed line in the examiner’s footnote above, finite (positive) level(s) of rear mechanical/friction braking forces are applied to vehicle; therefore, the “rear wheel friction braking torque . . . increase (from zero to the finite level shown at the right in FIG. 4) “when the required deceleration increases from the first reference deceleration to the second reference deceleration”[5]], and
the controller controls [e.g., when the required braking force in FIG. 4 is greater than the (dashed line) second brake force level as depicted by the examiner in the labeled/annotated sketch of FIG. 4 above] only the plurality of EMBs, among the regenerative braking apparatus and the plurality of EMBs [e.g., only the “Front” and “Rear” mechanical/friction braking forces as applied by the brake devices 72 are controlled when the required braking force in FIG. 4 is greater than the (dashed line) second brake force level as depicted by the examiner in the labeled/annotated sketch of FIG. 4 above], to apply the front wheel friction braking torque to the front wheels and the rear wheel friction braking torque to the rear wheels when the required deceleration is greater than the second reference deceleration [e.g., as shown in FIGS. 4 and 5, where no regenerative braking force is generated at high levels (above the dashed line second brake force level depicted by the examiner in the labeled/annotated sketch of FIG. 4 above, but rather only mechanical/friction braking forces are generated at the front and rear wheels];
It may be alleged that Okuda (JP, ‘643) does not expressly teach that the mechanical braking devices 72 at the front and rear wheels were electro mechanical brakes (EMBs) that apply front wheel and rear wheel “friction braking torque[s]” to the front and rear wheels, although the examiner understands that wheel brakes which apply frictional torques were fully conventional types of mechanical wheel brakes which would have been obvious to those skilled in the art from the teachings of Okuda (JP< ‘643), even without further teaching.
Moreover, while Okuda (JP, ‘643) teaches that relationships of the total braking forces of the mechanical front and rear brakes and the rear regenerative brake are controlled according to the control maps of FIGS. 4 and/or 5 based on the “required braking force” required by the driver (e.g., brake [pedal] depression force), it may be alleged that Okuda (JP, ‘643) does not teach that “required deceleration” (as opposed to “required braking force” required by the driver) and the claimed “reference deceleration[s]” (e.g., thresholds).
However, in the context/field of an improved regenerative braking system, Kim (‘204) teaches that electromechanical brakes (EMBs) 10 may be employed at two or four wheels (FIGS. 3 to 5), in place of a conventional hydraulic system, such that the braking force can be generated through friction between the disc 202 and the pads 201 for performing active braking (for slip control yaw rate control, paragraph [0085]) at each wheel.
Moreover, in the context/field of an improved braking control method of a vehicle powertrain, Chae et al. (‘337) teaches at paragraphs [0060], etc. that, “the required deceleration and the required braking torque may be easily converted to each other because the braking torque required for implementing the required deceleration is the required braking torque”, and shows in FIG. 6 that control sections of a braking system that controls both regenerative braking and friction braking may be specified based on increasing required deceleration, with the braking torque according to the required deceleration being distributed to the front wheel and the rear wheel along the braking force distribution line (see FIG. 5) of the respective section.
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement or modify the Okuda (JP, ‘643) regenerative braking control device and method of a hybrid vehicle so that the mechanical braking devices 72 at the respective vehicle wheels would have been implemented with independently controlled electro-mechanical brakes (EMBs) 10 that generated braking force through friction for performing slip and yaw rate control, as taught by Kim (‘204), in order that stability of the vehicle would have been maintained by active-control braking, etc., as taught by Kim (‘204),at each wheel brake, with a reasonable expectation of success, and e.g., as a use of a known technique to improve similar devices (methods, or products) in the same way.
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement or modify the Okuda (JP, ‘643) regenerative braking control device and method of a hybrid vehicle so that the horizontal axis of the normal braking force map of FIG. 4 in Okuda (JP, ‘643) which in Okuda (JP, ‘643) represented “required braking force” (required by the driver, paragraphs [0045], [0046], etc.) would have been made to equivalently represent “required deceleration” as taught at paragraph [0060], FIG. 6, etc. by Chae et al. (‘337), so that the relationships between the described forces of the mechanical/friction front and rear brakes and the rear regenerative brake would have been equivalently controlled according to the required deceleration (required by the driver in accordance with pedal depression, e.g., as represented on the horizontal axis in FIG. 4 in Okuda (JP, ‘643)) reaching the respective levels of deceleration represented by the braking force levels shown in FIG. 4, in order that the vehicle deceleration required by the driver’s depression force on a brake pedal would be met by the control of friction and regenerative braking as taught by Chae et al. (‘337), as a substitution of art recognized equivalents (required deceleration for required braking force) for the same purpose (MPEP 2144.06, II.), with a reasonable expectation of success, and e.g., as a use of a known technique to improve similar devices (methods, or products) in the same way.
For example, this modification to the normal braking force map in FIG. 4 of Okuda (JP, ‘643) would have been equivalently obvious from the teachings of Chae et al. (‘337) at paragraphs [0060], etc., FIG. 6, etc.:
PNG
media_image6.png
653
675
media_image6.png
Greyscale
As such, the implemented or modified Okuda (JP, ‘643) vehicle control device and method would have rendered obvious:
per claim 1, an apparatus for controlling braking torque for a vehicle, comprising:
a regenerative braking apparatus [e.g., in Okuda (JP, ‘643), 4] configured to apply a regenerative braking torque to rear wheels [e.g., in Okuda (JP, ‘643), 12L, 12R];
a plurality of electro mechanical brakes (EMBs) generating a friction braking torque using an actuator [e.g., the EMBs 10 in FIG. 4 of Kim (‘204); obviously implementing the brake devices 72 for mechanical braking provided on each wheel (left and right front wheels 1L, 1R and left and right rear wheels 12L, 12R) in Okuda (JP, ‘643), wherein the brake controller 14 (obviously electronic, such as a “brake ECU”, as at paragraph [0005]) controls the operation of each brake device 72]; and
a controller [e.g., in Okuda (JP, ‘643), 14, 24, 34, etc.] that controls [e.g., in Okuda (JP, ‘643), at Step S28 in FIG. 6, and as described at paragraphs [0029], [0048], [0049], etc.] the regenerative braking apparatus [e.g., in Okuda (JP, ‘643), 4] and the plurality of EMBs [e.g., in Okuda (JP, ‘643), brake devices 72, implemented as the EMBs 10 in FIG. 4 of Kim (‘204)] to apply a front wheel friction braking torque to front wheels [e.g., in Okuda (JP, ‘643), as shown by the solid line section designated with legend “Front” in FIGS. 4 and 5, representing mechanical/friction braking force at the front wheels] and to apply a rear wheel braking torque [e.g., in Okuda (JP, ‘643), as shown in FIGS. 4 and/or 5, in the dashed line sections below the section designated with the “Front” legend in FIGS. 4 and 5, representing mechanical/friction braking force at the rear wheels], which is a sum of a rear wheel friction braking torque [e.g., in Okuda (JP, ‘643), in the dashed line section to the right of the regenerative braking force section in FIGS. 4 and/or 5, representing mechanical/friction braking force at the rear wheels] and a rear wheel regenerative braking torque [e.g., in Okuda (JP, ‘643), in the dashed line section of FIGS. 4 and/or 5 labeled “regenerative braking force” in the Google translated image of FIG. 4 and/or FIG. 5], to the rear wheels [e.g., in Okuda (JP, ‘643), as shown in FIG. 1],
wherein the plurality of EMBs [e.g., 10 in Kim (‘204); and in Okuda (JP, ‘643), 72, 14, etc.] are respectively provided for each wheel of the vehicle so that a different friction braking torque is generated for each wheel [e.g., in Okuda (JP, ‘643), paragraphs [0029], [0033], etc., “the integrated controller 34 receives the above-mentioned information signals and outputs control commands to the brake controller 14 to control the operation of each brake device 72”; and paragraph [0085] in Kim (‘204), “The central ECU controls each EMB actuator by using each EMB ECU based on peripheral sensor information and existing information, thereby performing the slip control and yaw rate control through the position/current feedback control.”],
the controller changes a distribution ratio between the front wheel friction braking torque and the rear wheel friction braking torque when a required deceleration [e.g., the required deceleration (and deceleration levels of the brake control map) being equivalent as taught by Chae et al. (‘337) at paragraphs [0060], etc. to the required braking force (and brake force levels) in horizontal axis of the brake control map in FIG. 4 of Okuda (JP, ‘643)] is greater than a first reference deceleration [e.g., a first reference deceleration level being depicted as the “first deceleration level” in the annotated footnote below[6], when Okuda JP, ‘643) is implemented or modified in view of Chae et al. (‘337); for example, in the normal map as depicted in FIG. 4 in Okuda (JP, ‘643), the controller 14, 24, 34 changes the distribution ratio between the front wheel mechanical/friction braking force (“Front”) and the rear wheel mechanical/friction braking force (“Rear”) when the required brake force/deceleration level along the horizontal axis in FIG. 4 becomes greater than the brake force/deceleration level (depicted by the examiner by a vertical solid line) where rear friction braking starts being performed, which brake force/deceleration level (depicted by the vertical solid line) is greater than the first deceleration (reference) level (i.e., leftmost vertical dashed line) as depicted by the examiner in the footnote, e.g., the distribution ratio changes from an infinite value when only front mechanical braking is being performed (to the left of the vertical solid line) to a finite value (to the right of the vertical solid line), e.g., to near 21:12 as depicted[7] when the required brake force/deceleration is maximum at the right-hand portion of FIG. 4],
the controller controls only the regenerative braking apparatus, among the regenerative braking apparatus and the plurality of EMBs, to apply the rear wheel regenerative braking torque to the rear wheels when the required deceleration is less than or equal to the first reference deceleration [e.g., in Okuda (JP, ‘643), only regenerative braking is applied when the required brake force/deceleration (e.g., shown on the horizontal axis in FIG. 4 and output by the required brake force detecting means 80 based on the information signal output by the brake stroke sensor 70) is less that the (leftmost dashed line) first brake force/deceleration level as depicted by the examiner above in the labeled/annotated version of FIG. 4],
the controller controls [e.g., in Okuda (JP, ‘643), when the required braking force/deceleration in FIG. 4 is greater than the (vertical solid line) brake force/deceleration level and less than or equal to the (rightmost dashed line) second brake force/deceleration level as depicted by the examiner in the labeled/annotated sketch of FIG. 4 above] the regenerative braking apparatus to apply the rear wheel regenerative braking torque only to the rear wheels among the rear wheels and the front wheels [e.g., in Okuda (JP, ‘643), the regenerative braking force in FIG. 4 that is applied only to the rear wheels 12L, 12R (and not to front wheels 1L, 1R)] and controls the plurality of EMBs to apply at least one of the front wheel friction braking torque or the rear wheel friction braking torque to the front and rear wheels [e.g., in Okuda (JP, ‘643), to apply the front and rear mechanical/friction braking forces according to the relationships shown in FIG. 4] by changing the distribution ratio between the front wheel friction braking torque and the rear wheel friction braking torque [e.g., which would be infinity in Okuda (JP, ‘643) when the rear mechanical/friction braking force is zero at the (vertical solid line) brake force/deceleration level as depicted by the examiner in the labeled/annotated sketch of FIG. 4 above, and would be finite (e.g., near 21:12) at the (rightmost dashed line) second brake force/deceleration level as depicted by the examiner in the labeled/annotated sketch of FIG. 4 above] when the required deceleration is greater than the first reference deceleration [e.g., in Okuda (JP, ‘643), all required brake force/deceleration levels in FIG. 4 between the (vertical solid line) brake force/deceleration level and the (rightmost dashed line) second brake force/deceleration level as depicted by the examiner in the labeled/annotated sketch of FIG. 4 above are “greater than” the (leftmost dashed line) first brake force/deceleration level] and is less than or equal to a second reference deceleration [e.g., from Okuda (JP, ‘643) as implemented or modified in view of Chae et al. (‘337), a second reference level being depicted as the “second deceleration level” in the examiner’s annotated footnote above] greater than the first reference deceleration [e.g., in Okuda (JP, ‘643), all required brake force/deceleration levels in FIG. 4 between the (vertical solid line) brake force/deceleration level and the (rightmost dashed line) second brake force/deceleration level as depicted by the examiner in the labeled/annotated sketch of FIG. 4 above are “less than or equal to” the (rightmost dashed line) second brake force/deceleration level], wherein at least one of the rear wheel friction braking torque and the rear wheel regenerative braking torque increases when the required deceleration increases from the first reference deceleration to the second reference deceleration [e.g., as shown in FIG. 4 of Okuda (JP, ‘643), when the required braking force/deceleration in FIG. 4 is the “first deceleration level” depicted by the leftmost vertical dashed line in the examiner’s footnote above, no rear mechanical/friction braking forces are applied to vehicle, and when the required braking force/deceleration in FIG. 4 is increased to the “second deceleration level” depicted by the rightmost vertical dashed line in the examiner’s footnote above, finite (positive) level(s) of rear mechanical/friction braking forces are applied to vehicle; therefore, the “rear wheel friction braking torque . . . increases” (from zero to the finite level shown at the right in FIG. 4) “when the required deceleration increases from the first reference deceleration to the second reference deceleration”[8]], and
the controller controls [e.g., in Okuda (JP, ‘643), when the required braking/deceleration force in FIG. 4 is greater than the (rightmost dashed line) second brake force/deceleration level as depicted by the examiner in the labeled/annotated sketch of FIG. 4 above] only the plurality of EMBs, among the regenerative braking apparatus and the plurality of EMBs [e.g., in Okuda (JP, ‘643), only the “Front” and “Rear” mechanical/friction braking forces as applied by the brake devices 72 are controlled when the required braking force/deceleration in FIG. 4 is greater than the (rightmost dashed line) second brake force/deceleration level as depicted by the examiner in the labeled/annotated sketch of FIG. 4 above], to apply the front wheel friction braking torque to the front wheels and the rear wheel friction braking torque to the rear wheels when the required deceleration is greater than the second reference deceleration [e.g., in Okuda (JP, ‘643), as shown in FIGS. 4 and 5, where no regenerative braking force is generated at high levels (above the dashed line second brake force level depicted by the examiner in the labeled/annotated sketch of FIG. 4 above, but rather only mechanical/friction braking forces are generated at the front and rear wheels];
per claim 8, a method of controlling braking torque for a vehicle, comprising:
a first process of determining whether a required deceleration is less than or equal to a first reference deceleration [e.g., in conjunction with the normal brake control map in FIG. 4 of Okuda (JP, ‘643) obviously determining whether the required braking force (or required deceleration in Chae et al. (‘337)) is less than the level of the upper limit of the regenerative braking force or required brake force/deceleration where front mechanical/friction braking will also be used, when the driver starts to operate the brake pedal , e.g., at paragraph [0049], with the “first reference deceleration” being depicted by the examiner as the leftmost vertical dashed line in the footnote above];
a second process of applying a wheel regenerative braking torque, by a regenerative braking apparatus, to rear wheels when it is determined that the required deceleration is less than or equal to the first reference deceleration [e.g., paragraph [0049] in Okuda (JP, ‘643), as shown e.g., in FIG. 4];
a third process of determining whether the required deceleration is less than or equal to a second reference deceleration [e.g., in Okuda (JP, ‘643), the level of required brake force/deceleration in FIG. 4 where the depicted regenerative braking force returns to zero (e.g., by being reduced at paragraph [0051]), with the regenerative braking force being replaced by the rear mechanical/friction braking force, as depicted by the (rightmost dashed line) second brake force/deceleration level in the examiner’s labeled/annotated sketch of FIG. 4 above] when it is determined that the required deceleration is greater than the first reference deceleration [e.g., the (rightmost dashed line) second braking force/deceleration level as depicted by the examiner in the labeled/annotated sketch in FIG. 4 of Okuda (JP, ‘643) is greater than the (leftmost dashed line) first braking force/deceleration level in the examiner’s labeled/annotated sketch in FIG. 4 of Okuda (JP, ‘643)];
a fourth process of determining distribution ratios of a front wheel friction braking torque and a rear wheel friction braking torque when it is determined that the required deceleration is less than or equal to the second reference deceleration [e.g., various distribution ratios (e.g., as described in paragraphs [0049 to [0051] of Okuda (JP, ‘643)) between the front wheel mechanical/friction braking force and the rear wheel mechanical/friction braking force (e.g., ranging from infinite to finite) are depicted in FIG. 4 of Okuda (JP, ’643) to the left of the (rightmost dashed line) second braking force/deceleration level as depicted by the examiner in the labeled/annotated sketch in FIG. 4 of Okuda (JP, ‘643) above which rear wheel mechanical/friction braking force has replaced the regenerative braking force], wherein at least one of the rear wheel friction braking torque and the rear wheel regenerative braking torque to the rear wheels increases when the required deceleration increases from the first reference deceleration to the second reference deceleration [e.g., as shown in FIG. 4 of Okuda (JP, ‘643), when the required braking force/deceleration in FIG. 4 is the “first deceleration level” depicted by the leftmost vertical dashed line in the examiner’s footnote above, no rear mechanical/friction braking forces are applied to vehicle, and when the required braking force/deceleration in FIG. 4 is increased to the “second deceleration level” depicted by the rightmost vertical dashed line in the examiner’s footnote above, finite (positive) level(s) of rear mechanical/friction braking forces are applied to vehicle; therefore, the “rear wheel friction braking torque . . . increases” (from zero to the finite level shown at the right in FIG. 4) “when the required deceleration increases from the first reference deceleration to the second reference deceleration”[9]];
a fifth process of adjusting and applying, by the regenerative braking apparatus and a plurality of electro mechanical brakes (EMBs) [e.g., as taught by Kim (‘204) for implementing the front and rear wheel brake devices 72 of Okuda (JP, ‘643), for applying the front and rear mechanical/friction braking forces in FIG. 4 of Okuda (JP, ‘643)], at least one of the front wheel friction braking torque or the rear wheel friction braking torque to the front and rear wheels, and the wheel regenerative braking torque to the rear wheels based on the distribution ratios [e.g., when the level of required brake force/deceleration in FIG. 4 of Okuda (JP, ‘643) is between the (leftmost dashed line) first braking force/deceleration level and the (rightmost dashed line) second braking force/deceleration level as depicted by the examiner in the labeled/annotated sketch in FIG. 4 of Okuda (JP, ‘643), such that regenerative braking force, front mechanical/friction braking force, and optionally rear mechanical/friction braking force are applied to brake the vehicle, as described at paragraphs [0049] to [0051] of Okuda (JP, ‘643)]; and
a sixth process of applying only, by the plurality of EMBs, the front wheel friction braking torque to front wheels and the rear wheel friction braking torque to the rear wheels when it is determined that the required deceleration is greater than the second reference deceleration [e.g., when the level of required brake force/deceleration in FIG. 4 of Okuda (JP, ‘643) is greater than the (rightmost dashed line) second braking force/deceleration level as depicted by the examiner in the labeled/annotated sketch in FIG. 4 of Okuda (JP, ‘643), rear wheel mechanical/friction braking force has fully replaced the regenerative braking force, as clearly depicted in e.g., the right half of FIG. 4, such that (only) front mechanical/friction braking force and rear mechanical/friction braking force are applied to brake the vehicle],
wherein the fourth process and the sixth process are performed by changing the distribution ratio between the front wheel friction braking torque and the rear wheel friction braking torque [e.g., as shown in FIG. 4 of Okuda (JP, ‘643), wherein i) to the left of the (rightmost dashed line) second braking force/deceleration level as depicted by the examiner in the labeled/annotated sketch in FIG. 4 of Okuda (JP, ‘643) corresponding to the fourth process, the Front/Rear mechanical/friction braking distribution changes e.g., from infinite to finite, and ii) at the right hand portion of FIG. 4 in Okuda (JP, ‘643) where the total braking force plateaus at its maximum level, the Front/Rear mechanical/friction braking distribution changes (as depicted) from about 24:9 to about 21:12];
per claim 9, depending from claim 8, wherein, in the fourth process, a distribution ratio between the rear wheel friction braking torque applied to the rear wheels and the wheel regenerative braking torque applied to the rear wheels is changed while a predetermined distribution ratio between a front wheel braking torque and a rear wheel braking torque is maintained [e.g., as shown in FIG. 4 of Okuda (JP, ‘643) between i) the (vertical solid line) brake force/deceleration level as depicted by the examiner in the labeled/annotated sketch of FIG. 4 above and ii) the (rightmost dashed line) second braking force/deceleration level as depicted by the examiner in the labeled/annotated sketch in FIG. 4 of Okuda (JP, ‘643), where the overall Front/Rear brake force distribution ratio remains constant but the rear Regenerative/Friction braking force ratio changes from infinite to zero];
Claims 4 to 6 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Okuda (Japan, 2010-154643; EPO machine translation attached) in view of Kim (2011/0074204) and Chae et al. (2022/0009337) as applied to claims 1 and 8 above, and further in view of Yao et al. (2021/0086623).
Okuda (JP, ‘643) as implemented or modified in view of Kim (‘204) and Chae et al. (‘337) has been described above.
The implemented or modified Okuda (JP, ‘643) vehicle control device and method may not teach the claimed wheel lock prevention and associated aspects, although Kim (204) teaches that the EMBs 10 utilized by the examiner in the modified Okuda (JP, ‘643) vehicle control device and method have ABS/TCS/ESC functions (e.g., paragraphs [0052], [0081], etc.)
However, in the context/field of a regenerative braking/anti-lock braking control system, Yao et al. (‘623) teaches in conjunction with FIGS. 3 to 5 (e.g., at paragraph [0058] to [0060]) that in response to an ABS event, the required regeneration brake torque at the driving wheels may be decreased in substantially identical proportion/rate to an increase in the required friction braking torque at the driving wheels, and thereafter, the required friction braking torque is modulated (FIG. 3, Case 1 in paragraph [0051]) or both the friction brake torque and the regenerative braking are modulated (FIG. 5, Case 3 in paragraph [0051]), wherein the increase in the required friction braking torque in FIG. 3 is made to be greater than or equal to the modulation amplitude of the required friction braking torque, obviously in order to provide stability and satisfactory braking at all times in/during the ABS event.
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement or modify the Okuda (JP, ‘643) vehicle control device and method so that the anti-lock function would have been provided in the vehicle control device, as taught by Yao et al. (‘623) and as suggested by Kim (‘204), and so that in response to the occurrence on an ABS event, the required regeneration brake torque at the driving/rear wheels would have been decreased in/at substantially identical proportion/rate to an increase in the required friction braking torque at the driving/rear wheels, and thereafter, the required friction braking torque and/or regenerative braking torque would have been modulated (FIGS. 3 and 5), as taught by Yao et al. (‘623), wherein the increase in the required friction braking torque would have obviously been made to be greater than or equal to the modulation amplitude of the required friction braking torque, as shown in FIG. 3 or 5 of Yao et al. (;’623), obviously in order to provide stability and satisfactory braking at all times in/during the ABS event, with a reasonable expectation of success, and e.g., as a use of a known technique to improve similar devices (methods, or products) in the same way.
As such, the implemented or modified Okuda (JP, ‘643) vehicle control device and method would have rendered obvious:
per claim 4, depending from claim 1, wherein, when a required deceleration is greater than a first reference deceleration [e.g., greater that the deceleration in Okuda (JP, ‘643) that causes the front mechanical braking to supplement the regenerative braking force in FIG. 4 of Okuda (JP, ‘643), e.g., such as greater than the (leftmost dashed line) first deceleration level depicted by the examiner above in the labeled/annotated version of FIG. 4] and the controller does not perform wheel lock prevention control [e.g., the controller 14, 24, 34 in Okuda (JP, ‘643) obviously determines the distribution ratio (e.g., Front/Rear) of mechanical/friction braking in FG. 4 when no wheel lock prevention is being performed], the controller determines the distribution ratio [e.g., that decreases the proportion of required regeneration brake torque and increases the proportion of required friction torque, as taught in FIG. 3 by Yao et al. (‘623), in order that the magnitude of the regeneration/friction braking torques becomes lower] based on an amplitude of the rear wheel friction braking torque [e.g., the modulation amplitude of the friction braking torque in FIG. 3 of Yao et al. (‘623)],
wherein when the actuator performs the wheel lock prevention control, the controller repeatedly changes an amount of the rear wheel regenerative friction torque and an amount of the rear wheel friction braking torque to prevent locking of front wheels and the rear wheels [e.g., as shown in the shaded block/box in FIGS. 5 and/or 3 of Yao et al. (‘623)], and
wherein the amplitude refers to how much the rear wheel friction braking torque changes [e.g., as depicted in FIG. 3 of Yao et al. (‘623)] for a preset time [e.g., during the ABS event in the shaded block/box (time duration) in FIG. 3 of Yao et al. (‘623)] when the wheel lock prevention control is performed;
per claim 5, depending from claim 1, wherein, when performing wheel lock prevention control by repeatedly changing an amount of the friction braking torque [e.g., as depicted in the shaded block/box in FIG. 3 of Yao et al. (‘623)], the controller reduces the rear wheel regenerative braking torque [e.g., as depicted in time sequence just before the shaded block/box in FIG. 3 of Yao et al. (‘623)] and increases the rear wheel friction braking torque [e.g., as depicted in time sequence just before the shaded block/box in FIG. 3 of Yao et al. (‘623)];
per claim 6, depending from claim 5, wherein the controller determines the distribution ratio so that an amount of reduction in the rear wheel regenerative braking torque per unit time is equal to an amount of increase in the rear wheel friction braking torque per unit time [e.g., as depicted in, or obvious from the depiction in, FIG. 3 of Yao et al. (‘623), in time sequence just before the shaded block/box];
per claim 10, depending from claim 8, further comprising a seventh process of performing wheel lock prevention control by repeatedly changing an amount of a friction braking torque wheels [e.g., as shown in FIG. 3 of Yao et al. (‘623)],
wherein, in the seventh process, the wheel regenerative braking torque is reduced [e.g., as depicted in time sequence just before the shaded block/box in FIG. 3 of Yao et al. (‘623)] while the rear wheel friction braking torque is increased [e.g., as depicted in time sequence just before the shaded block/box in FIG. 3 of Yao et al. (‘623)] and an amount of change [e.g., the magnitude/slope of the increase in the required friction brake torque in FIG. 3 of Yao et al. (‘623)] in the rear wheel friction braking torque per unit time is determined based on an amount of change in the wheel regenerative braking torque per unit time [e.g., to obviously match the magnitude/slope of the decrease in the required regenerative brake torque in FIG. 3 of Yao et al. (‘623), obviously so that the total brake force is not changed during/by the replacement];
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to David A Testardi whose telephone number is (571)270-3528. The examiner can normally be reached Monday, Tuesday, Thursday, 8:30am - 5:30pm E.T., and Friday, 8:30 am - 12:30 pm E.T.
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, Rachid Bendidi can be reached at (571) 272-4896. 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.
/DAVID A TESTARDI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3664
1 Here, the examiner notes that an incorrectly/imprecisely worded rejection (at paragraph 21) in the previous Office action caused applicant to change “the front wheels” (which was correct) in line 22 to “front wheels”; however, the change made by applicant did not solve the contextual grammatical issue. The examiner apologizes for this error in the previous Office action, and any confusion caused. The suggested correction herein fully corrects the grammatical issue.
2 Okuda (Japan, 2010-154643) reveals in FIGS. 4 and 5 brake control maps utilizing rear wheel regeneration, with FIGS. 4 and 5 being reproduced, with added Google machine translations of legends, below/on the next page(s) by the examiner:
FIG. 4:
PNG
media_image3.png
775
960
media_image3.png
Greyscale
FIG. 5:
PNG
media_image4.png
490
624
media_image4.png
Greyscale
3 For example, the front/rear wheel mechanical brake force distribution ratio changes in FIG. 4 (from near infinite to a finite value) at this (solid line) brake force level, as depicted by the examiner in a labeled/annotated sketch of FIG. 4 in Okuda (JP, ‘643):
PNG
media_image5.png
653
675
media_image5.png
Greyscale
4 See MPEP 2125, “However, the description of the article pictured can be relied on, in combination with the drawings, for what they would reasonably teach one of ordinary skill in the art. In re Wright, 569 F.2d 1124, 1127-28, 193 USPQ 332, 335-36 (CCPA 1977).” The maps in FIGS. 4 and 5 are described at paragraph [0046] as, “showing the relationship between the required braking force, the front wheel braking force generated by the front wheels 1 and the rear wheel braking force generated by the rear wheels 12 in accordance with the required braking force, and the ratio of the regenerative braking force generated by the motor 4 in accordance with the required braking force to the rear wheel braking force”. In this respect, the Front/Rear mechanical/friction braking distribution ratio in Okuda (JP, ‘643) may obviously be inferred/measured e.g., in FIG. 4, by one having ordinary skill in the art, by i) measuring (e.g., in millimeters) the vertical extent of the front mechanical/friction braking force, ii) measuring the vertical extent of the rear mechanical/friction braking force, and iii) forming the ratio of the respective extents.
5 The examiner understands from FIG. 4 of Okuda (JP, ‘643) that his rear mechanical/friction braking forces do not increase immediately when the first brake force (deceleration) level (leftmost dashed line in the examiner’s footnote) is first exceeded, but an immediate increase when the “first reference deceleration” is first exceeded is apparently not required by the claim language. In the examiner’s broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI) of the claim language consistent with the specification, all that is required by the claim language is that e.g., some increase in the rear wheel friction braking force/torque occur when the required deceleration increases from the first reference deceleration all the way “to the second reference deceleration”.
6 For example, the front/rear wheel mechanical brake force distribution ratio changes in FIG. 4 in Okuda (JP, ‘643) (from near infinite to a finite value) at this (vertical solid line) brake force/deceleration level, as depicted by the examiner in a labeled/annotated sketch of FIG. 4 in Okuda (JP, ‘643):
PNG
media_image6.png
653
675
media_image6.png
Greyscale
7 See MPEP 2125, “However, the description of the article pictured can be relied on, in combination with the drawings, for what they would reasonably teach one of ordinary skill in the art. In re Wright, 569 F.2d 1124, 1127-28, 193 USPQ 332, 335-36 (CCPA 1977).” The maps in FIGS. 4 and 5 are described at paragraph [0046] as, “showing the relationship between the required braking force, the front wheel braking force generated by the front wheels 1 and the rear wheel braking force generated by the rear wheels 12 in accordance with the required braking force, and the ratio of the regenerative braking force generated by the motor 4 in accordance with the required braking force to the rear wheel braking force”.
8 The examiner understands from FIG. 4 of Okuda (JP, ‘643) that his rear mechanical/friction braking forces do not increase immediately when the first deceleration level (leftmost dashed line in the examiner’s footnote) is first exceeded, but an immediate increase when the “first reference deceleration” is first exceeded is apparently not required by the claim language. In the examiner’s broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI) of the claim language consistent with the specification, all that is required by the claim language is that e.g., some increase in the rear wheel friction braking force/torque occur when the required deceleration increases from the first reference deceleration all the way “to the second reference deceleration”. This would obviously occur in Okuda (JP, ‘643) as implemented or modified in view of Chae et al. (‘337).
9 The examiner understands from FIG. 4 of Okuda (JP, ‘643) that his rear mechanical/friction braking forces do not increase immediately when the first deceleration level (leftmost dashed line in the examiner’s footnote) is first exceeded, but an immediate increase when the “first reference deceleration” is first exceeded is apparently not required by the claim language. In the examiner’s broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI) of the claim language consistent with the specification, all that is required by the claim language is that e.g., some increase in the rear wheel friction braking force/torque occur when the required deceleration increases from the first reference deceleration all the way “to the second reference deceleration”. This would obviously occur in Okuda (JP, ‘643) as implemented or modified in view of Chae et al. (‘337).
Prosecution Insights