DETAILED ACTION
This is a non-final Office Action on the merits. Claims 1-18 are currently pending and are addressed below.
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 .
Claim Objections
Claim 16 is objected to because of the following informalities: Wherein the claim states , “to require an increased force to for a given…”, in the last two lines appears to have a typographical error. Appropriate correction is recommended.
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 1-9 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
In the art rejections below the claims have been treated as best understood by the examiner. Any claim not explicitly rejected under this heading is rejected as being dependent on an indefinite claim.
Wherein claim 1 recites, “and a corresponding threshold to inhibit movement of the drive input in a way that would cause an increase in a magnitude of the dynamic parameter”, in the last line is unclear. Is this referring to “a way" the drive input is causing a change in magnitude to the dynamic parameter? Or is this saying there is a change in magnitude to the driver input movement? It is unclear and appears maybe the language requires some clarification. The claim is understood to be either or.
Examiner's Note
Examiner has cited particular paragraphs / columns and line numbers or figures in the references as applied to the claims below for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested from the applicant, in preparing the responses, to fully consider the references in entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the examiner. Applicant is reminded that the Examiner is entitled to give the broadest reasonable interpretation to the language of the claims. Furthermore, the Examiner is not limited to Applicants' definition which is not specifically set forth in the claims.
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 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.
Claims 1-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over machine translation of EP 4169785 (“Bartels”) in further view of US Pat. No. 8712661 (“Saka”).
As per claim 1 Bartels discloses a system for control of a vehicle, comprising:
a drive input operable by a person to control steering, acceleration or braking [¶13 to prevent oversteering, ¶14 One advantage of such a designed procedure is that different vehicle systems can implement the target intervention specification. For example, in vehicles that have steer-by wire technology, this can trigger active steering interventions, while in other vehicles, targeted braking of individual wheels is performed additionally or alternatively.];
a drive input actuator associated with the drive input and having an output to resist movement [¶13 For this reason, the target intervention level is usually generated in such a way as to counteract overreaction (a type of resistance to movement), ¶15 target yaw rate is determined or detected based on the steering reaction of the driver];
one or more sensors responsive to a dynamic parameter of the vehicle [¶13 different factors can be taken into account when setting an original or initially requested target intervention level. However, since the situation depends on a wide variety of factors and also changes continuously over time, the invention provides that at least one sensor signal is evaluated before the detection of the end of the shoulder drive, ¶15 an actual yaw rate is detected as an of the at least one sensor (would be based on at least speed/velocity of vehicle aka a dynamic parameter)]; and
a control system communicated with the one or more sensors and the drive input (target intervention based on driver reaction/overreaction) [¶13 based on the at least one sensor signal it is checked whether the target intervention specification is still appropriate and the target intervention specification is adjusted if it is no longer appropriately recognized due to the evaluation of the at least one sensor signal, ¶15 target yaw rate is determined or detected based on the steering reaction of the driver], wherein the control system is operable to cause the drive input actuator to adjust the target intervention setting of the drive input as a function of an output from the one or more sensors [¶15 a difference between the actual yaw rate and the target yaw rate is determined and the target intervention setting is adjusted if the amount of the difference exceeds a first yaw rate threshold or if the amount of the difference does not exceed a second yaw rate threshold, wherein the second yaw rate threshold is smaller than the first yaw rate threshold] and a corresponding threshold to adjust the target intervention setting in a way that would cause an increase in a magnitude of the dynamic parameter [¶14 It has proven particularly advantageous, if the driver's steering movement back onto the road is too abrupt, to brake the front wheel located on the shoulder before returning (a braking magnitude/dynamic parameter is increased to slow vehicle down) to the road, which usually has a higher coefficient of friction, in order to reduce the lateral forces that occur, ¶15 a difference between the actual yaw rate and the target yaw rate is determined and the target intervention setting is adjusted if the amount of the difference exceeds a first yaw rate threshold or if the amount of the difference does not exceed a second yaw rate threshold, wherein the second yaw rate threshold is smaller than the first yaw rate threshold, ¶26 evaluated, and when an increase in the steering wheel angular velocity or a steering wheel angular velocity above a steering wheel angular velocity threshold value is detected, the additional yaw moment towards the shoulder is increased (increase in parameter cases increase in target intervention)].
Bartels is silent to an output to resist movement of a drive input, a drive input actuator to increase resistance to movement and inhibit movement of the drive input by an increase in magnitude of the dynamic parameter.
Saka discloses an output to resist movement of the drive input, drive input actuator to increase resistance to movement [abstract: which increases a pedal effort of an accelerator pedal 2 when an accelerator opening angle is larger than a predetermined accelerator opening angle threshold value] and inhibit movement of the drive input by an increase in magnitude of the dynamic parameter [abstract, Fig. 3(both pedal effort and accelerator opening angle increase in magnitude in relation to each other)].
PNG
media_image1.png
402
530
media_image1.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date the invention was made to modify Bartels with the teachings of Saka for a vehicle intervention system to apply different control schemes to changing detected parameters to enhance vehicle intervention applications at appropriate situations to increase safety of the vehicle operation to a user.
As per claim 10 Bartels discloses a method of providing feedback to a vehicle driver, comprising:
monitoring a vehicle dynamic parameter [¶13 different factors can be taken into account when setting an original or initially requested target intervention level. However, since the situation depends on a wide variety of factors and also changes continuously over time, the invention provides that at least one sensor signal is evaluated before the detection of the end of the shoulder drive, ¶15 an actual yaw rate is detected as an of the at least one sensor];
operating a vehicle drive control when the vehicle dynamic parameter is beyond a first threshold to reduce a magnitude of actuation of the vehicle drive control [¶13 different factors can be taken into account when setting an original or initially requested target intervention level. However, since the situation depends on a wide variety of factors and also changes continuously over time, the invention provides that at least one sensor signal is evaluated ¶14 One advantage of such a designed procedure is that different vehicle systems can implement the target intervention specification. For example, in vehicles that have steer-by wire technology, this can trigger active steering interventions, while in other vehicles, targeted braking of individual wheels is performed additionally or alternatively.]; and
operating an input actuator to increase target intervention setting to driver of the vehicle when the vehicle dynamic parameter is beyond a second threshold that is lower than the first threshold so that operating the a different target intervention setting occurs prior to operating the vehicle drive control of the first setting [¶14 if the driver's steering movement back onto the road is too abrupt, to brake the front wheel located on the shoulder before returning (a braking magnitude/dynamic parameter is increased to slow vehicle down) to the road, which usually has a higher coefficient of friction, in order to reduce the lateral forces that occur, ¶26 evaluated, and when an increase in the steering wheel angular velocity or a steering wheel angular velocity above a steering wheel angular velocity threshold value is detected, the additional yaw moment towards the shoulder is increased… and when a decrease in the steering wheel angular velocity or a steering wheel angular velocity below a second steering wheel angular velocity threshold value is detected, the additional yaw moment towards the shoulder is decreased].
Bartels is silent to an input actuator to increase resistance to driver caused movement of a drive input and operating the input actuator by a threshold.
Saka discloses an input actuator to increase resistance to driver caused movement of a drive input and operating the input actuator by a threshold [abstract: which increases a pedal effort of an accelerator pedal 2 when an accelerator opening angle is larger than a predetermined accelerator opening angle threshold value].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date the invention was made to modify Bartels with the teachings of Saka for a vehicle intervention system to apply different control schemes to changing detected parameters to enhance vehicle intervention applications at appropriate situations to increase safety of the vehicle operation to a user.
Examiner’s Note (for dependent claims): It is understood Bartels discloses the different available driver inputs and discloses uses of any combination of inputs with the dynamic control systems [¶65] for achieving better tuned drivability. The interchanging of inputs and systems still maintain the function of the vehicle schemes using different vehicle parameters/thresholds as both the Applicant and Bartels discloses the similar array of vehicle dynamic controls and vehicle inputs that could be implemented in the disclosed invention. As the Applicant interchanges the different inputs with little other claimed detail, making them understood variations, the combination of Bartels with Saka would still be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art as the change of inputs would only require routine skill in the art to perform.
As per claim 2 Bartels discloses further includes one or more vehicle dynamic control systems arranged to reduce a magnitude of a response from the drive input when a dynamic parameter that meets a first threshold is detected, and wherein the control system operates the a different target intervention setting at a second threshold that is lower than the first threshold [¶14 if the driver's steering movement back onto the road is too abrupt, to brake the front wheel located on the shoulder before returning (a braking magnitude/dynamic parameter is increased to slow vehicle down) to the road, which usually has a higher coefficient of friction, in order to reduce the lateral forces that occur, ¶26 evaluated, and when an increase in the steering wheel angular velocity or a steering wheel angular velocity above a steering wheel angular velocity threshold value is detected, the additional yaw moment towards the shoulder is increased… and when a decrease in the steering wheel angular velocity or a steering wheel angular velocity below a second steering wheel angular velocity threshold value is detected, the additional yaw moment towards the shoulder is decreased].
Bartels is silent to an input actuator to increase resistance to movement of a drive input.
Saka discloses an input actuator to increase resistance to movement of a drive input [abstract: which increases a pedal effort of an accelerator pedal 2 when an accelerator opening angle is larger than a predetermined accelerator opening angle threshold value, Fig. 3].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date the invention was made to modify Bartels with the teachings of Saka for a vehicle intervention system to apply different control schemes to changing detected parameters to enhance vehicle intervention applications at appropriate situations to increase safety of the vehicle operation to a user.
As per claim 3 Bartels discloses further wherein the one or more vehicle dynamic control systems includes a traction control system operable to reduce a power output from a prime mover of the vehicle when the first threshold is exceeded [¶14 different vehicle systems can implement the target intervention specification. For example, in vehicles that have steer-by wire technology, this can trigger active steering interventions, while in other vehicles, targeted braking of individual wheels (reduces power output) is performed additionally or alternatively., ¶22 A further reduction in the vehicle's speed can also be achieved by limiting or reducing the drive torque.], and wherein the drive input is a throttle input actuated by a driver to increase vehicle speed [¶2 driver may perform excessive steering, braking or acceleration maneuvers, ¶57 the driver operates the accelerator pedal].
As per claim 4 Bartels discloses further wherein the one or more vehicle dynamic control systems is an anti-lock braking system operable to reduce a braking force of a braking system of the vehicle when the first threshold is exceeded, and wherein the drive input is a brake input actuated by a driver to decrease vehicle speed or keep the vehicle from moving when the vehicle is stopped [¶2 driver may perform excessive steering, braking or acceleration maneuvers, ¶4 and an anti-lock braking system (ABS or ABS plus) (disclosed as known in the background), ¶14 targeted braking of individual wheels is performed, Fig. 1 shows a vehicle controlled by a driver (steering, braking, and accelerations inputs)].
As per claim 5 Bartels discloses further wherein the one or more vehicle dynamic control systems is a stability control system operable to control one or both of a braking force of a braking system of the vehicle or a power output of a prime mover of the vehicle [¶4 and an anti-lock braking system (ABS or ABS plus) (disclosed as known in the background), ¶14 targeted braking of individual wheels is performed, ¶22 A further reduction in the vehicle's speed can also be achieved by limiting or reducing the drive torque], and wherein the drive input is one of a brake input actuated by a driver to decrease vehicle speed or keep the vehicle stopped, or a throttle input actuated by a driver to increase vehicle speed [¶2 driver may perform excessive steering, braking or acceleration maneuvers, Fig. 1 shows a vehicle controlled by a driver (vehicle have steering, braking, and accelerations inputs)].
As per claim 6 Bartels discloses further wherein the second threshold is between is lower than the first threshold [¶15 wherein the second yaw rate threshold is smaller than the first yaw rate threshold.] but is silent to the specifics be in a range of 2% to 20% lower, however, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date the invention was made to use such a range of values since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or working ranges involves only routine skill in the art as it would maintain a desired performance for the invention to operate in a functional manner that improves drivability.
As per claim 7 Bartels discloses further wherein the one or more sensors includes at least one accelerometer that is responsive to vehicle acceleration, and the first threshold is a magnitude of acceleration [¶28 a lateral acceleration is detected as one of the at least one sensor signal and the lateral acceleration is compared with a lateral acceleration threshold value (setup to determine a target integration value)].
As per claim 8 Bartels discloses further wherein the one or more sensors includes at least one wheel speed sensor, and the first threshold is set as a function of a wheel speed [¶34 The coefficient of friction can be determined based on wheel slippage, which changes with constant drive torque. Wheel speeds and differences can also provide an indication (indication of wheel speeds is understood as using some form of wheel speed detection/sensor) of different friction coefficients (which is a function of wheel speed), ¶35 difference in the coefficient of friction… (used as the bases for determining target threshold)].
As per claim 9 Bartels discloses further wherein the drive input includes at least one of a throttle input operable to increase a vehicle speed and a brake input operable to decrease a vehicle speed [¶2 driver may perform excessive steering, braking or acceleration maneuvers, ¶Fig. 1 shows a vehicle controlled by a driver (steering, braking, and accelerations inputs)].
As per claim 11 Bartels discloses further wherein the vehicle dynamic parameter is an acceleration of the vehicle [¶14 can trigger active steering intervention, ¶ 28 a lateral acceleration is detected as one of the at least one sensor signal and the lateral acceleration is compared with a lateral acceleration threshold value, which is lower than an intervention threshold of a stabilization assistant, ] and the drive control is one of a throttle control and a braking control [¶21 to reduce the vehicle's speed by braking all vehicle wheels, adapted to the respective friction coefficients, to reduce the vehicle speed ¶22 it is therefore provided that a motor torque or drive torque is limited or reduced during driving on the shoulder], and the input actuator is associated with one of a throttle input and a brake input [¶2 driver may perform excessive steering, braking or acceleration maneuvers (brake and throttle inputs are understood to be involved), ¶65 to reduce the vehicle's speed by braking all vehicle wheels, adapted to the respective friction coefficients, to reduce the vehicle speed to reduce the vehicle's speed by braking all vehicle wheels, adapted to the respective friction coefficients, to reduce the vehicle speed].
As per claim 12 Bartels discloses further wherein the input actuator is associated with one of a steering input [¶2 driver may perform excessive steering] and is arranged to require an increase the target intervention setting on the steering input to cause an increase opposing moment on the driver through the steering angle of the vehicle [¶25 If the steering wheel angular velocity is high, it can be assumed that the target yaw moment, which is determined by the driver's steering behavior, becomes inappropriately high for the vehicle to be returned to neutral. Therefore, it makes sense to increase the target intervention setting, which determines an additional yaw moment that opposes the target yaw moment of the driver].
Bartels is silent to increasing force on a driver input to increase the input’s effect.
Saka discloses increase resistance to movement of a drive input [abstract: which increases a pedal effort of an accelerator pedal 2 when an accelerator opening angle is larger than a predetermined accelerator opening angle threshold value, Fig. 3].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date the invention was made to modify Bartels with the teachings of Saka for a use different vehicle control devices for vehicle intervention system to direct control schemes accordingly to enhance vehicle intervention applications at appropriate situations generating safer driving operations.
As per claim 13 Bartels is silent to however Saka discloses further wherein the input actuator is associated with a throttle input and is arranged to require an increased force to for a given magnitude of movement of the throttle input.
[abstract: which increases a pedal effort of an accelerator pedal 2 when an accelerator opening angle is larger than a predetermined accelerator opening angle threshold value, Fig. 3].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date the invention was made to modify Bartels with the teachings of Saka for a vehicle intervention system to apply different control schemes to changing detected parameters to enhance vehicle intervention applications at appropriate situations to increase safety of the vehicle operation to a user.
As per claim 14 Bartels discloses further wherein the input actuator is associated with a brake input and is arranged to require an increase in target intervention setting based on brake input [¶2 driver may perform excessive steering, braking or acceleration maneuvers, ¶14 targeted braking (brake input) of individual wheels is performed (based on target intervention), Fig. 1].
Bartels is silent to increasing force to for a given magnitude of movement.
Saka discloses to increasing force to for a given magnitude of movement [abstract: which increases a pedal effort of an accelerator pedal 2 when an accelerator opening angle is larger than a predetermined accelerator opening angle threshold value, Fig. 3].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date the invention was made to modify Bartels with the teachings of Saka for a use different vehicle control devices for vehicle intervention system to direct control schemes accordingly to enhance vehicle intervention applications at appropriate situations generating safer driving operations.
As per claim 15 Bartels discloses further wherein the vehicle dynamic parameter is an acceleration of the vehicle with a first threshold [¶28 a lateral acceleration is detected as one of the at least one sensor signal and the lateral acceleration is compared with a lateral acceleration threshold value] however is silent to the threshold being greater than the second threshold by 2% to 20%.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date the invention was made to use such a range of values since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or working ranges involves only routine skill in the art as it would maintain a desired performance for the invention to operate in a functional manner that improves vehicle drivability.
As per claim 16 Bartels wherein the vehicle dynamic parameter is a differential in vehicle wheel speed between at least two vehicle wheels [¶34 The coefficient of friction can be determined based on wheel slippage, which changes with constant drive torque. Wheel speeds and differences can also provide an indication of different friction coefficients].
Bartels is silent the input actuator is associated with a throttle input and is arranged to require an increased force to for a given magnitude of movement of the throttle input.
.
Saka discloses the input actuator is associated with a throttle input and is arranged to require an increased force to for a given magnitude of movement of the throttle input [abstract: which increases a pedal effort of an accelerator pedal 2 when an accelerator opening angle is larger than a predetermined accelerator opening angle threshold value, Fig. 3].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date the invention was made to modify Bartels with the teachings of Saka for a use different vehicle control devices for vehicle intervention system to direct control schemes accordingly to enhance vehicle intervention applications at appropriate situations generating safer driving operations.
As per claim 17 Bartels discloses further wherein the second threshold is determined as a function of an actuation of the vehicle drive control after the first threshold has been exceeded during a driving event [¶24 least one sensor signal is to iteratively detect a vehicle speed (function of an actuation) and to evaluate a change in the vehicle speed, and when an increase in the vehicle speed is detected, the additional yaw moment pointing towards the shoulder is increased and the additional yaw moment pointing towards the roadway is decreased, and when a decrease in the vehicle speed is detected, the additional yaw moment pointing towards the shoulder is decreased and the additional yaw moment pointing towards the roadway is increased (at least two levels for thresholds, one threshold is set to impose target intervention, then changes to decrease target intervention once passed a certain speed, after exceeding through the first imposed target integration)].
As per claim 18 Bartels discloses further wherein a vehicle traction limit is determined as a function of the actuation of the vehicle drive control [¶34 The coefficient of friction can be determined based on wheel slippage, which changes with constant drive torque. Wheel speeds and differences can also provide an indication of different friction coefficients.], and wherein the second threshold is determined as a function of the vehicle traction limit [¶48 For example, if an increase in wheel slip is observed at individual wheels 23, 24 while the drive torque is kept constant, this may indicate, for example, a change in the coefficient of friction associated with driving on a shoulder].
Additional Art to Consider
Application DE 10359393 titled, Determining Dynamics Of Vehicle In Turn Involves Determining Brakes And Drive Unit Control Parameters So Transverse Acceleration Does Not Exceed Acceleration That Determines Comfort Region Boundary, also discloses using dynamic vehicle parameters (yaw rate, vehicle speed) information for control parameters for the vehicle control scheme’s with the brakes and drive unit. This is similar to the Applicant’s invention in that Applicant’s in that the vehicle control system evaluates the dynamic parameters to instigate a control scheme for improving a comfort region for a driver under unique driving conditions.
Application US 20200324758 titled, CONTROL METHOD FOR ELECTRONIC LIMITED SLIP DIFFERENTIAL, also discloses using dynamic vehicle parameters (vertical load, lateral force, steering, and vehicle speed) information for control parameters for the vehicle’s control method of the LSD and brake systems. This is similar to the Applicant’s invention in that Applicant’s in that the vehicle control system evaluates the dynamic parameters to instigate a control scheme for improving a comfort region for a driver under unique driving conditions.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PAUL A CASTRO whose telephone number is (571)272-4836. The examiner can normally be reached 10-6pm on campus.
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, Ramon Mercado can be reached at 5712705744. 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.
PAUL A. CASTRO
Examiner
Art Unit 3662
/P.A.C/Examiner, Art Unit 3658
/JELANI A SMITH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3662