Test Apparatus for Simulating Off-Road Conditions for A Motor Vehicle
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 .
Terminal Disclaimer
The terminal disclaimer filed on 07/21/2026 disclaiming the terminal portion of any patent granted on this application which would extend beyond the expiration date of US Patent # 11,898,935 has been reviewed and is accepted. The terminal disclaimer has been recorded.
Response to Amendment
Receipt is acknowledged of Applicant’s reply filed 07/21/2026 which has amendments to the claims and Applicant's arguments related to the previous rejection. The above have been entered and considered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant argues the new title obviates the objection to the specification. The examiner is persuaded and withdraws the objection.
Applicant’s amended drawings have cured the drawing deficiencies leading to the outstanding objection, therefore, the objection is withdrawn.
Applicant argues the 07/21/2026 terminal disclaimer obviates the nonstatutory double patenting rejection. The examiner is persuaded and withdraws the rejection.
Applicant argues the amendments overcome the rejection under 112(b). The examiner is persuaded and withdraws the rejection.
Applicant seems to argue that the resistance assembly being located outside of the platform is not obvious but has not officially traversed the examiner’s assertion of official notice and has not explained why locating the resistance assembly outside of the platform would not be functionally possible with the cited prior art. Nevertheless, the examiner has reconsidered the broadest reasonable interpretation of “outside of the platform” and decided combined Goto/ Tian reads on the limitation “the at least one resistance assembly located outside of the platform”, since Goto’s dynamo motors are mounted to the outside of the test table as depicted in Goto’s figure 4. Additionally, the examiner has decided combined Shibayama/ Goto reads on the limitation “the plurality of resistance assemblies are located outside of the platform”, since Shibayama’s flywheels and braking means are mounted to the sliding table as depicted in Shibayama’s figure 7.
Applicant further argues Shibayama only discloses a mode in which brakes are applied to rear rolls resulting in a greater load on the rear wheels than the front wheels but does not disclose a mode in which the brakes apply a greater load to the front wheels than the rear wheels. Regarding this assertion and the reconsideration of the BRI above, please see the second non-final rejection below.
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.
Claims 1-2 and 4-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Goto (JP 2017219524; “Goto”), in view of Tian (CN 112683549; “Tian”).
Regarding claim 1, Goto discloses, in figures 1-4, a test apparatus (10) for simulating off-road conditions (the examiner believes this preamble recitation does not further limit the recited structure in the body of the claim, see MPEP 2111.02) for a motor vehicle (C), the test apparatus (10) comprising: a platform (12); front and rear roller assemblies (13) coupled to the platform (12), each of the front roller assembly (13) and the rear roller assembly (13) being configured to receive a pair of wheels (see figure 4, examiner notes Goto’s front pair of wheels are mounted to a front roller group and Goto’s rear pair of wheels are mounted to a rear roller group) of the motor vehicle (C); and at least one resistance assembly (14) coupled to at least one of the front and rear roller assemblies (13) and configured to vary a resistance (see Goto’s translation, p. 2, ¶ 8, examiner notes Goto’s motors connected to the front and rear roller groups are capable of applying a load to the rotation of the rollers) of the at least one of the front and rear roller assemblies (13), the at least one resistance (14) assembly located outside (see fig. 4) of the platform (12), wherein an orientation of the platform (12) is adjustable (see Goto’s translation, p. 2, ¶ 3, examiner notes the test stand can be tilted in a 3D inclined attitude).
Goto fails to disclose a driveshaft secured between the front and rear roller assemblies.
Tian teaches, in figure 1, a driveshaft (6) secured between the front roller assembly (see Tian’s annotated fig. 1 below) and the rear roller assembly (see Tian’s annotated fig. 1 below) and configured to transmit rotary power (see Tian’s translation, p. 5, ¶ 2, examiner notes the synchronous adjusting device drives the roller groups) from one of the front roller assembly (see Tian’s annotated fig. 1 below) to the other of the rear roller assembly (see Tian’s annotated fig. 1 below).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use Tian’s scheme of powering front and rear pairs of test table rollers with a single motor using a drive shaft in place of Goto’s roller motor combination to reduce the required number of dynamo motors. Doing so would provide for driving a synchronous transmission to effectively simulate the inertia of different driving modes utilizing one motor and thus reducing cost.
PNG
media_image1.png
796
811
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Goto and Tian disclose, in Goto’s figures 1-5, the at least one resistance assembly (Goto (14)) is secured (see Goto’s fig. 4, examiner notes the dynamo motors are at least connected to the platform through the depicted driveshafts) to the platform (Goto (12)).
Regarding claim 4, Goto and Tian disclose, in Goto’s figures 1-5, each of the front roller assembly (Goto (13)) and the rear roller assembly (Goto (13)) includes: first and second roller devices (see Goto’s fig. 3, examiner notes Goto includes a roller pair for each wheel of the four wheel vehicle), each of the first and second roller devices (13) configured to receive a respective wheel of the pair of wheels (see previous comment); and an axle secured to and between (see Goto’s figs. 3, examiner notes fig. 3 depicts an axle connecting rear roller pairs and fig. 4 depicts an axle connecting front roller pairs) the first and second roller devices (Goto (13)).
Regarding claim 5, Got and Tian disclose, in Tian’s figure 1, each of the first and second roller devices (see Goto’s fig. 3, examiner notes Goto includes a roller pair for each wheel of the four wheel vehicle, also see Tian’s annotated fig. 1 above) includes: a first drum fixed for rotation with the axle (see Tian’s annotated fig. 1 above); a second drum configured to be fixed for rotation with a drum axle (see Tian’s annotated fig. 1 above); and a transmission element ((20) see Tian’s annotated fig. 1 above) meshingly engaged with the axle (see Goto’s figs. 3, examiner notes fig. 3 depicts an axle connecting rear roller pairs and fig. 4 depicts an axle connecting front roller pairs, also see Tian’s fig. 1, examiner construes Tian’s AC current power dynamometer connection to the first drum to be via axle) and configured to be meshingly engaged with the drum axle (see Tian’s annotated fig. 1 above), the transmission element ((20) see Tian’s annotated fig. 1 above) configured to transmit rotatory power from the first drum to the second drum (see Tian’s annotated fig. 1 above).
Goto and Tian do not explicitly state the transmission element is meshingly engaged to the drum axle.
However, the Examiner takes official notice that meshingly engaging an axle to connect the axle to another element is well-known in the art.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a well-known scheme of meshingly engaging an axle to an element to connect Got and Tian’s rollers. Doing so provides an efficient scheme for connecting rotating elements.
Regarding claim 6, Goto and Tian disclose, in Goto’s figures 1-5 and Tian’s figures 1-3, the at least one resistance assembly (Goto (14), Tian (18) is engaged with the transmission element ((20) see Tian’s annotated fig. 1 above).
Regarding claim 7, Goto and Tian disclose, in Tian’s figures 1-3, a brake assembly (Tian (16, 18, 20) see Tian’s translation, p. 6, ¶ 1, examiner notes Tian’s AC power dynamometer applies braking torque to each rotating roller in each rotating assembly) associated with each of the first and second roller devices (see Goto’s fig. 3, examiner notes Goto includes a roller pair for each wheel of the four wheel vehicle, also see Tian’s annotated fig. 1).
Regarding claim 8, Goto and Tian, as combined in claim 1, disclose, in Goto’s figures 1-4, the orientation (see Goto’s translation, p. 2, ¶ 3, examiner notes the test stand can be tilted in a 3D inclined attitude) includes roll, pitch, yaw, and combinations thereof (see Goto’s translation, p. 2, ¶ 6, Goto sets yaw, pitch and rolling angle).
Regarding claim 9, Goto and Tian, as combined in claim 1, disclose, in Goto’s figures 1-4, a crane (Goto (21,22,23,24)); and a plurality of suspension devices (25), see Goto’s translation, p. 4, examiner notes Goto’s suspension means includes a universal joint and hanging tolls, such as wire rope and a chain), each suspension device (Goto (25)) secured at a first end to a respective corner (see fig. 4, examiner notes Goto’s universal joints are located at the corners of the test table) of the platform (Goto (12)) and at a second end (see Goto’s fig. 1) to the crane (Goto (21, 22, 23, 24)), wherein the crane (Goto (21, 22, 23, 24)) is configured to adjust the orientation (see Goto’s translation, p. 2, ¶ 3, examiner notes the test stand can be tilted in a 3D inclined attitude) of the platform (Goto (12)).
Regarding claim 10, Goto and Tian disclose, in Goto’s figures 1-4, the at least one resistance assembly (Goto (14)) includes a plurality of resistance assemblies (see Goto’s fig. 4), and wherein the plurality of resistance assemblies (Goto (14)) are operable independent of each other (see fig. 4, examiner construes Goto’s front and rear roller groups connected to separate dynamo motor to be evidence the motors operate at least on independent roller groups).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 11-20 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Regarding claim 11, although Shibayama and Goto disclose an inspecting apparatus with front and rear roller pairs coupled to a test table, the distance between the roller pairs being adjustable and configured to receive front and rear wheels of a vehicle, a driveshaft secured between the roller pairs and configured to selectively supply power to front and rear wheels, brake assemblies connected to each of the roller pairs and configured to independently slow rotation of selected roller pairs, where the orientation of the test table is adjustable; Shibayama and Goto do not disclose an apparatus having a controller that operates the resistance assemblies to vary resistance between the front and rear roller assemblies between a two loading conditions, the first loading condition provides a greater load to the front roller assembly than the rear roller assembly and the second loading condition provides grater load to the rear roller assembly than the front roller assembly. Furthermore, no other prior art can be found to motivate or teach applicant’s apparatus with a controller in communication with the plurality of resistance assemblies and configured to operate the plurality of resistance assemblies to vary the resistance of the front and rear roller assemblies between a first loading condition and a second loading condition, in the first loading condition, the front modular roller assembly comprises a first load and the rear modular roller assembly comprises a second load that is greater than the first load, in the second loading condition, the front modular assembly comprises a third load and the rear modular assembly comprises a fourth load that is less than the third load, in combination with the remaining limitations of the claim.
The dependent claims are allowed for at least the same reasons as above.
Regarding claim 20, although Shibayama discloses a method for inspecting a motorcar by disposing front and rear wheels of a vehicle on front and rear roller pairs coupled to a test table, driving the vehicle on the front and rear rollers, selectively applying brakes to the front and rear roller assemblies assemblies connected to each of the roller pairs and configured to independently slow rotation of selected roller pairs; Shibayama does not disclose a method of varying the resistance between the front and rear roller assemblies between a two loading conditions, the first loading condition provides a greater load to the front roller assembly than the rear roller assembly and the second loading condition provides grater load to the rear roller assembly than the front roller assembly. Furthermore, no other prior art can be found to motivate or teach applicant’s method including varying a resistance of the roller assembly such that between a first loading condition and a second loading condition, in the first loading condition, a first wheel of the pair of wheels comprises a first load and a second wheel of the pair of wheels comprises a second load that is greater than the first load, in the second loading condition, the first wheel comprises a third load and the second wheel comprises a fourth load that is less than the third load, in combination with the remaining limitations of the claim.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TIMOTHY P GRAVES whose telephone number is (469)295-9072. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8 a.m. - 5 p.m..
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, Peter Macchiarolo can be reached at 571-272-2375. 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.
/TIMOTHY P GRAVES/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2855
Prosecution Insights