DETAILED ACTION
This office action response to the communication filed on 01/31/2024
Claims 1-9 are presented for examination.
Notice of 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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (lDSs) submitted on January 31, 2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers submitted under 35 U.S.C.
119(a)-(d), which papers have been placed of record in the file.
CLAIM INTERPRETATION
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: computing unit, generation unit, acquisition units, determination unit, with combination of “configured to” in claim 1, 2, 4, and 5.
A review of the specification shows that the following appears to be the corresponding structure described in the specification for the 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), sixth paragraph limitation: For instance, on [0031] The microcomputer 70 includes two systems of reception units 501 and 502 and abnormality determination units 761 and 762 provided corresponding to the sensor devices 301 and 302, and a torque computing unit 77 and an assist amount computing unit 78 provided in common to the two systems. The torque computing unit 77 corresponds to a “physical quantity computing unit,” and the assist amount computing unit 78 corresponds to a “control amount computing unit”.
If applicant wishes to provide further explanation or dispute the examiner’s interpretation of the corresponding structure, applicant must identify the corresponding structure with reference to the specification by page and line number, and to the drawing, if any, by reference characters in response to this Office action.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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 of this title, 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, 4, and 7-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Taki et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20160362129), (“D1”, hereinafter), in view of NAKAMURA et al. (Japan Application Publication No. JP6468394B2), (“D2”, hereinafter).
As per Claim 1, D1 discloses a communication system ([see, 0005], a communication system]), comprising:
one or more sensor devices (one sensor apparatus) including a plurality of sensor elements (one sensing element) each of which detects a sensor value (a sensor value) of a physical quantity (physical quantity) regarding a same detection target ([see, [0005-0006, 0081], multiple sensing elements have substantially same specification and configuration, and detect the same physical quantity of the same detection target]); and
one or more microcomputers ([see, [0006], microcomputer]) including:
one or more reception units each of which is disposed corresponding to a respective one of the one or more sensor devices ([see, [0006, 0039, 0050], and Fig. 2 microcomputer includes a reception circuits 72, and sensor apparatus 501 includes a sensing element (SENS ELMT) 51 and a transmission circuit (TR CIRC) 54]), each of the one or more reception units being configured to receive a signal ([see, [0050], reception circuit 72 receives the sensor signal transmitted from the transmission circuit 54]) including the sensor value (sensor value) transmitted from a corresponding one of the plurality of sensor elements of the one or more sensor devices ([see, [0050, 0081], wherein a time differential calculation to the sensor value, the sensor apparatus 502 has multiple sensing elements 51, 52, multiple sensing elements have substantially same specification and configuration, and detect the same physical quantity of the same detection target]);
a physical quantity computing unit that is configured to calculate the physical quantity based on the sensor values ([see, [0050, 0081-0082], multiple sensing elements detect a common physical quantity of a common detection target, and sensor value outputted from the reception circuit 72]; and
a control amount computing unit that is configured to calculate a predetermined control amount based on the calculated physical quantity ([see, [0006], wherein the sensing element detects a sensor value indicating a physical quantity of a detection target, a sensor signal including information indicative of the sensor value at a predetermined transmission cycle includes detects a sensor value indicating a physical quantity of a detection target]),
wherein each of the one or more reception units ([see, [0006], reception circuit receives the sensor signal transmitted from the transmission circuit]) includes:
each of which is connected to a respective one of the sensor elements of the sensor devices (sensor apparatus 501 includes a sensing element) via a respective one of a plurality of communication channels ([see, [0039-0042], sensor apparatus 501 includes a sensing element (SENS ELMT) 51 connected to a respective a transmission circuit (TR CIRC) 54, and also, the sensing element 51 formed integrated circuit (IC) as a package including a plurality of communication channels through and the hall element corresponds to the sensor apparatus 501]);
acquire the sensor value transmitted via the corresponding communication channel when the corresponding communication channel is in a transmittable state ([see, [0080-0082], sensor value outputted from the reception circuit 72]); and
one transmission trigger signal generation unit (signal generation unit) that is configured to generate a common transmission trigger signal for simultaneously putting the communication channels in the transmittable state ([see, [0055-0057, 0087, 0087], synchronization signal generation unit, multiple sensing elements detect a common physical quantity of a common detection target, and receive the first and second sensor signals S1 and S2 simultaneously with the third and fourth sensor signals S3 and S4]), and
the plurality of signal acquisition units in each of the one or more reception units are configured to simultaneously acquire the sensor values by the common transmission trigger signal ([see, [0055-0057, 0087, 0087], multiple sensing elements detect a common physical quantity of a common detection target, and receive the first and second sensor signals S1 and S2 simultaneously with the third and fourth sensor signals S3 and S4]).
D1 doesn’t appear explicitly disclose: a plurality of signal acquisition units, and each of the signal acquisition units being configured to acquire the sensor.
However, D2 discloses a plurality of signal acquisition units (a signal acquisition unit 851), and each of the signal acquisition units being configured to acquire the sensor ([see, [0045], signal acquisition unit 851 acquires the first output signal Sd10 and the second output signal Sd20]).
In view of the above, having the system of D1 and then given the well-established teaching of D2, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the system of D1 as taught by D2. The motivation for doing so would have been to provide the electric power steering device results improvement of safety for assisting a steering operation of a vehicle (D2, [0008, 0053]).
As per Claim 2, D1 and D2 disclose the communication system of claim 1, and D1 further discloses wherein each of the signal acquisition units is integrally formed, as a module, with a respective one of a plurality of trigger signal generation units each of which is configured to generate a trigger signal ([see, [0039-0043], the sensing element 51 formed integrated circuit (IC) as a package including a plurality of communication channels through and the hall element corresponds to the sensor apparatus 501]), and
one of the modules included in each of the one or more reception units is a
representative module having the trigger signal generation unit that serves as the
transmission trigger signal generation unit ([see, [0039-0043, 0050], the transmission circuit 54 transmits the sensor signal, a synchronization signal generation unit (SYNC GENERATE) 77. The reception circuit 72 receives the sensor signal transmitted from the transmission circuit 54 through the signal line Ls, and updates the sensor value S received at last time with the latest value]).
As per Claim 4, D1 and D2 disclose the communication system of claim 3, and D1 further discloses wherein the one or more microcomputers further include an abnormality determination unit that is configured to determine abnormality in the sensor values transmitted from the plurality of sensor elements ([see, [0081], the sensing elements 51, 52 has abnormality or malfunction]).
As per Claim 7, D1 and D2 disclose the communication system of claim 1, and D1 further discloses wherein the one or more sensor devices are a plurality of sensor devices each of which is included in one of a plurality of systems ([see, [0005-0006, 0081], multiple sensing elements have substantially same specification and configuration, and detect the same physical quantity of the same detection target]), the one or more microcomputers include a plurality of reception units, as the one or more reception units, each of which is included in one of the plurality of systems with the corresponding sensor device ([see, [0006, 0039, 0050], and Fig. 2 microcomputer includes a reception circuits 72, and sensor apparatus 501 includes a sensing element (SENS ELMT) 51 and a transmission circuit (TR CIRC), and
the transmission trigger signal generation unit of each of the plurality of reception units included in one of the plurality of systems is configured to generate the transmission trigger signal in synchronization with each other ([see, [0052-0055], and Fig. 1B, the synchronization signal generation unit 77, and the transmission circuit 54 of the sensor apparatus 501 transmits the sensor signal to the microcomputer 711, and synchronization signal Sync may be transmitted in bidirectional manner using the signal line Ls, which transmits the sensor signal S]).
As per Claim 8, D1 and D2 disclose the communication system of claim 1, and D1 further discloses wherein the one or more sensor devices are configured to transmit the plurality of sensor values as a SENT signal based on American Society of Automotive Engineers standard SAE-J2716 ([see, [0044], the sensor signal adopts a nibble signal defined under SAE-J2716 which is a standard established by Society of Automotive Engineers International]).
As per Claim 9, D1 and D2 disclose the communication system of claim 1, and D1 further discloses wherein the communication system is applied to an electric power steering device of a vehicle ([see, [0053], applied to the electric power steering apparatus]), the one or more sensor devices are configured to detect a steering torque of a driver ([see, [0053], the communication system 401 is applied to the electric power steering apparatus 90, and the sensor value S indicates a steering torque]), and the one or more microcomputers are configured to calculate an assist amount output by a motor based on the steering torque detected by the one or more sensor devices ([see, [0053-0054], the communication system determine time differential value Sd corresponds to a changing rate of the steering torque with respect to time]).
Claims 3, 5, and 6 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over D1, hereinafter), in view of D2, and further in view of Okita et al. (US Application Publication No. 20010044688), (“D3”, hereinafter).
As per Claim 3, D1 and D2 disclose the communication system of claim 2, and D1 doesn’t appear explicitly disclose: wherein a remaining module among the modules other than the representative module is a general module, the trigger signal generated by the trigger signal generation unit in the general module serves as an intra-module trigger signal for changing a state of the signal acquisition unit in the general module to a signal receivable state, and the trigger signal generated by the trigger signal generation unit in the representative module serves as both the transmission trigger signal and the intra-module trigger signal.
However, D3 discloses wherein a remaining module among the modules other than the representative module is a general module, the trigger signal generated by the trigger signal generation unit in the general module serves as an intra-module trigger signal for changing a state of the signal acquisition unit in the general module to a signal receivable state, and the trigger signal generated by the trigger signal generation unit in the representative module serves as both the transmission trigger signal and the intra-module trigger signal ([see, [0145-0150], wherein an abnormal sensor is detected, abnormality of another sensor can be detected based on a sensor value provided by the abnormal sensor. When determined whether the vehicle is in a state in which four wheels are in the grip state, by comparing the grip level of each of the four wheels inputted from the tire grip state detecting circuit 24 with a previously determined threshold value]).
In view of the above, having the system of D1 and then given the well-established teaching of D3, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the system of D1 as taught by D3. The motivation for doing so would have been to provide evaluate threshold value compare between the grip state and the slipping state results accuracy determination of the grip states can be improved (D3, [0119]).
As per Claim 5, D1 and D2 disclose the communication system of claim 4, and D1 further discloses wherein each of the sensor values acquired by each of the plurality of sensor elements includes
a positive characteristic sensor value with linear output characteristics having a positive correlation with an actual physical quantity ([see, [0052-0054], and Fig. 1A-B, a Positivity of the sensor value S is defined corresponding to a rotation direction of the steering wheel 91]); and
a negative characteristic sensor value with linear output characteristics of a negative correlation with the actual physical quantity ([see, [0052-0054], and Fig. 1A-B, a negativity of the sensor value S is defined corresponding to a rotation direction of the steering wheel 91]),
the linear output characteristics of the negative characteristic sensor value having an inclination with an absolute value same as an absolute value of an inclination of the linear output characteristics of the positive characteristic sensor value ([see, [0033, 0052-0054], an absolute value of the time differential value of Positivity and negativity of the sensor value S]).
D1 doesn’t appear explicitly disclose: the abnormality determination unit is configured to determine that at least one of the sensor values is abnormal when a sum of the positive characteristic sensor value and the negative characteristic sensor value falls out of a predetermined range.
However, D3 discloses the abnormality determination unit is configured to determine that at least one of the sensor values is abnormal when a sum of the positive characteristic sensor value and the negative characteristic sensor value falls out of a predetermined range ([see, [0107, 0147-0149], determined that all of the four wheels are not in the grip state (negative determination), abnormality detection of the sensors constituting the object of abnormality detection by the sensor abnormality detecting circuit 30 (yaw rate sensor 26, steering angle sensor 28, and cross acceleration sensor 29) is low, and threshold value determine based on the sensor value]).
In view of the above, having the system of D1 and then given the well-established teaching of D3, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the system of D1 as taught by D3. The motivation for doing so would have been to provide evaluate threshold value compare between the grip state and the slipping state results accuracy determination of the grip states can be improved (D3, [0119]).
As per Claim 6, D1 and D2 disclose the communication system of claim 4, and D1 further discloses wherein the one or more sensor devices are a plurality of sensor devices each of which is included in one of a plurality of systems ([see, [0006, 0039, 0050], and Fig. 2 microcomputer includes a reception circuits 72, and sensor apparatus 501 includes a sensing element (SENS ELMT) 51 and a transmission circuit (TR CIRC) 54]),
the one or more microcomputers ([see, [0006], microcomputer]) include a plurality of reception units, as the one or more reception units ([see, [0050], reception circuit 72 receives the sensor signal transmitted from the transmission circuit 54]), each of which is included in one of the plurality of systems with the corresponding sensor device ([see, [0050, 0081], wherein a time differential calculation to the sensor value, the sensor apparatus 502 has multiple sensing elements 51, 52, multiple sensing elements have substantially same specification and configuration, and detect the same physical quantity of the same detection target]).
D1 doesn’t appear explicitly disclose: when the abnormality determination unit determines that any of the sensor values is abnormal, the one or more microcomputers continue to calculate the physical quantity using only the sensor value detected by the sensor device included in one of the plurality of systems that is determined to be normal.
However, D3 discloses when the abnormality determination unit determines that any of the sensor values is abnormal ([see, [0120], determined that at least two wheels at diagonally opposed positions are not in the grip state (negative determination), it is assumed that accuracy of abnormality determination of the sensors constituting the object of the abnormality detection by the sensor abnormality detecting circuit 30]), the one or more microcomputers ([see, [0006], microcomputer]) continue to calculate the physical quantity using only the sensor value detected by the sensor device ([see, [0117-0118], the acceleration calculated on the basis of the wheel speed signal inputted from the wheel speed sensor 12]) included in one of the plurality of systems that is determined to be normal ([see, [0136], the steering angle sensor 28 and the cross acceleration sensor 29 are all normal]).
In view of the above, having the system of D1 and then given the well-established teaching of D3, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the system of D1 as taught by D3. The motivation for doing so would have been to provide evaluate threshold value compare between the grip state and the slipping state results accuracy determination of the grip states can be improved (D3, [0119]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BERHANU BELETE whose telephone number is (571)272-3478. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 7:30am-5pm, Alt. Friday, and EDT.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, JEONG, MOO R. can be reached on (571) 272-9617. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/BERHANU D BELETE/
Examiner, Art Unit 2468
/WUTCHUNG CHU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2418