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 Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Young (US-20080141955-A1), in view of Wright (US-20190375414-A1), in view of Niwa (US-20110241905-A1), in view of Harvey (US-8000588-B1), and in view of Kamen (US-20130226383-A1).
Regarding Claim 1
Disclosure by Young
Young discloses:
A support mechanism
See at least: ""the vehicle reservoir tank 12 is fixedly coupled to an inner wall 10a of the vehicle 10 in a conventional manner, e.g. via a fastener 26." (0018])
Rationale: Young’s fixed coupling (via fastener) provides a structure that supports the reservoir tank on the vehicle, which corresponds to a support mechanism for the reservoir tank.
of a reservoir tank
See at least: "a vehicle reservoir tank 12" ([0017])
Rationale: Young expressly discloses a reservoir tank (vehicle reservoir tank 12).
for a vehicle,
See at least: "a vehicle 10 ... with a vehicle reservoir tank 12" ([0017])
Rationale: Young expressly places the reservoir tank on a vehicle.
the support mechanism comprising:
See at least: "the cooling circuit of the vehicle 10 basically includes the vehicle reservoir tank 12" ([0017])
Rationale: Young describes the disclosed arrangement as including the reservoir tank as part of the vehicle system, consistent with a comprising structure.
the reservoir tank in which a coolant is stored,
See at least: "The reservoir tank 12 normally stores a predetermined amount of coolant in the interior when the vehicle 10 is parked." ([0017]])
Rationale: Young explicitly states coolant is stored in the reservoir tank.
and that is connected to a cooling circuit;
See at least: "The vehicle reservoir tank 12 is arranged in a cooling circuit of the vehicle 10... The cooling circuit of the vehicle 10 basically includes the vehicle reservoir tank 12, a radiator 14, a coolant path (water jacket) 16." ([0017])
Rationale: Young expressly discloses the reservoir tank arranged in (i.e., connected in) the vehicle cooling circuit.
wherein a bottom wall of the reservoir tank
See at least: "the main reservoir portion 30 basically includes first and second end walls 40 and 42, first and second side walls 44 and 46, upper and lower walls 48 and 50, and a projection 52 extending into the main reservoir chamber C from one of the lower wall 50 and the second end wall 42 that is configured and arranged to redirect a fluid flowing into the main reservoir chamber C" ([0021])
Rationale: Young teaches a lower wall 50 which serves as the bottom wall of the reservoir tank. This wall defines the lower boundary of the fluid storage chamber and is the surface upon which the coolant rests under static conditions. The geometry of the bottom wall in Young includes a lower section 50a and a sloped section 50b, which together facilitate the collection and drainage of fluid through the associated port.
is provided with a port
See at least: "a fluid inlet/outlet port 40a" ([0022])
Rationale: Young discloses a port on the reservoir tank (fluid inlet/outlet port 40a).
that is an inlet and outlet of the coolant;
See at least: "The inlet/outlet port 40a acts as an inlet port when the vehicle reservoir tank 12 receives coolant from the radiator 14... the inlet/outlet port 40a acts as an outlet port when the vehicle reservoir tank 12 supplies coolant to the radiator 14." ([0024])
Rationale: Young expressly teaches that the same port acts as both an inlet and an outlet for coolant.
Claim limitations Not Explicitly Disclosed by Young
Young does not explicitly disclose:
a displacement device that is configured to vary an attitude of the reservoir tank;
a map data storage device storing map data;
a map data processor configured to set a travel route of the vehicle on the map data;
a positioning device configured to acquire a position of the vehicle;
and a processor configured to control the displacement device,
the displacement device includes a first actuator that is pivotable about a vertical axis;
a second actuator that is pivotable about an axis orthogonal to the vertical axis and is connected to the reservoir tank;
and an arm that connects the first actuator and the second actuator,
and the processor is configured to predict a lateral acceleration vector generated with respect to the vehicle in a vehicle width direction, based on an acceleration or a deceleration operation of the vehicle, a vehicle speed of the vehicle, and road information ahead of the vehicle along the travel route,
obtain a gravitational acceleration vector generated with respect to the vehicle in a gravitational direction,
predict a combined acceleration vector from the lateral acceleration vector and the gravitational acceleration vector,
and control the displacement device to displace the attitude of the reservoir tank such that the bottom wall of the reservoir tank is orthogonal to the combined acceleration vector.
Disclosure by Wright
Wright discloses:
and the processor is configured to predict a lateral acceleration vector
See at least: "determining, via an electronic controller, a predicted lateral G-force that will act on the vehicle while the vehicle moves along a road curve." (Abstract)
Rationale: Wright teaches that an electronic processor is configured to predict a lateral acceleration vector, which is described as a predicted lateral G-force. In the context of vehicle dynamics, lateral G-force is a vector quantity representing the acceleration experienced by a vehicle as it deviates from a straight path. Wright’s system uses predictive algorithms to anticipate these forces before they affect the vehicle's state, allowing for preemptive adjustments to vehicle subsystems. The use of a processor to perform these complex trigonometric and kinematic calculations is a standard application of modern vehicle control units (VCUs).
generated with respect to the vehicle
See at least: "…includes : determining , via an electronic control module of the vehicle , a predicted lateral G - force that will act on the vehicle while the vehicle moves." ([0004])
Rationale: Wright teaches that the acceleration is generated with respect to the vehicle. The predicted forces are calculated within the vehicle's local frame of reference. This is critical for stabilizing internal components like a reservoir tank, as the stabilization must account for the forces acting on the tank relative to the vehicle's chassis. Wright’s focus on the interaction between the road curvature and the specific vehicle system confirms that the forces are localized to the vehicle’s own inertial frame.
in a vehicle width direction,
See at least: "configured to measure, among other things, a lateral G-force... of the vehicle." ([0032])
Rationale: Wright teaches that the lateral G-force occurs in a vehicle width direction. In vehicle dynamics, "lateral" is synonymous with the width direction (the y-axis in a standard SAE vehicle coordinate system). This acceleration is what pushes the vehicle—and its stored fluids—toward the outside of a turn. Wright's disclosure of measuring and predicting this specific force component directly maps to the requirement for managing acceleration along the width of the platform.
based on an acceleration or a deceleration operation of the vehicle, a vehicle speed of the vehicle, and road information ahead of the vehicle along the travel route,
See at least: "Predicted vehicle Speed = vehicle Speed + acceleration* time to corner." (FIG. 3, 108); "predictive lateral G-force is determined based on the image data from the front camera and map data stored on a map database module of the vehicle." ([0006]); "determine the amount of time the vehicle will take to reach the road curve from a current location as a function of a current vehicle speed of the vehicle and a predicted distance... determine a predicted vehicle speed... as a function of the current vehicle speed and an acceleration." ([0013])
Rationale: Wright teaches that the prediction is based on an acceleration or a deceleration operation of the vehicle (denoted as 'A'), a vehicle speed of the vehicle (denoted as '$V_c$'), and road information ahead of the vehicle (obtained via the front camera and map data) along the travel route. Wright's formula for predicted speed specifically incorporates the vehicle's current acceleration/deceleration to estimate how fast the vehicle will be moving when it reaches an upcoming curve. The "road information" includes the curvature of the road and the distance to the curve, which are essential inputs for calculating future lateral g-forces.
Motivation to Combine Young and Wright
Therefore, given the teachings as a whole, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having Young and Wright before them, to incorporate the predictive g-force control logic of Wright into the vehicle reservoir tank system of Young. The primary reference, Young, explicitly identifies a technical problem where high-pressure fluid flow into the reservoir "sometimes spills out of the overflow port". Young explains that such spills lead to "a mess in the engine compartment" and can eventually cause "thermal incidents" if the coolant level gets too low. Wright provides a solution for predicting the exact dynamic forces (lateral g-forces) that cause fluid to shift and spill during vehicle maneuvers. A PHOSITA would be motivated to combine these teachings because predicting an upcoming lateral acceleration event, such as a sharp curve, would allow the vehicle's thermal management system to prepare for the resulting fluid shift. By knowing the lateral g-load in advance, the system could adjust the tank’s state to counteract the force that would otherwise drive the coolant toward the overflow port. This combination uses the predictive sensor data of Wright to enhance the reliability and cleanliness of Young's reservoir tank. The technical field compatibility is high, as both references are directed toward automotive control systems, and the integration of predictive vehicle dynamics into fluid management systems represents a predictable improvement in vehicle stability and maintenance.
Claim limitations Not Explicitly Disclosed by the Combination of Young and Wright
After combining the teachings of Young and Wright, the following are not explicitly disclosed:
a displacement device that is configured to vary an attitude of the reservoir tank;
a map data storage device storing map data;
a map data processor configured to set a travel route of the vehicle on the map data;
a positioning device configured to acquire a position of the vehicle;
the displacement device includes a first actuator that is pivotable about a vertical axis;
a second actuator that is pivotable about an axis orthogonal to the vertical axis and is connected to the reservoir tank;
and an arm that connects the first actuator and the second actuator,
obtain a gravitational acceleration vector generated with respect to the vehicle in a gravitational direction,
predict a combined acceleration vector from the lateral acceleration vector and the gravitational acceleration vector,
and control the displacement device to displace the attitude of the reservoir tank such that the bottom wall of the reservoir tank is orthogonal to the combined acceleration vector.
Disclosure by Niwa
Niwa discloses:
a map data storage device
See at least: "The navigation device 1... includes... a data recording part 12." ([0039]); "The data recording part 12 is provided with a hard disk (not shown) serving as an external storage device and a recording medium, and a recording head (not shown) serving as a driver for reading a map information DB 31." ([0042])
Rationale: Niwa discloses a map data storage device in the form of a data recording part 12. This component includes a physical storage medium (like a hard disk) and a database structure (DB 31) designed to hold geographical and infrastructural information. In modern vehicular electronics, such a storage device is a prerequisite for navigation and autonomous travel, providing the high-density data required for spatial reasoning.
storing map data;
See at least: "map information DB 31 is a storage unit storing, for example, link data 32 regarding roads (links), node data 33 regarding node points, facility data 34 regarding facilities, map display data for displaying a map." ([0043)
Rationale: Niwa’s database is explicitly storing map data, including link data 32 and node data 33. This map data provides a digital representation of the road network, including the geometry and connectivity of various travel paths. By storing this information locally, the vehicle can access road attributes even in areas with poor network connectivity, ensuring consistent performance of predictive systems.
a map data processor
See at least: "a navigation ECU 13 that performs various kinds of arithmetic processing based on the input information." ([0039])
Rationale: Niwa teaches a map data processor in the form of a navigation Electronic Control Unit (ECU) 13. The ECU is the "brain" of the navigation system, capable of interpreting map data, calculating distances, and executing complex pathfinding algorithms. This processor acts as the interface between the raw map data and the vehicle’s high-level control strategies.
configured to set a travel route
See at least: "navigation ECU…13…that performs... route setting processing for setting the route from the departure point (the current position or the home) to the destination based on the link data stored in the map information DB 31." ([0046])
Rationale: Niwa’s processor is configured to set a travel route. Setting a route involves calculating a sequence of road segments (links) that connect a starting point to a desired destination. This processing is essential for the vehicle to understand where it is going and what road conditions (like curves) it will encounter along the way.
of the vehicle on the map data;
See at least: "navigation device 1... is mounted as an in-vehicle device... performs travel guidance for the vehicle... displaying a map image... on a display device." ([0046])
Rationale: The travel route is specifically for the guidance of the vehicle on the map data. Niwa explains that the navigation device is an in-vehicle system that assists the driver or the vehicle's autonomous system in traversing the digital map. The route is projected onto the map data to provide a spatial context for the vehicle’s future movements.
a positioning device
See at least: "a current position detection part 11 that detects a current position of the vehicle 2." ([0039])
Rationale: Niwa teaches a positioning device (part 11). This device consists of various sensors that work together to determine where the vehicle is located in the real world. Without a positioning device, a map-based system would be unable to synchronize its digital data with the vehicle's actual physical location.
configured to acquire a position of the vehicle;
See at least: "current position detecting part 11 is formed of a global positioning system (GPS) 21... and can detect a current position and a direction of the vehicle." ([0041])
Rationale: The positioning device is configured to acquire a position of the vehicle using a GPS receiver 21. By receiving signals from satellites, the system can determine its latitude, longitude, and elevation. This acquired position is then used by the map data processor to "snap" the vehicle to the nearest road link in the map database.
and a processor
See at least: "navigation ECU 13... is provided with: a central processing unit (CPU) 41." ([0046])
Rationale: Niwa discloses a processor (CPU 41) within the navigation ECU. The CPU executes the software instructions required to perform position detection, map rendering, and route calculation. In the architecture of a modern vehicle, the CPU is the primary engine for data synthesis and control signal generation.
Motivation to Combine Young, Wright, and Niwa
Therefore, given the teachings as a whole, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having Young, Wright, and Niwa before them, to utilize the map processing and positioning teachings of Niwa to enable the predictive g-force calculations suggested by Wright for the reservoir tank of Young. Wright explicitly states that the "predictive lateral G-force is determined based on... map data stored on a map database module". Niwa provides the specific, detailed technical structure for such a "map information DB" and "navigation ECU" configured to set a "travel route". A PHOSITA would be motivated to integrate Niwa's navigation architecture into the combined system because Wright's predictive logic relies on knowing the curvature of the road ahead of the vehicle. By using Niwa's positioning device to acquire the vehicle's position and the travel route processor to identify upcoming road links, the system can extract the exact curvature parameters ($k$) from the map data before the vehicle reaches the curve. This synergy allows the reservoir tank control system to have a "look-ahead" capability, calculating future acceleration vectors with high precision. This is a common and predictable combination in the automotive industry, where navigation data is increasingly used to optimize the performance of active safety and stability subsystems (e.g., ADAS and active suspension).
Claim limitations Not Explicitly Disclosed by the Combination of Young, Wright, and Niwa
After combining the teachings of Young, Wright, and Niwa, the following are not explicitly disclosed:
a displacement device that is configured to vary an attitude of the reservoir tank;
the displacement device includes a first actuator that is pivotable about a vertical axis;
a second actuator that is pivotable about an axis orthogonal to the vertical axis and is connected to the reservoir tank;
and an arm that connects the first actuator and the second actuator,
obtain a gravitational acceleration vector generated with respect to the vehicle in a gravitational direction,
predict a combined acceleration vector from the lateral acceleration vector and the gravitational acceleration vector,
and control the displacement device to displace the attitude of the reservoir tank such that the bottom wall of the reservoir tank is orthogonal to the combined acceleration vector.
Disclosure by Harvey
Harvey discloses:
a displacement device
See at least: "A miniaturized, light weight, turret-mounted…assembly is disclosed... A retraction/extension assembly…" (Abstract, )
Rationale: Harvey teaches a displacement device in the form of a mounting and retraction assembly. A displacement device is any mechanical system designed to move a payload through space. In Harvey, this device is used to extend, retract, pan, and tilt a camera turret. In the context of the present claim, this mechanism is utilized to move the reservoir tank. Harvey’s focus on "miniaturized" and "light weight" components makes this displacement device particularly suitable for automotive subsystems where space and weight are at a premium.
that is configured to vary an attitude of the reservoir tank;
See at least: "The pan function comprises a rotating, vertically oriented, U-shaped camera yoke 14 which is... driven by a servomechanism... The tilt function comprises the use of a flexible control-cable 21 to rotate the angle of …with respect to the vertical axis of the yoke" (Col. 1, ll. 38-55)
Rationale: Harvey’s mechanism is configured to vary an attitude of its payload. Attitude refers to the orientation of an object in three-dimensional space. By using servos to rotate the payload about pan and tilt axes, Harvey can change the spatial orientation of the payload relative to its base.
configured to control the displacement device,
See at least: "The potentiometer 25 is connected to the yoke 14 in a manner that permits the potentiometer 25 to feedback the horizontal rotation angle... to a controller." (Col. 4, ll. 9-14)
Rationale: The controller sends signals to the servos to move them to specific displacements. This electronic control allows the mechanical assembly to be integrated into the vehicle’s wider data-bus.
the displacement device includes a first actuator
See at least: "A pan servo 16 and a tilt servo 17 are mounted to the base 10." (Col. 3, ll. 60-61)
Rationale: Harvey’s displacement device includes a first actuator, which is the pan servo 16. An actuator is a component that converts an electrical signal into physical motion.
that is pivotable about a vertical axis;
See at least: "pivotally mounted to yoke 14 within the opening 11 so as to allow the semi-shell 12 to tilt about tilt axis 13. The semi-shell 12 is not connected to the base 10 so that it can also rotate about pan axis 15. The tilt and pan axis are illustrated generally horizontal and vertical." (Col. 3, ll. 52-57)
Rationale: Harvey discloses that the yoke is pivotable about a vertical axis. This vertical orientation allows for pan motion. The vertical axis is established by the mounting of the pan gear and yoke assembly relative to the base.
a second actuator
See at least: "a tilt servo 17" (Col. 3, ll. 60)
Rationale: Harvey teaches a second actuator, which is the tilt servo. This separate motor is dedicated to the second degree of freedom in the system, allowing the payload to move independently in the tilt direction.
that is pivotable about an axis orthogonal to the vertical axis
See at least: "The pan function comprises a rotating, vertically oriented, U-shaped camera yoke which is chain (or other positive drive means, such as toothed belt) driven by a servomechanism" (Col. 3, ll. 56)
Rationale: A vertically oriented rotating yoke implies pivoting about a vertical axis.
and is connected to the reservoir tank;
See at least: "The driving end of the tilt cable is attached to the inside of the turret shell... such that a pull or push on the cable will result in a rotational displacement of the turret ball, and thus the camera." (Col. 1, ll. 59-63)
Rationale: Harvey’s actuators are connected to the payload. In the original reference, the payload is a camera turret, but in the combined system, the actuator is connected to the reservoir tank. The connection allows the mechanical work performed by the servo to be translated into the movement of the tank.
and an arm
See at least: "yoke 14 which is rotatably mounted in housing arm 24" (Col. 4, ll. 6)
Rationale: Harvey teaches an arm, specifically an output arm. This structural member provides the mechanical leverage and support needed to hold the payload away from the main chassis and actuators.
that connects the first actuator and the second actuator,
See at least: "Gear 20 drives a follower gear 23 and the end of 10 15 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 yoke 14 which is rotatably mounted in housing arm 24." (Col. 4, ll. 5-6)
Rationale: The mechanical linkage in Harvey teaches an arm that connects the first actuator and the second actuator. The output arm is the physical bridge that supports the camera turret (controlled by the tilt servo) and is itself moved by the base assembly (controlled by the pan and retraction servos). This hierarchical connection allows the combined motion of both actuators to influence the final position of the payload.
Motivation to Combine Young, Wright, Niwa, and Harvey
Therefore, given the teachings as a whole, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having Young, Wright, Niwa, and Harvey before them, to implement an actuator-driven, multi-axis attitude-varying mechanism (Harvey’s pan/tilt actuator architecture) to physically reorient Young’s reservoir tank, under processor control using navigation/map inputs (Niwa) and predictive lateral dynamics inputs (Wright), because multi-axis actuator mechanisms are routinely used to reorient mounted payloads and produce predictable orientation control results.
Claim limitations Not Explicitly Disclosed by the Combination of Young, Wright, Niwa, and Harvey
After combining the teachings of Young, Wright, Niwa, and Harvey, the following are not explicitly disclosed:
obtain a gravitational acceleration vector generated with respect to the vehicle in a gravitational direction,
predict a combined acceleration vector from the lateral acceleration vector and the gravitational acceleration vector,
and control the displacement device to displace the attitude of the reservoir tank such that the bottom wall of the reservoir tank is orthogonal to the combined acceleration vector.
Disclosure by Kamen
Kamen discloses:
obtain a gravitational acceleration vector
See at least: "detects the body position of the rider... “ ([0054]); “the bar should be positioned parallel the resultant vector of lateral acceleration and gravity." ([0110])
Rationale: Kamen teaches a system that is configured to obtain a gravitational acceleration vector, which is referred to simply as "gravity." In any stability-control application, gravity is the constant downward acceleration ($9.81 m/s^2$) that serves as the primary reference for the vertical direction. Kamen uses this vector to establish a baseline for stabilization, ensuring that the system knows which way is "down" before calculating additional dynamic forces.
generated with respect to the vehicle
See at least: "The control system maintains the stability of the transporter by continuously sensing the orientation of the transporter." ([0003])
Rationale: Kamen discloses that the orientation and forces are generated with respect to the vehicle (the transporter). The sensors (gyroscopes and inclinometers) are mounted on the vehicle to detect its state relative to the external environment. This localized sensing is what allows the processor to determine how to adjust the vehicle’s subsystems to maintain balance.
in a gravitational direction,
See at least: "lean... refers to the angle with respect to the local vertical direction." ([0046])
Rationale: Kamen specifies that the orientation is measured relative to the "local vertical direction," which is the gravitational direction. By aligning its coordinate system with gravity, Kamen can accurately calculate the "roll angle" and "pitch" of the vehicle, which are the angular deviations from the true gravitational vertical.
predict a combined acceleration vector
See at least: "In order to keep the user most stable, the bar should be positioned parallel the resultant vector of lateral acceleration and gravity." ([0110])
Rationale: Kamen teaches how to predict a combined acceleration vector, which he calls a "resultant vector." A resultant vector is the mathematical combination (vector sum) of all forces acting on an object. In a turning vehicle, a body is subjected to both gravity and lateral acceleration. Kamen’s system predicts the angle of this resultant vector to determine the most stable position for the platform. This prediction is the core of dynamic stabilization, as it identifies the direction of the "apparent" vertical force.
from the lateral acceleration vector and the gravitational acceleration vector,
See at least: "handlebar position based on the vector sum of lateral acceleration and the acceleration due to gravity." ([0114])
Rationale: Kamen explicitly teaches that the combined vector is calculated from the lateral acceleration vector and the gravitational acceleration vector. This "vector sum" logic accounts for the fact that a body on a turning platform feels a force that is the diagonal of the two component forces. By calculating this sum, Kamen identifies the total g-load acting on the system.
and control the displacement device
See at least: "handlebar is positioned with respect to the chassis based on lateral acceleration and roll angle... position loop that commands a position." ([0109])
Rationale: Kamen’s processor is configured to control the displacement device (the powered pivot or handlebar). The controller calculates the necessary position and then sends commands to the motor to move the structure to that specific angle. This active control ensures that the structure remains aligned with the dynamic forces of the vehicle in real-time.
to displace the attitude of the reservoir tank
See at least: "The powered pivot creates a torque between the chassis 12 and the control shaft 16... position control required by the active handlebar system." ([0116])
Rationale: In the context of the combined system, Kamen's controller is used to displace the attitude of the reservoir tank. By applying torque to the displacement device (Harvey’s actuators), the system changes the orientation of the tank. Kamen's position control loop is the specific software mechanism used to ensure that the tank reaches and maintains the correct attitude.
such that the bottom wall of the reservoir tank is orthogonal to the combined acceleration vector.
See at least: "the bar should be positioned parallel the resultant vector of lateral acceleration and gravity." ([0110])
Rationale: Kamen teaches positioning a structure "parallel" to the resultant vector. If a support arm or structure is parallel to the resultant acceleration vector, the base platform or bottom wall of the reservoir tank is orthogonal to the combined acceleration vector. In physics, if a structure is parallel to a force vector, its perpendicular cross-section (the bottom wall) is orthogonal to that vector. This alignment is what keeps the fluid "level" in the tank; when the tank is tilted such that the total g-load is pointing straight at the bottom wall, the fluid remains centered and does not slosh toward the overflow port.
Motivation to Combine Young, Wright, Niwa, Harvey, and Kamen
Therefore, given the teachings as a whole, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having Young, Wright, Niwa, Harvey, and Kamen before them, to incorporate Kamen’s combined-acceleration-vector computation (gravity plus turning/lateral acceleration) and actuator-based attitude control that aligns a surface normal with the combined acceleration vector into the Young + Wright + Niwa + Harvey reservoir-tank attitude control system, because Kamen provides a known, predictable control objective and computation for stabilizing a surface relative to combined inertial/gravitational acceleration using actuators, which directly complements Wright’s predictive dynamics and Niwa’s route-based map inputs for forward-looking control.
Regarding Claim 5,
The combination of Young, Wright, Niwa, Harvey, and Kamen establishes the support mechanism of Claim 1, which is the basis for Claim 5.
Disclosure by Young
Young does not explicitly disclose the following claim limitations:
wherein the processor is further configured to obtain a deceleration acceleration vector
based on a depression amount of a brake pedal of the vehicle,
and predict the combined acceleration vector from the lateral acceleration vector, the gravitational acceleration vector, and the deceleration acceleration vector.
Disclosure by Wright
Wright discloses:
wherein the processor is further configured to obtain a deceleration acceleration vector based on a depression amount of a brake pedal of the vehicle,
"the TCM 18 receives other inputs from, for example the ECM 16. These inputs include, but are not limited to, dynamic acceleration pedal information, brake pedal information, deceleration information, instant lateral G-force, and accumulated lateral G-force." ([0073])
Rationale: Wright teaches that the processor is further configured to obtain a deceleration acceleration vector by receiving and processing deceleration information through the transmission control module. In the context of vehicle dynamics, deceleration information constitutes a vector quantity representing the longitudinal rate of change of velocity. By obtaining this data, the processor can account for the longitudinal inertial forces that act on the vehicle's internal components during braking events. The cited text expressly recites “brake pedal information,” which corresponds to based on a depression amount of a brake pedal of the vehicle, because the brake pedal information inherently includes the brake pedal’s depression/position information used for vehicle control inputs.
Motivation to Combine Young and Wright
Therefore, given the teachings as a whole, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having Young and Wright before them, to incorporate Wright’s brake-related deceleration input acquisition (“brake pedal information” / “deceleration information”) into Young’s processor-controlled attitude displacement framework, because both references address vehicle control using predicted vehicle dynamics inputs, and incorporating deceleration-based inputs into the processor’s control logic would have predictably improved stability/attitude control performance during braking events using known, compatible vehicle sensor inputs.
Claim limitations Not Explicitly Disclosed by the Combination of Young and Wright
After combining the teachings of Young and Wright, the following are not explicitly disclosed:
and predict the combined acceleration vector from the lateral acceleration vector, the gravitational acceleration vector, and the deceleration acceleration vector.
Disclosure by Kamen
Kamen discloses:
and predict the combined acceleration vector from the lateral acceleration vector, the gravitational acceleration vector, and the deceleration acceleration vector.
"the bar should be positioned parallel the resultant vector of lateral acceleration and gravity...” ([0110]); “…position based on the vector sum of lateral acceleration and the acceleration due to gravity.” ([0115]).
Rationale: Kamen expressly teaches forming a “resultant vector” / “vector sum” using “lateral acceleration” and “gravity,” which corresponds to predict the combined acceleration vector from the lateral acceleration vector [and] the gravitational acceleration vector; and, in view of Wright’s expressly-recited “deceleration information” obtained based on “brake pedal information,” it would have been obvious for a PHOSITA to include that deceleration acceleration component as an additional acceleration vector term in the same resultant/vector-sum computation, thereby satisfying predict the combined acceleration vector from the lateral acceleration vector, the gravitational acceleration vector, and the deceleration acceleration vector as a predictable extension of Kamen’s vector-sum approach using known vehicle deceleration inputs..
Motivation to Combine Young, Wright, Niwa, Harvey, and Kamen
Therefore, given the teachings as a whole, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having Young, Wright, Niwa, Harvey, and Kamen before them, to utilize the multi-axis resultant vector calculation of Kamen with the predictive deceleration data of Wright for the control of Young's reservoir tank. The combination of Young, Wright, Niwa, and Harvey establishes a system capable of predicting turning forces and physically moving the tank. Kamen provides the specific mathematical logic for combining "lateral acceleration and gravity" into a single vector. A PHOSITA would be motivated to include the deceleration acceleration vector in the combined vector calculation because vehicles frequently brake and turn simultaneously. By obtaining the "depression amount" of the "brake pedal" as taught by Kamen and Wright, and summing it with the lateral and gravitational vectors as taught by Kamen, the system can predict the true 3D combined acceleration vector. This allows the processor to orient Young's reservoir tank such that the bottom wall is orthogonal to the net inertial force, preventing fluid slosh in the longitudinal direction during braking just as it does in the lateral direction during turning. This integration represents a predictable application of vector mechanics to achieve the desired result of total fluid stability.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s remarks filed 11/06/2025 have been fully considered. For the reasons set forth below, the arguments are not persuasive, and the rejections are maintained/newly made as appropriate.
Application Status and Disposition of the Claims
Applicant states that, upon entry of the amendments, claims 2–4 are cancelled and claims 1 and 5 are pending. The Office acknowledges the cancellation of claims 2–4, therefore, previous rejections directed at claims 2-4 are withdrawn due to the claims 2-4 being canceled.
Applicant asserts that the amendments do not introduce new matter. No new matter issue is raised in this response.
Response to Claim Interpretation
Applicant addresses an Office interpretation of cancelled claim 2 under 35 U.S.C. §112(f). As claim 2 is cancelled, Applicant’s arguments regarding 112(f) are moot.
Response to Rejections Under 35 U.S.C. §103
Applicant’s arguments are not responsive to the present rejection
Applicant’s §103 remarks are directed to the prior art relied upon in the previous Office Action, including Kerkewitz, Lewis, Soles, Akio, and Avrea, and contend that the cited art fails to disclose, inter alia, (i) obtaining a gravitational acceleration vector, (ii) predicting a combined acceleration vector from lateral and gravitational acceleration vectors, and (iii) controlling a displacement device such that a bottom wall is orthogonal to the combined acceleration vector.
However, the present Final rejection is not based on Kerkewitz/Lewis/Soles/Akio/Avrea. The present rejection applies a different set of references, namely Young in view of Wright, Niwa, Harvey, and Kamen, as set forth in the Office Action.
Accordingly, Applicant’s arguments directed to the previously applied references do not traverse the present ground(s) of rejection and therefore do not overcome the current §103 rejection of claim 1.
Claim 1 — Rejection maintained
The rejection of amended claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 is maintained for the reasons set forth in the present Office Action.
Additionally, to the extent Applicant’s remarks are read as asserting that the newly added limitations necessarily render claim 1 nonobvious, the Office notes that the present rejection expressly applies references that teach the newly emphasized subject matter, including, as set forth in the Office Action:
a navigation/map system including map data storage, route setting on map data, and vehicle position acquisition (Niwa);
prediction of lateral acceleration based on vehicle operation/vehicle speed and forward road information (Wright);
obtaining/using gravitational acceleration and forming a combined/resultant acceleration from acceleration components (Kamen);
controlling a multi-axis displacement mechanism to orient a mounted body relative to the combined/resultant acceleration (Kamen), implemented using the applied actuator architecture (Harvey), in the vehicle reservoir tank/cooling circuit context (Young).
For these reasons, Applicant’s assertions that the prior art fails to teach the amended limitations are not persuasive as applied to the present references.
New Claim 5 — Newly rejected under 103
Applicant argues that new claim 5 “would not have been obvious over the art of record for at least the same reasons” as amended claim 1. This argument is not persuasive because claim 5 includes additional limitations beyond claim 1, including obtaining a deceleration acceleration vector based on a depression amount of a brake pedal, and predicting the combined acceleration vector from lateral + gravitational + deceleration acceleration vectors.
Newly presented claim 5 is newly rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over the applied references and for the reasons set forth in the present Office Action, including the rationale applied to claim 1 and the additional limitations recited in claim 5.
More specifically, as set forth in the Office Action, the applied references provide for incorporating braking/deceleration inputs into vehicle-dynamics prediction/control (Wright) and for combining acceleration components into a resultant/combined vector for actuator-based orientation control (Kamen). A person of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to include the braking-derived deceleration component as an additional acceleration-vector term in the combined acceleration framework to improve predictive control under braking events, yielding predictable results in the same vehicle dynamics/control environment.
Examiner Conclusion
For the reasons above:
The rejection of claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. 103 is maintained.
New claim 5 is newly rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103.
Previous rejections directed at claims 2-4 are withdrawn due to the claims 2-4 being canceled.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OLUWABUSAYO ADEBANJO AWORUNSE whose telephone number is (571)272-4311. The examiner can normally be reached M - F (8:30AM - 5PM).
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, Jelani Smith can be reached at (571) 270-3969. 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.
/OLUWABUSAYO ADEBANJO AWORUNSE/Examiner, Art Unit 3662
/JELANI A SMITH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3662