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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This action is in response to the applicant’s filing on September 18, 2025. Claims 1-8 are pending.
Response to Amendment and Arguments
In respond to applicant's arguments based on the filed amendment with respect to 35 U.S.C. 102 rejections of said previous office action have been fully considered; however, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made.
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 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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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 1-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over in view of Nishimori et al. US2013/0261862 (“Nishimori”) in view of Sharma et al. US2009/0181819 (“Sharma”).
Regarding claim(s) 1, 3. Nishimori discloses a control system for a vehicle comprising:
a main prime mover that generates a drive torque; a motor that generates a torque different from the drive torque; and a transfer that distributes the drive torque to front wheels and to rear wheels while changing a split ratio of the drive torque distributed to the front wheels and to the rear wheels; wherein a drive force to propel the vehicle is established by both of the front wheels and the rear wheels, the transfer comprises a differential mechanism in which a first rotary element, a second rotary element, and a third rotary element are rotated differentially, a front output shaft that delivers the torque to the front wheels, and a rear output shaft that delivers the torque to the rear wheels, the first rotary element is connected to the motor in a torque transmittable manner, the second rotary element is connected to the front output shaft in a torque transmittable manner (FIG. 11 is a schematic configuration of a drive train and a periphery thereof of a vehicle according to a modified example of the present disclosure. In vehicle 10A, the configuration of the front wheel drive device 34 and the rear wheel drive device 38 of the vehicle 10 that relates to the embodiment given above is reversed. In other words, the front wheel drive device 34a of vehicle 10A is provided with second and third traction motors 16a and 18a disposed on the front side of vehicle 10A. In addition, the rear wheel drive device 33a of vehicle 10A is provided with an engine 12a and a first traction motor 14a disposed in-line at the rear side of the vehicle 10A.),
the third rotary element is connected to the main prime mover and the rear output shaft in a torque transmittable manner, the control system comprises a controller that controls the motor since the main prime movers of Nishimori is configured in the front of the vehicle (fig. 11).
the controller is configured to execute a drive force distribution control to control the torque of the motor such that the split ratio of the drive torque is adjusted to a target ratio (FIG. 5 (and FIG. 6), when lateral G force is below a first divergence generation value Gdiv 1 (first lateral G force), the turning radius ratio R/R0 for each drive state (FWD, RWD, and AWD) take nearly identical values. When the lateral G force exceeds the first divergence generation value Gdiv 1, the turning radius ratio R/R0 for FWD and the turning radius ratio R/R0 for RIND and AWD begin to diverge. In addition, when the lateral G force exceeds a second divergence generation value Gdiv 2 (second lateral G force), the turning radius ratio R/R0 for RWD and the turning radius ratio R/R0 for AWD begin to diverge.), and
execute a turning behavior stabilizing control temporarily instead of the drive force distribution control to increase the torque of the motor, when understeering or oversteering greater than a reference value is determined or predicted based on a behavior and a running condition of the vehicle while the vehicle is turning (para. 70-75, when the actual turning radius R is smaller relative to the reference turning radius R0 and the turning radius ratio R/R0 becomes smaller, this indicates that there is a tendency for oversteer. On the other hand, when the actual turning radius R is larger relative to the reference turning radius R0 and the turning radius ratio R/R0 becomes larger, this indicates that there is a tendency for understeer.)
Nishimori does not explicitly disclose a planetary gears are used to control torque transfer between the front and rear axles.
Sharma discloses another vehicle system configuration with the differential mechanism includes a planetary gear set comprising a sun gear serving as the first rotary element, a carrier serving as the second rotary element, and a ring gear serving as the third rotary element, the rear output shaft extends coaxially with a common rotational center axis of the main prime mover and the planetary gear set, and the front output shaft extends along an axis different from the rotational center axis of the rear output shaft (abstract, A drive axle assembly includes first and second axleshafts and a drive mechanism coupling a driven input shaft to the axleshafts. The drive mechanism includes a differential assembly, a planetary gear assembly operably disposed between the differential assembly and the first axleshaft, a brake and first and second mode clutches. The first clutch is operable with the brake and the planetary gear assembly to increase the rotary speed of the first axleshaft which, in turn, causes a corresponding decrease in the rotary speed of the second axleshaft. The second clutch is operable with the brakes and the planetary gear assembly to decrease the rotary speed of the first axleshaft so as to).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Nishimori with Sharma teaching of using planetary gears set improve torque transfer and vehicle stability control. One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination would have been predictable with a reasonable expectation of success since it merely a different arrangements and configurations of parts.
Regarding claim(s) 2. Nishimori discloses wherein the turning behavior stabilizing control includes: a control to increase the torque of the motor in a direction that a rotational speed of the rear output shaft is increased to a rotational speed of the front output shaft or higher, based on determination or prediction of the understeering; and a control to increase the torque of the motor in a direction that the rotational speed of the front output shaft is increased to the rotational speed of the rear output shaft or higher, based on determination or prediction of the oversteering (para. 137-138, the turning radius ratio R/R0 was used as a turning characteristic related value that generates divergence in relation with the lateral G force at the time of switching the drive state, but the first lateral G force threshold value G1 and the second lateral G force threshold value G2 may be set based on other turning characteristic values (for example, the actual turning radius R itself or the slip ratio of any of the wheels).).
Regarding claim(s) 4. Nishimori discloses wherein the speed difference reduction control includes: a control to increase the torque of the motor in a direction that the rotational speed of the rear output shaft is increased to the rotational speed of the front output shaft or higher, when the rotational speed of the front output shaft is higher than the rotational speed of the rear output shaft; and a control to increase the torque of the motor in a direction that the rotational speed of the front output shaft is increased to the rotational speed of the rear output shaft or higher, when the rotational speed of the rear output shaft is higher than the rotational speed of the front output shaft (para. 142-145 f FIG. 4, when the vehicle 10 is at a high vehicle speed (S12: No). FWD is selected and the rear motors 16 and 18 do not drive. Therefore, essentially, a decision is made whether the rear motors 16 and 18 can drive depending on vehicle speed V.).
Regarding claim(s) 5, 6, 7, 8. Nishimori does not explicitly disclose wherein the differential mechanism includes a planetary gear set comprising a sun gear serving as the first rotary element, a carrier serving as the second rotary element, and a ring gear serving as the third rotary element, the rear output shaft extends coaxially with a common rotational center axis of the main prime mover and the planetary gear set, and the front output shaft extends along an axis different from the rotational center axis of the rear output shaft.
Sharma discloses another vehicle system configuration with the differential mechanism includes a planetary gear set comprising a sun gear serving as the first rotary element, a carrier serving as the second rotary element, and a ring gear serving as the third rotary element, the rear output shaft extends coaxially with a common rotational center axis of the main prime mover and the planetary gear set, and the front output shaft extends along an axis different from the rotational center axis of the rear output shaft (abstract, A drive axle assembly includes first and second axleshafts and a drive mechanism coupling a driven input shaft to the axleshafts. The drive mechanism includes a differential assembly, a planetary gear assembly operably disposed between the differential assembly and the first axleshaft, a brake and first and second mode clutches. The first clutch is operable with the brake and the planetary gear assembly to increase the rotary speed of the first axleshaft which, in turn, causes a corresponding decrease in the rotary speed of the second axleshaft. The second clutch is operable with the brakes and the planetary gear assembly to decrease the rotary speed of the first axleshaft so as to).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Nishimori with Sharma teaching of using planetary gears set improve torque transfer and vehicle stability control. One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination would have been predictable with a reasonable expectation of success since it merely a different arrangements and configurations of parts.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Inquiry
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TRUC M DO whose telephone number is (571)270-5962. The examiner can normally be reached on 9AM-6PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Ramón Mercado, Ph.D. can be reached on (571) 270-5744. 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.
/TRUC M DO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3658