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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 21-23, 27, 29-32, 34-36, 38-39 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Bodie [US Pat # 5,707,115].
Regarding claim 21: Bodie shows a vehicle comprising: an electric motor; a wheel drivably coupled to the electric motor to propel the vehicle (see fig 1, lines 1-4); a drive torque control (20) for receiving a first input (see fig 1) for controlling a drive torque of the vehicle; a regenerative brake control (22) for receiving a second input (60) for controlling a regenerative braking force of the wheel; and an electronic control unit (12) configured to map the first input to a requested driving torque, map the second input to a requested regenerative braking torque (“…The electric vehicle sums both the brake and the accelerator torque commands and controls the vehicle in response to the sum of the requested torque commands and, when the sum requires braking, blends the regenerative and friction braking…”.) , determine a torque command based on the requested driving torque and the requested regenerative braking torque, wherein a torque limit is applied to at least one of the requested driving torque and the requested regenerative braking torque to determine the torque command, and transmit the torque command to the electric motor (“…The motor controller 22 then determines the amount of regeneration braking available and applies the a regenerative braking command to inverter 12 responsive to the minimum of (i) the sum of the torque commands and (ii) the regenerative braking torque available. In response, inverter 12 controls motor 18 to provide regenerative braking by generating power and transferring the power to battery pack 10…”).
Regarding claim 22: Bodie shows wherein the wheel includes a rear wheel (44, 46) of the vehicle.
Regarding claim 23: Bodie shows further comprising an electric power store powering the electric motor (“…rechargeable electric power storage device suitable for use in an electric vehicle…”), wherein, when the torque command is negative, the electric motor regeneratively brakes the wheel and energy captured during the regenerative braking is stored in the electric power store (“…When the torque request is negative, indicating regenerative braking is desired, block 142 limits the regenerative braking to the limit that is determined by block 136, and further in response to battery voltage and, if desired, vehicle speed. The output of block 142 commands the motor inverter system to act as a generator causing regenerative braking to the vehicle front wheels represented as summation block 148…).
Regarding claim 27: Bodie shows wherein the regenerative brake control includes a foot pedal (70).
Regarding claim 29: Bodie shows wherein the electronic control unit is configured to map the first input (input from control 20, see fig 1) to the requested driving torque based on a speed of the vehicle.
Regarding claim 30: Bodie shows wherein the electronic control unit is configured to map the first input to the requested driving torque by accessing a two-dimensional table (“…a look-up table function providing an output on line 214 between zero and one. For small wheel deceleration values on line 202 decelerations…) mapping the first input and a speed of the vehicle to the requested driving torque.
Regarding claim 31: Bodie shows wherein the electronic control unit is configured to map the first input (input form control 20, see fig 1) to the requested driving torque by accessing a table associated with a currently- activated ride mode of a plurality of ride modes (“…through a look-up table with the input as the total brake torque requested and the output as the open-loop rear brake torque command…).
Regarding claim 32: Bodie shows wherein the electronic control unit is configured to map the second input (60) to the requested regenerative braking torque based on an equation, the equation including dividing a position of the regenerative brake control by a predetermined maximum position and multiplying a result of the division by a predetermined maximum regenerative braking torque (“…Brake control 134 receives an input represented by line 151 from the brake pedal, runs the brake pedal input through a low-pass filter 152 to filter out noise and provides the filtered signal to block 153, which converts the signal, using a multiplication constant, to a brake torque command…”).
Regarding claim 34: Bodie shows wherein regenerative braking provided via the electric motor based on the torque command is the sole braking mechanism provided for the wheel (… Brake controller 66 converts the brake pedal pressure signals on lines 84 and 85 to a brake torque command and provides a request on line 60 to motor controller 22 for regenerative braking…).
Regarding claim 35: Bodie shows A method of operating an electric motor of a vehicle, the method comprising: receiving a first input (input from control 20, see fig 1) from a first control (20) included in the vehicle, the first control (20) controlling a drive torque of the vehicle; receiving a second input (60) from a second control included in the vehicle; mapping the first input received from the first control (20) to a first requested torque; mapping the second input (60) received from the second control to a second requested regenerative braking torque; determining, with an electronic control unit (12), a torque command based on the first requested driving torque and the second requested regenerative braking torque, wherein a torque limit is applied to at least one of the first requested driving torque and the second requested regenerative braking torque to determine the torque command (“…The electric vehicle sums both the brake and the accelerator torque commands and controls the vehicle in response to the sum of the requested torque commands…”); and transmitting the torque command to an electric motor included in the vehicle.
Regarding claim 36: Bodie shows wherein determining the torque command includes summing the first requested driving torque and the second requested regenerative braking torque (“…The electric vehicle sums both the brake and the accelerator torque commands and controls the vehicle in response to the sum of the requested torque commands…”).
Regarding claim 38: Bodie shows A system for operating an electric motor of a vehicle, the system comprising: at least one electronic control unit (12) included in the vehicle, the at least one electronic control unit configured to: receive a first input from a first control (20) included in the vehicle, the first control controlling a drive torque of the vehicle, receive a second input (60) from a second control included in the vehicle, map the first input (input form control 20) to a first requested torque, map the second input to a second requested regenerative braking torque, determine a torque command based on the first requested driving torque and the second requested regenerative braking torque, apply a torque limit to the torque command, and transmit the torque command to an electric motor included in the vehicle to regeneratively brake (22) a wheel of the vehicle.
Regarding claim 39: Bodie shows wherein the at least one electronic control unit (12) determines the torque command by summing the first requested driving torque and the second requested regenerative braking torque (“…The motor controller 22 then determines the amount of regeneration braking available and applies the a regenerative braking command to inverter 12 responsive to the minimum of (i) the sum of the torque commands and (ii) the regenerative braking torque available…”).
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, 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 24-26, 28, 33, 37 and 40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bodie [US Pat # 5707115] in view of Hughes [US Pub # 2003/0169002].
Regarding claims 24-26, 28 and 33, 37 and 40: Bodie does not show wherein the drive torque control includes a twist grip positioned on a handlebar of the vehicle. wherein the drive torque control is positioned on a right side of a handlebar of the vehicle. wherein the regenerative brake control includes a pivotable lever positioned on a handlebar of the vehicle. wherein the regenerative brake control is positioned on a left side of a handlebar of the vehicle. wherein the predetermined maximum braking torque is selected from memory based on at least one selected from a group consisting of an operator, a driving condition, and a ride mode. wherein mapping the second input to the second requested torque includes determining the second requested torque based on the second input and a maximum amount of regenerative braking torque available, wherein the maximum amount of regenerative braking torque is stored in memory and selected based on at least one selected from a group consisting of an operator, a driving condition, and a ride mode of the vehicle.
wherein the at least one electronic control unit is configured to map the second input to the second requested torque by determining the second requested torque based on the second input and a maximum amount of regenerative braking torque available, wherein the maximum amount of regenerative braking torque is stored in memory and selected based on at least one selected from a group consisting of an operator, a driving condition, and a ride mode of the vehicle.
However Hughes shows wherein the drive torque control includes a twist grip (22) positioned on a handlebar of the vehicle. wherein the drive torque control is positioned on a right side of a handlebar of the vehicle (see [0029]). wherein the regenerative brake control (64) includes a pivotable lever (24) positioned on a handlebar of the vehicle. wherein the regenerative brake control (64) is positioned on a left side of a handlebar of the vehicle (see [0029]). wherein the predetermined maximum braking torque is selected from memory based on at least one selected from a group consisting of an operator, a driving condition, and a ride mode (see [0053, lines 3-6]). wherein mapping the second input to the second requested torque includes determining the second requested torque based on the second input (see claim 30) and a maximum amount of regenerative braking torque available, wherein the maximum amount of regenerative braking torque is stored in memory (see [0053], lines 3-5) and selected based on at least one selected from a group consisting of an operator, a driving condition, and a ride mode of the vehicle.
wherein the at least one electronic control unit is configured to map the second input (60) to the second requested torque by determining the second requested torque based on the second input and a maximum amount of regenerative braking torque available (see [0053], lines 3-6), wherein the maximum amount of regenerative braking torque is stored in memory (see [0053], lines 1-3) and selected based on at least one selected from a group consisting of an operator, a driving condition, and a ride mode of the vehicle.
It would have been obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filling date to have positioned the torque control on the handlebar to easily access the controller and control the vehicle, It would also have been obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filling date to store maximum torque value in a memory to communicate with the controller and to set a torque threshold to protect the vehicle.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on 03/18/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to applicant argument that Bodie fails to disclose mapping an input to a requested regenerative braking torque. Bodie, input received via the brake pedal is mapped at most to a total requested braking torque and is not mapped to a specific level of regenerative braking being requested by an operator of the vehicle.
First, claim 1 does not disclose that the input is mapped to a specific lever of regenerative braking. It is simply “mapping input to a requested braking” which is discloses by Bodie, in addition Bodies discloses the flowing : “… The dynamic proportioning keeps the total brake torque of the vehicle to the level requested by the driver…”. The level of total brake torque is determined by the driver.
In response to applicant argument that Bodie failed to show applying any type of limit to either of the received torque commands
Bodies discloses the following: “…block 142 limits the command to the maximum limit motor torque request. The resultant torque request command is provided to the motor inverter system 144, which provides motive force to the vehicle front wheels…” a limit is applied to the requested driving torque.
In response to applicant argument that Bodie failed to teach or suggest a vehicle wherein regenerative braking is the sole braking mechanism for the wheel.
Bodie disclose mentioned only one generative braking system. Bodie didn’t mentioned any multiple generative braking, see for example the summary of the invention of Bodie states the following : “this invention provides a regenerative braking method that provides improved energy recovery by increasing the braking load of the regenerative braking system and correspondingly decreasing the braking load on the friction braking system….”.
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 ZAKARIA ELAHMADI whose telephone number is (571)270-5324. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 10-6 EST.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Minnah Seoh can be reached on 571-270-7778. 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.
/ZAKARIA ELAHMADI/
Examiner, Art Unit 3618
Prosecution Insights