Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/534,516

INTEGRATED AUTO-STEER SYSTEM FOR VEHICLE

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Dec 08, 2023
Examiner
WEHRLY, CHRISTOPHER B
Art Unit
3611
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Agjunction LLC
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
52%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 5m
To Grant
85%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 52% of resolved cases
52%
Career Allow Rate
100 granted / 194 resolved
-0.5% vs TC avg
Strong +33% interview lift
Without
With
+33.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 5m
Avg Prosecution
30 currently pending
Career history
224
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
12.0%
-28.0% vs TC avg
§103
35.8%
-4.2% vs TC avg
§102
19.3%
-20.7% vs TC avg
§112
30.9%
-9.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 194 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 Objections Claim 11 is objected to because of the following informalities: “a motor for rotating the steering control to steer the vehicle” should be and is interpreted as “a motor for rotating the steering control to steer a[[the]] vehicle”. Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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 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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claims 1-5, 7-9, 11-15 and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by US 2017/0261988 A1 to Owens et al (hereinafter Owens). Regarding claim 1, Owens discloses a method, comprising: providing a vehicle (102a) to utilize a steering actuator (300) (Figs. 1 and 9 & [0030]-[0031]) including: an external interface (216) to receive control signals from an external device (130) (Figs. 1-2 & [0033]-[0034],[0039]); a motor (340) for rotating a steering control (330) to steer the vehicle (Fig. 9 & [0059]); and an enclosure (110) including a control system (202,204) to control the motor (340) based at least on part on the control signals received over the external interface (216) (Figs. 1-2 and 9 & [0039], [0041], [0049] disclose the steering actuator receives controls from either the CPU or the mission computer and that the CPU/mission computer can receive controls through the antennae from the mobile user device 130. The box surrounding the M-PAK 110 is interpreted as being the enclosure); the method further comprising operating the control system (202,204) based on the received control signals to control the motor (340) and automatically steer the vehicle (102) (Figs. 1-2 and 9 & [0031], [0039], [0041], [0049]). Regarding claim 2, depending on claim 1, Owens further discloses wherein the steering control (330) comprises a circular steering control (330) (Fig. 9 depicts the steering controller 330 form a circular path to match the steering wheel. Note this interpretation is similar to that depicted by “circular arm 124” of Fig. 1 and [0025] of Applicant’s originally filed Specification). Regarding claim 3, depending on claim 1, Owens further discloses wherein the external device (130) comprises a user device (130) (Fig. 1 & [0033]-[0034] discloses the device may be a portable tablet), and the method further comprises: coupling the user device (130) to the external interface (216) (Figs. 1-2 & [0033]-[0034] and [0039]); and inputting the control signals to the steering actuator (110) using the user device (130) and over the external interface (216) (Figs. 1-2 & [0033]-[0034] and [0039] discloses the user can send steering controls from the tablet to the steering actuator via wireless communication from the tablet to the steering actuator and the control signals are received over the external interface 216). Regarding claim 4, depending on claim 3, Owens further discloses wherein the user device comprises a smart phone, a tablet, or other mobile device (Fig. 1 & [0033]-[0034] discloses the device may be a portable tablet). Regarding claim 5, depending on claim 3, Owens further discloses wherein the external interface (216) comprises a wireless transceiver (216), and wherein the method further comprises wirelessly coupling the user device (130) to the wireless transceiver (216) (Figs. 1-2 & [0033]-[0034] and [0039]). Regarding claim 7, depending on claim 5, Owens further discloses wherein the wireless transceiver (216) comprises a short range radio (Figs. 1-2 & [0033]-[0034] and [0039]). Regarding claim 8, depending on claim 1, Owens further discloses wherein the steering actuator (110) includes a drive assembly (320) coupled to the motor (340) for rotating the steering control (330) (Figs. 7-9 & [0059]). Regarding claim 9, depending on claim 1, Owens further discloses: receiving global navigation satellite system (GNSS) signals from an external antenna (216) located outside the enclosure and a GNSS receiver (210) located inside the enclosure (Figs. 1-2 & [0040]-[0041] disclose receiving GPS signals, GPS is a type of GNSS, via the antenna 216 and transmitting them to the GPS receiver 210 noting that the box surrounding the M-PAK 110 is interpreted as being the enclosure and the antenna 216 is external to that box and thus is interpreted as being an external antenna); and automatically steering the vehicle based at least in part on the GNSS signals (Figs. 1-2 & [0039]-[0041], [0049] disclose receiving GPS signals and feeding them to the mission computer which provides commands to the CPU to control the vehicle via steering actuator 300). Regarding claim 11, Owens discloses an apparatus, comprising: a steering actuator (300) for turning a steering control (702), the steering actuator (300) to mount to the steering column (602,1002) below the steering control (702) (Figs. 9-12 & [0081]-[0082]), the steering actuator including: an external interface (216) to receive control signals from an external device (130) (Figs. 1-2 & [0033]-[0034],[0039]); a motor (340) for rotating the steering control (702) to steer a[[the]] vehicle (102); and an enclosure (110) including a control system (202,204) to control the motor (340) based at least on part on the control signals received over the external interface (216) (Figs. 1-2 and 9 & [0039], [0041], [0049] disclose the steering actuator receives controls from either the CPU or the mission computer and that the CPU/mission computer can receive controls through the antennae from the mobile user device 130. The box surrounding the M-PAK 110 is interpreted as being the enclosure). Regarding claim 12, depending on claim 11, Owens further discloses wherein the steering column (602,1002) includes 1) an end on which the steering control (702) is mountable, and 2) a length below the end of the steering column (602,1002); wherein the steering actuator (300) is mountable on the length of the steering column (602,1002) (Figs. 8-12). Regarding claim 13, depending on claim 11, Owens further discloses wherein the steering actuator (300) is configured to install on the steering column (602,1002) after the steering control (702) is mounted on the steering column (602,1002), without requiring removal of the steering control (702) from the steering column (602,1002) (Figs. 5 and 8-8C & [0066] and [0075]-[0078]). Regarding claim 14, depending on claim 11, Owens further discloses at least one sensor or sensor assembly (210,216,220,222,224), the method further comprising: receiving sensor signals from the at least one sensor or sensor assembly (210,216,220,222,224); and automatically steering the vehicle (102a) based at least in part on the sensor signals (Figs. 1-2 & [0039]-[0041], [0046]-[0049]). Regarding claim 15, depending on claim 14, Owens further discloses wherein the sensor signals comprise satellite system (GNSS) signals (see above rejection of claim 9 and Figs. 1-2 & [0039]-[0041], [0049]). Regarding claim 17, depending on claim 14, Owens further discloses wherein the at least one sensor or sensor assembly (210,220,222,224) is located in the enclosure (110) (see above rejection of claim 9 and Figs. 1-2 & [0039]-[0041], [0049]). Regarding claim 18, depending on claim 14, Owens further discloses wherein one or more external components of the at least one sensor assembly (216) are located outside the enclosure (110) (see above rejection of claim 9 and Figs. 1-2 & [0039]-[0041], [0049]). Regarding claim 19, depending on claim 11, Owens further discloses wherein the steering actuator (300) comprises an upper section defining at least part of the enclosure (110), the upper section located (B) below the steering control (702) and a lower section (A) located below the upper section; and PNG media_image1.png 542 201 media_image1.png Greyscale wherein the motor (340) comprises a part of the lower section (A) of the steering actuator (300) and the upper section (B) is located between the steering control (702) and the motor (340) (Annotated Fig. 6 and Figs. 7-12 & [0082]-[0084] generally). Regarding claim 20, Owens discloses an apparatus, comprising: a vehicle (102a) including a steering assembly (Figs. 9-12 depict at least a portion of the steering assembly of the vehicle as including e.g., steering column 602,1002, steering wheel 702, steering actuator 300. See also Fig. 1 & [0079] and [0082]); one or more user interfaces (218) in the vehicle; and wherein the steering assembly includes a steering column (602,1002), a steering control (702), and a steering actuator (300) for turning the steering control (702), the steering actuator (300) mounted to the steering column (602,1002) (Figs. 9-12 & [0081]-[0082]), the steering actuator (300) including: a motor (340) for rotating the steering control (702) to steer the vehicle (102a) (Figs. 9-12 & [0081]-[0082]); and an enclosure (110) including a motor controller (202,204) to control the motor (340), wherein the motor controller (202,204) is controllable using inputs into the one or more user interfaces (218) (Figs. 1-2 and 9 & [0042], [0044] disclose the enclosure includes a button or switch, i.e., a user interface, enabling control of the motor 340, e.g., by using buttons to engage/disengage manual/automatic control, emergency stop, system configuration. As shown in Fig. 2, the box surrounding the M-PAK 110 is interpreted as being the enclosure). 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. 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. This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Owens in view of US 2017/0248946 A1 to Ogura et al (hereinafter Ogura). Regarding claim 6, depending on claim 5, although Owens discloses wirelessly communicating between the steering actuator and the user device as discussed above, Owens does not appear to explicitly disclose wherein the hardware used for wireless transmission is a wireless transceiver comprising a WiFi transceiver. Ogura teaches that it was old and well known in the art of remote steering control, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, for the wireless transceiver to be a WiFi tranceiver (Fig. 2 & [0052] disclose the user remote control device 112 communicates with the control device 30 of the work vehicle 1 via communication devices 110 and 111, i.e., transceivers, which may communicate via WiFi, i.e., WiFi transceivers. ). It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the noted features of Ogura with teaching of Owens since the combination of the two references is merely simple substitution of one known element for another producing a predictable result (KSR rationale B). Since each individual element and its function are shown in the prior art, albeit shown in separate references, the difference between the claimed subject matter and the prior art rests not on any individual element or function but in the very combination itself—that is, in the substitution of the Wifi transceiver of Ogura for the wireless transceiver of Owens. Thus, the simple substitution of one known element for another producing a predictable result renders the claim obvious. Claims 10 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Owens in view of US 2014/0074340 A1 to Wilson et al (hereinafter Wilson). Regarding claim 10, depending on claim 1, although Owens discloses receiving … signals from a sensor located in the enclosure; and automatically steering the vehicle based at least in part on the … signals (Fig. 2 & [0046]-[0047]). Owens does not appear to explicitly disclose: that the sensor is an internal measurement unit. Wilson teaches that it was old and well known in the art of automatic vehicle control, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, for sensors utilized for vehicle control to include an inertial measurement unit ([0023]-[0024] and [0026]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of vehicle control before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the vehicle control system disclosed by Owens to incorporate the for the sensors used to provide input to the control system to include an inertial measurement unit as taught by Wilson in order to improve steering control, e.g., see Wilson [0023]-[0024], and because doing so could be readily and easily performed by any person of ordinary skill in the art, without undue experimentation or risk of unexpected results. Regarding claim 16, depending on claim 14, Owens does not appear to further disclose wherein the sensor signals comprise inertial measurement unit (IMU) signals. Wilson teaches that it was old and well known in the art of automatic vehicle control, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, for sensors signals utilized for vehicle control to include inertial measurement unit (IMU) signals ([0023]-[0024] and [0026]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of vehicle control before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the vehicle control system disclosed by Owens to incorporate the for the sensors used to provide input to the control system to include sensor signals comprise inertial measurement unit (IMU) signals as taught by Wilson in order to improve steering control, e.g., see Wilson [0023]-[0024], and because doing so could be readily and easily performed by any person of ordinary skill in the art, without undue experimentation or risk of unexpected results. Conclusion See the 892 for prior art made of record and not relied upon that is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER B WEHRLY whose telephone number is (303)297-4433. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8:30 - 4:30 MT. 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, Valentin Neacsu can be reached at (571) 272-6265. 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. /CHRISTOPHER B WEHRLY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3611
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 08, 2023
Application Filed
Mar 20, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599109
DUALLY DRIVE WHEEL ASSEMBLY
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12600430
A TORQUE SUPPORT ASSEMBLY, A TORQUE SUPPORT DEVICE, A WHEEL SECURING DEVICE, A REAR AXLE ASSEMBLY AND A BICYCLE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12583551
CARGO BICYCLE CONVERSION SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12570115
OFFSET MULTI-POINT UNDER BED HITCH MOUNTING SYSTEM AND METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12559197
ELECTRIC BICYCLE DRIVE UNIT FASTENING ASSEMBLY
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
52%
Grant Probability
85%
With Interview (+33.2%)
3y 5m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 194 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month