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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5-8, and 11-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Deleval (USPub 2021/0046998).
With respect to claim 1, Deleval discloses a drive system for an electric bicycle, comprising a drive shaft (2), an output shaft (25) for driving a wheel of the electric bicycle, a first electric motor (40), which drives a first rotor shaft (47), a second electric motor (50), which drives a second rotor shaft (57), a superposition transmission, whose gear ratio is steplessly adjustable by means of the first and second electric motors and via which the drive shaft and the output shaft are coupled with each other (Fig 1 shows the parallel branches of the transmission corresponding to a superposition transmission), wherein a torque generated by the first electric motor can at least partly be transmitted to the output shaft [0128], and an energy accumulator (battery, [0093]) for supplying the first and second electric motors with electric current, characterized in that wherein the drive system comprises an electronic control system [0120] for a power control of the first and second electric motors in an emergency mode of the drive system, wherein the emergency mode is active when the first and second electric motors cannot be supplied with electric current via the energy accumulator (emergency mode when battery is empty; [0019]), and via the electronic control system, at least one of the first and second electric motors can at least temporarily be operated regeneratively in the emergency mode ([0097-0098]), in order to convert a power applied at the drive shaft by muscle force into electric energy [0072], which provides for a stepless variation of the gear ratio of the superposition transmission also in the emergency mode.
With respect to claim 2, wherein in the emergency mode the electronic control system for the power control of the first and second electric motors is adapted to actuate one of the electric motors with the aim to regulate an electric energy balance within the drive system to zero (the examiner notes that “with the aim to” is a functional limitation, and the structure must only have the ability to perform said function; in the instant case, Deleval does teach actuating one of the electric motors as discussed above but the purpose for which the motors are actuated in the emergency mode is not germane to the issue of patentability itself; however, one possible outcome of actuating one of the electric motors could be to regulate an electric energy balance within the drive system to zero).
With respect to claim 3, wherein in the emergency mode the electronic control system for the power control of the first and second electric motors is adapted to actuate the second electric motor corresponding to a normal mode (one motor operates normally and other “smooths” the power coming from the battery [0093]), in which the supply of the first and second electric motors with electric current is effected via the energy accumulator [0146], and to actuate the first electric motor with the aim to regulate an electric energy balance within the drive system to zero ([0193], one of the motors “smooths” power coming from the battery, and second motor allows CVT selection in both normal and emergency modes [0146]).
With respect to claim 5, wherein the drive system comprises at least one energy buffer (battery) connected to the electronic control system.
With respect to claim 6, wherein in the emergency mode the electronic control system for the power control of the first and second electric motors is adapted to actuate one of the electric motors with the aim to hold an intermediate circuit voltage provided via the energy buffer at a particular voltage value (the examiner notes that “with the aim to” is a functional limitation, and the structure must only have the ability to perform said function; in the instant case, Deleval does teach actuating one of the electric motors as discussed above but the purpose for which the motors are actuated in the emergency mode is not germane to the issue of patentability itself; however, one possible outcome of actuating one of the electric motors could be to hold an intermediate circuit voltage provided via the energy buffer at a particular voltage value).
With respect to claims 7 and 8, wherein the electronic control system is adapted for processing a measurement signal which is representative of the current intermediate circuit voltage of the drive system, and the electronic control system is adapted to compare an actual voltage value detected on the basis of the measurement signal with at least one setpoint voltage value (with regards to claims 7 and 8, the phrase “adapted to” is functional and the structure must only have the ability to perform the function; in the instant case, the control system is able to process measurement signals and compare voltages in order to operate the emergency mode in more stable way).
With respect to claim 11, Deleval discloses an electric bicycle [0030].
With respect to claims 12-14, the apparatus discussed above meets the method limitations.
With respect to claim 15, Deleval discloses a computer program product, including instructions which on execution by at least one processor of an electronic control system for a drive system of an electric bicycle cause the at least one processor to carry out a method according to claim 12 [0040-0044].
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.
Claim 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Deleval (USPub 2021/0046998).
With respect to claim 4, Deleval discloses the claimed invention discussed above but does not disclose wherein in the emergency mode the electronic control system for the power control of the first and second electric motors is adapted to take account of a power consumption of at least one load supplied with electric energy via the drive system and/or a power loss for the regulation of the one electric motor. However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the invention was filed to modify the invention of Deleval to take into account a power consumption of at least one load supplied with electric energy via the drive system or a power loss in order to operate essential electrical devices when the battery is empty such as headlights, which improves the safety and comfort of the vehicle.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9-10 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DREW J BROWN whose telephone number is (571)272-1362. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday.
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, Paul Dickson can be reached on 571-272-7742. 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 https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. 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.
DREW BROWN
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3616
/DREW J BROWN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3617