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 § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Claims 13 depends on “the method of claim 1” which is for “an axle module of a 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)(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 – 4 and 6 - 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kim (Pub. No.: US 2012/0137809 A1).
Regarding claims 1, 7 and 10; Kim discloses an axle module (Unbalanced shaft 140, FIG. 2) of a vehicle (Vehicle driven by motor ¶¶ 3, 5), vehicle (vehicle body is inherent of electric vehicle ¶ 5) and method for manufacturing an axle module of a vehicle, comprising:
a drive unit (Differential gear 480 is driven by output shaft 450, FIG. 4), which has a vehicle axle (490, FIG. 4), an electric motor (Drive motor 400, FIG. 4), a transmission (Collectively of components 100, 200, 300, 440, 450, 470, 460, 470, 480; FIG. 4 and automatic/manual transmission ¶ 32), and power electronics (Inherent of electric and fuel cell vehicles ¶¶ 5-6, 8),
wherein the vehicle axle is configured to connect to vehicle wheels (485, 490. FIG. 4),
a module carrier which is configured to connect to a vehicle body of the vehicle (Interpreted as vehicle frame which is inherent in electric vehicles, FIG. 4),
an assembly bearing, which connects the drive unit and the module carrier
to each other (assembly and connected components 400, 420, 440, 460, 450, 470, 480; FIG. 4), and
a control device (Unbalanced module 100, FIG. 4),
wherein the drive unit, the module carrier and the assembly bearing
jointly form a vibration transmission path (Sharp whining sound created by operation of the motor ¶¶ 6-9), and
wherein the control device is configured to actuate the drive unit in
a controlled manner in accordance with acoustic and/or mechanical vibration
transmission via the vibration transmission path, such that noise emission of the
axle module during operation of the axle module is adjusted in a predefined
way (“…uses an unbalanced mass 120 to generate a booming sound, as shown in FIG. 2. The unbalanced mass 120 is adhered on a side of an unbalanced shaft 140 so a vibration is created by rotating the unbalanced mass 120 according to the rotation of the unbalanced shaft 140. A generated imbalance vibration creates a booming sound in a vehicle by vibrating a vehicle body, and the rotation speed of the unbalanced shaft 140 and vibration frequency are as shown in FIG. 3.” ¶ 27. See also ¶¶ 28-32).
Regarding claims 2 and 8, Kim discloses the axle module and the vehicle, wherein the control device is configured to actuate the drive unit in a controlled manner to reduce a noise emission of the axle module (¶¶ 27-32).
Regarding claim 3, Kim discloses the axel module, wherein the control device is configured to actuate the drive unit in a controlled manner such that the axle module generates a predefined warning noise, in particular an acoustic vehicle alerting signal (¶¶ 27-32).
Regarding claim 4, Kim discloses the axel module, wherein the control device is configured to adjust an operating signal, by means of which the motor is actuated, in particular by the power electronics, as a function of the acoustic and/or mechanical vibration
transmission via the vibration transmission path (FIG. 1 and ¶¶ 27-32).
Regarding claim 6, Kim discloses the axle module, wherein the module carrier comprises at least one connecting element configured to connect to the vehicle body of the
vehicle, and wherein the connecting element is part of the vibration
transmission path (¶¶ 27-32).
Regarding claim 9, Kim discloses the vehicle wherein the axle module is arranged on a front axle or on a rear axle of the vehicle, or wherein the vehicle comprises two axle modules, wherein one axle module is arranged on the front axle and one on the rear axle of the vehicle (490, FIG. 4).
Regarding claim 11, Kim discloses the method, further comprising
the step of calibrating the vibration transmission path in the assembled state of the axle
module (¶¶ 27-32).
Regarding claim 12, Kim discloses the method, wherein the calibrating is performed prior to an installation of the axle module into a vehicle (¶¶ 27-32).
Regarding claim 13, Kim discloses the method of operating an axle module, comprising the step of: actuating the drive unit by means of the control device as a function of an
acoustic and/or mechanical vibration transmission via the vibration transmission path in such a way as to adjust in a predefined way a noise emission of the axle module during an operation of the axle module (¶¶ 27-32).
Regarding claim 14, Kim discloses the method, wherein drive unit is actuated by means of the control device in such a way as to reduce the noise emission of the axle module (¶¶ 27-32).
Regarding claim 15, Kim discloses the method wherein the drive unit is actuated by means of the control device in such a way that the axle module generates a predefined warning noise, in particular an acoustic vehicle alerting signal (¶¶ 27-32).
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.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (Pub. No.: US 2012/0137809 A1) as applied to claim 4 above, and further in view of Oide et al. (Pub. No.: US 2021/0031635 A1).
Regarding claim 5, Kim is silent to the axle module, wherein the
operating signal by means of which the motor is actuated has a sinusoidal basic
vibration, and wherein the control device is configured to modulate harmonics onto the sinusoidal basic vibration of the operating signal to adjust the noise emissions of the axle module. However, in a similar field of endeavor, Oide teaches an electrified vehicle configured with a control device to act as a feedforward control section configured based on a transfer function simulating vibration transmission characteristics of a power transmission system, receiving as an input a required torque of the electric motor from a drive. Subsequently, a correction torque for reduction a vibration generated in the power transmission due to elimination backlash is performed (See Abstract). More specifically, a sine wave of natural resonance frequency component located on the side closer to the electric motor backlash element in the power transmission, may be applied as a correction torque (¶¶ 58-60).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Kim to which the motor is actuated has a sinusoidal basic vibration, and wherein the control device is configured to modulate harmonics onto the sinusoidal basic vibration of the operating signal to adjust the noise emissions of the axle module as taught b Oide to reduce vibration of the transmission (¶ 4).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TYLER J LEE whose telephone number is (571)272-9727. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-5:00.
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, Abby Flynn can be reached at 571-272-9855. 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.
/TYLER J LEE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3663