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.
Claims 1-20 are 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.
Claim 1 recites “operate the powertrain in a first speed control mode where an output shaft rotational speed is controlled via the controller in response to a vehicle that includes the powertrain traveling with rotating wheels while delivering power to the power take-off.” It is unclear what types of controls might be considered speed control modes that are in response to a vehicle. There is no particular action of the vehicle that causes the control and it is unclear what speed is controlled or input into the controls in order to be considered a speed control mode.
Claim 2 recites “operating the power take-off in a second speed control mode while operating the powertrain in the first speed control mode.” This appears to imply that the two modes are part of the same mode or state. In other words, in whatever state (clutches and brakes engaged or disengaged) that the first speed control mode takes place is also the same as the second speed control mode since these modes occur simultaneously. As such, it is unclear what is intended by the speed control modes of the overall powertrain and of the power take-off.
Claim 8 recites “operating the powertrain in a speed control mode where a speed of a vehicle speed is controlled to a requested vehicle speed via a controller and in response to a power take-off supplying power to a device external to a transmission and a vehicle that includes the transmission traveling with rotating wheels.” Firstly, “a speed of a vehicle speed” should be “a speed of a vehicle.” Secondly, is it unclear what a speed of the vehicle being controlled “to a requested vehicle speed” meas. Does this mean the vehicle speed is kept at the requested speed or based on the requested speed? Lastly, it is unclear to which noun or phrase the phrase “a vehicle that includes the transmission traveling with rotating wheels” modifies. Does the claim mean “operating…a vehicle that includes the transmission traveling with rotating wheels” or instead “in response to …a vehicle that includes the transmission traveling with rotating wheels”?
Claim 12 is indefinite for the same reasons as claim 2.
Claim 16 is indefinite for the same reasons as claim 1.
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, 2, 8, 16, and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Van Dingenen (US 2021/0364065).
Claim 1
Van Dingenen discloses a powertrain (see FIGS. 2 and/or 3), comprising:
a transmission (FIG. 2 or 3) including a power take-off (212 or 318) and an output shaft (290 or 288; or equivalent shaft in FIG. 3) that delivers torque to vehicle wheels (wheels on axle 286), where the power take-off is coupled to the output shaft via a planetary gear set (232 and/or 226; or 306 and/or 304); and
a controller (152) including executable instructions that cause the controller to operate the powertrain in a first speed control mode (clutches 284 and 228 engaged, and one of 240 and 272 engaged while the other of 240 and 272 disengaged) where an output shaft rotational speed is controlled via the controller in response to a vehicle that includes the powertrain traveling with rotating wheels while delivering power to the power take-off (see e.g., paragraphs [0002], [0011], [0040], [0043], [0045], [0059], [0066]).
Claim 2
Van Dingenen discloses operating the power take-off in a second speed control mode while operating the powertrain in the first speed control mode (the power take-off is operated into the mode associated with one of the two options for the overall powertrain, i.e., one of 240 and 272 engaged and the other disengaged).
Claim 8
Van Dingenen discloses a method for operating a powertrain (see FIGS. 2 and/or 3), comprising:
operating the powertrain (FIG. 2 or 3) in a speed control mode (clutches 284 and 228 engaged, and one of 240 and 272 engaged while the other of 240 and 272 disengaged) where a speed of a vehicle is controlled to a requested vehicle speed via a controller and in response to a power take-off supplying power to a device external to a transmission and a vehicle that includes the transmission traveling with rotating wheels (see e.g., paragraphs [0002], [0011], [0032], [0040], [0043], [0045], [0053], [0059], [0066]).
Claim 16
Van Dingenen discloses a powertrain (see FIGS. 2 and/or 3), comprising:
a transmission (see FIGS. 2 and/or 3) including a first power take-off port (214 or 214/212) including a power take-off shaft (214) that rotates at a multiple of a rotational rate of a first shaft (206), the first shaft (206) coupled to a ring gear (224) of first planetary gear set (226), a second shaft (290) configured to deliver power to vehicle wheels (wheels connected to axle 286), the second shaft (290) coupled to carrier planetary gears (planet gears carried by carrier 244) of the first planetary gear set; and a second power take-off port (shaft of 258; or all of 258 and 256), the second power take-off port coupled to a sun gear (260) of the first planetary gear set, the first power take-off port and the second power take-off port not configured to be coupled to the second shaft (290), except via the first planetary gear set; and
a controller (152) including executable instructions that cause the controller to operate the powertrain in a speed control mode in response to a vehicle that includes the powertrain traveling with rotating wheels while delivering power to the second power take-off port (see e.g., paragraphs [0002], [0011], [0032], [0040], [0043], [0045], [0053], [0059], [0066]).
Claim 19
Van Dingenen discloses additional instructions to control a speed of a shaft (shaft of 258) of the second power take-off port (see paragraphs [0029] and [0040]).
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(s) 9, 14, 15, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Van Dingenen in view of McMillan (US 2012/0083173).
Claim 9
Van Dingenen does not necessarily disclose that the speed of the vehicle is controlled during its method. However, McMillan discloses that an output of a transmission/drive system is controlled to be within a range of a desired speed (see paragraph [0047]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to have modified Van Dingenen so that the controller also regulates the output speed which is also regulating the speed of the wheels and therefore speed of the vehicle in order to achieve the desired speed of the vehicle during various conditions. As so modified, Van Dingenen discloses where the speed control mode includes adjusting the speed of the vehicle to the requested vehicle speed while torque supplied via the powertrain is varied.
Claim 14
Van Dingenen does not disclose where operating the powertrain in the speed control mode includes adjusting a wheel torque output of the powertrain, and further comprising: confining the wheel torque output to be between a first threshold torque and a second threshold torque. However, maintaining an output within a particular range of torques, i.e., between two thresholds, is well known. For example, McMillan discloses that an output of a transmission/drive system is controlled to be within a range of a desired speed (see paragraph [0047]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to have modified Van Dingenen so that the controller also regulates the output torque to be maintained within a certain range, i.e., between upper and lower thresholds, in order to achieve the desired output torque.
Claim 15
Van Dingenen as modified discloses where the first threshold torque and the second threshold torque vary with the vehicle speed since as the desired output speed changes so too does the output shaft speed range discussed in McMillan and incorporated into Van Dingenen.
Claim 20
Van Dingenen does not disclose additional instructions to confine wheel torque output to be between a first threshold wheel torque and a second threshold wheel torque. However, maintaining an output within a particular range of torques, i.e., between two thresholds, is well known. For example, McMillan discloses that an output of a transmission/drive system is controlled to be within a range of a desired speed (see paragraph [0047]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to have modified Van Dingenen so that the controller also regulates the output torque to be maintained within a certain range, i.e., between upper and lower thresholds, in order to achieve the desired output torque.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Van Dingenen in view of McMillan, and further in view of Hans et al. (WO 2019/110259A2; hereinafter “Hans”).
Claim 10
Van Dingenen does not disclose torque supplied via the powertrain in response to a difference between the requested vehicle speed and the vehicle speed. However, Hans discloses torque supplied via the powertrain in response to a difference between the requested output speed and the actual output speed of the drivetrain (see e.g., Abstract) which is directly related to the actual and desired output speeds of the vehicle. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to have modified Van Dingenen to include supplying torque through the powertrain in response to a difference between the requested drivetrain/vehicle speed and the drivetrain/vehicle speed in order to determine how far off from the desired speed the vehicle was and correct any misalignments between the desired versus actual speeds, i.e., to provide more accurate speeds relative to the desired speed.
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Van Dingenen in view of McMillan, Hans, and further in view of Wilson (US 2022/0251936).
Claim 11
Van Dingenen does not disclose where the controller is a proportional, integral, derivative controller, but does disclose controlling the two motors. However, Wilson discloses that a controller can include a motor controller that is a proportional, integral, derivative controller (see paragraph [0033]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to have modified Van Dingenen to include as part of the controller proportional, integral, derivative controller for each of the motors in order to provide high accuracy and/or low error.
Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Van Dingenen in view of Hans.
Claim 17
Van Dingenen does not disclose where the speed control mode includes controlling a vehicle speed, and further comprising: additional instructions to control the vehicle speed via vehicle speed feedback. However, Ashrafi discloses controlling a drivetrain output speed which is directly related to wheel speed and therefore vehicle speed, and further comprising: additional instructions to control the actual speed via vehicle speed feedback (see Abstract disclosing adapting a clutch to adjust speed such that actual speed is closer to desired speed which is a feedback control). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to have modified Van Dingenen to include where the speed control mode includes controlling a vehicle speed, and further comprising: additional instructions to control the vehicle speed via using the difference between actual and desired speeds which is a vehicle speed feedback in order to provide improved controls that achieve a speed closer to what is desired during various conditions.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-7, 12, 13, and 18 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
With reference to claim 3, the prior art does not disclose or render obvious a powertrain comprising the combination of features as recited including “where a first speed controller of the controller controls the output shaft rotational speed, and where a second speed controller of the controller controls a power take-off rotational speed.”
With reference to claim 7, the prior art does not disclose or render obvious a powertrain comprising the combination of features as recited including “where a second speed controller adjusts torque of an electric machine in response to a difference between a requested power take-off speed and an actual power take-off speed.”
With reference to claim 12, the prior art does not disclose or render obvious a method for operating a powertrain comprising the combination of features as recited including “operating the power take-off in a second speed control mode via a second controller.”
With reference to claim 18, the prior art does not disclose or render obvious a method for operating a powertrain comprising the combination of features as recited including “additional instructions to control the vehicle speed in response to a requested vehicle speed, and where the requested vehicle speed is based on a position of a driver demand pedal.”
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Viitasalo et al. (US 2023/0018536) discloses a transmission with independent PTO’s. DE 102021115735A1 discloses parallel torque paths to both a PTO and an output shaft. EP 2949497A1 discloses a PTO connected to a planetary gearset.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STACEY A FLUHART whose telephone number is (571)270-1851. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 9AM-7PM.
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, Ernesto Suarez can be reached at 571-270-5565. 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.
/STACEY A FLUHART/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3655