DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
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 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.
Examiner’s Note
Examiner has cited particular paragraphs/columns and line numbers or figures in the references as applied to the claims below for convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations with the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested from the applicant, in preparing the responses, to fully consider the references in their entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the examiner. Applicant is reminded that the Examiner is entitled to give the broadest reasonable interpretation to the language of the claims. Furthermore, the Examiner is not limited to the Applicant’s definition which is not specifically set forth in the claims.
Information Disclosure Statements
The Information Disclosure Statement(s) (IDS) filed on 05/06/2024 has/have been acknowledged.
Status of Application
The list of claims 1-20 are pending in this application. In the claim set filed 05/06/2024:
Claim(s) 1, 9 and 19 is/are the independent claim(s) observed in the application.
Non-Final Rejection
Claim Objections/Allowable Subject Matter
Claim(s) 4, 11, 16 and 20 is/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. As allowable subject matter has been indicated, applicant's reply must either comply with all formal requirements or specifically traverse each requirement not complied with. See 37 CFR 1.111(b) and MPEP § 707.07(a).
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 of this title, 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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 under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a), the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned at the time any inventions covered therein were made absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and invention dates of each claim that was not commonly owned at the time a later invention was made in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(c) and potential pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(e), (f) or (g) prior art under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a).
Claim(s) 1, 5, 6, 9, 12, 13, 14 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KIM (United States Patent Publication 2021/0039632 A1) in view of Miao et al. (United States Patent Publication 2023/0137098 A1) referenced as Kim and Miao, respectively, moving forward.
With respect to claim 1, while Kim discloses:
“A jackknife deterrent system for a towing vehicle configured to be connected to a trailer, the towing vehicle includes rear wheels and a rear steering system to steer the rear wheels, the jackknife deterrent system comprising:” [Kim; In at least the paragraphs and figures cited, Kim discloses a system/method for controlling a vehicle (denoted 401 in Fig. 4) that is towing a trailer (denoted 402 in Fig. 4) including steering the rear wheels of the towing vehicle ("In this case, the vehicle driving assistance device 100 may control a rear wheel steering angle at the origin (see reference numeral 508) to prevent a situation where the vehicle 501 becomes unstable when controlled in an opposite phase;" ¶: 0091) in order to prevent jackknifing from occurring ("As such, when the control according to an exemplary embodiment of the present disclosure is performed, a jackknife phenomenon 414 in which the towing vehicle 401 and the trailer 402 are folded at the hitch point may be prevented in the situation while turning;" ¶: 0086); See also: Fig. 5; ¶: 0081-0085];
“at least one sensor configured to detect a distance between the towing vehicle and the trailer” [Kim; "The sensing device 200 may include a plurality of sensors for sensing a steering angle, lateral acceleration, longitudinal acceleration, a vehicle speed, a steering torque, and the like of the vehicle and may include an ultrasonic sensor, a radar, a camera, a laser scanner and/or a corner radar, a light detection and ranging (LiDAR);" Fig. 1; ¶: 0067];
“and a controller communicatively coupled to the at least one sensor and the rear steering system of the towing vehicle and configured to” [Kim; See the disclosed vehicle driving assistance device (denoted 100 in Fig. 1) that is connected to the rear wheel steering (RWS) (denoted 300 in Fig. 1) and the sensing device (denoted 200 in Fig. 1).];
“and control the rear steering system to control the steering of the rear wheels” [Kim; "The RWS 300 may control rear wheel steering of the vehicle depending on the amount of rear wheel steering control received from the vehicle driving assistance device 100;" Fig. 1; ¶: 0069];
Kim does not specifically state:
“monitor the distance between the towing vehicle and the trailer based on input received from the at least one sensor,”
“to keep the distance between the towing vehicle and the trailer equal to or above a first threshold distance value during turning of the towing vehicle relative to the trailer.”
Miao, which is in the same field of invention of control systems/methods for controlling towing vehicles and trailers, teaches:
“monitor the distance between the towing vehicle and the trailer based on input received from the at least one sensor” [Miao; In at least the paragraphs and figures cited, Miao teaches using a rearward-facing camera to monitor an amount of movement of a trailer (denoted 12 in Fig. 1) with respect to a tow vehicle (denoted 10 in Fig. 1), wherein the disclosed amount of movement indicative of a determined amount of sway between the trailer and the towing vehicle, which the Examiner has interpreted as patentably indistinct from the Applicant's broadly recited "distance between the towing vehicle and the trailer based on input received from the at least one sensor;" Fig. 1; ¶: 0020-0025];
“to keep the distance between the towing vehicle and the trailer equal to or above a first threshold distance value during turning of the towing vehicle relative to the trailer” [Miao; "In addition to determining movement, or sway, of the trailer 12, the systems described herein may also compare the determined trailer sway to a maximum allowable sway. If the movement is greater than the maximum allowable sway, the systems may mitigate sway of the trailer 12 with the tow vehicle 10, or with the trailer 12, itself;" ¶: 0025;
"Examples of mitigating sway of the trailer 12 involve, for example, and without limitation, the tow vehicle 10 executing one or more of differential braking, active rear steering, and/or active front steering. Differential braking generally refers to braking the right side or the left side of the tow vehicle 10. In general, the mitigation techniques work to counteract the moment created by the swaying trailer 12 with a contradictory moment of the tow vehicle 10. Implementing one or more of the mitigation techniques is schematically illustrated in FIG. 3;" Fig. 3; ¶: 0026].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system/method for controlling rear steering in a towing vehicle to prevent trailer jackknifing from occurring as disclosed by Kim to incorporate the teachings regarding performing rear steering control of a turning vehicle to prevent a trailer from swaying past a maximum allowable sway angle as taught by Miao with a reasonable expectation of success. By combining these inventions, the outcome is a system/method for controlling rear steering in a towing vehicle to prevent trailer jackknifing from occurring that is more robust in its ability to determine that a trailer is swaying rather than moving due to an intentional lane change operation, for example [Miao; ¶: 0035-0037].
With respect to claim 5, Kim discloses: “wherein the at least one sensor includes at least one of a camera and a vehicle parking sensor” [Kim; See disclosed camera in ¶: 0067].
With respect to claim 6, Kim discloses: “wherein the controller is configured to control the rear steering system when a tow-trailer mode of the towing vehicle is active” [Kim; "The corresponding function may enable a trailer mode to operate, thus enhancing merchantability according to a differentiation in vehicle driving mode;" ¶: 0073].
With respect to claim 9, while Kim discloses:
“A towing vehicle configured to be connected to a trailer to tow the trailer, the towing vehicle comprising: a rear steering system to steer rear wheels of the towing vehicle” [Kim; In at least the paragraphs and figures cited, Kim discloses a system/method for controlling a vehicle (denoted 401 in Fig. 4) that is towing a trailer (denoted 402 in Fig. 4) including steering the rear wheels of the towing vehicle ("In this case, the vehicle driving assistance device 100 may control a rear wheel steering angle at the origin (see reference numeral 508) to prevent a situation where the vehicle 501 becomes unstable when controlled in an opposite phase;" ¶: 0091) in order to prevent jackknifing from occurring ("As such, when the control according to an exemplary embodiment of the present disclosure is performed, a jackknife phenomenon 414 in which the towing vehicle 401 and the trailer 402 are folded at the hitch point may be prevented in the situation while turning;" ¶: 0086); See also: Fig. 5; ¶: 0081-0085];
“at least one sensor configured to detect a distance between the towing vehicle and the trailer” [Kim; "The sensing device 200 may include a plurality of sensors for sensing a steering angle, lateral acceleration, longitudinal acceleration, a vehicle speed, a steering torque, and the like of the vehicle and may include an ultrasonic sensor, a radar, a camera, a laser scanner and/or a corner radar, a light detection and ranging (LiDAR);" Fig. 1; ¶: 0067];
“and a controller communicatively coupled to the at least one sensor and the rear steering system of the towing vehicle and configured to” [Kim; See the disclosed vehicle driving assistance device (denoted 100 in Fig. 1) that is connected to the rear wheel steering (RWS) (denoted 300 in Fig. 1) and the sensing device (denoted 200 in Fig. 1).];
“and control the rear steering system to control the steering of the rear wheels” [Kim; "The RWS 300 may control rear wheel steering of the vehicle depending on the amount of rear wheel steering control received from the vehicle driving assistance device 100;" Fig. 1; ¶: 0069];
Kim does not specifically state:
“monitor the distance between the towing vehicle and the trailer based on input received from the at least one sensor,”
“to keep the distance between the towing vehicle and the trailer equal to or above a first threshold distance value during turning of the towing vehicle relative to the trailer.”
Miao teaches:
“monitor the distance between the towing vehicle and the trailer based on input received from the at least one sensor” [Miao; In at least the paragraphs and figures cited, Miao teaches using a rearward-facing camera to monitor an amount of movement of a trailer (denoted 12 in Fig. 1) with respect to a tow vehicle (denoted 10 in Fig. 1), wherein the disclosed amount of movement indicative of a determined amount of sway between the trailer and the towing vehicle, which the Examiner has interpreted as patentably indistinct from the Applicant's broadly recited "distance between the towing vehicle and the trailer based on input received from the at least one sensor;" Fig. 1; ¶: 0020-0025];
“to keep the distance between the towing vehicle and the trailer equal to or above a first threshold distance value during turning of the towing vehicle relative to the trailer” [Miao; "In addition to determining movement, or sway, of the trailer 12, the systems described herein may also compare the determined trailer sway to a maximum allowable sway. If the movement is greater than the maximum allowable sway, the systems may mitigate sway of the trailer 12 with the tow vehicle 10, or with the trailer 12, itself;" ¶: 0025;
"Examples of mitigating sway of the trailer 12 involve, for example, and without limitation, the tow vehicle 10 executing one or more of differential braking, active rear steering, and/or active front steering. Differential braking generally refers to braking the right side or the left side of the tow vehicle 10. In general, the mitigation techniques work to counteract the moment created by the swaying trailer 12 with a contradictory moment of the tow vehicle 10. Implementing one or more of the mitigation techniques is schematically illustrated in FIG. 3;" Fig. 3; ¶: 0026].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system/method for controlling rear steering in a towing vehicle to prevent trailer jackknifing from occurring as disclosed by Kim to incorporate the teachings regarding performing rear steering control of a turning vehicle to prevent a trailer from swaying past a maximum allowable sway angle as taught by Miao with a reasonable expectation of success. By combining these inventions, the outcome is a system/method for controlling rear steering in a towing vehicle to prevent trailer jackknifing from occurring that is more robust in its ability to determine that a trailer is swaying rather than moving due to an intentional lane change operation, for example [Miao; ¶: 0035-0037].
With respect to claim 12, Kim does not specifically state: “further comprising a rear parking assist system, and wherein the at least one sensor includes a vehicle parking sensor included within the rear parking assist system.”
Miao teaches: “further comprising a rear parking assist system, and wherein the at least one sensor includes a vehicle parking sensor included within the rear parking assist system” [Miao; See disclosed parking sensors in ¶: 0031].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system/method for controlling rear steering in a towing vehicle to prevent trailer jackknifing from occurring as disclosed by Kim to incorporate the teachings regarding performing rear steering control of a turning vehicle to prevent a trailer from swaying past a maximum allowable sway angle as taught by Miao with a reasonable expectation of success. By combining these inventions, the outcome is a system/method for controlling rear steering in a towing vehicle to prevent trailer jackknifing from occurring that is more robust in its ability to determine that a trailer is swaying rather than moving due to an intentional lane change operation, for example [Miao; ¶: 0035-0037].
With respect to claim 13, Kim discloses: “further comprising a reverse camera system, and wherein the at least one sensor includes a backup camera included within the reverse camera system” [Kim; See disclosed camera in ¶: 0067].
With respect to claim 14, Kim discloses: “wherein controller is configured to control the rear steering system when a tow-trailer mode of the towing vehicle is active” [Kim; "The corresponding function may enable a trailer mode to operate, thus enhancing merchantability according to a differentiation in vehicle driving mode;" ¶: 0073].
With respect to claim 19, while Kim discloses:
“A method for preventing a jackknifing of a towing vehicle and a trailer connected to the towing vehicle, the method comprising: detecting, by at least one sensor, a distance between the towing vehicle and the trailer” [Kim; "The sensing device 200 may include a plurality of sensors for sensing a steering angle, lateral acceleration, longitudinal acceleration, a vehicle speed, a steering torque, and the like of the vehicle and may include an ultrasonic sensor, a radar, a camera, a laser scanner and/or a corner radar, a light detection and ranging (LiDAR);" Fig. 1; ¶: 0067];
“and controlling a rear steering system of the towing vehicle to control the steering of rear wheels of the towing vehicle” [Kim; "The RWS 300 may control rear wheel steering of the vehicle depending on the amount of rear wheel steering control received from the vehicle driving assistance device 100;" Fig. 1; ¶: 0069];
Kim does not specifically state:
“monitoring, by a controller, the distance between the towing vehicle and the trailer based on input received from the at least one sensor,”
“to keep the distance between the towing vehicle and the trailer equal to or above a first threshold distance value during turning of the towing vehicle relative to the trailer.”
Miao teaches:
“monitoring, by a controller, the distance between the towing vehicle and the trailer based on input received from the at least one sensor” [Miao; In at least the paragraphs and figures cited, Miao teaches using a rearward-facing camera to monitor an amount of movement of a trailer (denoted 12 in Fig. 1) with respect to a tow vehicle (denoted 10 in Fig. 1), wherein the disclosed amount of movement indicative of a determined amount of sway between the trailer and the towing vehicle, which the Examiner has interpreted as patentably indistinct from the Applicant's broadly recited "distance between the towing vehicle and the trailer based on input received from the at least one sensor;" Fig. 1; ¶: 0020-0025];
“to keep the distance between the towing vehicle and the trailer equal to or above a first threshold distance value during turning of the towing vehicle relative to the trailer” [Miao; "In addition to determining movement, or sway, of the trailer 12, the systems described herein may also compare the determined trailer sway to a maximum allowable sway. If the movement is greater than the maximum allowable sway, the systems may mitigate sway of the trailer 12 with the tow vehicle 10, or with the trailer 12, itself;" ¶: 0025;
"Examples of mitigating sway of the trailer 12 involve, for example, and without limitation, the tow vehicle 10 executing one or more of differential braking, active rear steering, and/or active front steering. Differential braking generally refers to braking the right side or the left side of the tow vehicle 10. In general, the mitigation techniques work to counteract the moment created by the swaying trailer 12 with a contradictory moment of the tow vehicle 10. Implementing one or more of the mitigation techniques is schematically illustrated in FIG. 3;" Fig. 3; ¶: 0026].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system/method for controlling rear steering in a towing vehicle to prevent trailer jackknifing from occurring as disclosed by Kim to incorporate the teachings regarding performing rear steering control of a turning vehicle to prevent a trailer from swaying past a maximum allowable sway angle as taught by Miao with a reasonable expectation of success. By combining these inventions, the outcome is a system/method for controlling rear steering in a towing vehicle to prevent trailer jackknifing from occurring that is more robust in its ability to determine that a trailer is swaying rather than moving due to an intentional lane change operation, for example [Miao; ¶: 0035-0037].
Claim(s) 2, 3 and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim in view of Miao and Stabel et al. (United States Patent Publication 2019/0061816 A1) referenced as Stabel moving forward.
With respect to claim 2, Kim does not specifically state: “further comprising an input device configured to receive a skill level selection from a driver driving the towing vehicle.”
Stabel, which is in the same field of invention of control systems/methods for controlling towing vehicles and trailers, teaches: “further comprising an input device configured to receive a skill level selection from a driver driving the towing vehicle” [Stabel; "The method also includes retrieving an operator proficiency setting of the backing system selected by an operator. The method also includes determining a maximum allowable relevant position setting for the current trailer based on the selected operator proficiency setting and the current trailer calibration data;" ¶: 0005; See also: Fig. 7; ¶: 0042-0044].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system/method for controlling rear steering in a towing vehicle to prevent trailer jackknifing from occurring as disclosed by Kim to incorporate the teachings regarding setting a maximum allowable position of a trailer relative to a towing vehicle based on an operator proficiency level as taught by Stabel with a reasonable expectation of success. By combining these inventions, the outcome is a system/method for controlling rear steering in a towing vehicle to prevent trailer jackknifing from occurring that is more robust in its ability to enable individuals who are unaccustomed with operating tow vehicle and trailer systems to minimize instances of incorrect steering especially during reversing operations [Stabel; ¶: 0002-0005].
With respect to claim 3, Kim does not specifically state: “further comprising an input device configured to receive a skill level selection from a driver driving the towing vehicle.”
Stabel teaches: “wherein the controller is configured to determine the first threshold distance value based on the skill level selection” [Stabel; "The method also includes retrieving an operator proficiency setting of the backing system selected by an operator. The method also includes determining a maximum allowable relevant position setting for the current trailer based on the selected operator proficiency setting and the current trailer calibration data;" ¶: 0005; See also: Fig. 7; ¶: 0042-0044].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system/method for controlling rear steering in a towing vehicle to prevent trailer jackknifing from occurring as disclosed by Kim to incorporate the teachings regarding setting a maximum allowable position of a trailer relative to a towing vehicle based on an operator proficiency level as taught by Stabel with a reasonable expectation of success. By combining these inventions, the outcome is a system/method for controlling rear steering in a towing vehicle to prevent trailer jackknifing from occurring that is more robust in its ability to enable individuals who are unaccustomed with operating tow vehicle and trailer systems to minimize instances of incorrect steering especially during reversing operations [Stabel; ¶: 0002-0005].
With respect to claim 10, Kim does not specifically state: “further comprising an input device configured to receive a skill level selection from a driver driving the towing vehicle.”
Stabel teaches: “wherein the controller is configured to determine the first threshold distance value based on the skill level selection” [Stabel; "The method also includes retrieving an operator proficiency setting of the backing system selected by an operator. The method also includes determining a maximum allowable relevant position setting for the current trailer based on the selected operator proficiency setting and the current trailer calibration data;" ¶: 0005; See also: Fig. 7; ¶: 0042-0044].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system/method for controlling rear steering in a towing vehicle to prevent trailer jackknifing from occurring as disclosed by Kim to incorporate the teachings regarding setting a maximum allowable position of a trailer relative to a towing vehicle based on an operator proficiency level as taught by Stabel with a reasonable expectation of success. By combining these inventions, the outcome is a system/method for controlling rear steering in a towing vehicle to prevent trailer jackknifing from occurring that is more robust in its ability to enable individuals who are unaccustomed with operating tow vehicle and trailer systems to minimize instances of incorrect steering especially during reversing operations [Stabel; ¶: 0002-0005].
Claim(s) 7, 8, 15 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim in view of Miao and Lu et al. (United States Patent Publication 2023/0001984 A1) referenced as Lu moving forward.
With respect to claim 7, Kim does not specifically state: “wherein the controller is configured to generate an alert when the distance between the towing vehicle and the trailer is equal to or less than a second threshold distance value, wherein the second threshold distance value is smaller than the first threshold distance value.”
Lu, which is in the same field of invention of control systems/methods for controlling towing vehicles and trailers, teaches: “wherein the controller is configured to generate an alert when the distance between the towing vehicle and the trailer is equal to or less than a second threshold distance value, wherein the second threshold distance value is smaller than the first threshold distance value” [Lu; In at least the paragraphs and figures cited, Lu teaches a system/method for alerting a driver when the angle between a trailer and a towing vehicle exceeds a threshold angle referred to as a Jackknife angle/Collision angle (denoted 730 in Fig. 8), which is greater than a first desired trailer angle (denoted 720 in Fig. 8). In view of the above the Examiner has interpreted the disclosed desired trailer angle and Jackknife angle/Collision angle as patentably indistinct from the Applicant's broadly recited "first threshold distance value" and "second threshold distance value, wherein the second threshold distance value is smaller than the first threshold distance value," respectively; See also: Fig. 8; ¶: 0063-0065].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system/method for controlling rear steering in a towing vehicle to prevent trailer jackknifing from occurring as disclosed by Kim to incorporate the teachings regarding generating an alert when a trailer being towed behind a towing vehicle exceeds one or more threshold angles with respect to the towing vehicle as taught by Lu with a reasonable expectation of success. By combining these inventions, the outcome is a system/method for controlling rear steering in a towing vehicle to prevent trailer jackknifing from occurring that is more robust in its ability to prevent situations of jackknifing occurring by highlighting on a display using overlays when jackknifing will occur [Lu; ¶: 0063, 0064].
With respect to claim 8, Kim does not specifically state: “the alert is at least one of an audio alert, a visual alert, and a notification shared to a smart phone.”
Lu teaches: “the alert is at least one of an audio alert, a visual alert, and a notification shared to a smart phone” [Lu; Lu further teaches: "The system may instead alert the user when the desired trailer angle or DTA 212 is selected to be within a jackknife and/or collision zone 730. For example, the system 12 may provide an intermittent audio tone (e.g., a beeping) and/or provide a warning on the display 24;" ¶: 0068].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system/method for controlling rear steering in a towing vehicle to prevent trailer jackknifing from occurring as disclosed by Kim to incorporate the teachings regarding generating an alert when a trailer being towed behind a towing vehicle exceeds one or more threshold angles with respect to the towing vehicle as taught by Lu with a reasonable expectation of success. By combining these inventions, the outcome is a system/method for controlling rear steering in a towing vehicle to prevent trailer jackknifing from occurring that is more robust in its ability to prevent situations of jackknifing occurring by highlighting on a display using overlays when jackknifing will occur [Lu; ¶: 0063, 0064].
With respect to claim 15, Kim does not specifically state: “wherein the controller is configured to generate an alert when the distance between towing vehicle and the trailer is equal to or less than a second threshold distance value, wherein the second threshold distance value is smaller than the first threshold distance value.”
Lu teaches: “wherein the controller is configured to generate an alert when the distance between towing vehicle and the trailer is equal to or less than a second threshold distance value, wherein the second threshold distance value is smaller than the first threshold distance value” [Lu; In at least the paragraphs and figures cited, Lu teaches a system/method for alerting a driver when the angle between a trailer and a towing vehicle exceeds a threshold angle referred to as a Jackknife angle/Collision angle (denoted 730 in Fig. 8), which is greater than a first desired trailer angle (denoted 720 in Fig. 8). In view of the above the Examiner has interpreted the disclosed desired trailer angle and Jackknife angle/Collision angle as patentably indistinct from the Applicant's broadly recited "first threshold distance value" and "second threshold distance value, wherein the second threshold distance value is smaller than the first threshold distance value," respectively; See also: Fig. 8; ¶: 0063-0065].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system/method for controlling rear steering in a towing vehicle to prevent trailer jackknifing from occurring as disclosed by Kim to incorporate the teachings regarding generating an alert when a trailer being towed behind a towing vehicle exceeds one or more threshold angles with respect to the towing vehicle as taught by Lu with a reasonable expectation of success. By combining these inventions, the outcome is a system/method for controlling rear steering in a towing vehicle to prevent trailer jackknifing from occurring that is more robust in its ability to prevent situations of jackknifing occurring by highlighting on a display using overlays when jackknifing will occur [Lu; ¶: 0063, 0064].
With respect to claim 17, Kim does not specifically state: “the alert is at least one of an audio alert, a visual alert, and a notification shared to a smart phone.”
Lu teaches: “the alert is at least one of an audio alert, a visual alert, and a notification shared to a smart phone” [Lu; Lu further teaches: "The system may instead alert the user when the desired trailer angle or DTA 212 is selected to be within a jackknife and/or collision zone 730. For example, the system 12 may provide an intermittent audio tone (e.g., a beeping) and/or provide a warning on the display 24;" ¶: 0068].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system/method for controlling rear steering in a towing vehicle to prevent trailer jackknifing from occurring as disclosed by Kim to incorporate the teachings regarding generating an alert when a trailer being towed behind a towing vehicle exceeds one or more threshold angles with respect to the towing vehicle as taught by Lu with a reasonable expectation of success. By combining these inventions, the outcome is a system/method for controlling rear steering in a towing vehicle to prevent trailer jackknifing from occurring that is more robust in its ability to prevent situations of jackknifing occurring by highlighting on a display using overlays when jackknifing will occur [Lu; ¶: 0063, 0064].
Claim(s) 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim in view of Miao and Pourrezaei Khaligh et al. (United States Patent Publication 2021/0380109 A1) referenced as Khaligh moving forward.
With respect to claim 18, Kim does not specifically state: “wherein the controller is configured to determine a reversing of the towing vehicle and to control the rear steering system to steer the rear wheels during reversing of the towing vehicle to maintain the distance equal to or above the first threshold distance value.”
Khaligh, which is in the same field of invention of control systems/methods for controlling towing vehicles and trailers, teaches: “wherein the controller is configured to determine a reversing of the towing vehicle and to control the rear steering system to steer the rear wheels during reversing of the towing vehicle to maintain the distance equal to or above the first threshold distance value” [Khaligh; "The steering control module 108 controls the active rear steering actuator 53 based on the estimated rate of change of the hitch angle in order to assist the driver by automatically steering the vehicle 12 (e.g., by steering the vehicle 12 independent of an input from the driver such as the steering wheel angle measured by the rear steering angle sensor). The steering control module 108 may control the active rear steering actuator 53 based on the estimated rate of change of the hitch angle for jackknife prevention (e.g., while vehicle 12 moves trailer 14 in reverse) and obstacle avoidance (e.g., while vehicle 12 moves trailer 14 forward). For example, the steering control module 108 may control the active rear steering actuator 53 to decrease the rate of change of the hitch angle 56 when the corrected hitch angle is greater than the predetermined angle;" ¶: 0040; See also: Fig. 1; ¶: 0039, 0041].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system/method for controlling rear steering in a towing vehicle to prevent trailer jackknifing from occurring as disclosed by Kim to incorporate the teachings regarding controlling active rear steering for a towing vehicle that is reversing with a trailer attached to prevent jackknifing as taught by Khaligh with a reasonable expectation of success. By combining these inventions, the outcome is a system/method for controlling rear steering in a towing vehicle to prevent trailer jackknifing from occurring that is more robust in its ability to “prevent the jackknifing scenario while the vehicle is in reverse as well as provide added stability and control while towing trailer (which may include both on-road trailering applications and off-road trailering applications” [Khaligh; ¶: 0028-0030].
Prior Art (Not relied upon)
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure can be found in the attached form 892.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RAMI N BEDEWI whose telephone number is (571)272-5753. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday - 6:00 am - 11:00 am & 12:00pm - 5:00 pm.
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, Scott A. Browne can be reached on (571-270-0151). 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.
/RAMI NABIH BEDEWI/Examiner, Art Unit 3666C
Prosecution Insights