DETAILED ACTION
Drawings
This objection is withdrawn due to the amendments made to the drawings.
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.
(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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5-11, 13-15, 17, 20-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Brown (U.S. Pat. No. 5,572,627).
Regarding claim 1, 3, 17 Brown discloses a system comprising:
a multiplicity of drive modules (135) each for at least one actuator of a wheel or an axle of a vehicle;
each of said multiplicity of drive modules including a bus interface (141) for connecting to a bus, a switching signal input, and a switching signal output;
each of said multiplicity of drive modules being configured to be operated in an operating mode and in a learning mode (which is disclosed as switch being one of two positions);
each of said multiplicity of drive modules having a switch (140 “brake switches”) and a processor (20), the processor being configured to be connected to said bus and being configured to control said switch to conductively connect said switching signal input to said switching signal output in said operating mode, and, after a transition from said operating mode to said learning mode, to interrupt the connection between said switching signal input and said switching signal output (the switch has at least two positions and the actuator has a mode in both positions); and,
said multiplicity of drive modules being connected in series via said switching signal inputs and said switching signal outputs (col. 8, lines 51 discloses the use of series connections),
wherein each of said multiplicity of drive modules is configured, in said learning mode, to:
a) monitor a communication on the bus with said bus interface (col. 2, lines 9-14 discloses monitoring the signal);
b) set a drive module identifier of the drive module depending on the monitored communication (the system can actuate modules independently and so has to identify which it is actuating); and,
c) after setting the drive module identifier, conductively connect said switching signal input to said switching signal output via said switch (the switch control the communication to the drive).
Regarding claim 2 which depends from claim 1, Brown discloses further comprising a control unit (200) with a bus interface and all said bus interfaces of said multiplicity of drive modules and said control unit are connected to each other via a bus (fig. 8).
Regarding claim 13, 14 which depends from claim 1 and 3 respectively, Brown discloses a vehicle comprising the system of claim 1 (col. 46, lines 22-24 discloses robots that are moving which is construed as a vehicle).
Regarding claim 15 which depends from claim 13, Brown discloses further comprising a control unit (20).
Regarding claim 6 which depends from claim 3, Brown discloses wherein, after a switching signal is received at said switching signal input, the drive module is configured, in said learning mode, to: monitor a communication on the bus with said bus interface (col. 2, lines 9-14 discloses monitoring the signals); set a drive module identifier of the drive module depending on the monitored communication (The system is able to identify the signals); and, after setting the drive module identifier, conductively connect said switching signal input to said switching signal output via said switch (the switches are opened and closed at some point after identifying signals).
Regarding claim 7 which depends from claim 3, Brown discloses further comprising a supply input for receiving supply energy for operation of the drive module via said supply input (112 is the power bus).
Regarding claim 8 which depends from claim 3, Brown discloses wherein at least one of:
the drive module is connected to at least one sensor or
has at least one sensor; and,
the drive module is connected to the at least one actuator (actuator option addressed) or
has the at least one actuator (brake actuator).
Regarding claim 5 which depends from claim 3, Brown discloses wherein the drive module is configured, after setting the drive module identifier, to output a learning success message with a set drive module identifier to a control unit via said bus interface (col. 2, lines 9-14 discloses monitoring the signals and any of them can be construed as a success), to receive a reply message with an expected next drive module identifier from the control unit via said bus interface and, in an event that a response message includes a drive module identifier different from the set drive module identifier, to change from the learning mode to said operating mode and to conductively connect said switching signal input to said switching signal output via said switch after setting the drive module identifier (signals are sent that switch the modes whether because of meeting expectation or not meeting expectation but then doing this operation)
Regarding claim 9 which depends from claim 5, Brown discloses wherein the drive module is configured to output a sensor value to the control unit at the bus interface after the drive module identifier is set (col. 17, lines 40-45 outputs sensor signals).
Regarding claim 10 which depends from claim 9, Brown discloses wherein the sensor value is output together with the drive module identifier (any part of the signal can be an identifier including the port that the signal is received from is part of identifying).
Regarding claim 11 which depends from claim 9, Brown discloses wherein the sensor value is a displacement sensor value (col. 17, lines 40-45).
Regarding claim 20 which depends from claim 17, Brown discloses wherein the control unit expects a first predefined expected drive module identifier after sending the learning request prompt and after receiving a first message with a first received drive module identifier from a drive module of the multiple drive modules, checks whether this drive module identifier corresponds to the first predefined expected drive module identifier; and, in an event that the first received and the first predefined expected drive module identifiers agree, the control unit sends a second message with a second predefined drive module identifier different from the first predefined expected drive module identifier (col. 2, lines 9-14 discloses monitoring the signal, many signals are sent and received).
Regarding claim 21 which depends from claim 20, Brown discloses wherein at least one of: the first message is a learning success message and the second message is a response message (This is intended use of how the controller receives the signals).
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) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brown (U.S. Pat. No. 5,572,627) as applied to claims 1 and 3 above, and in view of Woods (U.S. Pat. No. 4,468,739).
Regarding claim 12 which depends from claim 3, Brown does not disclose wherein the drive module is an air suspension drive module for actuating a valve for at least one of supplying air to and venting an air spring; and, the drive module is connected or is connectable to at least one displacement sensor or a pressure sensor.
Woods, which deals in computerized machines, teaches wherein the drive module is an air suspension drive module for actuating a valve for at least one of supplying air to and venting an air spring; and, the drive module is connected or is connectable to at least one displacement sensor or a pressure sensor (Abstract).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have modified Brown to be used on an air suspension because this is a robot operating in a wide range of operating characteristics (abstract) which is the stated use of Brown (col. 1, lines 22-27).
Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brown (U.S. Pat. No. 5,572,627) as applied to claims 1, 3 and 13 above, and in view of Yoshida (U.S. Pat. No. 6,791,207).
Regarding claim 16 which depends from claim 13, Brown does not disclose wherein at least one of: a switching signal of a first drive module of the multiplicity of drive modules is connected to an ignition positive of the vehicle; and, the supply connection is connected to a battery of the vehicle.
Yoshida, which deals in vehicle modules, teaches wherein at least one of: a switching signal of a first drive module of the multiplicity of drive modules is connected to an ignition positive of the vehicle; and, the supply connection is connected to a battery of the vehicle (col. 8, lines 47-52).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have modified Brown to be used on an ignition because this is a known connection for providing power in a robot (col. 8, lines 4-9).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 01/15/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues on pages 1 and 2 that the system does not have computers/controllers for each actuator of the of wheels and the citation does not disclose processing power. Computer systems that are interconnected and communicating are indistinguishable from computer systems in general and each new connection to a computer/processor only creates a larger system, not a new one or different system. The difference between a computer processor that has specific portions dedicated to controlling the actuators and sending them commands as compared to interconnected modules of controllers with dedicated modules for each actuator is not clear. The citation does address processing power because it is dealing with neural networks that inherently possess processing power.
Applicant argues on page 2 and 3 that a switch being turned from one position to the other does not satisfy the “operational” and “learning” modes. The independent claim does not state what is required in either mode. The claim does state that the transition between the two modes consists of interrupting the signal going through the switch which is construed as being a flipping of the switch. Where the specification details more precisely what is required of the two modes it is recommended that those limitations be incorporated into the claims. Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
Applicant argues on pages 4 and 5 that the citation does not monitor the communications of a bus. The citation is a neural net that receives communication and sends communication through a bus. If it was not monitoring the communications it would not be able to send communications. How is this not monitoring the communications of a bus?
Applicant argues on page 5 that the citation does not identify the signals. The system understands which actuators are being actuated due to the signals it sends out and sensor feedback it receives. This is evidence of identifying and labeling. Any more requirement than this are limitations being placed on the signals inside of the processor which is not considered patentable subject matter that creates a patentable distinction.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GONZALO LAGUARDA whose telephone number is (571)272-5920. The examiner can normally be reached 8-5 M-Th Alt. F.
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, Logan Kraft can be reached at (571) 270-5065. 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.
GONZALO LAGUARDA
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3747 email: gonzalo.laguarda@uspto.gov
/GONZALO LAGUARDA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3747