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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Status of the Claims
This action is in response to applicant’s filing on June 05, 2024. Claims 9 and 11 have be canceled by the applicant. Claims 1-8, 10 and 12-21 are pending.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 10 and 12-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the applicants recite “A computer-readable storage medium storing a computer program . . . .” However, it is unclear whether the “computer-readable medium" is a transitory or a non-transitory medium. Because the claim fails to disclose this pertinent fact and the applicants’ disclosure provides no guidance, the claimed computer-readable medium is not considered to be directed to patent eligible subject matter. See MPEP 2106 (I).
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “control apparatus configures to”; “driving motor electricity supply loop is provided with”; and “bypass branch is provided with” in claims 1, 5 and 10.
A review of the specification yields the following:
“control apparatus configures to”; ¶ [0019] “The bypass branch 12 is provided with a switching element 121. In response to the bypass branch 12 being conducted, the generator will be directly connected to the first driving motor 115 via the switching element 121, and the generator 112 directly drives the first driving motor 115 without necessarily via the first motor controller 113 and the second motor controller 114.”
“driving motor electricity supply loop is provided with”; ¶ [0018] “The driving motor electricity supply loop 11 is provided with a first motor controller 113 and a second motor controller 114. The first motor controller 113 is electrically connected to the first driving motor 115. The second motor controller 114 is electrically connected to the generator 112. The first motor controller 113 controls the first driving motor 115, to process signals input into the first motor controller 113, and monitors corresponding parameters of the first driving motor 115 for adjustment control of voltage and current and completion of other control functions, and transmits an operation state of a control system of the first driving motor 115 to the controller.” and
“bypass branch is provided with”; ¶ [0019] “The bypass branch 12 is provided with a switching element 121. In response to the bypass branch 12 being conducted, the generator will be directly connected to the first driving motor 115 via the switching element 121, and the generator 112 directly drives the first driving motor 115 without necessarily via the first motor controller 113 and the second motor controller 114.”
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-8 and 18-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. The specification does not reasonably describe or show the claim elements “control apparatus configures to”; “driving motor electricity supply loop is provided with”; and “bypass branch is provided with” in such a manner to show that the inventor had possession of the claim as the specification does not recite structure for the listed claim elements.
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 1-8 and 18-20 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 limitation “control apparatus configures to”; “driving motor electricity supply loop is provided with”; and “bypass branch is provided with” invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
Applicant may:
(a) Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph;
(b) Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what structure, material, or acts perform the entire claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(c) Amend the written description of the specification such that it clearly links the structure, material, or acts disclosed therein to the function recited in the claim, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)).
If applicant is of the opinion that the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts and clearly links them to the function so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either:
(a) Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(b) Stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181.
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)(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, 5 and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Seo et al., US 2009/0143930 A1.
Regarding claim 1, Seo teaches a system for vehicle power control, comprising:
a control apparatus, a first driving motor, a generator, an engine, (Seo, see at least ¶ [0025] “The hybrid electric vehicle of the example embodiment is a series hybrid electric vehicle having an internal combustion engine 10 and generator 20 driven by the engine 10, referring to FIG. 1.”) a driving motor electricity supply loop and a bypass branch, (Seo, see at least ¶ [0034] “The bypass circuit 40 is composed of AC bypass switches 41 to 43, each of which is provided to correspond to each of the phases (u phase, v phase, w phase) of the generator 20 and the like.”) wherein:
the driving motor electricity supply loop and the bypass branch are connected in parallel, and are positioned between the first driving motor and the generator; (Seo, see at least ¶ [0034] “The bypass circuit 40 is composed of AC bypass switches 41 to 43, each of which is provided to correspond to each of the phases (u phase, v phase, w phase) of the generator 20 and the like.” and Fig. 1)
the generator is in mechanical transmission connection with the engine; (Seo, see at least ¶ [0025] “The hybrid electric vehicle of the example embodiment is a series hybrid electric vehicle having an internal combustion engine 10 and generator 20 driven by the engine 10, referring to FIG. 1.”)
the driving motor electricity supply loop is provided with a first motor controller and a second motor controller; (Seo, see at least ¶ [0027] “The generator 20 is provided with a generator torque controller (not shown) and configured such that the generator 20 is controlled via the generator torque controller by a control unit 100 described later. and ¶ [0031] “The motor 25 is provided with a motor torque controller (not shown) and configured such that the motor 25 is controlled via the motor torque controller by the control unit 100 described later.”)
the first motor controller is electrically connected to the first driving motor; (Seo, see at least ¶ [0027] “The generator 20 is provided with a generator torque controller (not shown) and configured such that the generator 20 is controlled via the generator torque controller by a control unit 100 described later. and ¶ [0031] “The motor 25 is provided with a motor torque controller (not shown) and configured such that the motor 25 is controlled via the motor torque controller by the control unit 100 described later.”)
the second motor controller is electrically connected to the generator; (Seo, see at least ¶ [0027] “The generator 20 is provided with a generator torque controller (not shown) and configured such that the generator 20 is controlled via the generator torque controller by a control unit 100 described later. and ¶ [0031] “The motor 25 is provided with a motor torque controller (not shown) and configured such that the motor 25 is controlled via the motor torque controller by the control unit 100 described later.”)
the bypass branch is provided with a switching element; (Seo, see at least ¶ [0036] “Referring to FIG. 2, each of the AC bypass switches 41 to 43 are embodied as semiconductor switches, each of which is composed of pairs of each of the forward direction transistors 41 a to 43 a to control a current in a direction of flowing from the generator 20 to the motor 25 and each of opposite direction transistors 41 b to 43 b to control a current in a direction of flowing from the motor 25 to the generator 20, respectively. Each of the transistors 41 a to 43 a and 41 b to 43 b are configured such that an ON/OFF operation thereof is controlled by the control unit 100 described in detail below.”) and
the control apparatus is configured to, in response to a speed meeting a preset speed condition, control the second motor controller to stop working, and control the switching element to be turned on to conduct the bypass branch. (Seo, see at least ¶ [0040] “Referring to FIGS. 1 and 3, the input component of the control unit 100 includes a vehicle speed sensor SN1, gas-pedal opening sensor SN2 and brake sensor SN3 to determine an operating condition of the hybrid electric vehicle. Further, various sensors are provided to control the power distribution from the generator 20 to the motor 25.”)
Claims 5 and 10 are rejected using substantially the same reasoning and rationale as claim 1 above.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-4, 6-8 and 18-21 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 1st paragraph, and 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.
Claims 12-17 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 101 set forth in this Office action and to include 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 BRIAN P SWEENEY whose telephone number is (313)446-4906. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Thursday from 7:30AM to 5:00PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, James J. Lee, can be reached at telephone number 571-270-5965. 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 Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center to authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to the USPTO patent electronic filing system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
Examiner interviews are available via a variety of formats. See MPEP § 713.01. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/InterviewPractice.
/BRIAN P SWEENEY/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3668