Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/749,549

DRIVING AND STEERING CONTROL SYSTEM, BUILT-IN DRIVING AND STEERING UNIT SYSTEM, BUILT-IN DRIVING AND STEERING UNIT, AND AUTONOMOUS GROUND VEHICLE

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Jun 20, 2024
Examiner
JIN, GEORGE C.
Art Unit
3747
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Yamaha Hatsudoki Kabushiki Kaisha
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
84%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 2m
To Grant
97%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 84% — above average
84%
Career Allow Rate
387 granted / 459 resolved
+14.3% vs TC avg
Moderate +13% lift
Without
With
+12.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 2m
Avg Prosecution
29 currently pending
Career history
488
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
3.2%
-36.8% vs TC avg
§103
45.1%
+5.1% vs TC avg
§102
38.5%
-1.5% vs TC avg
§112
12.3%
-27.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 459 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 § 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) 1-5, 7-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a1) as being anticipated by Romig US PG Pub No. 2007/0260370). Regarding claim 1, Romig teaches A driving and steering control system to be employed in an autonomous ground vehicle that is capable of running without a driver in/on the vehicle, the autonomous ground vehicle including: a plurality of wheels including a targeted wheel, (101 figure 1) a propulsion motor that rotates the targeted wheel around an axle of the targeted wheel, (108 figure 2 paragraph 19) a steering motor that steers the targeted wheel to left and right of the autonomous ground vehicle, (107 figure 2 paragraph 19) a steering shaft that: (124 steering tube figure 3 paragraph 21) is connected to the steering motor, (107 figure 2 paragraph 21) is configured to steer the targeted wheel by operation of the steering motor, and is positioned in such a manner to have a scrub radius relative to the targeted wheel, and (figure 6 paragraph 33+34 scrub radius 606 figure 3 paragraph 42) an upper-level control section that is configured to output: propulsion motor actuation instruction information for actuating the propulsion motor, and (figure 7) steering motor actuation instruction information for actuating the steering motor, (figure 7) the driving and steering control system comprising: an acquisition device (paragraph 37 steering logic may reside in controller) that is configured to acquire the propulsion motor actuation instruction information and the steering motor actuation instruction information from the upper-level control section; and (paragraph 38) a motor information processing device that is configured to concurrently actuate the propulsion motor and the steering motor in such a manner to: concurrently change an operation parameter of the steering motor and an operation parameter of the propulsion motor based on the steering motor actuation instruction information acquired by the acquisition device, and (602 figure 7 desired angle velocity -> 604) concurrently change the operation parameter of the propulsion motor and the operation parameter of the steering motor based on the propulsion motor actuation instruction information acquired by the acquisition device (603 figure 7 desired linear velocity -> 604). Regarding claim 2, Romig teaches wherein the motor information processing device is further configured to, while actuating both the steering motor and the propulsion motor, in response to receipt by the acquisition device a new piece of information that provides a change in only one, but not both, of the steering motor actuation instruction information and the propulsion motor actuation instruction information, concurrently change the operation parameters of both the steering motor and the propulsion motor (paragraph 41 605 figure 7 each wheel). Regarding claim 3, Romig teaches wherein the motor information processing device is further configured to, when the acquisition device receives the steering motor actuation instruction information and the propulsion motor actuation instruction information, concurrently actuate the propulsion motor and the steering motor, such that the propulsion motor is inhibited from interfering with the steering motor in steering of the targeted wheel, and such that a change in the steering angle caused by the propulsion motor is inhibited by the steering motor (paragraph 39 vector desired velocity). Regarding claim 4, Romig teaches wherein the targeted wheel, the propulsion motor, the steering motor, and the steering shaft constitute a built-in driving and steering unit that is attachable to the autonomous ground vehicle (figure 2). Regarding claim 5, Romig teaches wherein the steering motor actuation instruction information and the propulsion motor actuation instruction information are configured without information on the scrub radius and free of any information on the scrub radius (figure 2 motors have no instruction when built in factory). 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. Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Romig US PG Pub No. 2007/0260370) in view of Hanchett (US PG Pub. No. 2022/0355855) Regarding claim 6, Romig does not explicitly teach however Hanchett teaches wherein both the propulsion motor and the steering motor are in-wheel motors mounted to the targeted wheel (figure 7). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify Romig based on the teachings of Hanchett to teach wherein both the propulsion motor and the steering motor are in-wheel motors mounted to the targeted wheel. The motivation would be to improve packaging. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GEORGE C. JIN whose telephone number is (571)272-9898. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM-6PM. 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, Lindsay Low can be reached at (571) 272-1196. 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. /GEORGE C JIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3747
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 20, 2024
Application Filed
Sep 19, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600429
UNIVERSAL ROTATION FRONT STEERING FOR A RIDING DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12600368
ZONAL ARCHITECTURE FOR VEHICLE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12600327
DRIVING ASSISTANCE APPARATUS, DRIVING ASSISTANCE METHOD, AND NON-TRANSITORY STORAGE MEDIUM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12594939
VEHICLE CONTROL APPARATUS AND METHOD, AND STORAGE MEDIUM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12589719
REMOTE CONTROL OF A BRAKE CONTROLLER FOR A TOWED VEHICLE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
84%
Grant Probability
97%
With Interview (+12.8%)
2y 2m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 459 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month