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 .
Status of the Claims
This Office Action is in response to the Applicants’ filing on 03/26/2026. Claims 1-16 were previously pending, of which claims 1-4, 6, and 10-12 have been amended, claims 5 and 15 have been cancelled, and claims 17-20 have been newly added. Accordingly, claims 1-4, 6-14, and 16-20 are currently pending and are being examined below.
Response to Arguments
With respect to Applicant's remarks, see pages 6-12, filed 03/26/2026; Applicant’s “Amendment and Remarks” have been fully considered. Applicant’s remarks will be addressed in sequential order as they were presented.
With respect to the claim objections, the amendments have rendered the objections moot. Therefore, the objections to the claims are withdrawn.
With respect to the claim rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 112, the amendment renders the antecedent rejections to claims 10 and 12 moot, those rejections are withdrawn. The further amendments did not address the lack of support for the structure of the controller. Although it is true controller is known in the art, it could be any form of device used to control the function of a motor, including a pedal or joy stick which is used to control the speed or power received by the motor. It is not inherent that the controller could only be the processing structures listed in page 7 of the remarks. Therefore, the amended claims are still rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112.
With respect to the claim rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 103, applicant’s “Amendment and Remarks” have been fully considered and are not persuasive. Further consideration of the prior art of record determined that Lim does appear to disclose the defined magnetic field is generated with at least one current pulse having a higher current strength and/or maximum amplitude than a nominal current provided for the permanently excited synchronous machine, as amended in claim 1. Lim also appears to disclose the limitations provided in the newly added claims 17-20. Due to the nature of the applicant’s amendments, the scope of the applicant’s invention has changed. New application of prior art addresses the amended language, as mapped below. Therefore, the amended claims are still rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103, and have been updated in the final office action below.
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.
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) 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:
In claim 1, the “controller” in the limitation “controller configured to switch off the at least one traction motor…” invokes 112(f) as controller is a term that does not have definite structure which enables the initiation of a magnetic field generation or switching off of a motor.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, 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.
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.
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 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.
10. Claim 1 limitation “controller configured to switch off the at least one traction motor…” 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. The specification is devoid of adequate structure to perform the claimed function. In particular, the specification states that the claimed function of switching off a traction motor is performed by a control device. There is no disclosure of any particular structure, either explicitly or inherently, to perform the switching off of the traction motor. The use of the term controller is not adequate structure for performing the switching off because it does not describe a particular structure for performing the function as would be recognized by those of ordinary skill in the art, the term controller refers to a control device and can be performed in any number of ways in hardware, software or a combination of the two. The specification does not provide sufficient detail such that one of ordinary skill in the art would understand which structure or structures perform(s) the claimed 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.
Claims 2-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being dependent on rejected claim 1 and for failing to cure the deficiencies listed above.
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.
Claim 1 is 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 pre-AIA the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. As described above, the disclosure does not provide adequate structure to perform the claimed function of switching off the traction motor. The specification does not demonstrate that applicant has made an invention that achieves the claimed function because the invention is not described with sufficient detail such that one of ordinary skill in the art can reasonably conclude that the inventor had possession of the claimed invention.
Claims 2-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) as being dependent on rejected claim 1 and for failing to cure the deficiencies listed above.
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.
Claims 1-4, 6, 8-14, and 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lim et al. (US 2022/0329178 A1), hereinafter Lim.
With respect to claims 1 and 20, Lim discloses a drive system for an at least partially electrically driven motor vehicle, comprising: an electric traction drive with at least two electric traction motors, (see at least [0028] “traction motors for providing power to the main drive wheels and the auxiliary drive wheels are provided”)
wherein at least one traction motor of the at least two electric traction motors is a permanently excited synchronous machine having a rotor with a plurality of permanent magnets and a stator with a magnetic field generator for generating a stator magnetic field; (see at least [0006] “the synchronous motor includes a stator 100, a stator slot 110” [0014-0015] “the synchronous motor includes the permanent magnets 130 and the holes 140 in the rotor 120…the rotating magnetic field generated by the stator 100”)
and at least one controller configured to switch off the at least one traction motor as a function of a load state of the drive system at least in partial load operation, such that the at least one traction motor is in a towing mode and is towed along while a further traction motor of the at least two electric traction motors is still switched on and supplies a torque for driving, (see at least [0097] “For example, when a vehicle is driving using only the torque of the main motor 520, the power of the auxiliary-motor 522 may be turned off. Here, when the power of the auxiliary-motor 522 is turned off, the auxiliary-motor 522 rotates in any one of idle rotation, no-load rotation, and low-load rotation according to rotation of the main motor 520.”)
wherein the controller is configured to generate a defined magnetic field with the magnetic field generator and to at least partially demagnetize the permanent magnets of the at least one traction motor, which is switched off and in the towing mode, with a demagnetization field of the defined magnetic field such that drag losses are reduced when towing, (see at least [0097] “The drag force is a factor hindering the torque of the main motor 520. The control unit 540 may eliminate the drag force by demagnetizing the permanent magnet of the auxiliary-motor 522 before the power of the auxiliary-motor 522 is turned off.” [0044] “a cogging torque by the permanent magnets is removable without a clutch for power cutoff even when power of the auxiliary motor is turned off.”) Note: Towing appears to be used to define a non-driven axle being demagnetized to allow the wheels to roll freely.
and wherein the defined magnetic field is generated with at least one current pulse having a higher current strength and/or amplitude than a nominal current provided for the permanently excited synchronous machine. (see at least [0067] “The control unit 334 may be configured to form a rotating magnetic field using the stator current” [0070] “For the magnetization or demagnetization of the permanent magnet, the d-axis current having a high level is instantaneously applied to the stator coil.” [0080] “Here, the d-axis current may be instantaneously controlled to be a high negative value. The demagnetization state 440 in the demagnetization section 420 may be 0% or close to 0%.” Note: The high level current is understood to be the maximum negative amplitude required for 0% magnetization.)
With respect to claim 2, Lim discloses the controller is configured to generate a magnetization field as the defined magnetic field with the magnetic field generator and to magnetize the previously demagnetized permanent magnets of the at least one traction motor, which is switched off, with the magnetization field, such that the at least one traction motor can again supply a driving torque. (see at least [0092] “the control unit 540 is configured to control the torque of the conductor bar included in the rotor of the auxiliary-motor 522, and magnetize or demagnetize the permanent magnet according to the operation of the main motor 520 so as to control a driving mode of the auxiliary-motor” [0095] “The control unit 540 may be configured to control the driving mode of the auxiliary-motor 522 as a synchronous motor mode by magnetizing the permanent magnet of the auxiliary-motor 522 when the main motor 520 accelerates.” Note: It is understood that the auxiliary motor would have been demagnetized prior to the acceleration.)
With respect to claim 3, Lim discloses the controller is configured to magnetize the at least one traction motor again at least when a torque requirement is present, for the provision of which the at least one traction motor is required. (see at least [0095] “The control unit 540 may be configured to control the driving mode of the auxiliary-motor 522 as a synchronous motor mode by magnetizing the permanent magnet of the auxiliary-motor 522 when the main motor 520 accelerates.” [0066] “When the permanent magnet is magnetized, the control unit 334 may control… the torque generated by the magnetized permanent magnet using a rotating magnetic field formed by controlling the stator current.”)
With respect to claim 4, Lim discloses the control device is configured to generate the defined magnetic field with a defined magnetic field direction and to set a magnetic field direction for the magnetization field which is opposite to the magnetic field direction of the demagnetization field. (see at least [0080] “In the demagnetization section 420, the motor control apparatus may demagnetize the permanent magnet by controlling the d-axis current at the stator coil of the motor to be a negative value.”)
With respect to claim 6, Lim discloses a current pulse for generating the defined magnetic field is provided at least partially by power electronics of the traction drive. (see at least [0084] “the first inverter 510 is configured to apply a stator current to a stator coil of the main motor 520” [0067] “The control unit 334 may be configured to form a rotating magnetic field using the stator current)
With respect to claim 8, Lim discloses the controller is configured to set a current direction of a current pulse for generating the defined magnetic field and to set a current direction for the magnetization field which is opposite to a current direction of the demagnetization field. (see at least [0079] “In the magnetization section 410, the motor control apparatus may magnetize the permanent magnet by controlling the d-axis current at the stator coil of the motor to be a positive value.” [0080] “demagnetize the permanent magnet by controlling the d-axis current at the stator coil of the motor to be a negative value.”)
With respect to claim 9, Lim discloses the controller is configured to apply the defined magnetic field to the at least one traction motor under the condition that the at least one traction motor is switched on and supplies a torque for driving and/or that the drive system is in motion. (see at least [0095] “The control unit 540 may be configured to control the driving mode of the auxiliary-motor 522 as a synchronous motor mode by magnetizing the permanent magnet of the auxiliary-motor 522 when the main motor 520 accelerates.”)
With respect to claim 10, Lim discloses the controller is configured to adjust a torque of each of the at least two electric traction motors during application of the defined magnetic field to the at least one traction motor such that undesired torque pulses are avoided. (see at least [0097] “The drag force is a factor hindering the torque of the main motor 520. The control unit 540 may eliminate the drag force by demagnetizing the permanent magnet of the auxiliary-motor 522 before the power of the auxiliary-motor 522 is turned off.”)
With respect to claim 11, Lim discloses at least two axle units, which are each driven by at least one of the at least two electric traction motors, wherein the controller is configured to switch off and demagnetize the at least one traction motor to drive at least one of the at least two axle units as a function of the of the drive system such that the towing operation is provided axle by axle. (see at least [0090-0091] “The main drive wheels 530 and the auxiliary drive wheels 532 may be front wheels and rear wheels… power distribution to the front wheels and rear wheels and controls overall operations for controlling the driving of the main motor 520 and the auxiliary-motor 522.” Note: The axles can be seen on Fig. 5.)
With respect to claim 12, Lim discloses a front axle configured to be driven by the at least one front traction motor of the at least two electric traction motor and a rear axle configured to be driven by at least one rear traction motor of the at least two electric traction motors, wherein the controller is configured to switch off and demagnetize at least one front traction motor, which is configured to drive the front axle as a function of the load state of the drive system, such that the front axle is towed along while the rear axle is driven, or wherein the controller is configured to switch off and demagnetize the at least one rear traction motor configured to drive the rear axle as a function of the load state of the drive system such that the rear axle is towed along while the front axle is driven. (see at least [0090-0091] “The main drive wheels 530 and the auxiliary drive wheels 532 may be front wheels and rear wheels, respectively or may be rear wheels and front wheels, respectively… power distribution to the front wheels and rear wheels and controls overall operations for controlling the driving of the main motor 520 and the auxiliary-motor 522.” [0044] “controlling an auxiliary motor including both permanent magnets and conducting bars in which a torque of a main motor is assisted by controlling a driving mode of the auxiliary motor… and a cogging torque by the permanent magnets is removable without a clutch for power cutoff even when power of the auxiliary motor is turned off.” Note: The axles can be seen on Fig. 5.)
With respect to claim 13, Lim discloses a magnetic coercive field strength of the permanent magnets of the at least one traction motor designed as a permanently excited synchronous machine and the defined magnetic field generated by the magnetic field generator are matched to one another. (see at least [0072] “The magnitude of the magnetomotive force may be a level for forming a rotating magnetic field corresponding to the coercive force of the permanent magnet.”)
With respect to claim 14, Lim discloses a method for operating the drive system according to claim 1. (see at least [0031] “a method of controlling the auxiliary traction motor in consideration of the operation of the main traction motor”)
With respect to claim 16, Lim discloses a current pulse for generating the defined magnetic field is provided at least partially by an inverter. (see at least [0084] “the second inverter 512 is configured to apply a stator current to a stator coil of the auxiliary-motor 522.”)
With respect to claim 17, Lim discloses the nominal current is configured to provide power to the permanently excited synchronous machine during nominal operation of the permanently excited synchronous machine. (see at least Fig. 4, [0078] “In the normal operation section 400, the motor control apparatus controls the d-axis current 430 within a range necessary for controlling a torque.”)
With respect to claim 18, Lim discloses the at least one current pulse is at least 1.5 times the current strength and/or the maximum amplitude of the nominal current. (see at least Fig. 4, Note: Although the magnitude of the current change is not explicitly disclosed current on Fig. 4 clearly shows a difference of at least 1.5 times the normal operation current.)
With respect to claim 19, Lim discloses the at least one current pulse is at least three to five times the current strength and/or the maximum amplitude of the nominal current. (see at least Fig. 4, Note: Although the magnitude of the current change is not explicitly disclosed current on Fig. 4 clearly shows a difference of at least three times the normal operation current.)
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 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lim as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Oi (US 2022/0109391 A1), hereinafter Oi.
With respect to claim 7, Lim discloses the traction motor demagnetization using an inverter, but does not explicitly disclose the use of a capacitor to produce a current pulse.
However, Oi teaches a current pulse for generating the defined magnetic field is provided at least partially by a capacitor. (see at least [0022] “A capacitor 4 that reduces pulsation of a current (voltage) is connected between the power source 3 and the inverter 5.”)
As both are in the same field of endeavor, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the generation of a magnetic field using an inverter of Lim to include the capacitor disclosed in Oi, with reasonable expectation of success. The motivation for doing so would have been to reduce the pulse of the current before it hits the inverter, see Oi [0022].
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHELLEY MARIE OSTERHOUT whose telephone number is (703)756-1595. The examiner can normally be reached Mon to Fri 8:30 AM - 5:30 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, Navid Mehdizadeh can be reached on (571) 272-7691. 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.
/S.M.O./Examiner, Art Unit 3669
/NAVID Z. MEHDIZADEH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3669
Prosecution Insights