DETAILED ACTION
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) 1-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakakuki (U.S. Pub. No. 2019/0270482) and in view of Kitazume (U.S. Pat. No. 11,753,069).
Regarding claim 1 and 8, Nakakuki discloses a steering control device (20), comprising:
a receiver receiving a steering angle of a steering wheel from a steering angle sensor (10);
a torque calculator calculating a soft end stop (SES) torque in a direction opposite to steering of the steering wheel when the steering angle enters an SES torque output section (¶5); and
a controller outputting a control signal for adjusting a final torque applied to a steering motor based on the SES torque (Abstract discloses applying a “stopper torque” opposite the turning force when approaching a “stopper angle”)
Nakakuki does not disclose wherein the SES torque is calculated by further considering a vehicle velocity of a host vehicle, and the SES torque is calculated to increase as the vehicle velocity of the host vehicle increases.
Kitazume, which deals in steering torque, teaches wherein the SES torque is calculated by further considering a vehicle velocity of a host vehicle, and the SES torque is calculated to increase as the vehicle velocity of the host vehicle increases (col. 13, lines 41-48 discloses that from a stopping speed to a low and intermediate the force needed is higher than at a high speed, i.e. when increasing speed from a stop the SES also increases.).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have modified Nakakuki with the torque fluctuation due to speed of Kitazume because this reduces fluctuation due to vehicle speed (col. 14, lines 5-10). Nakakuki teaches to stop their SES torque at a certain speed which would will be construed as Kitazume’s “high-speed range”.
Regarding claim 2 and 9 which depends from claim 1 and 8 respectively, Nakakuki discloses wherein the SES torque is calculated as a sum of an angle-based torque and an SES damping torque (¶21 last lines disclose damping),
wherein the angle-based torque is calculated as a product of a weight torque and a weight factor,
wherein the weight torque is determined as a value corresponding to the steering angle (steering angle is part of the consideration as shown in fig. 8), and
wherein the weight factor is determined as a value corresponding to a detected steering angular velocity (¶21 discloses steering speed).
Regarding claim 3 and 10 which depends from claim 2 and 9 respectively, Nakakuki discloses wherein the weight torque is calculated to increase as the vehicle velocity of the host vehicle increases (shown in fig. 7 at s21).
Regarding claim 4 and 11 which depends from claim 2 and 9 respectively, Nakakuki discloses wherein the torque calculator decreases and calculates the weight torque when determining that the steering wheel is reversed (shown in fig. 8 where the steering wheel starts going in the other direction the torque would be decreased).
Regarding claim 5 and 12 which depends from claim 4 and 11 respectively, Nakakuki discloses wherein the torque calculator determines that the steering wheel is reversed when a direction of torque of the steering wheel is different from a direction of the steering angular velocity (the direction applied is in the opposite direction of the steering wheel movement).
Regarding claim 6 and 13 which depends from claim 4 and 11 respectively, Nakakuki discloses wherein the torque calculator determines that the steering wheel is reversed when a direction of the steering angle is reversed (the sensor provides the steering angle).
Regarding claim 7 and 14 which depends from claim 1 and 8 respectively, Nakakuki discloses wherein the SES torque output section is set to a section spaced apart from a mechanical end steering angle by a predetermined angle at each of two opposite ends of an operating range of the steering wheel (shown in fig. 8).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 5-7, filed 01/16/26, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-14 under USC 102 have been fully considered and are persuasive that the amendments overcome Nakakuki alone. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Nakakuki (U.S. Pub. No. 2019/0270482) in view of Kitazume (U.S. Pat. No. 11,753,069).
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
Prosecution Insights