DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
This Office Action is sent in response to Applicant’s Communication received on July 31, 2024 for application number 18/790,217. This Office hereby acknowledges receipt of the following and placed of record in file: Specification, Drawings, Abstract, Oath/Declaration, and Claims.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d). No certified copies have been filed for the parent application.
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 enough 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 enough 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 enough 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 enough structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier.
Such claim limitations are:
“manipulation unit” and “brake pedal detection unit” in claims 1-20.
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 § 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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yamakado et al. (US PG Pub No. 2014/0145498), hereinafter “Yamakado”.
Regarding claim 1, Yamakado discloses a vehicle brake force distribution control apparatus (Abstract: Vehicular motion control system comprising controller that independently controls driving force and/or braking force of each of four wheels) comprising: a manipulation unit (Fig. 10 (16)) configured to select at least one of a parallel moving mode (Parallel moving mode is interpreted as a straight-ahead moving direction), a diagonal moving mode (Diagonal moving mode is interpreted as a right/left turn moving direction), and an in-situ turn mode (This mode is interpreted as a near-zero turning radius of the vehicle); a brake pedal detection unit (32; paragraph 189) configured to detect a brake pedal (11) open value to predict a target deceleration in the parallel moving mode (Parallel moving mode is interpreted as a straight-ahead moving direction) or the diagonal moving mode (Diagonal moving mode is interpreted as a right/left turn moving direction); a sensor (paragraph 109: a steering angle input by the driver of a handle unit 1101 is input to a steering controller 1120 via a steering angle sensor) configured to generate and output steering amount information and longitudinal/lateral deceleration information (paragraph 217) according to the brake pedal open value detected by the brake pedal detection unit (32; paragraph 189); and a controller (40) configured to distribute a brake force of each wheel in the parallel moving mode or the diagonal moving mode according to the target deceleration (paragraph 181), correct the brake force of each wheel on the basis of the steering amount information and the longitudinal/lateral deceleration information output from the sensor, and allow a real brake force of each wheel to follow a corrected target brake force in the parallel moving mode or the diagonal moving mode (Abstract; paragraphs 109, 181-184).
Regarding claim 2, Yamakado discloses the apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the controller calculates a variable brake force distribution ratio and a weight transfer ratio for each wheel on the basis of the steering amount information and the longitudinal/lateral deceleration information output from the sensor, and corrects the brake force to follow the target brake force according to the calculated variable brake force distribution ratio and weight transfer ratio (Abstract; paragraphs 181-184).
Regarding claim 3, Yamakado discloses the apparatus according to claim 2, wherein the controller controls an open value of a hydraulic valve for each wheel for following the target brake force, and compares hydraulic pressure information for each wheel detected from the hydraulic valve with target hydraulic pressure information of the target brake force (paragraphs 288-292).
Regarding claim 4, Yamakado discloses the apparatus according to claim 3, wherein the controller repeatedly controls the open value of the hydraulic valve for each wheel so that the hydraulic pressure information matches the target hydraulic pressure information (paragraphs 181-183, 187-189).
Regarding claim 5, Yamakado discloses the apparatus according to claim 2, wherein the controller detects current hydraulic pressure information for each wheel for following the target brake force, and compares the current hydraulic pressure information with target hydraulic pressure information of the target brake force of each wheel (paragraphs 181-184, 187-189).
Regarding claim 6, Yamakado discloses the apparatus according to claim 5, wherein the controller generates, in a case where the current hydraulic pressure information for each wheel exceeds the target hydraulic pressure information, driving force in the same direction as a vehicle movement direction by controlling a drive motor (Abstract; paragraphs 187-189, 214, 362).
Regarding claim 7, Yamakado discloses the apparatus according to claim 5, wherein the controller generates, in a case where the current hydraulic pressure information for each wheel is lower than the target hydraulic pressure information, the brake force in a direction opposite to a vehicle movement direction by controlling a drive motor (paragraphs 109, 181-184, 187-189).
Regarding claim 8, Yamakado discloses the apparatus according to claim 1, wherein, in correcting the brake force of each wheel to follow the target brake force, the controller performs control for correcting a brake force error due to a braking deviation (Abstract; paragraphs 232-233, 362).
Regarding claim 9, Yamakado discloses the apparatus according to claim 8, wherein the controller determines, in a case where a yaw value output from a yaw rate sensor that belongs to the sensor exceeds a set value, that the braking deviation has occurred, and performs feedback control for correcting the brake force error for each wheel (paragraphs 217, 225-227).
Regarding claim 10, Yamakado discloses the apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the controller distributes, in a case where a drive mode is switched to the in-situ turn mode by the manipulation unit, the brake forces for the respective wheels to be the same (paragraphs 187-189).
Regarding claim 11, Yamakado discloses a vehicle brake force distribution control method (Abstract), comprising: determining whether a manipulation unit (Fig. 10 (16)) is manipulated to select at least one of a parallel moving mode (Parallel moving mode is interpreted as a straight-ahead moving direction), a diagonal moving mode (Diagonal moving mode is interpreted as a right/left turn moving direction), and an in-situ turn mode (This mode is interpreted as a near-zero turning radius of the vehicle), by a controller (Abstract; paragraphs 109, 181, 189); predicting, in a case where a drive mode is switched to the parallel moving mode (Parallel moving mode is interpreted as a straight-ahead moving direction) or the diagonal moving mode (Diagonal moving mode is interpreted as a right/left turn moving direction) by the manipulation unit (paragraphs 187-189), a target deceleration according to a brake pedal open value by the controller (paragraph 109); distributing brake forces for respective wheels in the parallel moving mode (Parallel moving mode is interpreted as a straight-ahead moving direction) or the diagonal moving mode (Diagonal moving mode is interpreted as a right/left turn moving direction) necessary for the target deceleration, by the controller (paragraphs 109, 181-184); and performing control for correcting the distributed brake force of each wheel and allowing a real brake force of each wheel to follow a corrected target brake force in the parallel moving mode or the diagonal moving mode, by the controller (Abstract; paragraphs 109, 181-184, 187-189).
Regarding claim 12, Yamakado discloses the method according to claim 11, wherein the performing control for allowing the real brake force to follow the target brake force, comprises: calculating a variable brake force distribution ratio and a weight transfer ratio for each wheel on the basis of steering amount information and longitudinal/lateral deceleration information output from a plurality of sensors, and correcting the brake force to follow the target brake force according to the calculated variable brake force distribution ratio and the weight transfer ratio (Abstract; paragraphs 181-184).
Regarding claim 13, Yamakado discloses the method according to claim 12, wherein the performing control for allowing the real brake force to follow the target brake force, comprises: controlling an open value of a hydraulic valve for each wheel for following the target brake force, and comparing hydraulic pressure information for each wheel detected from the hydraulic valve with target hydraulic pressure information of the target brake force (paragraphs 288-292).
Regarding claim 14, Yamakado discloses the method according to claim 13, wherein the performing control for allowing the real brake force to follow the target brake force, comprises: repeatedly controlling the open value of the hydraulic valve for each wheel so that the hydraulic pressure information matches the target hydraulic pressure information (paragraphs 181-183, 187-189).
Regarding claim 15, Yamakado discloses the method according to claim 12, wherein the performing control for allowing the real brake force to follow the target brake force, comprises: detecting current hydraulic pressure information for each wheel for following the target brake force, and comparing the current hydraulic pressure information with target hydraulic pressure information of the target brake force of each wheel (paragraphs 181-184, 187-189).
Regarding claim 16, Yamakado discloses the method according to claim 15, wherein the performing control for allowing the real brake force to follow the target brake force, comprises: generating, in a case where the current hydraulic pressure information for each wheel exceeds the target hydraulic pressure information, driving force in the same direction as a vehicle movement direction by controlling a drive motor (Abstract; paragraphs 187-189, 214, 362).
Regarding claim 17, Yamakado discloses the method according to claim 15, wherein the performing control for allowing the real brake force to follow the target brake force, comprises: generating, in a case where the current hydraulic pressure information for each wheel is lower than the target hydraulic pressure information, the brake force in a direction opposite to a vehicle movement direction by controlling a drive motor (paragraphs 109, 181-184, 187-189).
Regarding claim 18, Yamakado discloses the method according to claim 11, further comprising: correcting a brake force error due to a braking deviation in correcting the brake force of each wheel to follow the target brake force, by the controller (Abstract; paragraphs 232-233, 362).
Regarding claim 19, Yamakado discloses the method according to claim 11, wherein the performing control for allowing the real brake force to follow the target brake force, comprises: determining, in a case where a yaw value output from a yaw rate sensor that belongs to the sensor exceeds a set value, that the braking deviation has occurred, and performing feedback control for correcting the brake force error for each wheel (paragraphs 217, 225-227).
Regarding claim 20, Yamakado discloses the method according to claim 11, wherein the performing distributing brake forces for respective wheels comprises: distributing the brake forces so that the brake forces for the respective wheels are the same in a case where the drive mode is switched to the in-situ turn mode by the manipulation unit (paragraphs 187-189).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OMAR MORALES whose telephone number is (571)272-5923. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday thru Friday.
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 on (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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/O.M/Examiner, Art Unit 3747
/LINDSAY M LOW/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3747