Prosecution Insights
Last updated: May 04, 2026
Application No. 18/792,300

METHOD FOR OPERATING A MOTOR VEHICLE, AND CORRESPONDING MOTOR VEHICLE

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Aug 01, 2024
Priority
Aug 03, 2023 — DE 102023120572.2
Examiner
HUTCHINSON, ALAN D
Art Unit
3669
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Audi AG
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
78%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
9m
Est. Remaining
96%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 78% — above average
78%
Career Allowance Rate
391 granted / 498 resolved
+26.5% vs TC avg
Strong +17% interview lift
Without
With
+17.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 6m
Avg Prosecution
18 currently pending
Career history
516
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
9.1%
-30.9% vs TC avg
§103
44.8%
+4.8% vs TC avg
§102
24.1%
-15.9% vs TC avg
§112
15.6%
-24.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 498 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 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. Claims 1-4, 6, 7, 9, and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Nakamura et. al. (US Patent Publication 2021/0162869). Regarding claim 1, Nakamura discloses a method for operating a motor vehicle, which has at least one electric machine, the method comprising: (¶76) providing a recuperation torque by the at least one electric machine aimed at decelerating the motor vehicle at least temporarily; (¶22) setting the recuperation torque to a target value; and (¶38, 41) selecting a default value for the recuperation torque from a plurality of default values by an operating element, (¶29, “Running modes that are selectable through the mode switch 17 include at least a first driving mode in which driver's manual vehicle control is executed, and a second driving mode in which automatic control is executed.”; ¶38, TABLE 1 (B range), ) wherein the target value is determined in a first recuperation operating mode as a function of the default value and in a second recuperation operating mode as a function of a driving speed of the motor vehicle, (¶4,17, 21, 29, “The automatic control executed in the second driving mode includes at least automatically adjusting the speed” ¶41, TABLE 2 (B range); the motor torque is derived from a requested vehicle speed according to either a pedal (accelerator or brake) actuation amount or a speed requested from the autonomous driving controller ) the method further comprising: implementing the first recuperation operating mode when a default value is selected on the operating element which corresponds to a recuperation torque other than zero; and (¶50, 54) switching the first recuperation operating mode to the second recuperation operating mode when a default value is selected on the operating element which corresponds to a recuperation torque of zero and when an accelerator pedal of the motor vehicle is actuated. (¶52, 85-86) Regarding claim 2, Nakamura further discloses wherein the target value in the first recuperation operating mode is additionally set as a function of the driving speed. (¶4,17, 21, 29, “The automatic control executed in the second driving mode includes at least automatically adjusting the speed” ¶41, TABLE 2 (B range); the motor torque is derived from a requested vehicle speed according to either a pedal (accelerator or brake) actuation amount or a speed requested from the autonomous driving controller ) Regarding claim 3, Nakamura further discloses wherein the target value is set such that the driving speed is set to a target driving speed. (¶29) Regarding claim 4, Nakamura further discloses wherein the target driving speed is determined from a setting of the operating element and/or from a driver assistance device. (¶29) Regarding claim 6, Nakamura further discloses wherein the target value is determined as a function of a second default value for the recuperation torque when the driving speed is greater than the target driving speed. (¶4,17, 21, 29, “The automatic control executed in the second driving mode includes at least automatically adjusting the speed” ¶41, TABLE 2 (B range); the motor torque is derived from a requested vehicle speed according to either a pedal (accelerator or brake) actuation amount or a speed requested from the autonomous driving controller ) Regarding claim 7, Nakamura further discloses wherein the second default value is selected from the plurality of default values. (¶4,17, 21, 29, “The automatic control executed in the second driving mode includes at least automatically adjusting the speed” ¶41, TABLE 2 (B range); the motor torque is derived from a requested vehicle speed according to either a pedal (accelerator or brake) actuation amount or a speed requested from the autonomous driving controller ) Regarding claim 9, Nakamura further discloses wherein the target value is set as a function of a charge state of an energy storage device connected to the electric machine. (¶23, 56) Regarding claim 10, Nakamura discloses a motor vehicle comprising: (Abstract) at least one electric machine configured to provide a recuperation torque aimed at decelerating the motor vehicle at least temporarily and to set the recuperation torque to a target value; and (¶76, 22, 38, 41) an operating element configured to select a default value for the recuperation torque from a plurality of default values, (¶29) wherein the motor vehicle is configured to determine the target value in a first recuperation operating mode as a function of the default value and in a second recuperation operating mode as a function of a driving speed of the motor vehicle, (¶4,17, 21, 29, “The automatic control executed in the second driving mode includes at least automatically adjusting the speed” ¶41, TABLE 2 (B range); the motor torque is derived from a requested vehicle speed according to either a pedal (accelerator or brake) actuation amount or a speed requested from the autonomous driving controller ) wherein the motor vehicle is configured to implement the first recuperation operating mode when a default value is selected on the operating element which corresponds to a recuperation torque other than zero, and (¶50, 54) wherein the motor vehicle is further configured to switch from the first recuperation operating mode to the second recuperation operating mode when a default value is selected on the operating element which corresponds to a recuperation torque of zero and when an accelerator pedal of the motor vehicle is actuated. (¶52, 85-86) 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 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakamura as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Healy (US Patent Publication 2016/0318421). Regarding claim 5, Nakamura discloses setting the target value as a function of the angle of inclination. (¶60) Nakamura discusses setting the torque regeneration during downhill travel but appears to be silent as to details including determining an angle of inclination of the motor vehicle. Healy however teaches determining an angle of inclination of the motor vehicle; and setting the target value as a function of the angle of inclination. (¶35, 37; “an incline meter 364 configured to monitor the relative incline of the vehicle,” “The threshold condition may be a velocity of the vehicle, an angle of the vehicle”) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to provide the invention of Nakamura with determining an angle of inclination of the motor vehicle as taught by Healy with a reasonable expectation of success so as to determine the magnitude of the downhill road the vehicle is traveling upon and further because the technique for improving a particular class of devices was part of the ordinary capabilities of a person of ordinary skill in the art, in view of the teaching of the technique for improvement in other situations, would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention. Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakamura as applied to claim 3 above, and further in view of White et. al. (US Patent Publication 2017/0072941). Regarding claim 8, White teaches determining a driving speed difference between the driving speed of the motor vehicle and a driving speed of a vehicle traveling ahead; and setting the target driving speed as a function of the driving speed difference. (¶24; Examiner notes White uses an Adaptive Cruise Control which is a type of advanced driver-assistance system that automatically adjusts the vehicle speed to maintain a safe distance from vehicles ahead) Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALAN D HUTCHINSON whose telephone number is (571)272-8413. The examiner can normally be reached 7-5 Mon-Thur. 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 at (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. /ALAN D HUTCHINSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3669
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 01, 2024
Application Filed
Dec 17, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Mar 26, 2026
Response Filed

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12606004
CONTACTOR FAILURE DETERMINATION APPARATUS FOR VEHICLE
3y 7m to grant Granted Apr 21, 2026
Patent 12606054
INTELLIGENT VEHICLE CONTROLLER
2y 2m to grant Granted Apr 21, 2026
Patent 12602150
ENERGY STORAGE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM FOR AN AT LEAST PARTIALLY ELECTRICALLY DRIVEN VEHICLE, AND METHOD
2y 6m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12576720
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR OPERATING A VEHICLE WITH ELECTRIC POWER TAKE-OFF
2y 1m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12570180
CONTROL DEVICE FOR ELECTRIFIED VEHICLE
2y 2m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
78%
Grant Probability
96%
With Interview (+17.1%)
2y 6m (~9m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 498 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance 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