Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/813,022

ELECTRIC VEHICLE

Non-Final OA §103§DP
Filed
Aug 23, 2024
Examiner
BADII, BEHRANG
Art Unit
3665
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Toyota Jidosha Kabushiki Kaisha
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
74%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 0m
To Grant
82%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 74% — above average
74%
Career Allow Rate
297 granted / 401 resolved
+22.1% vs TC avg
Moderate +8% lift
Without
With
+7.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 0m
Avg Prosecution
5 currently pending
Career history
406
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
12.7%
-27.3% vs TC avg
§103
38.4%
-1.6% vs TC avg
§102
29.3%
-10.7% vs TC avg
§112
12.0%
-28.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 401 resolved cases

Office Action

§103 §DP
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 . Claims 1-18 have been examined. P = paragraph, e.g. p5 = paragraph 5. 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) 1-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moriya et al. USPAP 2018/0354490, and further in view of the 2017 Dodge Durango Owner’s manual along with the YouTube video explaining the 2017 Dodge Durango. As per claims 1, 7 and 13, Moriya discloses a device/method/computer readable media, comprising: a motor controller configured to: switch a control mode of an electric motor of a vehicle between an automatic mode and a manual mode in response to a mode switching operation to a paddle type shifter of the vehicle (p’s 3, 30, 33, 91; ab; p24; claim 1, figure 4), Moriya discloses via p3: [0003] Some automatic transmissions have a manual shift mode besides an automatic shift mode that automatically performs shifting of the automatic transmission in accordance with a driving state of a vehicle. The manual shift mode performs, when a shift operation is performed by a driver of the vehicle, downshift or upshift of a stage of the automatic transmission in accordance with the shift operation performed by the driver of the vehicle. The shift operation performed by the driver may be, for example but not limited to, an operation performed on a paddle switch directed to downshift or an operation performed on a paddle switch directed to upshift. Moriya discloses via p’s 30 and 33: 0030] A steering wheel 35 may be provided with a minus (−) paddle switch 36 and a plus (+) paddle switch 37 on the back side of the steering wheel 35. When any of the minus paddle switch 36 and the plus paddle switch 37 is operated during the automatic shift mode, the shift mode may be switched to the temporary manual mode. The minus paddle switch 36 may be directed to downshift of the stage during any of the manual shift mode and the temporary manual mode. The plus paddle switch 37 may be directed to upshift of the stage during any of the manual shift mode and the temporary manual mode. [0033] The TCU 32 may switch the shift mode to the manual shift mode when the manual position is detected by the position switch 34 as being selected. Alternatively, the TCU 32 may switch the shift mode to the temporary manual mode when any of the minus paddle switch 36 and the plus paddle switch 37 is operated during the automatic shift mode. For example, when an operation corresponding to the discontinuation condition of the temporary manual mode described above is performed, the TCU 32 may switch the shift mode to the automatic shift mode. In any of the manual shift mode and the temporary manual mode, the TCU 32 may so control the valve body 31 that downshift into an adjacent lower stage is performed when the minus paddle switch 36 is operated. When the plus paddle switch 37 is operated, the TCU 32 may so control the valve body 31 that upshift into an adjacent higher stage is performed. in the automatic mode, change an output of the electric motor in accordance with operation of an accelerator pedal of the vehicle (P’s 129, 46, 72; figure 2), and Moriya discloses via p129: [0129] For example, the driver's intention, e.g., whether the driver's intention is directed to deceleration or acceleration, may be determined on the basis of the accelerator pedal position detected by the accelerator pedal sensor 41 in the above-described implementations; however, this is non-limiting. The driver's intention may be determined by any other method. In one alternative example, a method may be applied that the driver's intention is determined as being directed to acceleration, i.e., the driver's intention is determined as not being directed to deceleration, on a condition that a change of lane is determined as being performed on the basis of information regarding an operation performed on a direction indicator. In another alternative example, a method may be applied that the driver's intention is determined as being directed to acceleration, i.e., the driver's intention is determined as not being directed to deceleration, on a condition that merging at a merging place such as a freeway is determined as being performed on the basis of image information obtained from a camera capturing an image ahead of the vehicle. in the manual mode, change an output characteristic of the electric motor with respect to the operation of the accelerator pedal in accordance with an upshift operation and a downshift operation to the paddle type shifter (p’s 46, 129, figure 8). Moriya discloses via p46: [0046] On a condition that the manual position is selected by means of the shifter 33 and the downshift operation is determined by the shift operation determiner 40a as being performed, the driving intention determiner 40b may determine, on the basis of the accelerator pedal position detected by the accelerator pedal sensor 41, whether the driver's intention is directed to deceleration or acceleration. For example, when the accelerator pedal position is 0[%], i.e., when the accelerator pedal is not pressed down, the driving intention determiner 40b may determine that the driver's intention is directed to deceleration. When the accelerator pedal position is not 0[%], i.e., when the accelerator pedal is pressed down, the driving intention determiner 40b may determine that the driver's intention is directed to acceleration. Moriya discloses all the limitations of the invention, however, arguendo, if Moriya is or might be interpreted such that it might not explicitly disclose switching between automatic and manual via a paddle shifter, then 2017 Dodge Durango Owner’s manual (pages 398-399) and the accompanying YouTube video (at 1 minute to 1:40) discloses switching between automatic and manual via a paddle shifter. If this interpretation is taken, then it would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Moriya to include switching between automatic and manual via a paddle shifter such as that taught by 2017 Dodge Durango Owner’s manual and the accompanying YouTube in order to disengage AutoStick (manual) and go back to automatic via pressing and holding the (+) shift paddle (2017 Dodge Durango Owner’s manual (page 399) and the accompanying YouTube video (at 1 minute to 1:40)). Figure 8 of Moriya discloses: PNG media_image1.png 960 628 media_image1.png Greyscale As per claims 2, 8 and 14, Moriya discloses wherein the mode switching operation includes one or more signals from the paddle type shifter(p’s 30, 33, 91, 3; ab; p’s 129, 46, 72, 25; fig’s 4 and 8) as per the discussion above and the rejection of corresponding parts of the claims above incorporated herein and further, Moriya discloses via p30: [0030] A steering wheel 35 may be provided with a minus (−) paddle switch 36 and a plus (+) paddle switch 37 on the back side of the steering wheel 35. When any of the minus paddle switch 36 and the plus paddle switch 37 is operated during the automatic shift mode, the shift mode may be switched to the temporary manual mode. The minus paddle switch 36 may be directed to downshift of the stage during any of the manual shift mode and the temporary manual mode. The plus paddle switch 37 may be directed to upshift of the stage during any of the manual shift mode and the temporary manual mode. As per claims 3, 9 and 15, Moriya discloses wherein the output characteristic includes a driving wheel torque of the electric motor (ab; p’s 129, 46, 72, 25; fig’s 4 and 8; p’s 30, 33, 91, 3) as per the discussion above and the rejection of corresponding parts of the claims above incorporated herein and further, Moriya discloses via figure 4: PNG media_image2.png 862 587 media_image2.png Greyscale As per claims 4, 10 and 16, Moriya discloses wherein the motor controller is configured to, in the manual mode, change the driving wheel torque of the electric motor in accordance with a vehicle model for determining the driving wheel torque based on the operation of the accelerator pedal and the at least one of the upshift operation and the downshift operation to the paddle type shifter (p’s 92, 129, 46, 72, 25; fig’s 4 and 8; p’s 30, 33, 91, 3; ab) as per the discussion above and the rejection of corresponding parts of the claims above incorporated herein and further, Moriya discloses via p92: [0092] As described above, when the shift operation is performed by the driver by means of any of the minus paddle switch 36 and the plus paddle switch 37, the hydraulic pressures of the respective drive oil chambers of the variator of the CVT 70 may be controlled by the TCU 72 and the valve body 71. Such a control of the hydraulic pressures may cause the respective pulley gap widths of the primary pulley and the secondary pulley of the variator to be varied gradually in a course of shifting of the CVT 70. In other words, such a control of the hydraulic pressures may gradually vary the speed ratio during the transition of the shifting of the CVT 70. Thus, the speed ratio may be varied to that of the lower stage when the minus paddle switch 36 is operated, and the speed ratio may be varied to that of the higher stage when the plus paddle switch 37 is operated. The shifting of the CVT 70 may be performed through such gradual variation in speed ratio. It may therefore take time until the shifting of the CVT 70 into the lower stage or into the higher stage is completed. Accordingly, for example, in a case where the deceleration of the vehicle is performed, the engine braking may be also varied gradually in accordance with the variation in speed ratio until the shifting of the CVT 70 is completed. Therefore, the deceleration torque derived from the engine braking may also be varied gradually until the shifting of the stage of the CVT 70 is performed. Accordingly, when the shifting of the CVT 70 into the lower stage is performed, the deceleration torque during the shifting of the CVT 70 may be insufficient relative to the deceleration torque to be generated after the shifting is completed. In other words, the deceleration torque during the shifting of the CVT 70 may become smaller than the deceleration torque to be generated after the shifting is completed. It is to be noted that an amount by which the deceleration torque is insufficient may be decreased gradually. When the shifting of the CVT 70 into the higher stage is performed, the deceleration torque during the shifting of the CVT 70 may be excessive relative to the deceleration torque to be generated after the shifting is completed. In other words, the deceleration torque during the shifting of the CVT 70 may become greater than the deceleration torque to be generated after the shifting is completed. It is to be noted that an amount by which the deceleration torque is excessive may be decreased gradually. As per claims 5, 11 and 17, Moriya discloses wherein the at least one of the upshift operation and the downshift operation to the paddle type shifter selects a virtual gear (p’s 28, 129, 46, 72, 25; fig’s 4 and 8; p’s 30, 33, 91, 3; ab) as per the discussion above and the rejection of corresponding parts of the claims above incorporated herein and further, Moriya discloses via p28: [0028] The automatic transmission 30 may have, as its shift mode, an automatic shift mode, a manual shift mode, and a temporary manual shift mode which will be hereinafter abbreviated as a “temporary manual mode”, for example. The automatic shift mode may automatically perform downshift or upshift of a stage in accordance with a traveling state of a vehicle. The manual shift mode may perform downshift or upshift of the stage in accordance with a shift operation performed by a driver of the vehicle. The temporary manual mode may perform downshift or upshift of the stage temporarily in accordance with the shift operation performed by the driver until a discontinuation condition is satisfied, when the shift operation is performed by the driver during the automatic shift mode. Non-limiting examples of the discontinuation condition may include an operation performed on a shifter, or an operation performed on an accelerator pedal to keep steady traveling, e.g., traveling at a constant speed, for a predetermined time period. As per claims 6, 12 and 18, Moriya discloses wherein the virtual gear selected by the paddle type shifter is among a plurality of virtual gears, wherein each virtual gear represents a gear ratio (fig’s 4 and 8; p’s 30, 33, 91, 3; ab; p’s 129, 46, 72, 25) as per the discussion above and the rejection of corresponding parts of the claims above incorporated herein and further, Moriya discloses via figure 8: PNG media_image3.png 956 637 media_image3.png Greyscale Double Patenting The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969). A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b). The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13. The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer. Claims 1-18 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-3 of U.S. Patent No. 12/365,251. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because USP 12/365,251 disclose the limitations of a motor controller for controlling the electric motor, wherein the motor controller is configured to: switch a control mode of the electric motor between an automatic mode and a manual mode in response to the mode switching operation to the paddle type shifter, in the automatic mode, change an output of the electric motor in accordance with operation of the accelerator pedal, and in the manual mode, change an output characteristic of the electric motor with respect to the operation of the accelerator pedal in accordance with the upshift operation and the downshift operation to the paddle type shifter. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Oh et al. (U.S. patent application publication 2023/0249703) discloses a control method for generating a virtual shifting sense of an electric vehicle. The objective of the control method is to enable a driver to feel differentiated driving sensitivity and various types of enjoyment of driving by generating and implementing a shifting sense in an electric vehicle without a multi-range transmission like a vehicle with a multi-range transmission. In order to achieve the objective, a control method of an electric vehicle that determines a torque range for controlling a motor and virtual shift intervention torque for implementing a virtual shifting sense from virtual variable information, determines driver request torque corresponding to a driving input value by a driver within the determined torque range, and then controls motor torque using the determined driver request torque and virtual shift intervention torque. Park et al. (U.S. patent application publication 2023/0001928) discloses a regenerative braking control system and a regenerative braking control method using a paddle shift of a hybrid vehicle, include a paddle switch including a first paddle shift for a down shift and a second paddle shift for an up shift, a first controller electrically connected to the paddle switch and configured to determine a deceleration control amount of regenerative braking for stopping the vehicle as a hold operation of the first paddle shift is input, and a second controller electrically connected to the first controller and configured to control a motor torque for the regenerative braking according to the deceleration control amount determined from the first controller and to control hydraulic braking of the vehicle to be executed when reaching a stop state of the vehicle. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BEHRANG BADII whose telephone number is 571-272-6879. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Hunter Lonsberry can be reached at 571-272-7298. 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 Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). Any response to this action should be mailed to: Mail Stop Amendment Commissioner for Patents P.O. Box 1450 Alexandria, VA 22313-1450 or faxed to (571)273-8300 Hand delivered responses should be brought to United States Patent and Trademark Office Customer Service Window Randolph Building 401 Dulany Street Alexandria, VA 22314 Any inquiry of a general nature or relating to the status of this application or proceeding should be directed to the Technology Center 3600 Customer Service Office whose telephone number is (571) 272-3600. /Behrang Badii/ Primary Examiner Art Unit 3665
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 23, 2024
Application Filed
Feb 07, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §DP (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12594841
PHYSICS-BASED DIMENSION REDUCTION STRATEGIES FOR ONLINE TORQUE OPTIMIZATION IN ELECTRIFIED VEHICLES
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12594895
VEHICLE-MOUNTED APPARATUS, PROGRAM, AND INFORMATION PROCESSING METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12596377
APPARATUS FOR CONTROLLING GROUP DRIVING AND METHOD THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12589761
Vehicle Control System
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12565201
EARLY OBJECT DETECTION FOR UNPROTECTED TURNS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 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
74%
Grant Probability
82%
With Interview (+7.9%)
3y 0m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 401 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