CTFR 18/816,847 CTFR 98084 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. 12-151 AIA 26-51 12-51 Status of Claims Applicant filed remarks and amendments on 03/09/2026. Claims 1 and 11 were amended. Claims 1 - 20 are pending examination. Response to Arguments Regarding the claim rejections under 35 USC 103: Applicant's arguments filed 03/09/2026 with respect to Onouchi (JP2005054898A) in view of Fushiki et al. (JP4791027B2) have been fully considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Onouchi (JP2005054898A) in view of Kondo (US20190077257A1) and further in view of Fushiki et al. (JP4791027B2), hereinafter referred to as Onouchi, Kondo and Fushiki respectively . Regarding claims 1 and 11 , Onouchi discloses A control system for determining a differential state in a vehicle (“The present invention relates to a differential lock switch determination device” [Pg.1 Par.4]) , the control system comprising: a first wheel sensor configured to detect a first wheel speed of a first wheel (“The differential rotation detection circuit 61 can also be configured to receive detection signals from the front wheel rotational speed sensors 67 and 69.” [Pg.3 Par.19]) ; a second wheel sensor configured to detect a second wheel speed of a second wheel (“The differential rotation detection circuit 61 can also be configured to receive detection signals from the front wheel rotational speed sensors 67 and 69.” [Pg.3 Par.19]) ; Onouchi does not explicitly teach an electronic controller configured to determine whether the first wheel speed is equal to or different from the second wheel speed for a predetermined amount of time. However, Kondo does teach an electronic controller configured to determine whether the first wheel speed is equal to or different from the second wheel speed for a predetermined amount of time, (“When the front-rear wheel rotation speed difference increases, the command value limiter 72 sets, through the processing operations of the correction coefficient calculation unit 722, the filtering unit 723, and the upper limit value setting unit 724, a smaller upper limit value for the torque command value T* as the change amount of the front-rear wheel rotation speed difference per unit time increases. The torque command value limiting unit 725 may execute the processing of limiting the torque command value T* to a value equal to or smaller than the upper limit value only when the estimated temperature of the main clutch 3 is lower than a predetermined value. In this case, it is desirable that, for example, a value equal to or lower than 0° C. be used as the predetermined value.” [0065] and “the control unit 70 compares the current value of the change amount of the differential rotation speed that is determined in Step S5 and the previous value of the change amount of the differential rotation speed that is determined in the previous calculation period” [0072]) . Both Onouchi and Kondo teach methods for determining a differential state in a vehicle. However, Kondo explicitly teaches an electronic controller configured to determine whether the first wheel speed is equal to or different from the second wheel speed for a predetermined amount of time. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the differential state determination method of Onouchi to also include an electronic controller configured to determine whether the first wheel speed is equal to or different from the second wheel speed for a predetermined amount of time, as taught by Kondo, with a reasonable expectation of success. Doing so improves the vehicle differential state determination method (With regard to this reasoning, see at least [ Kondo , 0065]) . Onouchi in view of Kondo does not explicitly teach and turn off an indicator when the first wheel speed is different from the second wheel speed for a predetermined amount of time, the indicator being illuminated indicating a locked differential state of the vehicle However, Fushiki does teach turn off an indicator when the first wheel speed is different from the second wheel speed for a predetermined amount of time, the indicator being illuminated indicating a locked differential state of the vehicle (“The diff lock controller 35 is configured to output to an instrument indicator lamp 41 or a monitor 43 in response to an input signal from a diff lock position switch 39. In addition to the indicator lamp 41 and the monitor 43, a configuration in which an audio announcement device is provided can also be adopted.” [Pg.2 Par.13] and “when the differential lock operation switch 37 is turned OFF, the differential lock mechanism 27 is in the differential lock state or the differential unlock state by turning on / off the indicator lamp 41 depending on whether the rear differential device 1 is differentially locked by the differential lock mechanism 27. Communication to the crew is performed.” [Pg.3 Par.11]) . Both Onouchi and Fushiki teach methods for determining a differential state in a vehicle. However, Fushiki explicitly teaches turn off an indicator when the first wheel speed is different from the second wheel speed, the indicator being illuminated indicating a locked differential state of the vehicle. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the differential state determination method of Onouchi to also include turn off an indicator when the first wheel speed is different from the second wheel speed for a predetermined amount of time, the indicator being illuminated indicating a locked differential state of the vehicle, as taught by Fushiki, with a reasonable expectation of success. Doing so improves the vehicle differential state determination method (With regard to this reasoning, see at least [Fushiki, Pg.2]) . Regarding claims 2 and 12 , Onouchi does not explicitly teach wherein the electronic controller is further configured to maintain the indicator in an illuminated condition when the first wheel speed is equal to the second wheel speed However, Fushiki does teach wherein the electronic controller is further configured to maintain the indicator in an illuminated condition when the first wheel speed is equal to the second wheel speed (“The actual position of the mechanism 27 is determined. If the actual position of the differential lock mechanism 27 is differential unlocked, an indicator turn-off signal is input from the indicator lighting determination circuit 75 to the indicator drive circuit 77, and if the actual position remains differential lock, the indicator lighting determination circuit 75 displays the indicator. The lighting signal output is maintained.” [Pg.3 Par.10]) . Both Onouchi and Fushiki teach methods for determining a differential state in a vehicle. However, Fushiki explicitly teaches wherein the electronic controller is further configured to maintain the indicator in an illuminated condition when the first wheel speed is equal to the second wheel speed It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the differential state determination method of Onouchi to also include wherein the electronic controller is further configured to maintain the indicator in an illuminated condition when the first wheel speed is equal to the second wheel speed, as taught by Fushiki, with a reasonable expectation of success. Doing so improves the vehicle differential state determination method (With regard to this reasoning, see at least [Fushiki, Pg.3]) . Regarding claims 3 and 13 , Onouchi discloses The control system according to claim 1, wherein a steering angle sensor is configured to detect a steering angle of a steering wheel (“The turning detection means detects the turning by any one of a differential rotation between front wheels, a differential rotation between front and rear wheels, and a front wheel steering angle” [Pg.2 Par.21]) . Regarding claims 4 and 14 , Onouchi does not explicitly teach wherein the electronic controller is further configured to turn off the indicator when the first wheel speed is different from the second wheel speed, and the steering angle is a non-zero angle However, Fushiki does teach wherein the electronic controller is further configured to turn off the indicator when the first wheel speed is different from the second wheel speed, and the steering angle is a non-zero angle (“The actual position of the mechanism 27 is determined. If the actual position of the differential lock mechanism 27 is differential unlocked, an indicator turn-off signal is input from the indicator lighting determination circuit 75 to the indicator drive circuit 77, and if the actual position remains differential lock, the indicator lighting determination circuit 75 displays the indicator. The lighting signal output is maintained.” [Pg.3 Par.10]) . Both Onouchi and Fushiki teach methods for determining a differential state in a vehicle. However, Fushiki explicitly teaches wherein the electronic controller is further configured to turn off the indicator when the first wheel speed is different from the second wheel speed, and the steering angle is a non-zero angle. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the differential state determination method of Onouchi to also include wherein the electronic controller is further configured to turn off the indicator when the first wheel speed is different from the second wheel speed, and the steering angle is a non-zero angle, as taught by Fushiki, with a reasonable expectation of success. Doing so improves the vehicle differential state determination method (With regard to this reasoning, see at least [Fushiki, Pg.3]) . Regarding claims 5 and 15 , Onouchi discloses The control system according to claim 3, wherein the first and second wheels are rear wheels of the vehicle (“The differential rotation determination based on the contact state determines whether or not there is a differential rotation between the rear wheels 2 and 3 when viewed from the actual switch contact state.” [Pg.4 Par.7]) . Regarding claims 6 and 16 , Onouchi discloses The control system according to claim 1, wherein the electronic controller is configured to determine whether the first wheel speed is equal to or different from the second wheel speed responsive to a button on a vehicle dashboard being pressed (“ First, in FIG. 2, the switch knob state in the differential lock and the differential unlock, the switch contact state, the differential rotation determination based on the contact state, the differential rotation determination based on the differential state, the switch state, the differential rotation detection by the sensor during straight traveling, The differential rotation detection by the sensor at the time of turning is shown.” [Pg.4 Par.3]) . Regarding claims 7 and 17 , Onouchi does not explicitly teach wherein the electronic controller is further configured to flash the indicator after the button is pressed until the first wheel speed is determined to be different from the second wheel speed However, Fushiki does teach wherein the electronic controller is further configured to flash the indicator after the button is pressed until the first wheel speed is determined to be different from the second wheel speed (“Accordingly, the indicator lighting determination circuit 75 receives the ON signal from the differential lock switch 37, and when the differential lock mechanism 27 is not locked after running and the differential lock position switch 39 detects the differential unlock, or the differential lock solenoid. When the energization control 33 is not controlled, it is determined that there is a failure and the indicator lamp 41 is blinked or the failure is displayed on the display monitor 43.” [Pg.3 Par.8]) . Both Onouchi and Fushiki teach methods for determining a differential state in a vehicle. However, Fushiki explicitly teaches wherein the electronic controller is further configured to flash the indicator after the button is pressed until the first wheel speed is determined to be different from the second wheel speed. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the differential state determination method of Onouchi to also include wherein the electronic controller is further configured to flash the indicator after the button is pressed until the first wheel speed is determined to be different from the second wheel speed, as taught by Fushiki, with a reasonable expectation of success. Doing so improves the vehicle differential state determination method (With regard to this reasoning, see at least [Fushiki, Pg.3]) . Regarding claims 8 and 18 , Onouchi does not explicitly teach wherein the electronic controller is further configured to maintain illumination of the indicator after the button is pressed until the first wheel speed is determined to be different from the second wheel speed However, Fushiki does teach wherein the electronic controller is further configured to maintain illumination of the indicator after the button is pressed until the first wheel speed is determined to be different from the second wheel speed (“and if the actual position remains differential lock, the indicator lighting determination circuit 75 displays the indicator. The lighting signal output is maintained.” [Pg.3 Par.10]) . Both Onouchi and Fushiki teach methods for determining a differential state in a vehicle. However, Fushiki explicitly teaches wherein the electronic controller is further configured to maintain illumination of the indicator after the button is pressed until the first wheel speed is determined to be different from the second wheel speed. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the differential state determination method of Onouchi to also include wherein the electronic controller is further configured to maintain illumination of the indicator after the button is pressed until the first wheel speed is determined to be different from the second wheel speed, as taught by Fushiki, with a reasonable expectation of success. Doing so improves the vehicle differential state determination method (With regard to this reasoning, see at least [Fushiki, Pg.3]) . Regarding claims 9 and 19 , Onouchi discloses The control system according to claim 1, wherein the first wheel sensor is disposed at a wheel end of a first axle on which the first wheel is mounted, and the second wheel sensor is disposed at a wheel end of a second axle on which the second wheel is mounted (“ As shown in FIG. 4, in the rear differential device 101, left and right side gears 105 and 107 are rotatably supported in a differential case 103. The left and right side gears 105 and 107 are linked to the axle shafts on the left and right rear wheels. A pinion gear 111 meshes with the left and right side gears 105 and 107, and the pinion gear 111 is rotatably supported by a pinion shaft 109.” [Pg.2 Par.2]) . Regarding claim 20 , Onouchi discloses The method according to claim 13, wherein the steering angle sensor is disposed on a steering column of the vehicle (“The turning detection circuit 56 may be configured to determine whether the vehicle is turning or traveling straight based on the steering angle detection of the front wheels 5 and 7 by the steering angle sensor.” [Pg.3 Par.17]) . Conclusion 07-40 AIA 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 AHMED ALKIRSH whose telephone number is (703) 756-4503. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00 am-5:00 pm EST. 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, FADEY JABR can be reached on (571) 272-1516. 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. /A.A./Examiner, Art Unit 3668 /Fadey S. Jabr/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3668 Application/Control Number: 18/816,847 Page 2 Art Unit: 3668 Application/Control Number: 18/816,847 Page 3 Art Unit: 3668 Application/Control Number: 18/816,847 Page 4 Art Unit: 3668 Application/Control Number: 18/816,847 Page 5 Art Unit: 3668 Application/Control Number: 18/816,847 Page 6 Art Unit: 3668 Application/Control Number: 18/816,847 Page 7 Art Unit: 3668 Application/Control Number: 18/816,847 Page 8 Art Unit: 3668 Application/Control Number: 18/816,847 Page 9 Art Unit: 3668 Application/Control Number: 18/816,847 Page 10 Art Unit: 3668 Application/Control Number: 18/816,847 Page 11 Art Unit: 3668
Prosecution Insights