DETAILED ACTION
Response to Amendment
The response filed 5/11/2026 has been entered. Claims 1-9 remain pending in the application. Applicant’s amendments have overcome the outstanding objection and rejections under 112(b). The outstanding 102 rejections remain.
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.
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 sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “driving means”, “braking means”, “main control unit”, and “sub control unit” in claims 1-9.
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.
Claim(s) 1-5 and 7-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Liu et al (US2021/0269018A1).
Regarding claim 1, Liu teaches travel control device for a vehicle (Figures 6-10), the vehicle including driving means for driving front and rear wheels on left and right (Paragraphs 0060, 0107-0108) and braking means (Paragraphs 0032, 0039, 0070, 0089-0092, etc.) for independently braking the front and rear wheels on the left and right and being capable of driving and braking the front and rear wheels on the left and right by the driving means and the braking means, the travel control device comprising: a main control unit ("electronic device", or "whole vehicle controller" in Figure 6, or "vehicle stability control device" in Figure 8, 9, or 10; or more specifically the portion of the "vehicle stability control device" in annotated Figure 8 below that excludes the "sub control unit") that calculates a requested driving force of the vehicle (See "initial torque" values) based on a driver request and a vehicle behavior (Paragraphs 0030, 0032, 0106, 0138-0139, 0179, 0208 etc.); and a sub control unit (See annotated Figure 8 below) which is provided to the driving means and the braking means downstream the main control unit and which controls each of the driving means and the braking means based on the requested driving force (Paragraphs 0179-0180), wherein the main control unit includes: a target reference wheel speed calculating part that calculates a target reference wheel speed that is a target rotation speed set as a reference of the wheels (See wheel/longitudinal vehicle speed calculation referenced throughout); and a target slip rate calculating part that calculates a target slip rate of the wheels which is set relative to the target reference wheel speed, the main control unit calculates the requested driving force based on the target slip rate (See target slip ratio box in Figure 8; Paragraphs 0155-0178, 0203-0214, and 0233-0241), and the sub control unit includes: an actual slip rate calculating part that calculates an actual slip rate of the wheels; and a slip rate control part that corrects the requested driving force in a manner that the actual slip rate turns to the target slip rate to control the driving means or the braking means (See "sub control unit" in annotated Figure 8 below; Paragraphs 0027-0029, 0042, 0117, 0134-0137, 0165-0178, 0202-0214, and 0240-0241).
PNG
media_image1.png
740
950
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Liu discloses the invention of claim 1 as discussed above, and Liu teaches that the target reference wheel speed calculating part calculates the target reference wheel speed (wi(t) where "i" designates which wheel as noted in paragraph 0102) for each of the wheels (Paragraphs 0028, 0122, 0123, 0135, 0136, 0152-0153, etc.), and the target slip rate calculating part calculates the target slip rate for each of the wheels (See front axis and rear axis target slip ratios in Paragraphs 0155-0178 and 0203-0214).
Regarding claim 3, Liu discloses the invention of claim 1 as discussed above, and Liu teaches that the target reference wheel speed calculating part calculates the target reference wheel speed to be set as a value common to the front and rear wheels on the left and right (See previously cited sections [the wheel speeds in Liu may naturally become equal during normal operation of the vehicle]), and the target slip rate calculating part calculates the target slip rate for each of the wheels (See previously cited front and rear target slip ratios).
Regarding claim 4, Liu discloses the invention of claim 1 as discussed above, and Liu teaches that the target reference wheel speed calculating part calculates the target reference wheel speed for each of the wheels, and the target slip rate calculating part calculates the target slip rate to be set as a value common to the front and rear wheels on the left and right (See previously cited sections [the wheel speeds and target ratios in Liu may naturally become equal during normal operation of the vehicle]).
Regarding claim 5, Liu discloses the invention of claim 2 as discussed above, and Liu teaches a target yaw rate calculating part that calculates a target yaw rate of the vehicle based on at least a steering angle of the vehicle (See "target yawing angular velocity..." block in Figure 8); and a yaw rate detecting part that detects an actual yaw rate of the vehicle (See "actual yawing angular velocity" input from "data processing" in Figure 8), wherein the target slip rate calculating part changes the target slip rate for each of the wheels based on the target yaw rate or a difference between the target yaw rate and the actual yaw rate (See flow of data from the "target yawing angular velocity..." block and "actual yawing angular velocity" input from "data processing", to the "front-axis target slip ratio and rear-axis target slip ratio" block, in Figure 8).
Regarding claim 7, Liu discloses the invention of claim 1 as discussed above, and Liu teaches that the driving means and the braking means include: a first electric motor that drives the front wheels of the vehicle; a second electric motor that drives the rear wheels of the vehicle; and a braking device which is provided to each of the front and rear wheels on the left and right of the vehicle and which is capable of applying a mutually different braking force to each of the wheels (See previously cited sections and Figures).
Regarding claim 8, Liu discloses the invention of claim 3 as discussed above, and Liu teaches a target yaw rate calculating part that calculates a target yaw rate of the vehicle based on at least a steering angle of the vehicle (See "target yawing angular velocity..." block in Figure 8); and a yaw rate detecting part that detects an actual yaw rate of the vehicle (See "actual yawing angular velocity" input from "data processing" in Figure 8), wherein the target slip rate calculating part changes the target slip rate for each of the wheels based on the target yaw rate or a difference between the target yaw rate and the actual yaw rate (See flow of data from the "target yawing angular velocity..." block and "actual yawing angular velocity" input from "data processing", to the "front-axis target slip ratio and rear-axis target slip ratio" block, in Figure 8).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6 and 9 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 5/11/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant’s arguments presume that the claimed invention necessarily includes split up physical controller structures in the manner argued. However, the “units” in the claim are interpreted under 112(f), which broadens the interpretation to the disclosed supporting structure and equivalents. In the current case, 1) the rejection has cited the functions recited in the claim in the single controller of the reference, with the corresponding functional flow (“downstream” flow indicated by the cited illustration) thus providing equivalent structure in that the recited functions are performed; and 2) a person having ordinary skill in the art would readily recognize that it is well-understood for either a single or multiple physical controller structures to perform the same set of different functions in a system, and functions may be arbitrarily split up between single or multiple controllers. Further, Paragraphs 0242-0243 or Liu actually explicitly describe splitting the functional units into various physical controller structures, stating that “It should be noted that the module division in the embodiments of this application is an example, and is merely logical function division, and there may be other division manners in actual implementation. In addition, functional units in the embodiments of this application may be integrated into one processing unit, or each of the units may exist alone physically, or at least two units may be integrated into one unit. The integrated unit may be implemented in a form of hardware, or may be implemented in a form of a software functional unit.”
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 KEVIN R STECKBAUER whose telephone number is (571)270-0433. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 9:30-7:30 PST.
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.
/KEVIN R STECKBAUER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3747
Prosecution Insights