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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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) 16, 18, 24-31 and 33 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mori (US 2006/0041365) and Yang (US 11 543 343).
Regarding claims 16 and 31, Mori discloses for estimating coefficients of friction between a surface and one or more tires in contact with the surface, the method comprising: during a testing and model generation stage, generating and storing in data storage one or more models by collecting input data sets representative of motion and one or more operating events of a vehicle and/or at least one tire mounted on the vehicle, wherein an expected motion of the at least one tire is correlated with at least one of the one or more operating events, and at least one surface condition is further associated with each of the one or more models ([0002] [0009]); during a model implementation stage, for a current vehicle having one or more tires mounted thereon: detecting one or more operating events on at least one of the one or more tires mounted on the current vehicle ([0027]); for at least one of the one or more operating events, receiving at least signals representative of a sensed motion from at least one sensor mounted on the at least one of the one or more tires mounted on the current vehicle; selectively retrieving from the data storage at least one of the one or more models, based on at least one of the one or more detected operating events on the at least one of the one or more tires mounted on the current vehicle ([0133]). Yang discloses the estimating respective values corresponding to a coefficient of friction between the surface and each of the one or more tires in contact with the surface based on the at least one model, the at least one of the one or more operating events, and the sensed motion; and generating at least one output signal corresponding to the estimated respective values corresponding to the coefficient of friction between the surface and each of the one or more tires in contact with the surface (Col. 1, lines10-24, Col. 4, lines 21-52). Since the prior art references art from the same field of endeavor, the purpose disclosed by Yang would have been recognized in the pertinent art of Mori. Therefore, it would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to provide the device of Mori with estimating respective value as taught by Yang.
Regarding claims 18 and 33, Mori disclose the surface condition comprises a value corresponding to a coefficient of friction ([0002]).
Regarding claim 24, Mori disclose determining a footprint length of the at least one of the one or more tires based at least in part on the at least signals representative of the sensed motion is considered a matter of mechanical design since one of ordinary skilled in the art has the ability to choose the suitable length.
Regarding claim 25, Mori disclose the sensed motion comprises at least one of a sensed lateral acceleration, a sensed longitudinal acceleration, or a sensed radial acceleration, and combinations thereof ([0020]-[0024]).
Regarding claim 26, the provision of the user interface connected to the vehicle for display to a user of the vehicle is considered a matter of mechanical since one of ordinary skilled in the art has the ability to choose the suitable display.
Regarding claim 27, the provision of a user interface connected to a remote computing device via a cloud-based data-management platform is considered a matter of mechanical since one of ordinary skilled in the art has the ability to choose the suitable display.
Regarding claim 28, Yang discloses using the estimated respective values corresponding to the coefficient of friction as an input to a tire traction detection model (Col. 4, lines 21-51).
Regarding claim 29, the connection of the vehicle control unit with an active safety system is considered a matter of mechanical since one of ordinary skilled in the art has the ability to choose the suitable display.
Regarding claim 30, the provision of the active safety system comprises at least one of a collision avoidance system (CAS), an advanced drive-assistance system (ADAS), an anti-lock braking system (ABS), an active suspension system (ASS), or an adaptive cruise control system (ACCS), and combinations thereof is considered a matter of mechanical design to choose the known device for the known function.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 17, 19-23, 32 and 34-35 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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN KWON whose telephone number is (571)272-4846. The examiner can normally be reached M-F; 9A-5P. 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, Phuttiwat Wongwian can be reached at 571-270-5426. 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.
/JOHN KWON/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3747 June 26, 2026
Prosecution Insights