Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/846,547

HYBRID VEHICLE

Non-Final OA §102§112
Filed
Sep 12, 2024
Examiner
MANCHO, RONNIE M
Art Unit
3657
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Mitsubishi Jidosha Kogyo Kabushiki Kaisha
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
76%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 3m
To Grant
79%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 76% — above average
76%
Career Allow Rate
729 granted / 963 resolved
+23.7% vs TC avg
Minimal +3% lift
Without
With
+3.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 3m
Avg Prosecution
42 currently pending
Career history
1005
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
4.7%
-35.3% vs TC avg
§103
26.3%
-13.7% vs TC avg
§102
31.1%
-8.9% vs TC avg
§112
32.1%
-7.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 963 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §112
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 § 112 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. Claims 7-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Claim 7 recites, “the controller sets an output of the engine and an electric power generated by the generator when an accelerator is not applied to be the same in the sport mode and the normal mode.” The limitation is incomplete. The controller sets the “output of the engine and an electric power generated by the generator” to what ? Claim 12 recites, “…..the controller controls the engine and the generator by adjusting a load of the generator on the engine such that the first minimum rotational speed is higher than the second minimum rotational speed while the output of the engine and the electric power generated by the generator when the accelerator is not applied are kept.” The limitation appears to be incomplete and is missing terms because the limitation does not explain what is been kept where or kept to what amount or mode? The rest of the claims are rejected for depending on a rejected base claim or for having similar deficiencies as the base claim. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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 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 7-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hashimoto (US Pub 2008/0228334). Regarding claim 1, Hashimoto discloses a hybrid vehicle (figs. 1-4; sec 0002, 0006-0010) comprising an engine, a motor, a generator, and a controller (figs. 1-4; sec 0002, 0006-0010) that controls an operating state of at least the engine (figs. 1-4; sec 0008-0010), the hybrid vehicle being capable of performing series driving in which driving force from the motor causes the vehicle to drive (sec 0008-0010) while driving force from the engine causes the generator to generate electric power (citing, “…..an electric power-mechanical power input output assembly constructed to connect with the axle and with the engine shaft of the internal combustion engine and configured to enable at least part of the output power of the internal combustion engine to the axle and transmission of electric power to and from the accumulator through input and output of electric power and mechanical power. Moreover, the electric power-mechanical power input output assembly may have: a generator configured to input and output power….”; sec 0013); wherein the hybrid vehicle has a normal mode in which a driver requesting output is set according to an accelerator opening degree (prior art discloses first and second drive modes; wherein any of the first or second drive modes can be selected to be an objective drive mode or normal mode, wherein if the first mode is selected as the objective driving mode then a driver requested output for the first drive mode is set to be equal to or higher than the second drive mode; the argument holds the same for the second drive mode if the second drive mode is selected as the objective drive mode; sec 0008-0012, 0014, etc); and a sport mode in which the driver requesting output is set to be equal to or higher than the driver requesting output set in the normal mode according to the accelerator opening degree (prior art discloses first and second drive modes; wherein any of the first or second drive modes can be selected to be an objective drive mode or sport mode according to an accelerator opening degree, wherein if the second mode is selected as the objective driving mode then a driver requested output for the second drive mode is set to be equal to or higher than the first drive mode; the argument holds the same for the first drive mode if the first drive mode is selected as the objective drive mode; sec 0008-0012, 0014, etc); wherein the controller sets a first minimum rotational speed of the engine in the sport mode to be higher than a second minimum rotational speed of the engine in the normal mode during the series driving (in the prior art, the controller sets the driver requested output to be equal to or higher than the driver requesting output set in the normal mode according to the accelerator opening degree, as such a minimum rotational speed of the engine in the sport mode is higher than a minimum rotational speed of the engine in the normal mode; 0008-0012, 0014, 0053, etc); wherein the controller sets an output of the engine and an electric power generated by the generator when an accelerator is not applied to be the same in the sport mode and the normal mode [the prior art sets an output of the engine and an electric power generated by the generator to any desired amount when an accelerator is not applied to be the same in the sport mode and the normal mode. As seen in fig. 3, there are instances when the accelerator is not applied to be the same in the sport mode and the normal mode and an output of the engine and the generator (such as engine or motor/generator speed, torque, power, etc) are set to any desired amount; sec 0040, 0041]. Regarding claim 8, Hashimoto discloses the hybrid vehicle according to claim 7, wherein when the vehicle is driving in the series driving and the driver requesting output is not zero, the controller sets a first increase rate to be higher than a second increase rate, wherein the first increase rate is a maximum increase rate of a rotational speed of the engine in the sport mode and the second increase rate is a maximum increase rate of the rotational speed of the engine in the normal mode (rotational speed of the engine is higher in the sport mode than in the normal mode; figs. 3, 5; sec 0008-0012, 0014, etc). Regarding claim 9, Hashimoto discloses the hybrid vehicle according to claim 7, wherein the controller sets the first minimum rotational speed according to a vehicle speed (rotational speed of the engine or motor is set accordant to a vehicle speed; figs. 3, 5; sec 0008-0012, 0014, etc). Regarding claim 10, Hashimoto discloses the hybrid vehicle according to claim 9, wherein the controller increases the first minimum rotational speed as the vehicle speed reduces (rotational speed of the engine or motor is set to increase based on driver demand e.g. if the vehicle speed reduces the driver can demand a higher vehicle speed and therefore increase the first or second rotational speed as desired; figs. 3, 5; sec 0008-0012, 0014, etc). Regarding claim 11, Hashimoto discloses the hybrid vehicle according to claim 9, wherein the controller increases the first minimum rotational speed as the vehicle speed increases (rotational speed of the engine or motor is set to increase based on driver demand e.g. if the vehicle speed increase the driver can demand a higher vehicle speed and therefore increase the first or second rotational speed as desired; figs. 3, 5; sec 0008-0012, 0014, etc). Regarding claim 12, Hashimoto discloses the hybrid vehicle according to claim 7, wherein the controller controls the engine and the generator by adjusting a load of the generator on the engine such that the first minimum rotational speed is higher than the second minimum rotational speed while the output of the engine and the electric power generated by the generator when the accelerator is not applied are kept. (in the prior art, the output of the engine and the electric power generated by the generator when the accelerator is not applied are kept to cruising mode e.g. using the cruise control when accelerator is not applied; sec 0008-0012, 0014, etc). Conclusion The prior art, US 11820391 B2, US 8874290 B2, US 7104347 B2 made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Communication Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RONNIE MANCHO whose telephone number is (571)272-6984. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs. 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, Adam Mott can be reached at 571 270 5376. 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. /RONNIE M MANCHO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3657
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 12, 2024
Application Filed
Jan 23, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600242
COMPUTER-IMPLEMENTED METHOD OF CONTROLLING FUTURE BRAKING CAPACITY OF A VEHICLE TRAVELLING ALONG A ROAD
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12597350
COLLISION ALERT DEVICE AND COLLISION ALERT METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12594682
WIRE-BODY FIXING MEMBER, WIRE-BODY-EXTENSION FIXING MEMBER, AND WIRE-BODY FITTING METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12582490
REAL TIME IMAGE GUIDED PORTABLE ROBOTIC INTERVENTION SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12583334
SYSTEMS AND METHODS TO PREDICT AND APPLY REGENERATIVE BRAKING
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 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
76%
Grant Probability
79%
With Interview (+3.0%)
3y 3m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 963 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