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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed April 10, 2026 has been entered. Claims 1-11 remain
pending in the application. Applicant’s amendment to the specification has overcome specification objection previously set forth in the Non‐Final Office Action mailed February 5, 2026.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed April 10, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argued:
Independent claim 1 recites in part "allocate and store a determination value, prior to travel toward a base and without requiring a driver to set a destination" and "acquire the determination value corresponding to a current map point of the vehicle, compare the determination value to a current battery charge amount of the vehicle, and switch from traveling in the second traveling-state to traveling in the first traveling state.
Citing [0023], [0026] and [0041] of Otabe, Applicant argued that Otabe does not anticipate the above limitations of the amended claim 1.
In this office action, rejection for claim 1 is written under 35 USC § 103 over Otabe in view of Abe. Abe teaches the concept of the base which does not require a driver to set a destination. Relevant paragraphs of Otabe, [0017], [0038], [0051], [0024], are further cited to reject the amended limitations.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Otabe (US20080262667A1), which was cited by Applicant, in view of Abe (US20030015874A1), which was cited by Applicant.
Regarding claim 1, Otabe discloses: A vehicle control device mounted on a vehicle capable of switching between a first traveling state in which the vehicle is driven by transmitting a driving force of an electric motor by power supply from a battery to drive wheels and a second traveling state in which the vehicle is driven with at least operation of an engine, the vehicle control device comprising {paragraph [0017]: The hybrid system 1 controls the driving of the vehicle… a mode in which the driving power of the engine 11 is mechanically translated to wheels, a mode in which the vehicle travels only using the motor 12 while the engine 11 is stopped, a mode in which the driving power of the engine 11 and the driving power of the motor 12 are translated to wheels}: one or more processors configured to: allocate and store a determination value, based on a battery consumption amount required for the vehicle to travel from a predetermined point to the base in the first traveling state and a target battery remaining amount at the time when the vehicle reaches the base for each of a plurality of predetermined points {[0017]: The hybrid system 1 controls the driving of the vehicle in various kinds of travel modes used in combination depending on travel conditions. As examples of the travel modes, a mode in which the driving power of the engine 11 is mechanically translated to wheels, a mode in which the vehicle travels only using the motor 12 while the engine 11 is stopped, [0038]: a suitable travel mode may be specified. [0041]: the battery management section 6… calculates the predicted travel distance between the current position of the hybrid vehicle and the predicted destination. Further, the possible distance that the hybrid vehicle is able to travel only using the motor 12 with the amount of charge remaining in the battery 16 is compared with the predicted travel distance. When the possible distance to be traveled with the amount of charge remaining in the battery is equal to or greater than the predicted travel distance, the battery usage per unit distance and a suitable travel mode are calculated in a way that the SOC value of the battery 16 becomes a low limit (target battery remaining amount) … when the hybrid vehicle arrives at the predicted destination [0023] discloses a history data storage, which stores the determination value for a travel. [0026] discloses that a route includes a plurality of predetermined points}; and acquire the determination value corresponding to a current map point of the vehicle, compare the determination value to a current battery charge amount of the vehicle, and switch from traveling in the second traveling state to traveling in the first traveling state in a case where the current battery charge amount of the vehicle exceeds the determination value corresponding to a current point of the vehicle {[0041], [0051]: referring to a relation map in which both of the amount of charge remaining in the battery and the distance which the vehicle can travel with the amount of charge remaining in the battery are related to each other. [0024]: The vehicle position calculating section 3 inputs a position detecting signal indicating coordinates such as the latitude and the longitude which is received by the GPS receiver}.
Otabe does not disclose: allocate and store a determination value, prior to travel toward a base and without requiring a driver to set a destination.
Abe teaches a base point (base) and prior to traveling toward the base, a determination is allocated and stored in [0034]: when returning from the destination C… it switches to EV running from HEV running, and is made to reach the base point A by EV running. Examiner notes that the determination is already allocated and stored prior to travel toward the base (base point) and setting a destination to travel by a driver is not required; [0006]: register an EV running area centered on the base point in the map data in the map information device based on a charge value of the battery, and perform EV running when the vehicle is in the EV running area.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the base feature of Abe with the described invention of Otabe in order to determine a preferred driving mode near that base.
Regarding claim 2, which depends from claim 1, Otabe discloses: wherein the one or more processors are further configured to: acquire map information {[0028] discloses a map information acquisition unit}; set a predetermined point of the map information as the base; generate a route from a peripheral point of the base to the base {[0030]: The route searching section 5 of the navigation ECU 2 obtains the destination (the base)… obtains coordinates of the current position (a peripheral of the base) and coordinates of the input destination by the user's operation and searches for a route to the destination}; an energy consumption amount calculation unit which calculate an energy consumption amount in a case where the vehicle travels on the route toward the base; and plan the battery charge amount based on the energy consumption amount such that the vehicle travels on the route from a predetermined point of the route in the first traveling state, and reaches the base with a predetermined charge amount of a battery of the vehicle, wherein the determination value is determination information for determining whether or not the vehicle travels in the first traveling state by associating the battery charge amount with a point of the route in the map information {[0041], [0026], [0030]}.
Regarding claim 3, which depends from claim 2, Otabe discloses: wherein the one or more processors are further configured to estimate a point to be the base; and store information for estimating the base, wherein store information for estimating the base so as to refer to a point where the vehicle has ended the driving by tracing back to the driving of the vehicle a predetermined number of times before, and estimate a point having a high appearance frequency as a point where the vehicle has ended the driving as the base {[0032] discloses history data that includes repeated travel from a place over a week, which implies that the starting point where an ignition switch is turned on or a vehicle position at which a destination has been set is the base}.
Regarding claim 5, which depends from claim 2, Abe teaches: wherein the one or more processors are further configured to: generate a route from the base toward a periphery of the base, and correct a charge amount when the vehicle reaches the base based on a difference between an energy consumption amount of a route from the periphery of the base to the base and an energy consumption amount of a route from the base to the periphery of the base {Abe teaches battery energy requirement for a route from the base to the periphery of the base and from the periphery of the base to the base in paragraphs [0061]-[0088], Figs. 6-8}.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the energy consumption amount for a round trip feature of Abe with the described invention of modified Otabe in order to prepare charging for the entire trip.
Regarding claim 6, which depends from claim 2, Otabe discloses: wherein the one or more processors are further configured to: accumulate a travel track record of a vehicle in association with the map information; correct a target charge state, correct the target charge state of the battery based on the travel track record of the vehicle, set the second traveling state in which the vehicle travels while driving the engine and driving a generator, or directly the driving drive wheels and driving the engine at a point not stored, and correct the target charge state of the battery in the second traveling state to a high charge side {[0028], [0030] and [0032] disclose travel track record accumulation. [0007] and [0050] disclose correcting the target charge state of the battery based on the travel track record. [0043] discloses driving in the second traveling state and correcting the target charge state to a high charge side. Examiner notes that when traveling in the second traveling state, the traveling route is not limited to the points stored in in determination value storage unit since the stored points are related to the first traveling state only}.
Regarding claim 7, which depends from claim 2, Otabe teaches: wherein the one or more processors are further configured to: store a first traveling state execution determination value indicating a charge state of the battery required to reach the base, and compare the first traveling state execution determination value for the vehicle to reach a first base with the first traveling state execution determination value having a value different from the first traveling state execution determination value for the vehicle to reach a second base, and determines a traveling state based on the first traveling state execution determination value on a higher charge side {[0023] teaches predicting destinations and travel distance. [0038] teaches a charge state of the battery required to reach the base}.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the base estimation feature of Otabe to choose a base that can be reached with less battery discharge amount in order to facilitate maintaining battery charge in a higher charge side.
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Otabe in view of Abe and in further view of Tabata (JP 2018169313 A), which was cited by Applicant.
Regarding claim 4, which depends from claim 2, modified Otabe does not teach: wherein the one or more processors are further configured to: estimate a point to be the base; and stores information for estimating the base, store in a base information storage unit a point at which driving of the vehicle is ended and a point at which driving is started, and a time at which the driving is ended and a time at which the driving is started which are associated respectively, estimate a time at which the driving is ended or started as the base where switching to the first traveling state is to be performed based on a fact that the time at which the driving is ended or started falls within a predetermined time zone, and determines whether or not to store information based on an elapsed time from the end of the driving to the start of the driving.
Tabata teaches information for start and end of driving point and time, and elapsed time from the end of driving to the start of driving, which are used for estimating the base in paragraph [0036] of the English translation: event information in which the start point, the goal point, and the travel route are set as one event. At this time, when the parking time, that is, the time during which the IG switch 10 is off is short (for example, within 10 minutes), the generation unit 21 can determine that the event is continuing without determining that the vehicle is parked during such a period; [0037]: set the position at which the vehicle C is parked for a long time as the goal point.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the driving point and time information feature of Tabata with the described invention of modified Otabe in order to facilitate estimating a base.
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Otabe in view of Abe and in further view of Hayamizu (JP 2009280139 A), which was cited by Applicant.
Regarding claim 8, which depends from claim 2, modified Otabe does not teach: wherein in response to a state where the first traveling state cannot be continued, the engine is operated at a low output, and a transition is made to a third traveling state in which an output of the engine is reduced and noise is reduced while only a generator is driven.
Hayamizu teaches the third traveling state with reducing engine workload and driving generator in paragraph [0043] of the English translation.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the third traveling state feature of Hayamizu with the described invention of modified Otabe in order to facilitate low noise traveling.
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Otabe in view of Abe and in further view of Sakai et al. (US 20100131139 A1), which was cited by Applicant.
Regarding claim 9, which depends from claim 2, modified Otabe does not teach: wherein the one or more processors are further configured to in response to a state where the vehicle cannot continue the first traveling state, store a point at which the first traveling state is ended, and corrects an execution determination value of a section in which the execution determination value falls in a previous travel route to a charge side.
Sakai teaches correcting execution determination value of a section, when traveling in the first traveling state is ended, in paragraph [0107]: If the estimated SOC transition is not within the allowable estimation value range, that is, if any part of the estimated SOC transition exceeds the allowable value range, the process proceeds to step 248 to fine-tune (i.e., modify) the tentative control index plan; [0108]: according to the final plan, the SOC loss and gain for each of the sections are calculated based on the SOC data acquired in step 220 or 230, and the calculated SOC for each section is added to the current SOC, section by section, for estimating the SOC transition along the navigation route.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the execution determination value correction feature of Sakai with the described invention of modified Otabe in order to facilitate route planning.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Otabe in view of Abe and in further view of Ogawa (US20170066429A1), which was cited by Applicant.
Regarding claim 10, which depends from claim 2, modified Otabe does not teach: further comprising an interface device which notifies a driver that the vehicle is in the first traveling state, wherein the interface device notifies information regarding the base and an execution determination value in the first traveling state when the vehicle starts the first traveling state.
Ogawa teaches an interface device notifying a driver that the vehicle is in the first driving state in paragraph [0048]: outputs the planned traveling mode to the display 50 as an EV mode indication 52; [0047]: displaying the searched route together with a map.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the interface device of Ogawa with the described invention of modified Otabe in order to facilitate informing a driver of a driving mode.
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Otabe in view of Abe and in further view of Morisaki (US 20190168736 A1).
Regarding claim 11, Otabe discloses: A vehicle control method of a vehicle capable of switching between a first traveling state in which the vehicle is driven by transmitting a driving force of an electric motor by power supply from a battery to drive wheels and a second traveling state in which the vehicle is driven with at least operation of an engine, the vehicle control method comprising: acquiring map information; setting a predetermined point of the map information as a base {[0017], [0028], [0030]}.
Otabe does not explicitly disclose: acquiring, via a communication device from a calculation resource installed outside the vehicle, a route from a peripheral point of the set base to the base, an energy consumption amount in a case where the vehicle travels on the route toward the base, and a battery charge amount plan which plans the battery charge amount based on the energy consumption amount such that the vehicle travels on the route from a predetermined point of the route in the first traveling state, and reaches the base with a predetermined charge amount of the battery of the vehicle.
Morisaki teaches an external calculation resource can provide route information and battery charge amount plan in Fig. 1 and paragraph [0048]: determined such as to decrease with a decrease in driving load in an estimated driving route… the map information… the cloud server. [0054]: destination estimated by the cloud server… the start reference value Pstart and the stop reference value Pstop based on the estimated driving route to the destination. This enables the state of charge reduction control to be performed.
In relation to these limitation, Otabe also discloses the energy consumption amount and the charge amount plan in [0041].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the external calculation resource feature of Morisaki with the described invention of modified Otabe in order to distribute computation load over a network.
Modified Otabe teaches: allocating and storing, a determination value, prior to travelling toward the base and without requiring a driver to set a destination, obtained based on a battery consumption amount required for the vehicle to travel from a predetermined point to the base in the first traveling state and a target battery remaining amount at the time when the vehicle reaches the base for each of a plurality of predetermined points; determining whether or not the vehicle travels in the first traveling state by associating the charge amount of the battery according to the battery charge amount plan with a point of the route in the map information; and switching from traveling in the second traveling state to traveling in the first traveling state in a case where a current battery charge amount of the vehicle exceeds the determination value corresponding to a current point of the vehicle {Otabe: [0041], [0023], [0026], [0017], [0038], [0051], [0024]; Abe: [0034], [0006]}.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Ogawa (US 20190248357 A1) teaches control of the engine and the motor for a hybrid vehicle.
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 CHANMIN PARK whose telephone number is (408)918-7555. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday and alternate Fridays, 7:30-4:30 PT.
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, Ramya P Burgess can be reached at (571)272-6011. 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.
/C.P./Examiner, Art Unit 3661
/RAMYA P BURGESS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3661
Prosecution Insights