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 Objections
Claim 5 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 5 appears to not depend on any claims, for the purpose of this examination, examiner assumes that claim 5 depends on claim 3.
. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claims 1-5, 7, 11-13 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tezuka (U.S. Publication No. 20230062641) in view of Ben-David et al. (U.S. Publication No. 20140163826).
Regarding claim 1, Tezuka teaches a method for measuring mechanical loss, the method comprising: controlling the electric motor to run at a specific speed (Fig.4, speed before t0), changing the control of the electric motor to an open circuit mode by leaving wires of the electric motor open and/or electrically disconnecting motor phases from a controller (Fig.9 S1), monitoring an operational parameter associated with a deceleration of the vehicle module (Fig.9, S2-S4), and determining the mechanical loss in the module based on the operational parameter (Fig.9, S5).
O’Meallie is silent about the method is for measuring mechanical loss in a vehicle module comprising an electric motor at an end-of-line of a manufacturing process and the module is a vehicle module.
Ben-David teaches the method is for measuring mechanical loss in a vehicle module comprising an electric motor at an end-of-line of a manufacturing process and the module is a vehicle module (Paragraphs 39-40).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to use Tezuka’s method to measure mechanical loss in a vehicle module at the end-of-line of a manufacturing process because it would assure quality control at the vehicle production line of the manufacturing companies.
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Tezuka and Ben-David teaches all the features of claim 1 as outlined above, Tezuka further teaches wherein the operational parameter is relating to a rotational speed of the electric motor (Fig.9, S2).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Tezuka and Ben-David teaches all the features of claim 2 as outlined above, Tezuka further teaches wherein monitoring the operational parameter comprises: determining a characteristic response of the module (Fig.4 and paragraphs 29-31).
O’Meallie is silent about the module is a vehicle module.
Ben-David teaches the module is a vehicle module (Paragraphs 39-40).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to use Tezuka’s method to measure mechanical loss in a vehicle module at the end-of-line of a manufacturing process because it would assure quality control at the vehicle production line of the manufacturing companies.
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Tezuka and Ben-David teaches all the features of claim 3 as outlined above, Tezuka further teaches wherein the characteristic response relates to at least one of: a speed drop during a predetermined time interval; a derivate of a speed; and/or a time required for reaching a predetermined speed (Fig.4 and paragraphs 29-31).
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Tezuka and Ben-David teaches all the features of claim 3 as outlined above, Tezuka further teaches wherein the characteristic response comprises a predetermined first time interval and a predetermined second time interval (Figs. 4-7).
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Tezuka and Ben-David teaches all the features of claim 1 as outlined above, Ben-David further teaches wherein the electric motor is connected to a gear assembly via a disconnect coupling, and wherein the method further comprises before the step of changing the control of the electric motor to open circuit mode: disconnecting the disconnect coupling (Paragraph 67).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to use Tezuka’s method to measure mechanical loss in a vehicle module at the end-of-line of a manufacturing process because it would assure quality control at the vehicle production line of the manufacturing companies.
Regarding claims 11-13, the claims are commensurate in scope with the above claims 3-5, and are rejected for the same reasons as set forth above.
Regarding claim 15, the combination of Tezuka and Ben-David teaches all the features of claim 1 as outlined above, Ben-David further teaches wherein the electric motor is connected to a multi-stage gear assembly, and wherein the method further comprises before the step of changing the control of the electric motor to the open circuit mode: shifting a stage of the gear assembly (Paragraph 67).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to use Tezuka’s method to measure mechanical loss in a vehicle module at the end-of-line of a manufacturing process because it would assure quality control at the vehicle production line of the manufacturing companies.
Claims 6 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tezuka (U.S. Publication No. 20230062641) in view of Ben-David et al. (U.S. Publication No. 20140163826) and Nakamura et al. (U.S. Publication No. 20230163715).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Tezuka and Ben-David teaches all the features of claim 5 as outlined above, the combination of Tezuka and Ben-David is silent about the method further comprising: comparing the determined characteristic response with a reference characteristic response.
Nakamura teaches comparing the determined characteristic response with a reference characteristic response (Paragraph 47).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to compare Tezuka’s characteristic response with a reference because it would increase accuracy of Tezuka’s measurement.
Regarding claim 14, the claim is commensurate in scope with the above claim 6, and is rejected for the same reasons as set forth above.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8-10 and 16 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.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: The primary reasons for allowance of dependent claim 8 is the inclusion of the specific limitations of “wherein the steps of controlling the electric motor to run at the specific speed, changing the control of the electric motor to the open circuit mode, and monitoring the operational parameter associated with the deceleration of the vehicle module, are performed as a first test cycle when the disconnect coupling is connected, and as a second test cycle when the disconnect coupling is disconnected, and wherein the method further comprises determining the mechanical loss in the gear assembly based on a comparison between the monitored operational parameters”, in combination of with all other recited (method steps/associated elements) in a method for measuring mechanical loss in a vehicle module.
The primary reasons for allowance of dependent claim 16 is the inclusion of the specific limitations of “wherein the steps of controlling the electric motor to run at the specific speed, changing the control of the electric motor to the open circuit mode, and monitoring the operational parameter associated with the deceleration of the vehicle module, are performed further as a third test cycle when the stage of the gear assembly is shifted, and wherein the method further comprises determining the mechanical loss in a specific gear assembly stage based on a comparison between the monitored operational parameters”, in combination of with all other recited (method steps/associated elements) in a method for measuring mechanical loss in a vehicle module.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to XIN Y ZHONG whose telephone number is (571)272-3798. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9 a.m. - 6 p.m..
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, Kristina Deherrera can be reached at 303-297-4237. 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.
/XIN Y ZHONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2855
Prosecution Insights