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 .
Status of Claims
The amendment of 11/05/2024 has been entered. Claims 1-20 are currently pending in the application.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers filed on 07/25/2025 as required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 11/05/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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.
Claim 11 is 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 11 recites the limitation “the one or more parameters comprises a spring rate and/or damping rate of one or more elements of the control system” in lines 1-3. The limitation is indefinite because the parameters are introduced in claim 1 as parameters of a vehicle suspension system not of the control system. For examination purposes the limitation “the control system at claim 11 line 3 has been considered as --the suspension system--.
Claim Analysis - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-14 and 16-20 are eligible under 35 U.S.C. 101 at step 2A prong 2 because the limitation of requesting modification of one or more parameters of a vehicle suspension system integrates the recited mental processes into a practical application.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 at step 1 because the claimed invention does recite a statutory category of invention.
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 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-2, 10, and 13-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by ENG (US 9,533,539).
Regarding claim 1, ENG discloses a control system for a vehicle, the control system comprising one or more controllers (col. 4 lines 25-27 and 50-58), the control system configured to:
identify an upcoming speed limit change (S140, Fig. 2, col. 3 lines 55-61, col. 9 lines 39-41); and
in dependence on the identified speed limit change, request modification of one or more parameters of a vehicle suspension system (S142, col. 3 lines 55-61, col. 9 lines 39-41, 50, 53-55).
Regarding claim 2, ENG discloses the control system of claim 1. ENG further discloses wherein the one or more controllers collectively comprise:
at least one electronic processor having an electrical input for receiving data for identifying the upcoming speed limit change (implied, i.a. col. 4 lines 25-27); and
at least one memory device electrically coupled to the at least one electronic processor and having instructions stored therein (col. 4 lines 30 and 32-34); and
wherein the at least one electronic processor is configured to access the at least one memory device and execute the instructions thereon so as to modify the one or more parameters of the vehicle suspension system in dependence on the identified speed limit change (implied, i.a. col. 4 lines 25-34, col. 5 lines 24-26).
Regarding claim 10, ENG discloses the control system according to claim 1.
ENG further discloses wherein the upcoming speed limit change is identified from a database storing speed limits and map data (col. 3 lines 53-54), and from a current location of the vehicle (col. 3 line 53).
Regarding claim 13, ENG discloses a vehicle comprising a suspension system (Fig. 1), and the control system according to claim 1.
Regarding claim 14, ENG discloses a control method for a vehicle suspension system of a vehicle, the control method comprising:
identifying an upcoming speed limit change (S140, Fig. 2, col. 3 lines 55-61, col. 9 lines 39-41); and
in dependence on the identified speed limit change, requesting modification of one or more parameters of the vehicle suspension system (S142, col. 9 lines 39-41, 50, 53-55).
Regarding claim 15, ENG discloses computer software (col. 4 lines 32-34) that, when executed by a processor, is arranged to cause the processor to perform the control method according to claim 14.
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 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 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ENG (US 9,533,539) in view of KOBAYASHI (JP 2008-238948).
Regarding claim 11, ENG discloses the control system according to claim 1.
ENG is relied upon to teach in dependence on the identified speed limit change, request modification of one or more parameters of a vehicle suspension system (S142, col. 3 lines 55-61, col. 9 lines 39-41, 50, 53-55).
ENG further teaches calculating a preemptive adjustment based on the anticipated effect that the road feature will have on the suspension device (col. 9 lines 53-55).
ENG is not relied upon to teach the one or more parameters as claimed.
KOBAYASHI teaches one or more parameters comprises a damping rate (implied by damping force, i.a. pg. 6 line 7) of one or more elements (variable dampers, pg. 6 lines 7-8) of the suspension system, and increasing the damping rate of the one or more elements (front wheel dampers, pg. 6 line 7) during deceleration, the increase in the amount of pitching can be suppressed, thereby stabilizing vehicle posture.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to select as the preemptive adjustment of ENG an increase in the damping rate of front wheel dampers during deceleration as taught by KOBAYASHI to suppress pitching of the vehicle thereby stabilizing vehicle posture.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ENG (US 9,533,539) in view of TANAKA (US 4,856,813).
Regarding claim 12, ENG discloses the control system according to claim 1.
ENG is not relied upon to teach reverting to a pre-control state at the end of a deceleration state as claimed.
TANKA teaches a control system is configured to revert one or more parameters to their previous settings (S25, col. 7 lines 50-54) in response to a reduction in a rate of acceleration or deceleration to below a predetermined deactivation threshold (when G falls below G1 at S9 while Flag A = 1 due to activation of dampening force control at S11 control flows to B in Fig. 5 where dampening is deactivated at S25, Figs. 4 and 5) to set the amount of air in each air spring chamber to a value prior to control (col. 7 lines 52-54) in a system for reducing nose dive generated when a vehicle is braked (col. 1 lines 8-9).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the control system of ENG to revert a parameter to their previous settings as taught by TANAKA to return the suspension system to the pre-control state at the end of a deceleration event.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-9 and 16-20 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARK L. GREENE whose telephone number is (571)270-7555. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-4:30 PM.
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.
/MARK L. GREENE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3747