DETAILED ACTION
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a) because they fail to show the drawings should be sufficiently detailed so that someone familiar with the specification can understand what is depicted without referencing the specification as described in the specification. Any structural detail that is essential for a proper understanding of the disclosed invention should be shown in the drawing. MPEP § 608.02(d). Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
The following title is suggested: Rear Wheel Steering Dependent Vehicle Speed and Power Mode .
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 8 and 15 are objected to under 37 CFR 1.75(c) as being in improper form because a multiple dependent claim referring to all prior claims. See MPEP § 608.01(n). Accordingly, the claim 8 not been further treated on the merits. Claim 15 then depends from claim 8 which is not appropriate for a multiple dependent claim to have a dependent claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim(s) 1-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Ohmura (U.S. Pat. No. 4,930,592).
Regarding claim 1 and 9, Ohmura discloses a control system (10) for controlling an actuator (4) of a rear wheel steering system (16) of a vehicle, the control system comprising one or more controllers (10, 8, col. 7, lines 34-35), the control system configured to:
receive a first input signal indicative of vehicle speed (col. 6, lines 6-7), and determine a vehicle speed in dependence on the first input signal;
receive a second input signal indicative of the power mode of a power unit of the vehicle (8, col. 7, lines 34-57), wherein the second input signal has a first state corresponding to a power mode ON (no stall), and a second state corresponding to a power mode OFF (stall);
determine, in dependence on the second input signal, if the power mode changes from ON to OFF (stall detection); and
output an actuator control signal (0rTN*f(t)) to control the actuator of the rear wheel steering system, the actuator control signal comprising an actuator displacement position request equal to zero (coefficient function f(t) converges to 0 in a predetermined time, which gradually sets the rear target angle to 0; see also claims 10,11) if the vehicle speed is greater than zero and the power mode changes from ON to OFF (col. 9, lines 15-20).
Regarding claim 2 which depends from claim 1, Ohmura discloses wherein the one or more controllers collectively comprise:
at least one electronic processor having an electrical input for receiving the first and/or second input signals (10 is at least one); and
at least one memory device electrically coupled to the at least one electronic processor and having instructions stored therein (all computers have to have memory to operate); 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: determine the vehicle speed; determine the power mode; and output the actuator control signal in dependence on the determined vehicle speed and power mode (addressed in claim 1 above).
Regarding claim 3 and 10 which depends from claim 1 and 9 respectively, Ohmura discloses configured to:
determine if the vehicle speed remains greater than zero after the power mode has changed from ON to OFF (col. 7, lines 46-47);
determine if the power mode remains OFF (col. 7, lines 46-47 discloses time must elapse in each condition); and
output an actuator control signal comprising an actuator displacement position request equal to zero (control function f(t) shown in fig. 8 forces the rear actuator to go neutral) if the vehicle speed remains greater than zero (col. 7, lines 46-47 require a speed greater than zero), and the power mode remains OFF (fig. 8).
Regarding claim 4 and 11 which depends from claim 1 and 9 respectively, Ohmura discloses configured to:
determine if the vehicle speed is zero after the power mode has changed from ON to OFF (the system detects speed in the off condition disclosed in col. 7, lines 34-57);
determine if the power mode is OFF (module 8); and
cease output of actuator control signals if the vehicle speed is zero, and the power mode is OFF (vehicle is off and driver leaves).
Regarding claim 5 and 12 which depends from claim 1 and 9 respectively, Ohmura discloses configured to:
receive a third input signal (72a) indicative of a steering system input (col. 6, lines 68 – col. 7, line 1), and determine an actuator displacement position (0rTN) set point in dependence on the third input signal;
determine if the vehicle speed is greater than zero;
determine if the power mode changes from OFF to ON (stall detection); and
output an actuator control signal (0rTN*f(t)) comprising an actuator displacement position request equal to the actuator displacement position set point if the vehicle speed is greater than zero and the power mode changes from OFF to ON (fig. 8 specifies the speed at which displacement request becomes 0).
Regarding claim 6 and 13 which depends from claim 5 and 12 respectively, Ohmura discloses configured to:
receive a fourth input signal indicative of an actual actuator displacement; determine the magnitude of the difference between the actuator displacement position set point and the actual actuator displacement (col. 6, lines 6-16); use the determined magnitude of the difference between the actuator displacement position set point and the actual actuator displacement to determine a rate of change of actuator displacement; and output an actuator control signal comprising a request to operate the actuator at the determined rate of change (shown in fig. 3 and disclosed as the convergence in col. 10, lines 20-30).
Regarding claim 7 and 14 which depends from claim 5 and 12 respectively, Ohmura discloses configured to: use the determined vehicle speed to determine a rate of change of actuator displacement; and output an actuator control signal comprising a request to operate the actuator at the determined rate of change (shown in fig. 3 and disclosed as the convergence in col. 10, lines 20-30).
Regarding claim 8, Ohmura discloses a system, comprising:
an actuator having a moveable actuator element, wherein displacement of the actuator element from a zero position determines a steering position of a rear wheel steering system; and the control system of any preceding claim (as per 112 rejection this is not appropriate dependence), including at least a first controller, wherein the at least a first controller is arranged to output an actuator control signal for causing movement of the actuator element, wherein the actuator is configured to receive the actuator control signal and move the actuator element in dependence on the actuator control signal (The system is controlling the actuator according to the command).
Regarding claim 15 which depends from claim 8, Ohmura discloses a vehicle comprising the control system of any of claims 1 (addressed above) or the system of claim 8.
Regarding claim 16 which depends from claim 9, Ohmura discloses Computer software that, when executed, is arranged to perform a method according to claims 9 (this citation uses computers to perform these steps).
Regarding claim 17 which depends from claim 9, Ohmura discloses a non-transitory, computer-readable storage medium storing instructions thereon that, when executed by one or more electronic processors, causes the one or more electronic processors to carry out the method of claim 9 (this citation uses computers to perform these steps).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Please review when considering a response to this office action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GONZALO LAGUARDA whose telephone number is (571)272-5920. The examiner can normally be reached 8-5 M-Th Alt. F.
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.
GONZALO LAGUARDA
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3747 email: gonzalo.laguarda@uspto.gov
/GONZALO LAGUARDA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3747