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 .
Response to Amendment
In response to the office action mailed 01/13/2026, Applicant amended Claims 16, 20, 25, 27 and added NEW claims 29-31. Claims 16-31 are currently pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see 35 USC § 112(b) Rejection, filed 04/13/2026 with respect to the referenced rejection have been fully considered and are persuasive in view of the amendment. The rejection of claim 20 has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, see 35 USC §102a1 Rejection, filed 04/13/2026 with respect to the rejection of Claim 27 as being anticipated by Tadashi has been fully considered and is persuasive in view of the amendment. The rejection of claim 27 as being anticipated by Tadashi has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tadashi (JP2005092264A) in view of Kawashima (U.S. Pat. 6542801) as detailed below.
Applicant's arguments filed 04/13/2026, see “ Regarding the obviousness rejection, applicant respectfully submits that the examiner has failed to establish a prima facie case of obviousness.”; have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. For the purpose of discussion, Examiner presumes the arguments are in reference to the Claim 16 rejection of record.
Regarding Applicant’s argument “The Examiner then relies on Kawashima only for allegedly teaching the conditional portion (i.e., the bold/italic portion "while the vehicle is travelling below a predetermined speed threshold, and to not limit the maximum steering rate to the first steering rate limit while the vehicle is travelling above the predetermined speed threshold"). However, the Examiner never circles back to identify where, if at all, the combination provides the temporal trigger ("following the expiry of a predetermined time period following launch of the vehicle") or the actual limiting step ("limit a maximum steering rate of a steering system of the vehicle to a first steering rate limit") that the Examiner admitted was missing from Tadashi. For this reason, the rejection fails to make a prima facie case of obviousness and should be withdrawn. Additionally, Kawashima does not supply those elements. Kawashima discloses only that "the controller being configured to change a set ratio of the target steering speed to the operating speed so as to increase or decrease in response to the running speed of the vehicle" and "to increase the set ratio of the target steering speed to the operating speed when the vehicle is running at low speed and to decrease the set ratio when the vehicle is running at high speed" (col. 3, 11. 30-34). Kawashima contains no disclosure of any timer, launch event, predetermined time period following launch, or any behavior triggered specifically "following the expiry" of such a period. Tadashi's post-expiry behavior is unconditional: "When t seconds elapse (step S7: YES), the count value of the timer 4 is reset to zero (step S8), the travel speed restriction in step S5 is canceled (step S9), and further in step S6. The increased steering speed V2 is lowered to the original steering speed V1 (step S10)" (Tadashi [0023]).”; Examiner respectfully disagrees.
As previously indicated:
“Tadashi discloses:
A control system (Fig. 1, ¶0017) for a vehicle (Fork Lift), the control system comprising one or more controllers (Fig. 1, Control Unit 11; ¶0017), the control system configured to:
receive an indication of current vehicle speed (Fig. 5, Step S5 and S6, CPU 11 monitors travel speed of the vehicle and limits the travel speed to predetermined value Vs; ¶0022);
monitor a time period since vehicle launch (Fig. 5, Step 3; ¶0022; “When the vehicle starts moving (step S3: YES), the timer 4 is started from that point on to
measure time (step S4).”);
and limit a maximum steering rate of a steering system of the vehicle in dependence on the current vehicle speed and a period of time since launch (¶0023; Fig. 5, S4-S7; “the count value of the timer 4 is checked to determine whether or not a certain time t seconds has elapsed (step S7). If t seconds have not elapsed (step S7: NO), the process returns to step S5, and the travel speed restriction in step S5 and the steering speed increase state in step S6 are both continued.”). wherein the controller is configured to, following the expiry of a predetermined time period following launch of the vehicle, limit a maximum steering rate of a steering system of the vehicle to a first steering rate limit (¶0023; original steering speed V1; “when t seconds have elapsed (step S7: YES), the count value of the timer 4 is reset to zero (step S8), the driving speed limit imposed in step S5 is released (step S9), and further, the steering speed V2 increased in step S6 is reduced to the original steering speed V1 (step S10). As a result, the speed of the forklift 30 can be varied up to the maximum value by operating the accelerator 2, and the forklift 30 travels under automatic steering control according to the travel speed set by the driver.” (¶0023).
However, Tadashi does not explicitly teach wherein the controller is configured to, following the expiry of a predetermined time period following launch of the vehicle, limit a maximum steering rate of a steering system of the vehicle to a first steering rate limit: while the vehicle is travelling below a predetermined speed threshold, and to not limit the maximum steering rate to the first steering rate while the vehicle is travelling above the predetermined speed threshold.
Kawashima discloses “An object of the invention is to provide a power steering system in which a set ratio of a target steering speed for a steering mechanism relative to the steering speed of a steering wheel is variable, and in which there is no risk of the operator of a forklift truck getting exhausted before long after the initiation of the operation of the vehicle or a muscular disorder being caused.” (Col. 3 lines 4-10) And “according to the power steering system, since the set ratio of the target steering speed relative to the operating speed is changed to be increased of decreased in response to the running speed of the vehicle by the controller, a set ratio suitable for a then running speed of the vehicle can be selected. In addition, the target steering speed of the steering mechanism which corresponds to the operating speed of the steering wheel is calculated in consideration of the running speed of the vehicle, and as a result of a deviation being calculated after the comparison of the target steering speed so calculated and the actual steering speed, the vehicle can be operated as required at the operating speed of the steering wheel which corresponds to the running speed of the vehicle or an appropriate turning speed.” (Col. 3 lines 35-48) and “FIG. 1 is a block diagram showing configuration of a power steering system according to a first embodiment of the invention. FIG. 2 is an explanatory diagram showing a relationship between the turning speed of a steering wheel which varies in response to the running speed of a vehicle and a target steering speed, according to the first embodiment of the invention.” (Col. 4 lines 52-58).
Kawashima teaches: limit a maximum steering rate of a steering system of the vehicle to a first steering rate limit: while the vehicle is travelling below a predetermined speed threshold, and to not limit the maximum steering rate to the first steering rate while the vehicle is travelling above the predetermined speed threshold (Fig. 2, target vehicle steering speed is limited to a first steering rate limit (e.g. between 15 and 30 degrees/sec) while vehicle is travelling at or below a predetermined low speed, but is not limited to the first steering rate limit while the vehicle is traveling above the predetermined low speed threshold.) in order to provide a power steering system in which a set ratio of a target steering speed for a steering mechanism relative to the steering speed of a steering wheel is variable, and in which there is no risk of the operator of a forklift truck getting exhausted before long after the initiation of the operation of the vehicle (Col. 3 lines 4-10).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing of the invention to have modified the steering rate control system of Tadashi to incorporate the teachings of Kawashima to include limiting a maximum steering rate of a steering system of the vehicle to a first steering rate limit: while the vehicle is travelling below a predetermined speed threshold, and to not limit the maximum steering rate to the first steering rate while the vehicle is travelling above the predetermined speed threshold in order to provide a power steering system in which a set ratio of a target steering speed for a steering mechanism relative to the steering speed of a steering wheel is variable, and in which there is no risk of the operator of a forklift truck getting exhausted before long after the initiation of the operation of the vehicle (Col. 3 lines 4-10).”
As explained above, Tadashi discloses all the elements of the claim with exception that Tadashi does not disclose making the limiting of the steering rate further conditional on the vehicle’s speed. Applicant’s contention that “the Examiner never circles back to identify where, if at all, the combination provides the temporal trigger ("following the expiry of a predetermined time period following launch of the vehicle") or the actual limiting step ("limit a maximum steering rate of a steering system of the vehicle to a first steering rate limit")…Kawashima contains no disclosure of any timer, launch event, predetermined time period following launch, or any behavior triggered specifically "following the expiry" of such a period. Tadashi's post-expiry behavior is unconditional” are considered moot based on the rejection of record which clearly sets forth that Tadashi teaches these limitations.
Regarding Applicant’s Argument “Furthermore, the Examiner's stated rationale for the combination - "to provide a power steering system in which a set ratio of a target steering speed for a steering mechanism relative to the steering speed of a steering wheel is variable, and in which there is no risk of the operator of a forklift truck getting exhausted before long after the initiation of the operation of the vehicle" (col. 3, II. 4-10) - this rationale provides no articulated reason why a person of ordinary skill would modify Tadashi's unconditional post-expiry reversion with Kawashima's continuous ratio change. The rationale only addresses the general goal of making a ratio variable to prevent the operator from getting exhausted before long after the initiation of the operation of the vehicle (Kawashima col. 10, 11. 23-39). It offers no reason for prompting combining the references in a way that produces the claimed discrete post-expiry conditional behavior. Rather, the examiner has arbitrarily pieced together selective features from the prior art in a manner that is only known from the present application. The Examiner's rationale therefore lacks the required rational underpinning and does not support a prima facie case of obviousness. KSR Int'l Co. V. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 418 (2007)”; Examiner respectfully disagrees.
In response to applicant’s argument that there is no teaching, suggestion, or motivation to combine the references, the examiner recognizes that obviousness may be established by combining or modifying the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed invention where there is some teaching, suggestion, or motivation to do so found either in the references themselves or in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 5 USPQ2d 1596 (Fed. Cir. 1988), In re Jones, 958 F.2d 347, 21 USPQ2d 1941 (Fed. Cir. 1992), and KSR International Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007). In this case, as previously indicated “Kawashima teaches: limit a maximum steering rate of a steering system of the vehicle to a first steering rate limit: while the vehicle is travelling below a predetermined speed threshold, and to not limit the maximum steering rate to the first steering rate while the vehicle is travelling above the predetermined speed threshold (Fig. 2, target vehicle steering speed is limited to a first steering rate limit (e.g. between 15 and 30 degrees/sec) while vehicle is travelling at or below a predetermined low speed, but is not limited to the first steering rate limit while the vehicle is traveling above the predetermined low speed threshold.) in order to provide a power steering system in which a set ratio of a target steering speed for a steering mechanism relative to the steering speed of a steering wheel is variable, and in which there is no risk of the operator of a forklift truck getting exhausted before long after the initiation of the operation of the vehicle (Col. 3 lines 4-10).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing of the invention to have modified the steering rate control system of Tadashi to incorporate the teachings of Kawashima to include limiting a maximum steering rate of a steering system of the vehicle to a first steering rate limit: while the vehicle is travelling below a predetermined speed threshold, and to not limit the maximum steering rate to the first steering rate while the vehicle is travelling above the predetermined speed threshold in order to provide a power steering system in which a set ratio of a target steering speed for a steering mechanism relative to the steering speed of a steering wheel is variable, and in which there is no risk of the operator of a forklift truck getting exhausted before long after the initiation of the operation of the vehicle (Col. 3 lines 4-10).”. Examiner notes that both prior art references are directed to improving vehicle control, including an embodiment wherein the vehicle comprises a “fork lift”. Additionally, both references disclose control processes that adapt steering rates in concert with detected vehicle speeds during and after initiation of the operation of the vehicle (e.g. after launch). It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing of the invention to have modified the steering rate control system of Tadashi to incorporate the teachings of Kawashima to include limiting a maximum steering rate of a steering system of the vehicle to a first steering rate limit: while the vehicle is travelling below a predetermined speed threshold, and to not limit the maximum steering rate to the first steering rate while the vehicle is travelling above the predetermined speed threshold in order to provide a power steering system in which a set ratio of a target steering speed for a steering mechanism relative to the steering speed of a steering wheel is variable, and in which there is no risk of the operator of a forklift truck getting exhausted before long after the initiation of the operation of the vehicle (Col. 3 lines 4-10).
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.
Claim(s) 16-28 and 30-31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tadashi (JP2005092264A) in view of Kawashima (U.S. Pat. 6542801).
Tadashi discloses “To improve straight running performance when making an auto-guidance type vehicle start in an automatic steering mode. ;SOLUTION: When this auto-guidance type vehicle begins to start when a driving mode is set to an automatic steering mode, a running motor is controlled so that a running speed does not exceed a predetermined value, and a steering motor is controlled so that the steering speed of steering tires can be made higher than a normal steering speed from the start of the vehicle until a fixed time passes. Thus, the distance where the vehicle body runs while swaying right and left can be made short by controlling the running speed, and the right and left sway width can be made small, and a time needed until the sway dies away can be made short by increasing the steering speed.” (Abstract)
Regarding Claim 16, Tadashi discloses:
A control system (Fig. 1, ¶0017) for a vehicle (Fork Lift), the control system comprising one or more controllers (Fig. 1, Control Unit 11; ¶0017), the control system configured to:
receive an indication of current vehicle speed (Fig. 5, Step S5 and S6, CPU 11 monitors travel speed of the vehicle and limits the travel speed to predetermined value Vs; ¶0022);
monitor a time period since vehicle launch (Fig. 5, Step 3; ¶0022; “When the vehicle starts moving (step S3: YES), the timer 4 is started from that point on to
measure time (step S4).”);
and limit a maximum steering rate of a steering system of the vehicle in dependence on the current vehicle speed and a period of time since launch (¶0023; Fig. 5, S4-S7; “the count value of the timer 4 is checked to determine whether or not a certain time t seconds has elapsed (step S7). If t seconds have not elapsed (step S7: NO), the process returns to step S5, and the travel speed restriction in step S5 and the steering speed increase state in step S6 are both continued.”). wherein the controller is configured to, following the expiry of a predetermined time period following launch of the vehicle, limit a maximum steering rate of a steering system of the vehicle to a first steering rate limit (¶0023; original steering speed V1; “when t seconds have elapsed (step S7: YES), the count value of the timer 4 is reset to zero (step S8), the driving speed limit imposed in step S5 is released (step S9), and further, the steering speed V2 increased in step S6 is reduced to the original steering speed V1 (step S10). As a result, the speed of the forklift 30 can be varied up to the maximum value by operating the accelerator 2, and the forklift 30 travels under automatic steering control according to the travel speed set by the driver.” (¶0023).
Therefore Tadashi discloses all the elements of Claim 16 including wherein the controller is configured to, following the expiry of a predetermined time period following launch of the vehicle, limit a maximum steering rate of a steering system of the vehicle to a first steering rate limit; but does not explicitly teach executing limiting the steering rate while the vehicle is travelling below a predetermined speed threshold, and to not limit the maximum steering rate to the first steering rate while the vehicle is travelling above the predetermined speed threshold.
Kawashima discloses “An object of the invention is to provide a power steering system in which a set ratio of a target steering speed for a steering mechanism relative to the steering speed of a steering wheel is variable, and in which there is no risk of the operator of a forklift truck getting exhausted before long after the initiation of the operation of the vehicle or a muscular disorder being caused.” (Col. 3 lines 4-10) And “according to the power steering system, since the set ratio of the target steering speed relative to the operating speed is changed to be increased of decreased in response to the running speed of the vehicle by the controller, a set ratio suitable for a then running speed of the vehicle can be selected. In addition, the target steering speed of the steering mechanism which corresponds to the operating speed of the steering wheel is calculated in consideration of the running speed of the vehicle, and as a result of a deviation being calculated after the comparison of the target steering speed so calculated and the actual steering speed, the vehicle can be operated as required at the operating speed of the steering wheel which corresponds to the running speed of the vehicle or an appropriate turning speed.” (Col. 3 lines 35-48) and “FIG. 1 is a block diagram showing configuration of a power steering system according to a first embodiment of the invention. FIG. 2 is an explanatory diagram showing a relationship between the turning speed of a steering wheel which varies in response to the running speed of a vehicle and a target steering speed, according to the first embodiment of the invention.” (Col. 4 lines 52-58).
Kawashima teaches: limit a maximum steering rate of a steering system of the vehicle to a first steering rate limit: while the vehicle is travelling below a predetermined speed threshold, and to not limit the maximum steering rate to the first steering rate while the vehicle is travelling above the predetermined speed threshold (Fig. 2, target vehicle steering speed is limited to a first steering rate limit (e.g. between 15 and 30 degrees/sec) while vehicle is travelling at or below a predetermined low speed, but is not limited to the first steering rate limit while the vehicle is traveling above the predetermined low speed threshold.) in order to provide a power steering system in which a set ratio of a target steering speed for a steering mechanism relative to the steering speed of a steering wheel is variable, and in which there is no risk of the operator of a forklift truck getting exhausted before long after the initiation of the operation of the vehicle (Col. 3 lines 4-10).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing of the invention to have modified the steering rate control system of Tadashi to incorporate the teachings of Kawashima to include limiting a maximum steering rate of a steering system of the vehicle to a first steering rate limit: while the vehicle is travelling below a predetermined speed threshold, and to not limit the maximum steering rate to the first steering rate while the vehicle is travelling above the predetermined speed threshold in order to provide a power steering system in which a set ratio of a target steering speed for a steering mechanism relative to the steering speed of a steering wheel is variable, and in which there is no risk of the operator of a forklift truck getting exhausted before long after the initiation of the operation of the vehicle (Col. 3 lines 4-10).
Regarding Claim 17, Tadashi further discloses: wherein the one or more controllers collectively comprise: at least one electronic processor having an electrical input for receiving the indication of current vehicle speed (CPU 11 imposes a driving speed limit in Fig. 5 S5, therefore the CPU monitors speed and implicitly has an electrical input for receiving the indication of current vehicle speed) ; and at least one memory device electrically coupled to the at least one electronic processor and having instructions stored therein; and wherein the at least one electronic processor is configured to monitor a time period since vehicle launch, and limit a maximum steering rate of a steering system of the vehicle in dependence on the current vehicle speed and a period of time since launch (¶0024; “8, 9 denotes a ROM in which programs for the CPU 11 and the like are stored, 10 denotes a RAM for temporarily storing data, and 11 denotes a CPU for controlling the traveling motor 6 and the steering motor 8”; CPU (central processing unit))
Regarding Claim 18, Tadashi further discloses: wherein during the predetermined time period following launch of the vehicle, a second steering rate limit which is higher than the first steering rate limit is applied (¶0022; “the CPU 11 controls the steering motor drive unit 7 to increase the steering speed by the steering motor 8 from the normal V1 to a faster V2 (step S6).” And “For example, if the normal steering speed is 120 deg/sec, the steering speed is increased to about 200 deg/sec.” (¶0019).
Regarding Claim 19, Tadashi further discloses: wherein during the predetermined time period following launch of the vehicle, no steering rate limit is applied (Applicants specification states “Higher NVH is considered to be a reasonable trade-off for this short initial period. In some cases, during the predetermined time period following launch of the vehicle, no steering rate limit is applied. That is, the steering actuator operates at its maximum capability.” Page 5 line 36- Page 6 line 2. A broadest reasonable interpretation of the limitation in light of the disclosure includes wherein following launch of the vehicle, not applying a steering rate limit means that a steering actuator operating at its maximum capability. Tadashi ¶0019 indicates steering speed of 200 deg/sec as the highest (maximum) steering speed of the steering motor drive unit)
Regarding Claim 20, Tadashi further discloses: wherein the predetermined time period is between 1 second and 5 seconds (¶0018; “In the present invention, when the driving mode selector switch 1 is set to the automatic steering mode, and the accelerator 2 is operated to start the forklift, the CPU 11 controls the travel motor drive unit 5 so that the speed of the travel motor 6 does not exceed a predetermined value (e.g., 1 km/h) even if the accelerator 2 lever is pushed down greatly until the timer 4 counts a certain period of time (e.g., 3 seconds).”)
Regarding Claims 21 and 22, Tadashi discloses “Furthermore, in the present invention, the CPU 11 controls the steering motor drive unit 7 so that the steering speed of the steering tires by the steering motor 8 is greater than the normal steering speed until the timer 4 counts a certain period of time. For example, if the normal steering speed is 120 deg/sec, the steering speed is increased to about 200 deg/sec.” (¶0019). Therefore the disclosed steering speeds are not limiting, but are instead exemplary. A person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of applicants filing on reviewing these exemplary ranges would so recognize that an optimum normal and increased steering speed values are dependent on the specific steering system to which they are applied, and the purpose and objectives of the corresponding vehicle.
Tadashi does not explicitly disclose wherein the first steering rate limit is between l0mm/s and 15mm/s or wherein the second steering rate is between 20mm/s and 30mm/s.
However, in this instance, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the disclosed normal and increased steering speeds to include wherein the first steering rate limit is between l0mm/s and 15mm/s or wherein the second steering rate is between 20mm/s and 30mm/s , since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Regarding Claim 23, Tadashi further discloses: wherein a maximum steering rate below the predetermined vehicle speed is dependent on a current driving mode of the vehicle (¶0022; “When the driving mode changeover switch 1 is switched (step S1), it is determined whether the switched mode is automatic steering mode or not (step S2), and if it is not automatic steering mode (step S2: NO), driving is performed in manual steering mode (step S11).”. In other words, the maximum steering rate below the predetermined speed (e.g. 1 km/h) depends on the driving mode selected (automatic steering mode or manual steering mode). If the driving mode is manual mode, then the maximum steering rate is the normal steering rate and not the increased steering rate.).
Regarding Claim 24, Tadashi further discloses: wherein the steering system is a rear wheel steering system of the vehicle (Fig. 8-10, show steering wheel 31 in the ‘rear’ of the forklift)
Regarding Claim 25, Tadashi discloses: A vehicle (Fork Lift)comprising a steering system and A control system (Fig. 1, ¶0017), the control system comprising one or more controllers (Fig. 1, Control Unit 11; ¶0017), the control system configured to:
receive an indication of current vehicle speed (Fig. 5, Step S5 and S6, CPU 11 monitors travel speed of the vehicle and limits the travel speed to predetermined value Vs; ¶0022);
monitor a time period since vehicle launch (Fig. 5, Step 3; ¶0022; “When the vehicle starts moving (step S3: YES), the timer 4 is started from that point on to
measure time (step S4).”);
and limit a maximum steering rate of a steering system of the vehicle in dependence on the current vehicle speed and a period of time since launch (¶0023; Fig. 5, S4-S7; “the count value of the timer 4 is checked to determine whether or not a certain time t seconds has elapsed (step S7). If t seconds have not elapsed (step S7: NO), the process returns to step S5, and the travel speed restriction in step S5 and the steering speed increase state in step S6 are bothcontinued.”). wherein the controller is configured to, following the expiry of a predetermined time period following launch of the vehicle, limit a maximum steering rate of a steering system of the vehicle to a first steering rate limit (¶0023; original steering speed V1; “when t seconds have elapsed (step S7: YES), the count value of the timer 4 is reset to zero (step S8), the driving speed limit imposed in step S5 is released (step S9), and further, the steering speed V2 increased in step S6 is reduced to the original steering speed V1 (step S10). As a result, the speed of the forklift 30 can be varied up to the maximum value by operating the accelerator 2, and the forklift 30 travels under automatic steering control according to the travel speed set by the driver.” (¶0023).
Therefore Tadashi discloses all the elements of Claim 25 including wherein the controller is configured to, following the expiry of a predetermined time period following launch of the vehicle, limit a maximum steering rate of a steering system of the vehicle to a first steering rate limit; but does not explicitly teach executing limiting the steering rate: while the vehicle is travelling below a predetermined speed threshold, and to not limit the maximum steering rate to the first steering rate while the vehicle is travelling above the predetermined speed threshold.
Kawashima discloses “An object of the invention is to provide a power steering system in which a set ratio of a target steering speed for a steering mechanism relative to the steering speed of a steering wheel is variable, and in which there is no risk of the operator of a forklift truck getting exhausted before long after the initiation of the operation of the vehicle or a muscular disorder being caused.” (Col. 3 lines 4-10) And “according to the power steering system, since the set ratio of the target steering speed relative to the operating speed is changed to be increased of decreased in response to the running speed of the vehicle by the controller, a set ratio suitable for a then running speed of the vehicle can be selected. In addition, the target steering speed of the steering mechanism which corresponds to the operating speed of the steering wheel is calculated in consideration of the running speed of the vehicle, and as a result of a deviation being calculated after the comparison of the target steering speed so calculated and the actual steering speed, the vehicle can be operated as required at the operating speed of the steering wheel which corresponds to the running speed of the vehicle or an appropriate turning speed.” (Col. 3 lines 35-48) and “FIG. 1 is a block diagram showing configuration of a power steering system according to a first embodiment of the invention. FIG. 2 is an explanatory diagram showing a relationship between the turning speed of a steering wheel which varies in response to the running speed of a vehicle and a target steering speed, according to the first embodiment of the invention.” (Col. 4 lines 52-58).
Kawashima teaches: limit a maximum steering rate of a steering system of the vehicle to a first steering rate limit: while the vehicle is travelling below a predetermined speed threshold, and to not limit the maximum steering rate to the first steering rate while the vehicle is travelling above the predetermined speed threshold (Fig. 2, target vehicle steering speed is limited to a first steering rate limit (e.g. between 15 and 30 degrees/sec) while vehicle is travelling at or below a predetermined low speed, but is not limited to the first steering rate limit while the vehicle is traveling above the predetermined low speed threshold.) in order to provide a power steering system in which a set ratio of a target steering speed for a steering mechanism relative to the steering speed of a steering wheel is variable, and in which there is no risk of the operator of a forklift truck getting exhausted before long after the initiation of the operation of the vehicle (Col. 3 lines 4-10).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing of the invention to have modified the steering rate control system of Tadashi to incorporate the teachings of Kawashima to include limiting a maximum steering rate of a steering system of the vehicle to a first steering rate limit: while the vehicle is travelling below a predetermined speed threshold, and to not limit the maximum steering rate to the first steering rate while the vehicle is travelling above the predetermined speed threshold in order to provide a power steering system in which a set ratio of a target steering speed for a steering mechanism relative to the steering speed of a steering wheel is variable, and in which there is no risk of the operator of a forklift truck getting exhausted before long after the initiation of the operation of the vehicle (Col. 3 lines 4-10).
Regarding Claim 26, Tadashi further discloses: wherein the steering system is a rear wheel steering system (Fig. 8-10, show steering wheel 31 in the ‘rear’ of the forklift), the vehicle further comprising a front wheel steering system (Fig. 8-10, ‘front’ wheels (tires) are at least implicitly disclosed that work together with the illustrated rear wheel (tires) 31 in order to transport the load. Additionally, such front wheels (tires) steer the forklift due to friction or the like on the driving surface. See Fig. 8. Without front wheels, the forklift 30 would not be able to turn as illustrated) , wherein the control system is configured to limit the maximum steering rate of the rear wheel steering system in dependent on vehicle speed and time since launch, but not to so limit the front wheel steering system (¶0023; Fig. 5, S4-S7; “the count value of the timer 4 is checked to determine whether or not a certain time t seconds has elapsed (step S7). If t seconds have not elapsed (step S7: NO), the process returns to step S5, and the travel speed restriction in step S5 and the steering speed increase state in step S6 are both continued.”; only the rear wheel steering system is controlled as disclosed).
Regarding Claim 27, Tadashi discloses A control method for steering a vehicle, the method comprising: receiving an indication of current vehicle speed (Fig. 5, Step S5 and S6, CPU 11 monitors travel speed of the vehicle and limits the travel speed to predetermined value Vs; ¶0022); monitoring a time period since vehicle launch (Fig. 5, Step 3; ¶0022; “When the vehicle starts moving (step S3: YES), the timer 4 is started from that point on to measure time (step S4).”); and limiting a maximum steering rate of a steering system of the vehicle in dependence on the current vehicle speed and a period of time since launch. (¶0023; Fig. 5, S4-S7; “the count value of the timer 4 is checked to determine whether or not a certain time t seconds has elapsed (step S7). If t seconds have not elapsed (step S7: NO), the process returns to step S5, and the travel speed restriction in step S5 and the steering speed increase state in step S6 are both continued.” and (¶0023; original steering speed V1; “when t seconds have elapsed (step S7: YES), the count value of the timer 4 is reset to zero (step S8), the driving speed limit imposed in step S5 is released (step S9), and further, the steering speed V2 increased in step S6 is reduced to the original steering speed V1 (step S10). As a result, the speed of the forklift 30 can be varied up to the maximum value by operating the accelerator 2, and the forklift 30 travels under automatic steering control according to the travel speed set by the driver.” (¶0023), and following the expiry of a predetermined time period following launch of the vehicle, limiting the maximum steering rate of a steering system of the vehicle to a first steering rate limit (¶0023; original steering speed V1; “when t seconds have elapsed (step S7: YES), the count value of the timer 4 is reset to zero (step S8), the driving speed limit imposed in step S5 is released (step S9), and further, the steering speed V2 increased in step S6 is reduced to the original steering speed V1 (step S10). As a result, the speed of the forklift 30 can be varied up to the maximum value by operating the accelerator 2, and the forklift 30 travels under automatic steering control according to the travel speed set by the driver.” (¶0023).
Therefore Tadashi discloses all the elements of Claim 25 including wherein the controller is configured to, following the expiry of a predetermined time period following launch of the vehicle, limit a maximum steering rate of a steering system of the vehicle to a first steering rate limit; but does not explicitly teach executing limiting the steering rate: while the vehicle is travelling below a predetermined speed threshold, and to not limit the maximum steering rate to the first steering rate while the vehicle is travelling above the predetermined speed threshold.
Kawashima discloses “An object of the invention is to provide a power steering system in which a set ratio of a target steering speed for a steering mechanism relative to the steering speed of a steering wheel is variable, and in which there is no risk of the operator of a forklift truck getting exhausted before long after the initiation of the operation of the vehicle or a muscular disorder being caused.” (Col. 3 lines 4-10) And “according to the power steering system, since the set ratio of the target steering speed relative to the operating speed is changed to be increased of decreased in response to the running speed of the vehicle by the controller, a set ratio suitable for a then running speed of the vehicle can be selected. In addition, the target steering speed of the steering mechanism which corresponds to the operating speed of the steering wheel is calculated in consideration of the running speed of the vehicle, and as a result of a deviation being calculated after the comparison of the target steering speed so calculated and the actual steering speed, the vehicle can be operated as required at the operating speed of the steering wheel which corresponds to the running speed of the vehicle or an appropriate turning speed.” (Col. 3 lines 35-48) and “FIG. 1 is a block diagram showing configuration of a power steering system according to a first embodiment of the invention. FIG. 2 is an explanatory diagram showing a relationship between the turning speed of a steering wheel which varies in response to the running speed of a vehicle and a target steering speed, according to the first embodiment of the invention.” (Col. 4 lines 52-58).
Kawashima teaches: limit a maximum steering rate of a steering system of the vehicle to a first steering rate limit: while the vehicle is travelling below a predetermined speed threshold, and to not limit the maximum steering rate to the first steering rate while the vehicle is travelling above the predetermined speed threshold (Fig. 2, target vehicle steering speed is limited to a first steering rate limit (e.g. between 15 and 30 degrees/sec) while vehicle is travelling at or below a predetermined low speed, but is not limited to the first steering rate limit while the vehicle is traveling above the predetermined low speed threshold.) in order to provide a power steering system in which a set ratio of a target steering speed for a steering mechanism relative to the steering speed of a steering wheel is variable, and in which there is no risk of the operator of a forklift truck getting exhausted before long after the initiation of the operation of the vehicle (Col. 3 lines 4-10).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing of the invention to have modified the method of controlling the steering rate system of Tadashi to incorporate the teachings of Kawashima to include limiting a maximum steering rate of a steering system of the vehicle to a first steering rate limit: while the vehicle is travelling below a predetermined speed threshold, and to not limit the maximum steering rate to the first steering rate while the vehicle is travelling above the predetermined speed threshold in order to provide a power steering system in which a set ratio of a target steering speed for a steering mechanism relative to the steering speed of a steering wheel is variable, and in which there is no risk of the operator of a forklift truck getting exhausted before long after the initiation of the operation of the vehicle (Col. 3 lines 4-10)
Regarding Claim 28, Tadashi further discloses Computer software that, when executed, is arranged to perform a method according to claim 27. (¶0017; “Reference numeral 9 denotes a ROM in which programs and control parameters for the CPU 11 are stored, and reference numeral 10 denotes a RAM in which various data are temporarily stored. Reference numeral 11 denotes a CPU serving as a control unit for controlling the traveling motor 6 and the steering motor 8.”)
Regarding Claim 30, Tadashi further discloses wherein the control system restarts the monitoring of the time period since vehicle launch every time the vehicle launches from a stationary condition. (¶0022, the control method is executed each time the vehicle starts moving (Step 3))
Regarding Claim 31, Tadashi further discloses wherein the control system is configured to limit the maximum steering rate of a rear wheel steering system of the vehicle in dependence on vehicle speed and time since launch (¶0023; original steering speed V1; “when t seconds have elapsed (step S7: YES), the count value of the timer 4 is reset to zero (step S8), the driving speed limit imposed in step S5 is released (step S9), and further, the steering speed V2 increased in step S6 is reduced to the original steering speed V1 (step S10). As a result, the speed of the forklift 30 can be varied up to the maximum value by operating the accelerator 2, and the forklift 30 travels under automatic steering control according to the travel speed set by the driver.” (¶0023). , but does not limit a front wheel steering system (Fig. 8-10, ‘front’ wheels (tires) are at least implicitly disclosed that work together with the illustrated rear wheel (tires) 31 in order to transport the load. Additionally, such front wheels (tires) steer the forklift due to friction or the like on the driving surface. See Fig. 8. Without front wheels, the forklift 30 would not be able to turn as illustrated) of the vehicle with the same maximum steering rate limit (¶0023; Fig. 5, S4-S7; “the count value of the timer 4 is checked to determine whether or not a certain time t seconds has elapsed (step S7). If t seconds have not elapsed (step S7: NO), the process returns to step S5, and the travel speed restriction in step S5 and the steering speed increase state in step S6 are both continued.”; only the rear wheel steering system is controlled as disclosed).
Claim 29 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tadashi (JP2005092264A) in view of Kawashima (U.S. Pat. 6542801) in further view of Hayama (U.S. Pat. 8862329)
Regarding Claim 29, Tadashi discloses “7 is the steering motor drive unit, and consists of a motor drive circuit and the like that supplies current to the steering motor 8, which steers the steering tires to change the direction of the vehicle.” (¶0017) and “Furthermore, in the present invention, the CPU 11 controls the steering motor drive unit 7 so that the steering speed of the steering tires by the steering motor 8 is greater than the normal steering speed until the timer 4 counts a certain period of time. For example, if the normal steering speed is 120 deg/sec, the steering speed is increased to about 200 deg/sec.” (¶0019). Therefore the disclosed steering speeds are not limiting, but are instead exemplary. A person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of applicants filing on reviewing these exemplary ranges would so recognize that an optimum normal and increased steering speed values are dependent on the specific steering system to which they are applied, and the purpose and objectives of the corresponding vehicle.
Therefore Tadashi further discloses wherein the maximum steering rate is a maximum amount of travel of a steering wheel of the vehicle per unit time, measured in mm/s or equivalent units (¶0017-0019, maximum steering rate of rotation of the steered tires/wheels is 120 deg/sec to about 200 deg/sec)
Tadashi does not explicitly disclose wherein the maximum steering rate is a maximum amount of rack travel of a steering rack of the vehicle per unit time, measured in mm/s or equivalent units
In other words, Tadashi does not disclose the steering mechanism includes a steering “rack” for connecting a steering motor to a steered tire/wheel, wherein the rack is configured to convert rotating rate motion of the motor into linear rate of motion for the purpose of changing the angle of the steered wheel(s).
Hayama discloses “The invention relates to a control apparatus for a steering mechanism that is used in a material handling vehicle.” (col. 1 lines 14-15) And “It is an object of the invention to provide a control apparatus for a steering mechanism, with which electric power consumption by a vehicle as a whole is reduced.” (Col. 1 lines 54-56) and “The steered system motor 19 is a direct-current motor that is incorporated in the rack support 18 so as to be coaxial with the rack shaft 17. The rotation of the steered system motor 19 is converted into a linear motion of the rack shaft 17 via a steered gear that is incorporated in the rack support 18. The linear motion of the rack shaft 17 is transmitted to the rear wheels 6 via tie rods 21L, 21R that are coupled to respective ends of the rack shaft 17. Thus, the rear wheels 6 are steered. The electric forklift 1 includes a drive system ECU 31 and the steered system ECU 22.” (Col. 4 line 19-28).
Therefore Hayama teaches: a steering mechanism (Fig. 2) includes a steering “rack” (17&18) for connecting a steering motor (19) to a steered tire/wheel (6), wherein the rack is configured to convert rotating rate motion of the motor into linear rate of motion for the purpose of changing the angle of the steered wheel(s) (Col. 4 line 19-28) and in order “to provide a control apparatus for a steering mechanism, with which electric power consumption by a vehicle as a whole is reduced.” (Col. 1 lines 54-56).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing of the invention to have modified the vehicle steering control system of Tadashi to incorporate the teachings of Hayama to include the steering mechanism includes a steering “rack” for connecting a steering motor to a steered tire/wheel, wherein the rack is configured to convert rotating rate motion of the motor into linear rate of motion for the purpose of changing the angle of the steered wheel(s) (Col. 4 line 19-28) and in order “to provide a control apparatus for a steering mechanism, with which electric power consumption by a vehicle as a whole is reduced.” (Col. 1 lines 54-56).
Conclusion
This action is a final rejection and closes the prosecution of this application. Applicant’s reply under 37 CFR 1.113 to this action is limited to an appeal to the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, an amendment complying with the requirements set forth below, or a request for continued examination (RCE) to reopen prosecution where permitted. Please note that the Office also offers initiatives that are available to applicants after the close of prosecution. See https://www.uspto.gov/patents/initiatives/uspto-patent-applications-iniatives-timeline for more information.
General information on the Patent Trial and Appeal Board is available at: www.uspto.gov/patents/ptab. The information at this page includes guidance on time limited options that may assist the applicant contemplating appealing an examiner’s rejection. It also includes information on pro bono (free) legal services and advice available for those who are under-resourced and considering an appeal at: https://www.uspto.gov/patents/ptab/free-legal-assistance. The page is best reviewed promptly after applicant has received a final rejection or the claims have been twice rejected because some of the noted assistance must be requested within one month from the date of the latest rejection. See MPEP § 1204 for more information on filing a notice of appeal.
If applicant should desire to appeal any rejection made by the examiner, a Notice of Appeal must be filed within the period for reply. The Notice of Appeal must be accompanied by the fee required by 37 CFR 41.20(b)(1). The current fee amount is available at: www.uspto.gov/Fees.
If applicant should desire to file an after-final amendment, entry of the proposed amendment cannot be made as a matter of right unless it merely cancels claims or complies with a formal requirement made in a previous Office action. Amendments touching the merits of the application which otherwise might not be proper may be admitted upon a showing of good and sufficient reasons why they are necessary and why they were not presented earlier.
A reply under 37 CFR 1.113 to a final rejection must include cancellation of or appeal from the rejection of, each rejected claim. The filing of an amendment after final rejection, whether or not it is entered, does not stop the running of the statutory period for reply to the final rejection unless the examiner holds all of the claims to be in condition for allowance.
If applicant should desire to continue prosecution in a utility or plant application filed on or after May 29, 2000 and have the finality of this Office action withdrawn, an RCE under 37 CFR 1.114 may be filed within the period for reply. See MPEP § 706.07(h) for more information on the requirements for filing an RCE.
The application will become abandoned unless a Notice of Appeal, an after final reply that places the application in condition for allowance, or an RCE has been filed properly within the period for reply, or any extension of this period obtained under either 37 CFR 1.136(a) or (b).
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.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
McLachlan et al. (U.S. 2022/0390955A1) discloses “Referring again to FIG. 5, at step 208, the travel control system 200, upon material handling vehicle startup, can generate a speed limit table of maximum speeds for the material handling vehicle 100 when the material handling vehicle 100 is steered at a given angle or within a given range of angles. These speed limits can be generated to minimize possible contact with objects that may not be in a field of view of a scanner of a material handling vehicle. For example, a speed that can be allowed in a first direction of travel can bring the material handling vehicle 100 into contact with an object outside of the field of view 124 if the speed is maintained when a material handling vehicle is steered toward a trajectory outside of the previous field of view 124. A non-limiting representative generated speed limit table is shown below. The steer angles shown are absolute values, and thus the associated speed limits would be applied to the corresponding negative steer angle.” (¶0052).
/BRIAN R KIRBY/Examiner, Art Unit 3747
/LINDSAY M LOW/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3747
Prosecution Insights