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 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 20 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
A broad range or limitation together with a narrow range or limitation that falls within the broad range or limitation (in the same claim) may be considered indefinite if the resulting claim does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired. See MPEP § 2173.05(c). In the present instance, claim 20 recites the broad recitation “wherein the predetermined time period is between 1 second and 5 seconds”, and the claim also recites and preferably approximately 2 seconds which is the narrower statement of the range/limitation. The claim(s) are considered indefinite because there is a question or doubt as to whether the feature introduced by such narrower language is (a) merely exemplary of the remainder of the claim, and therefore not required, or (b) a required feature of the claims. For the purpose of examination over the prior art, the limitation “wherein the predetermined time period is between 1 second and 5 seconds, and preferably approximately 2 seconds.” will be construed as “wherein the predetermined time period is between 1 second and 5 seconds”.
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.
Claim(s) 27-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Tadashi (JP2005092264A).
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 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).
Regarding Claim 28, Tadashi 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.”)
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) 16-26 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).
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).
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).
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).
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).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Avitan (U.S. Pat. 5847437) discloses “In a typical electric industrial fork lift vehicle such as a Schaeff Model E3, available from Schaeff Incorporated of Sioux City, Iowa, the fixed dimensional parameters, with reference to FIG. 1 are as follows: (13) A=9.25 inches (14) B=25.75 inches (15) C=46.75 inches (16) Drive Wheel Radius=8 inches.” (Col. 5 line 5-13). Fig. 1 is reproduced below to show a typical industrial fork lift have a rear steering wheel (22) and two front wheels (12, and 14).
PNG
media_image1.png
676
545
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRIAN R KIRBY whose telephone number is (571)270-3665. The examiner can normally be reached Telework: M-F, 9a-5p.
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, Lindsay Low can be reached at 571-272-1196. 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.
/BRIAN R KIRBY/Examiner, Art Unit 3747
/LINDSAY M LOW/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3747