DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Objections
Claim 20 is objected to because of the following informalities: In line 5 of claim 20, “herein” should be changed to --wherein--. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 14-26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fujiwara et al. (US 6,073,067).
With respect to claim 14, Fujiwara et al. disclose a control system for controlling an actuator of a rear wheel steering system of a vehicle, the control system comprising one or more controllers, the control system configured to: receive a first input signal (the output duty ratio D; column 4, lines 61-65) indicative of vehicle speed (Background of the Invention) and determine a vehicle speed in dependence on the first input signal (determine whether the vehicle is stationary; column 8, lines 31-45); receive a second input signal indicative of a requested actuator displacement (the modified computed target rear wheel steering angle which is obtained from the computed target steering angle reduced to a smaller value; Abstract and column 2, lines 6-42); receive a third input signal indicative of an actual actuator displacement (the actual rear wheel steering angle; claim 1); determine, in dependence on the second input signal and the third input signal, the magnitude of the difference (the deviation) between the requested actuator displacement and the actual actuator displacement (column 4, lines 13-27); and output a signal comprising an instruction to move the actuator to a position in which the difference between the requested actuator displacement and the actual actuator displacement is zero (actuating the steering actuator of the rear wheel steering device according to a deviation of the actual rear wheel steering angle from the modified computed target rear wheel steering angle; claim 1) if: the determined vehicle speed is zero (if the vehicle is stationary; column 8, lines 31-45) and the magnitude of the difference between the requested actuator displacement and the actual actuator displacement is determined to be greater than or equal to a first threshold value (implicit in the offset error, i.e., the amount of reduction of the computed target steering angle to the modified computed target rear wheel steering angle) but does not disclose that the magnitude of the difference between the requested actuator displacement and the actual actuator displacement is determined to be less than or equal to a second threshold value. Klein et al., however, disclose having a lower first threshold on the correction of the steering angle and limiting the maximum allowable rear wheel angle [0017-0022] when the speed is zero using a limiting threshold, interpreted as the second threshold. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the invention was filed to modify the invention of Fujiwara et al. in view of the teachings of Klein et al. to have the magnitude of the difference between the requested actuator displacement and the actual actuator displacement is determined be less than or equal to a second threshold value to only compensate for the difference when it becomes larger than acceptable errors caused by sensor inaccuracies.
With respect to claim 15, while the combination does not specifically disclose an electronic processors as well as at least one memory device for storing instructions, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the invention was filed to use an electronic processor with stored instructions, since it was old and well known in the art that vehicle steering and suspension controllers have electronic processing capabilities with stored instructions for operating appropriate vehicle components according to set parameters and thresholds in order to control the safety and comfort of the passengers.
With respect to claim 16, configured to determine a vehicle speed equal to zero if the first input signal is unavailable (speed signal is indeterminate; column 1, lines 43-54).
With respect to claim 17, configured to: output a signal comprising an instruction to hold the actuator at its current displacement if: the determined vehicle speed is zero; and the magnitude of the difference between the requested actuator displacement and the actual actuator displacement is determined to be greater than the second threshold value (not actuating the actuator if outside the threshold range; column 2, lines 43-59).
With respect to claim 18, configured to: output a signal comprising an instruction to hold the actuator at its current displacement if: the determined vehicle speed is zero; and the magnitude of the difference between the requested actuator displacement and the actual actuator displacement is determined to be less than the first threshold value (not actuating the actuator if outside the threshold range; column 2, lines 43-59)..
With respect to claim 19, a vehicle (Abstract) comprising the system of claim 20.
With respect to claim 20, comprising: an actuator having a moveable actuator element (Brief Summary of Invention), wherein displacement of the actuator element from a home position determines a steering position of a rear wheel steering system (steering angle is measured in relation to the straight forward “home” position); and the control system of claim 14 as discussed above.
With respect to claim 21, a vehicle (Abstract) comprising the system of claim 20.
With respect to claims 22-26, the apparatus discussed above meets the method limitations.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DREW J BROWN whose telephone number is (571)272-1362. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday.
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, John Olszewski can be reached at 571-272-2706. 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.
DREW BROWN
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3616
/DREW J BROWN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3617
Prosecution Insights