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 3 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.
Claim 3 recites the limitation "a time period T" which is previously referenced in claim 1. Therefore, this limitation in the claim is an example of double inclusion. Appropriate amendments to convey applicants intended meaning are required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-3, 5, 6, 8-12, 14, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and (a)(2) as being anticipated by Oshita et al. (USPN 4,979,114).
Regarding claim 1, Oshita teaches a control system (figures 1 and 2, elements 2-8) for a steering system of a vehicle (figure 1, elements 102 and 103), the control system comprising one or more controllers (figure 2, elements 2-8), the control system configured to:
receive a vehicle speed signal indicative of a current vehicle speed (figure 2, elements 3 and 33; column 4, lines 35-44);
receive a steering input signal output corresponding to a demanded steering angle of a steered wheel (figure 2, elements 4 and 41 and 3 and 31; column 4, lines 16-23);
determine from the received vehicle speed signal when the current vehicle speed reaches zero (figure 12, step S1:yes; column 9, lines 9-15); and
output a control signal to control a steering angle of a steered wheel, such that the steered wheel is controlled to turn towards a straight ahead condition, in the event that the current vehicle speed remains zero and the time since the current vehicle speed reached zero is within a time period T (figure 1, element 102; figure 12, steps S2-S8; column 9, lines 15-33).
Regarding claim 2, Oshita teaches the control system of claim 1 wherein the one or more controllers collectively comprise:
at least one electronic processor configured to access at least one electronic memory device and execute the instructions thereon so as to determine when the current vehicle speed reaches zero (figure 2, elements 71, 7, and 2; column 6 lines 7-15; column 5, lines 9-11); and
an electrical output configured to output the control signal to a steering actuator of the steering system (figure 2, element 2; column 7, lines 1-24).
Regarding claim 3, Oshita teaches a control system according to claim 1,
wherein the control system is configured to output a control signal to control a steering angle of a steered wheel (column 3, lines 54-68; figure 2, elements 2, 21, and 25), such that the steered wheel is controlled to turn towards the demanded steering angle, in the event that the current vehicle speed remains zero, the time since the current vehicle speed reached zero is within a time period T and the demanded steering angle is closer toward the straight ahead condition than a current steering angle (figure 12, all; column 9, lines 9-33).
Regarding claim 5, Oshita teaches a control system according to claim 1, wherein the time period T is a predetermined time value stored within a memory of the one or more controllers (column 6, lines 24-28; figure 2, element 73).
Regarding claim 6, Oshita teaches a control system according to claim 1, wherein the time period T comprises a tuneable time value (figure 2, element 76; column 6, lines 27-28).
Regarding claim 8, Oshita teaches a control system according to claim 1, wherein the time period T comprises the time period zero to 2s starting from when the current vehicle speed reaches zero (column 9, lines 9-33; figure 12; step S3:yes).
Regarding claim 9, Oshita teaches a control system according to claim 1, wherein, after the time period T, the control system is configured to stop outputting the control signal and to hold the steering angle at its time = T value (figure 12, step s3:no).
Regarding claim 10, Oshita teaches a control system according to claim 1, wherein the control system is configured to:
receive a drive mode signal indicative of a drive mode of the vehicle (figure 12, s1:yes and s2:yes); and
not output the control signal in dependence on the drive mode signal (figure 12, s3:no; column 9, lines 9-33).
Regarding claim 11, Oshita teaches a steering system comprising the control system of claim 1 (figure 1, elements 102 and 103) and a steering actuator (figure 2, element 1).
Regarding claim 12, Oshita teaches a vehicle comprising the control system (column 1, lines 6-10) of any one of claims 1 to 10 or the steering system of claim 11.
Regarding claim 14, Oshita teaches a method of controlling a steering system of a vehicle (figure 1, elements 102 and 103), the method comprising:
receiving a vehicle speed signal indicative of a current vehicle speed (figure 2, elements 3 and 33; column 4, lines 35-44);
receiving a steering input signal output corresponding to a demanded steering angle of a steered wheel (figure 2, elements 3 and 31; column 4, lines 16-23);
determining from the received vehicle speed signal when the current vehicle speed reaches zero (figure 12, step S1:yes; column 9, lines 9-15); and
controlling a steering angle of a steered wheel, such that the steered wheel is controlled to turn towards a straight ahead condition, in the event that the current vehicle speed remains zero and the time since the current vehicle speed reached zero is within a time period T (figure 1, element 102; figure 12, steps S2-S8; column 9, lines 15-33).
Regarding claim 15, Oshita teaches a non-transitory computer readable medium comprising computer readable instructions that, when executed by a processor, cause performance of the method of claim 14 (figures 1 and 2, elements 2-8).
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.
Claims 4 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oshita et al. (USPN 4,979,114) in view of Kawamoto et al. (USPN 4,697,816).
Regarding claim 4, Oshita teaches a control system according to claim 1.
Oshita is silent as to wherein the steering system is a rear wheel steering system.
Kawamoto teaches wherein the steering system is a rear wheel steering system (column 1, lines 5-8).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the invention to combine the steering system of Kawamoto with the controller for the steering system of Oshita since doing so would be an example of applying a known technique to a known product ready for improvement to yield predictable results. In this case, Oshita describes the control of a steering system used for returning the vehicle to neutral when the speed is decreased to 0, which could be applied on the front wheel steering of the vehicle in Oshita or on the rear or all wheel steering on the vehicle of Kawamoto in order to make the steering in the vehicle of Oshita more efficient.
Regarding claim 13, Oshita teaches a vehicle according to claim 12.
Oshita is silent as to wherein the vehicle is a rear wheel steer or all wheel steer vehicle.
Kawamoto teaches wherein the vehicle is a rear wheel steer or all wheel steer vehicle (column 1, lines 5-8).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the invention to combine the steering system of Kawamoto with the controller for the steering system of Oshita since doing so would be an example of applying a known technique to a known product ready for improvement to yield predictable results. In this case, Oshita describes the control of a steering system used for returning the vehicle to neutral when the speed is decreased to 0, which could be applied on the front wheel steering of the vehicle in Oshita or on the rear or all wheel steering on the vehicle of Kawamoto in order to make the steering in the vehicle of Oshita more efficient.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 7 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior art of record fails to teach or render obvious all of wherein the vehicle comprises an electric vehicle and the time period T is tuned in dependence with a charge state of the vehicle. The prior art does teach an electric vehicle but does not teach tuning the time period T in dependence with a charge state of the vehicle, as stated in claim 7.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record on PTO-892 and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SUSAN E SCHARPF whose telephone number is (571)270-5304. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7:30am-4:30pm.
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, Pat Wongwian can be reached at 571-270-5426. 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.
/Susan E Scharpf/Examiner, Art Unit 3747
/LINDSAY M LOW/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3747
Prosecution Insights