FIRST NON-FINAL REJECTION
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 23 is objected to because of the following informalities: line 1 of the claim reads “A test rig or a dual-axle vehicle corner system”. The examiner believes it should read -- A test rig for a dual-axle vehicle corner system-- or -- A test rig of a dual-axle vehicle corner system--. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 35 is objected to because of the following informalities: the claim phrase “wherein the computing device to calibrate the sensors of the of the dual-axle vehicle corner system based on signals from the sensors of the test rig” is not clearly understood because the phrase is missing language therefore the phrase is not clear. Appropriate correction is 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.
Claim(s) 23, 24, 26, 28, 30-36, 58, 59, 61, 62, 68-72 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Langer U.S. Patent Application Publication 2008/0275682.
With respect to claims 23 and 58, Langer teaches a test rig (test rig 12) for a dual-axle vehicle corner system (figure 1) comprising a suspension assembly and a first wheel and a second wheel coupled to the suspension assembly (interpreted as positioning plate 44 having axle components 40 where tires 20 are mounted to the axle components 20, paragraphs 29-35), the test rig comprising: a support frame to couple the dual-axle vehicle corner system to the test rig (interpreted as the stand 42 of the test rig 12 that is contact with the ground and which supports the positioning plate 44, paragraph 35, figure 1); a wheel support surface (roadways 22, figures 1 and 3) to support the first wheel and the second wheel of the dual- axle vehicle corner system (the roadways 22 support each of the tires 20, figures 1 and 3); and at least one actuator (movable supports 48, figures 1 and 3) to repeatedly move the support frame in a direction that is substantially perpendicular (vertical direction) to the wheel support (at least one of the first and second wheel) surface to actuate the suspension assembly of the dual-axle vehicle corner system (the supports 48 actuate the roadways 22 in the vertical direction, paragraphs 37-45).
With respect to claim 24, 26, 59, and 62, Langer teaches wherein the at least one actuator is to at least one of: repeatedly/incline move the support frame in a direction that is substantially perpendicular to the support frame and substantially parallel to the wheels support surface, and repeatedly move/incline the support frame in a direction that is substantially parallel to the support frame and to the wheels support surface (The configuration of the simulated roadway surfaces 22, with posts 46 and pistons 48, allows inputs of three degrees of freedom (road vertical, steer and longitudinal) for each tire 20, paragraph 38.).
With respect to claim 28, Langer teaches a reference frame (slide rail 54), wherein the frame is coupled to the reference frame and is slidable with respect to the reference frame in one or more directions (The positioning plate 44 is mounted on a slide rail 54 that extends vertically on the stand 42, and a slide rail coupling 56 couples the positioning plate 44 to the slide rail 54 for vertical movement along the slide rail 54, paragraph 41.).
With respect to claim 30, Langer teaches at least one rotatable member mounted within the at least one wheel support surface (roadways 22), the at least one rotatable member is to support the first wheel and the second wheel of the dual- axle vehicle corner system while the first wheel and the second wheel are spinning (the simulated roadway surfaces 22 are flat belts that induce tire rotation to provide a simulated roadway, paragraph 37).
With respect to claim 31 and 32, Langer teaches at least one motor (motors 50) to rotate the at least one rotatable member in a direction that is opposite to direction of rotation of the first wheel and the second wheel to resist operation of a powertrain assembly of the dual-axle vehicle corner system (braking may be induced in the roadways 22, paragraph 37), also Langer teaches at least one motor (motors 50) to rotate the at least one rotatable member to cause the first wheel and the second wheel the dual-axle vehicle corner system to spin (paragraph 37).
With respect to claim 33, Langer teaches wherein the at least one wheel support surface is rotatable about a rotation axis that is substantially perpendicular to the at least one wheel support surface (paragraph 37), and the test rig comprises at least one motor to rotate the at least one wheel support surface (motors 50).
With respect to claims 34 and 71, Langer teaches a computing device to (vehicle model module 18), based on signals from at least one of sensors of the dual-axle vehicle corner system or sensors of the test rig (test rig sensors, paragraph 57), determine whether or not subsystems of the dual- axle vehicle corner system are at least one of tuned and operate according to predefined specifications (Sensor signals are communicated to the vehicle model with minimal lag to permit stable operation of the model, paragraph 57.).
With respect to claims 35 and 72, Langer teaches wherein the computing device to calibrate the sensors of the of the dual-axle vehicle corner system based on signals from the sensors of the test rig (paragraph 54).
With respect to claims 36, 69, and 70, Langer teaches a computing device (vehicle model module 18) to control a steering assembly of the dual-axle vehicle corner system to cause at least one of the first wheel and the second wheel to steer about their respective steering axes during actuating of the suspension assembly (paragraphs 33 and 38).
With respect to claim 61, Langer teaches wherein the actuating of the suspension assembly is further by repeatedly causing motion of at least one of the first wheel, the second wheel and a sub-frame (axle component 40) of the dual-axle vehicle corner system in directions that are transverse to the vertical direction (the supports 48 actuate the roadways 22 in the vertical direction which actuates the tires 20 and axle components 40, paragraphs 37-45).
With respect to claim 68, Langer teaches by the test rig, controlling a powertrain assembly of the dual-axle vehicle corner system to cause at least one of the first wheel and the second wheel to spin (the simulated roadway surfaces 22 are flat belts that induce tire rotation through motors 50 to provide a simulated roadway, paragraph 37); and by the test rig, resisting operation of the powertrain assembly by applying a rotational force on at least one of the first wheel and the second wheel in a direction that is opposite to direction of spinning of the first wheel and the second wheel (braking may be induced in the roadways 22, paragraph 37).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FREDDIE KIRKLAND III whose telephone number is (571)272-2232. The examiner can normally be reached 9am-5pm.
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 Breene can be reached at (571) 272-4107. 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.
FREDDIE KIRKLAND III
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2855
/Freddie Kirkland III/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2855 12/23/2025