Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 16, 2026
Application No. 18/893,886

TRAVEL CONTROL METHOD AND APPARATUS

Non-Final OA §102
Filed
Sep 23, 2024
Examiner
WANG, YI-KAI
Art Unit
3747
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Doosan Bobcat Korea Co., LTD.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
84%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
1y 11m
To Grant
88%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 84% — above average
84%
Career Allow Rate
390 granted / 467 resolved
+13.5% vs TC avg
Minimal +5% lift
Without
With
+4.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
1y 11m
Avg Prosecution
18 currently pending
Career history
485
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.5%
-38.5% vs TC avg
§103
53.6%
+13.6% vs TC avg
§102
28.5%
-11.5% vs TC avg
§112
14.7%
-25.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 467 resolved cases

Office Action

§102
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 . Drawings The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: Fig. 3, S140, S150, S160. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance. Claim Objections Claims 9, 10 are objected to because of the following informalities: Regarding to Claims 9, 10, “the direction lever” should be amended to recite as “a direction lever.” Appropriate correction is required. 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. Claims 1-3, 6-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Murthy (US2020/0216141 A1). Regarding to Claim 1, Murthy teaches a travel control method of comprising: detecting a travel speed of an industrial vehicle (Fig. 5, Step 520, it would be known the vehicle is stop that time); detecting a gradient of a road surface (Fig. 5, Step 530); setting an accel drive function of the industrial vehicle to be turned on or off (Fig. 5, Steps 530, 540, 550, Paragraphs 79-81. The examiner considered when entering Step 540, maintaining current power output can be considered as turning on an accel driving function under the broadest reasonable interpretation); and controlling driving of a travel apparatus on the basis of a state in which the accel drive function is turned on or off (Fig. 5, Paragraphs 79-82). Regarding to Claim 2, Murthy teaches the method, wherein the setting of the accel drive function to be turned on or off includes setting the accel drive function to be turned off in a case in which the gradient is greater than or equal to a reference gradient in a state in which the industrial vehicle is stopped (Fig. 5, Steps 520, 530, 540, Paragraphs 78-80, it would be known the vehicle is stopped in Steps 520, 530). Regarding to Claim 3, Murthy teaches the method, wherein the setting of the accel drive function to be turned on or off includes setting the accel drive function to be turned on in a case in which the gradient is smaller than a reference gradient in a state in which the industrial vehicle is stopped (Fig. 5, Steps 520, 530, 550, 560, Paragraphs 78, 79, 81, 82, it would be known the vehicle is stopped in Steps 520, 530). Regarding to Claim 6, Murthy teaches a travel control apparatus for controlling a travel apparatus of an industrial vehicle, the travel control apparatus comprising: a travel speed detector configured to detect a travel speed on the basis of an output of a wheel speed sensor of the industrial vehicle (Fig. 5, Step 520, it would be known the vehicle is stop that time, and it would be known there is a sensor for wheel); a gradient detector configured to detect a gradient of a road surface on the basis of an output of an acceleration sensor of the industrial vehicle (Fig. 5, Step 530); and a travel controller configured to set an accel drive function of the industrial vehicle to be turned on or off on the basis of the travel speed and the gradient and control driving of the travel apparatus on the basis of a state in which the accel drive function is turned on or off (Fig. 5, Steps 530, 540, 550, Paragraphs 79-82. The examiner considered when entering Step 540, maintaining current power output can be considered as turning on an accel driving function under the broadest reasonable interpretation). Regarding to Claim 7, Murthy teaches the travel control apparatus, wherein the travel controller sets the accel drive function to be turned off in a case in which the gradient is greater than or equal to a reference gradient in a state in which the industrial vehicle is stopped (Fig. 5, Steps 520, 530, 550, 560, Paragraphs 78, 79, 81, 82, it would be known the vehicle is stopped in Steps 520, 530). Regarding to Claim 8, Murthy teaches the travel control apparatus, wherein the travel controller sets the accel drive function to be turned on in a case in which the gradient is smaller than a reference gradient in a state in which the industrial vehicle is stopped (Fig. 5, Steps 520, 530, 540, Paragraphs 78-80, it would be known the vehicle is stopped in Steps 520, 530). Claims 1, 4, 5, 6, 9, 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Zhou (US2025/0128713 A1). Regarding to Claim 1, Zhou teaches a travel control method of comprising: detecting a travel speed of an industrial vehicle (Paragraphs 101-106, it would be known there is a sensor to detect the speed); detecting a gradient of a road surface (Paragraphs 101-106); setting an accel drive function of the industrial vehicle to be turned on or off (Paragraph 101-106. The examiner considered when entering the second mode, the system turning on an accel drive function under the broadest reasonable interpretation); and controlling driving of a travel apparatus on the basis of a state in which the accel drive function is turned on or off (Paragraphs 101-106). Regarding to Claim 4, Zhou teaches the method, wherein the controlling of the driving of the travel apparatus includes controlling the driving of the travel apparatus on the basis of an output according to a manipulation state of a direction lever in the state in which the accel drive function is turned off (Paragraphs 101-106, since it is a vehicle, it would be known there is a lever, for example, a gear lever, to control a direction. In addition, based on the claimed language, the limitations only require at least a lever to control the operation of the vehicle. Therefore, the teachings would reflect the limitations under the broadest reasonable interpretation). Regarding to Claim 5, Zhou teaches the method, wherein the controlling of the driving of the travel apparatus includes controlling the driving of the travel apparatus on the basis of an output according to a manipulation state of a direction lever and an output of an accel pedal (14) in the state in which the accel drive function is turned on (Paragraphs 101-106, since it is a vehicle, it would be known there is a lever, for example, a gear lever, to control a direction. In addition, the paragraphs also teach an accelerate pedal. Therefore, the teachings would reflect the limitations under the broadest reasonable interpretation). Regarding to Claim 6, Zhou teaches a travel control apparatus for controlling a travel apparatus of an industrial vehicle, the travel control apparatus comprising: a travel speed detector configured to detect a travel speed on the basis of an output of a wheel speed sensor of the industrial vehicle (Paragraphs 101-106, it would be known there is a sensor to detect the speed, and the sensor can be a wheel sensor); a gradient detector configured to detect a gradient of a road surface on the basis of an output of an acceleration sensor of the industrial vehicle (Paragraphs 101-106); and a travel controller configured to set an accel drive function of the industrial vehicle to be turned on or off on the basis of the travel speed and the gradient and control driving of the travel apparatus on the basis of a state in which the accel drive function is turned on or off (Paragraphs 101-106). Regarding to Claim 9, Zhou teaches the travel control apparatus, wherein the travel controller controls the driving of the travel apparatus on the basis of an output according to a manipulation state of the direction lever of the industrial vehicle in a state in which the accel drive function is turned off (Paragraphs 101-106, since it is a vehicle, it would be known there is a lever, for example, a gear lever, to control a direction. In addition, based on the claimed language, the limitations only require at least a lever to control the operation of the vehicle. Therefore, the teachings would reflect the limitations under the broadest reasonable interpretation). Regarding to Claim 10, Zhou teaches the travel control apparatus, wherein the travel controller controls the driving of the travel apparatus on the basis of an output according to a manipulation state of the direction lever and an output of an accel pedal (14) of the industrial vehicle in a state in which the accel drive function is turned on (Paragraphs 101-106, since it is a vehicle, it would be known there is a lever, for example, a gear lever, to control a direction. In addition, the paragraphs also teach an accelerate pedal. Therefore, the teachings would reflect the limitations under the broadest reasonable interpretation). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YI-KAI WANG whose telephone number is (313)446-6613. The examiner can normally be reached Flexible. 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 5712721196. 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. /YI-KAI WANG/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3747
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 23, 2024
Application Filed
Nov 28, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102
Mar 31, 2026
Response Filed

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601317
LOW EMISSION ADSORBENT AND CANISTER SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12594993
VEHICLE CONTROL DEVICE, VEHICLE CONTROL METHOD, AND STORAGE MEDIUM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12590559
NACELLE INLET DUCT FOR A DUCTED FAN ENGINE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12583453
VEHICULAR TRAILERING ASSIST SYSTEM WITH DRIVER MONITORING AND GESTURE DETECTION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12585515
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR DISTRIBUTED SYSTEM STATE ESTIMATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
84%
Grant Probability
88%
With Interview (+4.6%)
1y 11m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 467 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month