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 § 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) 1-7, 9-14, and 16-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the Lavoie reference (US Patent Publication No. 2019/0009815) and the Futamura reference (US Patent Publication No. 2009/0005946).
4. Regarding claim 1, the Lavoie reference discloses:
a dynamic information estimation device (FIG. 1), comprising:
a vehicle information receiver (10) receiving host vehicle information using one or more sensors (17);
a trailer information obtainer (28) obtaining trailer information using a sensor (25) when host vehicle yaw rate information included in the host vehicle information (17) exceeds [[and]] a yaw rate threshold (60) [See US Patent Application No. 2009/0005946 Paragraph 0008—showing this concept is well known in the prior art and is in the same field of endeavor];
an angle calculator [Paragraph 0077] determining whether distance information between a host vehicle and a trailer included in the trailer information is included in a preset range [Paragraph 0077—D] and, if it is determined that the distance information is included in the preset range [Paragraph 0076—implicit that if the trailer length affects gains there would be a
trailer length that would render the operation impossible], calculating a trailer hitch angle [Paragraph 0077];
a storage unit (86) mapping the host vehicle information, the trailer information, and the trailer hitch angle and storing as a set (FIG. 2); and
a calculator (FIG. 10) calculating a trailer yaw rate (Step 135) and a trailer length (Step 136) [Paragraph 0096] using the set (FIG. 2—132) and an optimization algorithm if a number of sets meets a number condition (this feature holds no patentable weight because if the number of sets fails to meet a number condition the optimization algoritm is not utilizes and therefore this feature is not necessary to its operation).
The Lavoie reference discloses the invention as essentially claimed. However, the Lavoie reference fails to disclose using a radar sensor. The examiner takes Official Notice that it is well known in the art of control systems for driving assist to use a radar sensor in a vehicle-trailer combination during operation for the purpose of reducing complexity of the system. See US Patent Publication No. 2017/0363727 Paragraph 0012 for one example.
5. Regarding claim 2, the Lavoie reference further discloses:
wherein the host vehicle information includes at least one of host vehicle velocity information (58), host vehicle yaw rate information (60), and distance information between the host vehicle and a hitch.
6. Regarding claim 3, the Lavoie reference further discloses:
wherein the trailer information obtainer (28) determines that the trailer information is required if it is determined that host vehicle yaw rate information included in the host vehicle information exceeds the yaw rate threshold (inherent).
7. Regarding claim 4, the Lavoie reference further discloses:
wherein the trailer information includes at least one of trailer velocity information (23), trailer angle information, and distance information between the vehicle and the trailer.
8. Regarding claim 5, the Lavoie reference further discloses:
wherein the optimization algorithm is a gradient descent algorithm (no weight, but those algorithms are well known).
9. Regarding claim 6, the Lavoie reference further discloses:
wherein the trailer information obtainer (28) re-receives the trailer information (FIG. 10—implicit that the values would have to be updated as the vehicle moves), and
wherein the calculator (FIG. 10) evaluates the trailer length using the re-received trailer information.
10. Regarding claim 7, the Lavoie reference further discloses:
wherein the calculator evaluates the trailer length by comparing the re-received trailer information with the trailer length [Paragraph 0115].
11. Regarding claim 9, the Lavoie reference discloses:
a dynamic information estimation method, comprising:
receiving host vehicle information using one or more sensors (17);
obtaining trailer information using a sensor (25) when host vehicle yaw rate information included in the host vehicle information (17) exceeds [[and]] a yaw rate threshold (60) [See US Patent Application No. 2009/0005946 Paragraph 0008—showing this concept is well known in the prior art and is in the same field of endeavor];
determining whether distance information between a host vehicle and a trailer included in the trailer information is included in a preset range [Paragraph 0077—D] and, if it is determined that the distance information is included in the preset range [Paragraph 0076—implicit that if the trailer length affects gains there would be a trailer length that would render the operation impossible], calculating a trailer hitch angle [Paragraph 0077];
mapping the host vehicle information, the trailer information, and the trailer hitch angle and storing as a set (86) (FIG. 2); and
calculating a trailer yaw rate (Step 135) and a trailer length (Step 136) [Paragraph 0096] using the set (FIG. 2—132) and an optimization algorithm if a number of sets meets a number condition (this feature holds no patentable weight because if the number of sets fails to meet a
number condition the optimization algorithm is not utilizes and therefore this feature is not necessary to its operation).
The Lavoie reference discloses the invention as essentially claimed. However, the Lavoie reference fails to disclose using a radar sensor. The examiner takes Official Notice that it is well known in the art of control systems for driving assist to use a radar sensor in a vehicle-trailer combination during operation for the purpose of reducing complexity of the system. See US Patent Publication No. 2017/0363727 Paragraph 0012 for one example.
12. Regarding claim 10, the Lavoie reference further discloses:
wherein the host vehicle information includes at least one of host vehicle velocity information (58), host vehicle yaw rate information (60), and distance information between the host vehicle and a hitch.
13. Regarding claim 11, the Lavoie reference further discloses:
wherein obtaining the trailer information (28) determines that the trailer information is required if it is determined that host vehicle yaw rate information included in the host vehicle information exceeds the yaw rate threshold (inherent).
14. Regarding claim 12, the Lavoie reference further discloses:
wherein the trailer information includes at least one of trailer velocity information (23), trailer angle information, and distance information between the vehicle and the trailer.
15. Regarding claim 13, the Lavoie reference further discloses:
wherein the optimization algorithm is a gradient descent algorithm (no weight, but those algorithms are well known).
16. Regarding claim 14, the Lavoie reference further discloses:
wherein the calculating (FIG. 10) evaluates the trailer length using the re-received trailer information.
17. Regarding claim 16, the Lavoie reference discloses:
a computer-readable, non-transitory recording medium storing a computer-executable program instruction executed by a processor to operate a computer system (10), comprising: receiving host vehicle information using one or more sensors (17);
obtaining trailer information using a sensor (25) when host vehicle yaw rate information included in the host vehicle information (17) exceeds [[and]] a yaw rate threshold (60) [See US Patent Application No. 2009/0005946 Paragraph 0008—showing this concept is well known in the prior art and is in the same field of endeavor];
determining whether distance information between a host vehicle and a trailer included in the trailer information is included in a preset range [Paragraph 0077—D] and, if it is determined that the distance information is included in the preset range [Paragraph 0076—implicit that if the trailer length affects gains there would be a trailer length that would render the operation impossible], calculating a trailer hitch angle [Paragraph 0077];
mapping the host vehicle information, the trailer information, and the trailer hitch angle and storing as a set (86) (FIG. 2); and
calculating a trailer yaw rate (Step 135) and a trailer length (Step 136) [Paragraph 0096] using the set (FIG. 2—132) and an optimization algorithm if a number of sets meets a number condition (this feature holds no patentable weight because if the number of sets fails to meet a number condition the optimization algorithm is not utilizes and therefore this feature is not necessary to its operation).
The Lavoie reference discloses the invention as essentially claimed. However, the Lavoie reference fails to disclose using a radar sensor. The examiner takes Official Notice that it is well known in the art of control systems for driving assist to use a radar sensor in a vehicle-
trailer combination during operation for the purpose of reducing complexity of the system. See US Patent Publication No. 2017/0363727 Paragraph 0012 for one example.
18. Regarding claim 17, the Lavoie reference further discloses:
wherein the host vehicle information includes at least one of host vehicle velocity information (58), host vehicle yaw rate information (60), and distance information between the host vehicle and a hitch.
19. Regarding claim 18, the Lavoie reference further discloses: wherein obtaining the trailer information (28) determines that the trailer information is required if it is determined that host vehicle yaw rate information included in the host vehicle information exceeds the yaw rate threshold (inherent).
20. Regarding claim 19, the Lavoie reference further discloses:
wherein the trailer information includes at least one of trailer velocity information (23), trailer angle information, and distance information between the vehicle and the trailer.
21. Regarding claim 20, the Lavoie reference further discloses:
wherein the optimization algorithm is a gradient descent algorithm (no weight, but those algorithms are well known).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8 and 15 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.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed January 26, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The cited additional reference makes clear, as do many references, that measuring a yaw rate with a sensor and then using that measured value to exceed a threshold was a well-known practice in the prior art for trailer control. Accordingly, the claims are finally rejected.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHARLES J BRAUCH whose telephone number is (313)446-6511. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00 AM to 6 PM.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
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.
/CHARLES JOSEPH BRAUCH/
Examiner
Art Unit 3747
/LONG T TRAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3747