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 § 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 1-4, 8-14, 16-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kim (US2024/0149939 A1).
Regarding to Claim 1, Kim teaches a device for controlling an electric power steering system, the device comprising:
a steering controller configured to control a motor operably connected to a steering wheel (Fig. 2, Part 20, Paragraphs 61-64); and
a wake-up circuit configured to, in an ignition-off state of a vehicle, wake up the steering controller using back electromotive force generated by rotation of the motor caused by an external force (Paragraph 85, 90, teaches a wake-up process and a mode which would occur an electromotive force by the external force. Fig. 5, Paragraphs 106-115, especially Step S140 would reflect the limitations under the broadest reasonable interpretation),
wherein the steering controller is configured to, after being woken up, control to apply a reaction torque to the motor to suppress the rotation of the motor caused by the external force (Paragraph 90 teaches a reaction force would reflect the limitations, and Fig. 5, Paragraphs 106-115, especially Step S140, Paragraphs 109, 110 would reflect the operation).
Regarding to Claim 2, Kim teaches the device, wherein the steering controller is configured to, after being woken up, determine whether the vehicle is a non-driving state based on vehicle status information received from a sensor, and control to apply the reaction torque to the motor only when the vehicle is in the non-driving state (Fig. 5, Paragraphs 106-115, Paragraph 85, the examiner considered when in a getting-off mode, the operation would reflect the limitations under the broadest reasonable interpretation).
Regarding to Claim 3, Kim teaches the device, wherein the vehicle status information comprises at least one of vehicle ignition information, vehicle speed information, vehicle door lock information, vehicle door open information, driver boarding information, seat belt fastening information, or theft alarm function activation information (Fig. 5, Paragraphs 106-115, Paragraph 85).
Regarding to Claim 4, Kim teaches the device, wherein the steering controller comprises:
a regulator configured to regulate a voltage from a power supply (Figs. 3, 4, Paragraphs 81-84);
an inverter configured to supply control current to windings of the motor (Figs. 3, 4, Paragraphs 81-84);
a gate driver configured to control the inverter (Figs. 3, 4, Paragraphs 81-84); and
a micro-control unit (MCU) configured to be driven by a driving voltage supplied from the regulator and control the gate driver (Figs. 3, 4, Paragraphs 81-84).
Regarding to Claim 8, Kim teaches the device, wherein:
the motor is a reaction motor connected to the steering wheel (Fig. 2, Part 500), and
the electric power steering system includes a steer-by-wire steering system which comprises an upper device including the reaction motor connected to the steering wheel, and a lower device not mechanically connected to the upper device and including a steering driving motor connected to a wheel of the vehicle (Fig. 2, Paragraphs 53-60).
Regarding to Claim 9, Kim teaches the device, wherein the reaction torque is a torque for rotating the motor in a direction opposite to a direction of the rotation of the motor caused by the external force (Paragraphs 72, 106-115, since the reaction force would be used to restrict the rotation of the motor, it would be known the direction of the reaction force is opposite to the direction of the external force).
Regarding to Claim 10, Kim teaches the device, wherein the steering controller configured to, after being woken up, control to provide the reaction torque to the motor for a holding time and then turn off or enter a sleep mode after the holding time (Fig. 5, Paragraphs 106-115, the examiner considered when in the getting-off mode, the operation would reflect the limitation under the broadest reasonable interpretation).
Regarding to Claim 11, Kim teaches the device, wherein the holding time is set to a time period of 2 to 5 seconds (Paragraphs 106-115).
Regarding to Claim 12, Kim teaches a method for controlling an electric power steering system, the method comprising:
waking up, by a wake-up circuit, a steering controller using back electromotive force generated by rotation of a motor caused by an external force (Paragraph 85, 90, teaches a wake-up process and a mode which would occur an electromotive force by the external force. Fig. 5, Paragraphs 106-115, especially Step S140 would reflect the limitations under the broadest reasonable interpretation), the motor operably connected to a steering wheel (Fig. 2, Part 500); and
after the steering controller is woken by the wake-up circuit, controlling, by the steering controller, to apply a reaction torque to the motor to suppress the rotation of the motor caused by the external force (Paragraph 90 teaches a reaction force would reflect the limitations, and Fig. 5, Paragraphs 106-115, especially Step S140, Paragraphs 109, 110 would reflect the operation).
Regarding to Claim 13, Kim teaches the method, further comprising, after the steering controller is woken by the wake-up circuit, determining whether a vehicle is in a non-driving state based on vehicle status information received from a sensor (Fig. 5, Paragraphs 106-115, Paragraph 85, the examiner considered when in a getting-off mode, the operation would reflect the limitations under the broadest reasonable interpretation),
wherein the controlling to apply the reaction torque to the motor is performed only when the vehicle is in the non-driving state (Fig. 5, Paragraphs 106-115, Paragraph 85, the examiner considered when in a getting-off mode, the operation would reflect the limitations under the broadest reasonable interpretation).
Regarding to Claim 16, Kim teaches an electric power steering system comprising:
a motor operably connected to a steering wheel of a vehicle (Fig. 2, Part 500);
a steering controller configured to control rotation of the motor (Fig. 2, Paragraphs 53-60); and
a wake-up circuit configured to, in an ignition-off state of a vehicle, wake up the steering controller using back electromotive force generated by rotation of the motor caused by an external force (Paragraph 85, 90, teaches a wake-up process and a mode which would occur an electromotive force by the external force. Fig. 5, Paragraphs 106-115, especially Step S140 would reflect the limitations under the broadest reasonable interpretation),
wherein the steering controller is configured to, after being woken up, control to apply a reaction torque to the motor to suppress the rotation of the motor caused by the external force (Paragraph 90 teaches a reaction force would reflect the limitations, and Fig. 5, Paragraphs 106-115, especially Step S140, Paragraphs 109, 110 would reflect the operation).
Regarding to Claim 17, Kim teaches the electric power steering system, wherein the steering controller is configured to, after being woken up, determine whether the vehicle is in a non-driving state based on vehicle status information received from a sensor, and control to apply the reaction torque to the motor only when the vehicle is in the non-driving state (Fig. 5, Paragraphs 106-115, Paragraph 85, the examiner considered when in a getting-off mode, the operation would reflect the limitations under the broadest reasonable interpretation),
wherein the vehicle status information comprises at least one of vehicle ignition information, vehicle speed information, vehicle door lock information, vehicle door open information, driver boarding information, seat belt fastening information, or theft alarm function activation information (Fig. 5, Paragraphs 106-115, Paragraph 85).
Regarding to Claim 18, Kim teaches the electric power steering system, wherein:
the motor is a reaction motor connected to the steering wheel (Fig. 2), and
the electric power steering system includes a steer-by-wire steering system which comprises an upper device including the reaction motor connected to the steering wheel, and a lower device not mechanically connected to the upper device and including a steering driving motor connected to a wheel of the vehicle (Fig. 2, Paragraphs 53-60).
Regarding to Claim 19, Kim teaches the electric power steering system, wherein the steering controller comprises:
a regulator configured to regulate a voltage from a power supply (Figs. 3, 4, Paragraphs 81-84);
an inverter configured to supply control current to windings of the reaction motor (Figs. 3, 4, Paragraphs 81-84);
a gate driver configured to control the inverter (Figs. 3, 4, Paragraphs 81-84); and
a micro-control unit (MCU) configured to be driven by a driving voltage supplied from the regulator and control the gate driver (Figs. 3, 4, Paragraphs 81-84).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 5-7, 15, 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (US2024/0149939 A1) in view of Terdy (US2019/0002013 A1).
Regarding to Claim 5, Kim fails to explicitly disclose, but Terdy teaches a device, wherein the wake-up circuit comprises:
a rectifier circuit configured to rectify the back electromotive force and output a direct current (DC) output voltage; and
a switch circuit configured to enable the regulator according to the DC output voltage of the rectifier circuit [Terdy teaches a circuit comprises certain elements to do certain operation to help to smooth out transients (Terdy, Paragraph 3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Kim to incorporate the teachings of Terdy to design a circuit with certain elements to do certain operation in order to help to smooth out transients (Terdy, Paragraph 3).
Regarding to Claim 6, Kim in view of Terdy teaches the modified device, wherein the rectifier circuit is configured to rectify a sinusoidal back electromotive force generated during the rotation of the motor caused by the external force into a DC voltage to output the output DC voltage (Terdy, Fig. 3, and applying the teachings to Kim, Figs. 3, 4).
Regarding to Claim 7, Kim in view of Terdy teaches the modified device, wherein the switch circuit comprises a first switch unit configured to be turned on in response to the DC output voltage, and a second switch unit configured to be turned on in response to turning on the first switching unit and input a wake-up signal by the voltage of the power supply to an enable terminal of the regulator (Terdy, Fig. 3, and applying the teachings to Kim, Figs. 3, 4 would reflect the limitations under the broadest reasonable interpretation).
Retarding to Claim 15, Kim fails to explicitly disclose, but Terdy teaches a method, wherein the waking up of the steering controller comprises:
rectifying a sinusoidal back electromotive force generated during the rotation of the motor caused by the external force into a direct current voltage to output an output voltage; and
after a switch circuit is turned on, inputting, by the switch circuit, a wake-up signal by a voltage of a power supply to an enable terminal of a regulator included in the steering controller [Terdy teaches a circuit comprises certain elements to do certain operation to help to smooth out transients (Terdy, Paragraph 3). When applying the teachings of Terdy, Paragraph 3 to Kim, Figs. 3-5, the examiner considered the references would reflect the limitations under the broadest reasonable interpretation.]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Kim to incorporate the teachings of Terdy to design a circuit with certain elements to do certain operation in order to help to smooth out transients (Terdy, Paragraph 3).
Regarding to Claim 20, Kim fails to explicitly disclose, but Terdy teaches an electric power steering system, wherein the wake-up circuit comprises:
a rectifier circuit configured to rectify the back electromotive force and output a direct current (DC) output voltage; and
a switch circuit configured to enable the regulator according to the DC output voltage of the rectifier circuit,
wherein the switch circuit comprises a first switch unit configured to be turned on in response to the DC output voltage, and a second switch unit configured to be turned on in response to turning on the first switch unit and input a wake-up signal by the voltage of the power supply to an enable terminal of the regulator [Terdy teaches a circuit comprises certain elements to do certain operation to help to smooth out transients (Terdy, Paragraph 3).]
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Suzuki (US2016/0111988 A1) teaches a steering system comprises a lock control.
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