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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement filed 10/25/2024 fails to comply with 37 CFR 1.98(a)(2), which requires a legible copy of each cited foreign patent document; each non-patent literature publication or that portion which caused it to be listed; and all other information or that portion which caused it to be listed. It has been placed in the application file, but the information referred to therein has not been considered. Specifically, no copy of Foreign Patent Document AU 2015276542 A1 has been supplied by Applicant.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because the unlabeled rectangular boxes shown in Figs. 1-4 and 9-11 of the drawings should be provided with descriptive text labels [e.g., see: MPEP 608.02(b)].
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) 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. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. 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.
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Objections
Claim 12 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 12 recites “by the processing circuitry detecting” in line 5, which appears to be a misstating of --by the processing circuitry, detecting--.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1-14 are 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 1 introduces “a standstill” in line 8; however, the claim previously introduces “a standstill” in line 5, and it is unclear whether the “standstill” introduced in line 9 is intended to be the same as or different from the “standstill” previously introduced in line 5. Thus, there is improper antecedent basis for the limitation in the claim. To overcome the rejection, one suggestion is to amend line 8 of claim 1 to instead recite --[[a]] the standstill--.
Claim 1 also introduces “a longitudinal speed” in line 9; however, the claim previously introduces “a longitudinal speed” in line 5, and it is unclear whether the “longitudinal speed” introduced in line 9 is intended to be the same as or different from the “longitudinal speed” previously introduced in line 5. Thus, there is improper antecedent basis for the limitation in the claim. To overcome the rejection, one suggestion is to amend line 9 of claim 1 to instead recite --[[a]] the longitudinal speed--.
Claim 1 refers to “the speed threshold” in line 9; however, the claim fails to previously introduce “a speed threshold,” such that it is unclear what exactly is meant by “the speed threshold” in line 9. Claim 1 does, however, previously introduce “a threshold” in line 6, and it is unclear whether the “speed threshold” referred to in line 9 is intended to be the same as or different from the “threshold” previously introduced in line 6. Thus, there is improper antecedent basis for the limitation in the claim. To overcome the rejection, one suggestion is to amend line 6 of claim 1 to instead recite --a speed threshold--.
Claim 1 recites “in response to detecting that the reverse gear is the selected or current gear of the towing vehicle unit and in response to the vehicle combination being detected to be at a standstill, or detected to be moving at a longitudinal speed below the speed threshold, trigger at least one self-propelled towed vehicle unit out of the set of towed vehicle units to apply a negative torque to wheels of the at least one self-propelled towed vehicle unit, thereby causing the at least one self-propelled towed vehicle unit to travel in a reverse travel direction” in lines 7-12; however, it is unclear what exactly is meant by “in response to detecting that the reverse gear is the selected or current gear of the towing vehicle unit and in response to the vehicle combination being detected to be at a standstill, or detected to be moving at a longitudinal speed below the speed threshold” in association with “trigger…,” as it is unclear whether “trigger…” is intended to be performed in response to “detecting that the reverse gear is the selected or current gear of the towing vehicle unit” and “the vehicle combination being detected to be at a standstill, or detected to be moving at a longitudinal speed below the speed threshold” separately or only in combination. In other words, because each of “detecting that the reverse gear is the selected or current gear of the towing vehicle unit” and “the vehicle combination being detected to be at a standstill, or detected to be moving at a longitudinal speed below the speed threshold” is preceded a separate instance of “in response to,” it is unclear whether trigger…” is intended to be performed in response to “detecting that the reverse gear is the selected or current gear of the towing vehicle unit” at times including when the condition “the vehicle combination being detected to be at a standstill, or detected to be moving at a longitudinal speed below the speed threshold” is not met, and it is unclear whether trigger…” is intended to be performed in response to “the vehicle combination being detected to be at a standstill, or detected to be moving at a longitudinal speed below the speed threshold” at times including when the condition “detecting that the reverse gear is the selected or current gear of the towing vehicle unit” is not met. Put differently, it is unclear whether trigger…” is intended to be only performed in response to both of conditions “detecting that the reverse gear is the selected or current gear of the towing vehicle unit” and “the vehicle combination being detected to be at a standstill, or detected to be moving at a longitudinal speed below the speed threshold” being simultaneously met.
Claims 2-8 are dependent from claim 1, and claim 9 fully incorporates claim 1, and claims 10 and 11 are dependent from claim 9, such that claims 2-11 also include the indefinite subject matter recited by claim 1 and are rejected for at least the same reasons that claim 1 is rejected.
Claim 12 introduces “a standstill” in line 8; however, the claim previously introduces “a standstill” in line 5, and it is unclear whether the “standstill” introduced in line 9 is intended to be the same as or different from the “standstill” previously introduced in line 5. Thus, there is improper antecedent basis for the limitation in the claim. To overcome the rejection, one suggestion is to amend line 8 of claim 12 to instead recite --[[a]] the standstill--.
Claim 12 also introduces “a longitudinal speed” in line 9; however, the claim previously introduces “a longitudinal speed” in line 6, and it is unclear whether the “longitudinal speed” introduced in line 9 is intended to be the same as or different from the “longitudinal speed” previously introduced in line 6. Thus, there is improper antecedent basis for the limitation in the claim. To overcome the rejection, one suggestion is to amend line 9 of claim 12 to instead recite --[[a]] the longitudinal speed--.
Claim 12 refers to “the speed threshold” in line 9; however, the claim fails to previously introduce “a speed threshold,” such that it is unclear what exactly is meant by “the speed threshold” in line 9. Claim 12 does, however, previously introduce “a threshold” in line 6, and it is unclear whether the “speed threshold” referred to in line 9 is intended to be the same as or different from the “threshold” previously introduced in line 6. Thus, there is improper antecedent basis for the limitation in the claim. To overcome the rejection, one suggestion is to amend line 6 of claim 12 to instead recite --a speed threshold--.
Claim 12 recites “in response to detecting that the reverse gear is the selected or current gear of the towing vehicle unit and in response to the vehicle combination being detected to be at a standstill, or detected to be moving at a longitudinal speed below the speed threshold, by the processing unit, triggering at least one self-propelled towed vehicle unit out of the set of towed vehicle units to apply a negative torque to wheels of the at least one self-propelled towed vehicle unit, thereby causing the at least one self-propelled towed vehicle unit to travel in a reverse travel direction” in lines 7-13; however, it is unclear what exactly is meant by “in response to detecting that the reverse gear is the selected or current gear of the towing vehicle unit and in response to the vehicle combination being detected to be at a standstill, or detected to be moving at a longitudinal speed below the speed threshold” in association with “triggering…,” as it is unclear whether “triggering…” is intended to be performed in response to “detecting that the reverse gear is the selected or current gear of the towing vehicle unit” and “the vehicle combination being detected to be at a standstill, or detected to be moving at a longitudinal speed below the speed threshold” separately or only in combination. In other words, because each of “detecting that the reverse gear is the selected or current gear of the towing vehicle unit” and “the vehicle combination being detected to be at a standstill, or detected to be moving at a longitudinal speed below the speed threshold” is preceded a separate instance of “in response to,” it is unclear whether triggering…” is intended to be performed in response to “detecting that the reverse gear is the selected or current gear of the towing vehicle unit” at times including when the condition “the vehicle combination being detected to be at a standstill, or detected to be moving at a longitudinal speed below the speed threshold” is not met, and it is unclear whether triggering…” is intended to be performed in response to “the vehicle combination being detected to be at a standstill, or detected to be moving at a longitudinal speed below the speed threshold” at times including when the condition “detecting that the reverse gear is the selected or current gear of the towing vehicle unit” is not met. Put differently, it is unclear whether triggering…” is intended to be only performed in response to both of conditions “detecting that the reverse gear is the selected or current gear of the towing vehicle unit” and “the vehicle combination being detected to be at a standstill, or detected to be moving at a longitudinal speed below the speed threshold” being simultaneously met.
Each of claims 13 and 14 fully incorporates claim 12, such that claims 13 and 14 also include the indefinite subject matter recited by claim 12 and are rejected for at least the same reasons that claim 12 is rejected.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claim does not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter.
Claim 13 recites “A computer program product comprising program code for performing, when executed by the processing circuitry, the method of claim 12.” A claim to nothing more than a computer program (e.g., software) is a claim that is directed to a product that does not have a physical or tangible form, and the broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim to a “computer program product” includes a non-statutory embodiment (e.g., see: MPEP 2106.03_I). Because claim 13 is directed to nothing more than a computer program (i.e., “program code”), claim 13 is not directed to any of the statutory categories. To overcome the rejection, one suggestion is to cancel claim 13 in view of related claim 14 reciting “A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium comprising instructions, which when executed by the processing circuitry, cause the processing circuitry to perform the method of claim 12.”
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.
Claims 1-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2022/0355860 to Rydström et al. (hereinafter: “Rydström”).
With respect to claim 1, Rydström teaches a computer system (e.g., 115, 210, 440, 460, 470 & 1000) comprising processing circuitry (e.g., 1010) configured to handle a motion of a vehicle combination (e.g., 800, via 110, 120, 130, 140 & 150 together) comprising a towing vehicle unit (110) and a set of towed vehicle units (e.g., 120, 130, 140 & 150) (as depicted by at least Figs. 1-6 & 8-11 and as discussed by at least ¶ 0029-0038, 0052 & 0062-0068 & 0070-0071), the processing circuitry is configured to: detect that a reverse gear is a selected or current gear of the towing vehicle unit [for example, as depicted by at least Figs. 8 & 9 and as discussed by at least ¶ 0013-0015, 0038-0039, 0050-0051, 0053-0054, 0056-0057, 0060 & 0063, the processing circuitry 1010 is structured to execute functions to assist reversal of the multi-trailer articulated vehicle 800 in a reversal operation by applying propulsion by the tractor 110 to reduce (or minimize) a coupling force at a tractor coupling point 810, such that it is implicit that the processing circuitry 1010 is structured to execute functions to “detect that a reverse gear is a […] current gear of the towing vehicle unit”; alternatively, for example, as depicted by at least Figs. 8 & 9 and as discussed by at least ¶ 0010-0011, 0013, 0053 & 0056-0057, the processing circuitry 1010 is structured to execute functions to obtain a user request, via a manual control input, for a reversal operation of the multi-trailer articulated vehicle 800, such that it is implicit that the processing circuitry 1010 is structured to execute functions to “detect that a reverse gear is a selected […] gear of the towing vehicle unit”; because detect that a reverse gear is a selected gear and detect that a reverse gear is a current gear are recited in the alternative, it is sufficient to address one of the claimed alternatives]; detect that the vehicle combination is at a standstill, or has a longitudinal speed below a threshold [for example, as depicted by at least Figs. 4, 6 & 8 and as discussed by at least ¶ 0037, 0044, 0046, 0050-0051 & 0057, the processing circuitry 1010 is structured to execute functions to detect that a longitudinal speed of the multi-trailer articulated vehicle 800 is less than a limit on vehicle velocity (e.g., “threshold”) associated with the reversal operation; alternatively, for example, as depicted by at least Figs. 4, 6 & 8 and as discussed by at least ¶ 0037, 0044, 0046, 0050-0051 & 0057, the processing circuitry 1010 is structured to execute functions to detect a longitudinal speed of the multi-trailer articulated vehicle 800 so as to necessarily detect that the multi-trailer articulated vehicle 800 has reached zero (e.g., “standstill”) during transitioning from a normal forward driving operation to the reversal operation; alternatively, for example, as depicted by at least Figs. 4, 6 & 8 and as discussed by at least ¶ 0037, 0044, 0046, 0050-0051 & 0057, the processing circuitry 1010 is structured to execute functions to detect a longitudinal speed of the multi-trailer articulated vehicle 800 so as to necessarily detect that the longitudinal speed of the multi-trailer articulated vehicle 800 is less than a maximum possible longitudinal speed (e.g., “threshold”) of the multi-trailer articulated vehicle 800; because detect that the vehicle combination is at a standstill and detect that the vehicle combination has a longitudinal speed below a threshold are recited in the alternative, it is sufficient to address one of the claimed alternatives]; and in response to detecting that the reverse gear is the selected or current gear of the towing vehicle unit and in response to the vehicle combination being detected to be at a standstill, or detected to be moving at a longitudinal speed below the speed threshold, trigger at least one self-propelled towed vehicle unit out of the set of towed vehicle units to apply a negative torque to wheels of the at least one self-propelled towed vehicle unit, thereby causing the at least one self-propelled towed vehicle unit to travel in a reverse travel direction [as depicted by at least Figs. 4-6, 8 & 9 and as discussed by at least ¶ 0037-0061, the processing circuitry 1010 is structured to execute functions to cause (e.g., “trigger”) an electric machine (EM) 410 of one of the trailer units 130 & 140 (of the trailer units 120, 130, 140 & 150) (e.g., “self-propelled towed vehicle unit”) to supply torque (e.g., “negative torque”) to wheels 430 of the one of the trailer units 130 & 140 so as to cause the one of the trailer units 130 & 140 to travel in a reverse direction, responsive to the longitudinal speed of the multi-trailer articulated vehicle 800 being detected to be less than the maximum possible longitudinal speed of the multi-trailer articulated vehicle 800 (such as responsive to the longitudinal speed of the multi-trailer articulated vehicle 800 being detected to be less than the limit on vehicle velocity associated with the reversal operation, or such as responsive to the longitudinal speed of the multi-trailer articulated vehicle 800 being detected to have reached zero during the transitioning from the normal forward driving operation to the reversal operation), and also responsive to the applying of the propulsion by the tractor 110 during the assisting reversal of the multi-trailer articulated vehicle 800 in the reversal operation].
With respect to claim 2, Rydström teaches the computer system of claim 1, wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to: obtain a status of a braking arrangement of the vehicle combination [for example, as discussed by at least ¶ 0038-0039, the processing circuitry 1010 is structured to execute functions to disengage brakes of the tractor 110 (e.g., “obtain a status of a braking arrangement”) prior to commencement of the reversal operation]; and trigger the at least one self-propelled towed vehicle unit out of the set of towed vehicle units to apply the respective negative torque based on the status of the braking arrangement [for example, as discussed by at least ¶ 0038-0039, the processing circuitry 1010 is structured to execute functions to cause the EM 410 of the one of the trailer units 130 & 140 to supply the torque to the wheels 430 of the one of the trailer units 130 & 140 so as to cause the one of the trailer units 130 & 140 to travel in the reverse direction based, in part, on the disengaged brakes of the tractor 110].
With respect to claim 3, Rydström teaches the computer system of claim 1, wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to: detect an acceleration request of the towing vehicle unit [for example, as depicted by at least Figs. 8 & 9 and as discussed by at least ¶ 0013-0015, 0038, 0050-0051, 0053-0054, 0056-0057, 0060 & 0063, the processing circuitry 1010 is structured to execute functions to obtain a request (e.g., “acceleration request”) for applying the propulsion by the tractor 110 to reduce (or minimize) the coupling force at the tractor coupling point 810 to assist reversal of the multi-trailer articulated vehicle 800 in the reversal operation], and in response to detecting the acceleration request, trigger the at least one self-propelled towed vehicle unit out of the set of towed vehicle units to reduce the applied negative torque [for example, as depicted by at least Figs. 8 & 9 and as discussed by at least ¶ 0013-0015, 0038, 0050-0051, 0053-0054, 0056-0057, 0060 & 0063, the processing circuitry 1010 is structured to execute functions to cause the EM 410 of the one of the trailer units 130 & 140 to, at least at times, supply reduced torque to the wheels 430 of the one of the trailer units 130 & 140 so as to cause the one of the trailer units 130 & 140 to travel in the reverse direction responsive to the applied propulsion by the tractor 110 to reduce (or minimize) the coupling force at the tractor coupling point 810 to assist reversal of the multi-trailer articulated vehicle 800 in the reversal operation responsive to the obtained request].
With respect to claim 4, Rydström teaches the computer system of claim 1, wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to trigger the at least one self-propelled towed vehicle unit out of the set of towed vehicle units to apply the negative torque by being configured to trigger the at least one self-propelled towed vehicle unit to apply the negative torque as a predefined function of time [for example, as discussed by at least ¶ 0037, 0044 & 0053, the processing circuitry 1010 is structured to execute functions to cause the EM 410 of the one of the trailer units 130 & 140 to supply the torque to the wheels 430 of the one of the trailer units 130 & 140 so as to cause the one of the trailer units 130 & 140 to travel in the reverse direction based, in part, on driving operations planned, with respect to a time horizon, by a vehicle motion management (VMM) function (e.g., “as a predefined function of time”); alternatively, for example, as discussed by at least ¶ 0037, 0044 & 0053, the processing circuitry 1010 is structured to execute functions to cause the EM 410 of the one of the trailer units 130 & 140 to supply the torque to the wheels 430 of the one of the trailer units 130 & 140 so as to cause the one of the trailer units 130 & 140 to travel in the reverse direction as a function of time (e.g., “as a predefined function of time”)].
With respect to claim 5, Rydström teaches the computer system of claim 1, wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to trigger the at least one self-propelled towed vehicle unit out of the set of towed vehicle units to apply the negative torque based on a predefined speed limit [for example, as discussed by at least ¶ 0057, the processing circuitry 1010 is structured to execute functions to cause the EM 410 of the one of the trailer units 130 & 140 to supply the torque to the wheels 430 of the one of the trailer units 130 & 140 so as to cause the one of the trailer units 130 & 140 to travel in the reverse direction based, in part, on the limit on vehicle velocity (e.g., “predefined speed limit”)].
With respect to claim 6, Rydström teaches the computer system of claim 1, wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to: obtain an input from a user interface, the input being indicative to apply a negative torque to the at least one self-propelled towed vehicle unit [for example, as discussed by at least ¶ 0010-0011, 0013, 0053 & 0056-0057, the processing circuitry 1010 is structured to execute functions to obtain a manual control input (e.g., “input”) from a driver of the multi-trailer articulated vehicle 800, via a display (e.g., “user interface”), to request the reversal operation; alternatively, for example, as discussed by at least ¶ 0010-0011, 0013, 0053 & 0056-0057, the processing circuitry 1010 is structured to execute functions to obtain a manual control input (e.g., “input”) from a driver of the multi-trailer articulated vehicle 800, via a steering wheel (e.g., “user interface”), to request the reversal operation; alternatively, for example, as discussed by at least ¶ 0010-0011, 0013, 0053 & 0056-0057, the processing circuitry 1010 is structured to execute functions to obtain a manual control input (e.g., “input”) from a driver of the multi-trailer articulated vehicle 800 or an external operator, via a remote-control device (e.g., “user interface”), to request the reversal operation]; and trigger the at least one self-propelled towed vehicle unit out of the set of towed vehicle units to apply the respective negative torque in response to the input being detected [for example, as discussed by at least ¶ 0010-0011, 0013, 0053 & 0056-0057, the processing circuitry 1010 is structured to execute functions to cause the EM 410 of the one of the trailer units 130 & 140 to supply the torque to the wheels 430 of the one of the trailer units 130 & 140 so as to cause the one of the trailer units 130 & 140 to travel in the reverse direction responsive to the manual control input].
With respect to claim 7, Rydström teaches the computer system of claim 1, wherein at least one passive towed vehicle unit out of the set of towed vehicle units is attached to the at least one self-propelled towed vehicle unit [for example, as depicted by at least Figs. 8 & 9 and as discussed by at least ¶ 0037-0061, another one of the trailer units 120, 130, 140 & 150 operates, at least at times, in a passive towed configuration (e.g., “passive towed vehicle unit”) and is attached to the one of the trailer units 130 & 140], and wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to: obtain a first angle between the at least one self-propelled towed vehicle unit and the at least one passive towed vehicle unit [for example, as depicted by at least Figs. 3, 6, 8 & 9 and as discussed by at least ¶ 0035, 0044 & 0060, the processing circuitry 1010 is structured to execute functions to obtain an articulation angle (e.g., “first angle”) between the one of the trailer units 130 & 140 and the another one of the trailer units 120, 130, 140 & 150]; and trigger the at least one self-propelled towed vehicle unit to apply the negative torque in response to the first angle being within a predefined interval [for example, as depicted by at least Figs. 3, 6, 8 & 9 and as discussed by at least ¶ 0035, 0044 & 0060, the processing circuitry 1010 is structured to execute functions to cause the EM 410 of the one of the trailer units 130 & 140 to supply the torque to the wheels 430 of the one of the trailer units 130 & 140 so as to cause the one of the trailer units 130 & 140 to travel in the reverse direction responsive to the obtained articulation angle being below a given magnitude (e.g., “within a predefined interval”)].
With respect to claim 8, Rydström teaches the computer system of claim 1, wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to: obtain a plurality of angles comprising respective angles between one or more vehicle units out of the set of towed vehicle units arranged to be pushed by the at least one self-propelled towed vehicle unit when applying the negative torque [for example, as depicted by at least Figs. 3, 6, 8 & 9 and as discussed by at least ¶ 0035, 0044 & 0060, the processing circuitry 1010 is structured to execute functions to obtain respective articulation angles (e.g., “plurality of angles”) between each adjacent pair of the tractor 110, the first trailer unit 120, and the second trailer unit 130 at times including during the reversal operation]; and trigger the at least one self-propelled towed vehicle unit to apply the negative torque based on the plurality of angles [for example, as depicted by at least Figs. 3, 6, 8 & 9 and as discussed by at least ¶ 0035, 0044 & 0060, the processing circuitry 1010 is structured to execute functions to cause the EM 410 of the one of the trailer units 130 & 140 to supply the torque to the wheels 430 of the one of the trailer units 130 & 140 so as to cause the one of the trailer units 130 & 140 to travel in the reverse direction based, in part, on the obtained articulation angles].
With respect to claim 9, Rydström teaches a vehicle combination comprising a towing vehicle unit and a set of towed vehicle units, wherein the set of towed vehicle units comprises at least one self-propelled towed vehicle unit, and wherein the vehicle combination comprises the computer system of claim 1 (as discussed in detail above with respect to at least claim 1).
With respect to claim 10, Rydström teaches the vehicle combination of claim 9, wherein the at least one self-propelled towed vehicle unit is arranged at a rear-most position of the vehicle combination (as depicted by at least Fig. 8 and as discussed by at least ¶ 0031 & 0052).
With respect to claim 11, Rydström teaches the vehicle combination of claim 9, wherein the at least one self-propelled towed vehicle unit comprises a self-propelled dolly coupled with a passive towed vehicle unit, wherein the passive towed vehicle unit is arranged at a rear-most position of the vehicle combination (as depicted by at least Fig. 8 and as discussed by at least ¶ 0031 & 0052).
With respect to claim 12, Rydström teaches a computer-implemented method for handling a motion of a vehicle combination comprising a towing vehicle unit and a set of towed vehicle units, the method comprising: by processing circuitry of a computer system, detecting that a reverse gear is a selected or current gear of the towing vehicle unit; by the processing circuitry detecting that the vehicle combination is at a standstill, or has a longitudinal speed below a threshold; and in response to detecting that the reverse gear is the selected or current gear of the towing vehicle unit and in response to the vehicle combination being detected to be at a standstill, or detected to be moving at a longitudinal speed below the speed threshold, by the processing circuitry, triggering at least one self-propelled towed vehicle unit out of the set of towed vehicle units to apply a negative torque to wheels of the at least one self-propelled towed vehicle unit, thereby causing the at least one self-propelled towed vehicle unit to travel in a reverse travel direction (as discussed in detail above with respect to at least claim 1).
With respect to claim 13, Rydström teaches a computer program product comprising program code for performing, when executed by the processing circuitry, the method of claim 12 (as discussed in detail above with respect to at least claims 1 and 12).
With respect to claim 14, Rydström teaches a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium comprising instructions, which when executed by the processing circuitry, cause the processing circuitry to perform the method of claim 12 (as discussed in detail above with respect to at least claims 1, 12, and 13).
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rydström in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2012/0245796 to Yu et al. (hereinafter: “Yu”), in the alternative to under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Rydström.
With respect to claim 1, Rydström, as discussed in detail above, teaches each and every limitation of the claimed “computer system” so as to anticipate the claim under a broadest reasonable interpretation. However, in such a case where Applicant is able to persuasively argue that Rydström does not fully teach that the processing circuitry is configured to detect that the reverse gear is the selected or current gear of the towing vehicle unit and/or in such a case where Rydström is not interpreted or relied upon to teach that the processing circuitry is configured to detect that the reverse gear is the selected or current gear of the towing vehicle unit, it is also noted that Yu teaches an analogous computer system (apparent from at least Figs. 2 & 3) including processing circuitry configured to detect that a reverse gear is a selected or current gear of a towing vehicle unit (200) (as discussed by at least ¶ 0009-0010 & 0030), and trigger a self-propelled towed vehicle unit (201) to apply a negative torque to wheels of the self-propelled towed vehicle unit, thereby causing the self-propelled towed vehicle unit to travel in a reverse travel direction, in response to detecting that the reverse gear is the selected or current gear of the towing vehicle unit (as discussed by at least ¶ 0009-0010, 0022-0023, 0025-0026, 0028-0030 & 0034).
Therefore, even if Rydström is not interpreted or relied upon to teach the processing circuitry is configured to detect that the reverse gear is the selected or current gear of the towing vehicle unit, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have modified the computer system of Rydström with the teachings of Yu, if even necessary, such that the processing circuitry is further configured to detect that the reverse gear is the selected or current gear of the towing vehicle unit to beneficially ensure that a direction of propulsion by the tractor 110 has been switched from a forward travel direction prior to initiation of the reversal operation of the multi-trailer articulated vehicle 800. Also, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have modified the computer system of Rydström with the teachings of Yu, if even necessary, such that the processing circuitry is further configured to trigger the at least one self-propelled towed vehicle unit to apply the negative torque to the wheels of the at least one self-propelled towed vehicle unit, thereby causing the at least one self-propelled towed vehicle unit to travel in the reverse travel direction, in response to detecting that the reverse gear is the selected or current gear of the towing vehicle unit, to beneficially ensure that the direction of propulsion by the tractor 110 during the reversal operation has been switched from the forward travel direction when the reversal operation of the multi-trailer articulated vehicle 800 is initiated.
Therefore, Rydström modified supra further teaches the computer systems of claims 2-8, the vehicle combinations of claims 9-11, the computer-implemented method of claim 12, the computer program product of claim 13, and the non-transitory, computer-readable storage medium of claim 14 for at least the same reasons, as discussed in detail above, that: (1) Rydström modified supra teaches the computer system of claim 1, and (2) Rydström alone teaches each of the additional elements of the computer systems of claims 2-8, the vehicle combinations of claims 9-11, the computer-implemented method of claim 12, the computer program product of claim 13, and the non-transitory, computer-readable storage medium of claim 14.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure and is provided on the attached PTO-892 Notice of References Cited form.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN ZALESKAS whose telephone number is (571)272-5958. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00 AM - 4:00 PM.
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, Logan Kraft can be reached at 571-270-5065. 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.
/JOHN M ZALESKAS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3747