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 .
Status of Claims
Claims 1-6 and 8-13 are rejected
Claims 7 and 14 are objected to
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) 1, 3, 5, 8 and 11-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Ballard et al (US PUB 20110010269, hereinafter Ballard).
Regarding Claim 1, Ballard discloses a vehicle management system to be applied to a battery electric vehicle that includes an electric motor as a drive source (see at least the abstract, [0002] and figure 1), the vehicle management system comprising one or more processors (e.g. a processor 202) configured to: generate a pseudo engine sound based on a driving state of the battery electric vehicle (e.g. pseudo engine sound is generated based on RPM, vehicle speed or acceleration/deceleration), output the pseudo engine sound from a speaker (e.g. speakers 112) mounted on the battery electric vehicle (see figures 2 and 4-5); generate the pseudo engine sound using a sound source corresponding to a selected vehicle type selected from among a plurality of engine vehicle types (e.g. a driver select sound of a desired vehicle type from among a plurality of vehicle types), (see item 302, figure 3); and when a user makes a tentative designation input to tentatively designate the selected vehicle type while the battery electric vehicle is stationary, output a sample sound for an engine vehicle type corresponding to the tentative designation input in a predetermined output form from the speaker (e.g. the user can tentatively preview one or more selected sound of chosen vehicle type while the vehicle is not in motion by utilizing the preview button 306 in figure 3; and speakers 112 or 114 are designated to output a sample sound for the selected vehicle), (see Ballard, [0015], [0040]-[0041], [0043]-[0045], [0056]-[0057], and [0062]-[0063], also figures 1, 3-5 and 11).
Regarding Claim 3, Ballard discloses the vehicle management system according to claim 1, wherein: the driving state of the battery electric vehicle includes an operation state of a manual driving element of the battery electric vehicle (e.g. manual driving elements 300, 302, 306), (see figure 3); and the one or more processors are configured to stop outputting the sample sound when the manual driving element is operated while the sample sound is being output from the speaker (e.g. deselection of preview 306 will stop the outputting of a currently playing sample sound from speakers 112 or 114), (see Ballard, [0041], and figure 3).
Regarding Claim 5, Ballard discloses the vehicle management system according to claim 1, wherein the one or more processors are configured to: accept a change input to change a tone of the sample sound from the user while the sample sound is being output from the speaker; adjust the tone of the sample sound according to the change input when the change input is made; and output the pseudo engine sound so as to reflect an adjustment of the sample sound when the engine vehicle type corresponding to the tentative designation input is determined as the selected vehicle type (e.g. the user can input an adjustment to a pre-recorded selected sound while the sound is being played by the speakers 112 or 114 in such a that satisfies particular user’s listening desire or preference), (see Ballard, [0038] and [0062], also figures 3 and 11).
Regarding Claim 8, Ballard discloses the vehicle management system according to claim 1, wherein the battery electric vehicle includes a manual mode in which driving characteristics of a manual transmission vehicle are simulated (see Ballard, [0048] and figure 7).
Regarding Claim 11, Ballard discloses a battery electric vehicle comprising an electric motor as a drive source (see at least the abstract, [0002], and figure 1), comprising: an electric motor that is used as a drive source; and one or more processors (e.g. a processor 202) configured to generate a pseudo engine sound based on a driving state of the battery electric vehicle, output the pseudo engine sound from a speaker (e.g. speakers 112) mounted on the battery electric vehicle (see figures 2 and 4-5); generate the pseudo engine sound using a sound source corresponding to a selected vehicle type selected from among a plurality of engine vehicle types, (e.g. a driver select sound of a desired vehicle type from among a plurality of vehicle types), (see item 302, figure 3); and when a user makes a tentative designation input to tentatively designate the selected vehicle type while the battery electric vehicle is stationary, output a sample sound for an engine vehicle type corresponding to the tentative designation input in a predetermined output form from the speaker (e.g. the user can tentatively preview one or more selected sound of chosen vehicle type while the vehicle is not in motion by utilizing the preview button 306 in figure 3; and speakers 112 or 114 are designated to output a sample sound for the selected vehicle), (see Ballard, [0015], [0040]-[0041], [0043]-[0045], [0056]-[0057], and [0062]-[0063], also figures 1, 3-5 and 11).
Regarding Claim 12, Ballard discloses the battery electric vehicle according to claim 11, wherein the one or more processors are configured to: accept a change input to change a tone of the sample sound from the user while the sample sound is being output from the speaker; adjust the tone of the sample sound according to the change input when the change input is made; and output the pseudo engine sound so as to reflect an adjustment of the sample sound when the engine vehicle type corresponding to the tentative designation input is determined as the selected vehicle type (e.g. the user can input an adjustment to a pre-recorded selected sound while the sound is being played by the speakers 112 or 114 in such a that satisfies particular user’s listening desire or preference), (see Ballard, [0038] and [0062], also figures 3 and 11).
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.
Claim(s) 2, 4, 6, 9-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ballard as applied to Claim 1 above in view of Vangelov et al (US PUB 20210053487, hereinafter Vangelov).
Regarding Claim 2, Ballard discloses the vehicle management system according to claim 1, but fails to explicitly disclose wherein the sample sound is an engine revving sound in a predetermined engine rotational speed range.
However Vangelov in the same field of endeavor teaches that it is well known in the art to generate a sample sound in a battery electric vehicle, wherein the sample sound is an engine revving sound in a predetermined engine rotational speed range as demonstrated in [0022] and figures 1-2. Therefore, it would have been obvious to any person having an ordinary skill in the art to incorporate an engine revving sound as the sample sound in order to satisfy a desired choice.
Regarding Claim 4, Ballard as modified by Vangelov discloses the vehicle management system according to claim 3, wherein the manual driving element includes an accelerator pedal (see Vangelov, [0022] and [0045], also figures 1-2).
Regarding Claim 6, Ballard as modified by Vangelov discloses the vehicle management system according to claim 1, wherein the one or more processors are configured to: switch a state of an engine sound stop mode in which an output of the pseudo engine sound from the speaker is stopped; and output a pseudo engine start sound of the selected vehicle type from the speaker when the engine sound stop mode is turned from on to off (e.g. it is obvious that a transitioning from a running mode into an off mode will cause the speaker to stop producing sound, and a corresponding start-up of engine from an off mode will cause the speaker to start generating the pseudo engine sound again), (see Ballard, [0051], and figure 9).
Regarding Claim 9, Ballard as modified by Vangelov discloses the vehicle management system according to claim 8, wherein: the battery electric vehicle includes an accelerator pedal and a sequential shifter; and the battery electric vehicle is configured to vary output characteristics of the electric motor for an operation of the accelerator pedal according to a shift operation of the sequential shifter in the manual mode (see Vangelov, [0052]-[0054], and figure 3).
Regarding Claim 10, Ballard as modified by Vangelov discloses the vehicle management system according to claim 8, wherein: the battery electric vehicle includes an accelerator pedal, a pseudo clutch pedal, and a pseudo shift device; the pseudo clutch pedal is operated when operating the pseudo shift device; and the battery electric vehicle is configured to vary an output of the electric motor for an operation of the accelerator pedal according to an operation of the pseudo clutch pedal and an operation of the pseudo shift device in the manual mode (see Vangelov, [0050], [0052]-[0054], and figures 2-3).
Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ballard.
Regarding Claim 13, Ballard discloses the battery electric vehicle according to claim 11, wherein the one or more processors are configured to: switch a state of an engine sound stop mode in which an output of the pseudo engine sound from the speaker is stopped; and output a pseudo engine start sound of the selected vehicle type from the speaker when the engine sound stop mode is turned from on to off (e.g. it is obvious that a transitioning from a running mode into an off mode will cause the speaker to stop producing sound, and a corresponding start-up of engine from an off mode will cause the speaker to start generating the pseudo engine sound again), (see Ballard, [0051], and figure 9).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7 and 14 are 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record provided on PTO 892 and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OYESOLA C OJO whose telephone number is (571)272-0848. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday 8:00am to 4:00pm Central Time.
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, Vivian Chin can be reached at 571-272-7840. 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.
/OYESOLA C OJO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2695
Prosecution Insights