DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . This is the initial office action based on the 18/932,978 application filed October 31, 2024. Claims 1-20 are pending and have been fully considered.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) dated October 31, 2024 is noted. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97 and 1.98. Accordingly, the IDS is being considered by the Examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because there are several misspellings in Figure 2 (see boxes “S108” and “S114”, “Pedicted”).
Furthermore, Figure 4 is objected to because it shows only generic flow charts or block diagrams with no information presented in each element of the chart/diagram. New corrected drawings in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121 (d) are required. Applicants' invention is unclear from the drawings because a number of methods/devices may fit the same chart/diagram. See MPEP 608.02 and form paragraph 6.22, Examiner Note 1.
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.
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(s) 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. §101 because the claimed invention is directed to nonstatutory subject matter. The claim(s) does/do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because the claim(s) recite software per se (“program code”). See MPEP § 2106.03(I).
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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 8-13 and 18-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ose et al. (U.S. Patent Publ’n No. 2018/0080425, herein “Ose”).
Regarding Claims 1 and 11, Ose discloses restarting a combustion of a vehicle while that vehicle is coasting (step S110) by either using the power of a starter-generator ISG (step S180) or the energy level transmittable by a controllable clutch 13 (paragraph 18; figure 1) (step S170). Ose discloses a computer system comprising processing circuitry (ECU (16)) configured to determine an energy level (vehicle speed (ve)) in a controllable clutch (13) between a transmission and a combustion engine of a vehicle powertrain (see Figure 1), the energy level is indicative of the induced energy in the clutch during a time duration prior to determining the energy level, and control at least one of an engine start function and an engine off function depending on the determined energy level in relation to an energy threshold level. Specifically, the decision of which of those two start strategies (steps S110 or S170) to performed is based on the vehicle speed (step S160; paragraphs [0030] - [0032]), which represents the kinetic energy of the vehicle and, in turn, the energy level, which can be transmitted by the clutch (13) to the combustion engine (10), once the clutch (13) would be closed.
Regarding Claims 2 and 12, Ose discloses determining the energy level and control the engine start function and engine off function during coasting of the vehicle (see Step 110 and related text).
Regarding Claims 3 and 13, Ose discloses controlling the at least one of the engine start function (see Step 180) only when the determined energy level is below the energy threshold level (i.e., engine speed (ve0)) (see Step 160 and paragraphs [0030] - ]0032]).
Regarding Claims 8 and 18, Ose discloses determining the energy level in the clutch in response to starting of the internal combustion engine using the clutch when the vehicle is moving (see paragraphs [0030] - [0032]).
Regarding Claim 9, the claimed vehicle components are all inherently known in any internal combustion engine (see also Figure 1 and paragraphs [0016] - [0023]). As provided herein, Ose discloses the computer system provided in Claim 1.
Regarding Claim 10, Ose discloses that the computer system is used in a vehicle (100) having a power train (see Figure 1).
Regarding Claims 19 and 20, the claimed processing components are all inherently found in any known electronic control unit (ECU), such as ECU (16) of Ose (see paragraphs [0020] - [0021]). As provided herein, Ose discloses the computer system provided in Claim 11.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-7 and 14-17 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 and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Specifically, various references are cited that provide detail of relevant clutch control systems and methods.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES G MOUBRY whose telephone number is (571)270-5658. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10AM - 6:30PM.
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 M. 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.
/GRANT MOUBRY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3747