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 .
Claims 1-20 have been presented for examination.
Claims 1-9, and 12-20 are rejected.
Specification
The title of the invention “HYBRID VEHICLE” is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 10-11 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.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 12/29/2025, 05/22/2025, and 11/05/2024. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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 14-16 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 14 recites the limitation "and the residual value of the drive system converted with respect to the residual value of the clutch" in the third line of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The claim does not recite which drive system is referred to. Dependent claims 15-16 are also rejected for the same rational since they depend on claim 14.
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.
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.
Claim(s) 1-4 and 12-13, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zillmer (EP 1958836 B1), in view of Hellgren (US 20160339799 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Zillmer discloses a hybrid vehicle (See fig.1) comprising:
a drive system that comprises an internal combustion drive system and an electric drive system [0002] “internal combustion engine and at least one electric machine” [0024] “The hybrid drive 1 comprises an internal combustion engine 2, an electric machine 3;
a clutch that selectively connects the internal combustion drive system and the electric drive system [0013] “the electric machine is connected to the motor shaft of the internal combustion engine via a clutch.”; and
a controller that performs at least one of driving mode control, …, or clutch control, in response to entering residual value preservation control for balancing respective residual values of the internal combustion drive system, the electric drive system, and the clutch [0012] “wherein a setpoint aging curve for at least one component is stored in the at least one control unit, actual aging of the component is detected, wherein, if the setpoint aging curve is exceeded by the actual aging, the operating strategy (i.e., driving mode) is adapted in such a way that the actual aging approaches the setpoint aging curve, wherein the actual aging is preferably pressed onto or under the setpoint aging curve. The invention is based on the finding that individual components of a hybrid drive are subject to wear of varying degrees depending on the vehicle situations and driving behavior. In order to now ensure a more uniform service life of the parallel hybrid drive, actual aging is compared with a desired aging and, if appropriate, the operating strategy of the hybrid drive is adapted in the direction of service life extension.” [0017] “The number of clutch actuations can be reduced by the operating strategy, for example, by reducing the number of purely electric drives and/or start-stop processes. In the maximum case, only the first start per driving cycle is still carried out via the clutch. At this pulse start, the electric machine is first started up and the clutch is then closed, in order to start the internal combustion engine. In extreme cases, the impulse start can then also be dispensed with and only a drag start can be carried out (clutch remains closed and electric machine runs high when the clutch is closed).” [0025] “a clutch recovery time is activated i.e. the clutch 9 is not actuated for a specific time [] the operating strategy is adapted (e.g. the torque and/or rotational speed limits are restricted for purely electric driving)” Zillmer system shows “preservation control” as trigger and response, detect aging, compare to target, adapt strategy to keep aging aligned (i.e., preserve/normalize component value). Zillmer also shows explicit “driving-mode” changes (EV use, start-stop, or EV limits) performed when the aging condition indicates preservation is needed.
Zillmer does not teach the claim limitation regarding performing “operating point control” in response to entering residual value preservation control for balancing respective residual values.
However, Hellgren teaches equivalent teachings wherein to perform operating point control in response to entering residual value preservation control for balancing respective residual values [0025] “The short-term control controls at least one of an electric motor torque (i.e., operating point control ), a selection of gear speed, engine torque and air condition. The short-term control preferably controls all aspects of the driveline and the auxiliary systems dependent on the signal trajectories set by the long-term control.” [0040] “The vehicle dependent parameters Vi is also fed into the short-term control STC. The method aims to minimize a decrease in vehicle Value V, wherein the value of the energy stored in the vehicle and the value of the components in the vehicle can be comprised in the vehicle value V. The vehicle value V is further explained in conjunction with FIG. 3e.” [0041] “The long-term control LTC (i.e., residual value preservation control) is optimized to minimize the ownership cost of the vehicle” [0043] “The value of the SoH multiplied with the value of a new battery to become the residual value of the battery. Further components can be added” Hellgren teaches the control objective in terms of vehicle value and component residual value, e.g., “minimize a decrease in vehicle Value and the value of the components” and explains residual value computation (e.g., battery SoH residual value) and that “Further components can be added” to the value equation. Thus, Hellgren teaches controlling engine torque and motor torque (i.e., operating point control inputs) in response to entering the residual value preservation control which is the long-term control LTC (i.e., residual value preservation control) that is optimized to minimize the ownership cost of the vehicle.
It would have been obvious to a person that is skilled in the art before the effective filling date to combine Zillmer and Hellgren to make the system wherein perform operating point control in response to entering residual value preservation control for balancing respective residual values.
A person that is skilled in the art would have been motivated to combine Zillmer and Hellgren to improve overall system operation and minimize cost [0024] “The short term control controls the drivetrain and said auxiliary systems such that a cost for energy consumption of said vehicle is minimized, wherein the cost at least is dependent on the energy losses in the vehicle, energy needed for the drivetrain and energy needed for auxiliary systems and thereby said signal trajectories are followed. The signal trajectories are set by the long, term control, in order to minimize the values, decrease of the vehicle during a transport over the predefined time horizon. When the short-term control controls the vehicle, it optimizes the use of energy in the vehicle in such a way that the set signal trajectories are followed.”
Regarding Claim 2, The combination of Zillmer and Hellgren teaches the hybrid vehicle according to claim 1, Zillmer discloses wherein, in a case where a difference between the residual values of the internal combustion drive system and the electric drive system is outside a preset range, the controller enters the residual value preservation control [0012] “wherein a setpoint aging curve for at least one component is stored in the at least one control unit, actual aging of the component is detected, wherein, if the setpoint aging curve is exceeded by the actual aging, the operating strategy (i.e., driving mode) is adapted in such a way that the actual aging approaches the setpoint aging curve, wherein the actual aging is preferably pressed onto or under the setpoint aging curve. The invention is based on the finding that individual components of a hybrid drive are subject to wear of varying degrees depending on the vehicle situations and driving behavior. In order to now ensure a more uniform service life of the parallel hybrid drive, actual aging is compared with a desired aging and, if appropriate, the operating strategy of the hybrid drive is adapted in the direction of service life extension.” [0015] “if at least one threshold value is exceeded, the operating strategy is changed ” Zillmer expressly uses a threshold exceed condition to enter/adapt preservation strategy.
Regarding Claim 3, The combination of Zillmer and Hellgren teaches the hybrid vehicle according to claim 2, Zillmer discloses wherein the controller performs the driving mode control in response to entering the residual value preservation control [0012] “wherein a setpoint aging curve for at least one component is stored in the at least one control unit, actual aging of the component is detected, wherein, if the setpoint aging curve is exceeded by the actual aging, the operating strategy (i.e., driving mode control) is adapted in such a way that the actual aging approaches the setpoint aging curve, wherein the actual aging is preferably pressed onto or under the setpoint aging curve. The invention is based on the finding that individual components of a hybrid drive are subject to wear of varying degrees depending on the vehicle situations and driving behavior. In order to now ensure a more uniform service life of the parallel hybrid drive, actual aging is compared with a desired aging and, if appropriate, the operating strategy of the hybrid drive is adapted in the direction of service life extension.” [0017] “The number of clutch actuations can be reduced by the operating strategy, for example, by reducing the number of purely electric drives and/or start-stop processes. In the maximum case, only the first start per driving cycle is still carried out via the clutch. At this pulse start, the electric machine is first started up and the clutch is then closed, in order to start the internal combustion engine. In extreme cases, the impulse start can then also be dispensed with and only a drag start can be carried out (clutch remains closed and electric machine runs high when the clutch is closed).” [0025] “a clutch recovery time is activated i.e. the clutch 9 is not actuated for a specific time [] the operating strategy is adapted (e.g. the torque and/or rotational speed limits are restricted for purely electric driving)” Zillmer explicitly changes drive strategy (i.e., driving mode) when preservation (aging exceed) is entered.
Regarding Claim 4, The combination of Zillmer and Hellgren teaches the hybrid vehicle according to claim 3, Zillmer discloses wherein the controller performs the driving mode control by adjusting a power output condition of at least one of the internal combustion drive system or the electric drive system [0012] “the operating strategy [i.e., driving mode] is adapted (i.e., adjusting a power output) in such a way that the actual aging approaches the setpoint aging curve, wherein the actual aging is preferably pressed onto or under the setpoint aging curve. The invention is based on the finding that individual components of a hybrid drive are subject to wear of varying degrees depending on the vehicle situations and driving behavior. In order to now ensure a more uniform service life of the parallel hybrid drive, actual aging is compared with a desired aging and, if appropriate, the operating strategy of the hybrid drive (i.e., internal combustion drive system or the electric drive system) is adapted in the direction of service life extension.” [0021] “the maximum torques and powers are decreased during boosting and/or recuperation of the electric machine as a function of the running power and/or the transmitted energy: this reduction of the torques and powers extends the service life of the electric machine, of the energy store or else of the power electronics (converters)” [0017] “The number of clutch actuations can be reduced by the operating strategy, for example, by reducing the number of purely electric drives and/or start-stop processes. In the maximum case, only the first start per driving cycle is still carried out via the clutch. At this pulse start, the electric machine is first started up and the clutch is then closed, in order to start the internal combustion engine. In extreme cases, the impulse start can then also be dispensed with and only a drag start can be carried out (clutch remains closed and electric machine runs high when the clutch is closed).” Zillmer teaches adjusting engine/e-motor torque, power limits and torque/speed bounds is adjusting “power output conditions.”
Regarding Claim 12, The combination of Zillmer and Hellgren teaches the hybrid vehicle according to claim 2, Zillmer does not appear to teach the full claim limitation regarding “wherein the controller performs the operating point control in response to entering the residual value preservation control”
However, Hellgren teaches equivalent teachings wherein the controller performs the operating point control in response to entering the residual value preservation control [0025] “The short-term control controls at least one of an electric motor torque (i.e., operating point control ), a selection of gear speed, engine torque and air condition. The short-term control preferably controls all aspects of the driveline and the auxiliary systems dependent on the signal trajectories set by the long-term control.” [0040] “The method aims to minimize a decrease in vehicle Value V, wherein the value of the energy stored in the vehicle and the value of the components in the vehicle can be comprised in the vehicle value V. The vehicle value V is further explained in conjunction with FIG. 3e.” [0041] “The long-term control LTC is optimized to minimize the ownership cost of the vehicle” [0043] “The value of the SoH multiplied with the value of a new battery to become the residual value of the battery. Further components can be added” Hellgren teaches the control objective in terms of vehicle value and component residual value, e.g., “minimize a decrease in vehicle Value and the value of the components” and explains residual value computation (e.g., battery SoH residual value) and that “Further components can be added” to the value equation. Thus, Hellgren teaches controlling engine torque and motor torque (i.e., operating point control inputs) in response to entering the residual value preservation control.
It would have been obvious to a person that is skilled in the art before the effective filling date to combine Zillmer and Hellgren to make the system wherein the controller performs the operating point control in response to entering the residual value preservation control.
A person that is skilled in the art would have been motivated to combine Zillmer and Hellgren to improve overall system operation and minimize cost [0024] “The short term control controls the drivetrain and said auxiliary systems such that a cost for energy consumption of said vehicle is minimized, wherein the cost at least is dependent on the energy losses in the vehicle, energy needed for the drivetrain and energy needed for auxiliary systems and thereby said signal trajectories are followed. The signal trajectories are set by the long, term control, in order to minimize the values, decrease of the vehicle during a transport over the predefined time horizon. When the short-term control controls the vehicle, it optimizes the use of energy in the vehicle in such a way that the set signal trajectories are followed.”
Regarding Claim 13, The combination of Zillmer and Hellgren teaches the hybrid vehicle according to claim 12, Zillmer does not appear to teach the full claim limitation regarding “wherein the controller performs the operating point control by adjusting a required torque distribution ratio between the internal combustion drive system and the electric drive system”
However, Hellgren teaches equivalent teachings wherein the controller performs the operating point control by adjusting a required torque distribution ratio between the internal combustion drive system and the electric drive system [0025] “The short-term control controls at least one of an electric motor torque (i.e., operating point control ), a selection of gear speed, engine torque and air condition. The short-term control preferably controls all aspects of the driveline and the auxiliary systems dependent on the signal trajectories set by the long-term control.” [0040] “The method aims to minimize a decrease in vehicle Value V, wherein the value of the energy stored in the vehicle and the value of the components in the vehicle can be comprised in the vehicle value V. The vehicle value V is further explained in conjunction with FIG. 3e.” [0041] “The long-term control LTC is optimized to minimize the ownership cost of the vehicle” [0043] “The value of the SoH multiplied with the value of a new battery to become the residual value of the battery. Further components can be added” Hellgren teaches the control objective in terms of vehicle value and component residual value, e.g., “minimize a decrease in vehicle Value and the value of the components” and explains residual value computation (e.g., battery SoH residual value) and that “Further components can be added” to the value equation. Thus, Hellgren teaches controlling engine torque and motor torque (i.e., operating point control inputs) in response to entering the residual value preservation control. Hellgren [0025] states that “The short-term control controls at least one of an electric motor torque, a selection of gear speed, engine torque and air condition,” which teaches that the electric motor torque and engine torque can be simultaneously controlled. This teaches to adjust a required torque distribution ratio between the internal combustion drive system and the electric drive system as claimed.
It would have been obvious to a person that is skilled in the art before the effective filling date to combine Zillmer and Hellgren to make the system wherein the controller performs the operating point control by adjusting a required torque distribution ratio between the internal combustion drive system and the electric drive system.
A person that is skilled in the art would have been motivated to combine Zillmer and Hellgren to improve overall system operation and minimize cost [0024] “The short term control controls the drivetrain and said auxiliary systems such that a cost for energy consumption of said vehicle is minimized, wherein the cost at least is dependent on the energy losses in the vehicle, energy needed for the drivetrain and energy needed for auxiliary systems and thereby said signal trajectories are followed. The signal trajectories are set by the long, term control, in order to minimize the values, decrease of the vehicle during a transport over the predefined time horizon. When the short-term control controls the vehicle, it optimizes the use of energy in the vehicle in such a way that the set signal trajectories are followed.
Claim(s) 5-6, and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zillmer (EP 1958836 B1), in view of Hellgren (US 20160339799 A1), and further in view of Nishida (US 20210291698 A1).
Regarding Claim 5, The combination of Zillmer and Hellgren teaches the hybrid vehicle according to claim 4, The combination of Zillmer and Hellgren does not appear to teach the full claim limitation regarding “wherein the controller performs the driving mode control by raising the power output condition of the internal combustion drive system or the electric drive system, whichever has a lower residual value”
However, Nishida teaches equivalent teachings wherein the controller performs the driving mode control by raising the power output condition of the internal combustion drive system or the electric drive system, whichever has a lower residual value [0025] “the vehicle may be a hybrid vehicle including the secondary battery and an internal combustion engine, and the adjuster is configured to adjust a priority of use of the internal combustion engine with respect to curbing of deterioration of the secondary battery as the use mode associated with deterioration of the secondary battery.” [0111] “in a hybrid vehicle, as a ratio of travel with a motor activated to travel with an engine activated becomes lower, it is possible to further curb the deterioration of the battery 40 and to increase the residual value of the battery 40. Accordingly, the model generator 120 may classify a plurality of batteries 40 depending on the ratio of travel with a motor activated to travel with an engine activated.” [0112] “FIG. 12 is a diagram showing an example of a plurality of transition lines. The model generator 120 generates transition lines with a decrease of the residual value of the battery 40. A first transition line EL1 in FIG. 12 is a transition line in which the residual value of the battery 40 is the highest. A second transition line EL2 is a transition line in which the residual value of the battery 40 is the secondly highest, and a third transition line EL3 is a transition line in which the residual value of the battery 40 is the thirdly highest. A fourth transition line EL4 is a transition line in which the residual value is the lowest.” [0124] “the adjuster 84 may adjust a priority level of use of an engine provided in the hybrid vehicle with respect to use of the battery 40 as a use mode associated with the deterioration of the battery 40. When reception information for increasing the residual value of the battery 40 is output from the receiver 82, the adjuster 84 adjusts the priority level of use of the engine provided in the hybrid vehicle with respect to use of the battery 40 to be lower.” Nishida also shows when selecting higher residual value behavior [0121] “sets the SOC use range to the narrowest range.” Nishida narrowing SOC use range is a stricter operating condition on the battery side to curb deterioration (a preservation-mode shift).
It would have been obvious to a person that is skilled in the art before the effective filling date to combine Zillmer, Hellgren, and Nishida to make the system wherein the controller performs the driving mode control by raising the power output condition of the internal combustion drive system or the electric drive system, whichever has a lower residual value.
A person that is skilled in the art would have been motivated to combine Zillmer, Hellgren, and Nishida to improve hybrid system operation and durability [0121] “For example, the adjuster 84 adjusts the SOC use range of the battery 40 in the use mode associated with the deterioration of the battery 40. Specifically, when the first reception information is output from the receiver 82, the adjuster 84 outputs first adjustment information to the controller 36, and sets the SOC use range of the battery 40 to the narrowest range. In this case, the deterioration of the battery 40 is curbed and the durability time of the battery 40 is increased”
Regarding Claim 6, The combination of Zillmer and Hellgren teaches the hybrid vehicle according to claim 4, The combination of Zillmer and Hellgren does not appear to teach the full claim limitation regarding “wherein the controller performs the driving mode control by adjusting downward the power output condition of the internal combustion drive system or the electric drive system, whichever has a higher residual value”
However, Nishida teaches equivalent teachings wherein the controller performs the driving mode control by adjusting downward the power output condition of the internal combustion drive system or the electric drive system, whichever has a higher residual value [0025] “the vehicle may be a hybrid vehicle including the secondary battery and an internal combustion engine, and the adjuster is configured to adjust a priority of use of the internal combustion engine with respect to curbing of deterioration of the secondary battery as the use mode associated with deterioration of the secondary battery.” [0111] “in a hybrid vehicle, as a ratio of travel with a motor activated to travel with an engine activated becomes lower, it is possible to further curb the deterioration of the battery 40 and to increase the residual value of the battery 40. Accordingly, the model generator 120 may classify a plurality of batteries 40 depending on the ratio of travel with a motor activated to travel with an engine activated.” [0112] “FIG. 12 is a diagram showing an example of a plurality of transition lines. The model generator 120 generates transition lines with a decrease of the residual value of the battery 40. A first transition line EL1 in FIG. 12 is a transition line in which the residual value of the battery 40 is the highest. A second transition line EL2 is a transition line in which the residual value of the battery 40 is the secondly highest, and a third transition line EL3 is a transition line in which the residual value of the battery 40 is the thirdly highest. A fourth transition line EL4 is a transition line in which the residual value is the lowest.” [0124] “the adjuster 84 may adjust a priority level of use of an engine provided in the hybrid vehicle with respect to use of the battery 40 as a use mode associated with the deterioration of the battery 40. When reception information for increasing the residual value of the battery 40 is output from the receiver 82, the adjuster 84 adjusts the priority level of use of the engine provided in the hybrid vehicle with respect to use of the battery 40 to be lower.” Nishida also shows for lower-residual/performance-favoring choice [0122] “sets the SOC use range to the widest range.” Nishida widening SOC use range loosens constraints and permits more aggressive battery use (consistent with allowing more use/aging where value is higher or where performance is prioritized).
It would have been obvious to a person that is skilled in the art before the effective filling date to combine Zillmer, Hellgren, and Nishida to make the system wherein the controller performs the driving mode control by adjusting downward the power output condition of the internal combustion drive system or the electric drive system, whichever has a higher residual value.
A person that is skilled in the art would have been motivated to combine Zillmer, Hellgren, and Nishida to improve hybrid system operation and durability [0121] “For example, the adjuster 84 adjusts the SOC use range of the battery 40 in the use mode associated with the deterioration of the battery 40. Specifically, when the first reception information is output from the receiver 82, the adjuster 84 outputs first adjustment information to the controller 36, and sets the SOC use range of the battery 40 to the narrowest range. In this case, the deterioration of the battery 40 is curbed and the durability time of the battery 40 is increased”
Regarding Claim 17, The combination of Zillmer and Hellgren teaches the hybrid vehicle according to claim 1, The combination of Zillmer and Hellgren does not appear to teach the full claim limitation regarding “wherein the controller enters the residual value preservation control on a condition that a residual value preservation control function is to be activated based on user input”
However, Nishida teaches equivalent teachings wherein the controller enters the residual value preservation control on a condition that a residual value preservation control function is to be activated based on user input [0019] “the future state may be a residual value, and the diagnostic device may further include: a display controller configured to display an interface screen including an object indicating transition of the residual value derived by the deriver on a display; and a receiver configured to receive transition of the residual value in a state in which the interface screen is displayed on the display. [0118] “an operation with which the occupant touches the first residual value transition line VL1. The occupant can select the residual value of the battery 40 corresponding to the occupant's taste by selecting and operating one of the first to fourth residual value transition lines VL1 to VL4.” See also [0120] “first to fourth reception information setting residual value highest/lowest” Nishida’s system uses user selection/input which directly controls the residual value trajectory choice and triggers adjustments.
It would have been obvious to a person that is skilled in the art before the effective filling date to combine Zillmer, Hellgren, and Nishida to make the system wherein the controller enters the residual value preservation control on a condition that a residual value preservation control function is to be activated based on user input.
A person that is skilled in the art would have been motivated to combine Zillmer, Hellgren, and Nishida to improve hybrid system operation and durability [0127] “By allowing an occupant to operate one of a plurality of residual value transition lines, it is possible to adjust priority levels of curbing of deterioration of the battery 40 and vehicle performance Accordingly, the use state and the future state of the battery 40 can be made to satisfy a user's taste that the user wants to enjoy comfortable driving even with riding a vehicle 10B down and a user's taste that the user wants to increase the residual value of the battery 40 or to increase the durability time of the battery 40 even with decreasing vehicle performance.”
Regarding Claim 18, The combination of Zillmer and Hellgren teaches the hybrid vehicle according to claim 1, Zillmer and Hellgren teaches wherein the controller performs at least one of the driving mode control, the operating point control, or the clutch control See at least Zillmer [0012, 0017, 0018, 0025] and Hellgren [0025, 0040, 0041, 0043].
The combination of Zillmer and Hellgren does not appear to teach the full claim limitation regarding performing the controls “based on a preset control level regarding a degree of execution of the residual value preservation control.”
However, Nishida teaches equivalent teachings wherein the controller performs the controls “based on a preset control level regarding a degree of execution of the residual value preservation control.” [0120] “first, second, third, fourth reception information for setting the residual value to the highest or lowest value” [0121-0122] “adjuster sets SOC range to “narrowest or widest range” depending on chosen level. [0123] “adjusts the priority level of exhibition of vehicle performance” [0124] “may adjust a priority level of use of an engine” These are explicit preset levels (multiple selectable lines) corresponding to different degrees of deterioration curbing vs performance (i.e., degree of execution of preservation control).
It would have been obvious to a person that is skilled in the art before the effective filling date to combine Zillmer, Hellgren, and Nishida to make the system wherein the controller performs at least one of the driving mode control, the operating point control, or the clutch control based on a preset control level regarding a degree of execution of the residual value preservation control.
A person that is skilled in the art would have been motivated to combine Zillmer, Hellgren, and Nishida to improve hybrid system operation and durability [0121] “For example, the adjuster 84 adjusts the SOC use range of the battery 40 in the use mode associated with the deterioration of the battery 40. Specifically, when the first reception information is output from the receiver 82, the adjuster 84 outputs first adjustment information to the controller 36, and sets the SOC use range of the battery 40 to the narrowest range. In this case, the deterioration of the battery 40 is curbed and the durability time of the battery 40 is increased”
Regarding Claim 19, The combination of Zillmer and Hellgren teaches the hybrid vehicle according to claim 1, The combination of Zillmer and Hellgren does not appear to teach the full claim limitation regarding further comprising “a display device that outputs information corresponding to at least one of the residual values of the internal combustion drive system, the electric drive system, and the clutch.”
However, Nishida teaches equivalent teachings wherein a display device that outputs information corresponding to at least one of the residual values of the internal combustion drive system, the electric drive system, and the clutch [0019] “the future state may be a residual value, and the diagnostic device may further include: a display controller configured to display an interface screen including an object indicating transition of the residual value derived by the deriver on a display; and a receiver configured to receive transition of the residual value in a state in which the interface screen is displayed on the display.” [0115] “The residual value of a battery 40 changes depending on a deterioration ratio of the battery 40, and the residual value of the battery 40 decreases when the deterioration ratio of the battery 40 increases. FIG. 13 is a diagram showing an example of a plurality of residual value transition lines displayed on the touch panel 66.” Nishida teaches a display device that outputs information corresponding to at least on of the residual values of the battery (i.e., the electric drive system). A person that is skilled in the art would modify Nishida’s system’s display to also include residual values of the internal combustion drive system and the clutch.
It would have been obvious to a person that is skilled in the art before the effective filling date to combine Zillmer, Hellgren, and Nishida to make the system to include a display device that outputs information corresponding to at least one of the residual values of the internal combustion drive system, the electric drive system, and the clutch.
A person that is skilled in the art would have been motivated to combine Zillmer, Hellgren, and Nishida to improve hybrid system operation and notify the user of the degree of deterioration of the battery Nishida [0029] “According to the aspects (7) to (10), it is possible to notify a user of the degree of deterioration of a secondary battery with high accuracy.”
Regarding Claim 20, The combination of Zillmer and Hellgren teaches the hybrid vehicle according to claim 19, Zillmer teaches a hybrid vehicle system that performs control of the vehicle based on the … residual values of the internal combustion drive system, the electric drive system, and the clutch See at least Zillmer [0012, 0017, 0018, 0025].
Zillmer does not teach wherein the display device outputs information corresponding to a total residual value of the vehicle based on the residual values of the internal combustion drive system, the electric drive system, and the clutch.
However, Hellgren teaches a total residual value of the vehicle [0040] “minimize a decrease in vehicle Value V, wherein the value of the components in the vehicle can be comprised in the vehicle value V.” [0043] “SoH multiplied with the value of a new battery to become the residual value of the battery. Further components can be added.” Hellgren teaches an aggregate vehicle value (vehicle Value V) that comprises the value of the components and calculating a component residual value and that further components can be added . Tus, the “total residual value of the vehicle” is taught by Hellgren’s vehicle Value V as a function of component residual values.
It would have been obvious to a person that is skilled in the art before the effective filling date to combine Zillmer and Hellgren to make the system wherein to calculate a total residual value of the vehicle.
A person that is skilled in the art would have been motivated to combine Zillmer and Hellgren to improve overall system operation and minimize cost [0024] “The short term control controls the drivetrain and said auxiliary systems such that a cost for energy consumption of said vehicle is minimized, wherein the cost at least is dependent on the energy losses in the vehicle, energy needed for the drivetrain and energy needed for auxiliary systems and thereby said signal trajectories are followed. The signal trajectories are set by the long, term control, in order to minimize the values, decrease of the vehicle during a transport over the predefined time horizon. When the short-term control controls the vehicle, it optimizes the use of energy in the vehicle in such a way that the set signal trajectories are followed.”
The combination of Zillmer and Hellgren does not appear to teach the full claim limitation regarding “wherein the display device outputs information corresponding to a total residual value of the vehicle based on the residual values of the internal combustion drive system, the electric drive system, and the clutch”
However, Nishida teaches equivalent teachings wherein the display device outputs some information corresponding to some residual value of the vehicle based on at least one of the residual values of the internal combustion drive system, the electric drive system, and the clutch [0019] “the future state may be a residual value, and the diagnostic device may further include: a display controller configured to display an interface screen including an object indicating transition of the residual value derived by the deriver on a display; and a receiver configured to receive transition of the residual value in a state in which the interface screen is displayed on the display.” [0115] “The residual value of a battery 40 changes depending on a deterioration ratio of the battery 40, and the residual value of the battery 40 decreases when the deterioration ratio of the battery 40 increases. FIG. 13 is a diagram showing an example of a plurality of residual value transition lines displayed on the touch panel 66.” Nishida teaches a display device that outputs information corresponding to at least one of the residual values of the battery (i.e., the electric drive system).
It would have been obvious to a person that is skilled in the art before the effective filling date to combine Zillmer, Hellgren, and Nishida to make the system wherein the display device outputs information corresponding to a total residual value of the vehicle based on the residual values of the internal combustion drive system, the electric drive system, and the clutch.
A person that is skilled in the art would have been motivated to combine Zillmer, Hellgren, and Nishida to improve hybrid system operation and durability [0121] “For example, the adjuster 84 adjusts the SOC use range of the battery 40 in the use mode associated with the deterioration of the battery 40. Specifically, when the first reception information is output from the receiver 82, the adjuster 84 outputs first adjustment information to the controller 36, and sets the SOC use range of the battery 40 to the narrowest range. In this case, the deterioration of the battery 40 is curbed and the durability time of the battery 40 is increased”
Claim(s) 7-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zillmer (EP 1958836 B1), in view of Hellgren (US 20160339799 A1), and further in view Ibaraki (US 5789882 A).
Regarding Claim 7, The combination of Zillmer and Hellgren teaches the hybrid vehicle according to claim 4, The combination of Zillmer and Hellgren does not teaches the claim limitation regarding “wherein, on a vehicle-speed and torque graph, the power output condition is adjusted by changing a reference line that delimits a first area where the internal combustion drive system is a main drive source and a second area where the electric drive system is a main drive source”
However, Ibaraki teaches equivalent teachings wherein, on a vehicle-speed and torque graph, the power output condition is adjusted by changing a reference line that delimits a first area where the internal combustion drive system is a main drive source and a second area where the electric drive system is a main drive source (See at least fig. 5-6 and 11) and (col. 20 ll.10-36) “drive source selecting means 160 selects according to a drive source selecting data map (i.e., graph), FIG. 11 relationship between the vehicle drive torque and running speed V (i.e., a vehicle-speed and torque) and three drive modes. A first boundary line B and a second boundary line C define three ranges corresponding to the MOTOR DRIVE mode, ENGINE DRIVE mode and ENGINE-MOTOR DRIVE mode. Selects the MOTOR DRIVE mode below the first boundary line B selects the ENGINE DRIVE mode between B and C [and] above C selects the ENGINE-MOTOR DRIVE mode.” Fig. 5-6 also shows a vehicle-speed and torque graph that has a reference line that delimits a first area where the internal combustion drive system is a main drive source and a second area where the electric drive system is a main drive source”
It would have been obvious to a person that is skilled in the art before the effective filling date to combine Zillmer, Hellgren, and Ibaraki to make the system wherein, on a vehicle-speed and torque graph, the power output condition is adjusted by changing a reference line that delimits a first area where the internal combustion drive system is a main drive source and a second area where the electric drive system is a main drive source.
A person that is skilled in the art would have been motivated to combine Zillmer, Hellgren, and Ibaraki to improve hybrid system efficiency (col. 2 ll.40-50) “Excessive charging of the electric energy storage device may lead to reduction of the energy conversion efficiency (charging and discharging efficiencies), and may even cause a failure to charge the electric energy storage device. Thus, the known arrangement for selecting the engine or the electric motor as the drive power source does not permit effective utilization of the electric energy, resulting in an increase in the fuel consumption amount or the exhaust gas amount during running of the vehicle on a mountain path.”
Regarding Claim 8, The combination of Zillmer and Hellgren teaches the hybrid vehicle according to claim 7, The combination of Zillmer and Hellgren does not teache the claim limitation regarding “wherein on the vehicle-speed and torque graph, the second area is an area below the reference line, and the first area is an area above the reference line”
However, Ibaraki teaches equivalent teachings wherein on the vehicle-speed and torque graph, the second area is an area below the reference line, and the first area is an area above the reference line (See at least fig. 5-6 and 11) and (col. 20 ll.10-36) “drive source selecting means 160 selects according to a drive source selecting data map (i.e., graph), FIG. 11 relationship between the vehicle drive torque and running speed V (i.e., a vehicle-speed and torque) and three drive modes. A first boundary line B and a second boundary line C define three ranges corresponding to the MOTOR DRIVE mode, ENGINE DRIVE mode and ENGINE-MOTOR DRIVE mode. Selects the MOTOR DRIVE mode below the first boundary line B selects the ENGINE DRIVE mode between B and C and above C selects the ENGINE-MOTOR DRIVE mode.” (col. 21 ll.52-66) “shifting means 178 shifting the first boundary line B from B1 to B2 to enlarge the motor driving range. The shifted first boundary line B2 is below the second boundary line C.” Fig. 5-6 also shows a vehicle-speed and torque graph that has a reference line that delimits a first area where the second area is an area below the reference line, and the first area is an area above the reference line.
It would have been obvious to a person that is skilled in the art before the effective filling date to combine Zillmer, Hellgren, and Ibaraki to make the system wherein on the vehicle-speed and torque graph, the second area is an area below the reference line, and the first area is an area above the reference line.
A person that is skilled in the art would have been motivated to combine Zillmer, Hellgren, and Ibaraki to improve hybrid system efficiency (col. 2 ll.40-50) “Excessive charging of the electric energy storage device may lead to reduction of the energy conversion efficiency (charging and discharging efficiencies), and may even cause a failure to charge the electric energy storage device. Thus, the known arrangement for selecting the engine or the electric motor as the drive power source does not permit effective utilization of the electric energy, resulting in an increase in the fuel consumption amount or the exhaust gas amount during running of the vehicle on a mountain path.”
Regarding Claim 9, The combination of Zillmer and Hellgren teaches the hybrid vehicle according to claim 8, The combination of Zillmer and Hellgren does not teaches the claim limitation regarding “wherein the second area corresponds to an area where a first drive mode in which the hybrid vehicle runs with driving power of the electric drive system is performed, and the first area corresponds to an area where a second drive mode in which driving power of the internal combustion drive system is transmitted to wheels of the hybrid vehicle is performed.”
However, Ibaraki teaches equivalent teachings wherein the second area corresponds to an area where a first drive mode in which the hybrid vehicle runs with driving power of the electric drive system is performed, and the first area corresponds to an area where a second drive mode in which driving power of the internal combustion drive system is transmitted to wheels of the hybrid vehicle is performed (See at least fig. 5-6 and 11), (col. 22-24 ll. 1-66) and (col. 20 ll.10-36) “drive source selecting means 160 selects according to a drive source selecting data map (i.e., graph), FIG. 11 relationship between the vehicle drive torque and running speed V (i.e., a vehicle-speed and torque) and three drive modes. A first boundary line B and a second boundary line C define three ranges corresponding to the MOTOR DRIVE mode, ENGINE DRIVE mode and ENGINE-MOTOR DRIVE mode. Selects the MOTOR DRIVE mode below the first boundary line B selects the ENGINE DRIVE mode between B and C and above C selects the ENGINE-MOTOR DRIVE mode.” (col. 21 ll.52-66) “shifting means 178 shifting the first boundary line B from B1 to B2 to enlarge the motor driving range. The shifted first boundary line B2 is below the second boundary line C.” Fig. 5-6 also shows a vehicle-speed and torque graph that has a reference line that delimits a first area where the second area is an area below the reference line, and the first area is an area above the reference line each wherein the second area corresponds the hybrid system and the first area corresponds to the combustion engine as shown.
It would have been obvious to a person that is skilled in the art before the effective filling date to combine Zillmer, Hellgren, and Ibaraki to make the system wherein the second area corresponds to an area where a first drive mode in which the hybrid vehicle runs with driving power of the electric drive system is performed, and the first area corresponds to an area where a second drive mode in which driving power of the internal combustion drive system is transmitted to wheels of the hybrid vehicle is performed.
A person that is skilled in the art would have been motivated to combine Zillmer, Hellgren, and Ibaraki to improve hybrid system efficiency (col. 2 ll.40-50) “Excessive charging of the electric energy storage device may lead to reduction of the energy conversion efficiency (charging and discharging efficiencies), and may even cause a failure to charge the electric energy storage device. Thus, the known arrangement for selecting the engine or the electric motor as the drive power source does not permit effective utilization of the electric energy, resulting in an increase in the fuel consumption amount or the exhaust gas amount during running of the vehicle on a mountain path.”
Claim(s) 14-16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zillmer (EP 1958836 B1), in view of Hellgren (US 20160339799 A1), and further in view of Schmidt (US 20200262415 A1).
Regarding Claim 14, The combination of Zillmer and Hellgren teaches the hybrid vehicle according to claim 1, The combination of Zillmer and Hellgren does not appear to teach the full claim limitation regarding “wherein the controller enters the residual value preservation control based on the residual value of the clutch and the residual value of the drive system converted with respect to the residual value of the clutch.”
However, Schmidt teaches equivalent teachings wherein the controller enters the residual value preservation control based on the residual value of the clutch and the residual value of the drive system converted with respect to the residual value of the clutch [0012] “wear states of various components of the drivetrain of the motor vehicle, such as, for example, an engine, a clutch, a transmission, a cardan shaft, a universal shaft, a differential gear or other components used for the transmission of an engine torque to the wheels can occur.” [0022]-[0023] "In particular, it can be provided that a condition in which the component has reached, for example, 95% of a maximum permissible design spectrum, is considered to be an increased state of wear, so that the component can be replaced before a defect associated with the complete wear of the component occurs." and "It is also possible for additional information to be transmitted, for example information about the expected repair costs and/or the spare parts, working hours or the like necessary for the repair." Schmidt presenting information in terms of percentage of maximum permissible design spectrum and expected repair costs teaches to convert the residual values to values that can be compared with each other as claimed.
It would have been obvious to a person that is skilled in the art before the effective filling date to combine Zillmer, Hellgren, and Schmidt to make the system wherein the controller enters the residual value preservation control based on the residual value of the clutch and the residual value of the drive system converted with respect to the residual value of the clutch.
A person that is skilled in the art would have been motivated to combine Zillmer, Hellgren, and Schmidt to improve hybrid system wear prediction Schmidt [0009] “The disclosure is based on the object of specifying an improved method for wear prediction of a drivetrain of a motor vehicle.”
Regarding Claim 15, The combination of Zillmer, Hellgren, and Schmidt teaches the hybrid vehicle according to claim 14, Zillmer discloses wherein the controller performs the clutch control in response to entering the residual value preservation control [0012] “if the setpoint aging curve is exceeded by the actual aging, the operating strategy (i.e., driving mode) is adapted in such a way that the actual aging approaches the setpoint aging curve, wherein the actual aging is preferably pressed onto or under the setpoint aging curve.” [0017] “The number of clutch actuations can be reduced by the operating strategy, for example, by reducing the number of purely electric drives and/or start-stop processes. In the maximum case, only the first start per driving cycle is still carried out via the clutch. At this pulse start, the electric machine is first started up and the clutch is then closed, in order to start the internal combustion engine. [0025] “a clutch recovery time is activated i.e. the clutch 9 is not actuated for a specific time [] the operating strategy is adapted (e.g. the torque and/or rotational speed limits are restricted for purely electric driving)” Zillmer teaches that clutch control executed once preservation mode triggers.
Regarding Claim 16, The combination of Zillmer, Hellgren, and Schmidt teaches the hybrid vehicle according to claim 15, Zillmer discloses wherein the controller performs the clutch control by adjusting upward an engagement state change condition of the clutch [0019] “clutch recovery time is increased with an increasing absolute number of clutch actuations” [0018] recovery time is a window “within which clutch actuation is omitted.” Zillmer’s system increasing recovery time that increases the condition/constraint required before the clutch engagement state is allowed to change (i.e., adjusting upward an engagement state change condition of the clutch) which increases the condition before clutch actuation occurs.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HUSSAM ALZATEEMEH whose telephone number is (703)756-1013. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00-5:00 M-F.
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, Aniss Chad can be reached on (571) 270-3832. 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.
/HUSSAM ALDEEN ALZATEEMEH/ Examiner, Art Unit 3662
/ANISS CHAD/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3662