DETAILED ACTION
This is a first Office Action on the merits and is responsive to the originally filed application papers. Claims filed on 11/08/2024 are being examined. Claims 1-7 are being considered and further pending examination.
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(s) (IDS(s)) submitted on 11/08/2024 and 04/15/2025 is/are 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 2-5 and 7 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 2 recites “wherein the processor is configured to, at the time the driving force increase request is made, and when a predicted state predicted by driving force increase from the electric motor is within an allowable range from the predetermined target state, perform the driving force increase from the electric motor without downshifting the transmission, and when the predicted state is not within the allowable range, perform driving force increase from the engine that involves downshifting of the transmission.” however, this is generally unclear due to claim format and the conditional limitation of “when” could be interpreted as the claim reciting driving force increase as the object that is executing the prediction.
Claim 3 recites “wherein the processor is configured to, at the time the driving force increase request is made, and when a predicted state predicted by driving force increase from the engine that is increasable without changing speeds and the driving force increase from the electric motor is within an allowable range from the predetermined target state, perform the driving force increase from the engine that is increasable without changing speeds and the driving force increase from the electric motor, and when the predicted state is not within the allowable range, perform driving force increase from the engine that involves downshifting of the transmission” however this limitation is generally unclear due to claim format and punctuation where it is unclear exactly what functions are to be performed by the processor.
Claim 5 recites “wherein the processor is configured to predict the predicted state based on electric motor required power by which the driving force from the electric motor is increasable within a range of allowable output electric power that is outputtable from the power storage device, and an allowable duration of time during which the electric motor required power is continuously outputtable from the power storage device.” however this limitation is generally unclear due to claim format and punctuation.
Claim 7 recites “as compared to the manual driving” , however, it is unclear what comparison is to be made. For the purpose of compact prosecution the examiner will interpret this limitation as meaning the prior limitations of the claim are regarding an autonomous driving mode or equivalent.
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.
Claim(s) 1-5 and 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kawakami et al (US 20150134168 A1) henceforth referred to as Kawakami and further in view of Lee et al (US 20200353927 A1) henceforth referred to as Lee.
Regarding Claim 1 Kawakami teaches An in-vehicle control device configured to be installed in a vehicle (para [0027] : “The embodiments of the vehicle travel control apparatus of the present invention are described next while referring to the drawings. The vehicle for mounting the travel control apparatus of the present invention is a hybrid vehicle.”) including an engine, a transmission configured to change speed of motive power of the engine and output the motive power to a drive shaft connected to a drive wheel, an electric motor configured to input and output motive power to and from the drive shaft, a power storage device configured to input and output electric power to and from the electric motor, and a steering device (para [0030] : “As shown in this figure, the vehicle serving as the hybrid vehicle includes a travel control unit 100 (travel control apparatus), a vehicle speed sensor 101 to measure the speed of the vehicle, a steering SW 102 to express the driver's acceleration intent and the deceleration intent, an exterior sensor 103 to measure the distance or the relative speed to surrounding objects, a navigation device 104 including a communicator capable of acquiring map information and road information and signal information, and a mode SW 108 capable of switching the travel modes.”, para [0031] : “The hybrid vehicle contains a structure serially joining in order from the power source upstream side: an engine 107, a motor 112 and a transmission 114.”, para [0035] : “An inverter 111 to generate control current is coupled to the motor 112, and the inverter 111 is coupled to a battery 109.”) manual driving control in which the engine, the transmission, the electric motor, and the steering device are controlled such that the vehicle travels by manual driving, the in-vehicle control device comprising a processor (para [0008] : “Curing acceleration from the driver operating the accelerator pedal, the torque generated by the power source must be increased so that the driver experiences nothing wrong between the vehicle status and the amount of the accelerator pedal operation by the driver. However, preferably the vehicle is capable of reaching the specified vehicle speed by the certain level of acceleration during travel control without the driver operating the accelerator pedal.”, where this indicates the vehicle operated in a manual mode), wherein
the processor is configured to, at a time of driving force increase request when a driving force increase request is made to bring the vehicle into a predetermined target state during the automated driving control (para [0045] : “The target vehicle speed computing unit 200 calculates a target vehicle speed Vcmd 210 for executing travel control, based on the vehicle speed that is measured by the vehicle speed sensor 101 and information transmitted from the steering SW 102 for expressing the driver's acceleration intent and the deceleration intent, the exterior sensor 103 that measures the distance or the relative speed to surrounding objects, and the navigation device 104 for acquiring map information.”, para [0046] : “The acceleration command value calculation unit 201 calculates an acceleration command value Acmd for setting the current vehicle speed to a target vehicle speed based on the vehicle speed that is measured by the vehicle speed sensor 101, and the target vehicle speed Vcmd 210 that is calculated in the target vehicle speed computing unit 200.”), give priority to driving force increase from the electric motor in which driving force from the electric motor is increased without downshifting the transmission, over driving force increase that involves downshifting of the transmission (para [0050] : “FIG. 3 is a flowchart showing the acceleration upper-limit value calculation process.”, para [0051] : “In step S301, the upper-limit torque Tp_max capable of being generated from a combination of the engine and the motor is converted to the acceleration Aulmt_p.”). However, Kawakami does not explicitly teach the in-vehicle control device being configured to execute a plurality of types of driving control including automated driving control in which the engine, the transmission, the electric motor, and the steering device are controlled such that the vehicle travels by automated driving.
However, in a similar field of endeavor (systems for autonomous vehicles), Lee teaches the in-vehicle control device being configured to execute a plurality of types of driving control including automated driving control in which the engine, the transmission, the electric motor, and the steering device are controlled such that the vehicle travels by automated driving (para [0021] : “The control unit may operate the electric supercharger and may control the transmission with the transmission clutch stroke operation map corresponding to the operation of the electric supercharger, upon determining that the predetermined acceleration condition is satisfied based on an increase rate of a requested torque during an autonomous driving of the vehicle.”).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to modify the system of Kawakami with the autonomous driving of Lee to increase user convenience and ease of use by enabling autonomous driving and control of vehicle systems.
Regarding Claim 2 the combination of Kawakami and Lee teaches The in-vehicle control device according to claim 1, further Kawakami teaches wherein the processor is configured to, at the time the driving force increase request is made, and when a predicted state predicted by driving force increase from the electric motor is within an allowable range from the predetermined target state, perform the driving force increase from the electric motor without downshifting the transmission, and when the predicted state is not within the allowable range, perform driving force increase from the engine that involves downshifting of the transmission (para [0079] : “Next, the down-shift request torque threshold value Tm_mas during acceleration, and the down-shift request torque threshold value Tm_mis during deceleration are respectively calculated in step S502 and step S503.”, para [0080] : “The down-shift request torque threshold value Tm_mas during acceleration is converted to the transmission end torque by utilizing the motor output upper-limit torque Tm_max 207 and the gear ratio of the transmission 114, and a specified offset value for the speed change time portion is added as shown in the following Formula 4.”).
Regarding Claim 3 the combination of Kawakami and Lee teaches The in-vehicle control device according to claim 1, further Kawakami teaches wherein the processor is configured to, at the time the driving force increase request is made, and when a predicted state predicted by driving force increase from the engine that is increasable without changing speeds and the driving force increase from the electric motor is within an allowable range from the predetermined target state, perform the driving force increase from the engine that is increasable without changing speeds and the driving force increase from the electric motor, and when the predicted state is not within the allowable range, perform driving force increase from the engine that involves downshifting of the transmission (para [0079] : “Next, the down-shift request torque threshold value Tm_mas during acceleration, and the down-shift request torque threshold value Tm_mis during deceleration are respectively calculated in step S502 and step S503.”, para [0080] : “The down-shift request torque threshold value Tm_mas during acceleration is converted to the transmission end torque by utilizing the motor output upper-limit torque Tm_max 207 and the gear ratio of the transmission 114, and a specified offset value for the speed change time portion is added as shown in the following Formula 4.”, as the driving force increase from the electric motor is used when in an allowable range regardless a predicted state predicted by driving force increase form the engine that Is increasable without changing speeds, this would occur in a situation as described, further the described conditional limitation occurs for any vehicle when external situations require larger force to maintain speed, for example, in the case of any incline. ).
Regarding Claim 4 the combination of Kawakami and Lee teaches The in-vehicle control device according to claim 2, further Kawakami teaches wherein the processor is configured to predict the predicted state within a range of allowable output electric power that is outputtable from the power storage device (para [0114] : “The travel control unit 100A receives the SOC value 801 from the integrated control unit 105, converts the SOC value into an upper-limit torque Ts_max and lower-limit torque Ts_min in the torque converter unit 802, and inputs them instead of Tm_max and Tm_min into the acceleration upper-limit value calculation unit 202, the acceleration lower-limit value calculation unit 204, and the speed-change command value computing unit 206.”).
Regarding Claim 5 the combination of Kawakami and Lee teaches The in-vehicle control device according to claim 4, wherein the processor is configured to predict the predicted state based on electric motor required power by which the driving force from the electric motor is increasable within a range of allowable output electric power that is outputtable from the power storage device, and an allowable duration of time during which the electric motor required power is continuously outputtable from the power storage device (para [0061] : “Next, in step S402, a decision is made on whether or not the acceleration lower-limit value Adlmt is larger than the threshold value. This threshold value is calculated by adding a value that takes into account the time to reduce the SOC value to a specified value relative to the value-determined by the vehicle speed, gear ratio or gear position, the presence of a car in front, and the road conditions, etc.”).
Regarding Claim 7 the combination of Kawakami and Lee teaches The in-vehicle control device according to claim 1, wherein the processor is configured to, at the time the driving force increase request is made, give priority to driving force increase from the electric motor without downshifting the transmission, over driving force increase that involves downshifting of the transmission, as compared to the manual driving control (para [0050] : “FIG. 3 is a flowchart showing the acceleration upper-limit value calculation process.”, para [0051] : “In step S301, the upper-limit torque Tp_max capable of being generated from a combination of the engine and the motor is converted to the acceleration Aulmt_p.”, the combinations teachings of prioritizing driving force increase of the electric motor without downshifting teaches for both autonomous and manual control).
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kawakami et al (US 2015134168 A1) henceforth referred to as Kawakami and further in view of Meyer et al (US 20180257633 A1) henceforth referred to as Meyer.
Regarding Claim 6 Kawakami teaches An in-vehicle control device configured to be installed in a vehicle (para [0027] : “The embodiments of the vehicle travel control apparatus of the present invention are described next while referring to the drawings. The vehicle for mounting the travel control apparatus of the present invention is a hybrid vehicle.”) including an engine, a transmission configured to change speed of motive power of the engine and output the motive power to a drive shaft connected to a drive wheel, an electric motor configured to input and output motive power to and from the drive shaft, a power storage device configured to input and output electric power to and from the electric motor, and a steering device (para [0030] : “As shown in this figure, the vehicle serving as the hybrid vehicle includes a travel control unit 100 (travel control apparatus), a vehicle speed sensor 101 to measure the speed of the vehicle, a steering SW 102 to express the driver's acceleration intent and the deceleration intent, an exterior sensor 103 to measure the distance or the relative speed to surrounding objects, a navigation device 104 including a communicator capable of acquiring map information and road information and signal information, and a mode SW 108 capable of switching the travel modes.”, para [0031] : “The hybrid vehicle contains a structure serially joining in order from the power source upstream side: an engine 107, a motor 112 and a transmission 114.”, para [0035] : “An inverter 111 to generate control current is coupled to the motor 112, and the inverter 111 is coupled to a battery 109.”) manual driving control in which the engine, the transmission, the electric motor, and the steering device are controlled such that the vehicle travels by manual driving, the in-vehicle control device comprising a processor (para [0008] : “Curing acceleration from the driver operating the accelerator pedal, the torque generated by the power source must be increased so that the driver experiences nothing wrong between the vehicle status and the amount of the accelerator pedal operation by the driver. However, preferably the vehicle is capable of reaching the specified vehicle speed by the certain level of acceleration during travel control without the driver operating the accelerator pedal.”, where this indicates the vehicle operated in a manual mode). However, Kawakami does not explicitly teach the processor is configured to, at a time of driving force increase request when a driving force increase request is made to bring the vehicle into a predetermined target state during the automated driving control, give priority to driving force increase by the electric motor over driving force increase by the engine.
However, in a similar field of endeavor (hybrid electric vehicle control systems), Meyer teaches the processor is configured to, at a time of driving force increase request when a driving force increase request is made to bring the vehicle into a predetermined target state during the automated driving control, give priority to driving force increase by the electric motor over driving force increase by the engine (para [0017] : “The rear axle 122 may be driven either purely electrically and exclusively via electric machine 120 (e.g., electric only drive or propulsion mode, engine is not combusting air and fuel or rotating), in a hybrid fashion via electric machine 120 and engine 110 (e.g., parallel mode), or exclusively via engine 110 (e.g., engine only propulsion mode), in a purely combustion engine-operated fashion.”, any driving force increase request during an electric only propulsion mode would give priority to the electric motor over the engine as the engine is not in use during electric only driving mode).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to modify the system of Kawakami with the electric only drive mode of Meyer to reduce fuel consumption.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure.
Bellinger (US 12331831 B2) teaches methods, apparatuses, and systems for determining a dynamic shift schedule for a system are provided. A method includes: determining, by a controller, a priority for a system based on data indicative of operation of the system; determining, by the controller, a shift point for the system based on the priority and at least one of a current gear, a current accelerator pedal position (APP), an acceleration vector, or a target gear; and taking, by the controller, an action based on the determined shift point.
Luckevich et al (US 20190025857 A1) teaches methods, apparatuses, and systems for determining a dynamic shift schedule for a system are provided. A method includes: determining, by a controller, a priority for a system based on data indicative of operation of the system; determining, by the controller, a shift point for the system based on the priority and at least one of a current gear, a current accelerator pedal position (APP), an acceleration vector, or a target gear; and taking, by the controller, an action based on the determined shift point.
Borhan et al (US 20250162580 A1) teaches systems and methods for transmission gear shift management of a vehicle having cooperative adaptive cruise control (CACC) are provided. A method includes: enabling a cooperative adaptive cruise control (CACC) mode of a vehicle; updating a transmission shift map to adjust at least one threshold associated with a transmission shift event in response to enabling the CACC mode of the vehicle; receiving a torque demand from the vehicle in response to enabling the CACC mode of the vehicle; determining a transmission shift event based on the received torque demand and the updated transmission shift map; and implementing the determined transmission shift event.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID HATCH whose telephone number is (571)272-4518. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 8:00-5:00.
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, James J Lee can be reached on 571-270-5965. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/D.H./Examiner, Art Unit 3668
/JAMES J LEE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3668
Prosecution Insights