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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). A certified copy of the priority document (Application No. JP2023-215959, filed on 12/21/2023) has been received in this National Stage application from the International Bureau (PCT Rule 17.2(a)).
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 11/14/2024 and 5/22/2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Application Status
This office action is issued in response to application filed 11/14/2024. Claims 1-6 are pending. Claims 1-6 are rejected. This action is non-final. A three-month Shortened Statutory Period for Response has been set.
Claim Objections
A series of singular dependent claims is permissible in which a dependent claim refers to a preceding claim which, in turn, refers to another preceding claim.
A claim which depends from a dependent claim should not be separated by any claim which does not also depend from said dependent claim. It should be kept in mind that a dependent claim may refer to any preceding independent claim. In general, applicant's sequence will not be changed. See MPEP § 608.01(n).
With this in mind, the examiner notes that Claims 4-5 depend from Claim 2 with the intervening Claim 3 also depending from claim 2.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
Claims 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. §103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Kodera et al. (JP 2022/036823 A, henceforth Kodera) and Ikeda et al. (US 2025/0083647 A1, henceforth Ikeda).
Regarding Claim 1, Kodera discloses the limitations: a battery electric vehicle that includes an electric motor as a drive source {Abstract}, the battery electric vehicle comprising: a driving operation member that is used for driving of the battery electric vehicle {accelerator pedal 22 and brake pedal 24, Fig. 1 and ¶[0013]}; a simulated gear shifting operation member that imitates an operation member that is used for gear shifting operation of a manual gear shifting internal combustion engine vehicle {“The shift lever 26 functions as a shift device for the driver to select one shift mode from a plurality of shift modes in which the torque characteristics with respect to the rotation speed of the motor 2 are defined stepwise. The plurality of shift modes here are shift modes simulating the gear stages (shift stages) of an MT vehicle”, ¶[0015], wherein MT=manual transmission}; and a control device {Control device (ECU) 50, Fig. 1} configured to control the battery electric vehicle depending on operation of the driving operation member {¶[0012]}, wherein: the driving operation member includes an accelerator pedal {accelerator pedal 22 and brake pedal 24, Fig. 1 and ¶[0013]}; the simulated gear shifting operation member includes a simulated H-shifter that simulates an H-shifter of a manual transmission {“simulating the gear stages (shift stages) of an MT vehicle”, ¶[0015], wherein MT=manual transmission}, and a simulated clutch operation device that simulates a clutch operation device {“it does not have a transmission and a clutch mechanism included in an MT vehicle. Therefore, the shift lever 26 and the clutch pedal 28 are provided with the following functions in place of the functions of mechanically operating the actual transmission and the clutch mechanism.”, ¶[0014]}; the control device is configured to execute, by selection by a driver, a control mode in which a driver demand torque for driving the electric motor is calculated based on an operation amount of the accelerator pedal and operation of the simulated gear shifting operation member {control device 50 , Fig. 1, described in ¶[0016-0017] with respect to shift lever 26 and clutch pedal 28}, and [outputting] a drive wheel torque in an opposite direction of the gravity {modifying torque/power to the wheels is described to deal with an uphill gradient is discussed ¶[0040&0044]}.
Kodera does not appear to explicitly recite the limitations: perform a hold assist for preventing rearward movement or forward movement of the battery electric vehicle due to gravity that acts on the battery electric vehicle, when the control device detects that the battery electric vehicle is stopped on a road surface having a gradient in the control mode; and the hold assist includes outputting a hold assist torque that is a drive wheel torque in an opposite direction of the gravity, and ending the output of the hold assist torque and performing switching to output of the driver demand torque, in response to exceedance of the driver demand torque over the hold assist torque.
However, Ikeda explicitly recites the limitations: perform a hold assist for preventing rearward movement or forward movement {“preventing the phenomenon of the vehicle suddenly starting on level ground and preventing the vehicle from sliding down on a slope road.”, ¶[0007]} of the battery electric vehicle due to gravity that acts on the battery electric vehicle {“a slope starting assistance section that maintains braking force until a predetermined period of time elapses after a brake release operation is performed…and a control section that executes control to cause the motor to generate, in the predetermined period of time, threshold torque in accordance with the gradient of the road surface on which the vehicle is stopped”, ¶[0008], and “Brake actuator 48 corresponds to the “slope starting assistance section” of the present disclosure.”, ¶[0023]}, when the control device detects that the battery electric vehicle is stopped on a road surface having a gradient in the control mode {gradient sensor 32, control device 20, and torque sensor 36, Fig. 2 and ¶[0023]}; and the hold assist includes outputting a hold assist torque that is a drive wheel torque in an opposite direction of the gravity {compensating torque applied to prevent sliding down a hill when stopped or starting electric vehicle on a hill: “a slope starting assistance section that maintains braking force until a predetermined period of time elapses after a brake release operation is performed, wherein the braking force is maintained so that the vehicle including a motor as a power source does not slide down on a slope road…a control section that executes control to cause the motor to generate, in the predetermined period of time, threshold torque in accordance with the gradient of the road surface on which the vehicle is stopped”, ¶[0008]}, and ending the output of the hold assist torque and performing switching to output of the driver demand torque, in response to exceedance of the driver demand torque over the hold assist torque {compensating torque applied for a time interval after brake release to backwards down a hill, for example, before forward acceleration kicks-in: “while vehicle 1 is stopped on a slope road, brake actuator 48 is controlled to maintain the braking force applied to drive wheels 2 until a predetermined period of time elapses after the brake release operation using brake pedal 42 is performed.”, ¶[0027]; and “control section 23 that executes control to cause motor generator 14 to generate, in the predetermined period of time, threshold torque in accordance with the gradient of the road surface on which vehicle 1 is stopped”, ¶[0051]}.
Kodera and Ikeda are analogous art because they both deal with braking and driving forces for a vehicle without a manual transmission such as an electric vehicle.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having the teachings of Kodera and Ikeda before them, to modify the teachings of Kodera to include the teachings of Ikeda to prevent an electric vehicle form sliding downhill when a vehicle stopped on a hill is switched from a braking mode to a driving mode {“slope movement start assistance unit”, Abstract}.
Regarding Claim 2, the combination of Kodera and Ikeda discloses all the limitations of Claim 1, as discussed supra. Kodera does not appear to explicitly disclose the limitation: wherein the hold assist includes outputting the hold assist torque, on condition that the road surface having the gradient is a road surface having an uphill gradient.
However, Ikeda explicitly recites the limitation: wherein the hold assist includes outputting the hold assist torque, on condition that the road surface having the gradient is a road surface having an uphill gradient {“FIG. 4 illustrates a table in which each threshold torque is associated with the gradient of a stopped road surface”, ¶[0036], and “control section 23 that executes control to cause motor generator 14 to generate, in the predetermined period of time, threshold torque in accordance with the gradient of the road surface on which vehicle 1 is stopped”, ¶[0051]}.
Regarding Claim 3, the combination of Kodera and Ikeda discloses all the limitations of Claim 1, as discussed supra. Kodera does not appear to explicitly disclose the limitation: wherein the hold assist includes outputting the hold assist torque, on condition that the road surface having the gradient is a road surface having a downhill gradient.
However, Ikeda explicitly recites the limitation: wherein the hold assist includes outputting the hold assist torque, on condition that the road surface having the gradient is a road surface having a downhill gradient {“FIG. 4 illustrates a table in which each threshold torque is associated with the gradient of a stopped road surface”, ¶[0036], and “control section 23 that executes control to cause motor generator 14 to generate, in the predetermined period of time, threshold torque in accordance with the gradient of the road surface on which vehicle 1 is stopped”, ¶[0051]} and a shift switch of the battery electric vehicle is set to reverse {compensating torque applied for a time interval after brake release to backwards down a hill, for example, before forward acceleration kicks-in: “while vehicle 1 is stopped on a slope road, brake actuator 48 is controlled to maintain the braking force applied to drive wheels 2 until a predetermined period of time elapses after the brake release operation using brake pedal 42 is performed.”, ¶[0027]}.
Regarding Claim 4, the combination of Kodera and Ikeda discloses all the limitations of Claim 2, as discussed supra. Kodera does not appear to explicitly disclose the limitation: wherein the hold assist includes starting the output of the hold assist torque, in response to turning-off of brake operation by the driver.
However, Ikeda explicitly recites the limitation: wherein the hold assist includes starting the output of the hold assist torque, in response to turning-off of brake operation by the driver {compensating torque applied for a time interval after brake release to backwards down a hill, for example, before forward acceleration kicks-in: “while vehicle 1 is stopped on a slope road, brake actuator 48 is controlled to maintain the braking force applied to drive wheels 2 until a predetermined period of time elapses after the brake release operation using brake pedal 42 is performed.”, ¶[0027]}.
Regarding Claim 5, the combination of Kodera and Ikeda discloses all the limitations of Claim 4, as discussed supra. Kodera does not appear to explicitly disclose the limitation: wherein the hold assist includes ending the output of the hold assist torque, when the brake operation by the driver is performed in a period after the start of the output of the hold assist torque and before the exceedance of the driver demand torque over the hold assist torque
However, Ikeda explicitly recites the limitation: wherein the hold assist includes ending the output of the hold assist torque, when the brake operation by the driver is performed in a period after the start of the output of the hold assist torque and before the exceedance of the driver demand torque over the hold assist torque {compensating torque applied for a time interval after brake release to backwards down a hill, for example, before forward acceleration kicks-in: “while vehicle 1 is stopped on a slope road, brake actuator 48 is controlled to maintain the braking force applied to drive wheels 2 until a predetermined period of time elapses after the brake release operation using brake pedal 42 is performed.”, ¶[0027]}.
Regarding Claim 6, the combination of Kodera and Ikeda discloses all the limitations of Claim 1, as discussed supra. In addition, Kodera explicitly recites the limitations: wherein the control device is configured to calculate the driver demand torque using a vehicle model, and the vehicle model includes an engine model in which a virtual engine is modeled, a clutch model in which a virtual clutch is modeled, and a transmission model in which a virtual transmission is modeled {“FIG. 2 is a functional block diagram for explaining the configuration of the control device. The ECU 50 has a virtual engine rotation speed calculation unit 500, a virtual engine output torque calculation unit 502, a torque transmission gain calculation unit 504, a clutch output torque calculation unit 506, and gears as functional blocks related to torque control of the motor 2. It includes a ratio calculation unit 508, a transmission output torque calculation unit 510, and a determination unit 512.”, ¶[0024]; and “ FIG. 3 is a diagram showing a calculation map of the virtual engine output torque. FIG. 4 is a diagram showing a calculation map of torque transmission gain. FIG. 5 is a diagram showing a calculation map of the gear ratio. FIG. 6 is an operation flow diagram showing a procedure of a pseudo manual shift operation executed by the driver. FIG. 7 is a diagram showing an example of torque characteristics of a motor corresponding to a plurality of shift speed modes.”, ¶[0009]}.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
US 11,801,757 B2 – Use a second – or compensating – torque to deal with an electric vehicle dealing with uphill and downhill gradients, including dealing with stopping on the hill.
KR 0152753 B1 – For an electric vehicle, to compensate for the lack of engine idling, an approach is provided starting an electric vehicle stopped on an uphill incline that prevents the vehicle from being rolling backwards when restarting forward motion.
US 11,554,677 B2 – An electric vehicle with a simulated shifting approach, based on a virtual engine with a torque control unit.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RICHARD EDWIN GEIST whose telephone number is (703)756-5854. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 9am-6pm.
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, Christian Chace can be reached at (571) 272-4190. 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.
/R.E.G./Examiner, Art Unit 3665
/CHRISTIAN CHACE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3665
Prosecution Insights