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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Status of the Application
Claims 1-20 have been examined in this application. This communication is a Non Final Office Action on the on merits.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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. This is the case for claims 4 and 14 which separate the claims that follow and depend from 3 and 13 respectively. 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).
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.
Claim(s) 1 and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sun et al., hereinafter Sun (Document ID: CN 106740870 A) in view of Huang et al., hereinafter Huang (Document ID: CN 117842065 A).
Regarding claims 1 and 11, Sun teaches a method performed by an apparatus of a vehicle, and a vehicle, the method and vehicle comprising:
determining, based on a first weight estimation being applied to vehicle data, first estimated weight information of the vehicle, wherein the first weight estimation is based on recursive least squares (RLS) associated with a first forgetting factor (see at least P [0057]: “initial values are provided for the weighted least squares recursive mass estimation model. Then, based on the vehicle driving state data at the current moment, the first mass estimation is performed to obtain the first estimated value of the vehicle mass” See also P [0056] which establishes that the process uses “multiple forgetting factors” for this first weight estimation);
determining, based on a second weight estimation being applied to the vehicle data, second estimated weight information of the vehicle, wherein the second weight estimation is based on RLS associated with a second forgetting factor (see at least P [0058] wherein an operation phase allows for “a new round of mass estimation” using the weighted least squares recursive mass estimation model. Note that the second weight estimation is additionally applied to updated vehicle driving status data and the RLS model is updated in associated with “different forgetting factors”, which P [0093] establishes as related to different parameters);
Sun additionally teaches in P [0060] the ability to end recursive estimation based on the initial and continuous estimates converge “within a reasonable range”. Then, beginning in P [0122] Sun establishes ranges for different forgetting factors, and a process of responding to different vehicle driving states that affect the weight estimate. But Sun does not explicitly teach that the changing conditions then allow for
determining, based on the first estimated weight information and the second estimated weight information, a third forgetting factor for RLS of a third weight estimation;
determining, based on the third weight estimation being applied to the vehicle data, third estimated weight information of the vehicle; and
Instead, Huang whose invention pertains to improving kinematics control precision based on vehicle mass, teaches in P [0108] that “a forgetting factor is determined based on the vehicle's current driving conditions for the estimated vehicle mass output value at the previous moment”. Essentially, Huang generates a new forgetting factor based on the prior weight estimates as well as the vehicle driving condition. Then in P [0117]: “Based on the forgetting factor, update coefficient, fused vehicle mass, and the vehicle's estimated mass output value at the previous time step, calculate and output the final estimated vehicle mass at the current time step.”
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the real time weight estimation and convergence of Sun with the forgetting factor based on prior weight estimates of Huang in order to implement a third forgetting factor based on the prior two that can "reduce the impact of external factors such as vehicle driving conditions on the accuracy of the estimation of the vehicle weight", as in P [0018] of Huang. The real time parameters are important to consider, but having a fluid forgetting factor allows Huang to "significantly improve the accuracy of vehicle kinematic control and thus enhance the control effect of vehicle stability."
In view of the modification, Sun then teaches
controlling, based on the third estimated weight information, the vehicle (see at least P [0004] wherein the goal of “Accurate and real-time estimation of vehicle mass parameters” is to “improve the performance of vehicle electronic control systems.” This includes stability control for reliable slip resistance and fuel efficiency.).
Regarding claim 11 specifically, Sun teaches in P [0004] that the vehicle comprises an Electronic Stability Control (ESP) system and in P [0015] a “real-time vehicle mass estimation system”, but Sun does not teaching the particulars for a memory storing at least one instruction for controlling the vehicle; and a processor configured to execute the at least one instruction stored in the memory, wherein the at least one instruction is configured to cause, when executed by the processor, the vehicle to perform the steps listed above.
Instead, Huang teaches in at least P [0016] “a memory, a processor, and a computer program stored in the memory and executable on the processor, wherein the processor executes the computer program to implement the steps of the above-described method.”
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the real time weight estimation system and ESP of Sun with the known computer processing and memory elements of Huang in order to execute a design choice to utilize known, generic computer hardware to implement a vehicle weight estimation system.
Claim(s) 2 and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sun in view of Huang, and further in view of Woo (Document ID: US 20230138908 A1).
Regarding claims 2 and 12, modified Sun teaches the method of claim 1 and the vehicle of claim 11, and both Sun and Huang teach implementing previous weight estimates and vehicle driving status data to update the weight estimate, but Sun and Huang do not explicitly teach that
the third forgetting factor is differently determined based on a difference between the first estimated weight information and the second estimated weight information, and
wherein the second forgetting factor has a lower forgetting feature than the first forgetting factor.
Instead, Woo, whose invention pertains to improving stability control with accurate parameter estimation, teaches beginning in P [0076] the ability to determine a forgetting factor based on a difference in weight estimates, as well as a second forgetting factor with a smaller value than the first forgetting factor.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the prior weight estimate and iterative forgetting factors of Sun and Huang with the error based analysis for monitoring vehicle weight of Woo in order to ascertain the source of vehicle weight estimation error and modify a parameter accordingly to produce a valid parameter as in P [0088] of Sun.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-10 and 13-20 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Document ID: US 20240182043 A1
Invention pertains to vehicle mass estimation for use in various vehicle controls systems.
Document ID: US 20240343256 A1
Invention pertains to estimating vehicle weight and related parameter values to monitor the vehicle suspension system.
Document ID: KR 102219366 B1
Invention pertains to controlling the longitudinal acceleration of a bus based on the estimated weight.
Document ID: CN 117261919 A
Invention pertains to finely estimating the vehicle weight by iterating on multiple independent vehicle weight rough values with a forgetting factor.
Document ID: EP 4249340 A1
Invention pertains to estimating vehicle mass, especially in a turning condition.
Document ID: CN 117382651 A
Invention pertains to a recursive least square algorithm for an adjustable forgetting factor.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Dairon Estevez whose telephone number is (703)756-4552. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00AM - 4:00PM.
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, Khoi Tran can be reached at (571) 272-6919. 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.
/D.E./Examiner, Art Unit 3656
/KHOI H TRAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3656
Prosecution Insights