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 .
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis 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.
Status of Claims
This Office Action is in response to the application filed on 11/20/2024. Claims 1-20 are presently pending and are presented for examination.
Priority
Priority to U.S. App. No. 16/514,396 dated 7/17/2019 is acknowledged.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 8, and 15-16 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1 as presented currently states “A steer by wire system, the system comprising…” to which the Examiner recommends updating to instead state “A steer by wire system, the steer by wire system comprising…” for the sake of consistency.
Claim 8 as presented currently states “…a controller configures to…” to which the Examiner recommends updating to instead state “…a controller configured to…” to recite proper grammar.
Claim 8 as presented currently states “…a handwheel orientation offset value…a handwheel orientation offset value…” to which the Examiner recommends updating to instead state “…a handwheel orientation offset value…[ [ a ] ] the handwheel orientation offset value…” so as to avoid potential misinterpretation.
Claim 8 as presented currently states “…a predetermined handwheel zero value…a predetermined handwheel zero value…” to which the Examiner recommends updating to instead state “…a predetermined handwheel zero value…[ [ a ] ] the predetermined handwheel zero value…” so as to avoid potential misinterpretation.
Claim 15 as presented currently states “…the handwheel actuator…” to which the Examiner recommends updating to instead state “…[ [ the ] ] a handwheel actuator…” so as to avoid potential misinterpretation.
Claim 15 as presented currently states “…the handwheel torque…” to which the Examiner recommends updating to instead state “…[ [ the ] ] a handwheel torque…” so as to avoid potential misinterpretation.
Claim 16 as presented currently states “…the predetermined handwheel orientation threshold…” to which the Examiner recommends updating to instead state “…[ [ the ] ] a predetermined handwheel orientation threshold…” so as to avoid potential misinterpretation.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claim 17 recites a controller readable storage medium which stores program instructions. The specification does not set forth what constitutes a controller readable storage medium, and therefore, in view of the ordinary and customary meaning of computer storage medium and in accordance with the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim, said medium could be directed towards a transitory propagating signal per se and considered to be non-statutory subject matter. See In re Nuijten, 500 F.3d 1346, 1356-57 (Fed. Cir. 2007).
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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
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.
Claims 1-6, 8-13, and 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ueyama (US-2018/0339727) in view of Turner (US-2012/0041658).
Regarding claim 1, Ueyama discloses a steer by wire system, the system comprising:
…responsive to a handwheel orientation defined by an angular position of a handwheel having a handwheel orientation offset value corresponding to a substantially straight desired direction of travel with respect to a predetermined handwheel zero value (see Ueyama at least [0047] "More specifically, the pair of torque sensors 42 are constructed of a first resolver 42a and a second resolver 42b. A twist amount of the first torsion bar 41 is detected based on a difference between a rotation angle θ1 of the first shaft 211 detected by the first resolver 42a and a rotation angle θ2 of the second shaft 212 detected by the second resolver 42b. Further, a steering torque T input to the steering wheel 11 is calculated based on the detected twist amount.") and at least one of a yaw rate associated with a change rate of a yaw position about a yaw axis being less than a predetermined yaw rate threshold (see Ueyama at least [0114] "Thus, the second device sets a threshold value for the start of the assist by the EHPS 50 to each of three indicators including (1) the steering speed, (2) the yaw rate of the vehicle, and (3) the lateral acceleration of the vehicle in order to delay the start of the assist by the EHPS 50 as much as possible..." and [0119] "A yaw rate Yr is detected by a yaw rate sensor (not shown) provided in the vehicle...") or a lateral acceleration being less than a predetermined lateral acceleration threshold (see Ueyama at least [0114] "Thus, the second device sets a threshold value for the start of the assist by the EHPS 50 to each of three indicators including (1) the steering speed, (2) the yaw rate of the vehicle, and (3) the lateral acceleration of the vehicle in order to delay the start of the assist by the EHPS 50 as much as possible..." and [0122] "A lateral acceleration Gy is detected by a lateral acceleration sensor (not shown) provided in the vehicle..."), operate a roadwheel actuator (see Ueyama at least Fig 1 and [0071] "The first device 10 drives the first electric motor 44 and the second electric motor 54 so that a sum Ta of an assist torque Ta1 applied by the EPS 40 to the steering shaft 20 and an assist torque Ta2 applied by the EHPS 50 to the rack shaft 30 corresponds to the required assist torque Ta*... The assist torque Ta2 applied by the EHPS 50 to the rack shaft 30 is hereinafter also referred to as “second assist torque Ta2”.") such that a position command to the roadwheel actuator based on the handwheel orientation corresponding to the handwheel orientation offset value in an opposite direction (see Ueyama at least [0074] "When the steering torque T starts increasing from “0” (the steering wheel 11 is rotated toward the left steering direction), valve opening degrees (the flow passage cross sectional areas of the first flow passage P12 and the fourth flow passage P34) of the valves V1 and V2 gradually increase, while valve opening degrees (the flow passage cross sectional areas of the second flow passage P13 and the third flow passage P24) of the valves V3 and V4 gradually decrease... As a result, a rate (gradient) of an increase in the second assist torque Ta2 gradually increases, and the second assist torque Ta2 finally increases at an approximately constant rate. On the other hand, when the steering torque T starts decreasing from “0” (the steering wheel 11 is rotated toward the right steering direction), a rate (gradient) of a decrease of the second assist torque Ta2 gradually increases, and the second assist torque Ta2 finally decreases at an approximately constant rate..." [0100] "Then, at Step 830, the CPU estimates the second assist torque Ta2. More specifically, as described above, first, the CPU applies the acquired steering torque T and vehicle speed V to the lookup table MapTa2 (T, V) stored in the ROM, to thereby calculate the static second assist torque Ta2..." and [0107] "...Thus, the second assist torque Ta2 increases when the magnitude |T| of the steering torque is increasing...") to reduce a difference between the handwheel orientation offset value and the predetermined handwheel zero value (see Ueyama at least Fig 4, which depicts a steering torque plotted against an assist torque; a decrease in steering torque correlates to less rotation on the steering wheel, from a neutral “zero” position; thus, when the roadwheel motor provides assist torque, the required steering torque will lessen).
However, while Ueyama describes motor assisted controls according to a steering wheel orientation, Ueyama does not explicitly disclose the following:
…a controller operable to, responsive to a handwheel orientation defined by an angular position of a handwheel having a handwheel orientation offset value corresponding to a substantially straight desired direction of travel with respect to a predetermined handwheel zero value…
Turner, in the same field of endeavor, teaches the following:
…a controller (see Turner at least [0035] "Alternatively, instead of with the ECU 36, the wheels speed sensors 42L, 42R can be in electrical communication with an additional controller (not illustrated) that is different from the ECU 36. This additional controller can be in electrical communication with the ECU 36. This additional controller can be utilized to affect a different control system of the vehicle 12, such as, but not limited to, an anti-lock brake system (not illustrated). This additional controller can be configured to receive processed data from the wheel speed sensors 42L, 42R or to receive the raw data from the wheel speed sensors 42L, 42R and process the raw data to indicate a rotational velocity of the respective wheels 12L, 16R. Then, this additional controller can electrically communicate the processed data to the ECU 36.") operable to, responsive to a handwheel orientation defined by an angular position of a handwheel having a handwheel orientation offset value corresponding to a substantially straight desired direction of travel with respect to a predetermined handwheel zero value (see Turner at least [0041] "After the ECU 36 determines the steering angle signal, .delta..sub.AWD, the ECU 36 can proceed to step S104 where the ECU 36 can determine whether torque vectoring through the rear wheels 16L, 16R is appropriate for the given dynamic conditions of the vehicle 12. That is, the ECU 36 can determine at step S104 whether to supplement the operator's input to the steering wheel by driving one of the rear wheels 16L, 16R with more torque that the other of the rear wheels 16L, 16R. In general, when the steering angle signal, .delta..sub.AWD, indicates the neutral position, the ECU 36 can determine that the vehicle 12 is traveling along a substantially straight path or that the operator intends to direct the vehicle along a substantially straight path... Thus, the steering angle signal, .delta..sub.AWD, can be analyzed by the ECU 36 in conjunction with other dynamic data, such as, but not limited to, yaw rate, lateral acceleration, longitudinal acceleration and individual wheel speeds, to determine whether to supplement the driver's steering input with torque vectoring through the wheels 16L, 16R..." and [0137] "At step S127, the ECU 36 can select the constant predetermined value to estimate the steering angle signal, .delta..sub.AWD. This predetermined value can have any appropriate value. In this exemplary embodiment, this predetermined value can be zero...")…
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the steering assist controls as disclosed by Ueyama with a handwheel offset value determination as taught by Turner with a reasonable expectation of success so that the vehicle’s ECU may implement assistance control at appropriate times (see Turner at least [0006]-[0009]).
Regarding claim 2, Ueyama in view of Turner teach the steer by wire system of claim 1, wherein the controller is operable to operate the roadwheel actuator to reduce the difference until the predetermined handwheel zero value corresponds to the substantially straight desired direction of travel (see Ueyama at least Fig 4, which depicts a steering torque plotted against an assist torque; a decrease in steering torque correlates to less rotation on the steering wheel, from a neutral “zero” position; thus, when the roadwheel motor provides assist torque, the required steering torque will lessen).
Regarding claim 3, Ueyama in view of Turner teach the steer by wire system of claim 1, wherein the substantially straight desired direction of travel is defined by a predetermined deadband threshold (see Turner at least Fig 5 and [0086] "…The angle threshold can be a predetermined constant that can be indicative of a substantially straight path in accordance with the desired precision and accuracy for the straight travel assessment and the dynamic performance desired for the vehicle 12. In an exemplary embodiment, the angle threshold can be approximately 5.degree. . If the ECU 36 determines at step S140 that the first steering angle, .delta..sub.V, is less than the angle threshold, then the ECU 36 can determine that at least one possible parameter of the second straight judgment indicates a substantially straight path of travel by the vehicle 12.").
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the substantially straight determination as taught by Ueyama in view of Turner with a deadband threshold such as further taught by Turner with a reasonable expectation of success so as to as to accurately and reliably estimate when the vehicle is travelling straight according to various determinations (see Turner at least [0083]).
Regarding claim 4, Ueyama in view of Turner teach the steer by wire system of claim 1, wherein the controller is further operable to receive the handwheel orientation and the yaw rate (see Ueyama at least [0119] "A yaw rate Yr is detected by a yaw rate sensor (not shown) provided in the vehicle. A detection value output from the yaw rate sensor is set so as to take a positive value when the steering wheel 11 is rotated toward the left steering direction, and a negative value when the steering wheel 11 is rotated toward the right steering direction. When a magnitude (absolute value) |Yr| of the yaw rate changes from a value lower than a threshold yaw rate Yrth to a value equal to or higher than the threshold yaw rate Yrth, the second device starts the assist by the EHPS 50. Further, as shown in FIG. 10B, the second device has stored in the ROM a lookup table MapYrth (d|Yr|/dt) defined so that the threshold yaw rate Yrth decreases as a change rate (increase amount) d|Yr|/dt per unit time of the magnitude |Yr| of the yaw rate increases.").
Regarding claim 5, Ueyama in view of Turner teach the steer by wire system of claim 1, wherein the controller is further operable to receive instructions to operate the roadwheel actuator based on the handwheel orientation offset value and the yaw rate to reduce the difference (see Ueyama at least [0119] "A yaw rate Yr is detected by a yaw rate sensor (not shown) provided in the vehicle. A detection value output from the yaw rate sensor is set so as to take a positive value when the steering wheel 11 is rotated toward the left steering direction, and a negative value when the steering wheel 11 is rotated toward the right steering direction. When a magnitude (absolute value) |Yr| of the yaw rate changes from a value lower than a threshold yaw rate Yrth to a value equal to or higher than the threshold yaw rate Yrth, the second device starts the assist by the EHPS 50. Further, as shown in FIG. 10B, the second device has stored in the ROM a lookup table MapYrth (d|Yr|/dt) defined so that the threshold yaw rate Yrth decreases as a change rate (increase amount) d|Yr|/dt per unit time of the magnitude |Yr| of the yaw rate increases.").
Regarding claim 6, Ueyama in view of Turner teach the steer by wire system of claim 1, wherein the roadwheel actuator is a power steering electric motor configured to operate a pinion associated with a rack (see Ueyama at least Fig 1, [0050] "The second steering shaft 22 includes an input shaft 221 and an output shaft (hereinafter also referred to as “pinion shaft”) 222. A second torsion bar 51 is provided between the input shaft 221 and the output shaft 222." [0052] "The rack shaft 30 includes a shaft part 31. Steered wheels FW1 and FW2 are coupled to both ends of the shaft part 31 via knuckle arms (not shown). A rack part 32 meshing with the pinion gear 222a is formed on the shaft part 31. A rack and pinion mechanism is constructed of the pinion gear 222a and the rack part 32." and [0071] "The first device 10 drives the first electric motor 44 and the second electric motor 54 so that a sum Ta of an assist torque Ta1 applied by the EPS 40 to the steering shaft 20 and an assist torque Ta2 applied by the EHPS 50 to the rack shaft 30 corresponds to the required assist torque Ta*...").
Regarding claim 8, Ueyama in view of Turner teach the analogous material of that in claim 1 as recited in the instant claim and is rejected for similar reasons.
Regarding claim 9, Ueyama in view of Turner teach the analogous material of that in claim 2 as recited in the instant claim and is rejected for similar reasons.
Regarding claim 10, Ueyama in view of Turner teach the analogous material of that in claim 3 as recited in the instant claim and is rejected for similar reasons.
Regarding claim 11, Ueyama in view of Turner teach the analogous material of that in claim 4 as recited in the instant claim and is rejected for similar reasons.
Regarding claim 12, Ueyama in view of Turner teach the analogous material of that in claim 5 as recited in the instant claim and is rejected for similar reasons.
Regarding claim 13, Ueyama in view of Turner teach the analogous material of that in claim 6 as recited in the instant claim and is rejected for similar reasons.
Regarding claim 15, Ueyama in view of Turner teach the apparatus of claim 8, wherein the handwheel actuator is a handwheel electric motor configured to apply the handwheel torque to the handwheel (see Ueyama at least Fig 1, [0048] "The electric assist motor 44 is coupled to the second shaft 212 via the speed reducer 45, and is configured to rotate at a rotation speed in accordance with a control command from a control unit (ECU) 70, which is described later, to thereby generate a rotational driving force..." and [0088] "In this way, the first device 10 starts the drive of the electric assist motor 44 immediately after the steering wheel 11 is operated. As a result, the EPS 40 can generate the first assist torque Ta1, which is required from the initial stage of the steering. A relatively small motor is employed as the electric assist motor 44 based on a need for decreasing a cost and a mounting space, and the maximum torque that can be generated by the electric assist motor 44 is thus relatively low.").
Regarding claim 16, Ueyama in view of Turner teach the apparatus of claim 8, wherein the predetermined handwheel orientation threshold is based on a vehicle speed (see Turner at least [0073] "The lateral threshold can be a constant predetermined value or it can be a variable predetermined value. Generally, lateral acceleration varies as a function of vehicle speed. Thus, using a lateral threshold that can vary as a function of speed can enhance the precision and accuracy of the straight travel estimation during step S140.").
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the threshold as taught by Ueyama in view of Turner with a consideration of vehicle speed such as further taught by Turner with a reasonable expectation of success so as to as to accurately and reliably estimate when the vehicle is travelling straight according to various determinations (see Turner at least [0083]).
Claims 7, 14, and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ueyama in view of Turner, and further in view of Tamura et al. (US-2015/0025745; hereinafter Tamura).
Regarding claim 7, Ueyama in view of Turner teach the steer by wire system of claim 1. While Ueyama discloses …the roadwheel actuator is operated… according to certain conditions, and Turner teaches the monitoring of handwheel orientations, neither reference explicitly discloses or teaches the following:
[controls] responsive to the handwheel orientation offset value being less than a predetermined handwheel orientation threshold.
Tamura, in the same field of endeavor, teaches the following:
[controls] responsive to the handwheel orientation offset value being less than a predetermined handwheel orientation threshold (see Tamura at least Fig 3, [0096] "Incidentally, the initial value of the anti-unidirectional-drift steering angle value may be set to, for example, 0 degree. The initial value of the anti-unidirectional-drift steering angle value may be set, for example, when the steering angle of the steering wheel H is less than a predetermined steering angle threshold value, to a steering angle of the steering wheel H at that time..." and [0099] "In addition, the mapping information of the current value relative to the anti-unidirectional-drift steering angle value is set to have characteristics in which the electric motor 3 is supplied with such a current that suppresses motion of the electric motor 3 against a force causing a unidirectional drift behavior to the vehicle C. It is because the suppression of motion of the electric motor 3 leads to suppression of the movement of the steering wheel H, which in turn reduces the physical burden of the driver for making a steering effort on the steering wheel H.").
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the vehicle controls as taught by Ueyama in view of Turner with specific controls such as taught by Tamura with a reasonable expectation of success so as to provide a feeling of comfort to a driver when experiencing occurrences such as crosswinds (see Tamura at least [0005]).
Regarding claim 14, Ueyama in view of Turner and Tamura teach the analogous material of that in claim 7 as recited in the instant claim and is rejected for similar reasons.
Regarding claim 17, Ueyama in view of Turner and Tamura teach the analogous material of that in claims 1 and 7 as recited in the instant claim and is rejected for similar reasons. Additionally, Ueyama in view of Turner teach the following:
…operate a handwheel actuator such that a torque command to the handwheel actuator (see Ueyama at least [0068] "The ECU 70 is electrically connected to the electric assist motor 44 and the hydraulic-pump drive electric motor 54. The ECU 70 is electrically connected to the torque sensor 42, the vehicle speed sensor 71, and the like, and is configured to receive output signals from those sensors. As described above, the torque sensor 42 is configured to calculate the steering torque T input to the steering wheel 11, and generate an output signal indicating the steering torque T...") based on a rack force observer (see Turner at least [0032] "...In another example, the steering angle sensor 38 can lie adjacent the steering rack (not illustrated) to detect linear movement of the steering rack... Other configurations of the steering angle sensor 38 are also possible. The data from the steering angle sensor 38 can be processed by the steering angle sensor 38 or by the ECU 36 to determine the steering angle signal, .delta..sub.AWD. From the steering angle signal, .delta..sub.AWD, the ECU 36 can determine the operator's intended directional target for the vehicle 12. Further details regarding the determination and usage of the steering angle signal, .delta..sub.AWD, by the ECU 36 are provided below.") is a magnitude corresponding to the handwheel orientation offset value in an opposite direction to reduce a difference between a handwheel torque and a steady state resistance torque (see Ueyama at least Fig 3 and [0071] "The first device 10 drives the first electric motor 44 and the second electric motor 54 so that a sum Ta of an assist torque Ta1 applied by the EPS 40 to the steering shaft 20 and an assist torque Ta2 applied by the EHPS 50 to the rack shaft 30 corresponds to the required assist torque Ta*. The assist torque Ta1 applied by the EPS 40 to the steering shaft 20 is hereinafter also referred to as “first assist torque Ta1”...").
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the steering control such as taught by Ueyama in view of Turner with a sensor such as further taught by Turner so as to accurately control the vehicle according to a user’s input (see Turner at least [0006]).
Regarding claim 18, Ueyama in view of Turner and Tamura teach the analogous material of that in claim 1 as recited in the instant claim and is rejected for similar reasons.
Regarding claim 19, Ueyama in view of Turner and Tamura teach the analogous material of that in claim 2 as recited in the instant claim and is rejected for similar reasons.
Regarding claim 20, Ueyama in view of Turner and Tamura teach the analogous material of that in claim 3 as recited in the instant claim and is rejected for similar reasons.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Bar (US-2014/0005892) teaches the generation of a corrective yaw moment utilized in a vehicle in response to an unintended lateral offset.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SEAN REIDY whose telephone number is (571) 272-7660. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 7:00 AM- 3:00 PM.
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, Abby Flynn can be reached on (571) 272-9855. 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.
/S.P.R./Examiner, Art Unit 3663
/ABBY J FLYNN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3663