DETAILED ACTION
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a) because they fail to show sufficient detail so that one familiar with the specification can know what is being depicted without having to reference the specification as described in the specification. Any structural detail that is essential for a proper understanding of the disclosed invention should be shown in the drawing. MPEP § 608.02(d). Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
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.
The following title is suggested: Haptic Feedback for Steer-by-Wire System.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-3, 7, 9-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Hambloch (U.S. Pub. No. 2024/0124057).
Regarding claim 1, Hambloch discloses a method of operating a steer-by-wire steering system in a vehicle, the steer-by-wire steering system comprising a feedback actuator associated with a steering handle and a steering actuator, the method comprising:
during operation of the vehicle, generating and transmitting a first signal carrying information about at least one operating state to the steering handle by the feedback actuator as feedback to a driver of the vehicle;
generating a second signal that carries information regarding a responsibility of the driver for the operation; and
transmitting the second signal to the steering handle by the feedback actuator as feedback to the driver (¶12 discloses different ways that the feedback can manifest and lists different reasons for doing so allowing for an understanding of two different signals).
Regarding claim 2 which depends from claim 1, Hambloch discloses wherein the first signal carries information relating to a steering state of the vehicle and/or a road condition (¶12).
Regarding claim 3 which depends from claim 1, Hambloch discloses wherein the second signal carries information based on a level of automation of the vehicle (¶13 can be customized to include audio depending on desired signal).
Regarding claim 7 which depends from claim 1, Hambloch discloses wherein the feedback to the driver imparts a latching feeling to the steering handle with respect to a position (¶12 construed as vibration).
Regarding claim 9 which depends from claim 1, Hambloch discloses wherein the feedback to the driver is adjusted (¶12-13 discloses ways it can change).
Regarding claim 10 which depends from claim 1, Hambloch discloses wherein: the feedback to the driver is calculated in a vehicle control unit (¶16), and the feedback to the driver is overlaid onto a feedback signal from the feedback actuator (¶12 discloses the signal to the actuator).
Regarding claim 11 which depends from claim 10, Hambloch discloses wherein the vehicle control unit includes a steering control unit (¶16).
Regarding claim 12 which depends from claim 1, Hambloch discloses wherein synthetic mapping of a signature representing the second signal is performed using mathematical derivation (mechanical device option addressed) and/or reading from a mechanical device (¶3 discloses reading the vehicle going over a rough road to provide feedback).
Regarding claim 13 which depends from claim 1, Hambloch discloses an arrangement for operating an automated vehicle, comprising: an analysis unit, wherein the arrangement is configured to carry out the method according to claim 1 (ECU).
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) 4-6, 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hambloch (U.S. Pub. No. 2024/0124057) in view of Safour (U.S. Pat. No. 11,318,962).
Regarding claim 4 which depends from claim 3, Hambloch does not disclose wherein the second signal carries information related to a change in the level of automation.
Safour, which deals in steering wheel feedback, teaches wherein the second signal carries information related to a change in the level of automation (col. 15, lines 16-21).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have modified Hambloch with the feedback of Safour because this allows guidance to be given to the driver about the autonomous needs of the vehicle (col. 15, lines 20-25).
Regarding claim 5 which depends from claim 4, Hambloch discloses wherein the second signal carries information that the level of automation becomes greater than or equal to L3 (col. 9, lines 10-23 discloses that these changes are called “transitions” and discusses the changes that occur).
Regarding claim 6 which depends from claim 4, Hambloch discloses wherein the second signal carries information that the level of automation becomes less than L3 (col. 15, lines 27-30 discloses going from autonomous to manual).
Regarding claim 8 which depends from claim 7, Hambloch discloses wherein the latching feeling includes snapping or clicking (col. 9, lines 10-23 discloses how the steering wheel will no longer be controlled to follow the wheels when off and vice versa when off, this will be construed as a “latching feel” that can be described as a snap).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Please review when considering a response to this office action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GONZALO LAGUARDA whose telephone number is (571)272-5920. The examiner can normally be reached 8-5 M-Th Alt. 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, Logan Kraft can be reached at (571) 270-5065. 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.
GONZALO LAGUARDA
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3747 email: gonzalo.laguarda@uspto.gov
/GONZALO LAGUARDA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3747