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 .
Claim Status
Claims 1 and 11 have been amended. Claims 4 and 14 have been canceled.
Claims 1-3, 5-13, and 15-20 are pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed July 1st, 2026, with respect to claims 1-20 rejections under 35 USC 102(a)(1) have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant’s Arguments:
Applicant argues that Takebayashi et al. (20230286393; hereinafter Takebayashi, already of record) does not disclose of the claimed invention because the Takebayashi is related to limiting driving torque of a motor and does not disclose adjusting (e.g., increasing) the motor output through torque vectoring.
Examiner’s Response:
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. Under its broadest reasonable interpretation, “adjusting the torque command for at least one of the first and the second motors” can encompass nearly any adaptation to the torque output of either the first or second motor. Thus, decreasing the torque output constitutes an output adjustment of at least the first or second motor. Previously recited paragraphs of Takebayashi disclose:
“In one example, the motor control unit 67 distributes the target driving torque for the entire vehicle 1A to the front wheel driving motor 11F for the front wheels, the right rear wheel driving motor 11RR and the left rear wheel driving motor 11LR for the rear wheels, in accordance with a preset basic ratio. On straight travel, the motor control unit 67 distributes the driving torque distributed to the rear wheels, to the right rear wheel driving motor 11RR and the left rear wheel driving motor 11LR, evenly at a ratio of 5:5. When cornering, the motor control unit 67 distributes the driving torque distributed to the rear wheels, to the right rear wheel driving motor 11RR and the left rear wheel driving motor 11LR, to allow a ratio of the driving torque of the driving motor provided on the opposite side to a direction of cornering to be larger. The larger the curvature of the curve is, the larger the ratio of the driving torque to be distributed may be” ¶ 111
“Moreover, in a case where the output increase prediction unit 63 predicts that the driving torque of the left rear wheel driving motor 11LR or the right rear wheel driving motor 11RR becomes equal to or larger than the rated output torque because of the torque vectoring control to be carried out when the vehicle 1A passes through the curve, the output limiting unit 65 provides setting to limit the driving torque and the regenerative torque of the left rear wheel driving motor 11LR and the right rear wheel driving motor 11RR to the rated output or smaller. This makes it possible to suppress the temperature rise in the left rear wheel driving motor 11LR and the right rear wheel driving motor 11RR until the start of the torque vectoring control. Hence, it is possible to lower the peak of the temperature of the left rear wheel driving motor 11LR and the right rear wheel driving motor 11RR when passing through the curve” ¶ 114
Wherein it can be seen that Takebayashi discloses of torque vectoring control being carried out at either the first or second motor. It can be seen that the torque vector is adjusted based on the predicted curvature of the road to either increase (e.g., larger) or decrease (e.g., limit) the torque output of the motors. Therefore, Takebayashi does disclose of the claimed limitations, and the 35 USC 102(a)(1) rejection is proper and maintained. A detailed rejection follows below. Limitations have been bolded, and citation have been italicized, for readability.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5-13, and 15-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Takebayashi et al. (20230286393; hereinafter Takebayashi, already of record).
Regarding claim 1, Takebayashi teaches a motor driving apparatus comprising (Takebayashi: Abstract):
a first motor and a second motor, each independently driving a left wheel and a right wheel of a vehicle (Takebayashi: “the control apparatus is applied to a vehicle including two driving motors coupled to the left and right wheels, with respect to the front wheels, the rear wheels, or both” ¶ 106);
a first inverter unit driving the first motor through at least one inverter and a second inverter unit driving the second motor through at least one inverter (Takebayashi: “The inverter unit 13 includes a first inverter circuit, a second inverter circuit, and a third inverter circuit ... The second inverter circuit controls driving of the left rear wheel driving motor 11LR. The third inverter circuit controls driving of the right rear wheel driving motor 11RR” ¶ 108); and
a controller controlling the first inverter unit and the second inverter unit based on a torque command and an output limit for each of the first motor and the second motor (Takebayashi: “the control apparatus is applied to a vehicle including two driving motors coupled to the left and right wheels, with respect to the front wheels, the rear wheels, or both, and configured to carry out a torque vectoring control. The torque vectoring control includes assisting in cornering by generating a torque difference between the left and right wheels on the occasion of cornering of the vehicle. The control apparatus in this embodiment is configured to predict the outputs of the driving motors in carrying out the torque vectoring control” ¶ 110), wherein the controller performs torque vectoring to drive the left wheel and the right wheel with different torques by adjusting the torque command for at least one of the first motor and the second motor (Takebayashi: “When cornering, the motor control unit 67 distributes the driving torque distributed to the rear wheels, to the right rear wheel driving motor 11RR and the left rear wheel driving motor 11LR, to allow a ratio of the driving torque of the driving motor provided on the opposite side to a direction of cornering to be larger. The larger the curvature of the curve is, the larger the ratio of the driving torque to be distributed may be” ¶ 111), wherein the controller adjusts the output limit for the first motor based on the torque command, adjusted through the torque vectoring, for the first motor and on a present output limit for the first motor (Takebayashi: “Moreover, in a case where the output increase prediction unit 63 predicts that the driving torque of the left rear wheel driving motor 11LR or the right rear wheel driving motor 11RR becomes equal to or larger than the rated output torque because of the torque vectoring control to be carried out when the vehicle 1A passes through the curve, the output limiting unit 65 provides setting to limit the driving torque and the regenerative torque of the left rear wheel driving motor 11LR and the right rear wheel driving motor 11RR to the rated output or smaller” ¶ 114).
Regarding claim 2, Takebayashi teaches the motor driving apparatus of claim 1, wherein the controller performs the torque vectoring based on at least one of a torque command according to a required output of the vehicle, a steering angle of the vehicle, and a speed of the vehicle (Takebayashi: “the output increase prediction unit 63 predicts the brake operation and the accelerator operation by the driver on the basis of the current vehicle speed of the vehicle 1A detected by the vehicle state sensor 33 and the radius of curvature and the distance of the curve, and estimates the driving torque for the vehicle ... the output increase prediction unit 63 calculates driving torque obtained by distributing the driving torque distributed to the rear wheels to the left rear wheel driving motor 11LR and the right rear wheel driving motor 11RR in accordance with a distribution ratio of the torque vectoring” ¶ 120).
Regarding claim 3, Takebayashi teaches the motor driving apparatus of claim 2, wherein the controller performs the torque vectoring by adjusting the torque command for at least one of the first motor and the second motor by further considering a surface condition of a road on which the vehicle is driving (Takebayashi: “the method of calculating the driving torque as described above, on the basis of the radius of curvature and a length, i.e., a distance of continuation, of the curve” ¶ 112, “The presence or the absence of any curves ahead in the direction of travel of the vehicle 1A may be determined” ¶ 113).
Regarding claim 5, Takebayashi teaches the motor driving apparatus of claim 1, wherein the controller adjusts the output limit for the second motor based on the torque command, adjusted through the torque vectoring, for the second motor and on a present output limit for the second motor (Takebayashi: “in a case where the output increase prediction unit 63 predicts that the driving torque of the left rear wheel driving motor 11LR or the right rear wheel driving motor 11RR becomes equal to or larger than the rated output torque because of the torque vectoring control to be carried out when the vehicle 1A passes through the curve, the output limiting unit 65 provides setting to limit the driving torque” ¶ 114).
Regarding claim 6, Takebayashi teaches the motor driving apparatus of claim 1, wherein the controller increases the output limit for a motor, among the first motor and the second motor, with a torque command adjusted upward through the torque vectoring, based on the adjusted torque command and the present output limit (Takebayashi: “In a case without a determination as to the presence of any curves ahead (S55/No), the motor control unit 67 does not limit the outputs of the left rear wheel driving motor 11LR and the right rear wheel driving motor 11RR, but sets the target torque of the front wheel driving motor 11F, the left rear wheel driving motor 11LR, and the right rear wheel driving motor 11RR in the normal mode” ¶ 119).
Regarding claim 7, Takebayashi teaches the motor driving apparatus of claim 6, wherein the controller maintains the increased output limit for a preset period of time and restores the increased output limit to a level before the increasing when the preset period of time elapses (Takebayashi: “determines that the estimated driving torque of the left rear wheel driving motor 11LR during the execution of the torque vectoring control when the vehicle 1A passes through the curve becomes equal to or larger than the rated output torque. In this case, the mode of setting the target torque of the front wheel driving motor 11F, the left rear wheel driving motor 11LR, and the right rear wheel driving motor 11RR is switched from the normal mode to the output limited mode” ¶ 132, “After the time t22, the torque vectoring control is started, with the left rear wheel driving motor 11LR at a relatively low temperature. Hence, it is possible to delay the time of an arrival at a temperature at which the output of the left rear wheel driving motor 11LR is possibly lowered, making it possible to prevent lowered performance of the left rear wheel driving motor 11LR while passing through the curve” ¶ 133).
Regarding claim 8, Takebayashi teaches the motor driving apparatus of claim 6, wherein the controller increases the output limit when output limit increase conditions, including an output limit increase allowance setting, are satisfied (Takebayashi: “In a case without a determination as to the presence of any curves ahead (S55/No), the motor control unit 67 does not limit the outputs of the left rear wheel driving motor 11LR and the right rear wheel driving motor 11RR, but sets the target torque of the front wheel driving motor 11F, the left rear wheel driving motor 11LR, and the right rear wheel driving motor 11RR in the normal mode” ¶ 119, see also ¶ 120).
Regarding claim 9, Takebayashi teaches the motor driving apparatus of claim 1, wherein the first inverter unit and the second inverter unit each include a plurality of inverters, and drive the first motor and the second motor through one or all of the plurality of inverters based on a drive mode of each of the first motor and the second motor, respectively (Takebayashi: “The inverter unit 13 includes a first inverter circuit, a second inverter circuit, and a third inverter circuit. The first inverter circuit controls the driving of the front wheel driving motor 11F. The second inverter circuit controls driving of the left rear wheel driving motor 11LR. The third inverter circuit controls driving of the right rear wheel driving motor 11RR. Otherwise. the configuration of the vehicle 1A may be similar to the configuration of the vehicle 1 illustrated in FIG. 1, and description thereof is omitted” ¶ 108, see also ¶ 125).
Regarding claim 10, Takebayashi teaches the motor driving apparatus of claim 9, wherein the output limit is determined based on the drive mode (Takebayashi: “the mode of setting the target torque of the front wheel driving motor 11F, the left rear wheel driving motor 11LR, and the right rear wheel driving motor 11RR is switched from the normal mode to the output limited mode. The output limited mode is continued until the time t22 of an arrival at the position of the start of the execution of the torque vectoring control. At the time t22, the mode of setting the target torque of the front wheel driving motor 11F, the left rear wheel driving motor 11LR, and the right rear wheel driving motor 11RR is restored to the normal mode from the output limited mode” ¶ 132).
In regards to claim(s) 11-13 and 15-20, the claim(s) recite analogous limitations to claim(s) 1-3 and 5-10, and are therefore rejected under the same premise.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Omata et al. (20190296670) is in the similar field of endeavor of electric motor control as the claimed invention.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CLINT V PHAM whose telephone number is (571)272-4543. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5.
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 at 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 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.
/C.P./Examiner, Art Unit 3663
/ABBY J FLYNN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3663
Prosecution Insights