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 .
This is a Final Office Action on the merits. Claims 1, 3-4, and 6-9 are currently pending and are addressed below.
Response to Amendment
The specification was objected to due to minor informalities. Applicant amended the specification accordingly; therefore, the specification objection is withdrawn.
The interpretation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) has been withdrawn in view of the amendments to claims 1, 3, and 6-8.
Response to Arguments
In view of Applicant’s arguments on pg. 5 of the response and the prior conducted interview, the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-8 under 35 U.S.C. 103 has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Nabeshima.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) (IDS) submitted on 04/24/2026 is/are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement(s) is/are being considered by the examiner.
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.
Claim Objections
Claims 3 and 8 objected to because of the following informalities:
Claims 3-4 are dependent on claim 2, which was canceled by the Applicant.
Claim 8 recites “…acquiring torque information on an output torque of the vehicle in the process as the target; and an abnormality…”, in which the underlined portion appears to be grammatically incorrect. It appears the word “detecting” from the original claims dated 11/22/2024 (“…detecting an abnormality…”) was removed in error in the claim markup.
Appropriate correction is required.
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) 1, 3-4, and 6-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nabeshima of JP 2021062790 A, published 04/22/2021, hereinafter “Nabeshima”, in view of Ono of JP 2017008849 A, published 01/12/2017, hereinafter “Ono”.
Regarding claim 1, Nabeshima teaches:
A monitoring device that, in a factory in which a plurality of processes for manufacturing a vehicle that travels via unmanned driving is performed, monitors the vehicle that is an object of the processes, the monitoring device comprising: (See at least [0013]: “This embodiment describes a case in which the present invention is applied as a transport system for self-propelling a completed vehicle, which has a powertrain including a driving force source (e.g., an engine) and a steering system mounted on the vehicle body, in a vehicle production line. Furthermore, the present invention is not limited to a transport system for self-propelled completed vehicles, but can also be applied as a transport system for self-propelled vehicles that have become self-propelled by the installation of a powertrain (self-propelled unfinished vehicles)” & [0016]: “As shown in Figure 1, the transport system 1 according to this embodiment is configured to include a wireless terminal 2 mounted on a vehicle V that moves along the production line L, a camera 3 as an imaging means, a self-propelled control system 4, an electronic inspection device 5, and a router 6.”)
a processor programmed to: acquire process information on a process as a target among a plurality of processes in which the weight of a vehicle increases in stages as components are assembled onto the vehicle; (See at least [0025-0029]: “The wireless terminal 2 is then installed on the vehicle (completed vehicle) V after the vehicle body, which has been transported by a conveyor or the like in the transport area, has been fitted with the powertrain, steering system, etc., and the vehicle V has been completed” & [0031-0032]: “The self-propelled control system 4 receives image information of the vehicle V on the self-propelled area L1 captured by the camera 3, and also receives self-propelled state information transmitted wirelessly by the wireless terminal 2 via the electronic inspection device 5. The self-propelled control system 4 then calculates motion command values for driving the vehicle V along the self-propelled area L1 of the production line L, based on the position information of the vehicle V on the self-propelled area L1 obtained from the image information and the self-propelled state information. Specifically, the self-propelled control system 4 pre-stores information on the appropriate vehicle speed and travel path (ideal vehicle speed and travel path) when the vehicle V is driven along the self-propelled area L1 of the production line L. Based on the position information of the vehicle V obtained from the image information and the self-propelled state information, it calculates the deviation between the current vehicle speed and travel path (the position of the vehicle V on the production line L) and the ideal vehicle speed and travel path. It then calculates a correction amount to correct the vehicle speed and travel path from the current vehicle speed and travel path to the ideal vehicle speed and travel path.”)
acquire torque information on an output torque of the vehicle in the process as the target; and (See at least [0039]: “As the transport system 1 is configured as described above, the self-propelled control system 4, the electronic inspection device 5, and the router 6 constitute the self-propelled control wireless instruction information transmission unit 10 (a self-propelled control wireless instruction information transmission unit that receives image information of the vehicle captured by the imaging means, wirelessly receives self-propelled state quantity information including at least the state quantity of the driving force source from a wireless terminal, and wirelessly transmits self-propelled control wireless instruction information to the wireless terminal, which includes at least the motion instruction value of the driving force source necessary to propel the vehicle along the production line, based on the vehicle position information obtained based on the image information and the self-propelled state quantity information).”)
Nabeshima does not explicitly teach:
detect an abnormality in the output torque of the vehicle by using the output torque of the vehicle represented by the torque information, the process represented by the process information, and a torque-related criterion set in association with the process that is related to a waveform representing the output torque acquired in time series.
Ono teaches:
detect an abnormality in the output torque of the vehicle by using the output torque of the vehicle represented by the torque information, the process represented by the process information, and a torque-related criterion set in association with the process that is related to a waveform representing the output torque acquired in time series. (See at least Figs. 9A-9B, [0124]: “In step 1901, it is checked whether the difference between the amount of change in estimated generated torque (Δ40ET) over 40 ms and the amount of change in allowable generated torque (Δ40LT) is greater than a predetermined judgment threshold (KD40H). If the check result is YES, the process proceeds to step 1902, where the counter (CN40H) is counted up. Thereafter, in step 1904, it is checked whether the counter (CN40H) is equal to or greater than a predetermined counter threshold (KCN40H) for counter checking. If the check result is Yes, the abnormality flag (FLCN40HNG) is set to 1 in step 1905…”, [0075-0076]: “A judgment threshold 1 line 907 is a judgment threshold 1 for detecting an abnormality, and if the time period during which the judgment threshold 1 is exceeded continues for a predetermined time or longer, it is judged to be abnormal…An estimated generated torque line 913 shows the behavior of the estimated generated torque, and it can be seen from FIG. 9B that the estimated generated torque is in a state where it increases from time A due to the occurrence of an abnormality” & [0168]: “The system includes an abnormality detection unit that detects an abnormal state of the engine's estimated generated torque by comparing an index value calculated from the amount of change in the allowable generated torque and the amount of change in the estimated generated torque with a judgment threshold calculated based on a predetermined engine or vehicle state…”)
Although Ono does not explicitly teach a vehicle manufacturing process, Ono does teach that changes in vehicle condition, such as vehicle weight, require adjusting the judgement threshold value used for comparing the estimated generated torque with an allowable generated torque: “…if the vehicle condition changes, mainly if the vehicle weight or the vehicle's driving environment (the gradient of the road) changes, the above-mentioned judgment threshold can be modified to accurately determine abnormalities” (See at least [0085-0086] of Ono). [0068] of the instant specification demonstrates a similar relationship between a torque threshold and vehicle weight, except in a vehicle manufacturing process: “…Therefore, as the components are assembled, the weight of vehicle 100 is increased. Therefore, in the process at which the vehicle 100 is located, that is, the torque needed for the vehicle 100 to travel varies depending on the weight of the vehicle 100… in order to respond to the change in the weight of the vehicle 100, a different value is set for each process as the threshold value of the torque of the vehicle 100”. Since Ono addresses a similar problem as the claimed invention, one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have found it obvious to apply the teachings of Ono to the vehicle manufacturing process of Nabeshima, which provides the benefit of “improv[ing] the accuracy of abnormality judgment” in a vehicle manufacturing process (See at least [0171] of Ono).
One having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have found it obvious to combine Nabeshima’s monitoring device used in vehicle manufacturing with Ono’s technique of detecting an abnormality in the output torque of the vehicle. Doing so would be obvious “to improve the accuracy of abnormality judgment” in a manufacturing process (See at least [0171] of Ono).
Regarding claim 3, Nabeshima and Ono in combination teach all the limitations of canceled claim 2.
Ono additionally teaches:
wherein: a threshold value of the output torque in the process is set as the torque-related criterion; and (See at least [0126]: “…The determination threshold value (KD40L) here is set to be smaller than the determination threshold value (KD40H) used in step 1901. This is because the judgment threshold value (KD40H) in step 1901 is set to reliably detect an abnormal state, and the judgment threshold value (KD40L) in step 1907 is set to make a judgment when an abnormality has occurred but it is difficult to determine whether the state is normal.”)
the processor is programmed to, when a value of the output torque is greater than the threshold value of the output torque, determine that there is the abnormality in the output torque of the vehicle. (See at least [0124]: “In step 1901, it is checked whether the difference between the amount of change in estimated generated torque (Δ40ET) over 40 ms and the amount of change in allowable generated torque (Δ40LT) is greater than a predetermined judgment threshold (KD40H). If the check result is YES, the process proceeds to step 1902, where the counter (CN40H) is counted up. Thereafter, in step 1904, it is checked whether the counter (CN40H) is equal to or greater than a predetermined counter threshold (KCN40H) for counter checking. If the check result is Yes, the abnormality flag (FLCN40HNG) is set to 1 in step 1905…”)
Regarding claim 4, Nabeshima and Ono in combination teach all the limitations of claim 3 as discussed above.
Nabeshima and Ono in combination do not explicitly teach:
wherein, as a first threshold value of the output torque set for a first process among the processes, a value smaller than a second threshold value of the output torque set for a second process that is performed later than the first process is set.
However, Ono does teach detecting an abnormality if the difference between the change in estimated generated torque and the change in allowable generated torque exceeds the judgment threshold, and, if the vehicle weight changes (i.e., from a “first process” to a “second process”), then the judgment threshold can be adjusted accordingly to improve the accuracy of detecting the abnormality (See at least [0075], [0077], [0080] & [0085-0090]). [0120]). Since the judgment threshold changes based on changes in vehicle weight, the combination of Nabeshima and Ono render obvious a lower threshold value for a first process and a higher threshold value for a second, later process, which provides the benefit of “if the vehicle condition changes, mainly if the vehicle weight or the vehicle's driving environment (the gradient of the road) changes, the above-mentioned judgment threshold can be modified to accurately determine abnormalities” (See [0086] of Ono).
Regarding claim 6, Nabeshima and Ono in combination teach all the limitations of claim 1 as discussed above.
Nabeshima additionally teaches:
wherein the processor is programmed to: generate a control instruction for remotely controlling driving of the vehicle and transmit the generated control instruction to the vehicle, wherein: (See at least [0042]: “First, when the vehicle (finished vehicle) V reaches the self-propelled area L1 from the transport area of the production line L, self-propelled control instruction information (basic self-propelled control instruction information that does not reflect the motion instruction values from the self-propelled control system 4) that has been pre-stored in the wireless terminal 2 (wireless terminal connected to the DLC3 connector via a communication cable) mounted on the vehicle V is output to the various ECUs 71 to 75 (communication operation A in Figure 2), and the self-propelled movement of the vehicle V begins as the various devices mounted on the vehicle V (various devices controlled by the ECUs 71 to 75) operate according to the self-propelled control instruction information.”)
Ono additionally teaches:
when the abnormality in the output torque of the vehicle is detected, notify the control instruction generation unit that the abnormality in the output torque is detected; and (See at least [0124]: “In step 1901, it is checked whether the difference between the amount of change in estimated generated torque (Δ40ET) over 40 ms and the amount of change in allowable generated torque (Δ40LT) is greater than a predetermined judgment threshold (KD40H). If the check result is YES, the process proceeds to step 1902, where the counter (CN40H) is counted up. Thereafter, in step 1904, it is checked whether the counter (CN40H) is equal to or greater than a predetermined counter threshold (KCN40H) for counter checking. If the check result is Yes, the abnormality flag (FLCN40HNG) is set to 1 in step 1905...”)
when being notified of the abnormality in the output torque, generate the control instruction to stop the vehicle or to reduce a traveling speed of the vehicle to a speed lower than a current speed. (See at least [0049]: “In the event of an abnormality, the electronic throttle motor 204 is driven so that the throttle valve moves in a direction that suppresses the output of the engine 201, or fail-safe processing is executed to mechanically operate the throttle valve by stopping the driving of the electronic throttle motor 204.”)
Regarding claim 7, Nabeshima and Ono in combination teach all the limitations of claim 1 as discussed above.
Ono additionally teaches:
wherein the processor is programmed to, when the abnormality in the output torque of the vehicle is detected, notify the vehicle that the abnormality in the output torque of the vehicle is detected. (See at least [0124]: “In step 1901, it is checked whether the difference between the amount of change in estimated generated torque (Δ40ET) over 40 ms and the amount of change in allowable generated torque (Δ40LT) is greater than a predetermined judgment threshold (KD40H). If the check result is YES, the process proceeds to step 1902, where the counter (CN40H) is counted up. Thereafter, in step 1904, it is checked whether the counter (CN40H) is equal to or greater than a predetermined counter threshold (KCN40H) for counter checking. If the check result is Yes, the abnormality flag (FLCN40HNG) is set to 1 in step 1905…”)
Regarding claim 8, Nabeshima teaches:
A method of, in a factory in which a plurality of processes for manufacturing a vehicle that travels via unmanned driving is performed, monitoring the vehicle that is an object of the processes, the method comprising: (See at least [0013]: “This embodiment describes a case in which the present invention is applied as a transport system for self-propelling a completed vehicle, which has a powertrain including a driving force source (e.g., an engine) and a steering system mounted on the vehicle body, in a vehicle production line. Furthermore, the present invention is not limited to a transport system for self-propelled completed vehicles, but can also be applied as a transport system for self-propelled vehicles that have become self-propelled by the installation of a powertrain (self-propelled unfinished vehicles)” & [0016]: “As shown in Figure 1, the transport system 1 according to this embodiment is configured to include a wireless terminal 2 mounted on a vehicle V that moves along the production line L, a camera 3 as an imaging means, a self-propelled control system 4, an electronic inspection device 5, and a router 6.”)
acquiring process information on a process as a target among a plurality of processes in which the weight of a vehicle increases in stages as components are assembled onto the vehicle; (See at least [0025-0029]: “The wireless terminal 2 is then installed on the vehicle (completed vehicle) V after the vehicle body, which has been transported by a conveyor or the like in the transport area, has been fitted with the powertrain, steering system, etc., and the vehicle V has been completed” & [0031-0032]: “The self-propelled control system 4 receives image information of the vehicle V on the self-propelled area L1 captured by the camera 3, and also receives self-propelled state information transmitted wirelessly by the wireless terminal 2 via the electronic inspection device 5. The self-propelled control system 4 then calculates motion command values for driving the vehicle V along the self-propelled area L1 of the production line L, based on the position information of the vehicle V on the self-propelled area L1 obtained from the image information and the self-propelled state information. Specifically, the self-propelled control system 4 pre-stores information on the appropriate vehicle speed and travel path (ideal vehicle speed and travel path) when the vehicle V is driven along the self-propelled area L1 of the production line L. Based on the position information of the vehicle V obtained from the image information and the self-propelled state information, it calculates the deviation between the current vehicle speed and travel path (the position of the vehicle V on the production line L) and the ideal vehicle speed and travel path. It then calculates a correction amount to correct the vehicle speed and travel path from the current vehicle speed and travel path to the ideal vehicle speed and travel path.”)
acquiring torque information on an output torque of the vehicle in the process as the target; and (See at least [0039]: “As the transport system 1 is configured as described above, the self-propelled control system 4, the electronic inspection device 5, and the router 6 constitute the self-propelled control wireless instruction information transmission unit 10 (a self-propelled control wireless instruction information transmission unit that receives image information of the vehicle captured by the imaging means, wirelessly receives self-propelled state quantity information including at least the state quantity of the driving force source from a wireless terminal, and wirelessly transmits self-propelled control wireless instruction information to the wireless terminal, which includes at least the motion instruction value of the driving force source necessary to propel the vehicle along the production line, based on the vehicle position information obtained based on the image information and the self-propelled state quantity information).”)
Nabeshima does not explicitly teach:
an abnormality in the output torque of the vehicle by using the output torque of the vehicle represented by the torque information, the process represented by the process information, and a torque-related criterion set in association with the process that is related to a waveform representing the output torque acquired in time series.
Ono teaches:
an abnormality in the output torque of the vehicle by using the output torque of the vehicle represented by the torque information, the process represented by the process information, and a torque-related criterion set in association with the process that is related to a waveform representing the output torque acquired in time series. (See at least Figs. 9A-9B, [0124]: “In step 1901, it is checked whether the difference between the amount of change in estimated generated torque (Δ40ET) over 40 ms and the amount of change in allowable generated torque (Δ40LT) is greater than a predetermined judgment threshold (KD40H). If the check result is YES, the process proceeds to step 1902, where the counter (CN40H) is counted up. Thereafter, in step 1904, it is checked whether the counter (CN40H) is equal to or greater than a predetermined counter threshold (KCN40H) for counter checking. If the check result is Yes, the abnormality flag (FLCN40HNG) is set to 1 in step 1905…”, [0075-0076]: “A judgment threshold 1 line 907 is a judgment threshold 1 for detecting an abnormality, and if the time period during which the judgment threshold 1 is exceeded continues for a predetermined time or longer, it is judged to be abnormal…An estimated generated torque line 913 shows the behavior of the estimated generated torque, and it can be seen from FIG. 9B that the estimated generated torque is in a state where it increases from time A due to the occurrence of an abnormality” & [0168]: “The system includes an abnormality detection unit that detects an abnormal state of the engine's estimated generated torque by comparing an index value calculated from the amount of change in the allowable generated torque and the amount of change in the estimated generated torque with a judgment threshold calculated based on a predetermined engine or vehicle state…”)
Although Ono does not explicitly teach a vehicle manufacturing process, Ono does teach that changes in vehicle condition, such as vehicle weight, require adjusting the judgement threshold value used for comparing the estimated generated torque with an allowable generated torque: “…if the vehicle condition changes, mainly if the vehicle weight or the vehicle's driving environment (the gradient of the road) changes, the above-mentioned judgment threshold can be modified to accurately determine abnormalities” (See at least [0085-0086] of Ono). [0068] of the instant specification demonstrates a similar relationship between a torque threshold and vehicle weight, except in a vehicle manufacturing process: “…Therefore, as the components are assembled, the weight of vehicle 100 is increased. Therefore, in the process at which the vehicle 100 is located, that is, the torque needed for the vehicle 100 to travel varies depending on the weight of the vehicle 100… in order to respond to the change in the weight of the vehicle 100, a different value is set for each process as the threshold value of the torque of the vehicle 100”. Since Ono addresses a similar problem as the claimed invention, one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have found it obvious to apply the teachings of Ono to the vehicle manufacturing process of Nabeshima, which provides the benefit of “improv[ing] the accuracy of abnormality judgment” in a vehicle manufacturing process (See at least [0171] of Ono).
One having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have found it obvious to combine Nabeshima’s monitoring device used in vehicle manufacturing with Ono’s technique of detecting an abnormality in the output torque of the vehicle by using the output torque of the vehicle represented by the torque information, the process represented by the process information, and a torque-related criterion set in association with the process that is related to a waveform representing the output torque acquired in time series. Doing so would be obvious “to improve the accuracy of abnormality judgment” in a vehicle manufacturing process (See at least [0171] of Ono).
Regarding claim 9, Nabeshima and Ono in combination teach all the limitations of claim 1 as discussed above.
Ono additionally teaches:
wherein the waveform representing the output torque acquired in time series is linear. (See at least Figs. 9A-9B & [0076-0077]: “An estimated generated torque line 913 shows the behavior of the estimated generated torque, and it can be seen from FIG. 9B that the estimated generated torque is in a state where it increases from time A due to the occurrence of an abnormality. The Δ allowable generated torque line 914 shows the change in the allowable generated torque per unit time (Δ allowable generated torque), and the Δ estimated generated torque line 915 shows the behavior of the change in the estimated generated torque per unit time (Δ estimated generated torque).”)
Conclusion
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 NIKKI MARIE M MOLINA whose telephone number is (571)272-5180. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 9am-6pm PT.
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, Aniss Chad can be reached at 571-270-3832. 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.
/NIKKI MARIE M MOLINA/Examiner, Art Unit 3662
/ANISS CHAD/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3662
Prosecution Insights