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 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.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Luckevich, et al., US 2019/0025857 A1, in view of Fairgrieve, et al., US 2017/0274878 A1.
As per Claim 1, Luckevich teaches a method performed by an apparatus for controlling driving of a vehicle (¶¶ 34-35), the method comprising:
determining, based on a driver of the vehicle overriding a smart cruise control (SCC) driving (¶ 161), whether another vehicle ahead of the vehicle is detected (¶ 98; “lead vehicle”); and
determining, based on the other vehicle being detected at a first time point, a distance between the other vehicle and the vehicle (¶ 103).
Luckevich does not expressly teach: determining a plurality of engine torques of the vehicle based on at least one of the other vehicle being detected at the first time point or the distance, wherein the plurality of engine torques are different output torques determined based on different conditions; and controlling, based on at least one of the plurality of engine torques, driving of the vehicle. Fairgrieve teaches:
determining a plurality of engine torques of the vehicle based on at least one of the other vehicle being detected at the first time point or the distance, wherein the plurality of engine torques are different output torques determined based on different conditions (¶ 128; in comparing “on-road conditions” with “an off-road environment”); and
controlling, based on at least one of the plurality of engine torques, driving of the vehicle (¶¶ 116-117).
At the time of the invention, a person of skill in the art would have thought it obvious to combine the smart cruise control system of Luckevich with the condition sensors of Fairgrieve, in order to make it easier for a driver to use cruise control settings to negotiate difficult road conditions.
As per Claim 2, Luckevich does not expressly teach that the determining the plurality of engine torques comprises: based on the other vehicle not being detected at a second time point, determining a first output torque based on an accelerate pedal value at the driver’s override, wherein the first output torque is an engine torque of the vehicle. Fairgrieve teaches that the determining the plurality of engine torques comprises: based on the other vehicle not being detected at a second time point, determining a first output torque based on an accelerate pedal value at the driver’s override, wherein the first output torque is an engine torque of the vehicle (¶ 130; as taken from “an engine torque sensor”). See Claim 1 above for the rationale based on obviousness, motivations and reasons to combine.
As per Claim 3, Luckevich teaches that the determining the plurality of engine torques comprises:
based on the other vehicle being detected at the first time point, comparing the distance and a pre-set standard distance (¶ 128); and
determining an engine torque of the vehicle based on a driving speed of the vehicle and the comparison (¶ 129).
As per Claim 4, Luckevich teaches that the determining the plurality of engine torques further comprises: based on the distance being longer than the pre-set standard distance, determining a second output torque based on an accelerate pedal value at the driver’s override (¶¶ 68, 83), wherein the second output torque is the engine torque of the vehicle (¶¶ 70, 85).
As per Claim 5, Luckevich teaches that the determining the plurality of engine torques further comprises: based on the distance being shorter than the pre-set standard distance and based on the driving speed of the vehicle being faster than a pre-set standard speed (¶ 96), determining a third output torque according to a first weighting value (¶ 51; as part of determining a percentage of maximum torque), wherein the third output torque is the engine torque of the vehicle (¶ 103).
As per Claim 6, Luckevich teaches that the determining the plurality of engine torques further comprises: based on the distance being shorter than the pre-set standard distance and based on the driving speed of the vehicle being slower than the pre-set standard speed (¶ 128; “staying within a threshold (predefined or dynamic) distance/position/gap of space from a target gap”), determining a fourth output torque according to a second weighting value (¶ 51; as part of determining a percentage of maximum torque), wherein the fourth output torque is the engine torque of the vehicle (¶ 129).
As per Claim 7, Luckevich teaches that the determining the plurality of engine torques further comprises: applying, based on the distance (¶ 40), a weighting value to an engine torque, wherein the weighting value increases as the distance increases, and wherein the weighting value is greater than zero and is less than or equal to one (¶ 51; as part of determining a percentage of maximum torque).
As per Claim 8, Luckevich teaches that the determining the plurality of engine torques further comprises: applying, based on a driving speed of the vehicle (¶ 42), a weighting value to an engine torque, wherein the weighting value increases as the driving speed increases, and wherein the weighting value is greater than zero and is less than or equal to one (¶ 51; as part of determining a percentage of maximum torque).
As per Claim 9, Luckevich teaches a non-transitory computer-readable recording medium (¶ 180) storing instructions that, when executed by one or more processors of a vehicle (¶ 182; processor 1602 of Figure 16), are configured to cause the vehicle to:
determine, based on a driver of the vehicle overriding a smart cruise control (SCC) driving (¶ 161), whether another ahead of the vehicle is detected (¶ 98; “lead vehicle”); and
determine, based on the other vehicle being detected, a distance between the other vehicle and the vehicle (¶ 103).
Luckevich does not expressly teach: determine a plurality of engine torques of the vehicle based on at least one of the other vehicle being detected or the distance, wherein the plurality of engine torques are different output torques determined based on different conditions; and control, based on at least one of the plurality of engine torques, driving of the vehicle. Fairgrieve teaches:
determine a plurality of engine torques of the vehicle based on at least one of the other vehicle being detected or the distance, wherein the plurality of engine torques are different output torques determined based on different conditions (¶ 128; in comparing “on-road conditions” with “an off-road environment”); and
control, based on at least one of the plurality of engine torques, driving of the vehicle (¶¶ 116-117).
See Claim 1 above for the rationale based on obviousness, motivations and reasons to combine.
As per Claim 10, Luckevich does not expressly teach that the instructions, when executed by the one or more processors, are configured to cause the vehicle to, based on the other vehicle not being detected, determine a first output torque based on an accelerate pedal value at the driver’s override, wherein the first output torque is an engine torque of the vehicle. Fairgrieve teaches that the instructions, when executed by the one or more processors, are configured to cause the vehicle to, based on the other vehicle not being detected, determine a first output torque based on an accelerate pedal value at the driver’s override, wherein the first output torque is an engine torque of the vehicle (¶ 130; as taken from “an engine torque sensor”). See Claim 1 above for the rationale based on obviousness, motivations and reasons to combine.
As per Claim 11, Luckevich teaches that the instructions, when executed by the one or more processors, are configured to cause the vehicle to, based on the other vehicle being detected:
compare the distance and a pre-set standard distance (¶ 128); and
determine an engine torque of the vehicle based on a driving speed of the vehicle and the comparison (¶ 129).
As per Claim 12, Luckevich teaches that the instructions, when executed by the one or more processors, are configured to cause the vehicle to, based on the distance being longer than the pre-set standard distance: determine a second output torque based on an accelerate pedal value at the driver’s override (¶¶ 68, 83), wherein the second output torque is the engine torque of the vehicle (¶¶ 70, 85).
As per Claim 13, Luckevich teaches that the instructions, when executed by the one or more processors, are configured to cause the vehicle to, based on the distance being shorter than the pre-set standard distance and based on the driving speed of the vehicle being faster than a pre-set standard speed (¶ 96): determine a third output torque according to a first weighting value (¶ 51; as part of determining a percentage of maximum torque), wherein the third output torque is the engine torque of the vehicle (¶ 103).
As per Claim 14, Luckevich teaches that the instructions, when executed by the one or more processors, are configured to cause the vehicle to, based on the distance being shorter than the pre-set standard distance and based on the driving speed of the vehicle being slower than the pre-set standard speed (¶ 128; “staying within a threshold (predefined or dynamic) distance/position/gap of space from a target gap”): determine a fourth output torque according to a second weighting value (¶ 51; as part of determining a percentage of maximum torque), wherein the fourth output torque is the engine torque of the vehicle (¶ 129).
As per Claim 15, Luckevich teaches an apparatus for controlling driving of a vehicle (¶¶ 48-49; through an ECU) comprising:
a plurality of sensors (¶¶ 62-63);
one or more processors configured to execute instructions (¶ 182; processor 1602 of Figure 16);
a memory storing the instructions (¶ 92; “on-board flash memory 444, random access memory (RAM) 446, electrically erasable programmable read-only memory (EEPROM) 448, and one or more cores 442” of Figure 4) that, when executed by the one or more processors, are configured to cause the apparatus to:
determine, based on a driver of the vehicle overriding a smart cruise control (SCC) driving (¶ 161), whether another vehicle ahead of the vehicle is detected; determine, based on the other vehicle being detected, a distance between the other vehicle and the vehicle (¶ 103);
Luckevich does not expressly teach: determine a plurality of engine torques of the vehicle based on at least one of the other vehicle being detected or the distance, wherein the plurality of engine torques are different output torques determined based on different conditions; and control, based on at least one of the plurality of engine torques, driving of the vehicle. Fairgrieve teaches:
determine a plurality of engine torques of the vehicle based on at least one of the other vehicle being detected or the distance, wherein the plurality of engine torques are different output torques determined based on different conditions (¶ 128; in comparing “on-road conditions” with “an off-road environment”); and
control, based on at least one of the plurality of engine torques, driving of the vehicle (¶¶ 116-117).
See Claim 1 above for the rationale based on obviousness, motivations and reasons to combine.
As per Claim 16, Luckevich does not expressly teach that the instructions, when executed by the one or more processors, are configured to cause the apparatus to, based on the other vehicle not being detected, determine a first output torque based on an accelerate pedal value at the driver’s override, wherein the first output torque is an engine torque of the vehicle. Fairgrieve teaches that the instructions, when executed by the one or more processors, are configured to cause the apparatus to, based on the other vehicle not being detected, determine a first output torque based on an accelerate pedal value at the driver’s override, wherein the first output torque is an engine torque of the vehicle (¶ 130; as taken from “an engine torque sensor”). See Claim 1 above for the rationale based on obviousness, motivations and reasons to combine.
As per Claim 17, Luckevich teaches that the instructions, when executed by the one or more processors, are configured to cause the apparatus to:
based on the other vehicle being detected, compare the distance and a pre-set standard distance (¶ 128); and
determine an engine torque of the vehicle based on a driving speed of the vehicle and the comparison (¶ 129).
As per Claim 18, Luckevich teaches that the instructions, when executed by the one or more processors, are configured to cause the apparatus to, based on the distance being longer than the pre-set standard distance, determine a second output torque based on an accelerate pedal value at the driver’s override (¶¶ 68, 83), wherein the second output torque is the engine torque of the vehicle (¶¶ 70, 85).
As per Claim 19, Luckevich teaches that the instructions, when executed by the one or more processors, are configured to cause the apparatus to, based on the distance being shorter than the pre-set standard distance and the driving speed of the vehicle being faster than a pre-set standard speed (¶ 96), determine a third output torque according to a first weighting value (¶ 51; as part of determining a percentage of maximum torque), wherein the third output torque is the engine torque of the vehicle (¶ 103).
As per Claim 20, Luckevich teaches that the instructions, when executed by the one or more processors, are configured to cause the apparatus to, based on the distance being shorter than the pre-set standard distance and the driving speed of the vehicle being slower than the pre-set standard speed (¶ 128; “staying within a threshold (predefined or dynamic) distance/position/gap of space from a target gap”), determine a fourth output torque according to a second weighting value (¶ 51; as part of determining a percentage of maximum torque), wherein the fourth output torque is the engine torque of the vehicle (¶ 129).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ATUL TRIVEDI whose telephone number is (313)446-4908. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri; 9:00 AM-5:00 PM EST.
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, Peter Nolan can be reached at (571) 270-7016. 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.
ATUL TRIVEDI
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3661
/ATUL TRIVEDI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3661