DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claims 1-20 are pending in Instant Application.
Priority
Examiner acknowledges Applicant’s claim to priority benefits of KR10-2024-0052963 filed 04/19/2024.
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(a) 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.
Claims 1, 5, 9-10, 14, and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ohnuma et al. (USPGPub 2012/0185136) in view of Rojas et al. (USPGPub 2023/0322208). As per claim 1, Ohnuma discloses a method performed by an apparatus of a vehicle, the method comprising: detecting, via an acceleration sensor of the vehicle, a longitudinal acceleration of the vehicle (see at least paragraph 0099; wherein a longitudinal acceleration sensor [Gx] 226 configured to detect an actual longitudinal acceleration of the vehicle body 14); determining, by the apparatus and based on the detected longitudinal acceleration of the vehicle, a limit lateral acceleration (see at least paragraph 0133; wherein the estimated lateral acceleration and estimated longitudinal acceleration correspond to the above-described target lateral acceleration Gy* and target longitudinal acceleration Gx*, respectively…see at least paragraph 0135; wherein the ECU 200 limits the target vehicle-body acceleration G*, by limiting at least one of the target lateral acceleration Gy* and the target longitudinal acceleration Gx*, such that the vehicle-body acceleration falls outside the high rollover-probability region. Thus, in the rollover prevention control which is to be executed in the present control system, at least one of the turning angle of each of the front and rear wheels 12F, 12R and the braking force applied to the vehicle is limited by limiting at least one of the target lateral acceleration Gy* and target longitudinal acceleration Gx*); detecting, via a steering angle sensor associated with a steering wheel of the vehicle, a current steering angle (see at least paragraph 0099; wherein an operating angle sensor [S.sub.A] 222 configured to detect an operating angle of the steering wheel). Ohnuma does not explicitly mention determining, by the apparatus and based on the limit lateral acceleration, a limit steering angle; and transmitting, based on the current steering angle exceeding the limit steering angle, a control signal, from the apparatus to a power steering system of the vehicle, to suppress an excessive steering angle of the vehicle. However Rojas does disclose: determining, by the apparatus and based on the limit lateral acceleration, a limit steering angle (see at least paragraph 0880; wherein the host vehicle 6410 may be configured to operate at a first maximum lateral acceleration value on long road trips and a second maximum lateral acceleration value on shorter trips. As another example, the maximum lateral acceleration value (and/or the steering limit) may depend on one or more operational parameters associated with the vehicle); and transmitting, based on the current steering angle exceeding the limit steering angle, a control signal, from the apparatus to a power steering system of the vehicle, to suppress an excessive steering angle of the vehicle (see at least paragraph 0896; wherein determining the navigational action for the host vehicle may include determining, based on the characteristic associated with the environment of the host vehicle, whether implementing the steering maneuver consistent with the steering limit will result in the host vehicle maintaining a safe distance with at least one object in the environment of the host vehicle). Therefore it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings as in Rojas with the teachings as in Ohnuma. The motivation for doing so would have been to improve safety conditions, see Rojas paragraph 0187.
As per claims 5 and 14, Ohnuma discloses wherein the determining the limit lateral acceleration comprises determining, by the apparatus, the limit lateral acceleration based on at least one of a mass of the vehicle, a moment of inertia of the vehicle, a wheelbase length of the vehicle, a center of gravity position of the vehicle, or a vehicle width (see at least paragraph 0153; wherein depending on whether or not the target vehicle-body acceleration G* composed of the target lateral acceleration Gy* and the target longitudinal acceleration Gx* falls in the high rollover-probability region. Then, when the target vehicle-body acceleration G* falls in the high rollover-probability region, as shown in FIG. 13 (a), the rollover prevention control is executed. In the rollover prevention control, the center of gravity of the vehicle body 14 is shifted in a direction opposite to the direction of the target vehicle-body acceleration G* such that the sifted target vehicle-body acceleration G* falls outside the high rollover-probability region (that is determined based on the center of gravity), as shown in FIG. 13 (b)).
As per claims 9 and 18, Rojas discloses further comprising causing output, based on the current steering angle being predicted to exceed the limit steering angle, of a warning signal via an output device of the vehicle (see at least paragraph 0152; wherein when vehicle 200 navigates without human intervention, system 100 may automatically control the braking, acceleration, and/or steering of vehicle 200 (e.g., by sending control signals to one or more of throttling system 220, braking system 230, and steering system 240). Further, system 100 may analyze the collected data and issue warnings and/or alerts to vehicle occupants based on the analysis of the collected data). As per claim 10, Ohnuma discloses an apparatus for controlling a vehicle, the apparatus comprising: a communication interface (see at least Figure 1); a memory storing one or more instructions (see at least paragraph 0098; wherein the ECU 200 is constituted principally by a computer including CPU, ROM, RAM and the like); and one or more processors configured to execute the one or more instructions stored in the memory (see at least paragraph 0098; wherein the ECU 200 is constituted principally by a computer including CPU, ROM, RAM and the like), wherein the one or more processors (see at least Figure 1; ECU 200), by executing the one or more instructions, are configured to: detect, via an acceleration sensor of the vehicle, a longitudinal acceleration of the vehicle (see at least paragraph 0099; wherein a longitudinal acceleration sensor [Gx] 226 configured to detect an actual longitudinal acceleration of the vehicle body 14); determine, based on the detected longitudinal acceleration of the vehicle, a limit lateral acceleration (see at least paragraph 0133; wherein the estimated lateral acceleration and estimated longitudinal acceleration correspond to the above-described target lateral acceleration Gy* and target longitudinal acceleration Gx*, respectively…see at least paragraph 0135; wherein the ECU 200 limits the target vehicle-body acceleration G*, by limiting at least one of the target lateral acceleration Gy* and the target longitudinal acceleration Gx*, such that the vehicle-body acceleration falls outside the high rollover-probability region. Thus, in the rollover prevention control which is to be executed in the present control system, at least one of the turning angle of each of the front and rear wheels 12F, 12R and the braking force applied to the vehicle is limited by limiting at least one of the target lateral acceleration Gy* and target longitudinal acceleration Gx*); detect, via a steering angle sensor associated with a steering wheel of the vehicle, a current steering angle (see at least paragraph 0099; wherein an operating angle sensor [S.sub.A] 222 configured to detect an operating angle of the steering wheel). Ohnuma does not explicitly mention determine, based on the limit lateral acceleration, a limit steering angle; and transmit, based on the current steering angle exceeding the limit steering angle, a control signal to a power steering system via the communication interface to suppress an excessive steering angle of the vehicle. However Rojas does disclose: determine, based on the limit lateral acceleration, a limit steering angle (see at least paragraph 0880; wherein the host vehicle 6410 may be configured to operate at a first maximum lateral acceleration value on long road trips and a second maximum lateral acceleration value on shorter trips. As another example, the maximum lateral acceleration value (and/or the steering limit) may depend on one or more operational parameters associated with the vehicle); and transmit, based on the current steering angle exceeding the limit steering angle, a control signal to a power steering system via the communication interface to suppress an excessive steering angle of the vehicle (see at least paragraph 0896; wherein determining the navigational action for the host vehicle may include determining, based on the characteristic associated with the environment of the host vehicle, whether implementing the steering maneuver consistent with the steering limit will result in the host vehicle maintaining a safe distance with at least one object in the environment of the host vehicle). Therefore it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings as in Rojas with the teachings as in Ohnuma. The motivation for doing so would have been to improve safety conditions, see Rojas paragraph 0187. As per claim 19, Ohnuma discloses a vehicle comprising: a power steering system (see at least Figures 1-2); a steering wheel (see at least Figure 1; item 30); an acceleration sensor (see at least Figure 1; items 226, 228); a communication interface (see at least Figure 1); a memory storing one or more instructions (see at least paragraph 0098; wherein the ECU 200 is constituted principally by a computer including CPU, ROM, RAM and the like); and one or more processors configured to execute the one or more instructions stored in the memory (see at least paragraph 0098; wherein the ECU 200 is constituted principally by a computer including CPU, ROM, RAM and the like), wherein the one or more processors (see at least Figure 1; item 200), by executing the one or more instructions, are configured to cause the vehicle to: detect, via the acceleration sensor, a longitudinal acceleration of the vehicle (see at least paragraph 0099; wherein a longitudinal acceleration sensor [Gx] 226 configured to detect an actual longitudinal acceleration of the vehicle body 14); determine, based on the detected longitudinal acceleration of the vehicle, a limit lateral acceleration (see at least paragraph 0133; wherein the estimated lateral acceleration and estimated longitudinal acceleration correspond to the above-described target lateral acceleration Gy* and target longitudinal acceleration Gx*, respectively…see at least paragraph 0135; wherein the ECU 200 limits the target vehicle-body acceleration G*, by limiting at least one of the target lateral acceleration Gy* and the target longitudinal acceleration Gx*, such that the vehicle-body acceleration falls outside the high rollover-probability region. Thus, in the rollover prevention control which is to be executed in the present control system, at least one of the turning angle of each of the front and rear wheels 12F, 12R and the braking force applied to the vehicle is limited by limiting at least one of the target lateral acceleration Gy* and target longitudinal acceleration Gx*); detect a current steering angle of the steering wheel (see at least paragraph 0099; wherein an operating angle sensor [S.sub.A] 222 configured to detect an operating angle of the steering wheel). Ohnuma does not explicitly mention determine, based on the limit lateral acceleration, a limit steering angle; and transmit, based on the current steering angle exceeding the limit steering angle, a control signal to the power steering system via the communication interface to suppress an excessive steering angle of the vehicle. However Rojas does disclose: determine, based on the limit lateral acceleration, a limit steering angle (see at least paragraph 0880; wherein the host vehicle 6410 may be configured to operate at a first maximum lateral acceleration value on long road trips and a second maximum lateral acceleration value on shorter trips. As another example, the maximum lateral acceleration value (and/or the steering limit) may depend on one or more operational parameters associated with the vehicle); and transmit, based on the current steering angle exceeding the limit steering angle, a control signal to the power steering system via the communication interface to suppress an excessive steering angle of the vehicle (see at least paragraph 0896; wherein determining the navigational action for the host vehicle may include determining, based on the characteristic associated with the environment of the host vehicle, whether implementing the steering maneuver consistent with the steering limit will result in the host vehicle maintaining a safe distance with at least one object in the environment of the host vehicle). Therefore it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings as in Rojas with the teachings as in Ohnuma. The motivation for doing so would have been to improve safety conditions, see Rojas paragraph 0187.
As per claim 20, Ohnuma and Rojas disclose wherein the one or more processors, by executing the one or more instructions, are configured to cause the vehicle to, after suppressing the excessive steering angle: detect, via the acceleration sensor, a second longitudinal acceleration of the vehicle (see at least paragraph 0099; wherein Ohnuma discloses a longitudinal acceleration sensor [Gx] 226 configured to detect an actual longitudinal acceleration of the vehicle body 14); determine, based on the detected second longitudinal acceleration of the vehicle, a second limit lateral acceleration (see at least paragraph 0133; wherein Ohnuma discloses the estimated lateral acceleration and estimated longitudinal acceleration correspond to the above-described target lateral acceleration Gy* and target longitudinal acceleration Gx*, respectively…see at least paragraph 0135; wherein the ECU 200 limits the target vehicle-body acceleration G*, by limiting at least one of the target lateral acceleration Gy* and the target longitudinal acceleration Gx*, such that the vehicle-body acceleration falls outside the high rollover-probability region. Thus, in the rollover prevention control which is to be executed in the present control system, at least one of the turning angle of each of the front and rear wheels 12F, 12R and the braking force applied to the vehicle is limited by limiting at least one of the target lateral acceleration Gy* and target longitudinal acceleration Gx*); determine, based on the second limit lateral acceleration, a second limit steering angle (see at least paragraph 0880; wherein Rojas discloses the host vehicle 6410 may be configured to operate at a first maximum lateral acceleration value on long road trips and a second maximum lateral acceleration value on shorter trips. As another example, the maximum lateral acceleration value (and/or the steering limit) may depend on one or more operational parameters associated with the vehicle); and transmit, based on the suppressed steering angle not exceeding the second limit steering angle, a second control signal to the power steering system via the communication interface to adjust the suppressed steering angle of the vehicle (see at least paragraph 0896; wherein Rojas discloses determining the navigational action for the host vehicle may include determining, based on the characteristic associated with the environment of the host vehicle, whether implementing the steering maneuver consistent with the steering limit will result in the host vehicle maintaining a safe distance with at least one object in the environment of the host vehicle).
Claims 2-4 and 11-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ohnuma et al. (USPGPub 2012/0185136), in view of Rojas et al. (USPGPub 2023/0322208), and Aso (USPGPub 2025/0269855). As per claims 2 and 11, Ohnuma and Rojas do not explicitly mention wherein the determining the limit steering angle comprises determining a limit curvature. However Aso does disclose: wherein the determining the limit steering angle comprises determining a limit curvature (see at least paragraph 0050; wherein LCA control unit 140 calculates the target yaw angle θy, the target yaw rate γ, and the target curvature Cu at the current time point based on the vehicle speed v, the target lateral speed vy, and the target lateral acceleration ay at the current time point). Therefore it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings as in Aso with the teachings as in Ohnuma and Rojas. The motivation for doing so would have been to prevent driver discomfort or inconvenience, see Aso paragraph 0187. As per claims 3 and 12, Aso further discloses wherein the determining the limit curvature comprises determining, by the apparatus the limit curvature based on information of the limit lateral acceleration and a current vehicle speed (see at least paragraph 0050; wherein LCA control unit 140 calculates the target yaw angle θy, the target yaw rate γ, and the target curvature Cu at the current time point based on the vehicle speed v, the target lateral speed vy, and the target lateral acceleration ay at the current time point). As per claims 4 and 13, Ohnuma and Rojas do not explicitly mention wherein the determining the limit lateral acceleration comprises determining, by the apparatus, the limit lateral acceleration based on, for each tire, at least one of: a normal force, a lateral force, or a longitudinal force. However Aso does disclose: wherein the determining the limit lateral acceleration comprises determining, by the apparatus, the limit lateral acceleration based on, for each tire, at least one of: a normal force, a lateral force, or a longitudinal force (see at least paragraph 0026; wherein the steering device 21 applies a steering force to the wheels of the vehicle VH). Therefore it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings as in Aso with the teachings as in Ohnuma and Rojas. The motivation for doing so would have been to prevent driver discomfort or inconvenience, see Aso paragraph 0187.
Claims 8 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ohnuma et al. (USPGPub 2012/0185136), in view of Rojas et al. (USPGPub 2023/0322208), and Miyama et al. (USPGPub 2024/0270311).
As per claims 8 and 16, Ohnuma and Rojas do not explicitly mention wherein the excessive steering angle is suppressed by generating, by the power steering system, a reverse torque. However Miyama does disclose: wherein the excessive steering angle is suppressed by generating, by the power steering system, a reverse torque (see at least paragraph 0048; wherein when the steering wheel 4 is slightly rotated from the reference steering position So to the right or left, the actual steering angle δ exceeds the limit steering angle δmax. Consequently, the steering reaction force is established in a direction opposite to the rotational direction of the steering wheel 4. As a result, the steering angle or the steering position is maintained to the reference steering position So, and hence the vehicle 2 will not be turned to the left and right repeatedly due to such control hunting). Therefore it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings as in Miyama with the teachings as in Ohnuma and Rojas. The motivation for doing so would have been to avoid repetition of execution and interruption of the assist control to maintain the vehicle within a lane during propulsion in a narrow lane, see Miyama paragraph 0006.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim(s) 6 and 15 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The prior art fails to explicitly teach wherein the determining the limit lateral acceleration comprises determining, by using a map, the limit lateral acceleration based on the longitudinal acceleration, wherein the map indicates coordinates determined by a plurality of longitudinal acceleration values and a plurality of limit lateral acceleration values, and wherein each of the plurality of longitudinal acceleration values corresponds to one of the plurality of limit lateral acceleration values.
Claim(s) 7 and 17 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The prior art fails to explicitly teach wherein the determining the limit steering angle comprises calculating, by the apparatus, the limit steering angle based on the longitudinal acceleration at which all tires are subjected to frictional force within a stable friction region.
Relevant Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon are considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure: USPGPub 2021/0316724 – Provide a vehicle control system includes an information acquirer configured to acquire vehicle surrounding information, and a controller configured to execute driving assistance control. The controller is configured to set a first line as a target traveling line when an operation status of the driving assistance control is ON. The controller is configured to set, when a driving switching request is made, the target traveling line to cause a vehicle to travel along a second line displaced from the first line by a predetermined displacement amount after a specific timing that is a timing when a predetermined time has elapsed from a requested timing. USPGPub 2019/0061809 – Providing controlling a feedback torque actuator in a steering system that includes the feedback torque actuator and an assistance actuator incorporate, for feedback torque control, generating at least one input signal with a sensor, determining a steering angle from the input signal, transforming the steering angle to a target steering-wheel torque, and controlling the feedback torque actuator via a closed loop current control to achieve the target steering-wheel torque. The assistance actuator has a high gain, thereby resulting in a low torque in the axle above the assistance actuator such that the steering-wheel torque is close to the target steering-wheel torque, whereby acceptable steering feel is achieved.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MAHMOUD S ISMAIL whose telephone number is (571)272-1326. The examiner can normally be reached M - F: 8:00AM- 4:00PM.
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, Jelani Smith can be reached at 571-270-3969. 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.
/MAHMOUD S ISMAIL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3662
Prosecution Insights