DETAILED ACTION
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) 1-24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by (JP 2007 230527).
Regarding claim 1 and 22, Shiozawa discloses a method for determining a steering roll radius of a vehicle (¶4 “scrub radius” used to calculate the “MS” and fig. 1), the steering roll radius being initially unknown (all things are initially unknown where the scrub radius is the designed length it is used to calculate MS which is different at each event), the method comprising:
during a journey (¶10-12), initiating an asymmetrical braking maneuver on a steered axle of the vehicle, in which a first braking force is applied to a first wheel of the steered axle, which is greater than a second braking force applied to a second wheel of the steered axle;
during the asymmetrical braking maneuver, determining a steering command signal input from a driver or a vehicle system (¶7 “steering angle”);
during the asymmetrical braking maneuver, evaluating a steering maneuver (S2) caused by the asymmetrical braking maneuver; evaluating the asymmetrical braking maneuver as a function of determined data (¶10-14); and,
determining at least a sign of the initially unknown steering roll radius of at least the first wheel as a function of said evaluating the asymmetrical braking maneuver (¶10).
Regarding claim 2 which depends from claim 1, Shiozawa discloses wherein at least one of a following is carried out when evaluating the steering maneuver caused by the asymmetrical braking maneuver: determining and evaluating a steering torque exerted on the wheels of the steered axle; determining and evaluating at least one resulting wheel steering angle of the wheels of the steered axle; and, determining and evaluating a change in a direction of travel of the vehicle (¶12).
Regarding claim 3 which depends from claim 1, Shiozawa discloses wherein a temporal behavior of at least one of the steering command signal, the steering maneuver, a steering torque, and a change of direction is evaluated (¶7-¶12).
Regarding claim 4 which depends from claim 1, Shiozawa discloses wherein after a determining of the journey, a braking criterion is checked, and if the braking criterion is fulfilled, the asymmetrical braking maneuver is initiated on the steered axle (¶7-¶12).
Regarding claim 5 which depends from claim 4, Shiozawa discloses wherein the braking criterion includes at least one of a plurality of sub-criteria including:
comparison of a journey duration since a start of the journey with a first time limit value;
comparison of a time period between a last journey and the start of the journey with a second time limit value;
evaluation of at least one tire inflation pressure signal (straight travel option addressed); and,
determination of straight-ahead travel (¶9).
Regarding claim 6 which depends from claim 4, Shiozawa discloses wherein the braking criterion includes at least one of a plurality of sub-criteria including:
comparison of a journey duration since a start of the journey with a first time limit value;
comparison of a time period between a last journey and the start of the journey with a second time limit value;
evaluation of a change over time of at least one tire pressure signal of the first wheel or of the second wheel since the last journey; (straight travel option addressed); and,
determination of straight-ahead travel (¶9).
Regarding claim 7 which depends from claim 1, Shiozawa discloses wherein at least one of a steering wheel angle and a target steering torque, which is specified by at least one of the driver and the vehicle system, is applied as the steering command signal (¶7 steering angle option addressed).
Regarding claim 8 which depends from claim 2, Shiozawa discloses wherein, when the asymmetrical braking maneuver is initiated autonomously without a steering command signal, a compensation steering torque is input for at least partial or complete compensation of the determined steering torque (¶8).
Regarding claim 9 which depends from claim 8, Shiozawa discloses wherein the compensation steering torque is determined as a function of at least one of pre-stored values and a previously determined steering roll radius (¶8).
Regarding claim 10 which depends from claim 1, Shiozawa discloses wherein the asymmetrical braking maneuver is a first asymmetrical braking maneuver; and, the first asymmetrical braking maneuver is carried out with smaller braking forces than subsequent asymmetrical braking maneuvers (¶13 and ¶14 disclose how the braking is applied to maintain a straight running of the vehicle which would allow for larger brake forces once running striaght), and/or the braking forces of the first asymmetrical braking maneuver are below a limit braking force (subsequent option addressed).
Regarding claim 11 which depends from claim 1, Shiozawa discloses wherein at least two asymmetrical braking maneuvers with different signs of the difference of the first braking force and second braking force are carried out (the system is able to subtract through brake and then is able to add through adding torque).
Regarding claim 12 which depends from claim 1, Shiozawa discloses wherein validity data are recorded before or during the evaluation of the asymmetrical braking maneuver and a confidential index is created as a function of the validity data and represents a validity or accuracy of the determined steering roll radius and/or reflects an evaluation of accuracy of subsequent steering braking maneuvers (the gathered information is given full confidence).
Regarding claim 13 which depends from claim 12, Shiozawa discloses wherein the confidential index is compared with a limit value and, when the limit value is reached, at least one of a display signal and an enable signal for autonomous steer-by-braking maneuvers is set (the data is compared to apply steer braking as per ¶5).
Regarding claim 14 which depends from claim 1, Shiozawa discloses wherein, during at least one of the asymmetrical braking maneuver and a subsequent asymmetrical braking maneuver, at least one further axle of the vehicle is braked asymmetrically in addition to the at least one steered axle (¶18 discusses controlling the braking of an entire side of wheels).
Regarding claim 15 which depends from claim 1, Shiozawa discloses wherein the initiation of the asymmetrical braking maneuver on the at least one steered axle is terminated when a termination criterion is fulfilled; and, the termination criterion is fulfilled in a case of at least one of: a sign of the steering roll radius is determined (¶10 discusses canceling the moment of the scrub radius); and, a safety-critical driving situation is detected (determined option addressed).
Regarding claim 16, Shiozawa discloses a method for steering-braking a commercial vehicle, the method comprising: determining a steering roll radius; initiating a steering braking maneuver as a function of the determined steering roll radius, in which the vehicle is steered by asymmetrical application of wheel brakes at least of a steered axle; wherein said determining a steering roll radius that is initially unknown includes: during a journey, initiating an asymmetrical braking maneuver on the steered axle of the vehicle, in which a first braking force is applied to a first wheel of the steered axle, which is greater than a second braking force applied to a second wheel of the steered axle; during the asymmetrical braking maneuver, determining a steering command signal input from a driver or a vehicle system; during the asymmetrical braking maneuver, evaluating a steering maneuver caused by the asymmetrical braking maneuver; evaluating the asymmetrical braking maneuver as a function of determined data; and, determining at least a sign of the initially unknown steering roll radius of at least the first wheel as a function of said evaluating the asymmetrical braking maneuver (the limitations of this claim have been addressed above).
Regarding claim 17 which depends from claim 16, Shiozawa discloses wherein the steering braking maneuver is initiated as a function of a determined confidential index (the data gather is given full confidence).
Regarding claim 18 which depends from claim 16, Shiozawa discloses wherein the steering braking maneuver is initiated as a function of a determined confidential index when a limit value is reached (¶10 the values that lead to undesired brake steering).
Regarding claim 19 which depends from claim 16, Shiozawa discloses wherein the method is performed during an autonomous driving dynamics control and/or an autonomous driver assistance system (this is done during assistance).
Regarding claim 20 which depends from claim 19, Shiozawa discloses wherein the autonomous dynamics control and/or the autonomous driver assistance system is at least one of
an anti-lock braking system (stability option addressed),
an electronic braking system (stability option addressed),
an electronic stability program (the system is electronically controlling the brakes in order to create stability),
a vehicle dynamics control (stability option addressed), and
an automatic cruise control (stability option addressed).
Regarding claim 21 which depends from claim 18, Shiozawa discloses wherein the steering braking maneuver is only initiated if the determined confidential index exceeds a limit value (the system is confident in the sensors when those sensors require an adjustment to the system).
Regarding claim 23, Shiozawa discloses a vehicle comprising: at least one steered axle (4) with a first steered wheel (FR) and a second steered wheel (Fl); at least one further axle (figure 1 would require 2); a braking system including a plurality of wheel brakes provided on the first and second steered wheels of the steered axle and the further axle and a brake control unit; a steering system having at least one of a steering torque sensor for detecting a steering torque and a steering wheel angle sensor for detecting a steering wheel angle (¶7); the steering system further having a steering control unit; and, wherein at least one of the brake control unit and the steering control unit is configured as a control unit including a processor and a non-transitory computer readable storage medium having program code stored thereon; the program code being configured, when executed by said processor, to: during a journey, initiate an asymmetrical braking maneuver on the steered axle of the vehicle, in which a first braking force is applied to the first wheel of the steered axle, which is greater than a second braking force applied to the second wheel of the steered axle; during the asymmetrical braking maneuver, determine a steering command signal input from a driver or a vehicle system; during the asymmetrical braking maneuver, evaluate a steering maneuver caused by the asymmetrical braking maneuver; evaluate the asymmetrical braking maneuver as a function of determined data; and, determine at least a sign of a steering roll radius of at least the first wheel as a function of the evaluating the asymmetrical braking maneuver (the limitations of the claim have been addressed in claim 1 above).
Regarding claim 24 which depends from claim 23, Shiozawa discloses wherein the vehicle is a commercial vehicle (this is a intended use limitation).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 06/26/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues on page 2 that the Shiozawa reference does not cause an asymmetrical braking maneuver because it is only concerned with difference in road friction. Where the reference offers up as an example the road friction as reasons for the asymmetrical braking action there are many possible causes for this. The reference is primarily concerned with braking forces that are different between the right and left side of the vehicle which includes asymmetrical braking. This reference through its measurements determines whether the braking is an asymmetrical event. The reference also discusses that asymmetrical braking occurs when the “left and right braking actions are different”.
Applicant argues on pages 2 and 3 that the scrub radius does not address the limitations of the claims because it is previously known. Where it is previously known before the current braking event it was once initially unknown. But to more appropriately address the limitations the scrub radius has been replaced with the calculated MS value.
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 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
Prosecution Insights