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 .
Priority
The applicant’s claim to priority of PCT/CN2022/102795 on 6/30/2022 is acknowledged.
Information Disclosure Statement
The applicant filed an IDS on 2/18/25, 8/12/25 and 3/3/26. Each has been annotated and considered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 6 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 6 (and similarly 15), the claim is unclear as a third and fourth threshold are being claimed. However, only a first threshold is claimed in claim 1 (and similarly 10 for claim 15), leaving it unclear why a third and fourth threshold are subsequently claimed.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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)(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.
Claims 1-2, 4, 10-11, 13 and 20-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by CN 110667589 (hereinafter ‘589).
Regarding claim 1 (and similarly 10 and 20), teaches a speed limit value adjustment method (See at least: “A driving mode skip control method, comprising: obtaining a vehicle accelerator pedal opening degree and accelerator pedal opening change rate under the first driving mode with power characteristics limits; and a second driving mode according to the accelerator pedal opening degree and the accelerator pedal opening change rate judgement whether the driver has rapid acceleration intention or climbing intention, if so, controlling the vehicle by the first driving mode jumps to better power characteristics, otherwise, controlling the vehicle in the first driving mode to continue driving.”), comprising:
an accelerator pedal opening change rate of a vehicle running in a first mode, wherein a speed limit value of the vehicle in the first mode is a first speed limit value (See at least: “…wherein, the first drive mode is defined as having power characteristics limits, and power characteristics comprise torque and power, maximum speed and the like. the first driving mode of the power characteristic comprises: the maximum torque and maximum speed are limited to a certain value, for example.”);
detecting whether the accelerator pedal opening change rate is greater than or equal to a first threshold; and
adjusting the speed limit value of the vehicle to a second speed limit value within a first preset duration based on the accelerator pedal opening change rate is greater than or equal to the first threshold, wherein the second speed limit value is greater than the first speed limit value (See at least: “wherein the second driving mode is defined more preferably power property, more preferably than the first driving mode of the power characteristics of second drive mode include, for example, without torque limitation, the corresponding maximum speed is higher than the first driving mode… when the vehicle is in the first driving mode, because power characteristics limits, will in some rapid acceleration condition or climbing condition cannot meet the power needs, such as overtaking shortage of power and slope-climbing capability is insufficient. only driving mode the driver better manual operation driving mode switch to select power characteristics for this in the prior art. Therefore, the embodiment of the invention steps S400 through step S200 -, according to the opening degree of the accelerator pedal and the accelerator pedal opening change rate to judge whether the driver wants to acute intends to accelerating or climbing back, under the condition without operating the driving mode switch, controlling a vehicle jumping to kick down execution of power characteristics under the second driving mode so as to realize driving mode.”).
Regarding claim 2 (and similarly 11 and 21), ‘589 teaches wherein the adjusting further comprises:
obtaining an accelerator pedal opening of the vehicle running in the first mode;
detecting whether the accelerator pedal opening is greater than or equal to a second threshold; and
adjusting the speed limit value of the vehicle to the second speed limit value when the accelerator pedal opening is greater than or equal to the second threshold (Refer at least to claim 1 as the first drive mode and second drive mode of ‘589 are controlled in this manner).
Regarding claim 4 (and similarly 13 and 22), ‘589 teaches further comprising at least one of:
maintaining the speed limit value of the vehicle to the first speed limit value based on the accelerator pedal opening being less than or equal to the second threshold (refer at least to claim 1 regarding first drive mode); or
maintaining the speed limit value of the vehicle to the first speed limit value when a first duration within which the accelerator pedal opening change rate being less than or equal to the first threshold is greater than or equal to a second preset duration.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 5-9 and 14-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ‘589 in view of CN 108146437 (hereinafter ‘437).
Regarding claim 5 (and similarly 14), ‘589 fails to teach the following limitation, but ‘437 teaches wherein maintaining the speed limit value of the vehicle to the
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify ‘589 in view of ‘437 to teach wherein maintaining the speed limit value of the vehicle to the first speed limit value comprises adjusting, within a third preset duration, a vehicle speed of the vehicle from a current vehicle speed to a second vehicle speed corresponding to the first speed limit value so that the vehicle can be speed limited to conserve power in a power-saving mode.
Regarding claim 6 (and similarly 15), ‘589 fails to teach the following limitation, but ‘437 teaches adjusting the speed limit value of the vehicle to a
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify ‘589 in view of ‘437 to teach teaches adjusting the speed limit value of the vehicle to a third speed limit value based on at least one of a state of charge of the vehicle being less than or equal to a third threshold or a range corresponding to the state of charge being less than or equal to a fourth threshold, wherein the first speed limit value is greater than the third speed limit value so that the vehicle can be speed limited to conserve power in a power-saving mode.
Regarding claim 7 (and similarly 16), ‘589 fails to teach the following limitation but ‘437 teaches obtaining a first target mileage of the vehicle; determining a first range based on a first state of charge of the vehicle and the first speed limit value; and adjusting the speed limit value of the vehicle to a third speed limit value based on the first range being less than or equal to a first distance, wherein the first distance is based on the first target mileage, and wherein the first speed limit value is greater than the third speed limit value (See at least: Figs. 1-4; “comparing the residual electric quantity of power-saving mode lower endurance mileage and travel path distance between the destination from the current position, if the endurance mileage of the remaining electric quantity of the power-saving mode lower than travel path distance between the destination from the current position, driving the motor according to the power saving mode, if the mileage of the residual electric quantity of the saving mode less than travel path distance between the destination from the current position, then output charging proposal.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify ‘589 in view of ‘437 to teach obtaining a first target mileage of the vehicle; determining a first range based on a first state of charge of the vehicle and the first speed limit value; and adjusting the speed limit value of the vehicle to a third speed limit value based on the first range being less than or equal to a first distance, wherein the first distance is based on the first target mileage, and wherein the first speed limit value is greater than the third speed limit value so that the vehicle can be put in power-saving mode as needed to ensure it reaches its destination if possible before the battery runs out.
Regarding claim 8 (and similarly 17), ‘589 in view of ‘437 teaches obtaining a second target mileage of the vehicle;
determining a second range based on a second state of charge of the vehicle and the third speed limit value; and
adjusting the speed limit value of the vehicle to a fourth speed limit value based on the second range being less than or equal to a second distance, wherein the second distance is determined based on the second target mileage, and wherein the third speed limit value is greater than the fourth speed limit value (Refer to claim 7 for reasoning and rationale as another instance of distance planning based on the battery state of charge as taught by ‘437 can teach this limitation).
Regarding claim 9 (and similarly 18), ‘589 in view of ‘437 teaches obtaining the second target mileage based on an operation of switching a destination by a user is detected (Refer to claim 7 for reasoning and rationale as another instance of distance planning based on the battery state of charge as taught by ‘437 can teach this limitation); or
obtaining the second target mileage based on the destination not being reachable and on the third speed limit value.
Regarding claim 19 ‘589 in view of ‘437 teaches, wherein instructions that when executed by the processor further cause the speed limit value adjustment apparatus to:
receive information about the first target mileage;
obtain the first target mileage based on the destination (Refer to claim 7 for reasoning and rationale) or obtain the first target mileage based on a historical travel record when obtaining the destination.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Harry Oh whose telephone number is (571)270-5912. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Thursday, 9:00-3:00.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Abby Lin can be reached on (571) 270-3976. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/HARRY Y OH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3657