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 the first office action on the merits and is responsive to the papers filed on 1/6/2025 and 5/8/2026. Claims 1-10 and 16-20 are currently pending.
Election/Restrictions
1. Claims 11-15 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 5/8/2026.
Information Disclosure Statement
2. The Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) submitted on 9/17/2025 has been considered by the Examiner.
Specification
3. The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Objections
4. Claim 8 is objected to because of the following informalities:
The claim recites a sixth torque but there is not a second, third, fourth, or fifth torque
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
5. Claims 4 and 19 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.
6. The term “rough” in Claim 4 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “rough” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Under the broadest reasonable interpretation, rough is interpreted as any terrain that is uneven.
Claim 19 has the same limitations as Claim 4 except for its dependency and is rejected for the same reasoning.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
7. 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.
8. 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.
9. Claims 1-3 and 5-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Rehn (US 20220063581 A1).
Regarding Claim 1,
10. A drive-by-wire steering system for a power equipment machine, comprising (Rehn: [0009] and [0037]):
A steering interface system comprising: a steering interface configured to receive rotational input from a user (Rehn: [0035]);
One or more steering interface position encoders configured to determine a control angular displacement of the steering interface relative to a center angle of the steering interface (Rehn: [0035]);
One or more steering interface motors configured to rotate the steering interface (Rehn: [0050]);
And one or more steering interface motor controllers configured to control activation of the one or more steering interface motors to apply one or more torques to the steering interface (Rehn: [0050]);
A power steering system comprising, one or more steering elements (Rehn: [0009]);
One or more steering position encoders configured to determine an output angular displacement of the one or more steering elements relative to a center angle of the one or more steering elements (Rehn: [0036] and [0059]);
One or more steering motors configured to drive the one or more steering elements (Rehn: [0034]);
And one or more steering motor controllers configured to control activation of the one or more steering motors to drive the one or more steering elements toward a target output angular displacement, wherein the target output angular displacement is based on the control angular displacement and a steering ratio (Rehn: [0034] and [0064]),
Wherein the steering interface system and the power steering system communicate via a communication link, wherein the communication link is one of a wired communication link or a wireless communication link (Rehn: [0036]).
11. Regarding Claim 2, Rehn remains as applied above in Claim 1, and further, teaches a the one or more torques comprise a first torque, wherein the first torque has a first magnitude that is applied in opposition to the rotational input (Rehn: [0042] and [0066]).
12. Regarding Claim 3, Rehn remains as applied above in Claim 2, and further, teaches the steering interface motor controller is configured to one of increase or decrease the first magnitude in response to one or more of an operator input or at least one sensed condition (Rehn: [0042]).
13. Regarding Claim 5, Rehn remains as applied above in Claim 1, and further, teaches the center angle of the steering interface is fixed (Rehn: [0051]).
14. Regarding Claim 6, Rehn remains as applied above in Claim 1, and further, teaches the one or more steering motor controllers are configured to control activation of the one or more steering motors to drive the one or more steering elements according to one of autonomous or semi-autonomous operation (Rehn: [0060] and [0064]).
15. Regarding Claim 7, Rehn remains as applied above in Claim 6, and further, teaches the one or more steering interface motor controllers are configured to control activation of the one or more steering interface motors to drive the steering interface to one or more control angular displacements that correspond to one or more output angular displacements of the one or more steering elements during the one of autonomous or semi-autonomous operation (Rehn: [0060] and [0064]).
16. Regarding Claim 8, Rehn remains as applied above in Claim 1, and further, teaches the one or more torques comprise a sixth torque, wherein the sixth torque is applied in opposition to the rotational input, and wherein the sixth torque has a magnitude that depends on a load of each of the one or more steering motors (Rehn: [0042] and [0048]).
17. Regarding Claim 9, Rehn remains as applied above in Claim 1, and further, teaches the one or more steering motor controllers are configured to control activation of the one or more steering motors to drive the one or more steering elements according to a calibration operation (Rehn: [0060] and [0064] Note that under the broadest reasonable interpretation, the calibration operation is equivalent to the steering ratio curve defaulting to a standard steering ratio when the operator begins to turn the vehicle.),
And wherein the one or more steering interface motor controllers are configured to control activation of the one or more steering interface motors to drive the steering interface to one or more control angular displacements that correspond to one or more output angular displacements of the one or more steering elements during the calibration operation (Rehn: [0060] and [0064]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
18. 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.
18. 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.
19. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 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.
20. Claims 4, 10, and 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rehn (US 20220063581 A1) in view of Busboom (US 10836426 B1).
21. Regarding Claim 4, Rehn remains as applied above in Claim 3, and further, teaches the at least one sensed condition comprises… data associated with the power equipment machine operating on rough terrain (Rehn: [0041]);
Wherein the steering interface motor controller is configured to increase the first magnitude in response to the at least one sensed condition (Rehn: [0041] and [0048]);
And wherein the steering interface motor controller is configured to one of increase the first magnitude simultaneously with a decrease in the steering ratio or decrease the first magnitude simultaneously with an increase in the steering ratio (Rehn: [0041] Note that the low sensitivity level is equivalent to a increase in the steering ratio and the high sensitivity level is equivalent to a decrease in steering ratio (508 and 504 in Fig. 5).).
Rehn fail to explicitly teach acceleration data.
However, in the same field of endeavor Busboom teaches at least one sensed condition comprises acceleration data associated with the power equipment machine operating on rough terrain (Busboom: [Column 12, Lines 17-21] and [Column 25, 23-34]).
Rehn and Busboom are considered to be analogous to the claim invention because they are in the same field of steering control. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Rehn to incorporate the teachings of Busboom to sense a condition comprises acceleration data associated with the power equipment machine operating on rough terrain because it provides the benefit of controlling the steering to reduce the effects of electronic noise or unintended operator input along uneven terrain as explicitly explained in [Column 25, Lines 23-34] of Busboom.
22. Regarding Claim 10, Rehn remains as applied above in Claim 1.
Rehn fails to explicitly teach a control unit configured to redefine the center angle of the steering interface such that the control angular displacement corresponds to the output angular displacement based on the steering ratio, in response to one or more of: the power equipment machine being turned on, or an end of one of autonomous or semi-autonomous operation.
However, in the same field of endeavor Busboom teaches a control unit configured to redefine the center angle of the steering interface such that the control angular displacement corresponds to the output angular displacement based on the steering ratio, in response to one or more of: the power equipment machine being turned on, or an end of one of autonomous or semi-autonomous operation (Busboom: [Column 9, Lines 43-51]).
Rehn and Busboom are considered to be analogous to the claim invention because they are in the same field of steering control. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Rehn to incorporate the teachings of Busboom to redefine the center angle of the steering interface such that the control angular displacement corresponds to the output angular displacement because it provides the benefit of initializing the steering system so little or no front wheel movement would occur until commanded as explicitly explained in [Column 9, Lines 43-51] and [Column 10, Lines 20-26] of Busboom.
23. Regarding Claim 16, Rehn teaches a drive-by-wire steering system, comprising (Rehn: [0009] and [0037]):
A steering interface system comprising: a steering interface configured to receive rotational input from a user (Rehn: [0035]);
One or more steering interface position encoders configured to determine a control angular displacement of the steering interface relative to a center angle of the steering interface (Rehn: [0035]);
One or more steering interface motors configured to rotate the steering interface (Rehn: [0050]);
And one or more steering interface motor controllers configured to control activation of the one or more steering interface motors to apply one or more torques to the steering interface (Rehn: [0050]);
A power steering system comprising, one or more steering elements (Rehn: [0009]);
One or more steering position encoders configured to determine an output angular displacement of the one or more steering elements relative to a center angle of the one or more steering elements (Rehn: [0036] and [0059]);
One or more steering motors configured to drive the one or more steering elements (Rehn: [0034]);
One or more steering motor controllers configured to control activation of the one or more steering motors to drive the one or more steering elements toward a target output angular displacement, wherein the target output angular displacement is based on the control angular displacement and a steering ratio (Rehn: [0034] and [0064]),
And a… bus that facilitates communication between the steering interface system and the power steering system (Rehn: [0036]).
Rehn fails to explicitly teach a Controller Area Network (CAN) bus.
However, in the same field of endeavor Busboom teaches a Controller Area Network (CAN) bus that facilitates communication between the steering interface system and the power steering system (Busboom: [Column 13, Lines 46-54]).
Rehn and Busboom are considered to be analogous to the claim invention because they are in the same field of steering control. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Rehn to incorporate the teachings of Busboom to use a Controller Area Network bus because it provides the benefit of a standard communication protocol to communicate the motor controllers with the steering interface as explicitly explained in [Column 13, Lines 46-54] of Busboom.
24. Regarding Claim 17, Rehn and Busboom remain as applied above in Claim 16, and further, Rehn teaches the one or more torques comprise a first torque, wherein the first torque has a first magnitude that is applied in opposition to the rotational input (Rehn: [0042] and [0066]).
25. Regarding Claim 18, Rehn and Busboom remain as applied above in Claim 16, and further, Rehn teaches the steering interface motor controller is configured to one of increase or decrease the first magnitude in response to one or more of an operator input or at least one sensed condition (Rehn: [0042]).
26. Regarding Claim 19, Rehn and Busboom remain as applied above in Claim 16, and further, Rehn teaches the at least one sensed condition comprises… data associated with the power equipment machine operating on rough terrain (Rehn: [0041]);
Wherein the steering interface motor controller is configured to increase the first magnitude in response to the at least one sensed condition (Rehn: [0041] and [0048]);
And wherein the steering interface motor controller is configured to one of increase the first magnitude simultaneously with a decrease in the steering ratio or decrease the first magnitude simultaneously with an increase in the steering ratio (Rehn: [0041] Note that the low sensitivity level is equivalent to a increase in the steering ratio and the high sensitivity level is equivalent to a decrease in steering ratio (508 and 504 in Fig. 5).).
Rehn fail to explicitly teach acceleration data.
However, in the same field of endeavor Busboom teaches the at least one sensed condition comprises acceleration data associated with the power equipment machine operating on rough terrain (Busboom: [Column 12, Lines 17-21] and [Column 25, 23-34]).
Rehn and Busboom are considered to be analogous to the claim invention because they are in the same field of steering control. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Rehn to incorporate the teachings of Busboom to sense a condition comprises acceleration data associated with the power equipment machine operating on rough terrain because it provides the benefit of controlling the steering to reduce the effects of electronic noise or unintended operator input along uneven terrain as explicitly explained in [Column 25, Lines 23-34] of Busboom.
27. Regarding Claim 20, Rehn and Busboom remain as applied above in Claim 16, and further, Rehn teaches the center angle of the steering interface is fixed (Rehn: [0051]).
Conclusion
28. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Albinger (US 20250065951 A1)
Dai (US 20220124972 A1)
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL T SILVA whose telephone number is (571)272-6506. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Tues: 7AM - 4:30PM ET; Wed-Thurs: 7AM-6PM ET; Fri: OFF.
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, Angela Ortiz can be reached at 571-272-1206. 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.
/MICHAEL T SILVA/Examiner, Art Unit 3663
Prosecution Insights