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 .
This Office Action is in response to Applicant's Amendment and Remarks filed on 5/11/2026. This Action is made FINAL.
Claims 1-20 are pending for examination.
Response to Arguments
(A) Applicant’s arguments, see pages 11-12, filed “It may be the case that the Office Action is interpreting the present language broadly enough to provide that controlling "only the first electric motor brake" is performed when the control system of Yamamoto selectively applies a disc brake and does not apply a regenerative brake, and so forth, rather than an indication of whether the brakes themselves are present or absent. Accordingly, Applicant has amended the present claims in order to distinguish this interpretation, providing that the features controlled "only" for the respective wheels are provided "only" on their respective wheels. No new matter has been added” on 5/11/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) claim 1 under 35 USC § 102 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn.
As to point (A), upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Huang(US20210237583A1) and Georgiev(US20150019058A1).
(B) Applicant's arguments filed “Applicant also notes that claim 5 appears to be distinguishable. Claim 5 requires the control apparatus to "provide a correction angle signal for a steering system, so that the steering system compensates for a steering angle." That is, the control apparatus actively sends a signal to the steering system to cause the steering system to adjust the steering angle. In Yamamoto, the steering angle is merely read/detected as an input to the brake control decision. That is, the steering angle is used to determine whether to permit or inhibit brake operation. The steering system is not controlled. Here, there does not appear to be an interpretation that would provide for this even under "broadest reasonable interpretation."” on 5/11/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) claim 1 under 35 USC § 102 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn.
As to point (A), upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Huang(US20210237583A1) and Georgiev(US20150019058A1).
(C) Applicant's arguments filed “Addressing now the rejection of claims 6-9, 12, and 13 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over Yamamoto and Shin, this rejection is respectfully traversed. Shin is merely used to provide for simultaneous braking of the left wheel and the right wheel in response to a threshold, and does not seem to make up for the issues above. As a result, Applicant respectfully submits that independent claims 1, 10, and 14 are patentable over Yamamoto and Shin. As claims 2-9 and 15-19 depend from independent claim 1, claims 11-13 and 20 depend from independent claim 10, and claim 15 depends from independent claim 14, Applicant respectfully submits that claims 2-9, 11-13, and 15-20 are likewise patentable over Yamamoto and Shin. Accordingly, for at least the reasons set forth above, Applicant respectfully requests that the §103 rejections of claims 6-9, 12, and 13 be withdrawn.” on 5/11/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
As to point (C), the examiner respectfully disagrees. The examiner further notes the independent claims 1, 10, and 14 are fully rejected under the new combination of reference. The rejection of claims 6-9, 12, and 13 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 would include a combination of new reference and reference previous cited.
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.
Claim 1-5, 10-11, 14-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamamoto (US20020109403A1) in view of Huang (US20210237583A1) and Georgiev (US20150019058A1).
In regards to claim 1, Yamamoto teaches A vehicle comprising:
a first electric motor brake(Yamamoto: Fig. 1 Element 10; Para 88 “the electrically braking system includes four brake devices in the form of electrically operated wheel brakes 10, 12, 14 and 16 provided for a front left wheel 20, a front right wheel 22, a rear left wheel 24 and a rear right wheel 26, respectively. The wheel brakes 10, 12, 14, 16 include respective electrically operated and controlled actuators in the form of electric motors 28, 29, 30 and 31, respective motor controllers 34, 35, 36, 37 for controlling the respective electric motors 28-31, and at least one motor operation sensor for detecting the operating state of the corresponding electric motor 28, 29, 30, 31. Each wheel brake 10, 12, 14, 16 is equipped with friction members which are forced against a rotor rotating with the corresponding wheel 20, 22, 24, 26, upon operation of the corresponding electric motor 28-31, for generating a braking force for braking the corresponding wheel 20-26”; i.e. wheel brakes 10 encompasses first electric motor brake);
a second electric motor brake, wherein the first electric motor brake and the second electric motor brake are disposed on a first side of the vehicle(Yamamoto: Fig. 1 Element 12; Para 88 “the electrically braking system includes four brake devices in the form of electrically operated wheel brakes 10, 12, 14 and 16 provided for a front left wheel 20, a front right wheel 22, a rear left wheel 24 and a rear right wheel 26, respectively. The wheel brakes 10, 12, 14, 16 include respective electrically operated and controlled actuators in the form of electric motors 28, 29, 30 and 31, respective motor controllers 34, 35, 36, 37 for controlling the respective electric motors 28-31, and at least one motor operation sensor for detecting the operating state of the corresponding electric motor 28, 29, 30, 31. Each wheel brake 10, 12, 14, 16 is equipped with friction members which are forced against a rotor rotating with the corresponding wheel 20, 22, 24, 26, upon operation of the corresponding electric motor 28-31, for generating a braking force for braking the corresponding wheel 20-26”; i.e. wheel brakes 12 encompasses second electric motor brake and both wheel brakes 10 and 12 are located on the front side of the vehicle)…
a drive system with an energy regeneration function(Yamamoto: Fig. 1 Element 14 and 16; Para 40 “a regenerative brake device which utilizes a wheel drive electric motor operable to generate a regenerative braking effect for braking the corresponding wheel. In this case, the electric motor is provided for each of the wheels, for driving the corresponding wheel, and is controllable to control the regenerative braking torque to be applied to the corresponding wheel”)…
a control apparatus (Yamamoto: Para 88 “The wheel brakes 10, 12, 14, 16 include respective electrically operated and controlled actuators in the form of electric motors 28, 29, 30 and 31, respective motor controllers 34, 35, 36, 37 for controlling the respective electric motors 28-31, and at least one motor operation sensor for detecting the operating state of the corresponding electric motor 28, 29, 30, 31”)configured to:
control a left wheel of first side wheels of the vehicle to be braked by only the first electric motor brake and a right wheel of the first side wheels of the vehicle to be braked by only the second electric motor brake(Yamamoto: Fig. 1 Element 10 and 12; Para 88 “the electrically braking system includes four brake devices in the form of electrically operated wheel brakes 10, 12, 14 and 16 provided for a front left wheel 20, a front right wheel 22, a rear left wheel 24 and a rear right wheel 26, respectively. The wheel brakes 10, 12, 14, 16 include respective electrically operated and controlled actuators in the form of electric motors 28, 29, 30 and 31, respective motor controllers 34, 35, 36, 37 for controlling the respective electric motors 28-31, and at least one motor operation sensor for detecting the operating state of the corresponding electric motor 28, 29, 30, 31. Each wheel brake 10, 12, 14, 16 is equipped with friction members which are forced against a rotor rotating with the corresponding wheel 20, 22, 24, 26, upon operation of the corresponding electric motor 28-31, for generating a braking force for braking the corresponding wheel 20-26”; Para 37 “Each of the brake devices may be an electrically operated brake device including an electrically operated actuator in the form of an electric motor, for instance. In this type of electrically operated brake device, the friction member is moved by the electric motor other electrically operated actuator, into pressing contact with the rotor rotating with the corresponding wheel, so that the wheel is braked. The pressing force by which the friction member is forced against the rotor is controllable by controlling the amount of the electric energy to be supplied to the electrically operated actuator”; i.e. brake devices 10 and 12 would be friction based braking system for the front side of the vehicle); and
control a left wheel and a right wheel of second side wheels of the vehicle to be braked by only the drive system (Yamamoto: Fig. 1 Element 14 and 16; Para 88 “the electrically braking system includes four brake devices in the form of electrically operated wheel brakes 10, 12, 14 and 16 provided for a front left wheel 20, a front right wheel 22, a rear left wheel 24 and a rear right wheel 26, respectively”; Para 143 “Each of the electrically controlled brake devices is not limited to the friction brake described above, but may be a regenerative brake including a vehicle drive electric motor which is arranged to drive the corresponding wheel and is adapted to provide a regenerative braking effect for braking the corresponding wheel. In this case, the vehicle drive electric motor must be provided for each of the vehicle wheels”; i.e. regenerative brake would be motor based regenerative braking system for the rear side of the vehicle) wherein the first side and the second side are a front side and a rear side(Yamamoto: Fig. 1 Element 14 and 16; Para 88 “the electrically braking system includes four brake devices in the form of electrically operated wheel brakes 10, 12, 14 and 16 provided for a front left wheel 20, a front right wheel 22, a rear left wheel 24 and a rear right wheel 26, respectively. The wheel brakes 10, 12, 14, 16 include respective electrically operated and controlled actuators in the form of electric motors 28, 29, 30 and 31, respective motor controllers 34, 35, 36, 37 for controlling the respective electric motors 28-31, and at least one motor operation sensor for detecting the operating state of the corresponding electric motor 28, 29, 30, 31. Each wheel brake 10, 12, 14, 16 is equipped with friction members which are forced against a rotor rotating with the corresponding wheel 20, 22, 24, 26, upon operation of the corresponding electric motor 28-31, for generating a braking force for braking the corresponding wheel 20-26”).
Yet Yamamoto do not explicitly teach wherein electric motor brakes are disposed only on the first side of the vehicle;
wherein the drive system is disposed only on a second side of the vehicle.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Huang teaches wherein electric motor brakes are disposed only on the first side of the vehicle (Huang: Fig. 2 Element 224; Para 29 “In the front 216A of the vehicle 100, front wheels may be braked using an electro-hydraulic braking (EHB) brake-by-wire (BbW) system 220 controlled with electric motors on caliper (MoC) 224 as well as regenerative braking using motors 200 c, 200 d”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the vehicle of Yamamoto with the feature of wherein electric motor brakes are disposed only on the first side of the vehicle disclosed by Huang. One would be motivated to do so for the benefit of “new braking system is simpler, highly energy efficient, and can potentially achieve better chassis control performance”(Huang: Para 13).
Yet the combination of Yamamoto and Huang do not explicitly teach wherein the drive system is disposed only on a second side of the vehicle.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Georgiev teaches wherein the drive system is disposed only on a second side of the vehicle (Georgiev: Fig. 1; Para 56 “The vehicle 10 has two drive wheels 12 and 14 which could be the front wheels of the vehicle or the rear wheels thereof. Although not shown in the drawings, it is to be understood that the vehicle 10 would also have two other wheels which are not driven”; Para 64 “A control module 28 controls the supply of electrical power from the battery 16, when the electric motor/generator is in the drive mode, in other words it drives the wheels 12, 14, and also controls the reverse flow of electrical power, when the electric motor/generator 18 is in the regeneration mode producing electrical power used to re-charge the battery”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the vehicle of the combination of Yamamoto and Huang with the feature of wherein the drive system is disposed only on a second side of the vehicle disclosed by Georgiev. One would be motivated to do so for the benefit of “the speed reduction procedure is carried out without application of the vehicle brakes” (Georgiev: Para 14).
In regards to claim 2, the combination of Yamamoto, Huang, and Georgiev teaches The vehicle according to claim 1, and Yamamoto further teaches wherein the control apparatus is further configured to:
in response to a failure of the first electric motor brake, disable the second electric motor brake from braking the right wheel of the first side wheels, and control the drive system to brake the left wheel and the right wheel of the second side wheels(Yamamoto: Fig. 2; Para 26 “The controlled braking force may be zeroed as needed. Namely, the operation of at least one of the normal brake devices may be inhibited. The at least one normal brake whose braking force is controlled preferably includes at least one brake device which is located on one side of the vehicle which is opposite to the side on which at least one of the at least one defective brake device is located”; Para 101 “Where the wheel brakes 10, 12 for the front left and right wheels 20, 22 are found defective, the operations of the wheel brakes 14, 16 for the two rear wheels 24, 26 are permitted”; i.e. the figure indicated permitting the operation of both the rear brakes when both the front brake are disabled); and
in response to a failure of the second electric motor brake, disable the first electric motor brake from braking the left wheel of the first side wheels, and control the drive system to brake the left wheel and the right wheel of the second side wheels(Yamamoto: Fig. 2; Para 26 “The controlled braking force may be zeroed as needed. Namely, the operation of at least one of the normal brake devices may be inhibited. The at least one normal brake whose braking force is controlled preferably includes at least one brake device which is located on one side of the vehicle which is opposite to the side on which at least one of the at least one defective brake device is located”; Para 101 “Where the wheel brakes 10, 12 for the front left and right wheels 20, 22 are found defective, the operations of the wheel brakes 14, 16 for the two rear wheels 24, 26 are permitted”; i.e. the figure indicated permitting the operation of both the rear brakes when both the front brakes are disabled).
In regards to claim 3, the combination of Yamamoto, Huang, and Georgiev teaches The vehicle according to claim 1, and Yamamoto further teaches wherein the drive system further comprises:
a first drive motor configured to drive or brake the left wheel of the second side wheels of the vehicle(Yamamoto: Fig. 1 Element 14 and 16; Para 88 “the electrically braking system includes four brake devices in the form of electrically operated wheel brakes 10, 12, 14 and 16 provided for a front left wheel 20, a front right wheel 22, a rear left wheel 24 and a rear right wheel 26, respectively”; Para 143 “Each of the electrically controlled brake devices is not limited to the friction brake described above, but may be a regenerative brake including a vehicle drive electric motor which is arranged to drive the corresponding wheel and is adapted to provide a regenerative braking effect for braking the corresponding wheel. In this case, the vehicle drive electric motor must be provided for each of the vehicle wheels”); and
a second drive motor configured to drive or brake the right wheel of the second side wheels of the vehicle(Yamamoto: Fig. 1 Element 14 and 16; Para 88 “the electrically braking system includes four brake devices in the form of electrically operated wheel brakes 10, 12, 14 and 16 provided for a front left wheel 20, a front right wheel 22, a rear left wheel 24 and a rear right wheel 26, respectively”; Para 143 “Each of the electrically controlled brake devices is not limited to the friction brake described above, but may be a regenerative brake including a vehicle drive electric motor which is arranged to drive the corresponding wheel and is adapted to provide a regenerative braking effect for braking the corresponding wheel. In this case, the vehicle drive electric motor must be provided for each of the vehicle wheels”).
In regards to claim 4, the combination of Yamamoto, Huang, and Georgiev teaches The vehicle according to claim 3, and Yamamoto further teaches wherein the control apparatus is further configured to:
in response to a failure of the first drive motor, disable the second drive motor from braking the right wheel of the second side wheels, and control the first electric motor brake and the second electric motor brake to brake the left wheel and the right wheel of the first side wheels respectively(Yamamoto: Fig. 2; Para 26 “The controlled braking force may be zeroed as needed. Namely, the operation of at least one of the normal brake devices may be inhibited. The at least one normal brake whose braking force is controlled preferably includes at least one brake device which is located on one side of the vehicle which is opposite to the side on which at least one of the at least one defective brake device is located”; Para 101 “where the wheel brakes 14, 16 for the rear left and right wheels 24, 26 are found defective, the operations of the wheel brakes 10, 12 for the two front wheels 20, 22 are permitted”; i.e. the figure indicated permitting the operation of both the front brakes when both the rear brakes are disabled); and
in response to a failure of the second drive motor, disable the first drive motor from braking the left wheel of the second side wheels, and control the first electric motor brake and the second electric motor brake to brake the left wheel and the right wheel of the first side wheels respectively(Yamamoto: Fig. 2; Para 26 “The controlled braking force may be zeroed as needed. Namely, the operation of at least one of the normal brake devices may be inhibited. The at least one normal brake whose braking force is controlled preferably includes at least one brake device which is located on one side of the vehicle which is opposite to the side on which at least one of the at least one defective brake device is located”; Para 101 “where the wheel brakes 14, 16 for the rear left and right wheels 24, 26 are found defective, the operations of the wheel brakes 10, 12 for the two front wheels 20, 22 are permitted”; i.e. the figure indicated permitting the operation of both the front brakes when both the rear brakes are disabled).
In regards to claim 5, the combination of Yamamoto, Huang, and Georgiev teaches The vehicle according to claim 1, and Yamamoto further teaches wherein the control apparatus is further configured to: in response to a failure of any one of the first electric motor brake, the second electric motor brake, and the drive system, provide a correction angle signal for a steering system(Yamamoto: Para 118 “Where only the front wheel brake 10 for the front left wheel 20 is found defective, or where the wheel brakes 10, 14 for the front and rear left wheels 20, 24 are found defective, the CPU 42 reads out the vehicle running speed V and steering angle δ in step S8, and determine in step S8 whether the detected vehicle speed V is higher than the threshold value V2(δ) which is determined by the detected steering angle δ (both the absolute value and the sign)”), Huang further teaches so that the steering system compensates for a steering angle(Huang: Para180 “Step 3204 processes the sensor inputs to determine if the vehicle is dynamically stable during a cornering maneuver, such as for example if the vehicle is stable in yaw. A vehicle that is not stable in yaw manifests a rotation rate that is inconsistent with the steering input. The existence of such inconsistency shows that the vehicle is oversteering or understeering”; Para 181 “If a yaw stability exists, the controller module 28 implements a stability control strategy to help compensate the oversteer or understeer. A number of different strategies are possible, including applying automatically the brakes at selected wheel to create a brake steering effect and stabilize the vehicle. At the same time the controller module 28 invokes regenerative braking, which is useful to enhance the selective braking application and also reduce the vehicle speed for an overall more effective stability control”). The Examiner supplies the same rationale for the combination of references Yamamoto, Huang, and Georgiev as in Claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 10, Yamamoto teaches An integrated driving and braking control apparatus for a vehicle, wherein the vehicle comprises:
a first electric motor brake configured to brake a left wheel of first side wheels of the vehicle(Yamamoto: Fig. 1 Element 10; Para 88 “the electrically braking system includes four brake devices in the form of electrically operated wheel brakes 10, 12, 14 and 16 provided for a front left wheel 20, a front right wheel 22, a rear left wheel 24 and a rear right wheel 26, respectively. The wheel brakes 10, 12, 14, 16 include respective electrically operated and controlled actuators in the form of electric motors 28, 29, 30 and 31, respective motor controllers 34, 35, 36, 37 for controlling the respective electric motors 28-31, and at least one motor operation sensor for detecting the operating state of the corresponding electric motor 28, 29, 30, 31. Each wheel brake 10, 12, 14, 16 is equipped with friction members which are forced against a rotor rotating with the corresponding wheel 20, 22, 24, 26, upon operation of the corresponding electric motor 28-31, for generating a braking force for braking the corresponding wheel 20-26”);
a second electric motor brake configured to brake a right wheel of the first side wheels of the vehicle(Yamamoto: Fig. 1 Element 12; Para 88 “the electrically braking system includes four brake devices in the form of electrically operated wheel brakes 10, 12, 14 and 16 provided for a front left wheel 20, a front right wheel 22, a rear left wheel 24 and a rear right wheel 26, respectively. The wheel brakes 10, 12, 14, 16 include respective electrically operated and controlled actuators in the form of electric motors 28, 29, 30 and 31, respective motor controllers 34, 35, 36, 37 for controlling the respective electric motors 28-31, and at least one motor operation sensor for detecting the operating state of the corresponding electric motor 28, 29, 30, 31. Each wheel brake 10, 12, 14, 16 is equipped with friction members which are forced against a rotor rotating with the corresponding wheel 20, 22, 24, 26, upon operation of the corresponding electric motor 28-31, for generating a braking force for braking the corresponding wheel 20-26”); and
a drive system with an energy regeneration function(Yamamoto: Fig. 1 Element 14 and 16; Para 40 “a regenerative brake device which utilizes a wheel drive electric motor operable to generate a regenerative braking effect for braking the corresponding wheel. In this case, the electric motor is provided for each of the wheels, for driving the corresponding wheel, and is controllable to control the regenerative braking torque to be applied to the corresponding wheel”), wherein
the drive system comprises:
first drive motor configured to drive or brake a left wheel of second side wheels of the vehicle(Yamamoto: Fig. 1 Element 14 and 16; Para 40 “a regenerative brake device which utilizes a wheel drive electric motor operable to generate a regenerative braking effect for braking the corresponding wheel. In this case, the electric motor is provided for each of the wheels, for driving the corresponding wheel, and is controllable to control the regenerative braking torque to be applied to the corresponding wheel”; Para 88 “the electrically braking system includes four brake devices in the form of electrically operated wheel brakes 10, 12, 14 and 16 provided for a front left wheel 20, a front right wheel 22, a rear left wheel 24 and a rear right wheel 26, respectively”); and
a second drive motor configured to drive or brake a right wheel of the second side wheels of the vehicle(Yamamoto: Fig. 1 Element 14 and 16; Para 40 “a regenerative brake device which utilizes a wheel drive electric motor operable to generate a regenerative braking effect for braking the corresponding wheel. In this case, the electric motor is provided for each of the wheels, for driving the corresponding wheel, and is controllable to control the regenerative braking torque to be applied to the corresponding wheel”; Para 88 “the electrically braking system includes four brake devices in the form of electrically operated wheel brakes 10, 12, 14 and 16 provided for a front left wheel 20, a front right wheel 22, a rear left wheel 24 and a rear right wheel 26, respectively.”), and wherein a first side and a second side are a front side and a rear side(Yamamoto: Fig. 1 Element 14 and 16; Para 88 “the electrically braking system includes four brake devices in the form of electrically operated wheel brakes 10, 12, 14 and 16 provided for a front left wheel 20, a front right wheel 22, a rear left wheel 24 and a rear right wheel 26, respectively. The wheel brakes 10, 12, 14, 16 include respective electrically operated and controlled actuators in the form of electric motors 28, 29, 30 and 31, respective motor controllers 34, 35, 36, 37 for controlling the respective electric motors 28-31, and at least one motor operation sensor for detecting the operating state of the corresponding electric motor 28, 29, 30, 31. Each wheel brake 10, 12, 14, 16 is equipped with friction members which are forced against a rotor rotating with the corresponding wheel 20, 22, 24, 26, upon operation of the corresponding electric motor 28-31, for generating a braking force for braking the corresponding wheel 20-26”); and
the control apparatus(Yamamoto: Para 88 “The wheel brakes 10, 12, 14, 16 include respective electrically operated and controlled actuators in the form of electric motors 28, 29, 30 and 31, respective motor controllers 34, 35, 36, 37 for controlling the respective electric motors 28-31, and at least one motor operation sensor for detecting the operating state of the corresponding electric motor 28, 29, 30, 31”) is configured to:
in response to a failure of the first electric motor brake, disable the second drive motor from braking the right wheel of the second side wheels, and control the first drive motor to brake the left wheel of the second side wheels and the second electric motor brake to brake the right wheel of the first side wheels(Yamamoto: Fig. 2; Para 97 “Where one of the front wheel brakes 10, 12 for the front wheels 20, 22 is found defective, the other normal front brake 10, 12 and one of the rear wheel brakes 14, 16 which is on the same side of the vehicle as the defective front wheel brake 10, 12 are permitted to be operated (in a predetermined restricted manner as described below), and the operation of the other rear wheel 14, 16 on the other side of the vehicle is either permitted (also in the restricted manner) or inhibited depending upon the detected vehicle speed and steering angle. Where the wheel brake 10 for the front left wheel 20 is found defective, for instance, the normal wheel brake 16 for the rear right wheel 26 is permitted to be operated in the restricted manner, when an operation of the normal rear right wheel brake 16 in the present vehicle running condition as represented by the presently detected running speed and steering angle is not likely to deteriorate the running stability of the vehicle. When the operation of the normal rear right wheel brake 16 in the present vehicle running condition is likely to deteriorate the vehicle running stability, the operation of this wheel brake 16 is inhibited”).
Yet Yamamoto do not explicitly teach wherein electric motor brakes are disposed only on the first side of the vehicle and wherein the drive motors is disposed only on a second side of the vehicle.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Huang teaches wherein electric motor brakes are disposed only on the first side of the vehicle (Huang: Fig. 2 Element 224; Para 29 “In the front 216A of the vehicle 100, front wheels may be braked using an electro-hydraulic braking (EHB) brake-by-wire (BbW) system 220 controlled with electric motors on caliper (MoC) 224 as well as regenerative braking using motors 200 c, 200 d”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the vehicle of Yamamoto with the feature of wherein electric motor brakes are disposed only on the first side of the vehicle disclosed by Huang. One would be motivated to do so for the benefit of “new braking system is simpler, highly energy efficient, and can potentially achieve better chassis control performance”(Huang: Para 13).
Yet the combination of Yamamoto and Huang do not explicitly teach wherein the drive motors is disposed only on a second side of the vehicle.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Georgiev teaches wherein the drive motors is disposed only on a second side of the vehicle (Georgiev: Fig. 1; Para 56 “The vehicle 10 has two drive wheels 12 and 14 which could be the front wheels of the vehicle or the rear wheels thereof. Although not shown in the drawings, it is to be understood that the vehicle 10 would also have two other wheels which are not driven”; Para 64 “A control module 28 controls the supply of electrical power from the battery 16, when the electric motor/generator is in the drive mode, in other words it drives the wheels 12, 14, and also controls the reverse flow of electrical power, when the electric motor/generator 18 is in the regeneration mode producing electrical power used to re-charge the battery”; Para 69 “In this example the electric motors/generators are integrated into the wheels of the vehicle”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the vehicle of the combination of Yamamoto and Huang with the feature of wherein the drive motors is disposed only on a second side of the vehicle disclosed by Georgiev. One would be motivated to do so for the benefit of “the speed reduction procedure is carried out without application of the vehicle brakes” (Georgiev: Para 14).
As per claim 11, it recites An integrated driving and braking control apparatus for a vehicle having limitations similar to those of claim 5 and therefore is rejected on the same basis.
Regarding claim 14, Yamamoto teaches An integrated driving and braking control method for a vehicle, wherein the vehicle comprises a first electric motor brake, a second electric motor brake, and a drive system with an energy regeneration function, the drive system comprises a first drive motor and a second drive motor, and the method comprises:
in response to a failure of the first electric motor brake, disabling the second drive motor from braking the right wheel of the second side wheels, and controlling the first drive motor to brake the left wheel of the second side wheels and the second electric motor brake to brake the right wheel of the first side wheels(Yamamoto: Fig. 2; Para 97 “Where one of the front wheel brakes 10, 12 for the front wheels 20, 22 is found defective, the other normal front brake 10, 12 and one of the rear wheel brakes 14, 16 which is on the same side of the vehicle as the defective front wheel brake 10, 12 are permitted to be operated (in a predetermined restricted manner as described below), and the operation of the other rear wheel 14, 16 on the other side of the vehicle is either permitted (also in the restricted manner) or inhibited depending upon the detected vehicle speed and steering angle. Where the wheel brake 10 for the front left wheel 20 is found defective, for instance, the normal wheel brake 16 for the rear right wheel 26 is permitted to be operated in the restricted manner, when an operation of the normal rear right wheel brake 16 in the present vehicle running condition as represented by the presently detected running speed and steering angle is not likely to deteriorate the running stability of the vehicle. When the operation of the normal rear right wheel brake 16 in the present vehicle running condition is likely to deteriorate the vehicle running stability, the operation of this wheel brake 16 is inhibited”); and
in response to a failure of the second electric motor brake, disabling the first drive motor from braking the left wheel of the second side wheels, and controlling the second drive motor to brake the right wheel of the second side wheels and the first electric motor brake to brake the left wheel of the first side wheels(Yamamoto: Fig. 2; Para 98 “Where the wheel brake 12 for the front right wheel 22 is found defective, the other normal front left brake 10 and the rear right wheel brake 16 which is on the same side of the vehicle as the defective front right wheel brake 12 are permitted to be operated, and the operation of the other rear wheel 14 on the other side of the vehicle is either permitted or inhibited depending upon the detected vehicle speed and steering angle”); or disabling the first electric motor brake from braking the left wheel of the first side wheels, and controlling the first drive motor and the second drive motor to brake the left wheel and the right wheel of the second side wheels respectively, wherein a first side and a second side are a front side and a rear side.
Yet Yamamoto do not explicitly teach wherein electric motor brakes are disposed only on the first side of the vehicle and wherein the drive motors is disposed only on a second side of the vehicle.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Huang teaches wherein electric motor brakes are disposed only on the first side of the vehicle (Huang: Fig. 2 Element 224; Para 29 “In the front 216A of the vehicle 100, front wheels may be braked using an electro-hydraulic braking (EHB) brake-by-wire (BbW) system 220 controlled with electric motors on caliper (MoC) 224 as well as regenerative braking using motors 200 c, 200 d”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the vehicle of Yamamoto with the feature of wherein electric motor brakes are disposed only on the first side of the vehicle disclosed by Huang. One would be motivated to do so for the benefit of “new braking system is simpler, highly energy efficient, and can potentially achieve better chassis control performance”(Huang: Para 13).
Yet the combination of Yamamoto and Huang do not explicitly teach wherein the drive motors is disposed only on a second side of the vehicle.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Georgiev teaches wherein the drive motors is disposed only on a second side of the vehicle (Georgiev: Fig. 1; Para 56 “The vehicle 10 has two drive wheels 12 and 14 which could be the front wheels of the vehicle or the rear wheels thereof. Although not shown in the drawings, it is to be understood that the vehicle 10 would also have two other wheels which are not driven”; Para 64 “A control module 28 controls the supply of electrical power from the battery 16, when the electric motor/generator is in the drive mode, in other words it drives the wheels 12, 14, and also controls the reverse flow of electrical power, when the electric motor/generator 18 is in the regeneration mode producing electrical power used to re-charge the battery”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the vehicle of the combination of Yamamoto and Huang with the feature of wherein the drive motors is disposed only on a second side of the vehicle disclosed by Georgiev. One would be motivated to do so for the benefit of “the speed reduction procedure is carried out without application of the vehicle brakes” (Georgiev: Para 14).
As per claim 15, it recites An integrated driving and braking control method for a vehicle having limitations similar to those of claim 5 and therefore is rejected on the same basis.
In regards to claim 16, the combination of Yamamoto, Huang, and Georgiev teaches The vehicle according to claim 3, and Yamamoto further teaches wherein the control apparatus is further configured to, in response to a failure of the first electric motor brake: disable the second drive motor from braking the right wheel of the second side wheels; and control the first drive motor to brake the left wheel of the second side wheels and the second electric motor brake to brake the right wheel of the first side wheels(Yamamoto: Fig. 2; Para 97 “Where one of the front wheel brakes 10, 12 for the front wheels 20, 22 is found defective, the other normal front brake 10, 12 and one of the rear wheel brakes 14, 16 which is on the same side of the vehicle as the defective front wheel brake 10, 12 are permitted to be operated (in a predetermined restricted manner as described below), and the operation of the other rear wheel 14, 16 on the other side of the vehicle is either permitted (also in the restricted manner) or inhibited depending upon the detected vehicle speed and steering angle. Where the wheel brake 10 for the front left wheel 20 is found defective, for instance, the normal wheel brake 16 for the rear right wheel 26 is permitted to be operated in the restricted manner, when an operation of the normal rear right wheel brake 16 in the present vehicle running condition as represented by the presently detected running speed and steering angle is not likely to deteriorate the running stability of the vehicle. When the operation of the normal rear right wheel brake 16 in the present vehicle running condition is likely to deteriorate the vehicle running stability, the operation of this wheel brake 16 is inhibited”).
In regards to claim 17, the combination of Yamamoto, Huang, and Georgiev teaches The vehicle according to claim 3, and Yamamoto further teaches wherein the control apparatus is further configured to, in response to a failure of the first electric motor brake: disable the second electric motor brake from braking the right wheel of the first side wheels, and control the first drive motor and the second drive motor to brake the left wheel and the right wheel of the second side wheels respectively(Yamamoto: Fig. 2; Para 26 “The controlled braking force may be zeroed as needed. Namely, the operation of at least one of the normal brake devices may be inhibited. The at least one normal brake whose braking force is controlled preferably includes at least one brake device which is located on one side of the vehicle which is opposite to the side on which at least one of the at least one defective brake device is located”; Para 101 “Where the wheel brakes 10, 12 for the front left and right wheels 20, 22 are found defective, the operations of the wheel brakes 14, 16 for the two rear wheels 24, 26 are permitted”; i.e. the figure indicated permitting the operation of both the rear brakes when both the front brake are disabled).
In regards to claim 18, the combination of Yamamoto, Huang, and Georgiev teaches The vehicle according to claim 3, and Yamamoto further teaches wherein the control apparatus is further configured to, in response to a failure of the second electric motor brake: disable the first drive motor from braking the left wheel of the second side wheels; and
control the second drive motor to brake the right wheel of the second side wheels and the first electric motor brake to brake the left wheel of the first side wheels(Yamamoto: Fig. 2; Para 98 “Where the wheel brake 12 for the front right wheel 22 is found defective, the other normal front left brake 10 and the rear right wheel brake 16 which is on the same side of the vehicle as the defective front right wheel brake 12 are permitted to be operated, and the operation of the other rear wheel 14 on the other side of the vehicle is either permitted or inhibited depending upon the detected vehicle speed and steering angle”).
In regards to claim 19, the combination of Yamamoto, Huang, and Georgiev teaches The vehicle according to claim 3, and Yamamoto further teaches wherein the control apparatus is further configured to, in response to a failure of the second electric motor brake: disable the first electric motor brake from braking the left wheel of the first side wheels; and control the first drive motor and the second drive motor to brake the left wheel and the right wheel of the second side wheels respectively(Yamamoto: Fig. 2; Para 26 “The controlled braking force may be zeroed as needed. Namely, the operation of at least one of the normal brake devices may be inhibited. The at least one normal brake whose braking force is controlled preferably includes at least one brake device which is located on one side of the vehicle which is opposite to the side on which at least one of the at least one defective brake device is located”; Para 101 “where the wheel brakes 14, 16 for the rear left and right wheels 24, 26 are found defective, the operations of the wheel brakes 10, 12 for the two front wheels 20, 22 are permitted”; i.e. the figure indicated permitting the operation of both the front brakes when both the rear brakes are disabled).
In regards to claim 20, the combination of Yamamoto, Huang, and Georgiev teaches The vehicle according to claim 10, and Yamamoto further teaches The integrated driving and braking control apparatus for a vehicle according to claim 10, wherein the control apparatus is further configured to, in response to a failure of the second electric motor brake: disable the first drive motor from braking the left wheel of the second side wheels; and control the second drive motor to brake the right wheel of the second side wheels and the first electric motor brake to brake the left wheel of the first side wheel(Yamamoto: Fig. 2; Para 98 “Where the wheel brake 12 for the front right wheel 22 is found defective, the other normal front left brake 10 and the rear right wheel brake 16 which is on the same side of the vehicle as the defective front right wheel brake 12 are permitted to be operated, and the operation of the other rear wheel 14 on the other side of the vehicle is either permitted or inhibited depending upon the detected vehicle speed and steering angle”).
Claim 6-9, 12-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamamoto (US20020109403A1), Huang (US20210237583A1), and Georgiev (US20150019058A1) in view of SHIN (JPH11168802A).
In regards to claim 6, the combination of Yamamoto, Huang, and Georgiev teaches The vehicle according to claim 1.
Yet the combination of Yamamoto, Huang, and Georgiev do not explicitly teach wherein the control apparatus is further configured to: in response to a brake force requirement indicated by a brake signal being less than a first threshold, control the drive system to brake the left wheel and the right wheel of the second side wheels.
However, in the same field of endeavor, SHIN teaches wherein the control apparatus is further configured to: in response to a brake force requirement indicated by a brake signal being less than a first threshold, control the drive system to brake the left wheel and the right wheel of the second side wheels(SHIN: Para 13 “In the braking control device of the invention described in claim 2, first a determination is made regarding the value corresponding to the required braking force for the vehicle based on a plurality of predetermined values. If the value corresponding to the required braking force is less than or equal to the first predetermined value, regenerative braking is performed on all drive wheels”; Para 23 “the value of G1 should be the maximum deceleration achievable through braking using the four-wheel regenerative braking system. If it is determined in step 140 that the value is less than or equal to a first predetermined value, the process proceeds to step 141, where the variable C indicating the braking method is set to C0, which represents the four-wheel regenerative braking method, and in step 142, a predetermined torque command value T is determined appropriately based on the required deceleration G. The braking method variable C and torque command value T are control information for the drive motor 1 that is sent to the motor driver”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the vehicle of the combination of Yamamoto, Huang, and Georgiev with the feature of wherein the control apparatus is further configured to: in response to a brake force requirement indicated by a brake signal being less than a first threshold, control the drive system to brake the left wheel and the right wheel of the second side wheels disclosed by SHIN. One would be motivated to do so for the benefit of “increasing the amount of regenerative braking, even slightly, in order to increase the driving distance per battery charge” (SHIN: Para 4).
In regards to claim 7, the combination of Yamamoto, Huang, and Georgiev teaches The vehicle according to claim 1, and SHIN further teaches wherein the control apparatus is further configured to: in response to a brake force requirement indicated by a brake signal being greater than a first threshold and less than a second threshold, control the first electric motor brake and the second electric motor brake to brake the left wheel and the right wheel of the first side wheels(SHIN: Para 13 “In the braking control device of the invention described in claim 2, first a determination is made regarding the value corresponding to the required braking force for the vehicle based on a plurality of predetermined values … If it is greater than the first predetermined value but less than or equal to the second predetermined value, regenerative braking is performed on one of the front drive wheels and the other on the other drive wheel”; Para 32 “when there is no abnormality in the power supply state to the motor driver, if the required deceleration G is greater than G1 and less than or equal to G2, torque commands are issued using the regenerative braking method for the front wheels and the reverse braking method for the rear wheels”). The Examiner supplies the same rationale for the combination of references Yamamoto, Huang, Georgiev, and SHIN as in Claim 6 above.
In regards to claim 8, the combination of Yamamoto, Huang, and Georgiev teaches The vehicle according to claim 1, and SHIN further teaches wherein the control apparatus is further configured to: in response to a brake force requirement indicated by a brake signal being greater than a second threshold, control the first electric motor brake and the second electric motor brake to brake the left wheel and the right wheel of the first side wheels, and control the drive system to brake the left wheel and the right wheel of the second side wheels(SHIN: Para 34 “if the driver's braking is large and the required deceleration G is greater than G2, but the battery voltage E is greater than the first predetermined value E1 but less than or equal to the second predetermined value E2, indicating an incomplete power supply state, regenerative braking will be applied to the front wheels and reverse braking to the rear wheels”). The Examiner supplies the same rationale for the combination of references Yamamoto and SHIN as in Claim 6 above.
In regards to claim 9, the combination of Yamamoto, Huang, and Georgiev teaches The vehicle according to claim 1, and SHIN further teaches wherein the control apparatus is further configured to:
in response to a brake force requirement indicated by a brake signal being greater than a second threshold and less than a third threshold, control the first electric motor brake and the second electric motor brake to brake the left wheel and the right wheel of the first side wheels, and control the drive system to brake the left wheel and the right wheel of the second side wheels by using the energy regeneration function(SHIN: Para 13 “In the braking control device of the invention described in claim 2, first a determination is made regarding the value corresponding to the required braking force for the vehicle based on a plurality of predetermined values … If it is greater than the first predetermined value but less than or equal to the second predetermined value, regenerative braking is performed on one of the front drive wheels and the other on the other drive wheel”; Para 32 “if the required deceleration G is greater than G1 and less than or equal to G2, torque commands are issued using the regenerative braking method for the front wheels and the reverse braking method for the rear wheels”; i.e. the regenerative braking can be designed to apply to any of the front or rear wheels with a motor under different predetermined values); and
in response to the brake force requirement indicated by the brake signal being is greater than the third threshold, control the first electric motor brake and the second electric motor brake to brake the left wheel and the right wheel of the first side wheels, and control the drive system to reversely brake the left wheel and the right wheel of the second side wheels(SHIN: Para 13 “In the braking control device of the invention described in claim 2, first a determination is made regarding the value corresponding to the required braking force for the vehicle based on a plurality of predetermined values … If it is greater than the second predetermined value, reversal braking is performed on all drive wheels” i.e. the reversal braking can be designed to apply to any of the front or rear wheels under different predetermined values). The Examiner supplies the same rationale for the combination of references Yamamoto and SHIN as in Claim 6 above.
As per claim 12, it recites An integrated driving and braking control apparatus for a vehicle having limitations similar to those of claim 8 and therefore is rejected on the same basis.
As per claim 13, it recites An integrated driving and braking control apparatus for a vehicle having limitations similar to those of claim 9 and therefore is rejected on the same basis.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Doi (US20160264111A1) disclosed a braking force control system for rear wheels of a vehicle that include: a regenerative braking force controller that controls a regenerative braking force for the rear wheels, which is generated by a first motor-generator for driving the rear wheels; a frictional braking force controller that controls a frictional braking force to be generated by the rear wheels of the vehicle; and a braking force determiner that determines the frictional braking force and the regenerative braking force inclusive of a braking force equivalent to an engine brake, so that a total braking force to be applied to the rear wheels does not exceed a preset value.
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 WENYUAN YANG whose telephone number is (571)272-5455. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 9:00AM-5:00PM 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, Hitesh Patel can be reached at (571) 270-5442. 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.
/W.Y./Examiner, Art Unit 3667
/Hitesh Patel/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3667
7/30/26
Prosecution Insights