DETAILED ACTION
This action is in reply to the amendments and arguments filed July 2nd, 2026. Claims 21-38 are currently pending.
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
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.
Claims 21-24, 26-33, and 35-38 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over previously cited of record Christensen et al. (US Pub. No. 20170225564 A1), herein after Christensen, in view of previously cited of record Perry et al. (US Pub. No. 20200031224 A1), herein after Perry, and further in view of previously cited of record Fox; Matthew G. (US Pub. No. 20150119181 A1), herein after Fox.
Regarding claim 21, Christensen teaches [a] method for actuating one or more drive line actuators (DLAs) to control application of torque to wheels of [a] vehicle (EV), the method comprising (Christensen: Para. 0028, teaching a vehicle with drivetrains that selectively powers different wheels; and Para. 0040, teaching the use of electric motors that may be disconnected from the drivetrains by actuators): receiving, at a DLA controller: first speed information representing a speed associated with an end of a first shaft that is rotationally coupled to an electric motor of the EV (Christensen: Para. 0055, teaching receiving wheel speed information from a wheel that is coupled to a shaft that is coupled to a motor); second speed information representing a speed of an end of a second shaft rotationally coupled to a wheel of the EV (Christensen: Para. 0030, teaching a plurality of wheel speed sensors with each wheel having their own sensor that measure the speed of the wheel at each end of each shaft).
Christensen does not explicitly teach that the method is for an electric vehicle (EV) however it is well known in the art that hybrid systems can be controlled as electric vehicles as evidenced by Perry.
Perry teaches [a] method for actuating one or more drive line actuators (DLAs) to control application of torque to wheels of a vehicle that can be an electric vehicle (EV) or a hybrid vehicle (Perry: Para. 0030-0032, teaching a system for connecting and disconnecting clutches from powertrains that are applicable to both hybrid electric vehicles and electric vehicles) for the benefit of controlling vehicles which either emit reduced or zero greenhouse gases compared to combustion engines.
It would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art before the filing of the application that the hybrid electric powertrain configuration of Christensen would still be applicable for purely electric vehicles, as taught by Perry, for the benefit of controlling vehicles which either emit reduced or zero greenhouse gases compared to combustion engines.
Christensen and Perry are silent to wherein the first speed information and the second speed information indicate the EV is stationary; in response to a request at the DLA controller to actuate a DLA: sending a control signal to the motor of the EV to rotate the first shaft at a predetermined speed, while the second shaft remains stationary; and sending an actuating signal to the DLA to actuate the DLA and couple the first shaft with the second shaft.
In a similar field, Fox teaches wherein the first speed information and the second speed information indicate the EV is stationary (Fox: Para. 0032 and 0043, teaching that the speed of each wheel is measured and that the clutch assembly at each wheel can be smoothly engaged when the speed of the vehicle is substantially zero); in response to a request at the DLA controller to actuate a DLA: sending a control signal to the motor of the EV to rotate the first shaft at a predetermined speed, while the second shaft remains stationary; and sending an actuating signal to the DLA to actuate the DLA and couple the first shaft with the second shaft (Fox: Para. 0032, teaching that the clutch assembly is engaged when the speed between the two ends of the clutch are within a range including when the vehicle is at a standstill or the motor is off; and Para. 0043, teaching that the clutch assembly is engaged after controlling the motor such that the speeds of both ends of the clutch are within a range of about 50 rpm) for the benefit of reducing noise, vibration, and harshness of the driveline during actuation.
It would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the applicant’s claimed invention to modify the driveline disconnect clutch control from Christensen in view of Perry with to wait to actuate a disconnect clutch until the components of the driveline that are connected by the clutch are rotating at speeds close to one another with one side being stationary, as taught by Fox, for the benefit of reducing noise, vibration, and harshness of the driveline during actuation.
Regarding claim 22, Christensen, Perry, and Fox remain as applied as in claim 21, and Fox goes on to further teach [t]he method of claim 21, wherein the predetermined speed is in a range of 25-250 revolutions per minute (Fox: Para. 0032, teaching that the speed of the clutch plates that are to be engaged includes a first clutch plate rotating at a speed greater than 50 RPM and the second clutch plate rotates at a difference in speed from the first clutch plate to a speed greater than 200 RPM).
Regarding claim 23, Christensen, Perry, and Fox remain as applied as in claim 21, and Fox goes on to further teach [t]he method of claim 21, wherein the first speed information and the second speed information indicate the EV is stationary when the first speed information and the second speed information indicate a rotational speed of less than five revolutions per minute (Fox: Para. 0032 and 0043, teaching that the speed of each wheel is measured and that the clutch assembly at each wheel can be smoothly engaged when the speed of the vehicle is substantially zero).
Regarding claim 24, Christensen, Perry, and Fox remain as applied as in claim 21, and Christensen goes on to further teach [t]he method of claim 21, wherein the predetermined speed is determined based on additional vehicle parameters comprising at least one of: external temperature, windshield wiper status, headlight state, camera inputs, throttle position, brake inputs, or steering inputs (Christensen: Para. 0103, teaching that the amount of torque to be applied to the clutch is based on vehicle operating parameters such as throttle position, outside air temperature, and steering angle; and Para. 0113, teaching that the engagement of the clutches are also based on vehicle operating parameters such as the steering angle, windshield wiper state, brake pressure, and fog light state).
Regarding claim 26, Christensen, Perry, and Fox remain as applied as in claim 21, and Christensen goes on to further teach [t]he method of claim 21, wherein the electric vehicle is a four wheel drive (4WD) or all-wheel drive (AWD) vehicle and wherein the DLA is a first DLA, the method comprising (Christensen: Para. 0027, teaching that the vehicle is operable in four wheel drive) and Perry goes on to further teach sending an actuating signal to a second DLA to actuate the second DLA and couple a third shaft with a fourth shaft (Perry: Para. 0059 and 0064, teaching a configuration where each axle of the vehicle has two shafts that are connectable together).
Regarding claim 27, Christensen, Perry, and Fox remain as applied as in claim 26, and Perry goes on to further teach [t]he method of claim 26, wherein the first DLA is configured to couple the first shaft to vehicle front wheels, wherein the second DLA is configured to couple a third to vehicle rear wheels (Perry: Para. 0083 and 0085, teaching a first shaft for the front wheels, a second shaft for the rear wheels, and a third shaft that connects both shafts together that can be coupled according to a clutching action).
Regarding claim 28, Christensen, Perry, and Fox remain as applied as in claim 21, and Fox goes on to further teach [t]he method of claim 21, wherein sending the actuating signal to the DLA occurs while the first shaft is rotating in response to the control signal (Fox: Para. 0043, teaching that the clutch assembly is engaged after controlling the motor such that the speeds of both ends of the clutch are at similar speeds).
Regarding claim 29, Christensen, Perry, and Fox remain as applied as in claim 21, and Fox goes on to further teach [t]he method of claim 21, wherein sending the actuating signal to the DLA occurs after sending the control signal to the motor of the EV (Fox: Para. 0043, teaching that the clutch assembly is engaged after controlling the motor such that the speeds of both ends of the clutch are at similar speeds).
Regarding claim 30, Christensen teaches [a] system comprising: one or more drive line actuators (DLAs) configured to couple one or more wheels of [a] vehicle (EV) to an electric motor (Christensen: Para. 0028, teaching a vehicle with drivetrains that selectively powers different wheels; and Para. 0040, teaching the use of electric motors that may be disconnected from the drivetrains by actuators): a DLA controller configured to receive: first speed information representing a speed associated with an end of a first shaft that is rotationally coupled to the electric motor of the EV (Christensen: Para. 0055, teaching receiving wheel speed information from a wheel that is coupled to a shaft that is coupled to a motor); second speed information representing a speed of an end of a second shaft rotationally coupled to a wheel of the EV (Christensen: Para. 0030, teaching a plurality of wheel speed sensors with each wheel having their own sensor that measure the speed of the wheel at each end of each shaft).
Christensen does not explicitly teach that the method is for an electric vehicle (EV) however it is well known in the art that hybrid systems can be controlled as electric vehicles as evidenced by Perry.
Perry teaches [a] system comprising: one or more drive line actuators (DLAs) configured to couple one or more wheels of an electric vehicle (EV) to an electric motor (Perry: Para. 0030-0032, teaching a system for connecting and disconnecting clutches from powertrains that are applicable to both hybrid electric vehicles and electric vehicles) for the benefit of controlling vehicles which either emit reduced or zero greenhouse gases compared to combustion engines.
It would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art before the filing of the application that the hybrid electric powertrain configuration of Christensen would still be applicable for purely electric vehicles, as taught by Perry, for the benefit of controlling vehicles which either emit reduced or zero greenhouse gases compared to combustion engines.
Christensen and Perry are silent to wherein the first speed information and the second speed information indicate the EV is stationary; a request to actuate a DLA, wherein in response to receiving the request, the DLA controller is configured to: send a control signal to the motor of the EV to rotate the first shaft at a predetermined speed, while the second shaft remains stationary; and send an actuating signal to the DLA to actuate the DLA and couple the first shaft with the second shaft.
In a similar field, Fox teaches wherein the first speed information and the second speed information indicate the EV is stationary (Fox: Para. 0032 and 0043, teaching that the speed of each wheel is measured and that the clutch assembly at each wheel can be smoothly engaged when the speed of the vehicle is substantially zero); a request to actuate a DLA, wherein in response to receiving the request, the DLA controller is configured to: send a control signal to the motor of the EV to rotate the first shaft at a predetermined speed, while the second shaft remains stationary; and send an actuating signal to the DLA to actuate the DLA and couple the first shaft with the second shaft (Fox: Para. 0032, teaching that the clutch assembly is engaged when the speed between the two ends of the clutch are within a range including when the vehicle is at a standstill or the motor is off; and Para. 0043, teaching that the clutch assembly is engaged after controlling the motor such that the speeds of both ends of the clutch are within a range of about 50 rpm) for the benefit of reducing noise, vibration, and harshness of the driveline during actuation.
It would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the applicant’s claimed invention to modify the driveline disconnect clutch control from Christensen in view of Perry with to wait to actuate a disconnect clutch until the components of the driveline that are connected by the clutch are rotating at speeds close to one another with one side being stationary, as taught by Fox, for the benefit of reducing noise, vibration, and harshness of the driveline during actuation.
Regarding claim 31, Christensen, Perry, and Fox remain as applied as in claim 30, and Fox goes on to further teach [t]he system of claim 30, wherein the predetermined speed is in a range of 25-250 revolutions per minute (Fox: Para. 0032, teaching that the speed of the clutch plates that are to be engaged includes a first clutch plate rotating at a speed greater than 50 RPM and the second clutch plate rotates at a difference in speed from the first clutch plate to a speed greater than 200 RPM).
Regarding claim 32, Christensen, Perry, and Fox remain as applied as in claim 30, and Fox goes on to further teach [t]he system of claim 30, wherein the first speed information and the second speed information indicate the EV is stationary when the first speed information and the second speed information indicate a rotational speed of less than five revolutions per minute (Fox: Para. 0032 and 0043, teaching that the speed of each wheel is measured and that the clutch assembly at each wheel can be smoothly engaged when the speed of the vehicle is substantially zero).
Regarding claim 33, Christensen, Perry, and Fox remain as applied as in claim 30, and Christensen goes on to further teach [t]he system of claim 30, wherein the predetermined speed is determined based on additional vehicle parameters comprising at least one of: external temperature, windshield wiper status, headlight state, camera inputs, throttle position, brake inputs, or steering inputs (Christensen: Para. 0103, teaching that the amount of torque to be applied to the clutch is based on vehicle operating parameters such as throttle position, outside air temperature, and steering angle; and Para. 0113, teaching that the engagement of the clutches are also based on vehicle operating parameters such as the steering angle, windshield wiper state, brake pressure, and fog light state).
Regarding claim 35, Christensen, Perry, and Fox remain as applied as in claim 30, and Christensen goes on to further teach [t]he system of claim 30, wherein the electric vehicle is a four-wheel drive (4WD) or all-wheel drive (AWD) vehicle and wherein the DLA is a first DLA, the DLA controller configured to (Christensen: Para. 0027, teaching that the vehicle is operable in four wheel drive) and Perry goes on to further teach send an actuating signal to a second DLA to actuate the second DLA and couple a third shaft with a fourth shaft (Perry: Para. 0059 and 0064, teaching a configuration where each axle of the vehicle has two shafts that are connectable together).
Regarding claim 36, Christensen, Perry, and Fox remain as applied as in claim 35, and Perry goes on to further teach [t]he system of claim 35, wherein the first DLA is configured to couple the first shaft to vehicle front wheels, wherein the second DLA is configured to couple a third to vehicle rear wheels (Perry: Para. 0083 and 0085, teaching a first shaft for the front wheels, a second shaft for the rear wheels, and a third shaft that connects both shafts together that can be coupled according to a clutching action).
Regarding claim 37, Christensen, Perry, and Fox remain as applied as in claim 30, and Fox goes on to further teach [t]he system of claim 30, wherein the DLA controller is configured to send the actuating signal to the DLA while the first shaft is rotating in response to the control signal (Fox: Para. 0043, teaching that the clutch assembly is engaged after controlling the motor such that the speeds of both ends of the clutch are at similar speeds).
Regarding claim 38, Christensen, Perry, and Fox remain as applied as in claim 30, and Fox goes on to further teach [t]he system of claim 30, wherein the DLA controller is configured to send the actuating signal to the DLA after sending the control signal to the motor of the EV (Fox: Para. 0043, teaching that the clutch assembly is engaged after controlling the motor such that the speeds of both ends of the clutch are at similar speeds).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 25 and 34 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Claims 25 and 34 recites causing a sinusoidal torque variation that is applied by the electric motor to the first shaft (emphasis added) which is deemed unique and non-obvious over the prior art of record. The closest prior art of record Yao et al. (US Pub. No. 20210086736 A1) discloses applying torque in a cyclical sine wave using brakes, however this is insufficient for teaching rotating the first shaft using a sinusoidal torque variation as specification of applicant’s invention in pages 19-20 paragraph 0072 states that when the shaft is rotated using a torque profile that is a sinusoidal torque variation, the drive-line shaft is rocked such that it causes a reversal of the torque profile.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed July 2nd, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant’s amendments filed July 2nd, 2026 with respect to the 112(a) rejections of claims 25 and 34 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The 112(a) rejections of claims 25 and 34 have been withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments filed July 2nd, 2026 against the 103 rejections of claims 21-24, 26-33, and 35-38 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant contends (see page 7 lines 17-27, filed July 2nd, 2026) that Fox is deficient in teaching actuating the DLA when the first shaft is rotated to a predetermined speed while the second shaft remains stationary as required by the amended independent claims. The examiner respectfully disagrees. The examiner notes that the prior art of Fox teaches in paragraph 0032 that the clutch plates can be engaged when rotating at different speed where “the difference in the speed of the first clutch plates 44 and the second clutch plates 46 may range from about zero (vehicle stand still, motor off) to greater than about 200 RPM” (emphasis added). While not explicit, the prior art of Fox does contemplate scenarios where the clutches plates are engaged when the vehicle is standing still or has the motor being off as well as when there is a speed difference between the two, thus a reasonable interpretation of Fox is that it teaches that the clutch plates can engage in situations where a clutch plate connected to a motor turned off is stationary is engaged to a clutch plate that is rotating at speed.
Applicant contends (see page 7 line 28 through page 8 line 2, filed July 2nd, 2026) that independent claim 30 has been rendered allowable over the prior art of record for the same reason that independent claim 21 has been rendered allowable over the prior art of record and that the dependent claims are allowable over the prior art of record as they depend upon independent claims which have been rendered allowable over the prior art of record. The examiner respectfully disagrees. The examiner notes that independent claim 30 has not been rendered allowable over the prior art of record for the same reason that independent claim 21 has not been rendered allowable over the prior art of record and that as the independent claims have not been rendered allowable over the prior art of record dependent claims 22-24, 26-29, 31-33, and 35-38 stand to fall with the claims they depend upon.
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 Aaron K McCullers whose telephone number is (571)272-3523. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, Roughly 9 AM - 6 PM ET.
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.
/A.K.M./Examiner, Art Unit 3663
/ANGELA Y ORTIZ/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3663
Prosecution Insights