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 .
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 1, 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sujan (US 2020/0361444) in view of Huh (US 2021/0323532)
As to claim 1 Sujan discloses a hybrid vehicle that comprises an engine and a motor as drive sources, the hybrid vehicle comprising:
a detection part that detects a start timing at which the hybrid vehicle passes through a start position of an uphill slope (Paragraph 42 “In a second portion 202 of the route, the vehicle is facing an inclination which increases the predicted load on the engine and motor, but the speed of the vehicle is to stay the same as in the first portion 200.”); and
an output control part that increases an output of the engine and decreases an output of the motor as a time elapsed from the start timing increases (Paragraph 42 “In a second portion 202 of the route, the vehicle is facing an inclination which increases the predicted load on the engine and motor, but the speed of the vehicle is to stay the same as in the first portion 200. As such, the power demand is increased to 300 hp, of which the engine-to-motor power ratio is 250/50, such that both the engine and the motor are contributing to the power demand. Because the load on the engine is increased, the exhaust temperature is high to accommodate for the temperature increase necessary for the aftertreatment system of the engine to operate efficiently.”).
Sujan does not explicitly disclose of gradually decreasing an output of the motor at the start timing.
Huh teaches an output control part that at a time after the start timing, gradually increases an output of the engine from the output of the engine at the start timing and gradually decreases an output of the motor from the output of the motor at the start timing, as a time elapsed from the start timing increases(Abstract “…determining, by a controller, a driving state of a vehicle on the basis of information collected from the vehicle; when the vehicle is determined as being in a uphill driving state, performing, by the controller, high torque control on an engine of the vehicle by increasing an engine torque to control the engine at a predetermined high torque engine operating point and reducing a motor torque of a motor in the vehicle to satisfy a driver request torque;”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to modify Sujan to include the teachings of gradually increasing an output of the engine at the start timing for the purpose of improving efficiency.
As to claim 9 Sujan discloses a hybrid vehicle further comprising:
a determination part that determines that the hybrid vehicle will travel on the uphill slope when no branch point of a road exists between the position of the hybrid vehicle and the start position at a time prior to the start timing (Paragraph 41-42).
Claims 2-8, 10-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sujan (US 2020/0361444) in view of Huh (US 2021/0323532) as applied to claim 1 above, and in further view of Qiu (US 2024/0034300)
As to claim 2 Qiu teaches a hybrid vehicle wherein
the output control part increases the output of the engine by a predetermined change amount, taking an output corresponding to an accelerator opening degree as a maximum value, at the time elapsed from the start timing (Paragraph 59), and
reduces the output of the motor by the predetermined change amount so that an output obtained by subtracting the output of the engine from the output corresponding to the accelerator opening degree becomes the output of the motor (Paragraph 59). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to modify Qiu to include the teachings of increasing the output of the engine and reducing the output of the motor by a predetermine change amount for the purpose of reducing emissions in the vehicle.
As to claim 3 Sujan discloses a hybrid vehicle wherein
the output control part determines the predetermined change amount on the basis of (i) a state of charge stored in a power storage device that supplies electricity to the motor and (ii) the angle of the uphill slope, both measured at the start timing (Paragraph 45, 47).
As to claim 4 Sujan discloses a hybrid vehicle wherein
the output control part reduces the predetermined change amount as the angle of the uphill slope increases (Paragraph 42).
As to claim 5 Sujan discloses a hybrid vehicle wherein
the output control part reduces the predetermined change amount as the state of charge increases(Paragraph 47).
As to claim 6 Qiu teaches a hybrid vehicle wherein
the output control part determines the predetermined change amount so that the state of charge is reduced to 0 while the hybrid vehicle travels on the uphill slope (Paragraph 59).
As to claim 7 Qiu teaches a hybrid vehicle wherein
the output control part determines the output of the engine and the output of the motor at the start timing on the basis of (i) an average output of the engine in a time period from the time prior to the start timing by a predetermined time to the start timing and (ii) an accelerator opening degree at the start timing (Paragraph 54).
As to claim 8 Qiu teaches a hybrid vehicle wherein
the output control part determines the average output as the output of the engine at the start timing, and determines an output obtained by subtracting the average output from an output corresponding to the accelerator opening degree at the start timing as the output of the motor at the start timing (Paragraph 59).
As to claim 10 Qiu teaches a hybrid vehicle wherein
the output control part causes the engine to generate a first correction output obtained by adding a correction amount to the output of the engine corresponding to the accelerator opening degree and the vehicle speed, and causes the motor to generate a second correction output obtained by subtracting the correction amount from the output of the motor corresponding to the accelerator opening degree and the vehicle speed, at a time prior to the start timing as a result of the determination part determining that the vehicle will travel on the uphill slope (Paragraph 59, 69).
As to claim 11 Sujan discloses a hybrid vehicle wherein
the output control part increases the correction amount at a time prior to the start timing as the time elapsed from a determination timing, at which the determination part determined that the vehicle will travel on the uphill slope increases (Paragraph 41-42).
As to claim 12 Sujan discloses a hybrid vehicle wherein the steeper the angle of the uphill slope, the more the output control part increases the correction amount (Paragraph 42).
As to claim 13 Sujan discloses a hybrid vehicle wherein the longer a distance of the uphill slope, the more the output control part increases the correction amount(Paragraph 41-42).
As to claim 14 Qiu teaches a hybrid vehicle wherein
the detection part detects, as the start timing, a timing at which a subtraction value, obtained by subtracting a second accelerator opening degree at a time prior to the current time by a predetermined time from a first accelerator opening degree at the current time, is equal to or greater than a predetermined value (Paragraph 59).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-14 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 IMRAN K MUSTAFA whose telephone number is (571)270-1471. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9-5.
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, James J Lee can be reached at 571-270-5965. 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.
IMRAN K. MUSTAFA
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3668
/IMRAN K MUSTAFA/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3668 9/4/2026
Prosecution Insights