DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendment
2. This communication is a Final Office Action, in response to the communication received on 08/12/2026. Claims 1, 11 and 20 have been amended . Claim 21 is a newly added claim. Therefore, Claims 1-9 and 11-21 are pending and have been considered below.
Response to Arguments
3. Applicant's arguments with respect to claims have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection which has been necessitated by amendment.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
4. 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.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
5. Claims 1, 11 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jiang et al. ( CN-114407676 A) in view of Liu et al. ( CN-111391866 A) in view of Handa et al. (JP-2006-182107A).
As Per Claim 1, Jiang et al. ( Jiang) teaches, a torque adjustment method, comprising: obtaining a requested torque value; and controlling, the vehicle to perform energy regeneration based on the requested torque value and the first intervention torque value. (Page 2, last para – Page 8, 1st para).
However, Jiang does not explicitly teach, wherein the obtaining a requested torque value comprises determining the requested torque value based on at least one of a vehicle speed of a vehicle, an accelerator pedal opening of the vehicle, or a brake pedal opening of the vehicle; determining a first intervention torque value based on a wheel acceleration of the vehicle and a vehicle acceleration of the vehicle.
In an analogous art, Liu et al. ( Liu) discloses, a functional safety torque monitoring method and system, wherein the obtaining a requested torque value comprises determining the requested torque value based on at least one of a vehicle speed of a vehicle, an accelerator pedal opening of the vehicle, or a brake pedal opening of the vehicle; (via Page 4, 1st -2nd para; Page 8, 10th-11th para; Page 9, 1st-2nd -3rd para; page 12, 2nd para, Figs. 1-3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Jiang and Liu before him before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the systems of Jiang, to include the teachings (the system) of Liu and configure with the system of Jiang in order to, real-time monitoring the driving torque of the vehicle to the vehicle driving torque or braking torque under abnormal condition in order to control vehicle operation. Motivation to combine the two teachings is, control vehicle operation (i.e., ensure driver safety and accident avoidance).
However, Jiang in view of Liu does not explicitly teach, determining a first intervention torque value based on a wheel acceleration of the vehicle and a vehicle acceleration of the vehicle.
In an analogous art, Handa et al. (Handa) teaches, a vehicle brake control device wherein, determining a first intervention torque value based on a wheel acceleration of the vehicle and a vehicle acceleration of the vehicle (via an estimated output torque calculation means 23 calculating estimated output torque, acceleration calculation means 24 calculating vehicle body acceleration from torque and wheel acceleration calculation means 22 calculating wheel acceleration , Abstract, Fig.6,8).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Jiang, Liu and Handa before him before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the systems of Jiang, to include the teachings ( output torque calculation means 23, predicted acceleration calculation means 24, wheel acceleration means 22 etc.) of Handa and configure with the system of Jiang in order to calculate intervention torque based on wheel acceleration and vehicle acceleration and storing sliding energy recovery. Motivation to combine the two teachings is, to achieve energy reservation.
As Per Claim 11, Jiang et al. ( Jiang) teaches, a torque adjustment apparatus,(Abstract) comprising: at least one processor ( via electronic brake controller ESC) ; and one or more memories coupled to the at least one processor and storing programming instructions for execution by the at least one processor (inherent) to: obtain a requested torque value; and control, the vehicle to perform energy regeneration based on the requested torque value and the first intervention torque value. ( Page 2, last para – Page 8, 1st para).
However, Jiang does not explicitly teach, wherein obtaining the requested torque value comprises determining the requested torque value based on at least one of a vehicle speed of a vehicle, an accelerator pedal opening of the vehicle, or a brake pedal opening of the vehicle; determine a first intervention torque value based on a wheel acceleration of the vehicle and a vehicle acceleration of the vehicle.
In an analogous art, Liu et al. ( Liu) discloses, a functional safety torque monitoring method and system, wherein obtaining the requested torque value comprises determining the requested torque value based on at least one of a vehicle speed of a vehicle, an accelerator pedal opening of the vehicle, or a brake pedal opening of the vehicle;(via Page 4, 1st -2nd para; Page 8, 10th-11th para; Page 9, 1st-2nd -3rd para; page 12, 2nd para, Figs. 1-3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Jiang and Liu before him before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the systems of Jiang, to include the teachings (the system) of Liu and configure with the system of Jiang in order to, real-time monitoring the driving torque of the vehicle to the vehicle driving torque or braking torque under abnormal condition in order to control vehicle operation. Motivation to combine the two teachings is, control vehicle operation (i.e., ensure driver safety and accident avoidance).
However, Jiang in view of Liu does not explicitly teach, determine a first intervention torque value based on a wheel acceleration of the vehicle and a vehicle acceleration of the vehicle.
In an analogous art, Handa et a . ( Handa) teaches, a vehicle brake control device wherein, determine a first intervention torque value based on a wheel acceleration of the vehicle and a vehicle acceleration of the vehicle (via an estimated output torque calculation means 23 calculating estimated output torque, acceleration calculation means 24 calculating vehicle body acceleration from torque and wheel acceleration calculation means 22 calculating wheel acceleration , Abstract, Fig.6,8).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Jiang , Liu and Handa before him before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the systems of Jiang, to include the teachings (output torque calculation means 23, predicted acceleration calculation means 24, wheel acceleration means 22 etc.) of Handa and configure with the system of Jiang in order to calculate intervention torque based on wheel acceleration and vehicle acceleration and storing sliding energy recovery. Motivation to combine the two teachings is, to achieve energy reservation.
As Per Claim 20, Jiang et al. ( Jiang) teaches, a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium, wherein the non-transitory computer-readable storage medium stores a computer program, that when executed by a computer, ( via electronic brake controller ESC) ,causes the computer to perform operations comprising: obtaining a requested torque value; and controlling the vehicle to perform energy regeneration based on the requested torque value and the first intervention torque value. ( Page 2, last para – Page 8, 1st para).
However, Jiang does not explicitly teach, wherein the obtaining a requested torque value comprises determining the requested torque value based on at least one of a vehicle speed of a vehicle, an accelerator pedal opening of the vehicle, or a brake pedal opening of the vehicle; determining a first intervention torque value based on a wheel acceleration of a vehicle and a vehicle acceleration of the vehicle.
In an analogous art, Liu et al. ( Liu) discloses, a functional safety torque monitoring method and system, wherein the obtaining a requested torque value comprises determining the requested torque value based on at least one of a vehicle speed of a vehicle, an accelerator pedal opening of the vehicle, or a brake pedal opening of the vehicle; (via Page 4, 1st -2nd para; Page 8, 10th-11th para; Page 9, 1st-2nd -3rd para; page 12, 2nd para, Figs. 1-3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Jiang and Liu before him before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the systems of Jiang, to include the teachings (the system) of Liu and configure with the system of Jiang in order to, real-time monitoring the driving torque of the vehicle to the vehicle driving torque or braking torque under abnormal condition in order to control vehicle operation. Motivation to combine the two teachings is, control vehicle operation (i.e., ensure driver safety and accident avoidance).
However, Jiang in view of Liu does not explicitly teach, determining a first intervention torque value based on a wheel acceleration of a vehicle and a vehicle acceleration of the vehicle.
In an analogous art, Handa et al. ( Handa) teaches, a vehicle brake control device wherein, determining a first intervention torque value based on a wheel acceleration of a vehicle and a vehicle acceleration of the vehicle; (via an estimated output torque calculation means 23 calculating estimated output torque, acceleration calculation means 24 calculating vehicle body acceleration from torque and wheel acceleration calculation means 22 calculating wheel acceleration , Abstract, Fig.6,8).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Jiang, Liu and Handa before him before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the systems of Jiang, to include the teachings ( output torque calculation means 23, predicted acceleration calculation means 24, wheel acceleration means 22 etc.) of Handa and configure with the system of Jiang in order to calculate intervention torque based on wheel acceleration and vehicle acceleration and storing sliding energy recovery. Motivation to combine the two teachings is, to achieve energy reservation.
Allowable Subject Matter
6. Claims 2-9, 12-19 and 21 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MUHAMMAD SHAFI whose telephone number is (571)270-5741. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30 am -5:00 pm.
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, Scott Browne can be reached at 571-270-0151. 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.
/MUHAMMAD SHAFI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3666C
Prosecution Insights