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 .
Response to Amendment
Claim 1 has been amended.
Claim 4 is newly added.
No claims have been cancelled.
Claims 1-4 are currently pending.
The official correspondence below is an after non-final.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that use the word “means” or “step” but are nonetheless not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph because the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure, materials, or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
a target path calculation unit configured to calculate a target path, claims 1-3
an acquisition unit configured to acquire, claim 1-3
a calculation unit configured to calculate first target curvature, claim 1-3
a first conversion unit configured to convert, claim 1-3
and a second conversion unit configured to convert the second target curvature, claim 1-3
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are not being interpreted to cover only the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. Specifically, a processor containing code.
If applicant intends to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to remove the structure, materials, or acts that performs the claimed function; or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) does/do not recite sufficient structure, materials, or acts to perform the claimed function.
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.
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.
Claim(s) 1-2 and 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mayer (US 20240308589 A1) in view of Mattern (US 20190061817 A1).
REGARDING CLAIM 1, Mayer discloses, a processor and a memory storing instructions (Mayer: [0015] one or more electronic processors configured to perform the described functionality by executing instructions stored in non-transitory, computer-readable medium) a target path calculation unit (Mayer: [ABS] The trailer tow assist system determines a reverse direction path to a final position of the vehicle and the trailer) configured to calculate a target path on which the towed vehicle is to be moved (Mayer: [ABS] selects a target waypoint positioned along the reverse direction path, determines an offset between a current position and orientation of the trailer and a target position and orientation of the trailer associated with the target waypoint); an acquisition unit (Mayer: [0018] A respective waypoint 125 includes x-y coordinates associated with the position of the vehicle 100 and the trailer 105) configured to acquire coordinates of the towed vehicle (Mayer: [0018] A respective waypoint 125 includes x-y coordinates associated with the position of the vehicle 100 and the trailer 106) in a planar coordinate system (Mayer: [0018] A respective waypoint 125 includes x-y coordinates associated with the position of the vehicle 100 and the trailer 107) a calculation unit configured to calculate first target curvature that is target curvature of the towed vehicle (Mayer: [0035] the electronic tow assist unit 205 determines, based on the offset determined at step 320, a target trailer angle, or curvature, needed to maneuver the trailer 105 to the target waypoint) a first conversion unit configured to convert (Mayer: [0019] the trailer tow assist system controls movement of the vehicle 100 and the trailer 105 from the starting position 110 to the waypoint 125-1, from the waypoint 125-1 to the waypoint 125-2, from the waypoint 125-2 to the waypoint 125-3, and from the waypoint 125-3 to the third final position 115C; [0035] the electronic tow assist unit 205 determines, based on the offset determined at step 320, a target trailer angle, or curvature, needed to maneuver the trailer 105 to the target waypoint) the first target curvature into second target curvature that is target curvature of the towing vehicle (Mayer: [0019] the trailer tow assist system controls movement of the vehicle 100 and the trailer 105 from the starting position 110 to the waypoint 125-1, from the waypoint 125-1 to the waypoint 125-2, from the waypoint 125-2 to the waypoint 125-3, and from the waypoint 125-3 to the third final position 115C; [0035] the electronic tow assist unit 205 determines, based on the offset determined at step 320, a target trailer angle, or curvature, needed to maneuver the trailer 105 to the target waypoint); and a second conversion unit configured to convert the second target curvature into a target steering angle of the towing vehicle (Mayer: [ABS] determines an offset between the trailer angle and the target trailer angle, determines a steering angle based on the offset, and controls steering of the vehicle based on the steering angle while the vehicle moves backwards), and outputs the target steering angle to a steering system of the towing vehicle to control steering of the towing vehicle during backward travel (Mayer: [0023] The vehicle speed limiter 245 limits speed of a vehicle in an automatic steering maneuver mode ... the vehicle speed limiter 245 is an electronic drive control system of a vehicle that receives an input of a vehicle speed limit signal from the electronic processor 210 from the tow assist system that limits the reverse direction speed for a vehicle to prevent a driver from exceeding the vehicle speed limit for an automatic steering maneuver mode).
Mayer discloses [0031] information associated with an angle between the vehicle 100 and the trailer 105. Which the examiner respectfully submits is parallel in service and result and appears to be a parallel teaching. Mayer does not explicitly disclose determining “a coupling angle between the towed vehicle and the towing vehicle” and data “used for feedforward control based on the target path”.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Mattern discloses, a coupling angle between the towed vehicle and the towing vehicle (Mattern: [ABS] A system for assisting in reversing of a vehicle-trailer combination includes a vehicle steering system and a controller. The controller outputs a steering signal based on a control parameter to the steering system to maintain the trailer along a commanded backing path, determines an error between a measured behavior of a characteristic of the vehicle-trailer combination and a predicted behavior of the characteristic, and adjusts the control parameter based on the error; [0032-0036] a predicted behavior of the characteristic and adjusts the control parameter based on the error); a calculation unit configured to calculate first target curvature that is target curvature of the towed vehicle used for feedforward control based on the target path (Mattern: [ABS] A system for assisting in reversing of a vehicle-trailer combination includes a vehicle steering system and a controller. The controller outputs a steering signal based on a control parameter to the steering system to maintain the trailer along a commanded backing path, determines an error between a measured behavior of a characteristic of the vehicle-trailer combination and a predicted behavior of the characteristic, and adjusts the control parameter based on the error; [0032-0036] a predicted behavior of the characteristic and adjusts the control parameter based on the error), for the benefit of preventing a jack-knife condition.
Mattern does not explicitly recite the terminology “feedforward”. However, Mattern does disclose a process that proactively adjusts inputs to counteract errors/deviations before they affect the system's final output (in this case, final location of trailer), anticipating disturbances (predicting) and making adjustments. To the examiner’s best understanding, this is the definition of feeding forward, making prediction during a process and making adjustments to achieve a final result.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the process disclosed by Mayer to include a feedforward control is a system that proactively adjusts inputs to counteract errors/deviations before they affect the system's final output (in this case, location), anticipating disturbances (predicting) and making adjustments taught by Mattern. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to preventing a jack-knife condition.
REGARDING CLAIM 2, Mayer, as modified, remains as applied above to claim 1. Further Mayer also discloses, the calculation unit calculates, based on the coordinates of the towed vehicle and the coupling angle, deviation of the towed vehicle from the target path (Mayer: [0034] differences between the x-y coordinates of the current position of the vehicle 100 and the trailer 105 and the x-y coordinates of the position of the vehicle 100 and the trailer 105 at the target waypoint 125. The offset may also include differences between the current orientation of the vehicle 100 and the trailer 105 and the orientation of the vehicle 100 and the trailer 105 at the target waypoint 125. FIG. 5 shows the vehicle 100 connected to the trailer 105 and the offset between the current position and/or orientation of the vehicle 100 and the trailer 105 and the target position and/or orientation of the vehicle 100 and the trailer 105 at a plurality of waypoints), the towing assistance apparatus further comprises a feedback control unit configured to calculate third target curvature that is target curvature of the towing vehicle (Mayer: [0019] the trailer tow assist system controls movement of the vehicle 100 and the trailer 105 from the starting position 110 to the waypoint 125-1, from the waypoint 125-1 to the waypoint 125-2, from the waypoint 125-2 to the waypoint 125-3, and from the waypoint 125-3 to the third final position 115C; [0035] the electronic tow assist unit 205 determines, based on the offset determined at step 320, a target trailer angle, or curvature, needed to maneuver the trailer 105 to the target waypoint ) used for feedback control based on the deviation of the towed vehicle (Mayer: [0025] the vehicle interior display 255 is a display panel for displaying images and instructions to a driver; [0029] video data associated with the environment surrounding the vehicle 100 received from the rear video camera 250 is presented to a user via the vehicle interior display 255 and/or touchscreen 265, and the user provides the reverse direction path 120 and/or the final position), and the second conversion unit converts the second target curvature (Mayer: [0019] the trailer tow assist system controls movement of the vehicle 100 and the trailer 105 from the starting position 110 to the waypoint 125-1, from the waypoint 125-1 to the waypoint 125-2, from the waypoint 125-2 to the waypoint 125-3, and from the waypoint 125-3 to the third final position 115C; [0035] the electronic tow assist unit 205 determines, based on the offset determined at step 320, a target trailer angle, or curvature, needed to maneuver the trailer 105 to the target waypoint), to which the third target curvature is added, to the target steering angle (Mayer: [0019] the trailer tow assist system controls movement of the vehicle 100 and the trailer 105 from the starting position 110 to the waypoint 125-1, from the waypoint 125-1 to the waypoint 125-2, from the waypoint 125-2 to the waypoint 125-3, and from the waypoint 125-3 to the third final position 115C; [0035] the electronic tow assist unit 205 determines, based on the offset determined at step 320, a target trailer angle, or curvature, needed to maneuver the trailer 105 to the target waypoint).
REGARDING CLAIM 4, Mayer, as modified, remains as applied above to claim 1. Further Mayer also discloses, the first target curvature is calculated based on a nearest point of the target path relative to a current position of the towed vehicle (Mayer: [0035] At step 325, the electronic tow assist unit 205 determines, based on the offset determined at step 320, a target trailer angle, or curvature, needed to maneuver the trailer 105 to the target waypoint; [FIG. 1(curves)(waypoints)]).
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mayer (US 20240308589 A1) in view of Mattern (US 20190061817 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Singh (US 20160129939 A1).
REGARDING CLAIM 3, Mayer, as modified, remains as applied above to claim 1. Further Mayer also discloses, the calculation unit calculates, based on the coordinates of the towed vehicle and the coupling angle, deviation of the towed vehicle from the target path (Mayer: [0034] differences between the x-y coordinates of the current position of the vehicle 100 and the trailer 105 and the x-y coordinates of the position of the vehicle 100 and the trailer 105 at the target waypoint 125. The offset may also include differences between the current orientation of the vehicle 100 and the trailer 105 and the orientation of the vehicle 100 and the trailer 105 at the target waypoint 125. FIG. 5 shows the vehicle 100 connected to the trailer 105 and the offset between the current position and/or orientation of the vehicle 100 and the trailer 105 and the target position and/or orientation of the vehicle 100 and the trailer 105 at a plurality of waypoints), the towing assistance apparatus further comprises a feedback control unit configured to calculate fourth target curvature that is target curvature of the towed vehicle used for feedback control (Mayer: [0019] the trailer tow assist system controls movement of the vehicle 100 and the trailer 105 from the starting position 110 to the waypoint 125-1, from the waypoint 125-1 to the waypoint 125-2, from the waypoint 125-2 to the waypoint 125-3, and from the waypoint 125-3 to the third final position 115C; [0035] the electronic tow assist unit 205 determines, based on the offset determined at step 320, a target trailer angle, or curvature, needed to maneuver the trailer 105 to the target waypoint) based on the deviation of the towed vehicle (Mayer: [0034] differences between the x-y coordinates of the current position of the vehicle 100 and the trailer 105 and the x-y coordinates of the position of the vehicle 100 and the trailer 105 at the target waypoint 125. The offset may also include differences between the current orientation of the vehicle 100 and the trailer 105 and the orientation of the vehicle 100 and the trailer 105 at the target waypoint 125. FIG. 5 shows the vehicle 100 connected to the trailer 105 and the offset between the current position and/or orientation of the vehicle 100 and the trailer 105 and the target position and/or orientation of the vehicle 100 and the trailer 105 at a plurality of waypoints).
To the examiner’s best understanding, Mayer discloses, the first conversion unit converts the first target curvature, to which the fourth target curvature is added, to the second target curvature (Mayer: [0019]; [0035]; [ABS]).
However, in the alternative, Singh discloses, the first conversion unit converts the first target curvature, to which the fourth target curvature is added, to the second target curvature (Singh: [0077] In the scenario illustrated in FIG. 5E, the target longitudinal axis X2.sub.TAR is offset by +90° and is directed to the right side of the S-shaped path 55. Accordingly, the included angle of the second curve B is increased. However, to compensate for the lateral offset of the trailer 5, the second curve B is increased by 45° to 0°, thereby removing the second curve B. The first curve A is also increased by 45° to 90° (again to compensate for the lateral offset of the target parking destination P.sub.TAR). The resulting modified curve is defined as the target route R ... [0079] With reference to FIGS. 6A and 6B, in order to guide the trailer 5 the guidance module 33B calculates the required vehicle steering angle θ to achieve the appropriate trailer angle δ at intervals; [0101]; [0127-0133]), for the benefit of output a vehicle control signal to control the vehicle (3) to guide the trailer (5) along the target route (R).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus disclosed by Mayer to include recalibrations to correct offsetting taught by Singh. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to output a vehicle control signal to control the vehicle (3) to guide the trailer (5) along the target route (R).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, beginning on page 4, filed 08-07-2026, with respect to the drawing objections, §112(f) interpretations and accompanying §112(a)(b) rejections, and §101 ineligible subject matter rejections of record have been fully considered and are persuasive. The drawing objections, §112(f) interpretations and accompanying §112(a)(b) rejections, and §101 ineligible subject matter rejections of record have been withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments beginning on page 10, received 08-07-2026, regarding “a first conversion unit configured to convert the first target curvature into second target curvature that is target curvature of the towing vehicle” have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
To the examiner’s best understanding, the applicant has contended that Mayer (US 20240308589 A1) fails to disclose the above limitation. The examiner respectfully disagrees. The examiner respectfully submits, Mayer (US 20240308589 A1) discloses, “[0035] At step 325, the electronic tow assist unit 205 determines, based on the offset determined at step 320, a target trailer angle, or curvature, needed to maneuver the trailer 105 to the target waypoint”, and ¶’[0017-0020] discloses following a plurality of waypoints and a plurality of line curves that change as each waypoint is achieved (also see figure 1), and as each waypoint is achieved a turning angle is changed (implies changing a curvature, converting), all achieved by the tow assist system (the converter). While Mayer (US 20240308589 A1) does not explicitly recite the terminology used in the claim, Mayer (US 20240308589 A1) does disclose a process that is parallel in service and result. Thus teaching/disclosing “a first conversion unit configured to convert the first target curvature into second target curvature that is target curvature of the towing vehicle”. Because the prior art of record discloses that which is claimed, the examiner respectfully maintains the rejection of claim 1 under 35 USC §103, obviousness.
Regarding the applicant’s remaining arguments with respect to the rejection of claim 1 under 35 USC §103, obviousness, have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on the reference combination applied in the prior rejection of record for matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Yang (US 20230365209 A1)
Nariyambut (US 20240336256 A1)
Salter (US 20220379958 A1)
Maruoka (US 11420678 B2)
Watanabe (US 11400974 B2)
Watanabe (US 11491916 B2)
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 AARRON SANTOS whose telephone number is (571)272-5288. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday: 8:00am - 4:30pm.
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.S./Examiner, Art Unit 3663
/ANGELA Y ORTIZ/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3663
