DETAILED ACTION
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 30 June 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant submits that:
Shiino does not disclose or suggest the following features of claim 1:
“a sensing unit disposed on a surface of the control module and configured to detect a magnetic field, wherein the control module is configured to detect a rotation angle of a wheel linked to the steering wheel through the magnetic field detected by the sensing unit”.
Applicant further submits that the Office Action identifies Shiino's ECU 19 as the claimed "control module," and separately identifies Shiino's detection sensor 23 as the claimed "sensing unit." However, the rejection does not establish that Shiino's detection sensor 23 is disposed on a surface of the ECU 19, as required by claim 1. Rather, the Office Action relies on Shiino's holder 40a and states that holder 40a is "considered to be, generally, a part of the control module assembly." Applicant states that this mapping is insufficient for anticipation. The Examiner identifies the claimed control module as "with at least ECU 19," but then relies on a separate holder 40a to satisfy the limitation requiring the sensing unit to be disposed on a surface of the control module. The Office Action does not identify any disclosure in Shiino showing that holder 40a is part of ECU 19, that holder 40a forms a surface of ECU 19, or that Shiino's detection sensor 23 is disposed on a surface of ECU 19. Instead, the Office Action acknowledges that Shiino's detection sensor 23 is connected to ECU 19 through lead wire 37 and external harness 34.
Examiner maintains:
As set forth in the Non-Final Rejection of 04 May 2026, the control module of Shiino comprises ECU 19 and further comprises holder 40a. It is reasonable to consider holder 40a to be generally included with ECU 19 as it is part of the same electrical assembly as ECU 19 and is involved with delivering data to the ECU 19 (i.e., securing sensor 23). Similarly, simply for example, harness 34 could also be considered to be included with ECU 19 under broadest reasonable interpretation.
Sensor 23 of Shiino is disposed on a surface of 40a, and thus is disposed on a surface of the control module, as very broadly claimed.
The rejection of claim 1, as previously set forth, still stands.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Shiino et al. (US Pub No 2020/0079419).
In regard to claim 1, Shiino discloses a steering device (see the Title) comprising:
a steering shaft (17, see Figs 1 and 2) configured to move in a longitudinal direction (Paragraph 0019: "so that steering shaft 17 moves in the longitudinal direction") in conjunction with rotation of a steering wheel (Paragraph 0014: "Steering shaft 17 is provided (disposed) inside steering shaft housing space 11a, and moves in the direction of a first axis AX1 so as to enable steering of the steering wheel.");
a magnet (22, see Fig 2) attached to the steering shaft (22 attached to 17, see Fig 2 and Paragraph 0027: "detection target 22 is the magnetic tape attached to the inner surface of the groove formed on the surface of steering shaft 17");
a control module (with at least ECU 19) disposed adjacent to the steering shaft (the spatial relationship of 19 and 17 best seen in Fig 1); and
a sensing unit (detection sensor 23, see Fig 2) disposed on a surface of the control module (the surface of 40a, see Fig 2, considered to be, generally, a part of the control module assembly; also see Paragraph 0022: "a holder 40a as a displacement detection sensor holding part for holding displacement detection sensor 23") and configured to detect a magnetic field (Paragraph 0027: "for displacement detection sensor 23, the Hall IC (magnetoelectric conversion element) can be used, in which by utilizing the Hall effect, the quantity of magnetism recorded on a magnetic tape is converted into the quantity of electricity and read"), wherein the control module (19) is configured to detect a rotation angle of a wheel linked to the steering wheel through the magnetic field detected by the sensing unit (for example, see Paragraph 0028: "One end of a lead wire 37 of displacement detection sensor 23 is connected with connector 36a by means of a connector 36b, and the other end of lead wire 37 penetrates through the inside of rubber grommet 38 and is led to the outside. The other end of lead wire 37 is connected with ECU 19 for controlling the EPS through external harness 34.").
Allowable Subject Matter
As previously detailed in the Non-Final Rejection of 04 May 2026, claims 2-9 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but appear they would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 JACOB M AMICK whose telephone number is (571)272-5790. The examiner can normally be reached Core Hours 10-6 M-F (First Fridays Off).
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, Lindsay Low can be reached at (571) 272-1196. 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.
/JACOB M AMICK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3747
Prosecution Insights