DETAILED ACTION
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 2-10 and 14-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 2 recites the limitation "the wheel" in lines 3 and 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 7 recites the limitation "the small steer-angle adjustment arm" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Regarding Claims 8 and 15, it is claimed that a mounting position of the ball is appropriately changeable however it is unclear what is meant by “appropriately” or what satisfies it. Secondly, it appears that the balls 21-23 in Applicant’s disclosure are mounted fixedly to their respective arms, wherein rather it is the positions of these arms that are changeable.
Claims 3-6, 9-10, 14, 16 and 17 are rejected by dependency.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-8, 11 and 13-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Bertani (US Pub No. 2018/0101191 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Bertani discloses
a rotary shaft ([0022]) configured to be rotated about an axis (i.e. its central longitudinal axis) thereof;
a first operating portion (4, secured to 1 via 5) provided to the rotary shaft; and
a second operating portion (i.e. two balls 2a and their respective arms, see Fig. 3), which is connected to the rotary shaft and has a different length from a rotation center of the rotary shaft with respect to the first operating portion (i.e. 2a are radially further from the shaft center than 4 is from the shaft center).
Regarding Claim 2, Bertani discloses
wherein the first operating portion is subjected to a steering operation when a first steer angle is to be applied to the wheel, and
wherein the second operating portion is subjected to a steering operation when a second steer angle larger than the first steer angle is to be applied to the wheel.
It is noted that the operating portions may be operated as claimed, wherein they are capable of such and the language involves intended use.
Regarding Claim 3, Bertani discloses
wherein the first operating portion includes a dial (4) configured to be rotated about the rotary shaft, and
wherein the second operating portion includes a first arm and a second arm (i.e. the two arms of 1 extending out from 4, towards the left side in Fig.1, with 2/2a at their ends), which are each subjected to a steering operation larger than a steering operation performed on the dial (i.e. capable of/intended use).
Regarding Claim 4, Bertani discloses
wherein, when a direction extending along the rotary shaft is defined as an axial direction (i.e. up/down direction in Fig. 2), the dial includes:
a placement portion (i.e. its upper surface as seen in Fig. 2), which expands outward from the rotary shaft in a radial direction (i.e. left/right in Fig. 2) of the rotary shaft and allows a hand of the driver to be placed on the placement portion; and
a side surface portion (i.e. the outer side/circumferential surface, seen on the left/right sides of 4 in Fig. 2) extending in the axial direction from an outer side of the placement portion in the radial direction (i.e. from the placement portion and extending downwards in Fig. 2), and
wherein the first arm and the second arm each extend outward in the radial direction from the dial (see Fig. 1).
Regarding Claim 5, Bertani discloses
wherein the first arm and the second arm are arranged so as to be located at bilaterally symmetric positions with respect to the dial when the dial is in neutral position (i.e. a neutral position is not defined, however the two arms are seen to be bilaterally symmetric with respect to the dial along line I-I of Fig. 1).
Regarding Claim 6, Bertani discloses
wherein the first operating portion includes a small steer-angle adjustment arm extending outward in the radial direction from the dial (i.e. wherein the arm extending to the right in Fig. 1 may be taken as part of the first operating portion, along with 4), and
wherein the small steer-angle adjustment arm is arranged so as to be located on a rear side of the vehicle with respect to the dial when the dial is in neutral position (i.e. a neutral position is not defined, however 1 may be rotated such that this arm is directed towards a rear side of the vehicle).
Regarding Claims 7 and 14, Bertani discloses
wherein the first arm, the second arm, and the small steer-angle adjustment arm each have a ball (2a in Fig. 3) that is grippable by the driver with his/her fingers.
Regarding Claims 8 and 15, Bertani discloses
wherein a mounting position of the ball in the axial direction is appropriately changeable (i.e. this may vary with the vertical elevation of the vehicle it is being mounted to, also see the 112 rejection above).
Regarding Claim 11, Bertani discloses
wherein the first operating portion can be gripped while a palm of the driver is kept in contact with the rotary shaft (i.e. 4 can be gripped while a palm is kept in contact, at least indirectly, with the rotary shaft), and
wherein the second operating portion is provided at a position separated apart from the first operating portion and allows the steering operation to be performed with fingers of the driver (i.e. when taking the second operating portion as the two arms of 1 extending out from 4, towards the left side in Fig.1, with 2/2a at their ends, it can be seen that these are separated apart from 4 and can be operated with a driver’s fingers).
Regarding Claim 13, Bertani discloses
a rotary shaft ([0022]) configured to be rotated about an axis (i.e. its central longitudinal axis) thereof;
a first operating portion (4, secured to 1 via 5) provided to the rotary shaft; and
a second operating portion (i.e. two balls 2a and their respective arms, see Fig. 3), which is connected to the rotary shaft and has a different length from a rotation center of the rotary shaft with respect to the first operating portion (i.e. 2a are radially further from the shaft center than 4 is from the shaft center).
It is noted that the remaining claim language belongs to the preamble.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bertani (US Pub No. 2018/0101191 A1) in view of Shibazaki et al. (US Pub No. 2004/0231434 A1).
Regarding Claim 12, Bertani discloses
a steering-operation input member to which a steering operation performed by a driver is to be input; and
wherein the steering-operation input member comprises:
a rotary shaft ([0022]) configured to be rotated about an axis (i.e. its central longitudinal axis) thereof;
a first operating portion (4, secured to 1 via 5) provided to the rotary shaft; and
a second operating portion (i.e. two balls 2a and their respective arms, see Fig. 3), which is connected to the rotary shaft and has a different length from a rotation center of the rotary shaft with respect to the first operating portion (i.e. 2a are radially further from the shaft center than 4 is from the shaft center).
Bertani does not disclose an output unit.
Shibazaki et al. discloses
an output unit (i.e. steering apparatus) configured to output a turning command to a turning actuator configured to turn a wheel of a vehicle based on an operation amount of the steering-operation input member (i.e. inherent in a steer-by-wire system, [0005]), for the purpose of steering a vehicle by a steer-by-wire system.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective
filing date to modify the invention of Bertani by including an output unit as disclosed by
Shibazaki et al., for the purpose of steering a vehicle by a steer-by-wire system.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9, 10, 16 and 17 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: None of the prior art of record shows positions (Claims 9 and 16) or diameters (Claims 10 and 17) of the balls as claimed, in combination with the remaining elements.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Yakushi (US Patent No. 11,667,317) discloses 80 (that may be spherical) with a steering wheel 200 in Fig. 7.
Ko (US Pub No. 2021/0316776) discloses a rotary shaft (102), first operating portion 110, second operating portion (130, 150).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PRASAD GOKHALE whose telephone number is (571)270-3543. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 9am - 5:30pm.
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, Michael McCullough can be reached at (571) 272-7805. 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.
/PRASAD V GOKHALE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3653 August 6, 2026
Prosecution Insights