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 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.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
“the torque vectoring unit is configured to control the lateral distribution of the drive torque…”
in claim 3 & 16.
A review of the specification shows that the following appears to be the corresponding structure for the above limitation described in the specification: (see at least Applicant Specification, page. 3: The torque vectoring unit may comprises a right wheel clutch and a left wheel clutch. The right wheel clutch and the left wheel clutch are independently controllable. The torque vectoring axle can then be made very compact with great design freedom since the two clutches will act as a differential with built in torque vectoring functionality.)
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend 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 avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-3, 7, 15-16, & 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by DE 102008050214A1 (“Reim”).
As per claim 1 Reim discloses
A vehicle, comprising at least two drive axles and at least one torque vectoring unit arranged on one of said drive axles thus forming a torque vectoring axle (see at least Reim, para. [0022]: A motor vehicle 10 shown in Fig. 1 is located on a roadway 12 which comprises two side areas 14, 16 extending essentially parallel to each other and exhibiting different properties with regard to coefficients of friction. In this case, a left wheel 18 of a front axle 20 and a left wheel 22 of a rear axle 24 of the motor vehicle 10 are located in the first side area 14 of the driving track 12, and a right wheel 26 of the front axle 20 and a right wheel 28 of the rear axle 24 are located in the second side area 16 of the driving track 12.), and
a control unit configured to determine a specific torque corresponding to a desired torque vectoring requirement for the vehicle (see at least Reim, para. [0024]: The following example illustrates how the overall efficiency of the all-wheel drive equipped with a device for intra-axial torque distribution can be increased by distributing the drive torque between the front and rear axles 20, 24 according to the invention, compared to the efficiency of the drive according to Fig. 1.); and
when drive torque supplied to the torque vectoring axle is not sufficient to realise the specific torque (see at least Reim, para. [0026]: Taking these basic drive torques into account, 50% of the total drive torque remains to be distributed between the front and rear axles 20, 24 or for the electronic differential lock. If the electronic differential lock is completely dispensed with, i.e. on both axles, a transmissible maximum torque can be transferred to the rear axle 24 by means of the device 30 for interaxial torque distribution. For example, assuming that the device 30 for interaxial torque distribution is able to distribute the drive torque between the front and rear axles 20, 24 in a ratio of at most 0.75 to 0.25 in favor of the rear axle 24, the maximum torque that can be transmitted to the rear axle 24 is 75% = 25% (see arrows 36) + 50% (see arrows 44).), the control unit is further configured to:
redistribute a net vehicle drive torque between said drive axles by increasing an absolute value of the drive torque of the torque vectoring axle (see at least Reim, para. [0026]: Taking these basic drive torques into account, 50% of the total drive torque remains to be distributed between the front and rear axles 20, 24 or for the electronic differential lock. If the electronic differential lock is completely dispensed with, i.e. on both axles, a transmissible maximum torque can be transferred to the rear axle 24 by means of the device 30 for interaxial torque distribution. For example, assuming that the device 30 for interaxial torque distribution is able to distribute the drive torque between the front and rear axles 20, 24 in a ratio of at most 0.75 to 0.25 in favor of the rear axle 24, the maximum torque that can be transmitted to the rear axle 24 is 75% = 25% (see arrows 36) + 50% (see arrows 44).), and
distributing the increased drive torque of the torque vectoring axle to left and right wheels (see at least Reim, para. [0026]: The difference between the drive torque applied to the rear axle 24 and the drive torque applied to the front axle 20 is therefore 50% of the total drive torque. The task of the device 42 for intra-axial torque distribution is now to transfer the additional drive torque of 50% of the total drive torque to the right rear wheel 28 located in the second side area 16 of the travel path 12. In this way, the predominant driving torque of five eighths (62.5%) is applied to the one wheel 28, by means of which the motor vehicle 10 is now predominantly driven. It now becomes apparent that with such a distribution of the drive torque, no losses occur at all and the overall efficiency can be maximized.).
As per claim 2 Reim discloses
comprising a front drive axle, a rear drive axle, and optionally one or more intermediate axles (see at least Reim, para. [0012]: A torque distribution device is typically characterized, among other things, by a torque distribution ratio (TDR) between the first and second axles, within which the device ensures that the two cardan shafts driving the respective differential gears have nearly equal rotational speeds.).
As per claim 3 Reim discloses
wherein the torque vectoring unit is configured to control lateral distribution of the drive torque to each one of the left and right wheels (see at least Reim, para. [0024]: The following example illustrates how the overall efficiency of the all-wheel drive equipped with a device for intra-axial torque distribution can be increased by distributing the drive torque between the front and rear axles 20, 24 according to the invention, compared to the efficiency of the drive according to Fig. 1… In this process, a transmissible maximum torque is transferred to the rear axle 24 by means of the device 30 for interaxial torque distribution. This maximum torque that can be transmitted to the rear axle 24 is determined according to several criteria. Care is taken to ensure that no more torque is applied to the rear axle 24 or the rear wheels 22, 28 than the rear axle 24 or the rear wheels 22, 28 are able to apply to the driving distance 12.).
As per claim 7 Reim discloses
A method for a vehicle comprising at least two drive axles and at least one torque vectoring unit arranged on one of said drive axles thus forming a torque vectoring axle (see at least Reim, para. [0022]: A motor vehicle 10 shown in Fig. 1 is located on a roadway 12 which comprises two side areas 14, 16 extending essentially parallel to each other and exhibiting different properties with regard to coefficients of friction. In this case, a left wheel 18 of a front axle 20 and a left wheel 22 of a rear axle 24 of the motor vehicle 10 are located in the first side area 14 of the driving track 12, and a right wheel 26 of the front axle 20 and a right wheel 28 of the rear axle 24 are located in the second side area 16 of the driving track 12.), said method comprising:
determining a specific torque corresponding to a desired torque vectoring requirement for the vehicle (see at least Reim, para. [0024]: The following example illustrates how the overall efficiency of the all-wheel drive equipped with a device for intra-axial torque distribution can be increased by distributing the drive torque between the front and rear axles 20, 24 according to the invention, compared to the efficiency of the drive according to Fig. 1.);
determining a drive torque supplied to the torque vectoring axle (see at least Reim, para. [0024]: In the present example, the drive torque is distributed between the front and rear axles 20 and 24 by means of the device 30 for interaxial torque distribution in such a way that a drive torque higher than, for example, 20% of the total drive torque is transmitted to the rear axle 24 than to the front axle 20.); and
when the determined drive torque of the torque vectoring axle is not sufficient to realise the specific torque the method further comprises (see at least Reim, para. [0026]: Taking these basic drive torques into account, 50% of the total drive torque remains to be distributed between the front and rear axles 20, 24 or for the electronic differential lock. If the electronic differential lock is completely dispensed with, i.e. on both axles, a transmissible maximum torque can be transferred to the rear axle 24 by means of the device 30 for interaxial torque distribution. For example, assuming that the device 30 for interaxial torque distribution is able to distribute the drive torque between the front and rear axles 20, 24 in a ratio of at most 0.75 to 0.25 in favor of the rear axle 24, the maximum torque that can be transmitted to the rear axle 24 is 75% = 25% (see arrows 36) + 50% (see arrows 44).):
redistributing a net vehicle drive torque between said drive axles by increasing an absolute value of the drive torque of the torque vectoring axle (see at least Reim, para. [0026]: Taking these basic drive torques into account, 50% of the total drive torque remains to be distributed between the front and rear axles 20, 24 or for the electronic differential lock. If the electronic differential lock is completely dispensed with, i.e. on both axles, a transmissible maximum torque can be transferred to the rear axle 24 by means of the device 30 for interaxial torque distribution. For example, assuming that the device 30 for interaxial torque distribution is able to distribute the drive torque between the front and rear axles 20, 24 in a ratio of at most 0.75 to 0.25 in favor of the rear axle 24, the maximum torque that can be transmitted to the rear axle 24 is 75% = 25% (see arrows 36) + 50% (see arrows 44).), and
distributing the increased drive torque of the torque vectoring axle to left and right wheels (see at least Reim, para. [0026]: The difference between the drive torque applied to the rear axle 24 and the drive torque applied to the front axle 20 is therefore 50% of the total drive torque. The task of the device 42 for intra-axial torque distribution is now to transfer the additional drive torque of 50% of the total drive torque to the right rear wheel 28 located in the second side area 16 of the travel path 12. In this way, the predominant driving torque of five eighths (62.5%) is applied to the one wheel 28, by means of which the motor vehicle 10 is now predominantly driven. It now becomes apparent that with such a distribution of the drive torque, no losses occur at all and the overall efficiency can be maximized.).
As per claim 15 Reim discloses
comprising a front drive axle and a rear drive axle (see at least Reim, para. [0012]: A torque distribution device is typically characterized, among other things, by a torque distribution ratio (TDR) between the first and second axles, within which the device ensures that the two cardan shafts driving the respective differential gears have nearly equal rotational speeds.).
As per claim 16 Reim discloses
wherein the torque vectoring unit is configured to control lateral distribution of the drive torque to each one of the left and right wheels (see at least Reim, para. [0024]: The following example illustrates how the overall efficiency of the all-wheel drive equipped with a device for intra-axial torque distribution can be increased by distributing the drive torque between the front and rear axles 20, 24 according to the invention, compared to the efficiency of the drive according to Fig. 1… In this process, a transmissible maximum torque is transferred to the rear axle 24 by means of the device 30 for interaxial torque distribution. This maximum torque that can be transmitted to the rear axle 24 is determined according to several criteria. Care is taken to ensure that no more torque is applied to the rear axle 24 or the rear wheels 22, 28 than the rear axle 24 or the rear wheels 22, 28 are able to apply to the driving distance 12.).
As per claim 19 Reim discloses
when the drive torque supplied to the torque vectoring axle is not sufficient to realise the specific torque (see at least Reim, para. [0026]: Taking these basic drive torques into account, 50% of the total drive torque remains to be distributed between the front and rear axles 20, 24 or for the electronic differential lock. If the electronic differential lock is completely dispensed with, i.e. on both axles, a transmissible maximum torque can be transferred to the rear axle 24 by means of the device 30 for interaxial torque distribution. For example, assuming that the device 30 for interaxial torque distribution is able to distribute the drive torque between the front and rear axles 20, 24 in a ratio of at most 0.75 to 0.25 in favor of the rear axle 24, the maximum torque that can be transmitted to the rear axle 24 is 75% = 25% (see arrows 36) + 50% (see arrows 44).), the control unit is configured to:
redistribute the net vehicle drive torque between said drive axles such that at least the specific torque is distributed to the torque vectoring axle (see at least Reim, para. [0026]: Taking these basic drive torques into account, 50% of the total drive torque remains to be distributed between the front and rear axles 20, 24 or for the electronic differential lock. If the electronic differential lock is completely dispensed with, i.e. on both axles, a transmissible maximum torque can be transferred to the rear axle 24 by means of the device 30 for interaxial torque distribution. For example, assuming that the device 30 for interaxial torque distribution is able to distribute the drive torque between the front and rear axles 20, 24 in a ratio of at most 0.75 to 0.25 in favor of the rear axle 24, the maximum torque that can be transmitted to the rear axle 24 is 75% = 25% (see arrows 36) + 50% (see arrows 44).), and
distributing the specific torque of the torque vectoring axle to the left and right wheels (see at least Reim, para. [0026]: The difference between the drive torque applied to the rear axle 24 and the drive torque applied to the front axle 20 is therefore 50% of the total drive torque. The task of the device 42 for intra-axial torque distribution is now to transfer the additional drive torque of 50% of the total drive torque to the right rear wheel 28 located in the second side area 16 of the travel path 12. In this way, the predominant driving torque of five eighths (62.5%) is applied to the one wheel 28, by means of which the motor vehicle 10 is now predominantly driven. It now becomes apparent that with such a distribution of the drive torque, no losses occur at all and the overall efficiency can be maximized.).
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.
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.
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) 4-6, 8-14, & 17-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reim, in view of US 2020/0324770A1 (“Alcantar”).
As per claim 4 Reim does not explicitly disclose
wherein the torque vectoring unit/ comprises a left wheel clutch and a right wheel clutch.
Alcantar teaches
wherein the torque vectoring unit/ comprises a left wheel clutch and a right wheel clutch (see at least Alcantar, para. [0047]: Powertrain and friction braking coordination are performed in block 206. The powertrain and friction braking controls receive the traction torque request, the traction torque limit, and the vectoring torque request and output a traction torque command ( e.g., a torque to propel or slow the vehicle via a torque source), a left clutch command (e.g., a command for clutch 191 shown in FIG. lA), a right clutch command, (e.g., a command for clutch 193 shown in FIG. lA)…).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Reim to incorporate the teaching of wherein the torque vectoring unit/ comprises a left wheel clutch and a right wheel clutch of Alcantar, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide vehicle yaw moment control when driver demand wheel torque is low or high (see at least Alcantar, para. [0005]).
As per claim 5 Reim does not explicitly disclose
wherein the left wheel clutch and the right wheel clutch are independently controllable.
Alcantar teaches
wherein the left wheel clutch and the right wheel clutch are independently controllable (see at least Alcantar, para. [0047]: Powertrain and friction braking coordination are performed in block 206. The powertrain and friction braking controls receive the traction torque request, the traction torque limit, and the vectoring torque request and output a traction torque command ( e.g., a torque to propel or slow the vehicle via a torque source), a left clutch command (e.g., a command for clutch 191 shown in FIG. lA), a right clutch command, (e.g., a command for clutch 193 shown in FIG. lA)…).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Reim to incorporate the teaching of wherein the left wheel clutch and the right wheel clutch are independently controllable of Alcantar, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide vehicle yaw moment control when driver demand wheel torque is low or high (see at least Alcantar, para. [0005]).
As per claim 6 Reim discloses
when the drive torque supplied to the torque vectoring axle is not sufficient to realise the specific torque (see at least Reim, para. [0026]: Taking these basic drive torques into account, 50% of the total drive torque remains to be distributed between the front and rear axles 20, 24 or for the electronic differential lock. If the electronic differential lock is completely dispensed with, i.e. on both axles, a transmissible maximum torque can be transferred to the rear axle 24 by means of the device 30 for interaxial torque distribution. For example, assuming that the device 30 for interaxial torque distribution is able to distribute the drive torque between the front and rear axles 20, 24 in a ratio of at most 0.75 to 0.25 in favor of the rear axle 24, the maximum torque that can be transmitted to the rear axle 24 is 75% = 25% (see arrows 36) + 50% (see arrows 44).), the control unit is configured to:
redistribute the net vehicle drive torque between said drive axles such that at least the specific torque distributed to the torque vectoring axle (see at least Reim, para. [0026]: Taking these basic drive torques into account, 50% of the total drive torque remains to be distributed between the front and rear axles 20, 24 or for the electronic differential lock. If the electronic differential lock is completely dispensed with, i.e. on both axles, a transmissible maximum torque can be transferred to the rear axle 24 by means of the device 30 for interaxial torque distribution. For example, assuming that the device 30 for interaxial torque distribution is able to distribute the drive torque between the front and rear axles 20, 24 in a ratio of at most 0.75 to 0.25 in favor of the rear axle 24, the maximum torque that can be transmitted to the rear axle 24 is 75% = 25% (see arrows 36) + 50% (see arrows 44).), and
distributing the specific torque of the torque vectoring axle to the left and right wheels (see at least Reim, para. [0026]: The difference between the drive torque applied to the rear axle 24 and the drive torque applied to the front axle 20 is therefore 50% of the total drive torque. The task of the device 42 for intra-axial torque distribution is now to transfer the additional drive torque of 50% of the total drive torque to the right rear wheel 28 located in the second side area 16 of the travel path 12. In this way, the predominant driving torque of five eighths (62.5%) is applied to the one wheel 28, by means of which the motor vehicle 10 is now predominantly driven. It now becomes apparent that with such a distribution of the drive torque, no losses occur at all and the overall efficiency can be maximized.).
As per claim 8 Reim does not explicitly disclose
wherein redistributing the net vehicle drive torque between said drive axles comprises adding the drive torque to the torque vectoring axle and subtracting the drive torque from the other drive axle.
Alcantar teaches
wherein redistributing the net vehicle drive torque between said drive axles comprises adding the drive torque to the torque vectoring axle and subtracting the drive torque from the other drive axle (see at least Alcantar, para. [0052]: Since the vehicle's friction brakes can only remove torque from the wheels, the method described herein increases the traction torque such that whatever torque is removed by the brake on one wheel, the same quantity of torque is added to the other wheel by a torque source (e.g., engine 110 or electric machine 120). To achieve this, the absolute value of one half of the vectoring torque request is added to the traction torque request. Thus, the method described herein increases the total amount of torque applied to an axle and removes the same amount of torque from one wheel via the friction brake system so that the propulsion torque (e.g., the torque to propel the vehicle forward) is equal to the traction torque command. Thus, the vectoring torque request is delivered in equal and opposite quantities at the vehicle wheels resulting in no net change in the total torque output from the axle to the wheels while creating the desired torque difference on the axle.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Reim to incorporate the teaching of wherein redistributing the net vehicle drive torque between said drive axles comprises adding the drive torque to the torque vectoring axle and subtracting the drive torque from the other drive axle of Alcantar, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide vehicle yaw moment control when driver demand wheel torque is low or high (see at least Alcantar, para. [0005]).
As per claim 9 Reim does not explicitly disclose
wherein the subtracting drive torque from the other drive axle is performed by reducing the drive torque.
Alcantar teaches
wherein the subtracting drive torque from the other drive axle is performed by reducing the drive torque (see at least Alcantar, para. [0052]: To achieve this, the absolute value of one half of the vectoring torque request is added to the traction torque request. Thus, the method described herein increases the total amount of torque applied to an axle and removes the same amount of torque from one wheel via the friction brake system so that the propulsion torque (e.g., the torque to propel the vehicle forward) is equal to the traction torque command. Thus, the vectoring torque request is delivered in equal and opposite quantities at the vehicle wheels resulting in no net change in the total torque output from the axle to the wheels while creating the desired torque difference on the axle.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Reim to incorporate the teaching of wherein the subtracting drive torque from the other drive axle is performed by reducing the drive torque of Alcantar, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide vehicle yaw moment control when driver demand wheel torque is low or high (see at least Alcantar, para. [0005]).
As per claim 10 Reim does not explicitly disclose
wherein the subtracting drive torque from the other drive axle is performed by applying a negative torque.
Alcantar teaches
wherein the subtracting drive torque from the other drive axle is performed by applying a negative torque (see at least Alcantar, para. [0052]: To achieve this, the absolute value of one half of the vectoring torque request is added to the traction torque request. Thus, the method described herein increases the total amount of torque applied to an axle and removes the same amount of torque from one wheel via the friction brake system so that the propulsion torque (e.g., the torque to propel the vehicle forward) is equal to the traction torque command. Thus, the vectoring torque request is delivered in equal and opposite quantities at the vehicle wheels resulting in no net change in the total torque output from the axle to the wheels while creating the desired torque difference on the axle.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Reim to incorporate the teaching of wherein the subtracting drive torque from the other drive axle is performed by applying a negative torque of Alcantar, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide vehicle yaw moment control when driver demand wheel torque is low or high (see at least Alcantar, para. [0005]).
As per claim 11 Reim does not explicitly disclose
wherein adding the drive torque to the torque vectoring axle is performed simultaneously as subtracting the drive torque from the other drive axle.
Alcantar teaches
wherein adding the drive torque to the torque vectoring axle is performed simultaneously as subtracting the drive torque from the other drive axle (see at least Alcantar, para. [0052]: Since the vehicle's friction brakes can only remove torque from the wheels, the method described herein increases the traction torque such that whatever torque is removed by the brake on one wheel, the same quantity of torque is added to the other wheel by a torque source (e.g., engine 110 or electric machine 120). To achieve this, the absolute value of one half of the vectoring torque request is added to the traction torque request. Thus, the method described herein increases the total amount of torque applied to an axle and removes the same amount of torque from one wheel via the friction brake system so that the propulsion torque (e.g., the torque to propel the vehicle forward) is equal to the traction torque command. Thus, the vectoring torque request is delivered in equal and opposite quantities at the vehicle wheels resulting in no net change in the total torque output from the axle to the wheels while creating the desired torque difference on the axle.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Reim to incorporate the teaching of wherein adding the drive torque to the torque vectoring axle is performed simultaneously as subtracting the drive torque from the other drive axle of Alcantar, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide vehicle yaw moment control when driver demand wheel torque is low or high (see at least Alcantar, para. [0005]).
As per claim 12 Reim does not explicitly disclose
wherein redistributing the net vehicle drive torque between said drive axles is performed simultaneously as distributing the specific torque of the torque vectoring axle to the left and right wheels.
Alcantar teaches
wherein redistributing the net vehicle drive torque between said drive axles is performed simultaneously as distributing the specific torque of the torque vectoring axle to the left and right wheels (see at least Alcantar, para. [0052]: Since the vehicle's friction brakes can only remove torque from the wheels, the method described herein increases the traction torque such that whatever torque is removed by the brake on one wheel, the same quantity of torque is added to the other wheel by a torque source (e.g., engine 110 or electric machine 120). To achieve this, the absolute value of one half of the vectoring torque request is added to the traction torque request. Thus, the method described herein increases the total amount of torque applied to an axle and removes the same amount of torque from one wheel via the friction brake system so that the propulsion torque (e.g., the torque to propel the vehicle forward) is equal to the traction torque command. Thus, the vectoring torque request is delivered in equal and opposite quantities at the vehicle wheels resulting in no net change in the total torque output from the axle to the wheels while creating the desired torque difference on the axle.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Reim to incorporate the teaching of wherein redistributing the net vehicle drive torque between said drive axles is performed simultaneously as distributing the specific torque of the torque vectoring axle to the left and right wheels of Alcantar, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide vehicle yaw moment control when driver demand wheel torque is low or high (see at least Alcantar, para. [0005]).
As per claim 13 Reim does not explicitly disclose
wherein adding the drive torque to the torque vectoring axle is performed simultaneously as subtracting the drive torque from the other drive axle.
Alcantar teaches
wherein adding the drive torque to the torque vectoring axle is performed simultaneously as subtracting the drive torque from the other drive axle (see at least Alcantar, para. [0052]: Since the vehicle's friction brakes can only remove torque from the wheels, the method described herein increases the traction torque such that whatever torque is removed by the brake on one wheel, the same quantity of torque is added to the other wheel by a torque source (e.g., engine 110 or electric machine 120). To achieve this, the absolute value of one half of the vectoring torque request is added to the traction torque request. Thus, the method described herein increases the total amount of torque applied to an axle and removes the same amount of torque from one wheel via the friction brake system so that the propulsion torque (e.g., the torque to propel the vehicle forward) is equal to the traction torque command. Thus, the vectoring torque request is delivered in equal and opposite quantities at the vehicle wheels resulting in no net change in the total torque output from the axle to the wheels while creating the desired torque difference on the axle.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Reim to incorporate the teaching of wherein adding the drive torque to the torque vectoring axle is performed simultaneously as subtracting the drive torque from the other drive axle of Alcantar, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide vehicle yaw moment control when driver demand wheel torque is low or high (see at least Alcantar, para. [0005]).
As per claim 14 Reim does not explicitly disclose
wherein redistributing the net vehicle drive torque between said drive axles is performed simultaneously as distributing the specific torque of the torque vectoring axle to the left and right wheels
Alcantar teaches
wherein redistributing the net vehicle drive torque between said drive axles is performed simultaneously as distributing the specific torque of the torque vectoring axle to the left and right wheels (see at least Alcantar, para. [0052]: Since the vehicle's friction brakes can only remove torque from the wheels, the method described herein increases the traction torque such that whatever torque is removed by the brake on one wheel, the same quantity of torque is added to the other wheel by a torque source (e.g., engine 110 or electric machine 120). To achieve this, the absolute value of one half of the vectoring torque request is added to the traction torque request. Thus, the method described herein increases the total amount of torque applied to an axle and removes the same amount of torque from one wheel via the friction brake system so that the propulsion torque (e.g., the torque to propel the vehicle forward) is equal to the traction torque command. Thus, the vectoring torque request is delivered in equal and opposite quantities at the vehicle wheels resulting in no net change in the total torque output from the axle to the wheels while creating the desired torque difference on the axle.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Reim to incorporate the teaching of wherein redistributing the net vehicle drive torque between said drive axles is performed simultaneously as distributing the specific torque of the torque vectoring axle to the left and right wheels of Alcantar, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide vehicle yaw moment control when driver demand wheel torque is low or high (see at least Alcantar, para. [0005]).
As per claim 17 Reim does not explicitly disclose
wherein the torque vectoring unit comprises a left wheel clutch and a right wheel clutch.
Alcantar teaches
wherein the torque vectoring unit comprises a left wheel clutch and a right wheel clutch (see at least Alcantar, para. [0047]: Powertrain and friction braking coordination are performed in block 206. The powertrain and friction braking controls receive the traction torque request, the traction torque limit, and the vectoring torque request and output a traction torque command ( e.g., a torque to propel or slow the vehicle via a torque source), a left clutch command (e.g., a command for clutch 191 shown in FIG. lA), a right clutch command, (e.g., a command for clutch 193 shown in FIG. lA)…).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Reim to incorporate the teaching of wherein the torque vectoring unit comprises a left wheel clutch and a right wheel clutch of Alcantar, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide vehicle yaw moment control when driver demand wheel torque is low or high (see at least Alcantar, para. [0005]).
As per claim 18 Reim does not explicitly disclose
wherein the left wheel clutch and the right wheel clutch are independently controllable.
Alcantar teaches
wherein the left wheel clutch and the right wheel clutch are independently controllable (see at least Alcantar, para. [0047]: Powertrain and friction braking coordination are performed in block 206. The powertrain and friction braking controls receive the traction torque request, the traction torque limit, and the vectoring torque request and output a traction torque command ( e.g., a torque to propel or slow the vehicle via a torque source), a left clutch command (e.g., a command for clutch 191 shown in FIG. lA), a right clutch command, (e.g., a command for clutch 193 shown in FIG. lA)…).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Reim to incorporate the teaching of wherein the left wheel clutch and the right wheel clutch are independently controllable of Alcantar, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide vehicle yaw moment control when driver demand wheel torque is low or high (see at least Alcantar, para. [0005]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MOHAMED ABDO ALGEHAIM whose telephone number is (571)272-3628. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8-5PM EST.
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, Fadey Jabr can be reached at 571-272-1516. 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.
/MOHAMED ABDO ALGEHAIM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3668
