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 .
Status of Claims
This Office Action is in response to the application filed on 05/14/2025. Claims 1-25 are presently pending and are presented for examination.
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: "recovery operation unit configured to" in claim 20.
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 § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
As to Claim 20, the claim element “recovery operation unit” is a limitation that invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for the claimed function. Examiner is unable to find the corresponding structure in the Specification because the sections of Applicant's Specification that discuss these elements do not include the corresponding structure (See at least, ¶94, and ¶143 for “recovery operation unit” of the Applicant's Specification).
Therefore, claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim 20 is 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
As to Claim 20, the claim element “recovery operation unit” invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for the claimed function. Examiner is unable to find the corresponding structure in the Specification because the sections of Applicant's Specification that discuss these elements do not include the corresponding structure (See at least, ¶94, and ¶143 for “recovery operation unit” of the Applicant's Specification). Therefore, claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1-6, 8, 14, 18 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(1) as being unpatentable over Byeon, US-20220258704-A1, hereinafter referred to as Byeon.
As per claim 1
Byeon discloses [a] method for recovering at least a partially automated vehicle comprising a vehicle control system, wherein the vehicle control system comprises at least a first subunit and a second subunit, wherein the method comprises (automatically control a parking brake without a driver manipulating the parking brake, an engine management system (EMS), a transmission control unit (TCU), an electronic parking brake (EPB) - Byeon Fig 2 (S201-S210) + ¶8 & ¶13):
detecting a malfunction in at least part of the first subunit of the vehicle control system (the breakdown and malfunction of the driving and braking systems to be considered during the vehicle emergency stop control by the gear interlock described above may cause a failure to stop a vehicle at a D/R gear stage due to physical failure of a brake pedal - Byeon Fig 2 (S201-S210) + ¶60);
checking whether the first subunit is in an emergency operating state, and, if based on determining that the first subunit is not in an emergency operating state, transitioning the first subunit or the vehicle control system into an emergency operating state (at S208 and S210 at which the vehicle emergency stop control is being performed, when it is checked that the EPB or SBW of the vehicle malfunctions…the controller 110 transmits an additional control signal to the TCU 122 so as to allow the TCU 122 to apply a gear interlock such that the emergency braking of the vehicle can be performed secondly - Byeon Fig 2 (S201-S210) + ¶56);
controlling the vehicle in the emergency operating state based on the emergency operating state with help from the vehicle control system (at S208 and S210 at which the vehicle emergency stop control is being performed, when it is checked that the EPB or SBW of the vehicle malfunctions…the controller 110 transmits an additional control signal to the TCU 122 so as to allow the TCU 122 to apply a gear interlock such that the emergency braking of the vehicle can be performed secondly - Byeon Fig 2 (S201-S210) + ¶56);
receiving a release signal via the vehicle control system (when it is checked that the vehicle emergency stop control is not performed, the vehicle enters S209 and it is determined whether each of the acceleration and speed of the vehicle is a preset value or more…to request the urgent engagement of EPB and to perform the vehicle emergency stop control in which the transmission performs P gear engagement at S210 - Byeon Fig 2 (S201-S210) + ¶50);
actuating the first subunit or the second subunit of the vehicle control system based on the release signal (when it is checked that the vehicle emergency stop control is not performed, the vehicle enters S209 and it is determined whether each of the acceleration and speed of the vehicle is a preset value or more…to request the urgent engagement of EPB and to perform the vehicle emergency stop control in which the transmission performs P gear engagement at S210 - Byeon Fig 2 (S201-S210) + ¶50).
As per claim 2
Byeon further discloses wherein the malfunction prevents the vehicle from continuing to drive safely (the breakdown and malfunction of the driving and braking systems to be considered during the vehicle emergency stop control by the gear interlock described above may cause a failure to stop a vehicle at a D/R gear stage due to physical failure of a brake pedal - Byeon Fig 2 (S201-S210) + ¶60).
As per claim 3
Byeon further discloses wherein the control of the vehicle in the emergency operating state based on the emergency operating state comprises a stop of the vehicle (at S208 and S210 at which the vehicle emergency stop control is being performed, when it is checked that the EPB or SBW of the vehicle malfunctions…the controller 110 transmits an additional control signal to the TCU 122 so as to allow the TCU 122 to apply a gear interlock such that the emergency braking of the vehicle can be performed secondly - Byeon Fig 2 (S201-S210) + ¶56).
As per claim 4
Byeon further discloses wherein the stop involves engaging a parking brake and/or deactivating at least part of the vehicle control system that is configured to control the vehicle in an at least partially automated manner (parking brake, an electronic parking brake (EPB) is automatically engaged and released according to a state of a vehicle, when it is checked that the vehicle emergency stop control is not performed, the vehicle enters S209 and it is determined whether each of the acceleration and speed of the vehicle is a preset value or more…to request the urgent engagement of EPB and to perform the vehicle emergency stop control in which the transmission performs P gear engagement at S210 - Byeon Fig 2 (S201-S210) + ¶7 & ¶50).
As per claim 5
Byeon further discloses wherein actuating the first subunit or the second subunit of the vehicle control system based on the release signal includes a stop (at S208 and S210 at which the vehicle emergency stop control is being performed, when it is checked that the EPB or SBW of the vehicle malfunctions…the controller 110 transmits an additional control signal to the TCU 122 so as to allow the TCU 122 to apply a gear interlock such that the emergency braking of the vehicle can be performed secondly - Byeon Fig 2 (S201-S210) + ¶56).
As per claim 6
Byeon further discloses wherein the method further comprises: following actuation of the first subunit or the second subunit, controlling the vehicle based on the release signal in a restricted operating mode compared with a normal operating mode of the vehicle (at S208 and S210 at which the vehicle emergency stop control is being performed, when it is checked that the EPB or SBW of the vehicle malfunctions…the controller 110 transmits an additional control signal to the TCU 122 so as to allow the TCU 122 to apply a gear interlock such that the emergency braking of the vehicle can be performed secondly - Byeon Fig 2 (S201-S210) + ¶56).
As per claim 8
Byeon further discloses wherein the actuation of the first subunit or the second subunit includes actuating at least one actuator of the respective first subunit or second subunit (control method is also gradually changing from a physical control method by a cable, a rod, and hydraulics to an electronic control method by a sensor, an electronic control unit (ECU), and an actuator. - Byeon Fig 2 (S201-S210) + ¶3).
As per claim 14
Byeon further discloses wherein actuation of the first subunit or the second subunit includes actuating a parking brake, wherein the parking brake is brought into a released state by actuation based on the release signal (parking brake, an electronic parking brake (EPB) is automatically engaged and released according to a state of a vehicle, when it is checked that the vehicle is completely stopped in the step (c-4), the vehicle emergency stop control may be released, when it is checked that the vehicle emergency stop control is not performed, the vehicle enters S209 and it is determined whether each of the acceleration and speed of the vehicle is a preset value or more…to request the urgent engagement of EPB and to perform the vehicle emergency stop control in which the transmission performs P gear engagement at S210 - Byeon Fig 2 (S201-S210) + ¶7 & ¶19 & ¶50).
As per claim 18
Byeon further discloses [a] vehicle control system comprising: a brake control unit; a transmission control unit; a steering control unit; an engine control unit; a monitoring unit; and an interface unit, wherein the interface unit is configured to execute the method, and wherein the first subunit and the second subunit each correspond to one of the brake control unit, the transmission control unit, the steering control unit, the engine control unit, and the monitoring unit (engine management system (EMS), a transmission control unit (TCU), an electronic parking brake (EPB), an electronic stability control (ESC), and a shift by wire (SBW), controller 110… sensors 101 to 105…transmit control signals to the EPB 123 and the TCU 122 so as to perform vehicle emergency stop control - Byeon Fig 2 (S201-S210) + ¶13 & ¶41).
As per claim 22
Byeon further discloses wherein the second subunit comprises a parking brake, wherein the parking brake is brought into a released state based on the release signal (parking brake, an electronic parking brake (EPB) is automatically engaged and released according to a state of a vehicle, when it is checked that the vehicle is completely stopped in the step (c-4), the vehicle emergency stop control may be released - Byeon Fig 2 (S201-S210) + ¶7 & ¶19).
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.
Claims 7, and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Byeon, as per claim 6, and further in view of Oshida, US-20180301033-A1, hereinafter referred to as Oshida.
As per claim 7
Byeon does not specifically disclose wherein the method further comprises: monitoring a communication link between the vehicle and a transmitting unit from which the release signal is sent; and based on determining that a connection between the vehicle and the transmitting unit is lost, terminating control of the vehicle.
However, Oshida teaches wherein the method further comprises: monitoring a communication link between the vehicle and a transmitting unit from which the release signal is sent; and based on determining that a connection between the vehicle and the transmitting unit is lost, terminating control of the vehicle (in-vehicle unit 11 continues to transmit the message (vehicle stop pre-message) until the transmission gear 145 is moved from parking, the parking brake 147 is released, infrastructure 20 (roadside unit 21)…process determines that the vehicle stops if the message transmission is lost, V2X communication…The vehicle can be determined to stop when the communication is lost - Oshida ¶89 & ¶90 & ¶96).
Byeon discloses a system and a method for vehicle stop control. Oshida teaches a safe driving assistance system.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Byeon, a system and a method for vehicle stop control, with a safe driving assistance system, as taught by Oshida, with a reasonable expectation of success for prevention of collision accidents, see Oshida ¶35 for details.
As per claim 9
Byeon further discloses wherein a number of actuated actuators is minimized (control method is also gradually changing from a physical control method by a cable, a rod, and hydraulics to an electronic control method by a sensor, an electronic control unit (ECU), and an actuator. - Byeon Fig 2 (S201-S210) + ¶3).
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Byeon, as per claim 1, and further in view of Sadu et al., US-20240038058-A1, hereinafter referred to as Sadu.
As per claim 10
Byeon does not specifically disclose wherein the release signal is received via a V2X communication.
However, Sadu teaches wherein the release signal is received via a V2X communication (V2X-based operations)…the ITS stack can generate a message or instruction and can send the message or instruction to the control system 452, which can cause the control system 452 to automatically break the vehicle 404 so that it comes to a stop before making impact with the other vehicle - Sadu ¶98).
Byeon discloses a system and a method for vehicle stop control. Sadu teaches a smart vehicle malfunction and driver misbehavior detection and alert solution utilizing vehicle-to-everything (V2X) communications.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Byeon, a system and a method for vehicle stop control, with a smart vehicle malfunction and driver misbehavior detection and alert solution utilizing vehicle-to-everything (V2X) communications, as taught by Sadu, with a reasonable expectation of success to improve road safety, fuel savings, and traffic efficiency, see Sadu ¶32 for details.
Claims 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Byeon, as per claim 1, and further in view of Keum et al., US-20180237055-A1, hereinafter referred to as Keum.
As per claim 11
Byeon does not specifically disclose wherein the method further comprises based on the detection of the malfunction in at least part of the first subunit, providing and/or transmitting fault data, wherein the fault data is indicative of the malfunction.
However, Keum teaches wherein the method further comprises based on the detection of the malfunction in at least part of the first subunit, providing and/or transmitting fault data, wherein the fault data is indicative of the malfunction (steering motor 400 and the steering motor controller 310-1 are in an abnormal state, the transmitter 330-1 may transmit first failure indication information (for example, a failure flag) to the other steering motor control device (e.g., the second steering motor control device 300-2) - Keum ¶87).
Byeon discloses a system and a method for vehicle stop control. Keum teaches an apparatus and a method for controlling a current output of a double-winding motor when the motor malfunctions.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Byeon, a system and a method for vehicle stop control, with an apparatus and a method for controlling a current output of a double-winding motor when the motor malfunctions, as taught by Keum, with a reasonable expectation of success for improving the driving stability, see Keum ¶11 for details.
As per claim 12
Byeon further discloses wherein the release signal is based on the fault data (at S208 and S210 at which the vehicle emergency stop control is being performed, when it is checked that the EPB or SBW of the vehicle malfunctions…the controller 110 transmits an additional control signal to the TCU 122 so as to allow the TCU 122 to apply a gear interlock such that the emergency braking of the vehicle can be performed secondly - Byeon Fig 2 (S201-S210) + ¶56).
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Byeon, as per claim 1, and further in view of Crawford, US-20070257551-A1, hereinafter referred to as Crawford.
As per claim 13
Byeon does not specifically disclose wherein the method further comprises based on the actuation of the first subunit or the second subunit, towing the vehicle.
However, Crawford teaches wherein the method further comprises based on the actuation of the first subunit or the second subunit, towing the vehicle (a system that allows a disabled vehicle to be safely towed and a method of towing such a vehicle…releasing or applying a parking brake of a disabled vehicle using the towing vehicle…pressure of the supplied hydraulic fluid is controlled at the towing vehicle so as to release the parking brake of the disabled vehicle – Crawford ¶8).
Byeon discloses a system and a method for vehicle stop control. Crawford teaches a system and method for remotely releasing a parking brake on a disabled vehicle.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Byeon, a system and a method for vehicle stop control, with a system and method for remotely releasing a parking brake on a disabled vehicle, as taught by Crawford, with a reasonable expectation of success to provide improved systems for control of the parking brakes of disabled vehicles, particularly heavy duty haul trucks, see Crawford ¶4 for details.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Byeon, as per claim 14, and further in view of Haffelder et al., US-20070164602-A1, hereinafter referred to as Haffelder.
As per claim 15
Byeon does not specifically disclose wherein the actuation of the parking brake includes actuating an anti-compound port, an emergency release port, a select-high valve, and/or a spindle drive.
However, Haffelder teaches wherein the actuation of the parking brake includes actuating an anti-compound port, an emergency release port, a select-high valve, and/or a spindle drive (automatic parking brake,…a spindle device connected to the auxiliary piston via a threaded connection, and a drive for the spindle device, wherein in a locked state of the parking brake, the brake piston is mechanically locked via the spindle device and the spring-loaded auxiliary piston, automatic parking brake… a spring element for prestressing the auxiliary piston, a spindle device connected to the auxiliary piston via a threaded connection, and a drive for the spindle device – Haffelder Abstract & ¶4).
Byeon discloses a system and a method for vehicle stop control. Haffelder teaches an automatic parking brake for keeping a vehicle parked.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Byeon, a system and a method for vehicle stop control, with an automatic parking brake for keeping a vehicle parked, as taught by Haffelder, with a reasonable expectation of success to provide an improved method for actuating an automatic parking brake, see Haffelder ¶2 for details.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Byeon, as per claim 14, and further in view of Wulf, US-20190248349-A1, hereinafter referred to as Wulf.
As per claim 16
Byeon does not specifically disclose wherein the actuation of the parking brake includes actuating a monostable valve or a bistable valve.
However, Wulf teaches wherein the actuation of the parking brake includes actuating a monostable valve or a bistable valve (brake system further includes an electronically controllable monostable bypass valve, wherein the monostable bypass valve is disposed between a manually operated parking brake valve and the spring-loaded cylinders. The monostable bypass valve controls, in a first switching position, a bypass control pressure based on an actuation pressure produced by the parking brake valve to implement a manually specified parking brake force - Wulf ¶11).
Byeon discloses a system and a method for vehicle stop control. Wulf teaches an electronically controllable pneumatic brake system in a utility vehicle.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Byeon, a system and a method for vehicle stop control, with an electronically controllable pneumatic brake system in a utility vehicle, as taught by Wulf, with a reasonable expectation of success so that manual actuation of the parking brake can be retained without using additional components for this, such as a select-high valve or pneumatic latching, see Wulf ¶29 for details.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Byeon, as per claim 1, and further in view of Stark et al., US-20190092332-A1, hereinafter referred to as Stark.
As per claim 17
Byeon does not specifically disclose wherein the actuation of the first subunit or the second subunit includes actuating a drivetrain and/or a transmission, wherein the drivetrain and/or transmission is moved into a disengaged state through actuation based on the release signal.
However, Stark teaches wherein the actuation of the first subunit or the second subunit includes actuating a drivetrain and/or a transmission, wherein the drivetrain and/or transmission is moved into a disengaged state through actuation based on the release signal (in response to receiving the signal, moving a gear control to a neutral state thereby disengaging a transmission of the vehicle - Stark ¶4).
Byeon discloses a system and a method for vehicle stop control. Stark teaches an electronically controllable pneumatic brake system in a vehicle.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Byeon, a system and a method for vehicle stop control, with an electronically controllable pneumatic brake system in a vehicle, as taught by Stark, with a reasonable expectation of success to safely maneuver the vehicle to reach a desired destination, and for stopping the vehicle safely, see Stark ¶2 & ¶27 for details.
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Byeon, as per claim 18, and further in view of Kim, US-20220198967-A1, hereinafter referred to as Kim.
As per claim 19
Byeon does not specifically disclose wherein the interface unit comprises a power supply unit that is in addition to a power supply unit of the vehicle control system.
However, Kim teaches wherein the interface unit comprises a power supply unit that is in addition to a power supply unit of the vehicle control system (even when the engine of the vehicle is turned off, the display panel 100 may be configured to display an image using a separate battery included in the vehicle - Kim ¶57).
Byeon discloses a system and a method for vehicle stop control. Kim teaches a display apparatus for a vehicle and a control method therefor.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Byeon, a system and a method for vehicle stop control, with a display apparatus for a vehicle and a control method therefor, as taught by Kim, with a reasonable expectation of success to provide an improved sense of immersion to a viewer by minimizing the image blank, see Kim ¶36 for details.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Byeon, as per claim 18, and further in view of Hose, US-20180156329-A1, hereinafter referred to as Hose.
As per claim 20
Byeon does not specifically disclose wherein the interface unit further comprises a recovery operation unit wherein the recovery operation unit is configured to actuate the first subunit or the second subunit of the vehicle control system based on the release signal.
However, Hose teaches wherein the interface unit further comprises a recovery operation unit wherein the recovery operation unit is configured to actuate the first subunit or the second subunit of the vehicle control system based on the release signal (A further message is displayed on the display screen…touchscreen…‘Press “acknowledge” button to continue with safe vehicle recovery’, along with a virtual button labelled “acknowledge”. Having seen the messages, the driver presses the “acknowledge” button., A further message is then displayed, informing the driver that in order to recover the vehicle, a reverse gear will be engaged and the vehicle will reverse down the hill in ‘hill descent mode’—also that the driver may initiate this, such as by displaying the further message ‘to initiate this, release all foot pedals and then press the brake pedal. Release the brake pedal when ready to descend - Hose ¶93 & ¶94).
Byeon discloses a system and a method for vehicle stop control. Hose teaches a method of using a transmission with multiple clutches in order to provide improved methods of traction control on a hill ascent.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Byeon, a system and a method for vehicle stop control, with a method of using a transmission with multiple clutches in order to provide improved methods of traction control on a hill ascent, as taught by Hose, with a reasonable expectation of success to provide an improved method of dealing with a failed hill ascent, see Hose ¶18 for details.
Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Byeon, as per claim 18, and further in view of Zimmermann et al., US-20220231534-A1, hereinafter referred to as Zimmermann.
As per claim 21
Byeon does not specifically disclose wherein the second subunit comprises an additional actuator emergency unit or an additional actuator, which is provided in addition to actuators of the vehicle intended for normal vehicle operation, and is electrically independent of the actuators of the vehicle provided for normal operation of the vehicle.
However, Zimmermann teaches wherein the second subunit comprises an additional actuator emergency unit or an additional actuator, which is provided in addition to actuators of the vehicle intended for normal vehicle operation, and is electrically independent of the actuators of the vehicle provided for normal operation of the vehicle (to ensure emergency operation of an actuator of a motor vehicle in the event of failure of an electrical supply line for a control unit of the actuator…at least one driver for the actuator that is supplied with electrical voltage by a capacitor - Zimmermann ¶6).
Byeon discloses a system and a method for vehicle stop control. Zimmermann teaches a method for ensuring an emergency operation of an actuator of a motor vehicle.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Byeon, a system and a method for vehicle stop control, with a method for ensuring an emergency operation of an actuator of a motor vehicle, as taught by Zimmermann, with a reasonable expectation of success so that the emergency operation of the actuator is not dependent on an alternative line to supply power to the control unit, see Zimmermann ¶6 for details.
Claim 23 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Byeon, as per claim 22, and further in view of Hoover et al., US-20060284479-A1, hereinafter referred to as Hoover.
As per claim 23
Byeon does not specifically disclose wherein the parking brake comprises a brake pressure supply unit that is additional to a brake pressure supply unit of a brake control unit.
However, Hoover teaches wherein the parking brake comprises a brake pressure supply unit that is additional to a brake pressure supply unit of a brake control unit (a parking brake, comprises: a primary fluid pressure supply reservoir and a secondary fluid pressure supply reservoir adapted to supply a braking force to at least one brake actuator including a parking brake chamber and a service brake chamber - Hoover ¶18).
Byeon discloses a system and a method for vehicle stop control. Hoover teaches pneumatic brake systems.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Byeon, a system and a method for vehicle stop control, with pneumatic brake systems, as taught by Hoover, with a reasonable expectation of success to automatically place the actuators of the air brakes in an engaged condition when one or more dangerous conditions exist at various stations around/in the vehicle, see Hoover ¶34 for details.
Claims 24-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Byeon, as per claim 22, and further in view of Beier et al., EP-3112230-A1, hereinafter referred to as Beier (Translation of Espacenet).
As per claim 24
Byeon does not specifically disclose wherein the parking brake includes emergency release units provided in addition to a release unit of the parking brake.
However, Beier teaches wherein the parking brake includes emergency release units provided in addition to a release unit of the parking brake (solenoid valve (14) that can be actuated…applying pressure medium to at least one brake actuator (40)…emergency release pressure medium connection (44) and a double check valve (46) with which an emergency release function of the parking brake device, provide a parking brake device having an emergency release function, at least one solenoid valve actuatable by the control device and a pressure medium quantity-intensifying valve are integrated in the parking brake module, a parking brake device which, in the event of a fault…can nevertheless brake the vehicle securely, If the brake actuators 40 are acted upon with a sufficient pressure, the parking brake is released - Beier Abstract & ¶8 & ¶11 & ¶32 & ¶50).
Byeon discloses a system and a method for vehicle stop control. Beier teaches a parking brake device.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Byeon, a system and a method for vehicle stop control, with a parking brake device, as taught by Beier, with a reasonable expectation of success to release the parking brake, even if the electronic components of the parking brake module have failed or no supply pressure is available to the parking brake module, see Beier ¶19 for details.
As per claim 25
Byeon does not specifically disclose wherein the emergency release units comprise solenoid valves, wherein a release of the parking brake corresponds to a release of the solenoid valves.
However, Beier teaches wherein the emergency release units comprise solenoid valves, wherein a release of the parking brake corresponds to a release of the solenoid valves (solenoid valve (14) that can be actuated…applying pressure medium to at least one brake actuator (40)…emergency release pressure medium connection (44) and a double check valve (46) with which an emergency release function of the parking brake device, provide a parking brake device having an emergency release function, at least one solenoid valve actuatable by the control device and a pressure medium quantity-intensifying valve are integrated in the parking brake module, a parking brake device which, in the event of a fault…can nevertheless brake the vehicle securely, If the brake actuators 40 are acted upon with a sufficient pressure, the parking brake is released - Beier Abstract & ¶8 & ¶11 & ¶32 & ¶50).
Byeon discloses a system and a method for vehicle stop control. Beier teaches a parking brake device.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Byeon, a system and a method for vehicle stop control, with a parking brake device, as taught by Beier, with a reasonable expectation of success to release the parking brake, even if the electronic components of the parking brake module have failed or no supply pressure is available to the parking brake module, see Beier ¶19 for details.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FARIS ASIM SHAIKH whose telephone number is (571)272-6426. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00-5:30 M-F 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 S. 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.
/F.A.S./Examiner, Art Unit 3668
/Fadey S. Jabr/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3668
Prosecution Insights