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 .
Claims 1 – 20 remain pending in the application and have been fully considered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1 – 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The claim(s) recite(s) a computer system configured to acquiring a current vertical load on a coupling, determining a load capability, and determining a desired vertical load based on the load capability.
The limitation of acquiring a current vertical load on a coupling, determining a load capability, and determining a desired vertical load based on the load capability, as drafted, is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components. That is, other than reciting “by a processing circuitry,” nothing in the claim element precludes the step from practically being performed in the mind. For example, but for the “by a processing circuitry” language, “determining” in the context of this claim encompasses the user manually calculating the amount of vertical load and capability on the coupling. Similarly, the limitation of acquiring a current vertical load on a coupling, determining a load capability, and determining a desired vertical load based on the load capability, as drafted, is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components. For example, but for the “by a processing circuitry” language, “determining” in the context of this claim encompasses the user to calculate based on load, weight, and size of the trailer. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas. Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claim only recites one additional element – using a processor to perform both the acquiring and determining of values. The processor in both steps is recited at a high-level of generality (i.e., as a generic processor performing a generic computer function of ranking information based on a determined amount of use) such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Accordingly, this additional element does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claim is directed to an abstract idea.
The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional element of using a processor to perform both acquiring and determining of load values amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept. The claim is not patent eligible.
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.
Claim(s) 1 – 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Javidan et al. (US 2024/0067278).
Regarding Claim 1:
Javidan et al. teaches a computer system (150) for controlling a vertical load on a coupling (110) between units of a vehicle combination (Figs 1 – 4) comprising a trailing unit (140) and a preceding unit, wherein the trailing unit comprises two or more axles (Figs 1 – 4) and is coupled to the preceding unit via the coupling, the computer system comprising processing circuitry configured to: acquire a current value of a vertical load F.sub.1 on the coupling (via 119); determine a coupling load capability F.sub.1,cap based on the current value of the vertical load F.sub.1 on the coupling and a current value of a virtual wheelbase L of the trailing unit (via 150, see paragraphs 032, 0035, 0115, and 0150 regarding “total forces”); and determine a desired vertical load F.sub.1,req on the coupling based on the coupling load capability F.sub.1,cap (via 150, “target preload force” described in paragraphs 0032 - 0035).
Regarding Claim 2:
Javidan et al. teaches the current value of the vertical load F.sub.1 on the coupling is acquired by a first controller (150) associated with the preceding unit and transmitted to a second controller (122) associated with the trailing unit.
Regarding Claim 3:
Javidan et al. teaches the coupling load capability F.sub.1,cap is determined by a second controller (122) associated with the trailing unit and transmitted to a first controller (150) associated with the preceding unit.
Regarding Claim 4:
Javidan et al. teaches the processing circuitry is configured to determine the coupling load capability F.sub.1,cap by determining a maximum value L.sub.max and/or a minimum value L.sub.min for the virtual wheelbase L of the trailing unit, and/or determining a maximum value M.sub.max and/or a minimum value M.sub.min for the payload of the trailing unit (paragraphs 0148 – 0153).
Regarding Claim 5:
Javidan et al. teaches the coupling load capability F.sub.1,cap comprises a maximum coupling load capability F.sub.1,cap,max and/or a minimum coupling load capability F.sub.1,cap,min (paragraphs 0148 – 0153, 0115).
Regarding Claim 6:
Javidan et al. teaches the desired vertical load F.sub.1,req is determined by a first controller associated with the preceding unit and transmitted to a second controller associated with the trailing unit (paragraph 0115, fig 1 – 4).
Regarding Claim 7:
Javidan et al. teaches the processing circuitry is configured to determine the desired vertical load F.sub.1,req based on a maximum coupling load limit F.sub.1,max (Fig 4, 7B).
Regarding Claim 8:
Javidan et al. teaches the processing circuitry is configured to determine the desired vertical load F.sub.1,req based on a desired increase to a load that can be carried by the trailing unit and/or a desired redistribution of traction between the trailing unit and the preceding unit (Fig 4, 7B).
Regarding Claim 9:
Javidan et al. teaches the virtual wheelbase L of the trailing unit is defined between the coupling and a load centre G of the axles of the trailing unit (Fig 1 – 4).
Regarding Claim 10:
Javidan et al. teaches the processing circuitry is further configured to provide the desired vertical load F.sub.1,req by adjusting the load on at least one axle of the trailing unit such that the longitudinal position of the load centre G of the axles of the trailing unit is translated (Figs 1 – 4).
Regarding Claim 11:
Javidan et al. teaches the processing circuitry is configured to adjust the load on at least one axle of the trailing unit by adjusting a suspension parameter associated with the axle (Figs 1 – 4).
Regarding Claim 12:
Javidan et al. teaches A vehicle comprising the computer system of claim 1 (Figs 1 – 40.
Regarding Claim 13:
See rejection of Claim 1 above.
Regarding Claim 14:
See rejection of Claim 2 above.
Regarding Claim 15:
See rejection of Claim 3 above.
Regarding Claim 16:
See rejection of Claim 4 above.
Regarding Claim 17:
See rejection of Claim 8 above.
Regarding Claim 18:
See rejection of Claim 10 above.
Regarding Claim 19:
See rejection of Claim 1 above.
Regarding Claim 20:
See rejection of Claim 1 above.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LONG T TRAN whose telephone number is (571)270-1899. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 9:00 - 5:00.
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, Logan Kraft can be reached at 571-270-5065. 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.
/LONG T TRAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3747
Prosecution Insights