DETAILED ACTION
The following is a first action on the merits of application serial no. 19/226912 filed 6/3/2025.
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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement filed 6/3/25 has been considered.
Claim Objections
Claim 12 is objected to because of the following informalities:
-The limitations recite “the left wheel and the right wheel” in lines 3-4. To maintain scope of consistency with claim 10 from which this claim depends from, the limitations should be changed to “the left side wheel and the right side wheel” as recited (introduced) in claim 10. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that uses a generic placeholder coupled with functional language that can be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph; however, via MPEP 2181, section I, section A, the generic term used is considered a structural term when read in light of the specification and as combined with description of the function of the term as recited.
Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
“processing circuitry (structural placeholder) configured to: receive………an indication of a driving situation where it would be desirable to disengage the differential lock on the drive axle (function)” in claim 1.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are not being interpreted to cover only the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant intends 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 remove the structure, materials, or acts that performs the claimed function; or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) does/do not recite sufficient structure, materials, or acts to perform the claimed function.
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, 4-10 and 12-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by JP2004122989 (with machine translation). As to claim 1, JP discloses a computer system comprising processing circuitry configured to: receive, when a differential lock (24) is engaged on a drive axle (via 31, 41 to axles 34, 44) of a vehicle, an indication of a driving situation where it would be desirable to disengage the differential lock on the drive axle (abstract, lines 9-12; [0046] via conditions A-C and [0065] in translation); receive a first indication of a first road friction on a left side of the vehicle and a second indication of a second road friction on a right side of the vehicle ([0015], lines 10-12, via slip determination for all wheels); determine, based on the first indication and the second indication, a first braking setting for a left side wheel on the drive axle and a second braking setting for a right side wheel on the drive axle ([0039], [0078] describes that braking force for front wheels or rear wheels can be large the right and left sides would have similar braking settings); and change driving mode for the vehicle by controlling the differential lock to disengage and controlling at least one braking system of the vehicle to brake the left side wheel with the first braking setting, and to brake the right side wheel with the second braking setting ([0047], [0056]).
As to claim 4, wherein the processing circuitry is configured to, when changing driving mode for the vehicle: control the at least one braking system of the vehicle with an initial braking setting ([0046] via condition C when brake pedal is depressed) resulting in substantially maintained rotational speeds of the left side wheel and the right side wheel, in relation to when the differential lock was engaged ([0047] via restriction being maintained until pedal detection is detected), before controlling the at least one braking system of the vehicle to brake the left side wheel with the first braking setting, and to brake the right side wheel with the second braking setting ([0056]).
As to claim 5, wherein the processing circuitry is configured to: start to control the at least one braking system of the vehicle with the initial braking setting within a predefined time after controlling the differential lock to disengage ([0056], brakes are controlled to be operated via brake pedal depression after “a timing” of release”).
As to claim 6, wherein the predefined time is shorter than one second (Figure 3; [0062], [0064], via depression of brake pedal causing brakes to be driven at t3 and by t4 when release happens, brakes are forcibly stopping wheels immediately).
As to claim 7, wherein the processing circuitry is configured to: receive, when the differential lock is disengaged, an indication of a driving situation where it would be desirable to engage the differential lock; and change driving mode for the vehicle by controlling the differential lock to engage ([0048]).
As to claim 8, wherein the processing circuitry is configured to, when changing driving mode for the vehicle: ([0064]) control the at least one braking system of the vehicle with a transitional braking setting (forcible stop) resulting in substantially equal rotational speeds of the left wheel and the right wheel on the drive axle (0 speed), before controlling the differential lock to engage.
As to claim 9, JP discloses a vehicle comprising: a drive axle (34, 44) having a left side wheel and a right side wheel (33, 43); a differential lock (24) on the drive axle (via 31, 41); at least one braking system controllable to brake the left side wheel and the right side wheel with different braking settings (13, 14, 15, 52); and the computer system of claim 1.
As to claim 10, JP discloses a computer-implemented method, comprising: receiving, when a differential lock (24) is engaged (via 31, 41) on a drive axle (34, 44) of a vehicle, an indication of a driving situation where it would be desirable to disengage the differential lock on the drive axle (abstract, lines 9-12; [0046] via conditions A-C and [0065] in translation); receiving a first indication of a first road friction on a left side of the vehicle and a second indication of a second road friction on a right side of the vehicle ([0015], lines 10-12, via slip determination for all wheels); determining, based on the first indication and the second indication, a first braking setting for a left side wheel on the drive axle and a second braking setting for a right side wheel on the drive axle ([0039], [0078] describes that braking force for front wheels or rear wheels can be large the right and left sides would have similar braking settings); and changing driving mode for the vehicle by controlling the differential lock to disengage and controlling at least one braking system of the vehicle to brake the left side wheel with the first braking setting, and to brake the right side wheel with the second braking setting ([0047], [0056]).
As to claim 12, comprising: controlling the at least one braking system of the vehicle with an initial braking setting ([0046] via condition C when brake pedal is depressed) resulting in substantially maintained rotational speeds of the left wheel and the right wheel, in relation to when the differential lock was engaged ([0047] via restriction being maintained until pedal detection is detected), before controlling the at least one braking system of the vehicle to brake the left side wheel with the first braking setting, and to brake the right side wheel with the second braking setting ([0056]).
As to claim 13, comprising: starting to control the at least one braking system of the vehicle with the initial braking setting within a predefined time after controlling the differential lock to disengage ([0056], brakes are controlled to be operated via brake pedal depression after “a timing” of release”).
As to claim 14, comprising: receiving, when the differential lock is disengaged, an indication of a driving situation where it would be desirable to engage the differential lock; and changing driving mode for the vehicle by controlling the differential lock to engage ([0048]).
As to claim 15, JP discloses a computer program product comprising program code for performing, when executed by the processing circuitry comprised in the computer system (well known in the art within microcomputer systems, [0042]), the method of claim 10.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 2, 3 and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP in view of Cho 20200130660. JP discloses determining a first braking setting and a second braking setting for left side and right side wheels ([0039], [0078] in the form of a first braking force and a second braking force (force corresponding to torque), but doesn’t disclose a second braking torque being greater than the first braking torque, when the second road friction on the right side of the vehicle is less than the first road friction on the left side of the vehicle and a second braking torque being less than the first braking torque, when the second road friction on the right side of the vehicle is greater than the first road friction on the left side of the vehicle.
Cho discloses a computer system comprising processing circuitry configured to: determine a first braking torque (21 or 22), and a second braking torque (21 or 22) and shows that it is well known in the art to determine the second braking torque greater than the first braking torque, when the second road friction on the right side of the vehicle is less than the first road friction on the left side of the vehicle and the second braking torque less than the first braking torque, when the second road friction on the right side of the vehicle is less than the first road friction on the left side of the vehicle (via 10, based on which wheel is on high or low friction road).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide JP with a first and second braking torque determination parameter in view of Cho to control stabilization of braking performance during operation of vehicle which increases operating efficiency of system.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
-The corresponding EPO office action as filed has been considered and the examiner agrees that the prior art cited meets the inventive concept of the present invention. The prior art cited as meeting the limitations of at least claims 1 and 10 does seem to be lacking the receiving a second road friction, determining a second braking setting for a right side wheel and braking right side of wheel with second braking setting as recited in claims 1 and 10.
-Uematsu et al 20110257851 discloses a computer system having processing circuitry and shows that it is well known in the art to receive, when a differential lock (1CA) is engaged, an indication of a driving situation where it would be desirable to disengage the differential lock on the drive axle (Figure 12, S30, S33, S35) and to receive a first indication of a first road friction on a left side of the vehicle and a second indication of a second road friction on a right side of the vehicle (Figure 10; [0015]-[0017]); and to determine, based on the first indication and the second indication, a first braking setting for a left side wheel on the drive axle and a second braking setting for a right side wheel on the drive axle ([0015]-[0017]).
-JPH07246854A (with machine translation) discloses a computer system having processing circuitry and shows that it is well known in the art to receive, when a differential lock (a) is engaged, an indication of a driving situation where it would be desirable to disengage the differential lock on the drive axle (abstract, lines 7-10).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TISHA D LEWIS whose telephone number is (571)272-7093. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri: 8:30am to 5:00pm.
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, Anna M Momper can be reached at 571-270-5788. 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.
Tdl
/TISHA D LEWIS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3619 January 24, 2026