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 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 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.
Claims 1, 3, 10, 12, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being unpatentable over Takeuchi et al. (US 5,650,713).
Regarding claim 1, Takeuchi teaches an apparatus for assisting braking of an electric vehicle, the apparatus comprising: a motor control unit (MCU) configured to control an operation of a motor based on an inverter; and a controller configured to determine a motor braking amount based on a state of charge (SOC) of a battery when the SOC of the battery exceeds a reference SOC on a downhill road, and to control the MCU to generate a motor reverse torque corresponding to the motor braking amount (see Takeuchi at least at col. 1 lines 45-50 which discloses that when regenerative braking of the motor for running the automobile is performed where the automobile runs on a long downhill slope, the charging of the battery by current generated by the regenerative braking is promoted by which the battery easily reaches a saturated state of charging; see Takeuchi at col. 2 lines 9-14 which discloses a control device which exerts a braking force capable of sufficiently dealing with travel of the automobile down a long downhill slope; Examiner maps control device to motor control unit (MCU). Also, see Takeuchi at col. 2 lines 35-43 which discloses a controller for driving the generator with the generator inverter to rotate the internal combustion engine. Examiner maps Takeuchi’s controller to the recited controller; see Takeuchi at col. 2 lines 16-25 which discloses that according to a first aspect of the present invention, a control device for a series-type hybrid automobile includes a generator driven by an internal combustion engine; a generator inverter for controlling the generator; a battery charged by an output of the generator and a motor inverter for driving the automobile using battery power in accordance with an operational state of an accelerator pedal wherein a power source capacitor is jointly used by the inverter for running the automobile and the inverter for the generator. Examiner notes that an internal combustion engine comprises a motor. Further, see Takeuchi at col. 6 which discloses that the battery voltage and the output of a current sensor 9 can be used to determine whether the battery charge level will fall below the predetermined level. Also, see Takeuchi at col. 4 lines 51-53 which discloses that a large braking force is generated in the generator by a reverse torque resulting from making current flow in the generator inverter.)
Regarding claim 3, Takeuchi teaches the apparatus of claim 2, wherein the controller is configured to determine a result of subtracting the predicted SOC increase amount from a fully charged state of the battery as the reference SOC (see Takeuchi at least at the Summary of the Invention which discloses that the generator inverter includes a controller which rotatably controls the generator when used as a motor for driving the internal combustion engine by making current flow by the generator inverter when a capacity of the battery is a predetermined amount or more in regeneratively controlling the motor, whereby the internal combustion engine is driven by the generator. Examiner maps the capacity of a battery minus the predetermined amount to the predicted SOC increase amount. Examiner notes that a controller that rotatably controls a generator inverter to make current flow when a capacity of a battery is a predetermined amount corresponds to a controller configured to determine a result of subtracting the predicted SOC increase amount from a fully charged state of the battery as the reference SOC. Examiner has shown a teaching based on a broadest reasonable interpretation of the claimed language in light of what is written in the specification.)
Claim 10 is directed toward a method that performs the steps recited in the apparatus of claim 1. The cited portions of the reference(s) used in the rejections of claim 1 teach the steps recited in the method of claim 10. Therefore, claim 10 is rejected under the same rationale used in the rejection of claim 1.
Claim 12 is directed toward a method that performs the steps recited in the apparatus of claim 3. The cited portions of the reference(s) used in the rejections of claim 3 teach the steps recited in the method of claim 12. Therefore, claim 12 is rejected under the same rationale used in the rejection of claim 3.
Claim 19 are directed toward an electric vehicle that performs the steps recited in the apparatus of claim 1. The cited portions of the reference(s) used in the rejections of claim 1 teach the steps recited in the electric vehicle of claim 19. Therefore, claim 19 is rejected under the same rationale used in the rejection of claim 1.
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 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.
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.
Claims 2 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takeuchi et al. (US 5,650,713) in view of Gesang et al. (US 2026/0145662).
Regarding claim 2, Takeuchi teaches the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the controller is configured [to obtain forward downhill road information from a navigation system provided in the electric vehicle,] to predict an SOC increase amount due to regenerative braking on the downhill road, and to determine the reference SOC based on the predicted SOC increase amount (see Takeuchi at least at the Summary of the Invention which discloses that the generator inverter includes a controller which rotatably controls the generator when used as a motor for driving the internal combustion engine by making current flow by the generator inverter when a capacity of the battery is a predetermined amount or more in regeneratively controlling the motor, whereby the internal combustion engine is driven by the generator. Examiner notes that a controller that rotatably controls a generator inverter to make current flow when a capacity of a battery is a predetermined amount corresponds to a controller configured to obtain and predict an SOC increase amount and determine the reference SOC based on the predicted SOC increase amount.)
Takeuchi does not expressly disclose to obtain forward downhill road information from a navigation system provided in the electric vehicle, which in a related art Gesang teaches (see Gesant at [0062], for example, which discloses that various ADAS electronic navigation map or HD map supporting L3+automatic driving currently commercially available in many countries around the world can be used as the 3D map of the present disclosure, providing an electronic horizon (Electronic Horizon) priori road information for the vehicle; and that the so-called “electronic horizon” refers to various kinds of road information covered by the 3D (three-dimensional) electronic map within a specific range of road in front of the vehicle, especially the 3D information such as the longitude, latitude, and longitudinal grade along the highway.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Takeuchi to obtain forward downhill road information from a navigation system provided in the electric vehicle, as taught by Gesant.
One would have been motivated to make such a modification to provide such road information to ensure industry-leading power and braking performance of the ACE heavy truck while automatically optimizes both energy saving and emission reduction based on the vehicle's dynamic driving data and 3D electronic map information of roads for any transport event by way of regenerative braking, as suggested by Gesant at the Abstract and at [0010].
Claim 11 is directed toward a method that performs the steps recited in the apparatus of claim 2. The cited portions of the reference(s) used in the rejections of claim 2 teach the steps recited in the method of claim 11. Therefore, claim 11 is rejected under the same rationale used in the rejection of claim 2.
Claims 4-8 and 13-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takeuchi et al. (US 5,650,713) in view of Murthy et al. (US 2017/0129340).
Regarding claim 4, Takeuchi does not expressly disclose the apparatus of claim 1, further comprising: storage configured to store a lookup table in which different motor braking amounts are recorded for each SOC section of the battery, which in a related art Murthy teaches (see Murthy at [0026], for example, which discloses that RB LUT 24r is a memory resource that will be used to retrieve, for a current rotor speed, one or more predetermined braking torque limits and levels that can be used to ensure or maximize the charging current during regenerative braking and that RB LUT 24r may be realized in non-volatile memory, such as read-only memory (ROM) or electrically programmable read-only memory (EPROM) as may be used for program memory 24p, particularly if its contents are determined for an installation associated with a particular model of motor 210; see Murthy at the Abstract which discloses that a method for establishing the braking torques to be stored in the lookup table is also disclosed; see Murthy at [0039] in conjunction with Fig. 2 which discloses that regenerative braking lookup table (RB LUT) 24r is provided in MCU 220 and that these braking torque levels are predetermined for various motor speeds and are stored in RB LUT 24r for later access during operation. Examiner notes that the braking torque levels may be recorded for all ranges of battery levels as the battery is being charged. Examiner, for example, maps memory to storage. Examiner has shown a teaching based on a broadest reasonable interpretation of the claimed language.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Takeuchi to include storage configured to store a lookup table in which different motor braking amounts are recorded for each SOC section of the battery, as taught by Murthy.
One would have been motivated to make such a modification to facilitate retrieval of one or more predetermined braking torque limits and levels to ensure or maximize the charging current during regenerative braking, as suggested by Murthy at [0026].
Regarding claim 5, the modified Takeuchi teaches the apparatus of claim 4, wherein the controller is configured to determine the motor braking amount corresponding to the SOC of the battery based on the lookup table (see Murthy at [0039] which discloses that according to these embodiments, regenerative braking lookup table (RB LUT) 24r is provided in MCU 220, as shown in FIG. 2, as a memory resource that stores pre-calculated or otherwise pre-determined braking torque levels for each of a number of rotor speeds; see Murthy at [0050] which discloses that the optimization process 26 determines, for each rotor speed w over the operating range, the braking torque at which the current output by the battery is at its minimum, which conversely corresponds to the torque at which the charging current during regenerative braking is at a maximum. Examiner notes that the battery state in which current output is at its minimum corresponds to an SOC of the battery.)
Regarding claim 6, Takeuchi does not expressly disclose the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the controller is configured to control the MCU to change a direction of a rotating magnetic field of the motor to an opposite direction in a process of generating the motor reverse torque corresponding to the motor braking amount which in a related art Murthy teaches (see Murthy at [0007] which discloses that electric motors have two mechanical operations, motoring and braking, and that motoring refers to the motor operation in which the applied torque and rotational velocity of the motor are in the same direction, while the braking operation applies a torque in the opposite direction from the rotational velocity of the motor.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Takeuchi to include wherein the controller is configured to control the MCU to change a direction of a rotating magnetic field of the motor to an opposite direction in a process of generating the motor reverse torque corresponding to the motor braking amount, as taught by Murthy.
One would have been motivated to make such a modification to facilitate motoring as well as regenerative braking, as suggested by Murthy at [0007].
Regarding claim 7, Takeuchi does not expressly disclose the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the controller is configured to control the MCU to change a current phase angle of the inverter in a process of generating the motor reverse torque corresponding to the motor braking amount, which in a related art Murthy teaches (see Murthy at [0007] which discloses that the torque indicated by the multiphase control signals produced by the field-oriented control system will determine whether energy recovery through regenerative braking occurs, and if so, the extent of the energy recovered; see Murthy at [0024] which discloses that as will be apparent to those skilled in the art having reference to this specification, the number of phases in motor 210 may vary from the three phases shown in FIG. 2 and that in field-oriented control (FOC) systems, such as system 250 according to these embodiments, the application of alternating current to the stator windings is controlled to produce a rotating magnetic field that interacts with the magnetic field from the permanent magnets on the rotor at the appropriate torque to rotate the rotor at the desired speed; see Murthy at [0056] which discloses that while this description will be for the case of braking a forward motion by the application of a reverse torque, it will be recognized by those skilled in the art that reverse braking (quadrant II) would be carried out in much the same manner but with opposite-signed values.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Takeuchi to include wherein the controller is configured to control the MCU to change a current phase angle of the inverter in a process of generating the motor reverse torque corresponding to the motor braking amount, as taught by Murthy.
One would have been motivated to make such a modification to facilitate application of a reverse torque, as suggested by Murthy at [0056].
Regarding claim 8, Takeuchi does not expressly disclose the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the controller is configured to control the MCU to change an order of two phases among three phases (U, V, W) of the inverter in a process of generating the motor reverse torque corresponding to the motor braking amount which in a related art Murthy teaches (see at least Murthy at [0025] which discloses that result of this program execution by processor unit 22 are three-phase data signals Tabc indicative of the pulse-width-modulation duty cycles at which the three phases (i.e., phases a, b, c, respectively) of motor M are to be driven, that data signals Tabc are applied to PWM drivers 255 in MCU 220, which in turn generate output control signals that are applied to power driver circuits 231, which in turn generates the corresponding pulse-width-modulated pulses on lines PWM(a, b, c), at the appropriate frequency and phase that are applied to three-phase inverter 232 for driving motor 210 at the desired speed. Examiner maps phases a, b, and c to the recited three phases (U, V, W). Examiner notes that the each of the three phases, a, b, and c, indicative of the pulse-width-modulation duty cycles, are used to generate the motor reverse torque and that varying the three-phase data signals by way of their pulse-width modulation duty cycles correspond to changing an order of two phases among the three phases (U, V, W) of the inverter.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Takeuchi to include wherein the controller is configured to control the MCU to change an order of two phases among three phases (U, V, W) of the inverter in a process of generating the motor reverse torque corresponding to the motor braking amount, as taught by Murthy.
One would have been motivated to make such a modification to facilitate application of a reverse torque, as suggested by Murthy at [0056].
Claims 13-17 are directed toward methods that perform the steps recited in the apparatus of claims 4-8. The cited portions of the reference(s) used in the rejections of claims 4-8 teach the steps recited in the methods of claims 13-17. Therefore, claims 13-17 are rejected under the same rationale used in the rejections of claims 4-8.
Claims 9 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takeuchi et al. (US 5,650,713) in view of Kava et al. (US 2018/0334160).
Regarding claim 9, Takeuchi does not expressly disclose the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the controller is configured to warn a user of overheating of a brake when a temperature of the motor exceeds a reference temperature, which in a related art Kava teaches (see at least Kava at [0039] which discloses that under a scenario where the drive wheels are isolated from receiving motor power by application of the vehicle brakes, the controller may still command the motor to generate power, that however, since the wheels are being braked and unable to receive power from the motor, the motor will be able to generate torque but will be unable to rotate (i.e., will have a zero rotational speed), and that the commanded motor power will be dissipated in the form of heat energy under such a scenario since the motor is not able to rotate to produce rotational power (rotational power being torque multiplied by rotational speed). Kava at [0039] further discloses that predetermined torque output that motor is increased to at step 206 under such a scenario (where the motor is commanded to produce power while also having a zero rotational speed) may correspond to a motor torque output that will increase motor temperature to, but not above, a predetermined threshold via the heat dissipation and that the temperature threshold may correspond to a failure temperature that will result in failure of the electric motor if the electric motor exceeds the temperature threshold. Also, see Kava at [0043] which discloses that the trigger condition at step 208 may be the temperature of either the engine or the motor exceeding a threshold, while the accelerator and brake pedals remain fully depressed, the transmission remains in drive, and the vehicle remains stopped. Examiner maps trigger condition to warning a user of overheating. Examiner maps temperature threshold to reference temperature.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Takeuchi to include wherein the controller is configured to warn a user of overheating of a brake when a temperature of the motor exceeds a reference temperature, as taught by Kava.
One would have been motivated to make such a modification to generate a trigger condition associated with overheating or excessive wear and tear, as suggested by Kava at [0042].
Claim 18 is directed toward a method that performs the steps recited in the apparatus of claim 9. The cited portions of the reference(s) used in the rejections of claim 9 teach the steps recited in the method of claim 18. Therefore, claim 18 is rejected under the same rationale used in the rejection of claim 9.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROY RHEE whose telephone number is 313-446-6593. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30 am to 5:30 pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, Applicant may contact the Examiner via telephone or 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, Kito Robinson, can be reached on 571-270-3921. 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, one may visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. In addition, more information about Patent Center may be found at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center. Should you have questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/ROY RHEE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3664
Prosecution Insights