DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1 recites “a target value of the steering angle of the wheels” in line 10, which appears to be a misstating of --a target --.
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.
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 limitations are: “turning device” in claims 1-4 and “reaction force device” in claims 1-4.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(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, 2, and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2025/0196915 to Tsubaki et al. (hereinafter: “Tsubaki”).
With respect to claim 1, Tsubaki teaches a steering system of a steer-by-wire type (apparent from at least Fig. 1 in view of at least ¶ 0002-0003, 0056 & 0105-0106), provided in a vehicle (apparent from at least Fig. 1 in view of at least ¶ 0001, 0056 & 0105-0114), comprising: a turning device (e.g., 40) configured to turn wheels (e.g., 5L, 5B) of the vehicle (apparent from at least Figs. 1 & 3 in view of at least ¶ 0105-0112), a reaction force device (e.g., 30) configured to apply a reaction force (e.g., “steering reaction force”) to a steering operation member (e.g., 1) operable by a driver (apparent from at least Figs. 1 & 3 in view of at least ¶ 0105-0112), and a controller (e.g., 50) configured to control the reaction force (apparent from at least Figs. 1-3 in view of at least ¶ 0105-0131), wherein the controller is configured to control the reaction force based on a phase-adjusted deviation, the phase-adjusted deviation being a deviation between an actual steering angle and a target steering angle, a phase in the phase-adjusted deviation having been adjusted, and the actual steering angle being an actual steering angle of the wheels, the target steering angle being a target value of the steering angle of the wheels [as depicted by at least Figs. 3 & 32-33 and as discussed by at least ¶ 0120-0131, 0272-0274, 0278-0281 & 0311, the control device 50 is structured to perform functions to control the steering reaction force based, in part, on a steered angle control unit 700 of the control device 50 which determines a deviation θt_err between an actual steered angle θt_act (e.g., “actual steering angle”) of the steered wheels 5L & 5R and a steered angle target value θt_ref (e.g., “target steering angle”) of the steered wheels 5L & 5R, and a friction compensation unit 770 of the steered angle control unit 700 which adjusts the steered angle target value θt_ref to compensate for a following delay (e.g., “phase”) of the actual steered angle θt_act with respect to the steered angle target value θt_ref prior to the steered angle control unit 700 determining the deviation θt_err; additionally or alternatively, as depicted by at least Figs. 3 & 32-33 and as discussed by at least ¶ 0120-0131, 0272-0274, 0278-0281 & 0311, the control device 50 is structured to perform functions to control the steering reaction force based, in part, on a steered angle control unit 700 of the control unit 50 which determines a deviation θt_err between an actual steered angle θt_act (e.g., “actual steering angle”) of the steered wheels 5L & 5R and a steered angle target value θt_ref (e.g., “target steering angle”) of the steered wheels 5L & 5R, and a feedforward compensation unit 710 of the steered angle control unit 700 which adjusts the steered angle target value θt_ref to compensate for a following delay (e.g., “phase”) of the actual steered angle θt_act with respect to the steered angle target value θt_ref prior to the steered angle control unit 700 determining the deviation θt_err].
With respect to claim 2, Tsubaki teaches the steering system according to claim 1, wherein the controller is configured to obtain the phase-adjusted deviation in which a phase in the target steering angle is adjusted so as to be in conformity to a phase of an operation of the steering operation member (as discussed in detail above with respect to claim 1).
With respect to claim 4, Tsubaki teaches the steering system according to claim 1, wherein the controller is configured to obtain: a turning target steering angle by performing one or more processes on an operation amount of the steering operation member, the turning target steering angle being the target steering angle, and the phase-adjusted deviation by obtaining a phase-adjusted target steering angle by performing phase adjustment on the turning target steering angle based on a delay generated in one or more of the one or more processes (as discussed in detail above with respect to claim 1, and apparent from at least Figs. 3 & 32-33 in view of at least ¶ 0120-0131, 0272-0274, 0278-0281 & 0311).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 3 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure and is provided on the attached PTO-892 Notice of References Cited form.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN ZALESKAS whose telephone number is (571)272-5958. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00 AM - 4:00 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 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.
/JOHN M ZALESKAS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3747
Prosecution Insights