Ex Parte Laws et al

Patent Trial and Appeal Board

Mar 8, 2018

12714966 (P.T.A.B. Mar. 8, 2018)

United States Patent and Trademark Office
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
United States Patent and Trademark Office
Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
P.O.Box 1450
Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
www.uspto.gov
APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE FIRST NAMED INVENTOR ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. CONFIRMATION NO.
12/714,966 03/01/2010 Larry D. Laws P005436-NAPD-LDA 7829
60770 7590 03/12/2018
General Motors Corporation
c/o REISING ETHINGTON P.C.
755 W. Big Beaver Road
Suite 1850
TROY, MI 48084
EXAMINER
YU, ARIEL J
ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER
3627
NOTIFICATION DATE DELIVERY MODE
03/12/2018 ELECTRONIC
Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
Notice of the Office communication was sent electronically on above-indicated "Notification Date" to the
following e-mail address(es):
stevens@reising.com
U S PTOmail @ reising. com
USPTOmail@gmx.com
PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
Ex parte LARRY D. LAWS and JOHN P. BLANCHARD
Appeal 2016-000131
Application 12/714,966
Technology Center 3600
Before MURRIEL E. CRAWFORD, BAYAT B. BRADLEY, and
SHEILA F. McSHANE, Administrative Patent Judges.
CRAWFORD, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Appellants seek our review under 35 U.S.C. § 134 of the Examiner’s
final decision rejecting claims 1—3, 5—12, and 14—19. We have jurisdiction
over the appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b).
We REVERSE.
Claim 1 is illustrative:
1. A method for operating a hybrid vehicle having a
primary power source and an auxiliary power source,
comprising the steps of:
(a) monitoring at least one primary power source
parameter that relates to an electric motor or a battery of
the primary power source and at least one vehicle
Appeal 2016-000131
Application 12/714,966
performance parameter that relates to the performance of
the hybrid vehicle and, based at least partially on a
comparison of the primary power source parameter to the
vehicle performance parameter, determining if the hybrid
vehicle enters a steep grade environment where an
average grade is steep enough to warrant a specific power
management scheme for the hybrid vehicle;
(b) making a first set of adjustments to the power
management scheme that controls one or more aspects of
the primary power source and/or the auxiliary power
source at least partially in response to the hybrid vehicle
entering the steep grade environment, and the first set of
adjustments is based on an anticipated future need for
electrical energy by the hybrid vehicle in the steep grade
environment; and
(c) operating the hybrid vehicle according to the
power management scheme with the first set of
adjustments.
Appellants appeal the following rejections:
1. Claims 1—3, 5—9, 12, and 14—17 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable
over Otake (US 2010/0286857 Al, pub. Nov. 11, 2010), Woestman et al.
(6,487,477 Bl, iss. Nov. 26, 2002 (hereinafter “Woestman”)), Snyder et
al. (US 2009/0212626 Al, pub. Aug. 27, 2009 (hereinafter “Snyder”)),
and Meloche et al. (US 2009/0164081 Al, pub. June 25, 2009
(hereinafter “Meloche”)).
2. Claims 10, 11, 18, and 19 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable over
Otake, Woestman, Snyder, Meloche, and Hanssen et al. (US
2010/0106351 Al, pub. Apr. 29, 2010 (hereinafter “Hanssen”)).
2
Appeal 2016-000131
Application 12/714,966
ANALYSIS
The Appellants argue that the prior art does not disclose determining
if the hybrid vehicle enters a steep grade environment based on a
comparison of the primary power source parameter to the vehicle
performance parameter. We agree.
The Examiner acknowledges that Otake does not disclose this subject
matter (Final Act. 4). The Examiner finds that Woestman discloses
determining whether a hybrid vehicle enters a steep grade where a grade is
steep enough to warrant a specific power management scheme and making a
first set of adjustments to a power management scheme in response to the
hybrid entering a steep grade. (Final Act. 7). The Examiner further finds
that Snyder discloses monitoring a primary power source parameter to
determine if the hybrid vehicle enters a steep grade. The Examiner, relying
on paragraph 13, also finds that Meloche discloses monitoring at least one
vehicle performance parameter and based on the comparison between the
primary power source parameter and the vehicle performance parameter
determining if the hybrid vehicle enters a steep grade. (Final Act. 8). In the
Answer, the Examiner finds that Meloche discloses that horsepower output,
vehicle speed net load, and average acceleration (vehicle performance
parameters) are used to determine whether a hybrid vehicle enters a steep
grade (Ans. 4).
We find that paragraph 13 of Meloche discloses determining whether
a heavy duty diesel is descending grade and how steep the grade is by
measuring vehicle speed and comparing the moving average vehicle
acceleration to the predetermined programmable vehicle acceleration
threshold, determining whether the horsepower output is less than a
3
Appeal 2016-000131
Application 12/714,966
calibratable maximum horsepower and determining engine torque reduction.
As such, Meloche discloses a method to determine whether a heavy duty
diesel vehicle has entered a steep grade but discloses nothing about a hybrid
vehicle. In addition, the parameters used to make the determination of
whether the vehicle has entered a steep grade are vehicle performance
parameters, and, therefore, the relied on portion of Meloche does not
disclose comparing an electric motor or primary power source parameter to
the vehicle parameters to determine whether the vehicle has entered a steep
grade. Still further, as Woestman and Snyder disclose determining whether
a hybrid vehicle enters a steep grade by monitoring and adjusting a power
parameter, there is no disclosure of comparing a power parameter to a
vehicle performance parameter in any of the references or in the combined
teachings of the references. Therefore, we will not sustain this rejection on
this basis. We additionally note that we agree with Appellants that since
Meloche discloses determining whether a high powered diesel engine enters
a steep grade, there is no disclosure in the relied on portion of this reference
that teaches anything about determining whether a hybrid vehicle enters a
steep grade.
In view of the foregoing, we will not sustain the Examiner’s rejection
of claim 1 and claims 2—11 dependent therefrom. We will also not sustain
this rejection as it is directed to the remaining claims because claim 12, from
which the remaining claims depend, also requires that a determination is
made as to whether a hybrid vehicle enters a steep grade based on a
comparison of the primary power source parameter and the vehicle
performance parameter.
4
Appeal 2016-000131
Application 12/714,966
DECISION
The decision of the Examiner is reversed.
ORDER
REVERSED
5