Guidelines for revision of the IPC

Project: C477
IPC: B60W 20/00
08 Oct 2015
Annex 24 Comments EP 17-Sep-15
Annex 26 Comments US 28-Sep-15
JP thanks EP and US for posting comments. JP would like to make following
comments concerning Annex 24 and 26.
Annex 24 EP comments
(1) EP commented that our proposal “may be too restricted”. According to the EP
comments, scope of the term “MPC” used in the B60W20/11 title seems to be broader
than the scope of the term “Model Predictive Control” used in the ordinary control
engineering for us. If our understanding is correct, the current “Glossary of terms” allows to
allocate B60W20/11 on the documents, regardless of whether the documents referred to
“Receding Horizon Control” or not. And it seems to allocate B60W20/11, if the control
system includes any kind of models for predicting status of sub-units on a vehicle as the
technical feature of the invention. (This understanding is just based on a result of our
screening of EP documents which are classified in CPC B60W20/102, and therefore, JP
appreciates any comments from EP on our speculation.)
(2) Considering the fact that we do not have much time left, any further revision may be
difficult. But still, in B60W 20/11, JP is concerned that descriptions provided by the current
“Definition statement” and “Glossary of terms” is unclear as a guidance in determining
what is covered by B60W 20/11 and what is not. (For example, it is highly doubtful if a
classifier, without knowing the current IEF discussion, reads the Definition statement and
could clearly understand that “conventional technology” is excluded as shown in Annex 18.
Furthermore, as in the case (1), if the meaning of the term “MPC” in the context of
B60W20/11 is broader than the meaning given in the ordinary control engineering, the
definition should be fully stated so.)
Annex 26 US comments
JP supports the US comment. JP understands that EP comment (“an empty fuel tank is
not a system failure”) follows the strict interpretation of the word “failure”. However, for
search usefulness, we should not interpret the word “failure” strictly; but rather we should
gather documents, which disclose phenomenon similar or equivalent to “failure” in hybrid
vehicles, i.e. phenomenon of unusual conditions, in B60W20/50. To clarify this, JP also
supports the following US comment: “Further examples of other failures such as engine,
motor or battery failure would be useful in the definition”.
S. Yazawa