DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the prior art rejections of claims 11-17 and 19-21 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the arguments
[e.g., while the examiner agrees with applicant’s argument that the previously cited prior art reference US 20150019058 A1 (Georgiev) only discusses an averaging of braking data over time, not establishing a temporal frequency distribution of the braking data, an updated search performed in view of applicant’s amendments revealed new prior art that clearly teaches the establishing of a temporal frequency distribution of braking data as provided per the independent claims];
[e.g., the newly cited prior art reference US 20100209891 A1 (Lin) teaches the aforementioned subject matter pertaining to the establishing of a temporal frequency distribution of braking data, such as a brake pedal rate, as at least part of a piece of a driver-characterizing braking and/or driving style information (see at least Fig. 18, 20-21 and abstract)]. See detailed rejection below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claims 11-12, 14-15, 17 and 19-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over US 20100209891 A1 (Lin) in view of US 20170232914 A1 (Brenner).
Regarding claims 11 and 20, Lin (Figures 18, 20-21) teaches a sensor and/or control device for a vehicle (332) [and commensurate method] for creating a piece of driver-characterizing braking and/or driving style information for a driver of the vehicle (see Fig. 18, 20 in conjunction with abstract and paragraphs [0062]-[0064], [0156], [0175]), comprising:
an electronics unit (330, 360) configured to read out and/or establish, during at least a single actuation of a brake actuation element [e.g., brake pedal] of the vehicle by a driver of the vehicle, an adjustment speed of the brake actuation element and/or an adjustment acceleration of the brake actuation element, based on at least one signal (or command input) provided to the electronics unit (see Fig. 18, 20 in conjunction with abstract and paragraphs [0062]-[0064], [0156], [0175]) [e.g., “Driver control command inputs including steering, braking and throttle controls are processed by a driver input data processor 346”]; [e.g., “the processor classifies driver skill by performing frequency analysis on the brake pedal rate using a discrete Fourier transform to find a frequency component of the brake pedal rate”]; [e.g., the disclosed brake pedal rate defining and/or encompassing either one or both of the adjustment speed of the brake pedal and the adjustment acceleration (or rate of change) of the brake pedal], and
the electronics unit also being configured to establish a temporal frequency distribution of: adjustment speeds of the brake actuation element and/or adjustment accelerations of the brake actuation element, as at least part of a piece of a driver-characterizing braking and/or driving style information (see Fig. 18, 20-21 in conjunction with abstract and paragraphs [0062]-[0064], [0156], [0175]-[0177], [0185]-[0187]) [e.g., “the processor classifies driver skill by performing frequency analysis on the brake pedal rate using a discrete Fourier transform to find a frequency component of the brake pedal rate”]; [e.g., “the driver command inputs at box 366 from the driver input data processor 346 are sent to a frequency spectrum analysis processor 368. The inputs are converted to the frequency domain by the frequency spectrum analysis processors 364 and 368, which are then sent to a frequency content discrepancy analysis processor 370 to determine the difference therebetween”]; [e.g., “The skill characterization processor then classifies the driver's driving skill based on the brake pedal rate”].
Lin fails to expressly teach wherein the electronics unit is configured to provide the established piece of driver-characterizing braking and/or driving style information to a vehicle-to-vehicle communication system of the vehicle for transmission to a further vehicle.
However, Brenner (Figures 1-6) teaches an analogous system/control device/method for a vehicle (110) (see Fig. 1 in conjunction with paragraph [0003]), and wherein the corresponding electronics unit [e.g., vehicle control module] is configured to provide any/all relevant and/or desired vehicle settings and/or driving style information [e.g., encompassing driver-characterized braking and/or driving style information] to a vehicle-to-vehicle communication system (130, 140) of the vehicle for transmission to a further vehicle (120) (see Fig. 1-6 in conjunction with paragraphs [0003]-[0004], [0035]-[0036], [0084]) [e.g., see the vehicle control module(s) illustrated/indicated per Fig. 2A-2B]; [e.g., “the vehicle driver cloud database 140 may store vehicle setting data that may be specific to a particular driver, specific to a particular vehicle, or may be abstract vehicle setting values associated with a profile of a particular driver. The vehicle driver cloud database 140 may maintain vehicle setting data categorized by driver or by vehicle make and model”]; [e.g., “In general, the vehicle settings may include any driver or passenger-configurable option or setting in a vehicle”].
As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art and/or merely involve routine skill in the art to have wherein the electronics unit is further configured to provide the established piece of driver-characterized braking and/or driving style information to a vehicle-to-vehicle communication system of the vehicle for transmission to a further vehicle as a modification in the system/control device/method per Lin [e.g., such that the driver assistance system/settings (described per paragraphs [0002], [0062]-[0064] of Lin) based on classifying/characterizing driver skill/driving characteristics are readily available and/or can be efficiently utilized in one or more other vehicles if/when necessary], as suggested by Brenner, in order to remove the need for making adjustment(s) to the relevant vehicle setting values of other vehicles that the user or driver will (or may) potentially utilize, and thereby improve control over the vehicle riding experience and/or reduce inconvenience(s) associated with having to always adjust the relevant vehicle setting values of the other vehicles [e.g., via implementing and/or incorporating the teachings per Brenner, when a user or driver approaches or gets into another vehicle (e.g., a loaner vehicle, a rental vehicle, a new vehicle, etc.), their specifically adapted drive/driver assistance and/or vehicle settings (including braking settings if desired) will already be set in advance, thereby reducing wasted time/productivity/efficiency, enhancing driver comfort/feel, etc. (implicit in view of basic engineering logic)]; [e.g., via implementing and/or incorporating the teachings per Brenner, one of ordinary skill in the art can efficiently transfer the corresponding driver-characterizing braking and/or driving style information established per Lin from one vehicle to another (e.g., a loaner vehicle, a rental vehicle, a new vehicle, etc.), thereby reducing wasted time/productivity/efficiency, enhancing driver comfort/feel, etc. (implicit in view of basic engineering logic)] (see Fig. 1 in conjunction with paragraphs [0004], [0084]).
Additionally (or alternatively) note that the aforementioned modification constitutes the application and/or combination of well-known analogous prior art elements/techniques in such a way as to yield highly predictable results [e.g., in consideration that Lin and Brenner are both relevant to at least the same general field(s) of endeavor concerning vehicle control systems, techniques for adapting and/or establishing vehicle settings based on driver profiles, styles and/or preferences, etc., there would be no unexpected result(s)/effect(s) yielded via accordingly implementing the aforementioned feature(s)/functionality per Brenner into the system/control device per Lin, and similarly, one of ordinary skill in the art can readily select from various well-known configurations based on certain factors concerning the particular application (e.g., convenience considerations, cost considerations, etc.), without exercising inventive skill].
Regarding claims 19 and 21, Lin (Figures 18, 20-21) teaches a vehicle device [e.g., adaptive vehicle control system and/or driver assistance system, etc.] for the vehicle for interacting with the sensor and/or control device [and commensurate method] discussed regarding claims 11 and 20 (see Fig. 18, 20-21 in conjunction with abstract and paragraphs [0002], [0004], [0062]-[0064], [0156], [0175]-[0177], [0185]-[0187]) [e.g., “the present invention shows how driving skill can be characterized based on the driver's control input and vehicle motion during various vehicle maneuvers. The driving skill recognition provides an assessment of a driver's driving skill, which can be incorporated in various vehicle control and driver assistance systems”].
Lin further teaches (at least implicitly) and/or suggests wherein the electronics unit is also configured to, taking the established piece of driver-characterized braking and/or driving style information into account, activate (or utilize) the vehicle device of the vehicle and/or establish a driver-specific setpoint operating mode of the vehicle device of the vehicle, the vehicle device being (or configurable as) a cruise control system and/or an automatic drive control system (see Fig. 18, 20-21 in conjunction with abstract and paragraphs [0002], [0004], [0062]-[0064], [0156], [0175]-[0177], [0185]-[0187]) [e.g., “This invention relates generally to an adaptive vehicle control system that provides driver skill recognition and, more particularly, to an adaptive vehicle control system that provides driver assistance by classifying driving skill based on stop-and-go driving behavior”]; [e.g., “Driver assistance systems and vehicle active safety systems are becoming an integral part of vehicle design and development as an attempt to reduce driving stress and enhance vehicle/roadway safety. For example, adaptive cruise control (ACC) systems are known to relieve drivers from routine longitudinal vehicle control by keeping the vehicle a safe distance away from a preceding vehicle”]; [e.g., “The driving skill recognition provides an assessment of a driver's driving skill, which can be incorporated in various vehicle control and driver assistance systems”]; [e.g., the aforementioned emphasized incorporation corresponding to and/or encompassing the claimed activation of the vehicle device].
Lin fails to expressly teach wherein the electronics unit is configured to provide the established piece of driver-characterizing braking and/or driving style information to a vehicle-to-vehicle communication system of the vehicle for transmission to a further vehicle.
However, Brenner (Figures 1-6) teaches an analogous system/control device/method for a vehicle (110) (see Fig. 1 in conjunction with paragraph [0003]), and wherein the corresponding electronics unit [e.g., vehicle control module] is configured to provide any/all relevant and/or desired vehicle settings and/or driving style information [e.g., encompassing driver-characterized braking and/or driving style information] to a vehicle-to-vehicle communication system (130, 140) of the vehicle for transmission to a further vehicle (120) (see Fig. 1-6 in conjunction with paragraphs [0003]-[0004], [0035]-[0036], [0084]) [e.g., see the vehicle control module(s) illustrated/indicated per Fig. 2A-2B]; [e.g., “the vehicle driver cloud database 140 may store vehicle setting data that may be specific to a particular driver, specific to a particular vehicle, or may be abstract vehicle setting values associated with a profile of a particular driver. The vehicle driver cloud database 140 may maintain vehicle setting data categorized by driver or by vehicle make and model”]; [e.g., “In general, the vehicle settings may include any driver or passenger-configurable option or setting in a vehicle”]; see motivation(s)/rationale(s) as discussed regarding claims 11 and 20.
Regarding claim 12, Lin in view of Brenner teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above. Lin fails to expressly teach wherein the electronics unit is further configured to store the established piece of driver-characterizing braking and/or driving style information on at least one mobile device predefined for the sensor and/or control device.
However, Brenner (Figures 1-6) teaches an analogous system/control device/method for a vehicle (110) (see Fig. 1 in conjunction with paragraph [0003]), and wherein the corresponding electronics unit [e.g., vehicle control module] is configured to provide any/all relevant and/or desired vehicle settings and/or driving style information [e.g., encompassing driver-characterized braking and/or driving style information] to a vehicle-to-vehicle communication system (130, 140) of the vehicle for transmission to a further vehicle (120), and wherein said vehicle settings and/or driving style information may be transmitted from a vehicle control module of the vehicle and stored on a mobile (or user) device (115) predefined for the sensor and/or control device (see Fig. 1-6 in conjunction with paragraphs [0003]-[0004], [0035]-[0036], [0052]-[0053], [0084]) [e.g., see the vehicle control module(s) illustrated/indicated per Fig. 2A-2B]; [e.g., “the vehicle driver cloud database 140 may store vehicle setting data that may be specific to a particular driver, specific to a particular vehicle, or may be abstract vehicle setting values associated with a profile of a particular driver. The vehicle driver cloud database 140 may maintain vehicle setting data categorized by driver or by vehicle make and model”]; [e.g., “In general, the vehicle settings may include any driver or passenger-configurable option or setting in a vehicle”]; [e.g., “a driver or user may elect to download a portable vehicle settings application onto user device 115”]; [e.g., downloading entails storing a copy of one or more files on the user device]; [e.g., “The information regarding one or more vehicles may be stored in the user device 115 or a driver profile in the vehicle driver cloud database 140”]; see motivation(s)/rationale(s) as discussed regarding claims 11 and 20.
Regarding claim 14, Lin in view of Brenner teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above. Lin further teaches (at least implicitly) and/or suggests wherein the electronics unit is also configured to, taking the established piece of driver-characterized braking and/or driving style information into account, activate (or utilize) at least one vehicle device [e.g., adaptive vehicle control system and/or driver assistance system, etc.] of the vehicle and/or establish a driver-specific setpoint operating mode of the at least one vehicle device of the vehicle, the vehicle device being (or configurable as) a cruise control system and/or an automatic drive control system (see Fig. 18, 20-21 in conjunction with abstract and paragraphs [0002], [0004], [0062]-[0064], [0156], [0175]-[0177], [0185]-[0187]) [e.g., “This invention relates generally to an adaptive vehicle control system that provides driver skill recognition and, more particularly, to an adaptive vehicle control system that provides driver assistance by classifying driving skill based on stop-and-go driving behavior”]; [e.g., “Driver assistance systems and vehicle active safety systems are becoming an integral part of vehicle design and development as an attempt to reduce driving stress and enhance vehicle/roadway safety. For example, adaptive cruise control (ACC) systems are known to relieve drivers from routine longitudinal vehicle control by keeping the vehicle a safe distance away from a preceding vehicle”]; [e.g., “The driving skill recognition provides an assessment of a driver's driving skill, which can be incorporated in various vehicle control and driver assistance systems”]; [e.g., the aforementioned emphasized incorporation corresponding to and/or encompassing the claimed activation of the vehicle device]. Also refer to discussion regarding claims 11 and 20.
Regarding claim 15, Lin in view of Brenner teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above. Lin further teaches (at least implicitly) and/or suggests wherein the electronics unit is also configured to, taking the established piece of driver-characterizing braking and/or driving style information into account, select (or change, adapt, etc.) the driver-specific setpoint operating mode of the at least one vehicle device of the vehicle (see Fig. 18, 20-21 in conjunction with abstract and paragraphs [0002], [0004], [0062]-[0064], [0156], [0175]-[0177], [0185]-[0187]) [e.g., “This invention relates generally to an adaptive vehicle control system that provides driver skill recognition and, more particularly, to an adaptive vehicle control system that provides driver assistance by classifying driving skill based on stop-and-go driving behavior”]; [e.g., “Driver assistance systems and vehicle active safety systems are becoming an integral part of vehicle design and development as an attempt to reduce driving stress and enhance vehicle/roadway safety. For example, adaptive cruise control (ACC) systems are known to relieve drivers from routine longitudinal vehicle control by keeping the vehicle a safe distance away from a preceding vehicle”]; [e.g., “The driving skill recognition provides an assessment of a driver's driving skill, which can be incorporated in various vehicle control and driver assistance systems”]. Also refer to discussion regarding claims 11 and 20.
Lin fails to explicitly or expressly teach wherein the driver-specific setpoint operating mode is selected from at least two operating modes selectable for the at least one vehicle device of the vehicle, and activating and/or programming the at least one vehicle device of the vehicle, taking the driver-specific setpoint operating mode into account, in such a way that a later operating mode of the at least one vehicle device of the vehicle corresponds to the selected driver-specific setpoint operating mode and is after the driver-specific setpoint operating mode.
However, the aforementioned subject matter is obvious in view of the context per Lin, such that Lin suggests that the driving skill recognition that provides an assessment/characterization of a driver’s driving skill, may be incorporated into various vehicle control and driver assistance systems, including adaptive systems, and such that the assessment/characterization may be later updated (or adapted) to take into consideration various external factors that can affect a driver’s driving performance (see Fig. 18, 20-21 in conjunction with abstract and paragraphs [0002], [0004]-[0005], [0062]-[0064], [0130]-[0131]) [e.g., such that the system(s) is/are configurable to be initially adapted based on a driver that has been characterized as a typical driver (e.g., corresponding to a first/initial driver-specific setpoint operating mode), and then later/subsequently adapted based on a driver that has been characterized as a low-skill driver, based on certain and/or changing factors such as traffic conditions, road/environmental conditions, weather conditions, etc. (e.g., corresponding to a later operating mode that is after the first/initial driver-specific setpoint operating mode)]; [e.g., the aforementioned context per Lin constitutes and/or at least suggests a functional equivalent to the claimed feature(s)]. Also refer to discussion regarding claims 11 and 20.
Regarding claim 17, Lin in view of Brenner teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above. Lin further teaches (at least implicitly) and/or suggests wherein the electronics unit is additionally configured to ascertain deviations between a last established piece of driver-characterizing braking and/or driving style information and a previously established piece of driver-characterizing braking and/or driving style information (see Fig. 5, 18, 20-21 in conjunction with abstract and paragraphs [0002], [0004]-[0005], [0062]-[0064], [0087], [0130]-[0131]) [e.g., further note the recitation “a deviation of the skill exhibited in the current trip from that in the profile history may imply a change in driver state”, such that the last established piece of driver-characterizing braking and/or driving style information is configured to be updated, adapted, changed, etc. based on the aforementioned deviation(s)]; [e.g., the electronics unit may update, adapt, change, etc. the driver-characterizing braking and/or driving style information based on a previously established profile history compared to a current or last trip]. Also refer to discussion regarding claims 11 and 20.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over US 20100209891 A1 (Lin) in view of US 20170232914 A1 (Brenner) in further view of US 7694555 B2 (Howell).
Regarding claim 13, Lin in view of Brenner teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above. Lin in view of Brenner fails to expressly teach wherein the electronics unit is additionally configured to, taking into account the established piece of driver-characterization braking and/or driving style information into account, create a wear prognosis, and/or a damage prognosis and/or a service life prognosis for at least one vehicle device of the vehicle.
However, Howell (Figures 1-4) teaches an analogous braking system/device (see title, abstract), and wherein the provision(s) of utilizing driver brake modeling to create a service life prognosis for the brakes [e.g., vehicle device] of the vehicle is/are well-known in at least the same general field(s) of endeavor concerning braking systems, driver brake modeling systems/techniques, etc. (see Fig. 1-4 in conjunction with column 1, lines 49-54, column 2, lines 25-29 and column 4, lines 44-57) [e.g., “The method employs fusion of sensors, if used, and driver brake modeling to predict the vehicle brake pad life”]; [e.g., “The present invention proposes using sensor fusion, driver braking information and driver brake models to predict or estimate vehicle brake pad thickness, and provide an indication of remaining brake pad life, such as in remaining miles or percentage of brake pad thickness, to the vehicle operator”]; [e.g., “An estimate of the remaining vehicle mileage can be obtained in a number of ways, such as from driver braking characteristics”].
As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art and/or merely involve routine skill in the art to additionally have the electronics unit per Lin configured to, taking into account the established piece of driver-characterization braking and/or driving style information into account, create a wear prognosis, and/or a damage prognosis and/or a service life prognosis for the at least one vehicle device of the vehicle as a modification, as suggested by Howell, in order to provide the driver of the vehicle with a continuous indication of remaining brake pad life, thereby enabling the driver to better know (or be better informed) if the brake pad(s) is/are going to last for a particular trip (see column 1, lines 13-33), and/or achieve an extra degree of safety [e.g., for the occupants of the vehicle and surrounding vehicles, such that the driver can be assured that the brakes won’t fail while driving/making a trip], such that the driver will be less susceptible to starting a trip via which the brake pad(s) may (or will) fail while driving and/or able to replace the brake pad(s) in a reliable manner prior to starting a trip via which the brake pad(s) may (or will) fail while driving (implicit in view of basic engineering logic).
Additionally (or alternatively) note that the aforementioned modification constitutes the application and/or combination of well-known analogous prior art elements/techniques in such a way as to yield highly predictable results [e.g., in consideration that Lin and Howell are both relevant to at least the same general field(s) of endeavor concerning braking systems, driver brake modeling systems/techniques, etc., there would be no unexpected result(s)/effect(s) yielded via accordingly implementing and/or utilizing the teachings per Howell in the system(s)/device(s) per Lin to achieve the same technical effect(s) discussed above, and similarly, one of ordinary skill in the art can readily select from various well-known configurations based on certain factors concerning the particular application (e.g., cost considerations, driver safety considerations, maintenance considerations, etc.), without exercising inventive skill].
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over US 20100209891 A1 (Lin) in view of US 20170232914 A1 (Brenner) in further view of US 20150019058 A1 (Georgiev).
Regarding claim 16, Lin in view of Brenner teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above. Lin further teaches (at least implicitly) and/or suggests wherein the electronics unit is also configured to, taking the established piece of driver-characterizing braking and/or driving style information into account, select (or change, adapt, etc.) the driver-specific setpoint operating mode of the at least one vehicle device of the vehicle (see Fig. 18, 20-21 in conjunction with abstract and paragraphs [0002], [0004], [0062]-[0064], [0156], [0175]-[0177], [0185]-[0187]) [e.g., “This invention relates generally to an adaptive vehicle control system that provides driver skill recognition and, more particularly, to an adaptive vehicle control system that provides driver assistance by classifying driving skill based on stop-and-go driving behavior”]; [e.g., “Driver assistance systems and vehicle active safety systems are becoming an integral part of vehicle design and development as an attempt to reduce driving stress and enhance vehicle/roadway safety. For example, adaptive cruise control (ACC) systems are known to relieve drivers from routine longitudinal vehicle control by keeping the vehicle a safe distance away from a preceding vehicle”]; [e.g., “The driving skill recognition provides an assessment of a driver's driving skill, which can be incorporated in various vehicle control and driver assistance systems”]. Also refer to discussion regarding claims 11 and 20.
Lin fails to explicitly or expressly teach wherein the electronics unit is additionally configured to, taking the established piece of driver-specific braking style and/or driving style information into account, preselect the driver-specific setpoint operating mode from at least two operating modes selectable for the at least one vehicle device of the vehicle, and when at least two operating modes are preselected for the at least one vehicle device, prompting the driver via at least one of a display device, a sound emitting device, and/or a mobile device of the driver, to select the driver-specific setpoint operating mode of the at least one vehicle device of the vehicle from the preselected operating modes by actuating an input element of the vehicle or the mobile device of the driver, and activating and/or programming the at least one vehicle device of the vehicle, taking the driver-specific setpoint operating mode into account, in such a way that a later operating mode of the at least one vehicle device of the vehicle corresponds to the selected driver-specific setpoint operating mode from the preselected operating modes and is after the driver-specific setpoint operating mode.
However, Georgiev teaches an analogous sensor and/or control device [and commensurate method] for a vehicle (10) for creating a piece of driver-characterizing braking and/or driving style information for a driver of the vehicle (see Fig. 1-5 in conjunction with abstract and paragraph [0105]) [e.g., “The invention relates to a self-learning regenerative control system that adapts to the user's driving style”]; [e.g., the driver-specific setpoint operating mode of the vehicle device being with respect to the self-learning functionality that adapts to the user’s driving style, such that regenerative braking and/or friction braking is applied accordingly as a function of the user’s driving style], and suggests wherein the driver can be prompted and/or presented the choice of at least two operating modes, via at least one display device [e.g., a user operated control on the dashboard], for the at least one vehicle device [e.g., an automatically controlled braking system/device/mechanism (or a driver assistance system for braking)] of the vehicle, by actuating an input element of the vehicle [e.g., utilizing the user operated control on the dashboard], and such that a later operating mode of at least the vehicle device of the vehicle corresponds to the selected driver-specific setpoint operating mode (see Fig. 1-5 in conjunction with paragraph [0117]) [e.g., “For users that easily adapt to a varying degree of regenerative braking, more aggressive adjustments can be made without creating uncomfortable driving conditions. Since the degree of adjustment is a matter of preference, the vehicle may be provided with a user operated control that indicates if the driver desires the regenerative braking adjustment function to operate and in the affirmative the degree of aggressiveness of the adjustability. The user operated control can be any type of control on the dashboard of the vehicle allowing to specify if the function is active or not active and if active the range of aggressiveness”]; [e.g., the driver/user being prompted to and/or able to select or specify active or inactive braking adjustment(s) corresponding to a first and/or initial operating mode, and being able to select or specify a range of aggressiveness of the braking adjustment(s) corresponding to a second and/or later operating mode]; [e.g., the aforementioned user operated control that indicates a desire to operate the braking adjustment function(s) implies and/or suggests that the driver can accordingly select, adjust, or view settings/modes related to the braking function(s)].
As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art and/or merely involve routine skill in the art to accordingly implement the aforementioned technical feature(s) and/or functionality into the invention(s) per Lin as a modification [e.g., further providing a user operated control or display on the dashboard of the vehicle that enables the driver/user to be able to select from, adjust, and/or view the previously established driver-specific settings/modes related to the adaptation(s)/adjustment(s) of the driver assistance and/or braking system(s)], as suggested by Georgiev, in order to increase the agency and/or engagement of (or empower) the driver/user, via allowing the driver/user to actively (or further) control the vehicle settings/modes even when one or more driver assistance systems are being generally relied upon, and thereby ensure that the optimal vehicle settings/modes are selected [e.g., as opposed to relying solely on the driver assistance systems to select the vehicle settings/modes, where the possibility exists for an undesired or less than optimal vehicle setting/mode may be selected] (implicit in view of basic engineering logic).
Additionally (or alternatively) note that the aforementioned modification constitutes the application and/or combination of well-known analogous prior art elements/techniques in such a way as to yield highly predictable results [e.g., in consideration that Lin and Georgiev are both relevant to at least the same general field(s) of endeavor concerning braking systems, driver brake modeling systems/techniques, etc., there would be no unexpected result(s)/effect(s) yielded via accordingly implementing and/or utilizing the teachings per Georgiev in the system(s)/device(s) per Lin to achieve the same technical effect(s) discussed above, and similarly, one of ordinary skill in the art can readily select from various well-known configurations based on certain factors concerning the particular application (e.g., cost considerations, driver safety considerations, convenience considerations, etc.), without exercising inventive skill].
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANTHONY D TAYLOR JR whose telephone number is (469)295-9192. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9a-5p (central time).
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.
/ANTHONY DONALD TAYLOR JR./Examiner, Art Unit 3747
/KURT PHILIP LIETHEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3747