Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/784,165

METHOD FOR SIGNALLING VITAL PARAMETERS AND/OR VITAL PARAMETER PATTERNS IN A VEHICLE

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Jun 10, 2022
Examiner
MANCINI, EVAN THOMAS
Art Unit
2855
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Mercedes-Benz Group AG
OA Round
4 (Final)
51%
Grant Probability
Moderate
5-6
OA Rounds
3y 7m
To Grant
90%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 51% of resolved cases
51%
Career Allow Rate
20 granted / 39 resolved
-16.7% vs TC avg
Strong +39% interview lift
Without
With
+38.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 7m
Avg Prosecution
30 currently pending
Career history
69
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.6%
-37.4% vs TC avg
§103
44.5%
+4.5% vs TC avg
§102
34.7%
-5.3% vs TC avg
§112
17.9%
-22.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 39 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . Response to Amendment The amendment filed December 15th, 2025 has been entered. Claims 11, 13,-14, and 16-20 remain pending in the application. Response to Arguments Applicant’s amendments to claim 1 has overcome the rejection under 35 USC § 112(b) previously set forth in the Non-Final Office Action mailed November 28th, 2025. Applicant’s arguments with respect to the rejection of claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 have been considered but are moot because the limitations of the claims have amended to add new issues. New grounds of rejection have been issued. Claim Objections Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 1 lines 4 and 10 “adjustable lumber support” contains a typographical error and should read “adjustable lumbar support” in all instances. Claim 1 lines 10-11 recites “[…] back and forth in a dorsal-ventral in a decreasing frequency” but should read “[…] back and forth in a dorsal-ventral direction in a decreasing frequency […]” For the purposes of examination, the lines are interpreted to recite “[…] back and forth in a dorsal-ventral direction in a decreasing frequency […]” Appropriate correction is required. 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, 13, and 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Honda Motor Co. (WO 2015200224 A2) further in view of Parades (Paredes, Pablo E., et al. “Just Breathe: In-Car Interventions for Guided Slow Breathing.” Proceedings of the ACM on Interactive, Mobile, Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies, vol. 2, no. 1, 26 Mar. 2018, pp. 1–23, https://doi.org/10.1145/3191760). Regarding Claim 11: Honda discloses a method (in at least the abstract, the disclosure, figures 70-75, and the claims), comprising: measuring a vital parameter or vital parameter pattern of a vehicle occupant in a vehicle seat of a vehicle (claim 1 and par. 479: “the motor vehicle can include provisions for assessing one or more states of a driver and automatically adjusting the operation of one or more vehicle systems in response to the one or more driver states or one or more levels of the driver states”. See also par.’s 633-634: “the driver state can be number indicating a pattern and/or frequency of monitoring information over a period of time”), wherein the vehicle seat includes at least one massage element or an adjustable lumbar support (fig.’s 70-72 and par.’s 232, 715, and 117: in response to measured biological data such as breathing rate, the vehicle response system 188 can operate the vehicle seat 168 to shake, vibrate, or massage (thereby creating a shift the dorsal-ventral direction) in order to alert or wake the driver 102. NOTE: One of ordinary skill in the art would understand that shaking, vibrating, or massaging of vehicle seat 168 results in a shift in the dorsal-ventral direction.); determining, based on the measuring, that the vehicle occupant is in a stress state (par. 202: “The "state" of the biological being or "driver state," as used herein, refers to a measurement of a state of the biological being and/or a state of the environment surrounding (e.g., a vehicle) the biological being. A driver state or alternatively a "being state" can be one or more of alert, vigilant, drowsy, inattentive, distracted, stressed, intoxicated, other generally impaired states […]”); and non-verbally signaling the vehicle occupant, a course of inspiration and expiration according to a recommended breathing frequency (fig.’s 70-72 and par. 715: providing tactile stimuli to alert drowsy driver. See also par. 285: breathing rate is monitored as biological data, fig. 1B and par. 296: presentation interface 506 displays biological data to user, and par. 365: “The respiratory monitoring system 312 could include any devices or systems for monitoring the respiratory function (e.g. breathing) of a driver. For example, the respiratory monitoring system 312 could include sensors disposed in a seat for detecting when a driver inhales and exhales.”), by shifting the at least on massage element or the adjustable lumber support back and forth in a dorsal-ventral (fig.’s 70-72 and par.’s 232, 715, and 117: in response to measured biological data such as breathing rate, the vehicle response system 188 can operate the vehicle seat 168 to shake, vibrate, or massage (thereby creating a shift the dorsal-ventral direction) in order to alert or wake the driver 102. NOTE: One of ordinary skill in the art would understand that shaking, vibrating, or massaging of vehicle seat 168 results in a shift in the dorsal-ventral direction.). Honda does not explicitly disclose wherein a course of recommended inspiration and expiration is signaled by shifting the at least on massage element or the adjustable lumber support in a decreasing frequency over time until the vehicle occupant’s breathing frequency is the same as the breathing frequency. Parades discloses an analogous method (fig.’s 1-2 and sections 3 and 3.1: haptic guidance system to reduce drivers’ breathing rate and provide a sustained post-intervention effect without affecting driving safety.) comprising non-verbally signaling the vehicle occupant, a course of a recommended inspiration and a recommended expiration according to a recommended breathing frequency (Fig. 2 and section 3: “To explore breathing-based interventions for stress management, we developed two systems that continuously deliver feedback and can be used inside a car. Both methods prompt drivers to inhale/exhale in a manner that achieves a slower breathing rate, with our haptic-based guidance using vibrations and our voice-based guidance providing spoken audio commands.” See also section 3.1: “Our haptic guidance system is composed of forty-one linear resonant actuators […] the system provides a continuous vibration pattern that lasts for the duration of one breathing cycle (inspiration and expiration)”) by shifting the at least one massage element or the adjustable lumber support back and forth in a dorsal-ventral (Table 1 and Section 3.1: “[…] we tested one pattern wherein the motors begin vibrating from the middle of the seat and then move outwards, like an accordion. Other patterns included the successive vibration of rows going up and down to simulate counting up and down, as well as a spiral with vibrations emanating in spiraling circles. We also tested activating individual vibrotactile motors, columns, and rows in order to examine whether we could deliver feedback to particular locations on the back in a way that would correspond to the physical movements associated with deep breathing (e.g., spine extension, rib lifting, torso compression, etc.)”) in a decreasing frequency over time until the vehicle occupant's breathing frequency is same as the breathing frequency (See fig.’s 6-7 and section 5-5.1: “Altogether, our results indicate that both haptic and voice guidance can successfully reduce breathing rate and sustain its effects regardless of driving environment, guidance modality or activation.”). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for Honda’s at least one massage element or adjustable lumbar support to, as taught by Parades, signal a course of recommended inspiration and expiration by shifting in a decreasing frequency over time until the vehicle occupant’s breathing frequency is the same as the breathing frequency. Thereby, the method is able to provide enhanced, personalized just-in-time stress management interventions to promote slow breathing and improve overall driver alertness and engagement (Parades section 2.1.3 and sections 2.2-2.3). Regarding Claim 13: Honda in view of Parades discloses the method of claim 11, further disclosing wherein the measured vital parameter or vital parameter pattern is compared to a reference vital parameter or a reference vital parameter pattern typical of a relaxed state, wherein a degree of accordance between the measured vital parameter or the measured vital parameter pattern and the reference vital parameter or the reference vital parameter pattern typical of a relaxed state is non- verbally signaled to the vehicle occupant by the at least one functional element in a visual, audible, or haptical manner (par. 640: parameter thresholds can be predetermined and/or modified based on the identity of the driver and characteristics of the identified driver, par. 729: the activation threshold could vary according to the degree of drowsiness and par. 793: the degree to which the non-verbal signal element or number of non-verbal signal elements activate to alert the driver corresponds to the indexed level of driver drowsiness detected.). Regarding Claim 14: Honda in view of Parades discloses the method of claim 13, further disclosing wherein the measured vital parameter or vital parameter pattern is a heart rate variability determined from a heart rate of the vehicle occupant and the heart rate variability is compared to a reference heart rate variability typical of a relaxed state (par. 638: response system 188 could detect a driver state for a driver by analyzing heart information, breathing rate information, brain information, perspiration information, as well as any other kinds of autonomic information, par. 640: parameter thresholds can be predetermined and/or modified based on the identity of the driver and characteristics of the identified driver. See also fig. 9A and par.’s 320-322: heart rate variability analyzed using EKG and cardiac waveform 902). Regarding Claim 16: Honda in view of Parades discloses the method of claim 13, further disclosing wherein the non-verbal signaling further comprises reproducing a quadrophonic sound signal by a plurality of loudspeakers arranged in the vehicle interior and configured for quadrophonic sound reproduction (fig.’s 70-72 and par.’s 715-717: response system 188 may alert drowsy driver via audio played through speakers 7004). The embodiment wherein sound signal is quadrophonic is an obvious variant of the embodiment disclosed by Honda, wherein the sound signal is generated by a plurality of speakers. Applicant does not show the criticality of the sound signal explicitly being quadrophonic as opposed to being generated from a number of speaker elements. On page 14 paragraph 0069 of the specification filed 8/31/2022, applicant discloses that alternatives, modifications, and variations will be apparent without further limiting the scope of the claims. Regarding Claim 17: Honda in view of Parades discloses the method of claim 13, further disclosing wherein the non-verbal signaling further comprises changing a light intensity or a light color of at least one interior light arranged in an interior of the vehicle (fig.’s 70-72 and par.’s 715-717: response system 188 may alert drowsy driver via warning displayed on brightly-lit display screen 7002). Regarding Claim 18: Honda in view of Parades discloses the method of claim 13, further disclosing wherein the non-verbal signaling further comprises adjusting an air-conditioning system arranged in the vehicle having an air outlet opening arranged in an interior of the vehicle by changing a temperature or volume of an air flow emitted by the air-conditioning system via the air outlet opening (fig. 69 and par.’s 713-714: response system 188 may alert drowsy driver by automatically adjusting the cabin temperature. The response system 188 can lower the cabin temperature by engaging a fan or air-conditioner). Regarding Claim 19: Honda in view of Parades discloses the method of claim 13, further disclosing wherein the non-verbal signaling further comprises vibrating a steering wheel arranged in an interior of the vehicle (fig.’s 70-72 and par.’s 715-717: response system 188 may alert drowsy driver via vibrating vehicle steering wheel 134). Regarding Claim 20: Honda in view of Parades discloses the method of claim 13, further disclosing wherein the non-verbal signaling further comprises changing a belt tension or a belt setting of at least one seatbelt in an interior of the vehicle in terms of belt tension or belt position (fig.’s 73-74 and par. 719: response system 188 can include provisions for controlling a seat belt system to help wake a driver. In some cases, a response system can control an electronic pretensioning system for a seat belt to provide a warning pulse to a driver). Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure includes: DECKE (DE 102016207447 A1) discloses certain elements of claims 11, 13, and 16-20. Zhao (US 20180178808 A1) discloses certain elements of claims 11, 13, and 16-20. Welles (US 20130302760 A1) discloses certain elements of claims 11, 13, and 16-20. Glaser (US 20180244288 A1) discloses certain elements of claims 11, 13, and 16-20. Dobler (DE 10322458 A1) discloses certain elements of claims 11, 13, and 16-20. THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EVAN MANCINI whose telephone number is (703)756-5796. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8AM-5PM. 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, KRISTINA DEHERRERA can be reached at (303)297-4237. 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. /EVAN MANCINI/Examiner, Art Unit 2855 /KRISTINA M DEHERRERA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2855 2/25/26
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 10, 2022
Application Filed
Jan 24, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Apr 07, 2025
Response Filed
May 15, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Jun 04, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Aug 27, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Aug 27, 2025
Notice of Allowance
Sep 16, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Nov 20, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Dec 15, 2025
Response Filed
Feb 24, 2026
Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601611
POSITION-INDICATING DEVICE FOR A SUPPORT ELEMENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12596037
THERMOCHROMIC PELLET FOR THERMOCHROMIC INDICATOR, THERMOCHROMIC INDICATOR, AND ASSOCIATED ELECTRICAL UNIT AND ELECTRICAL SWITCHBOARD
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12594878
TURN SIGNAL SWITCH DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12568954
DEVICE FOR CONTROLLING UNWANTED WATER-FOWL
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12553845
HOLDER TEMPERATURE DETECTION METHOD, HOLDER MONITORING METHOD AND SUBSTRATE PROCESSING APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

5-6
Expected OA Rounds
51%
Grant Probability
90%
With Interview (+38.6%)
3y 7m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 39 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month