DOOR OPENING AND CLOSING APPARATUS

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 . Status of Claims Applicant’s Amendment and Remarks filed 07/06/2026. Claim 1 was amended. Claim 7 was newly added. Claim 5 was canceled. Claims 1, 2, 6, and 7 are currently pending examination. Response to Arguments In regards to the previous rejection of claims 1, 2, 5, and 6 under 35 U.S.C. § 103: Applicant argues that the prior art does not explicitly disclose the limitations “a first detector configured to repeatedly detect a distance to a first detection object including a moving object present in a first detection range, the first detection range being set on a side of the vehicle body” and “a second detector configured to repeatedly detect a distance to a second detection object including the moving object present in a second detection range, the second detection range being set on the same side of the vehicle body on a front side of the first detection range”. Applicant further argues on pages 6–7 of the Remarks, “As clearly explained in the Nara reference, the door control device 10 includes the single, solitary detector (detection unit/ detection sensor) 12 (see, for example, Abstract and paragraph [0011]), and so the function of the control device 10 – which function the Examiner asserts somehow forms a second detector - is actually the same detector 12 identified by the Examiner as the claimed "first detector." The Nara reference does not teach or even suggest a first detector and a second detector, as required by claim 1.” Examiner respectfully disagrees. Applicant is reminded claims must be given their broadest reasonable interpretation. Nara is incorporated to disclose both the first detector and the second detector. The second detector is not the door control device 10. It is the second detection sensor of Nara’s two-sensor embodiment. Nara expressly discloses that, in the second embodiment controlling the rear door 5A and the front door 5B, “the detection sensor 12A for the rear door 5A is disposed on the front tire 6 side of the vehicle body 2, and the detection sensor for the front door 5B on the rear tire 7 side of the vehicle body 2. You may arrange 12B.” (see at least Nara, para. [0069]; FIG. 9). Nara’s list of reference signs likewise identifies “12, 12A, 12B ... Detection sensor” (see at least Nara, para. [0076]). Each of the detection sensors 12A, 12B is an ultrasonic distance-measuring sensor that repeatedly measures the distance to an object in its detection range 17, and that detection range extends along the side surface 4 of the vehicle body 2 (see at least Nara, para. [0015], [0020]–[0021], [0024]). Under broadest reasonable interpretation, detection sensor 12A and detection sensor 12B are considered the claimed first detector and second detector.) Applicant further argues on page 7 of the Remarks, “Thus, the Nara reference does not even suggest any detector on a side of the vehicle body, and certainly therefore does not even suggest a first detector and a second detector positioned on the same side of the vehicle body so as to be spaced apart by a gap along a longitudinal direction of the vehicle body. Instead, the primary Nara reference clearly and unequivocally teaches that the solitary detector be located on the bottom of the vehicle in order to achieve the stated objectives of the reference. Any suggested modification of the primary Nara reference in which the single detection unit 12 is duplicated and moved to the side of the vehicle is therefore contrary to the objectives of that reference, and thus clearly would not be obvious to one skilled in the art.” Applicant relies on Nara’s statement, “since the detection unit is disposed at the bottom of the vehicle body, even when the space around the door is small, the distance necessary for detection can be secured” (see Nara, para. [0007]). Examiner respectfully disagrees. Applicant is reminded claims must be given their broadest reasonable interpretation. First, the detection unit does not need to be duplicated: as set forth above, Nara itself discloses two detection sensors 12A, 12B spaced along the length of the vehicle body on the side having the front door 5B and rear door 5A (see at least Nara, para. [0069]; FIG. 9). Second, Nara is not limited to sensing beneath the vehicle. Nara teaches that “the detection range 17 of the detection sensor 12 is configured to extend along the side surface 4 of the vehicle body 2 in which the door 5 to be controlled is disposed” (see at least Nara, para. [0024]). Nara further teaches that “the detection sensors 12 may be respectively disposed on the both side surfaces 4” of the vehicle (see at least Nara, para. [0074]). Third, Examiner is aware that Nara’s preferred embodiments fix the sensor to the bottom 3 of the vehicle body. However, Dhull, not Nara, is incorporated to teach the limitations “wherein the first detector and the second detector are positioned on the same side of the vehicle body so as to be spaced apart by a gap along a longitudinal direction of the vehicle body below the front side door and the rear side door on the same side of the vehicle body” and “wherein the first detector and the second detector are mounted to face outwardly from the same side of the vehicle body so that each of the first detection range and the second detection range projects outwardly from the same side of the vehicle body”. Dhull teaches that “the side facing sensors 116D, 116E (e.g., RADAR, ultrasonic, camera, combinations thereof, and/or other type of sensor), may detect targets at a side of the vehicle 100” and that “the sensing zones 216C of two or more sensors 116D, 116E may intersect at an overlap zone 220” (see at least Dhull, para. [0044] and [0043], respectively; FIG. 2). A reference’s statement of a preferred arrangement and its advantages is not a teaching away unless the reference criticizes, discredits, or otherwise discourages the solution claimed. Nara’s statement in para. [0007] describes benefits of a bottom-mounted unit. It does not criticize or discourage side-mounted sensors, and Nara itself contemplates sensors on the side surfaces 4 (para. [0074]). Mounting Nara’s ultrasonic sensors 12A, 12B to face outwardly from the side of the vehicle body also does not change Nara’s principle of operation. The sensors would still transmit and receive ultrasonic waves, measure the distance to a user beside the doors, and judge the user’s movement from the change in distance (see at least Nara, para. [0015], [0021]–[0022]). Dhull teaches joining outwardly facing side sensors with overlapping sensing zones, and Nara already has two ultrasonic sensors 12A, 12B whose detection ranges extend along the side surface 4 of the vehicle body. It would therefore have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified Nara to position the detectors on the same side of the vehicle body, spaced apart longitudinally below the front and rear side doors and facing outwardly, because “multiple sensors 116A-K may be effectively joined to increase a sensing zone and provide increased sensing coverage” and “These overlapping detection zones may provide redundant sensing, enhanced sensing, and/or provide greater detail in sensing” (see at least Dhull, para. [0043]). Applicant further argues that the prior art does not explicitly disclose the limitations “determine whether the first detection object is the moving object or a stationary object based on the detection result of the first detector, and determine whether the second detection object is the moving object or the stationary object based on the detection result of the second detector” and “execute the first processing when the control unit determines that the first detection object is the moving object and the second detection object is the stationary object, execute the second processing when the control unit determines that the second detection object is the moving object and the first detection object is the stationary object, and execute the third processing when the control unit determines that both of the first detection object and the second detection object are the moving objects”. Applicant further argues on pages 7–8 of the Remarks, “Thus, amended independent claim 1 now recites a control logic for selecting which door-driving processing is to be executed based on a combination of detection states of two detection objects detected by two detectors; and is not merely a display or notification function.” Applicant further argues on page 8 of the Remarks, “In particular, the Nara reference teaches switching an LED between various states of lighting, blinking, and being turned-off, but this type of LED control merely provides a visual indication to a user. … The blinking or lighting of an LED as in the Nara reference does not even suggest a mechanical or control operation in which a front door is selected, a rear door is selected, or both the front and rear doors are selected based on whether the respective detection objects detected by the first and second detectors are moving or stationary.” Examiner respectfully disagrees. Applicant is reminded claims must be given their broadest reasonable interpretation. Examiner agrees that the passage previously cited for this limitation (para. [0023]) concerns Nara’s LED display. The rejection is therefore re-pinned to Nara’s door-drive disclosure, which Nara remains incorporated to disclose. Nara determines, from the change in measured distance, whether each detected object is moving or stationary: “the determination unit 30 determines whether the object to be detected has moved or stopped based on the difference (change amount) between the current measurement result and the previous measurement result” (see at least Nara, para. [0022]). Nara also discloses that “the control unit 27 (judging unit 30) determines that the detected object having no change in the distance (position) for a predetermined time or more is an obstacle, and the measurement result is not used to detect the movement of the user” (see at least Nara, para. [0075]). This is done for each of the two detection sensors 12A, 12B (see at least Nara, para. [0069]). Nara then selects which door to drive according to where the moving user is detected. Specifically, “the control unit 27 drives the rear door drive unit 21A and the rear LED 23A, while the front The door drive unit 21B and the front LED 23B are not driven” when the user is detected in the first operation section 18. Conversely, “the control unit 27 drives the front door drive unit 21B and the front LED 23B while the rear door drive unit 21A and rear LED23A are not driven” when the user is detected in the second operation section 19 (see at least Nara, para. [0053]–[0054]). The control unit 27 “performs a door open output for opening the door 5A or 5B by the door drive unit 21A or 21B” (see at least Nara, para. [0065]). This is a door-selection and door-driving operation, not merely a notification. Under broadest reasonable interpretation, driving only one door drive unit when the moving user is detected in that door’s range, while the object in the other range is disregarded as stationary, is considered executing the first processing and the second processing as claimed. Examiner is aware that Nara does not explicitly disclose driving both doors together when both detection objects are moving. However, Elie is incorporated to teach that aspect of the limitation, i.e., a controller that selectively drives one or more of a vehicle’s multiple doors for detected passengers: “The vehicle 160 may comprise one or more door actuators 22 configured to selectively position one or more of the doors 14” (see at least Elie, para. [0047]; see also para. [0021], [0045]). Elie teaches opening one or more of multiple doors for detected passengers, and Nara already detects a moving user in the range of each of its two sensors and drives the corresponding door drive unit. It would therefore have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified Nara to drive both the front and rear door drive units when a moving object is detected in both detection ranges, so that each approaching passenger may access the vehicle (see at least Elie, para. [0021], [0045], [0047]). Applicant further argues on page 8 of the Remarks, “The Elie reference generally relates to vehicle door control and passenger detection, but does not teach the claimed determination logic based on a combination of moving-object and stationary-object determinations for first and second detection objects detected by first and second detectors arranged on the same side of the vehicle body. Furthermore, the secondary Elie reference does not teach or suggest selecting among three door-driving processes based on the specific combinations recited in amended independent claim 1.” Applicant further argues on page 9 of the Remarks, “The Dhull reference is directed to an external alert system for vehicle door opening to warn others outside the vehicle that an occupant may exit the vehicle. The Dhull reference, however, does not teach or suggest the claimed determining whether first and second detection objects are moving or stationary, and selecting first, second, or third door-driving processing based on the resulting combination.” Examiner respectfully disagrees. Applicant is reminded claims must be given their broadest reasonable interpretation. Elie and Dhull are not relied upon for the moving/stationary determination or for the first and second processing, which Nara is incorporated to disclose as set forth above (see at least Nara, para. [0022], [0053]–[0054], [0065], [0069], [0075]). Elie is relied upon for the multi-stage control unit and for driving both doors in the third processing (see at least Elie, para. [0021], [0045], [0047], [0061]). Dhull is relied upon only for the positioning and orientation of the detectors and the arrangement of their overlapping and non-overlapping areas (see at least Dhull, para. [0043]–[0044]; FIG. 2). Applicant’s arguments that Elie alone and Dhull alone lack the determination logic therefore attack the references individually. One cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. Applicant further argues on page 9 of the Remarks, “any combination of the Nara reference, the Elie reference, and the Dhull reference (assuming such a combination was even considered by one skilled in the art in view of the teachings in the primary Nara reference as discussed above) would not teach or even suggest the newly-added determination and execution functions of the control unit.” Applicant further argues on page 9 of the Remarks that “New independent claim 7 generally corresponds to amended independent claim 1 discussed above, including the newly-added subject matter of previously-pending dependent claim 5. … Thus, for the reasons discussed above with respect to amended independent claim 1, it is submitted that new independent claim 7 is also clearly patentable over the prior art of record.” Examiner respectfully disagrees. As set forth above and in the rejection below, the combination teaches the determination and execution functions of the control unit. Nara discloses the moving/stationary determination and the first and second processing, Elie teaches driving both doors in the third processing, and Dhull teaches the detector positioning. Applicant’s teaching-away argument is addressed above. New claim 7 recites no limitation beyond those of claim 1, and Applicant argues it only by its correspondence to claim 1. Claim 7 is therefore rejected for the same reasons, as set forth below. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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 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 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. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. Claims 1, 2, 6, and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nara (JP2019108693A) in view of Elie et al. (US 20170249797 A1) and further in view of Dhull et al. (US 20190139411 A1), hereinafter referred to as Nara, Elie and Dhull. Regarding claims 1 and 7, Nara discloses A door opening and closing apparatus for driving a front side door and a rear side door located on a same side of a vehicle body, the door opening and closing apparatus comprising (“The door control device 10 includes a rear door (first door) 5A disposed on the side surface 4 of the vehicle body 2 and a front door (second door) 5B disposed on the same side surface 4 as the rear door 5A.” [0048]): a first driver configured to open and close the front side door(“The front door drive unit 21B drives the front door 5B rotatably connected to the vehicle body 2 so as to open and close.” [0051]); a second driver configured to open and close the rear side door(“The rear door drive unit 21A drives the rear door 5A with respect to the vehicle body 2” [0051]; door drive unit 21 for the rear side door 5 [0010]); a first detector configured to repeatedly detect a distance to a first detection object including a moving object present in a first detection range, the first detection range being set on a side of the vehicle body (“the measuring unit 29 and the detection sensor 12 constitute a distance measurement sensor” [0021]; the detection result is used “to calculate the distance from the detection sensor 12 to the object” [0015]; the storage unit 28 stores “the detection result of the detection sensor 12 for the set number of times (for example, 10 times)” [0020]; “the detection range 17 of the detection sensor 12 is configured to extend along the side surface 4 of the vehicle body 2 in which the door 5 to be controlled is disposed” [0024]; detection sensor 12A [0069]; FIG. 9); a second detector configured to repeatedly detect a distance to a second detection object including the moving object present in a second detection range, the second detection range being set on the same side of the vehicle body on a front side of the first detection range (“the detection sensor 12A for the rear door 5A is disposed on the front tire 6 side of the vehicle body 2, and the detection sensor for the front door 5B on the rear tire 7 side of the vehicle body 2. You may arrange 12B.” [0069]; FIG. 9; “the X direction front side of the detection range 17 is referred to as a second operation section 19” [0050]; each of detection sensors 12A, 12B is a distance measurement sensor of the same construction [0015], [0021], [0076]); wherein the control unit is further configured to, based on the detection result of the first detector and the detection result of the second detector, determine from which one of a rear, a front, and the side of the vehicle body the moving object is approaching, and according to a result of the determination, execute one of first processing of driving only the first driver by setting the first detection range of the first detector as a detection section, second processing of driving only the second driver by setting the second detection range of the second detector as the detection section, and third processing of driving both of the first driver and the second driver by setting an overlapping area of the first detection range of the first detector and the second detection range of the second detector as the detection section (“The control unit 27 is configured to control the corresponding door 5A or 5B depending on which of the operation sections 18 and 19 the user detected by the detection sensor 12 is located.” [0053]; the user’s movement between the trigger section 18 and the start section 19, whose positions “may be reversed” [0036]; control unit 27 drives only the rear door drive unit 21A, or only the front door drive unit 21B, according to the operation section in which the user is detected [0054]); wherein each of the first detector and the second detector includes: a wave transmitter configured to transmit ultrasonic waves (“As the detection sensor 12, an ultrasonic sensor including a transmitter 13 and a receiver 14 is used.” [0015]); and a wave receiver configured to receive the ultrasonic waves transmitted by the wave transmitter after the ultrasonic waves are reflected by the moving object (“The reflected wave of the ultrasonic wave transmitted from the transmitter 13 is received by the receiver 14.” [0015]); wherein the first detection range and the second detection range each have a start zone and a trigger zone, the trigger zone being located closer to the vehicle body than the start zone (“The detection range 17 of the detection sensor 12 is divided into a trigger section (first operation section) 18 and a start section (second operation section) 19 according to the difference in distance from the detection sensor 12.” [0035]; “the positions of the trigger section 18 and the start section 19 may be reversed” [0036]); the predetermined movement includes a first stage, in which the moving object in the start zone moves to the trigger zone, and a second stage, in which the moving object in the trigger zone returns to the start zone (“a second operation M2 in which the user moves the foot from the start section 19 to the trigger section 18” [0036]; the movement “includes the movement between the trigger section 18 and the start section 19” [0036]); and determine, in the first stage, which one of the first processing to the third processing is executed depending on which one of the start zone of the first detection range and the start zone of the second detection range the moving object is present in (“when the operation sections 18 and 19 are further divided into two areas and the user's defined movement including the movement between the areas is detected, the control unit 27 controls the door” [0069]; “The control unit 27 may divide the detection range 17 into three or more operation sections to detect the movement set by the user.” [0072]). wherein the control unit is further configured to: determine whether the first detection object is the moving object or a stationary object based on the detection result of the first detector, and determine whether the second detection object is the moving object or the stationary object based on the detection result of the second detector (“the determination unit 30 determines whether the object to be detected has moved or stopped based on the difference (change amount) between the current measurement result and the previous measurement result” [0022]; “the control unit 27 (judging unit 30) determines that the detected object having no change in the distance (position) for a predetermined time or more is an obstacle, and the measurement result is not used to detect the movement of the user” [0075]; for each of detection sensors 12A, 12B [0069]), and execute the first processing when the control unit determines that the first detection object is the moving object and the second detection object is the stationary object, execute the second processing when the control unit determines that the second detection object is the moving object and the first detection object is the stationary object (“the control unit 27 drives the rear door drive unit 21A and the rear LED 23A, while the front The door drive unit 21B and the front LED 23B are not driven” and “the control unit 27 drives the front door drive unit 21B and the front LED 23B while the rear door drive unit 21A and rear LED23A are not driven” [0054]; “the control unit 27 performs a door open output for opening the door 5A or 5B by the door drive unit 21A or 21B” [0065]; [0053]; moved / stopped determination for each sensor [0022], [0069], [0075]). Nara does not explicitly disclose a control unit configured to, when the moving object is determined based on a detection result of the first detector and a detection result of the second detector to have performed a predetermined movement having a plurality of stages, drive at least one of the first driver and the second driver to open and close a corresponding one of the front side door and the rear side door; and execute the third processing when the control unit determines that both of the first detection object and the second detection object are the moving objects; wherein the first detector and the second detector are positioned on the same side of the vehicle body so as to be spaced apart by a gap along a longitudinal direction of the vehicle body below the front side door and the rear side door on the same side of the vehicle body; wherein the first detector and the second detector are mounted to face outwardly from the same side of the vehicle body so that each of the first detection range and the second detection range projects outwardly from the same side of the vehicle body; and wherein the first detector and the second detector are arranged such that the overlapping area of the first detection range of the first detector and the second detection range of the second detector is centrally located between the front side door and the rear side door, and non-overlapping areas of the first detection range of the first detector and the second detection range of the second detector are respectively positioned in front of and behind the overlapping area. However, Elie does teach a control unit configured to, when the moving object is determined based on a detection result of the first detector and a detection result of the second detector to have performed a predetermined movement having a plurality of stages, drive at least one of the first driver and the second driver to open and close a corresponding one of the front side door and the rear side door (“The door 14 can open when a passenger is detected using the proximity sensors 96, 97, 98 of sensor array 94” [0045]; “sensor 78 will detect the passenger in detection region 40 followed by a detection by sensor 76 detecting the passenger in detection region 38” [0061]; “the controller 70 may control the one or more door actuators 22 to open at least one door 14 of the vehicle 160 in response to the authentication” [0047]; imaging devices C1-C4 with fields of view 182 of the environment 186 proximate the vehicle [0058]–[0059]); and and execute the third processing when the control unit determines that both of the first detection object and the second detection object are the moving objects (“The vehicle 160 may comprise one or more door actuators 22 configured to selectively position one or more of the doors 14” [0047]; “a vehicle 10 is shown and contemplated to have multiple doors 14, such as found on a four-door sedan” [0021]; the actuator 22 opens a door 14 “when a passenger is detected” [0045]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the door opening and closing apparatus of Nara to also include a control unit that drives the door driver(s) when a detected passenger performs a movement through successive detection regions, and that drives both door drivers when a moving passenger is detected at both doors, as taught by Elie, with a reasonable expectation of success. Elie’s controller selectively positions one or more of a vehicle’s multiple doors in response to detected passengers so that each potential passenger may access the vehicle, which applies directly to Nara’s two-door, two-sensor arrangement when users approach both doors. (With regard to this reasoning, see at least Elie [0021], [0045], [0047], [0061].) However, Dhull does teach wherein the first detector and the second detector are positioned on the same side of the vehicle body so as to be spaced apart by a gap along a longitudinal direction of the vehicle body below the front side door and the rear side door on the same side of the vehicle body (“the side facing sensors 116D, 116E (e.g., RADAR, ultrasonic, camera, combinations thereof, and/or other type of sensor), may detect targets at a side of the vehicle 100” [0044]; side sensors 116D, 116E disposed at longitudinally spaced positions along the side of the vehicle 100 adjacent the side doors, FIG. 2; [0043]); wherein the first detector and the second detector are mounted to face outwardly from the same side of the vehicle body so that each of the first detection range and the second detection range projects outwardly from the same side of the vehicle body(“multiple sensors 116A-K may be effectively joined to increase a sensing zone and provide increased sensing coverage” [0043]; sensing zones 216C projecting outwardly from the side of the vehicle, FIG. 2; [0044]); and wherein the first detector and the second detector are arranged such that the overlapping area of the first detection range of the first detector and the second detection range of the second detector is centrally located between the front side door and the rear side door, and non-overlapping areas of the first detection range of the first detector and the second detection range of the second detector are respectively positioned in front of and behind the overlapping area (“the sensing zones 216C of two or more sensors 116D, 116E may intersect at an overlap zone 220” [0043]; overlap zone 220 at the side of the vehicle, between the positions of sensors 116D and 116E, with the non-overlapping portions of the sensing zones 216C forward and rearward of it, FIG. 2). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the door opening and closing apparatus of Nara as modified by Elie to also include positioning the first and second detectors on the same side of the vehicle body, spaced apart longitudinally below the front and rear side doors, facing outwardly, with an overlapping area centered between the doors and non-overlapping areas in front of and behind it, as taught by Dhull, with a reasonable expectation of success. Joining outwardly facing side sensors whose sensing zones overlap increases the sensing coverage along the side of the vehicle and provides redundant, enhanced sensing in the overlap region. (With regard to this reasoning, see at least Dhull [0043]–[0044]; FIG. 2.) Regarding claim 2, Nara as modified by Elie and Dhull discloses the door opening and closing apparatus of claim 1, as set forth above. Nara does not explicitly disclose wherein the first detection range and the second detection range partially overlap with each other when the vehicle body is viewed from above. However, Elie does teach wherein the first detection range and the second detection range partially overlap with each other when the vehicle body is viewed from above (“The imaging devices C1-C4 may be arranged in various locations such that each of the fields of view 182 of the imaging devices C1-C4 is configured to capture a significantly different portion of the surrounding environment 186” [0059]; in the plan view of FIG. 5, the fields of view 182 of adjacent imaging devices partially overlap in the cross-hatched regions; [0058]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the door opening and closing apparatus of Nara as modified by Elie and Dhull to also include arranging the first and second detection ranges to partially overlap when viewed from above, as taught by Elie, with a reasonable expectation of success. Elie arranges the fields of view of its exterior sensors so that together they cover the environment proximate the vehicle, with adjacent fields of view partially overlapping in plan view so that the covered environment has no gap between them. (With regard to this reasoning, see at least Elie [0058]–[0059]; FIG. 5.) Regarding claim 6, Nara as modified by Elie and Dhull discloses the door opening and closing apparatus of claim 1, as set forth above. Nara does not explicitly disclose wherein the first detector and the second detector are spaced apart along a longitudinal direction of the vehicle body and are mounted on a side of the vehicle body to face outwardly such that the respective first detection range and second detection range extend outwardly from the side of the vehicle body. However, Elie does teach wherein the first detector and the second detector are spaced apart along a longitudinal direction of the vehicle body and are mounted on a side of the vehicle body to face outwardly such that the respective first detection range and second detection range extend outwardly from the side of the vehicle body (“Each of the imaging devices may have a field of view focusing on an environment 186 proximate the vehicle 160.” [0058]; “The imaging devices C1-C4 may be arranged in various locations” [0059]; in FIG. 5, imaging devices C1-C4 are mounted at locations spaced along the length of the vehicle 160, including devices C3, C4 on the sides of the vehicle adjacent the doors 14, and each field of view 182 extends outwardly from the vehicle body). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the door opening and closing apparatus of Nara as modified by Elie and Dhull to also include detectors spaced apart along the longitudinal direction and mounted on the side of the vehicle body facing outwardly so that their detection ranges extend outwardly from the side, as taught by Elie, with a reasonable expectation of success. Elie mounts its exterior sensors at spaced locations facing outwardly so that each field of view captures the environment proximate the vehicle, including the area beside the doors where a passenger approaches. (With regard to this reasoning, see at least Elie [0058]–[0059]; FIG. 5.) Conclusion 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 extension fee 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 AHMED ALKIRSH whose telephone number is (703) 756-4503. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00 am-5:00 pm EST. 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, FADEY JABR can be reached on (571) 272-1516. 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. /A.A./Examiner, Art Unit 3668 /Fadey S. Jabr/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3668