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 .
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
Joint Inventors
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Response to Amendment/Remarks/Arguments
The examiner received amendments to the claims and corresponding arguments/remarks dated 16 September 2025 in response to the non-final rejection office action dated 18 July 2025 (hereinafter the document of concern when referencing “outstanding objections”, “outstanding rejections”, “prior office action”, and the like). No new matter was entered.
Regarding the applicant’s response to the outstanding double patenting rejections, the examiner understands applicant’s intent and will continue to issue double patenting rejections (provisional or otherwise) as necessary. However, the examiner reviewed the amended claim language and the previously presented U.S. Patents and found that continuation of a double patenting rejection was not proper at this time. Therefore, all outstanding double patenting rejections are withdrawn.
Regarding the outstanding 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejection for “exterior surface” (affecting claim 8 as well), the examiner has reviewed the amendments and arguments and found the amended terminology to be definite. Therefore, all outstanding 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejections are withdrawn.
Regarding the outstanding prior art (35 U.S.C. 102/103) rejections, as a formal matter, the arguments presented are moot due to amendments made to the claims. The applicant appears to argue that none of the prior art of note discusses “determining, by a processor, a surface temperature of a component on an exterior portion of vehicle, wherein the exterior portion of the vehicle includes at least one of: an exterior portion of a door of the vehicle, an exterior portion of a trunk of the vehicle, or an exterior portion of a hood of the vehicle.” (see page 11 of the remarks). The examiner respectfully disagrees with this assertion and does not find this argument persuasive. The examiner agrees that Yang (the primary reference of note) does not, alone, explicitly disclose this limitation and therefore withdraws the outstanding 35 U.S.C. 102 rejections. However, the examiner strives to provide reasonable prior art which reads upon claim language under broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the specification in addition to art which may better suit applicant’s intent, when applicable. As such, the examiner previously presented the teachings of Mersmann (discussed further below) as an alternative rejection, which explicitly discloses the determination of a surface temperature of an exterior component of a vehicle, including doors, hood, trunk, etc. with a reasonable rationale to combine. However, this art was provided as an alternative rejection in the event that the previous rejection(s) was/were traversed. The examiner has determined that Mersmann, in obvious combination with the other prior art of note, continues to read upon the amended claim set. Therefore, the examiner presents new grounds of rejection, necessitated by claim amendment, below.
Status of Claims
The most recent revision of the claim set is dated 16 September 2025. Claims 1-3, 5-18, 20-22 are pending. Claims 4 and 19 remain cancelled. Claims 1, 9, and 15 are independent claims. Claims 1-3, 5-18, 20, 22 are rejected for the reasons provided below. Claim 21 is objected to for depending upon a rejected base claim but contains allowable subject matter, as previously noted.
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.
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 9-11, 15-16, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang et al. (US 2010/0294455 A1; hereinafter Yang) in view of Mersmann et al. (DE 102020121646 A1; published 24 Feb 2022, hereinafter Mersmann) or further in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang in view of Mersmann in further view of Dulin et al. (US 2002/0161501 A1; hereinafter Dulin) including foreign filing of Dulin (WO2002/087910A2; WO filing of the aforementioned US reference including Table 1; provided with this office action). When referencing Dulin, paragraph and figure callouts are in reference to the US filing whereas reference to Table 1 pertains to the WO filing.
Regarding Claim 9: Yang discloses A method comprising: (Paragraph [0024], Yang discloses a method)
determining, by a processor, a surface temperature of a component on an [exterior] portion of a vehicle, [wherein the exterior portion of the vehicle includes at least one of: an exterior portion of a door of the vehicle, an exterior portion of a trunk of the vehicle, or an exterior portion of a hood of the vehicle]; (Paragraph [0018, 0020, 0027-0028, 0031-0032] and Figure [2], Yang discloses that the control unit may be a processing device (a processor). Further, Yang discloses determining a surface temperature of a component of a vehicle, such as a seat)
evaluating, by the processor, the surface temperature of the component; (Paragraph [0032, 0036] and Figure [2-3], Yang discloses determining that the temperature exceeds a threshold)
issuing, by the processor, a notification based on evaluating the surface temperature of the component; and (The examiner notes that specification paragraphs [0036-0038] describe exemplary “notifications”. However, the applicant has not provided positive redefinition of this term, and as such, the examiner is applying broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the specification. Paragraph [0036], Yang discloses that when the temperature exceeds a threshold, the control unit sends a command to the solar panel to direct power to the thermoelectric unit (a command is considered analogous to a notification))
initiating, by the processor, a cooling operation to reduce the surface temperature of the component, the cooling operation comprising at least one of operating an air-conditioning system of the vehicle, directing air flow upon the component, or opening a window of the vehicle. (The examiner notes that recitation of “or” indicates that only one is necessary. Paragraph [0036], Yang discloses that when the temperature exceeds a threshold, the control unit sends a command to the solar panel to direct power to the thermoelectric unit (a command is considered analogous to a notification) to perform a cooling operation to include air conditioning)
Regarding determination of [a surface temperature of a component on an exterior portion of a vehicle, wherein the exterior portion of the vehicle includes at least one of: an exterior portion of a door of the vehicle, an exterior portion of a trunk of the vehicle, or an exterior portion of a hood of the vehicle], Mersmann, in a similar field of endeavor of vehicle temperature monitoring systems, teaches determining a surface temperature of a component on an exterior portion of a vehicle, wherein the exterior portion of the vehicle includes at least one of: an exterior portion of a door of the vehicle, an exterior portion of a trunk of the vehicle, or an exterior portion of a hood of the vehicle (Paragraph [0007-0009, 0014], Mersmann teaches surface temperature monitoring of exterior surfaces including doors, hoods, tailgates, and associated handles, to warn future users about hot surfaces)
Yang and Mersmann are in a similar field of endeavor of vehicle temperature monitoring systems. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing, with a reasonable expectation of success, to have modified the disclosure of Yang to have included exterior surfaces including door handles as taught by Mersmann in order to warn future users about hot surfaces to prevent injury/discomfort (Paragraph [0003, 0009] of Mersmann). This constitutes a combination of known elements according to known methods to produce predictable results.
In the event that applicant traverses the above explanation pertaining to the above limitations being disclosed by Yang, as an alternative rejection under 35 USC 103, Dulin, in a similar field of endeavor of vehicle cabin temperature monitoring systems, teaches evaluating, by the processor, the [surface] temperature of the component; (Paragraph [0023, 0066, 0081], Table [1], and Figure [2], Dulin teaches that a processor can carry out the functions of the system. Further, Dulin teaches that at a first time, the system can detect exceeding a first threshold temperature at a first time (evaluation of a temperature of the cabin/a component))
issuing, by the processor, a notification based on evaluating the [surface] temperature of the component; and (Paragraph [0023], Dulin teaches that when the temperature inside of the cabin becomes above a certain threshold, alerts (notifications) are provided)
initiating, by the processor, a cooling operation to reduce the surface temperature of the component, the cooling operation comprising at least one of operating an air-conditioning system of the vehicle, directing an air flow upon the component, or opening a window of the vehicle. (The examiner first notes that recitation of “to reduce the surface temperature of the component” is functional language, and that it is attempting to claim a result of the cooling operation rather than the cooling operation itself. This language is not provided significant patentable weight, as a cooling operation performed in the cabin of the vehicle will ultimately result in some form of heat transfer/cooling of a component. Second, recitation of “or” indicates that only one is needed. Paragraph [0016-0019, 0047, 0058, 0060, 0063-0064, 0068-0073], Table [1], and Figure [1-2], Dulin teaches that a plurality of thresholds exist. For example, in Table 1, thresholds exist at 90 degrees, 95 degrees, 100 degrees, and 110 degrees (as exemplary values). Varying responses occur based on the severity; Dulin explicitly teaches that “It should also be understood that preferably the same or similar schedule of actions taken on the basis of ΔT, the temperature rise rate, is taken on absolute temperature thresholds, independent of the temperature rate rise”, thus indicating that temperature may provide the sole threshold rather than the change in temperature/rate. Finally, Dulin discloses varying responses based on severity; Table 1, for instance, shows that at 90 degrees, a light may activate (a first threshold with response of an alert) and at 100 degrees, the AC via battery or engine may run (a second threshold with response of an operation of an AC system). Additionally, opening the window is disclosed at various thresholds)
Yang and Dulin are in a similar field of endeavor of vehicle cabin temperature monitoring systems. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing, with a reasonable expectation of success, to have modified the disclosure of Yang to have included audio alerts and further control features depending on severity of detected temperature, as taught by Dulin, in order to alert an operator of a potentially harmful situation and to protect an individual who may be left inside (Dulin, Paragraph [0004-0005, 0009-0010, 0012, 0023]). This constitutes a combination of known elements according to known methods to produce predictable results.
Regarding Claim 10: Yang further discloses wherein determining the surface temperature comprises: at least one of measuring the surface temperature of the component, estimating the surface temperature of the component, or predicting the surface temperature of the component. (The examiner notes that recitation of “or” indicates that only one element is needed. Paragraph [0026, 0032, 0035], Yang discloses that the internal surface is measured using measuring means).
Regarding Claim 11: Yang further discloses wherein evaluating, by the processor, the surface temperature of the component comprises: determining, by the processor, that the surface temperature corresponds to a first temperature category of a plurality of temperature categories; and issuing, by the processor, the notification based on the surface temperature corresponding to the first temperature category. (The examiner notes that the instant application specification provides an exemplary discussion of temperature categories in paragraphs [0066-0070], for instance. However, this is purely exemplary and does not clearly redefine the terms or explicitly limit the claim scope. Therefore, the examiner is applying broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the specification. Paragraph [0036], Yang discloses that when the temperature exceeds a threshold, the control unit sends a command to the solar panel to direct power to the thermoelectric unit (a command is considered analogous to a notification). The examiner considers a temperature exceeding the threshold to correspond to a first temperature category and a temperature within the threshold to be a second temperature category)
In the event that applicant traverses the above explanation pertaining to the above limitation being disclosed by Yang, as an alternative rejection under 35 USC 103, Dulin, in a similar field of endeavor of vehicle cabin temperature monitoring systems, teaches wherein evaluating, by the processor, the [surface] temperature of the component comprises: determining, by the processor, that the [surface] temperature corresponds to a first temperature category of a plurality of temperature categories; and issuing, by the processor, the notification based on the [surface] temperature corresponding to the first temperature category. (Paragraph [0023] and Figure [2], Dulin teaches the use of a plurality of categories/levels of response to surface temperatures measured)
Yang and Dulin are in a similar field of endeavor of vehicle cabin temperature monitoring systems. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing, with a reasonable expectation of success, to have modified the disclosure of Yang to have included a plurality of temperature of levels in order to provide a response commensurate with the intensity of the temperature as taught by Dulin (a leveled response based on urgency, Dulin, Paragraph [0023]). This represents a combination of known elements according to known methods to produce predictable results.
Regarding Claim 15: Yang discloses A vehicle comprising: (Paragraph [0008, 0010] and Figure [1], Yang discloses a vehicle)
a surface temperature detection and notification system comprising: (Paragraph [0008, 0010, 0012] and Figure [1], Yang discloses a surface temperature monitoring/ heating/ cooling system)
a memory that stores computer-executable instructions; and a processor configured to access the memory and execute the computer-executable instructions to perform operations comprising: (Paragraph [0018], Yang discloses a control unit containing a processor and memory to execute the control method)
determining a surface temperature of a component on an [exterior] portion of a vehicle, [wherein the exterior portion of the vehicle includes at least one of: an exterior portion of a door of the vehicle, an exterior portion of a trunk of the vehicle, or an exterior portion of a hood of the vehicle]; (Paragraph [0018, 0020, 0027-0028, 0031-0032] and Figure [2], Yang discloses that the control unit may be a processing device (a processor). Further, Yang discloses determining a surface temperature of a component of a vehicle, such as a seat)
determining that the surface temperature exceeds a threshold surface temperature; (Paragraph [0032, 0036] and Figure [2-3], Yang discloses determining that the temperature exceeds a threshold)
issuing a notification based on the surface temperature exceeding the threshold surface temperature; and (The examiner notes that specification paragraphs [0036-0038] describe exemplary “notifications”. However, the applicant has not provided positive redefinition of this term, and as such, the examiner is applying broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the specification. Paragraph [0036], Yang discloses that when the temperature exceeds a threshold, the control unit sends a command to the solar panel to direct power to the thermoelectric unit (a command is considered analogous to a notification))
initiating a cooling operation to reduce the surface temperature of the component, the cooling operation comprising at least one of operating an air-conditioning system of the vehicle, directing air flow upon the component, or opening a window of the vehicle. (The examiner notes that recitation of “or” indicates that only one is necessary. Paragraph [0036], Yang discloses that when the temperature exceeds a threshold, the control unit sends a command to the solar panel to direct power to the thermoelectric unit (a command is considered analogous to a notification) to perform a cooling operation to include an air conditioning)
Regarding determination of [a surface temperature of a component on an exterior portion of a vehicle, wherein the exterior portion of the vehicle includes at least one of: an exterior portion of a door of the vehicle, an exterior portion of a trunk of the vehicle, or an exterior portion of a hood of the vehicle], Mersmann, in a similar field of endeavor of vehicle temperature monitoring systems, teaches determining a surface temperature of a component on an exterior portion of a vehicle, wherein the exterior portion of the vehicle includes at least one of: an exterior portion of a door of the vehicle, an exterior portion of a trunk of the vehicle, or an exterior portion of a hood of the vehicle (Paragraph [0007-0009, 0014], Mersmann teaches surface temperature monitoring of exterior surfaces including doors, hoods, tailgates, and associated handles, to warn future users about hot surfaces)
Yang and Mersmann are in a similar field of endeavor of vehicle temperature monitoring systems. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing, with a reasonable expectation of success, to have modified the disclosure of Yang to have included exterior surfaces including door handles as taught by Mersmann in order to warn future users about hot surfaces to prevent injury/discomfort (Paragraph [0003, 0009] of Mersmann). This constitutes a combination of known elements according to known methods to produce predictable results.
In the event that applicant traverses the above explanation pertaining to the above limitations being disclosed by Yang, as an alternative rejection under 35 USC 103, Dulin, in a similar field of endeavor of vehicle cabin temperature monitoring systems, teaches determining that the [surface] temperature exceeds a threshold [surface] temperature; (Paragraph [0023, 0066, 0081], Table [1], and Figure [2], Dulin teaches that a processor can carry out the functions of the system. Further, Dulin teaches that at a first time, the system can detect exceeding a first threshold temperature at a first time (evaluation of a temperature of the cabin/a component))
issuing a notification based on the [surface] temperature exceeding the threshold [surface temperature]; and (Paragraph [0023], Dulin teaches that when the temperature inside of the cabin becomes above a certain threshold, alerts (notifications) are provided)
initiating a cooling operation to reduce the surface temperature of the component, the cooling operation comprising at least one of operating an air-conditioning system of the vehicle, directing an air flow upon the component, or opening a window of the vehicle. (The examiner first notes that recitation of “to reduce the surface temperature of the component” is functional language, and that it is attempting to claim a result of the cooling operation rather than the cooling operation itself. This language is not provided significant patentable weight, as a cooling operation performed in the cabin of the vehicle will ultimately result in some form of heat transfer/cooling of a component. Second, recitation of “or” indicates that only one is needed. Paragraph [0016-0019, 0047, 0058, 0060, 0063-0064, 0068-0073], Table [1], and Figure [1-2], Dulin teaches that a plurality of thresholds exist. For example, in Table 1, thresholds exist at 90 degrees, 95 degrees, 100 degrees, and 110 degrees (as exemplary values). Varying responses occur based on the severity; Dulin explicitly teaches that “It should also be understood that preferably the same or similar schedule of actions taken on the basis of ΔT, the temperature rise rate, is taken on absolute temperature thresholds, independent of the temperature rate rise”, thus indicating that temperature may provide the sole threshold rather than the change in temperature/rate. Finally, Dulin discloses varying responses based on severity; Table 1, for instance, shows that at 90 degrees, a light may activate (a first threshold with response of an alert) and at 100 degrees, the AC via battery or engine may run (a second threshold with response of an operation of an AC system). Additionally, opening the window is disclosed at various thresholds)
Yang and Dulin are in a similar field of endeavor of vehicle cabin temperature monitoring systems. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing, with a reasonable expectation of success, to have modified the disclosure of Yang to have included audio alerts and further control features depending on severity of detected temperature, as taught by Dulin, in order to alert an operator of a potentially harmful situation and to protect an individual who may be left inside (Dulin, Paragraph [0004-0005, 0009-0010, 0012, 0023]). This constitutes a combination of known elements according to known methods to produce predictable results.
Regarding Claim 16: Yang further discloses wherein determining that the surface temperature exceeds the threshold surface temperature comprises at least one of measuring the surface temperature of the component, estimating the surface temperature of the component, or predicting the surface temperature of the component. (The examiner notes that recitation of “or” indicates that only one element is needed. Paragraph [0026, 0032, 0035], Yang discloses that the internal surface is measured using measuring means)
Regarding Claim 20: Yang further discloses wherein the component is one of a steering wheel, a seat, a drive selector, an infotainment system, a console, a switch, a button, a door handle, a trunk handle, or a mirror. (The examiner notes that recitation of “or” indicates that only one element is needed. Paragraph [0012], Yang discloses that the component is at least a seat, steering wheel, etc.)
Claims 1-2, 5-7, 12, 18, and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang et al. (US 2010/0294455 A1; hereinafter Yang) in view of Dulin et al. (US 2002/0161501 A1; hereinafter Dulin) including foreign filing of Dulin (WO2002/087910A2; WO filing of the aforementioned US reference including Table 1; provided with this office action), in further view of Mersmann et al. (DE 102020121646 A1; published 24 Feb 2022, hereinafter Mersmann). When referencing Dulin, paragraph and figure callouts are in reference to the US filing whereas reference to Table 1 pertains to the WO filing.
Regarding Claim 1: Yang discloses A method comprising: (Paragraph [0024], Yang discloses a method)
determining, by a processor, a surface temperature of a component on an [exterior] portion of a vehicle, [wherein the exterior portion of the vehicle includes at least one of: an exterior portion of a door of the vehicle, an exterior portion of a trunk of the vehicle, or an exterior portion of a hood of the vehicle]; (Paragraph [0018, 0027, 0031-0032] and Figure [2], Yang discloses that the control unit may be a processing device (a processor). Further, Yang discloses determining a surface temperature of a component of a vehicle, such as a seat)
determining, by the processor and at a first time, that the surface temperature of the component exceeds a threshold surface temperature; (Paragraph [0032, 0036] and Figure [2-3], Yang discloses determining that the temperature exceeds a threshold at a time)
issuing, by the processor, a notification based on the surface temperature of the component exceeding the threshold surface temperature; (The examiner notes that specification paragraphs [0036-0038] describe exemplary “notifications”. However, the applicant has not provided positive redefinition of this term, and as such, the examiner is applying broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the specification. Paragraph [0036], Yang discloses that when the temperature exceeds a threshold, the control unit sends a command to the solar panel to direct power to the thermoelectric unit (a command is considered analogous to a notification))
Yang is silent regarding a plurality of temperature thresholds and detection of a surface temperature of a component particularly located on an exterior portion of a vehicle.
However, Dulin, in a similar field of endeavor of vehicle cabin temperature monitoring systems, teaches determining, by the processor and at a first time, that the [surface] temperature of the component exceeds a first threshold [surface] temperature (Paragraph [0023, 0066, 0081], Table [1], and Figure [2], Dulin teaches that a processor can carry out the functions of the system. Further, Dulin teaches that at a first time, the system can detect exceeding a first threshold temperature at a first time)
issuing, by the processor, a notification based on the [surface] temperature of the component exceeding the first threshold [surface] temperature; (Paragraph [0023], Dulin teaches that when the temperature inside of the cabin becomes above a certain threshold, alerts (notifications) are provided)
determining, by the processor and at a second time, that the [surface] temperature of the component exceeds a second threshold [surface] temperature, wherein the second threshold [surface] temperature is greater than the first threshold [surface] temperature; and (Paragraph [0023, 0066, 0081], Table [1], and Figure [2], Dulin teaches that the temperature checking/control method may cyclically repeat (thus, performing an operation/check at a second time) and that a second preselected value/threshold may be exceeded. Table [1] shows a plurality of temperature thresholds with corresponding corrective action)
initiating, by the processor and based on the determination that the [surface] temperature exceeds the second threshold [surface] temperature, a first type of cooling operation to reduce the surface temperature of the component, the cooling operation comprising at least one of operating an air-conditioning system of the vehicle, directing an air flow upon the component, or opening a window of the vehicle. (The examiner first notes that recitation of “to reduce the surface temperature of the component” is functional language, and that it is attempting to claim a result of the cooling operation rather than the cooling operation itself. This language is not provided significant patentable weight, as a cooling operation performed in the cabin of the vehicle will ultimately result in some form of heat transfer/cooling of a component. Second, recitation of “or” indicates that only one is needed. Paragraph [0016-0019, 0047, 0058, 0060, 0063-0064, 0068-0073], Table [1], and Figure [1-2], Dulin teaches that a plurality of thresholds exist. For example, in Table 1, thresholds exist at 90 degrees, 95 degrees, 100 degrees, and 110 degrees (as exemplary values). Varying responses occur based on the severity; Dulin explicitly teaches that “It should also be understood that preferably the same or similar schedule of actions taken on the basis of ΔT, the temperature rise rate, is taken on absolute temperature thresholds, independent of the temperature rate rise”, thus indicating that temperature may provide the sole threshold rather than the change in temperature/rate. Finally, Dulin discloses varying responses based on severity; Table 1, for instance, shows that at 90 degrees, a light may activate (a first threshold with response of an alert) and at 100 degrees, the AC via battery or engine may run (a second threshold with response of an operation of an AC system). Additionally, opening the window is disclosed at various thresholds)
Yang and Dulin are in a similar field of endeavor of vehicle cabin temperature monitoring systems. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing, with a reasonable expectation of success, to have modified the disclosure of Yang to have included audio alerts and further control features depending on severity of detected temperature, as taught by Dulin, in order to alert an operator of a potentially harmful situation and to protect an individual who may be left inside (Dulin, Paragraph [0004-0005, 0009-0010, 0012, 0023]). This constitutes a combination of known elements according to known methods to produce predictable results.
As noted above, Yang is silent regarding determination of a surface temperature of a component particularly on an exterior portion of a vehicle. However, Mersmann, in a similar field of endeavor of vehicle temperature monitoring systems, teaches determining a surface temperature of a component on an exterior portion of a vehicle, wherein the exterior portion of the vehicle includes at least one of: an exterior portion of a door of the vehicle, an exterior portion of a trunk of the vehicle, or an exterior portion of a hood of the vehicle (Paragraph [0007-0009, 0014], Mersmann teaches surface temperature monitoring of exterior surfaces including doors, hoods, tailgates, and associated handles, to warn future users about hot surfaces)
Yang and Mersmann are in a similar field of endeavor of vehicle temperature monitoring systems. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing, with a reasonable expectation of success, to have modified the disclosure of Yang to have included exterior surfaces including door handles as taught by Mersmann in order to warn future users about hot surfaces to prevent injury/discomfort (Paragraph [0003, 0009] of Mersmann). This constitutes a combination of known elements according to known methods to produce predictable results.
Regarding Claim 2: Yang further discloses wherein determining the surface temperature comprises: at least one of measuring the surface temperature of the component, estimating the surface temperature of the component, or predicting the surface temperature of the component. (The examiner notes that recitation of “or” indicates that only one element is needed. Paragraph [0026, 0032, 0035], Yang discloses that the internal surface is measured using measuring means)
Regarding Claim 5: Yang further discloses wherein the first threshold surface temperature is preset based on a classification of the component as belonging to a first component category, the first component category instead of a second component category. (Paragraph [0023], Yang discloses that the seat (a component belonging to a first category that gets contacted by a user at a higher frequency) would have a setpoint different than that which the general internal cabin area is set, as understood with “a cooling of the passenger seat, would, over time, also cool the internal cabin area to some degree, where such cooling is based, at least in part, on heat transfer principles”. Thus, the primary touch components are monitored at a certain threshold, wherein the secondary components (general cabin, a second category) is, through heat transfer principles, maintained at a different threshold)
Regarding Claim 6: Yang does not explicitly disclose the use of an audio or light source-based method of issuing a notification.
However, Dulin, in a similar field of endeavor of vehicle cabin temperature monitoring systems, teaches (or alternatively, further teaches) wherein issuing the notification comprises: activating, by the processor, at least one of an audio transmitter, a first light source mounted upon the component, or a second light source mounted adjacent to the component. (The examiner notes that recitation of “or” indicates that only one element is needed. Paragraph [0023], Dulin teaches that when the temperature inside of the cabin becomes above a certain threshold, audio alerts (notifications) are provided)
Yang and Dulin are in a similar field of endeavor of vehicle cabin temperature monitoring systems. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing, with a reasonable expectation of success, to have modified the disclosure of Yang to have included audio alerts, as taught (or alternatively, as further taught) by Dulin, in order to alert an operator of a potentially harmful situation (Dulin, Paragraph [0009-0010, 0012, 0023]). This constitutes a combination of known elements according to known methods to produce predictable results.
Regarding Claim 7: Yang further discloses display of messages such as user selected reference temperatures (Yang, Paragraph [0025]), but does not explicitly disclose issuance of a notification on a display screen based on the exceeding of a preset temperature.
However, Dulin, in a similar field of endeavor of vehicle cabin temperature monitoring systems, teaches (or alternatively, further teaches) wherein issuing the notification comprises: displaying, by the processor, upon a display screen, at least one of a thermal map of an exterior surface of the component or a notification message. (The examiner notes that recitation of “or” indicates that only one element is needed. Paragraph [0036, 0058], Dulin teaches the use of a display message to convey a warning message)
Yang and Dulin are in a similar field of endeavor of vehicle cabin temperature monitoring systems. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing, with a reasonable expectation of success, to have modified the disclosure of Yang to have included display alerts, as taught (or alternatively, as further taught) by Dulin, in order to alert an operator of a potentially harmful situation (Dulin, Paragraph [0009-0010, 0012, 0023, 0058]). This constitutes a combination of known elements according to known methods to produce predictable results.
Regarding Claim 12: Yang does not explicitly disclose the use of a display, an audio, or light source-based method of issuing a notification.
However, Dulin, in a similar field of endeavor of vehicle cabin temperature monitoring systems, teaches (or alternatively, further teaches) wherein issuing the notification comprises at least one of displaying, by the processor, a notification message on a display screen, or activating, by the processor, at least one of an audio transmitter, a first light source mounted upon the component, or a second light source mounted adjacent to the component. (The examiner notes that recitation of “or” indicates that only one element is needed. Paragraph [0023], Dulin teaches that when the temperature inside of the cabin becomes above a certain threshold, audio alerts (notifications) are provided)
Yang and Dulin are in a similar field of endeavor of vehicle cabin temperature monitoring systems. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing, with a reasonable expectation of success, to have modified the disclosure of Yang to have included audio alerts, as taught (or alternatively, as further taught) by Dulin, in order to alert an operator of a potentially harmful situation (Dulin, Paragraph [0009-0010, 0012, 0023]). This constitutes a combination of known elements according to known methods to produce predictable results.
Regarding Claim 18: The limitations are analogous to the limitations of claim 12; therefore, this claim is rejected under the same premise.
Regarding Claim 22: Yang does not explicitly disclose a plurality of temperature thresholds, but does disclose monitoring the surface temperature of components within the cabin of the vehicle, as discussed above.
However, Dulin, in a similar field of endeavor of vehicle cabin temperature monitoring systems, teaches determining, by the processor and at a third time, that the surface temperature of the component exceeds a third threshold surface temperature, wherein the third threshold surface temperature is greater than the second threshold surface temperature; and (Paragraph [0016-0019, 0047, 0058, 0060, 0063-0064, 0068-0073], Table [1], and Figure [1-2], Dulin teaches that a plurality of thresholds exist, including thresholds in an exemplary embodiment at 90, 95, 100, and 110 degrees (therefore, at least four thresholds), wherein 110 is greater than 100, 100 is greater than 95, and 95 is greater than 90 degrees)
initiating, by the processor and based on the determination that the surface temperature exceeds the threshold surface temperature, a second type of cooling operation to reduce the surface temperature of the component, wherein the second type of cooling operation is different than the first type of cooling operation (Paragraph [0016-0019, 0047, 0058, 0060, 0063-0064, 0068-0073], Table [1], and Figure [1-2], Dulin teaches that a plurality of thresholds exist and teaches varying responses based on severity; Table 1, for instance, shows that at 90 degrees, a light may activate (a first threshold with response of an alert) and at 100 degrees, the AC via battery or engine may run (a second threshold with response of an operation of an AC system). Additionally, opening the window is disclosed at various thresholds, such as 95 degrees. As such, two different cooling operations (windows and AC, for instance) may be performed at different thresholds)
Yang and Dulin are in a similar field of endeavor of vehicle cabin temperature monitoring systems. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing, with a reasonable expectation of success, to have modified the disclosure of Yang to have included audio alerts and further control features depending on severity of detected temperature, as taught by Dulin, in order to alert an operator of a potentially harmful situation and to protect an individual who may be left inside (Dulin, Paragraph [0004-0005, 0009-0010, 0012, 0023]). This constitutes a combination of known elements according to known methods to produce predictable results.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang in view of Dulin in further view of Mersmann, in further view of Gage et al. (US 2018/0148008 A1; hereinafter Gage).
Regarding Claim 3: Yang further discloses wherein measuring the surface temperature of the component comprises obtaining a temperature measurement from a thermal sensor, (Paragraph [0026, 0032, 0035], Yang discloses that the internal surface is measured using measuring means, including temperature sensors)
wherein estimating the surface temperature of the component comprises at least one of evaluating a thermal image of at least a portion of the component, evaluating an ambient temperature, or evaluating sunlight exposure, and […] (The examiner notes that recitation of “or” indicates that only one element is needed. Paragraph [0019-0020, 0027-0028], Yang discloses the use of an infrared scanner (analogous to a thermal imager) to determine internal surface temperature. Further, Yang discloses the use of ambient temperature sensors to monitor the ambient temperature. Finally, Yang discloses monitoring the exposure of sunlight to one or more of the vehicle surfaces)
Yang does not explicitly disclose use of predicted weather information or historical vehicle parking information.
However, Gage, in a similar field of endeavor of vehicle cabin temperature monitoring systems, teaches […] wherein predicting the surface temperature of the component comprises evaluating at least one of predicted weather information or historical vehicle parking information. (Paragraph [0021], Gage teaches the use of weather forecast data to predict/estimate the future temperature of the passenger compartment)
Yang and Gage are in a similar field of endeavor of vehicle cabin temperature monitoring systems. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing, with a reasonable expectation of success, to have modified the disclosure of Yang to have included the use of weather forecast data to predict a future cabin temperature as taught by Gage (Gage, Paragraph [0021]) for the benefit of advanced notice of a potential temperature condition (Gage, Paragraph [0021]). This represents a combination of known elements according to known methods to produce predictable results.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang in view of Mersmann in view of Gage, or in the alternative, as being unpatentable over Yang in view of Mersmann in view of Dulin and further in view of Gage.
Regarding Claim 17: Yang further discloses wherein measuring the surface temperature of the component comprises obtaining a temperature measurement from a thermal sensor, (Paragraph [0026, 0032, 0035], Yang discloses that the internal surface is measured using measuring means, including temperature sensors)
wherein estimating the surface temperature of the component comprises at least one of evaluating a thermal image of at least a portion of the component, evaluating an ambient temperature, or evaluating sunlight exposure, and […] (The examiner notes that recitation of “or” indicates that only one element is needed. Paragraph [0019-0020, 0027-0028], Yang discloses the use of an infrared scanner (analogous to a thermal imager) to determine internal surface temperature. Further, Yang discloses the use of ambient temperature sensors to monitor the ambient temperature. Finally, Yang discloses monitoring the exposure of sunlight to one or more of the vehicle surfaces)
Yang does not explicitly disclose use of predicted weather information or historical vehicle parking information.
However, Gage, in a similar field of endeavor of vehicle cabin temperature monitoring systems, teaches […] wherein predicting the surface temperature of the component comprises evaluating at least one of predicted weather information or historical vehicle parking information. (Paragraph [0021], Gage teaches the use of weather forecast data to predict/estimate the future temperature of the passenger compartment)
Yang and Gage are in a similar field of endeavor of vehicle cabin temperature monitoring systems. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing, with a reasonable expectation of success, to have modified the disclosure of Yang to have included the use of weather forecast data to predict a future cabin temperature as taught by Gage (Gage, Paragraph [0021]) for the benefit of advanced notice of a potential temperature condition (Gage, Paragraph [0021]). This represents a combination of known elements according to known methods to produce predictable results.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang in view of Dulin in further view of Mersmann, and further in view of Xie et al. (CN 216957347 U; published 12 July 2022, provided with previous office action as an authoritative document in the native language, and an English translation, the English translation is referenced below, hereinafter Xie).
Regarding Claim 8: Yang does not explicitly disclose display of a thermal map on a display.
However, Xie, in a similar field of endeavor of vehicle component temperature monitoring, teaches further comprising displaying, by the processor, upon a display screen, at least one of a thermal map of an exterior surface of a second component, wherein the second component is an infotainment system, and wherein the thermal map is displayed upon the display screen of the infotainment system. (Page [3] Paragraph [8, 13] and Figure [3], Xie teaches that the temperature distribution of a vehicle mounted display screen is shown)
Yang and Xie are in a similar field of endeavor of vehicle component temperature monitoring. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing, with a reasonable expectation of success, to have modified the disclosure of Yang to include display of a thermal map, as taught by Xie for the benefit of failure prevention through identification of potentially hazardous conditions (Xie, Page [3] Paragraph [5, 13]). Yang discloses use of infrared scanners mounted in the headliner, the rearview mirror, etc. to be used for cabin temperature monitoring, thus requiring only modification of the primary reference to display the information received from the infrared sensors. Xie is a reference that discusses an observed temperature profile of the component of interest (a vehicle mounted display screen). Therefore, this represents a combination of known elements according to known methods to produce predictable results.
Claims 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang in view of Mersmann in further view of Xie, or in the alternative, as being unpatentable over Yang in view of Mersmann in further view of Dulin and further in view of Xie.
Regarding Claim 13: Yang does not explicitly disclose display of a thermal map on a display.
However, Xie, in a similar field of endeavor of vehicle component temperature monitoring, teaches wherein the method further comprises: evaluating, by the processor, the surface temperature of a touch screen of the infotainment system; and (Page [3] Paragraph [8, 13] and Figure [3], Xie teaches measuring of the temperature distribution of a vehicle mounted display screen)
displaying, by the processor, a thermal map upon the touch screen of the infotainment system, the thermal map indicating at least a first surface temperature of a first area of the touch screen and a second surface temperature of a second area of the touch screen. (Page [3] Paragraph [8, 13] and Figure [3], Xie teaches that the temperature distribution of a vehicle mounted display screen is shown, including at least a first and second surface temperature at a first and second area)
Yang and Xie are in a similar field of endeavor of vehicle component temperature monitoring. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing, with a reasonable expectation of success, to have modified the disclosure of Yang to include display of a thermal map, as taught by Xie for the benefit of failure prevention through identification of potentially hazardous conditions (Xie, Page [3] Paragraph [5, 13]). Yang discloses use of infrared scanners mounted in the headliner, the rearview mirror, etc. to be used for cabin temperature monitoring, thus requiring only modification of the primary reference to display the information received from the infrared sensors. Xie is a reference that discusses an observed temperature profile of the component of interest (a vehicle mounted display screen). Therefore, this represents a combination of known elements according to known methods to produce predictable results.
Regarding Claim 14: Yang does not explicitly disclose display of a thermal map on a display.
However, Xie, in a similar field of endeavor of vehicle component temperature monitoring, teaches wherein evaluating the surface temperature of the touch screen of the infotainment system comprises: classifying, by the processor, the first su