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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 01/02/2026 has been entered.
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 1-2, 4-6 and 9, 11-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Almahmoud et al (US 20200247423 A1) in view of Andreas et al (EP 3597480 A1).
Regarding claims 1 and 2, Almahmoud in figures 1-7 discloses a vehicle weight monitoring system (100; system for weight monitoring), comprising installed underneath a lining (118) divided into cells (para [0006]) of a vehicle (truck; Figs. 1 and 2) a plurality of weight sensors (102, 104, 106, and 108) that each individually (Fig. 5) measure weight of cargo (load) of the vehicle (truck) that is situated above the lining (118) for a respective one of the cells (Fig. 1); a control manager (606; microprocessor) operationally connected to the weight sensors (102, 104, 106, and 108); and a display (608) operationally connected to the control manager (606); wherein the control manager (606) in real-time (para [0007]) during driving of the vehicle determines weight information (para [0046]) based on using input from the weight sensors (102, 104, 106, and 108) and causes the display (608); the weight information (Fig. 6; para [0054]). Wherein the outputted weight information displayed on the display (para [0035]) includes: for each of the cells (Figs. 1 and 5), a numeric amount (ex: 20kg), in a predetermined weight unit (para [0045]), of the measured weight (Fig. 5; para [0045]) of the cargo (load) as measured by the respective one of the sensors (102, 104, 106, and 108); a warning (para [0046]) if it is determined that a load in the bed (116) is over a maximum weight (para [0047]) along with a specific recommendation as to an amount of weight to remove so that the load is no longer over the maximum weight (Fig. 7): a warning (alarm) if it is determined that a load in the bed (116) is imbalanced along with a recommendation as to how to correct the imbalance including a specific recommendation as to a weight amount to move from a first side to a second side (para [0046]): and wherein the vehicle control manager (606) calculates (para [0049]) an overall score taking into consideration load weight relative to the maximum weight and an extent (para [0036] and [0037]), if any, of an imbalance. Almahmoud does not explicitly disclose graphically display and output a color-coded indicia.
Andreas teaches graphically display (Paragraph [0061] lines 582-583) and output a color-coded indicia (Paragraph [0065] lines 631-632, Figs.3A and 3B).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Almahmoud’s system for weight monitoring with Andreas’ color-coded indicia because this will provide real-time overload detection and improve driving safety.
Regarding claim 4, Almahmoud in view of Andreas discloses the vehicle weight monitoring system (system for weight monitoring), wherein the display (608) shows a graphical depiction (Paragraph [0061] lines 582-583; Andreas) of a truck bed (116).
The motivation for combining Almahmoud and Andreas would be the same as the one stated above.
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Almahmoud and Andreas discloses the vehicle weight monitoring system (system for weight monitoring), wherein each of the cells (quadrant) is located within a different area (Figs. 1 and 5) of the truck bed (116).
The motivation for combining Almahmoud and Andreas would be the same as the one stated above.
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Almahmoud and Andreas discloses the vehicle weight monitoring system (system for weight monitoring), wherein the control manager (606) determines whether a load of the vehicle (truck) is unbalanced based on a set of rules taking into consideration the distribution of weights among the cells (quadrant) (Paragraph [0050] lines 464-468; Andreas).
The motivation for combining Almahmoud and Andreas would be the same as the one stated above.
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Almahmoud and Andreas discloses in the vehicle weight monitoring system (system for weight monitoring), wherein the control manager (606) sums the weights from each of the weight sensors (102, 104, 106, 108) to calculate a total vehicle weight (para [0035]; Almahmoud) and the display graphically illustrates the total vehicle weight (Paragraph [0031] lines 239-241 & Paragraph [0061] lines 583-585).
The motivation for combining Almahmoud and Andreas would be the same as the one stated above.
Regarding claim 11, the combination of Almahmoud and Andreas the vehicle weight monitoring system (system for weight monitoring), wherein the vehicle control manager (606) causes the display (608) to output the total recommended maximum load weight and displays the total calculated load weight (Paragraph [0031] lines 239-244).
The motivation for combining Almahmoud and Andreas would be the same as the one stated above.
Regarding claim 12, the combination of Almahmoud and Andreas discloses the vehicle weight monitoring system (system for weight monitoring), wherein the vehicle control manager (606) causes the display (608) to color-code the warnings (Paragraph [0065] lines 631-632).
The motivation for combining Almahmoud and Andreas would be the same as the one stated above.
Regarding claim 13, the combination of Almahmoud and Andreas discloses the vehicle weight monitoring system (system for weight monitoring), wherein the vehicle control manager (606) causes the display (608) to audibly output one or more of the warmings (para [0061]).
The motivation would be the same as above.
Regarding claim 14, the combination of Almahmoud and Andreas discloses the vehicle weight monitoring system (system for weight monitoring), wherein the vehicle control manager (606) causes the display (608) to haptically output one or more of the warmings (para [0035]).
The motivation would be the same as above.
Regarding claim 15, the combination of Almahmoud and Andreas discloses the vehicle weight monitoring system (system for weight monitoring), wherein the lining (118) is a bed lining (Figs. 1, 2 and 5).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Almahmoud et al.
Regarding claim 8, Almahmoud discloses the vehicle weight monitoring system (system for weight monitoring). Almahmoud fails to disclose the vehicle is an SUV.
The examiner notes a claim containing a recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus" if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1987). MPEP 2114.
It would have been obvious to one having skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use Andreas’ weight measurement sensors in an SUV because this type of vehicle provides more seating options, is family friendly and has a large area to transport cargo that can also be monitored for weight imbalance.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MIREILLE SANDRA SADATE-MOUALEU whose telephone number is (571)272-2862. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 0730-1700.
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, Peter Macchiarolo can be reached at 571-272-2375. 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.
/MIREILLE S SADATE-MOUALEU/Examiner, Art Unit 2855 .
/PETER J MACCHIAROLO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2855