Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/961,893

NOTIFICATION SYSTEM AND ELECTRIC POWER ASSISTED VEHICLE

Final Rejection §102§103§112
Filed
Oct 07, 2022
Examiner
WILSON, BRIAN P
Art Unit
2689
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Yamaha Hatsudoki Kabushiki Kaisha
OA Round
4 (Final)
62%
Grant Probability
Moderate
5-6
OA Rounds
2y 8m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 62% of resolved cases
62%
Career Allow Rate
495 granted / 792 resolved
+0.5% vs TC avg
Strong +42% interview lift
Without
With
+42.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 8m
Avg Prosecution
26 currently pending
Career history
818
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.7%
-38.3% vs TC avg
§103
48.0%
+8.0% vs TC avg
§102
18.8%
-21.2% vs TC avg
§112
24.5%
-15.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 792 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103 §112
DETAILED ACTION Summary This Office Action is in response to reply dated September 8, 2025. Claims 1 and 3-17 are currently pending. 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 . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Claim 6 requires the “notification to the user is performed by a combination of the operations of the two or more notifiers”. It is noted that when the battery charge is higher than the predetermined value, the display panel only provides the notification. For at least this reason, the claim is rendered indefinite. Clarification is requested. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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. The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action: A person shall be entitled to a patent unless – (a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claims 1, 3-9, 16 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Bartz (US 2022/0242213 A1). Regarding claim 1, Bartz discloses a notification system for use in an electric power assisted vehicle (see at least Figures 1 and 13 | [0005]), the notification system comprising: two or more notifiers to notify a user that the remaining charge of a battery that supplies power to an electric motor is low (see at least [0071] | [0127-0128] note the display could correspond to the display of the user’s device, see Figures 8-9, where the user can set thresholds, such as a first and second threshold, when notifications are to be displayed | [0129] note additionally or alternatively, a charge indicator level can be included in a display of the vehicle, wherein the charge indicator level can be fully illuminated at 100% charge, half illuminated at 50% charge, etc., and when the charge level is below a certain level, headlights can flash and/or an auditory signal can be generated | [0136] note the vehicle includes a sound component, a display, an LED, headlights, etc. | [0152] note the LCD or touch screen displays information, i.e., the charge indicator level, to the user); and a controller configured or programmed to control operations of the two or more notifiers (see at least Figures 12 and 13, item 86 | [0128] note the controller 86 sends charge level to the user device for display | [0142] note the controller | [0148] note the computing system 200 for implementing the controller 86); wherein the two or more notifiers include a display panel to display the remaining battery charge, and at least one of a lamp to emit light and a sound component to produce sound (see at least [0128-0129]); the controller is configured or programmed to compare the remaining battery charge with a predetermined value, and when the remaining battery charge is lower than or equal to the predetermined value, to notify the user by a combination of the operations of the two or more notifiers (see at least [0129] note when the charge level is below a certain level, headlights can flash and/or an auditory signal can be generated | [0145] note that when the remaining battery charge is below the second threshold, the notification is provided via a flashing light and audio indicator); and when the remaining battery charge is higher than the predetermined value, the controller is configured or programmed to cause the display panel to display the remaining battery charge, and to cause no other notifier in the notification system to perform a notification operation (see at least [0128] note a charge indicator can be displayed on the user’s device | [0129] note a charge indicator level included in a display can be fully illuminated at 100% charge | [0144] note if the remaining battery charge is below the first threshold the notification, which is above the second threshold, the notification is provided via the user interface on the vehicle or the user interface of the user’s device). Regarding claim 3, Bartz further discloses wherein the two or more notifiers include the display panel and the lamp; and when the remaining battery charge is lower than or equal to the predetermined value, the controller is configured or programmed to cause the display panel and the lamp to notify the user that the remaining battery charge is low by a combination of a remaining battery charge display on the display panel and a light emitted by the lamp (see at least [0136] note sound component, display and LED | [0129] note the charge indicator level is provided on the display and via flashing headlights or an LED when the battery charge is below a certain level | claims 18-20, note that when the charge is below the second threshold the notification is sent to the user’s device for display | [0145] note when the charge is below the second threshold the display is provided via a flashing light, audio indicator and/or the like, which can be the display of the user’s device as shown by claim 19 and/or the display of the vehicle). Regarding claim 4, Bartz, as addressed above, discloses wherein the two or more notifiers include the display panel and the sound component; and when the remaining battery charge is lower than or equal to the predetermined value, the controller is configured or programmed to cause the display panel and the sound component to notify the user that the remaining battery charge is low by a combination of a remaining battery charge display on the display panel and a sound produced by the sound component (see at least [0136] note sound component, display and LED | [0129] note the charge indicator level is provided on the display and via flashing headlights or an LED when the battery charge is below a certain level | claims 18-20, note that when the charge is below the second threshold the notification is sent to the user’s device for display | [0145] note when the charge is below the second threshold the display is provided via a flashing light, audio indicator and/or the like, which can be the display of the user’s device as shown by claim 19 and/or the display of the vehicle). Regarding claim 5, Bartz, as addressed above, discloses wherein the two or more notifiers include the display panel, the lamp, and the sound component; and when the remaining battery charge is lower than or equal to the predetermined value, the controller is configured or programmed to cause the display panel, the lamp, and the sound component to notify the user that the remaining battery charge is low by a combination of a remaining battery charge display on the display panel, a light emitted by the lamp, and a sound produced by the sound component (see at least [0136] note sound component, display and LED | [0129] note the charge indicator level is provided on the display and via flashing headlights or an LED when the battery charge is below a certain level | claims 18-20, note that when the charge is below the second threshold the notification is sent to the user’s device for display | [0145] note when the charge is below the second threshold the display is provided via a flashing light, audio indicator and/or the like, which can be the display of the user’s device as shown by claim 19 and/or the display of the vehicle). Regarding claim 6, Bartz, as addressed above, discloses wherein when the notification to the user is performed by a combination of the operations of the two or more notifiers, the controller is configured or programmed to synchronize the operations of the two or more notifiers with each other (see at least [0136] | [0128-0129] | claims 18-20 | [0144-0145]). Regarding claim 7, Bartz, as addressed above, discloses wherein the controller is configured or programmed to perform different notification operations by different combinations of the operations of the two or more notifiers, the notification operations differing between when the remaining battery charge is within a first predetermined range and when the remaining battery charge is within a second predetermined range that is lower than the first predetermined range (see at least [0128-0129] | [0144-0145]). Regarding claim 8, Bartz, as addressed above, discloses wherein the two or more notifiers include the display panel, the lamp, and the sound component; when the remaining battery charge is within the first predetermined range, the controller is configured or programmed to notify the user that the remaining battery charge is within the first predetermined range by a remaining battery charge display on the display panel in combination with of one of light emitted by the lamp and sound produced by the sound component; and when the remaining battery charge is within the second predetermined range, the controller is configured or programmed to notify the user that the remaining battery charge is within the second predetermined range by the remaining battery charge display on the display panel in combination with the other one of the light emitted by the lamp and the sound produced by the sound component (see at least [0144] note the display and light | [0145] note the display and sound). Regarding claim 9, Bartz, as addressed above, discloses wherein the two or more notifiers include the display panel, the lamp, and the sound component; when the remaining battery charge is within the first predetermined range, the controller is configured or programmed to notify the user that the remaining battery charge is within the first predetermined range by a remaining battery charge display on the display panel in combination with of one of light emitted by the lamp and sound produced by the sound component; and when the remaining battery charge is within the second predetermined range, the controller is configured or programmed to notify the user that the remaining battery charge is within the second predetermined range by a combination of the light emitted by the lamp, the sound produced by the sound component, and the remaining battery charge display on the display panel (see at least [0144] note the display and light | [0145] note the display, light and sound). Regarding claim 16, Bartz, as addressed above, discloses wherein the display panel displays an indicator to indicate the remaining battery charge (see at least [0127] | [0129]). Regarding claim 17, Bartz, as addressed above, discloses an electric power assisted vehicle comprising: the notification system according to claim 1 (see at least Figures 1 and 13 | [0005]). 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 (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. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action: A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made. Claims 10, 12 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bartz (US 2022/0242213 A1) in view of Koike (US 5,730,243 A). Regarding claim 10, Bartz, as addressed above, discloses wherein when the remaining battery charge is lower than or equal to the predetermined value, the controller is configured or programmed to cause the two or more notifiers to notify the user that the remaining battery charge is low by a combination of the operations of the two or more notifiers (see at least [0127-0129] | [0144-0145] | claims 18-20). However, Bartz does not specifically disclose and if the user performs an operation to turn off a power supply of the electric power assisted vehicle It is known to notify a user of battery charge in different ways. For example, Koike teaches a vehicle system wherein when the remaining battery charge is lower than or equal to the predetermined value, and if the user performs an operation to turn off a power supply of the electric power assisted vehicle, the controller is configured or programmed to cause a notifier to notify the user that the remaining battery charge is low (see at least col. 1, line 60 – col. 2, line 5 | col. 5, lines 9-23 of Koike, note locking the vehicle corresponds to turning off the ignition and removing the key | col. 6, lines 64-67 of Koike | col. 7, lines 58-61 | col. 17, lines 4-39 of Koike). Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the features of Koike into Bartz. This prevents the vehicle from being immobilized due to lack of power in the battery in the middle of a run. Regarding claim 12, Bartz in view of Koike, as addressed above, teach wherein when the remaining battery charge is lower than or equal to the predetermined value, and if the user performs an operation to lock a lock of the electric power assisted vehicle and the controller detects a locked state based on an output signal of a lock sensor that detects a locked state and an unlocked state of the lock, the controller is configured or programmed to cause the two or more notifiers to notify the user that the remaining battery charge is low by a combination of the operations of the two or more notifiers (see at least col. 1, line 60 – col. 2, line 5, note the circuit monitors when the key is removed from the main switch and cuts power, and the circuit monitors when the key turns on the main switch and delivers power to the system | col. 5, lines 9-23 of Koike, note locking the vehicle corresponds to turning it off the ignition and removing the key | col. 6, lines 64-67 of Koike | col. 7, lines 58-61 | col. 17, lines 4-39 of Koike). Regarding claim 13, Bartz in view of Koike, as addressed above, teach wherein when the remaining battery charge is lower than or equal to the predetermined value, and if the electric power assisted vehicle is at rest, the controller is configured or programmed to cause the two or more notifiers to notify the user that the remaining battery charge is low by a combination of the operations of the two or more notifiers (see at least col. 1, line 60 – col. 2, line 5 | col. 5, lines 9-23 of Koike, note the vehicle is at rest after turning off the ignition and removing the key | col. 6, lines 64-67 of Koike | col. 7, lines 58-61 | col. 17, lines 4-39 of Koike). Claims 14 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bartz (US 2022/0242213 A1) in view of Shull (US 2009/0261838 A1). Regarding claim 14, Bartz does not specifically disclose wherein when the user performs an operation to turn on a power supply of the electric power assisted vehicle, and if the remaining battery charge is lower than or equal to the predetermined value, the controller is configured or programmed to cause the two or more notifiers to notify the user that the remaining battery charge is low by a combination of the operations of the two or more notifiers. It is known to notify a user of battery charge in different ways. For example, Shull teaches a vehicle system wherein when the user performs an operation to turn on a power supply of the electric power assisted vehicle, and if the remaining battery charge is lower than or equal to the predetermined value, the controller is configured or programmed to cause the two or more notifiers to notify the user that the remaining battery charge is low by a combination of the operations of the two or more notifiers (see at least Figure 1, items 40, 44 and 41 | [0014-0015]). Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the features of Shull into Bartz. This provides the ability to notify the user of a low battery charge before a trip. Regarding claim 15, Bartz in view of Shull, as addressed above, teach wherein the two or more notifiers include the display panel and the lamp; and the lamp is adjacent to a portion of the display panel in which the remaining battery charge is displayed (see at least Figure 2, items 40 and 44 of Shull). Allowable Subject Matter Claim 10 is allowed. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Applicant’s arguments are persuasive. Bartz (US 2022/0242213 A1), Shull (US 2009/0261838 A1), Koike (US 5,730,243 A) and Bergum (US 2007/0045013 A1) do not disclose and/or fairly suggest the limitations as claimed. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claim 1 have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground of rejection. Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 11 are persuasive. Conclusion Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRIAN WILSON whose telephone number is 571-270-5884. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00-5:00pm. 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, CURTIS KUNTZ can be reached at 571-272-7499. 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. /BRIAN WILSON/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2687
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 07, 2022
Application Filed
Jan 25, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112
May 20, 2024
Response Filed
Aug 31, 2024
Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112
Nov 27, 2024
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Nov 30, 2024
Examiner Interview Summary
Dec 03, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Dec 20, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Jan 15, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Jan 17, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
May 02, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112
Aug 07, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Aug 09, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Sep 05, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Sep 06, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Sep 08, 2025
Response Filed
Oct 14, 2025
Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12584404
DIRECTIONAL DRILLING COMMUNICATION PROTOCOLS, APPARATUS AND METHODS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12576868
INCLEMENT WEATHER DETECTION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12567317
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR PREVENTION OF ACCIDENTS DUE TO TRIPPING OR BUMPING ON COMMON EQUIPMENT AND OPEN DOORS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12562046
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR MONITORING LOSS OF FISHING GEAR AND ESTIMATING LOCATION OF LOST FISHING GEAR
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12542043
Dynamic Context Aware Response System for Enterprise Protection
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 03, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

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

Prosecution Projections

5-6
Expected OA Rounds
62%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+42.2%)
2y 8m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 792 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

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

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

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month