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 ..
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.
Claims 1-19 and 41-42 are 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.
Regarding claim 1, the phrase "can be" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Regarding claim 11, the phrase "can be" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1. 7,11, 17, 41 and 42 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Machine Translation of KR10192534B1, hereinafter 534’.
As to claims 1 and 11, 534’ discloses in figure 8, determining, using control circuitry [the controller (804); determines the vehicle or the charging status based on the receive communication, see ¶00221, ¶0244-0245], an amount of time for charging a vehicle battery [ see ¶00244-0245] ; and
selecting, using the control circuitry [control circuitry (804) selects display object ; see ¶00245-0246], one or more media content items for display on a user device based on (a) the amount of time for charging the vehicle battery [see ¶0045-0047]; and (b) determining that the one or more media content items can be consumed within the amount of time for charging the vehicle battery [see Abstract, ¶0244-0250].
As to claims 7 and 17, 534’ discloses in figures 1-10, determining what amenities are provided at a charging station for charging the vehicle battery; and selecting the one or more media content items for display on the user device based on the determined amenities [see Abstract, ¶0244-0250].
As to claims 41-42. 534’ discloses in figures 1-10. determining that the selected one or more media content items is being consumed while the vehicle battery is charging; and adjusting a playback speed [see ¶0018-¶0019] of the one or more media content items based on the amount of time for charging the vehicle battery, such that consumption of the one or more media content items concludes within the amount of time for charging the vehicle battery [¶0235, ¶0247-¶0248, ¶0263-¶0265, ¶0275].
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 2-3 and 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over 534’ in view of Zheng et al. (US 2018/0105051), hereinafter Zheng..
As to claims 2 and 12, 534’ discloses in figures 7-10, generating the one or more media content items for display on the user device while the vehicle battery is charging [se ¶0244-0248].
534’ does not disclose explicitly, determining whether the vehicle battery has reached a predetermined state of charge while displaying the one or more media content items; determining an operational mode of the vehicle in response to the vehicle battery reaching the predetermined state of charge; and changing a setting for the display of the one or more media content items based on the operational mode of the vehicle.
Zheng discloses in figure 1, determining whether the vehicle battery has reached a predetermined state of charge while displaying the one or more media content items [see ¶0045; advertisement is displayed while charging] ; determining an operational mode of the vehicle in response to the vehicle battery reaching the predetermined state of charge; and changing a setting for the display [see figure 2D, ¶0046] the display is changing to display the surcharge and the summary of the charge after completion of the charge,] of the one or more media content items based on the operational mode of the vehicle.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the display content of 534’ as taught by Zheng in order to display the charge completion and summary in order to allow the driver of the vehicle to exit the charging station to avoid extra fee.
As to claims 3 and 13, 534’ discloses in figures -8, requesting a media content item having an audio component relating to the one or more displayed media content items based on the operational mode of the vehicle; and generating for audio playback the audio component while the vehicle is moving [see ¶0056, ¶0080, ¶0143]
Claims 4, 9,14 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over 534’ in view of Tzirkel-Hancock et al. (US 2017/0349184 A1), hereinafter Tzirkel
As to claims 4 and 14,534’ discloses all of the claim limitations except, wherein selecting the one or more media content items for display is based on multiple user profiles of people associated with the vehicle.
Tzirkel discloses in figure 1, wherein selecting the one or more media content items for display is based on multiple user profiles of people associated with the vehicle [see ¶0012-0016, ¶104; the display content is modified by vehicle occupancies profiles].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify 534’s display contents based on passengers profile as taught by Tzirkel in order to provide contents based on passenger behavior, selections and activities.
As to claims 9 and 19, Tzirkel discloses in figure 1, while the vehicle battery is being charged, the occupancy of the vehicle; and updating the selected one or more media content items for display based on the occupancy of the vehicle [the vehicle display is updated of user or passenger profile].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify 534’s display contents based on passengers profile as taught by Tzirkel in order to provide contents based on passenger behavior, selections and activities.
Claims 5 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over 534’ in view of Machine Translation of DE1020211112275, hereinafter 275’
As to claims 5 and 15, 534’ discloses all of the claim limitations except, wherein determining the amount of time for charging the vehicle battery comprises: determining a waiting time before charging can be initiated; and determining an amount of time for the vehicle battery to achieve a predetermined state of charge.
275’ discloses in figure 1, wherein determining the amount of time for charging the vehicle battery comprises: determining a waiting time before charging can be initiated; and determining an amount of time for the vehicle battery to achieve a predetermined state of charge [see ¶0050*0051].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to use battery capacity to determine charging wait and charging time of Sakuma as taught by 534’ in order to provide efficient or enough charging power to the vehicle battery to reach its destination.
Claim 6 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over 534’ in view of Machine Translation of CN113858968 , hereinafter 968’.
As to claims 6 and 16, 534’ discloses all of the claim limitations except, wherein the amount of time for charging the vehicle battery is based on a current state of charge of the vehicle battery and a state of charge required to complete an upcoming journey.
968’ disclose in figures 1-2, wherein the amount of time for charging the vehicle battery is based on a current state of charge of the vehicle battery and a state of charge required to complete an upcoming journey [see page 2, ¶004; the charging time is based on battery state of charge and trip information].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to use battery state of charge and trip to determine charging time of the vehicle battery of 534’ as taught by 968’ in order to extend electrical vehicle usage.
Claims 8 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over 534’ in view of Machine Translation of KR101925334, hereinafter 334’
As to claims 8 and 18, 534’ discloses all of the claim limitations except, the method comprising: determining, while the vehicle battery is being charged, an operational mode of a vehicle accessory device; and updating the selected one or more media content items for display based on the operational mode of a vehicle accessory device.
334’ discloses in figures 1-16, while the vehicle battery is being charged, an operational mode of a vehicle accessory device; and updating the selected one or more media content items for display based on the operational mode of a vehicle accessory device [noted that the media content is updated or the playback speed increases based on charging time].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to adjust playback time of the image display device of 534’s vehicle as taught by 334’ in order to allow the vehicle driver to finish listening or watching all of the media content prior to the charging is complete.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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.
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 SAMUEL BERHANU whose telephone number is (571)272-8430. The examiner can normally be reached M_F.
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, Julian A. Huffman can be reached at Julian.Huffman@uspto.gov. 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.
/SAMUEL BERHANU/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2859
Prosecution Insights