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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed April 16th 2026, with respect to the body temperature sensor have been fully considered and are persuasive. The office Action mailed on January 16th 2026 has been withdrawn, a new Second Non-Final Office Action is being written as below.
Claims Status:
Claims 1-18 are pending.
Claims 1-2, 4, 6-16, and18 are amended.
Claims 1-18 are examined as follow:
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.
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, 10 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jayasundera et al (US2017/0028811A1 newly cited) herein set forth as Jayasundera, in view of Spillner (US2021/0162899A1 previously cited) herein set forth as Spillner.
Regarding claim 1, Jayasundera discloses a control system (refer to the “the system” cited in paragraph 0007 below) for controlling a temperature of an environment (refer as “interior” cited in Paragraph 0008 below) upon which a passenger rests, the control system (refer to the “the system” cited in paragraph 0007 below) comprising:
a heater (refer as “heating system” cited in Paragraph 0015 below) provided to the environment (refer as “interior” cited in Paragraph 0008 below) and configured to increase a temperature of the environment (refer as “interior” cited in Paragraph 0008 below);
a body temperature sensor (refer as “body temperature sensor” cited in Paragraph 0007 below) provided to the environment (refer as “interior” cited in Paragraph 0008 below) and configured to measure a temperature of the passenger in contact with the environment (refer as “interior” cited in Paragraph 0008 below);
a temperature sensor (refer as “temperature sensor” cited in Paragraph 0008 below) configured to measure the temperature of the environment (refer as “interior” cited in Paragraph 0008 below); and
a controller (refer to “controller” cited in paragraph 0007 cited below) configured to control an output of the heater (refer as “heating system” cited in Paragraph 0015 below) based on a difference (refer to Paragraph 0027 cited: “…The systems can detect temperature, and changes in temperature, of the vehicle interior and or of the vehicle occupants. The systems include a controller configured to evaluate inputs to determine if a thermal stress danger exists for any occupant present. The controller can be configured to take action to protect the occupant from harm due to the thermal stress. Methods of preventing thermal stress for occupants of a vehicle can include, e.g., using sensor hardware to evaluate conditions in a vehicle and the thermal stress status of occupants, identifying combinations of conditions that suggest a thermal stress hazard, and energizing hardware that mitigates the thermal stress condition, e.g., by heating or cooling the interior of the vehicle…”) between the temperature of the environment (refer as “interior” cited in Paragraph 0008 below) measured by the temperature sensor (refer as “temperature sensor” cited in Paragraph 0008 below) and the temperature of passenger (refer as “body temperature” cited in paragraph 007 below) measured by the body temperature sensor (refer as “body temperature sensor” cited in Paragraph 0007 below).
(refer to Paragraph 0007 cited: “The systems for preventing excessive heat or cold exposure to occupants of a vehicle can include an occupancy sensor, an occupant body temperature sensor, a controller configured to receive signals from the occupancy sensor, and body temperature sensor, and one or more actuator to provide a response to an over heat or cold condition. The controller can be configured to determine an occupant temperature from the body temperature sensor when the controller receives an occupant present signal from the occupancy sensor. Further, the controller can be configured to activate the actuator when the determined occupant body temperature goes outside a preset temperature range.” And Paragraph 0008 cited: “…Sensors in the system can provide signals relevant to determination of a possible thermal stress danger. For example, system sensors can include a vehicle interior temperature sensor. The system controller can be configured to only activate a particular actuator if an interior temperature detected by the interior temperature sensor falls outside a preset range…” and Paragraph 0015 cited: “…Activating the actuator can include, e.g., energizing an electric window motor, energizing a fan motor, energizing a heating system, dialing a phone number, energizing an audio speaker, and/or the like …”)
Jayasundera does not disclose the mounting portion upon which the arm of the passenger rests.
In the similar field of providing and controlling warm for passenger, Spillner discloses the mounting portion (rest #100, fig.1) upon which the arm of the passenger rests (refer to the arm rest in fig.1).
PNG
media_image1.png
233
521
media_image1.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Jayasundera’s control system on to Spillner passenger arm rest warmer, as taught by Spillner, in order to provide the increasing expectation of the interior comfort of a vehicle, such that customer expectation would be meet and better utilization of the invention.
Regarding claim 2, the modification of Jayasundera and Spillner discloses substantially all features set forth in claim 1, Jayasundera further discloses a start signal output device (refer as “actuator” cited in Paragraph 0015 above) configured to output a signal (refer as “energize heating system” cited in Paragraph 0015 below) for starting an operation of the heater (refer as “heating system” cited in Paragraph 0015 below).
Regarding claim 10, the modification of Jayasundera and Spillner discloses substantially all features set forth in claim 1, Jayasundera does not specifically discloses when the temperature of the arm of the passenger is greater than or equal to the temperature of the surface of the mounting portion, the controller is configured to maximally control the output of the heater until the temperature of the arm of the passenger becomes the same as the temperature of the surface of the mounting portion.
However, Jayasundera does disclose the teaching of identifying different combination of possible (refer to Paragraph 0027 cited: “…The systems can detect temperature, and changes in temperature, of the vehicle interior and or of the vehicle occupants. The systems include a controller configured to evaluate inputs to determine if a thermal stress danger exists for any occupant present. The controller can be configured to take action to protect the occupant from harm due to the thermal stress. Methods of preventing thermal stress for occupants of a vehicle can include, e.g., using sensor hardware to evaluate conditions in a vehicle and the thermal stress status of occupants, identifying combinations of conditions that suggest a thermal stress hazard, and energizing hardware that mitigates the thermal stress condition, e.g., by heating or cooling the interior of the vehicle…”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have try any possible combination that suggested a thermal stress, implying the temperature differences such as “the temperature of the arm of the passenger is greater than or equal to the temperature of the surface of the mounting portion”, then act accordingly to minimize the thermal stress (refer to Paragraph 0015 cited above about “the controller can be configured to activate the actuator when the determined occupant body temperature goes outside a preset temperature range”), in order to able to anticipate possible thermal stress hazards and provide a safer monitoring and control for the passenger.
Regarding claim 12, Jayasundera discloses a control method (refer to the “the system” cited in paragraph 0007 below) for controlling a temperature of an environment (refer as “interior” cited in Paragraph 0008 below) upon which a passenger rests, the control method (refer to the “the system” cited in paragraph 0007 below) comprising:
receiving a signal (refer as “energize heating system” cited in Paragraph 0015 below) for starting an operation of a heater (refer as “heating system” cited in Paragraph 0015 below) for increasing a temperature (refer as “energize heating system” cited in Paragraph 0015 below) of the environment (refer as “interior” cited in Paragraph 0008 below) upon which the passenger rests;
comparing (refer to Paragraph 0027 cited: “…The systems can detect temperature, and changes in temperature, of the vehicle interior and or of the vehicle occupants. The systems include a controller configured to evaluate inputs to determine if a thermal stress danger exists for any occupant present. The controller can be configured to take action to protect the occupant from harm due to the thermal stress. Methods of preventing thermal stress for occupants of a vehicle can include, e.g., using sensor hardware to evaluate conditions in a vehicle and the thermal stress status of occupants, identifying combinations of conditions that suggest a thermal stress hazard, and energizing hardware that mitigates the thermal stress condition, e.g., by heating or cooling the interior of the vehicle…”) a temperature of the passenger (refer as “body temperature” cited in paragraph 007 below) with the temperature of the environment (refer as “interior” cited in Paragraph 0008 below) to determine an output of the heater (refer as “heating system” cited in Paragraph 0015 below); and
increasing a temperature of the heater to a preset target set temperature (refer to “preset range” cited in paragraph 0008 below)(refer to Paragraph 0007 cited: “The systems for preventing excessive heat or cold exposure to occupants of a vehicle can include an occupancy sensor, an occupant body temperature sensor, a controller configured to receive signals from the occupancy sensor, and body temperature sensor, and one or more actuator to provide a response to an over heat or cold condition. The controller can be configured to determine an occupant temperature from the body temperature sensor when the controller receives an occupant present signal from the occupancy sensor. Further, the controller can be configured to activate the actuator when the determined occupant body temperature goes outside a preset temperature range.” And Paragraph 0008 cited: “…Sensors in the system can provide signals relevant to determination of a possible thermal stress danger. For example, system sensors can include a vehicle interior temperature sensor. The system controller can be configured to only activate a particular actuator if an interior temperature detected by the interior temperature sensor falls outside a preset range…” and Paragraph 0015 cited: “…Activating the actuator can include, e.g., energizing an electric window motor, energizing a fan motor, energizing a heating system, dialing a phone number, energizing an audio speaker, and/or the like …”).
Jayasundera does not disclose the mounting portion upon which the arm of the passenger rests.
In the similar field of providing and controling warm for passenger, Spillner discloses the mounting portion (rest #100, fig.1) upon which the arm of the passenger rests (refer to the arm rest in fig.1).
PNG
media_image1.png
233
521
media_image1.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Jayasundera’s control system on to Spillner passenger arm rest warmer, as taught by Spillner, in order to provide the increasing expectation of the interior comfort of a vehicle, such that customer expectation would be meet and better utilization of the invention.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jayasundera et al (US2017/0028811A1 newly cited) herein set forth as Jayasundera, in view of Spillner (US2021/0162899A1 previously cited) herein set forth as Spillner, and further in view of Rodriguez, Jr. (US5285961 previously cited) herein set forth as Rodriguez.
Regarding claim 3, the modification of Jayasundera and Spillner discloses substantially all features set forth in claim 2, Jayasundera does not disclose wherein the start signal output device is configured to recognize a tilt of a tilt portion of the mounting portion and output a signal to the controller.
In the similar field of providing and controlling warm for passenger, Spillner further discloses control switches (refer to “control switch” annotated in fig.1) can be placed on the mounting portion (#100, fig.1) and output a signal to the controller system (#48, referring to Paragraph 0076 cited: “…a temperature control system 48 of a surface temperature-controlling device 10 according to the invention. The temperature control system 48 is used for heating or cooling air before it is introduced into the air inlets 18 of the air-distributing layer 14.…”).
PNG
media_image2.png
233
658
media_image2.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Jayasundera’s control system with control switches can be placed on the mounting portion and output a signal to the controller system, as taught by Spillner, in order to provide the increasing expectation of the interior comfort of a vehicle, such that customer expectation would be meet and better utilization of the invention.
Spillner does not explicitly disclose wherein the start signal output device is configured to recognize a tilt of a tilt portion.
In the similar field of control for heating and cooling, Rodriguez discloses wherein the start signal output device (#12 and #14, fig.2) is configured to recognize a tilt of a tilt portion (#11 and #13, fig.2).
PNG
media_image3.png
538
519
media_image3.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Jayasundera’s control system with wherein the start signal output device is configured to recognize a tilt of a tilt portion, just as taught by Rodriguez, in order to provide the wide range of adjustment and also virtually easily confirm what is the setting is by observing the amount of tilt.
Claims 4 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jayasundera et al (US2017/0028811A1 newly cited) herein set forth as Jayasundera, in view of Spillner (US2021/0162899A1 previously cited) herein set forth as Spillner, further in view of Rodriguez, Jr. (US5285961 previously cited) herein set forth as Rodriguez, and further in view of FURUI et al (US2020/0391634A1 previously cited) herein set forth as FURUI.
Regarding claim 4, the modification of Jayasundera, Spillner and Rodriguez discloses substantially all features set forth in claim 3, in claim 3 rejection the limitation “…the start signal output device is configured to output a signal to the controller…” is already disclosed.
Jayasundera or Spillner does not disclose the start signal output device is configured to output a signal indicating a stage of the tilt of the tilt portion and is configured to control the output of the heater based on the stage of the tilt of the tilt portion; the controller is configured to control the output of the heater based on the stage of the tilt of the tilt portion.
In the similar field of control for heating and cooling, Rodriguez discloses wherein the start signal output device (#12 and #14, fig.2) is configured to output a signal indicating a stage of the tilt of the tilt portion (#11 and #13, fig.2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Jayasundera’s control system with the start signal output device is configured to output a signal indicating a stage of the tilt of the tilt portion and is configured to control the output of the heater based on the stage of the tilt of the tilt portion, just as taught by Rodriguez, in order to provide the wide range of adjustment and also virtually easily confirm what is the setting is by observing the amount of tilt.
However, Rodriguez does not disclose the controller is configured to control the output of the heater based on the setting provided.
In the similar field of heater control on a seat, FURUI discloses the controller (#4, refer to Paragraph 0069 cited above) is configured to control the output of the heater (refer as “heating element” in Paragraph 0069 cited above) based on the setting provided (refer to Paragraph 0069 cited: “…The lower limit of the temperature close to the occupant's body temperature is, for example, 33° C. The upper limit is, for example 39° C., preferably 37° C., and further preferably 35° C. However, other limits are acceptable as long as the temperature limit can prevent a low-temperature burn and maintain a comfortable warming condition.…”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Spillner’s control system with the controller is configured to control the output of the temperature based on the setting provided, as taught by FURUI, in order to provide a more comfortable warming experience to the user and avoid possible sensation of burning due to the huge temperature different from the heating element and the user body temperature (refer to Paragraph 0069 cited: “…The lower limit of the temperature close to the occupant's body temperature is, for example, 33° C. The upper limit is, for example 39° C., preferably 37° C., and further preferably 35° C. However, other limits are acceptable as long as the temperature limit can prevent a low-temperature burn and maintain a comfortable warming condition.…”).
Regarding claim 18, the modification of Jayasundera and Spillner, discloses substantially all features set forth in claim 12, Jayasundera or Spillner does not explicitly disclose determining whether to manually adjust the temperature of the heater after the determining of the output of the heater, wherein, when the temperature of the heater is manually adjusted, the output of the heater is determined based on a stage of a signal received from a sensor detecting that a part of the mounting portion is tilted.
In the similar field of control for heating and cooling, Rodriguez further discloses wherein the start signal output device (#12 and #14, fig.2) is configured to output a signal indicating a stage of the tilt of the tilt portion (#11 and #13, fig.2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Jayasundera’s control method a sensor detecting that a part of the mounting portion is tilted, just as taught by Rodriguez, in order to provide the wide range of adjustment and also virtually easily confirm what is the setting is by observing the amount of tilt.
Rodriguez does not disclose determining whether to manually adjust the temperature of the heater after the determining of the output of the heater, wherein, when the temperature of the heater is manually adjusted, the output of the heater is determined based on a stage of a signal received from a sensor detecting.
In the similar field of heater control on a seat, FURUI discloses determining whether to manually adjust (refer to paragraph 0003 cited: “…In the initial mode, a heating temperature of the first heater unit is set higher than a heating temperature of the second heater unit. In the steady mode, the heating temperature of the first heater unit is set lower than the heating temperature of the second heater unit, and the heating temperature of the second heater unit is set lower than the heating temperature of the third heater unit …”) the temperature (refer as “heating temperature” cited in Paragraph 0003 above) of the heater (refer as “heating element” in Paragraph 0069 cited above, or “heating unit” in Paragraph 0003 cited above) after the determining of the output of the heater (refer as “heating element” in Paragraph 0069 cited above, or “heating unit” in Paragraph 0003 cited above), wherein, when the temperature of the heater (refer as “heating element” in Paragraph 0069 cited above, or “heating unit” in Paragraph 0003 cited above) is manually adjusted (refer to “high” and “low” temperature in Paragraph 0003 above), the output of the heater (refer as “heating element” in Paragraph 0069 cited above, or “heating unit” in Paragraph 0003 cited above) is determined based on a stage of a signal received from a sensor (refer to temperature sensor #5 and #6 in fig.2) detecting.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Spillner’s control method with determining whether to manually adjust the temperature of the heater after the determining of the output of the heater, wherein, when the temperature of the heater is manually adjusted, the output of the heater is determined based on a stage of a signal received from a sensor, as taught by FURUI, in order to provide a more comfortable warming experience to the user and avoid possible sensation of burning due to the huge temperature different from the heating element and the user body temperature (refer to Paragraph 0069 cited: “…The lower limit of the temperature close to the occupant's body temperature is, for example, 33° C. The upper limit is, for example 39° C., preferably 37° C., and further preferably 35° C. However, other limits are acceptable as long as the temperature limit can prevent a low-temperature burn and maintain a comfortable warming condition.…”).
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jayasundera et al (US2017/0028811A1 newly cited) herein set forth as Jayasundera, in view of Spillner (US2021/0162899A1 previously cited) herein set forth as Spillner, and further in view of in view of Akhbari et al (US2019/0354238A1 newly cited) herein set forth as Akhbari.
Regarding claim 5, the modification of Jayasundera and Spillner discloses substantially all features set forth in claim 2, Jayasundera or Spillner does not explicitly disclose wherein the start signal output device includes at least one of a proximity sensor configured to recognize a distance between the mounting portion and the arm of the passenger or a pressure sensor configured to measure a pressure at which the arm of the passenger presses the mounting portion.
In the similar field of signal output device, Akhbari discloses wherein the start signal output device (#100, fig.1) includes at least one of a proximity sensor (#102, fig.1) configured to recognize a distance between the mounting portion (#104, fig.1) and the arm of the passenger (#112 and #113, fig.1) or a pressure sensor (#102, fig.1) configured to measure a pressure (refer to “ADC output” in fig.1) at which the arm of the passenger (#112 and #113 in fig.1) presses the mounting portion (#104, fig.1).
PNG
media_image4.png
814
554
media_image4.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Jayasundera’s control system with wherein the start signal output device includes at least one of a proximity sensor configured to recognize a distance between the mounting portion and the arm of the passenger or a pressure sensor configured to measure a pressure at which the arm of the passenger presses the mounting portion, as taught by Akhbari, in order to provide a much more appealing capacitive sensing than mechanical switches and rotary encoders, both in term of looks and reliability (refer to paragraph 0002 cited: “…Capacitive sensing has proven to be much more appealing than mechanical switches and rotary encoders, both in terms of looks and reliability...”).
Claims 6-7 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jayasundera et al (US2017/0028811A1 newly cited) herein set forth as Jayasundera, in view of Spillner (US2021/0162899A1 previously cited) herein set forth as Spillner, further in view of Akhbari et al (US2019/0354238A1 previously cited) herein set forth as Akhbari, and further in view of FURUI et al (US2020/0391634A1 previously cited) herein set forth as FURUI.
Regarding claim 6, the modification of Jayasundera, Spillner and Akhbari discloses substantially all features set forth in claim 5, Jayasundera or Spillner does not explicitly disclose wherein, when the start signal output device is the pressure sensor, the controller is configured to control the output of the heater based on a degree of pressure at which the passenger presses a part of the mounting portion on which the pressure sensor is located.
In the similar field of signal output device, Akhbari further discloses wherein, a degree of pressure (refer to “ADC output” in fig.1) at which the passenger presses (#112 and #113 in fig.1) a part of the mounting portion (#104, fig.1) on which the pressure sensor (#102, fig.1) is located.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Jayasundera’s control system with a degree of pressure at which the passenger presses a part of the mounting portion on which the pressure sensor is located, as taught by Akhbari, in order to provide a much more appealing capactive sensing than mechanical switches and rotary encoders, both in term of looks and reliability (refer to paragraph 0002 cited: “…Capacitive sensing has proven to be much more appealing than mechanical switches and rotary encoders, both in terms of looks and reliability...”).
Akhbari does not disclose the controller is configured to control the output of the heater based on the setting provided.
In the similar field of heater control on a seat, FURUI discloses the controller (#4, refer to Paragraph 0069 cited above) is configured to control the output of the heater (refer as “heating element” in Paragraph 0069 cited above) based on the setting provided (refer to Paragraph 0069 cited: “…The lower limit of the temperature close to the occupant's body temperature is, for example, 33° C. The upper limit is, for example 39° C., preferably 37° C., and further preferably 35° C. However, other limits are acceptable as long as the temperature limit can prevent a low-temperature burn and maintain a comfortable warming condition.…”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Jayasundera’s control system with the controller is configured to control the output of the temperature based on the setting provided, as taught by FURUI, in order to provide a more comfortable warming experience to the user and avoid possible sensation of burning due to the huge temperature different from the heating element and the user body temperature (refer to Paragraph 0069 cited: “…The lower limit of the temperature close to the occupant's body temperature is, for example, 33° C. The upper limit is, for example 39° C., preferably 37° C., and further preferably 35° C. However, other limits are acceptable as long as the temperature limit can prevent a low-temperature burn and maintain a comfortable warming condition.…”).
Regarding claim 7, the modification of Jayasundera, Spillner and Akhbari discloses substantially all features set forth in claim 5, Jayasundera or Spillner does not explicitly disclose wherein, when the start signal output device is the proximity sensor, the proximity sensor is configured to transmit a signal indicating that the arm of the passenger is detected within a preset distance to the controller, and the controller is configured to activate the heater.
In the similar field of signal output device, Akhbari further discloses the proximity sensor (#102, fig.1) is configured to transmit a signal indicating that the arm of the passenger (#112 and #113, fig.1) is detected within a preset distance (refer to the distance of #104 to the passenger in fig.1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Jayasundera’s control system with the proximity sensor is configured to transmit a signal indicating that the arm of the passenger is detected within a preset distance, as taught by Akhbari, in order to provide a much more appealing capactive sensing than mechanical switches and rotary encoders, both in term of looks and reliability (refer to paragraph 0002 cited: “…Capacitive sensing has proven to be much more appealing than mechanical switches and rotary encoders, both in terms of looks and reliability...”).
Akhbari does not disclose the controller is configured to control the output of the heater based on the setting provided.
In the similar field of heater control on a seat, FURUI discloses the controller (#4, refer to Paragraph 0069 cited above) is configured to control the output of the heater (refer as “heating element” in Paragraph 0069 cited above) based on the setting provided (refer to Paragraph 0069 cited: “…The lower limit of the temperature close to the occupant's body temperature is, for example, 33° C. The upper limit is, for example 39° C., preferably 37° C., and further preferably 35° C. However, other limits are acceptable as long as the temperature limit can prevent a low-temperature burn and maintain a comfortable warming condition.…”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Jayasundera’s control system with the controller is configured to control the output of the temperature based on the setting provided, as taught by FURUI, in order to provide a more comfortable warming experience to the user and avoid possible sensation of burning due to the huge temperature different from the heating element and the user body temperature (refer to Paragraph 0069 cited: “…The lower limit of the temperature close to the occupant's body temperature is, for example, 33° C. The upper limit is, for example 39° C., preferably 37° C., and further preferably 35° C. However, other limits are acceptable as long as the temperature limit can prevent a low-temperature burn and maintain a comfortable warming condition.…”).
Regarding claim 13, the modification of Jayasundera and Spillner discloses substantially all features set forth in claim 12, Jayasundera or Spillner does not disclose wherein the signal for starting the operation of the heater is a signal received from at least one of a body temperature sensor configured to measure the temperature of the arm of the passenger, a proximity sensor configured to detect that the arm of the passenger approaches the mounting portion, a sensor configured to detect a stage of a tilt of a part of the mounting portion, or a pressure sensor configured to detect a pressure applied to a part of the mounting portion.
In the similar field of signal output device, Akhbari further discloses wherein, a degree of pressure (refer to “ADC output” in fig.1) at which the passenger presses (#112 and #113 in fig.1) a part of the mounting portion (#104, fig.1) on which the pressure sensor (#102, fig.1) is located.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Jayasundera’s control system with a pressure sensor configured to detect a pressure applied to a part of the mounting portion, as taught by Akhbari, in order to provide a much more appealing capactive sensing than mechanical switches and rotary encoders, both in term of looks and reliability (refer to paragraph 0002 cited: “…Capacitive sensing has proven to be much more appealing than mechanical switches and rotary encoders, both in terms of looks and reliability...”).
Akhbari does not disclose the controller is configured to control the output of the heater based on the sensor provided.
In the similar field of heater control on a seat, FURUI further discloses the controller (#4, fig.2 and refer to Paragraph 0069 cited above) is configured to control the output of the heater (refer as “heating element” in Paragraph 0069 cited above and in fig.2) based on the sensor (#5 and #6, fig.2) provided (refer to Paragraph 0069 cited: “…The lower limit of the temperature close to the occupant's body temperature is, for example, 33° C. The upper limit is, for example 39° C., preferably 37° C., and further preferably 35° C. However, other limits are acceptable as long as the temperature limit can prevent a low-temperature burn and maintain a comfortable warming condition.…”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Spillner’s control method with wherein the signal for starting the operation of the heater is a signal, as taught by FURUI, in order to provide a more comfortable warming experience to the user and avoid possible sensation of burning due to the huge temperature different from the heating element and the user body temperature (refer to Paragraph 0069 cited: “…The lower limit of the temperature close to the occupant's body temperature is, for example, 33° C. The upper limit is, for example 39° C., preferably 37° C., and further preferably 35° C. However, other limits are acceptable as long as the temperature limit can prevent a low-temperature burn and maintain a comfortable warming condition.…”).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jayasundera et al (US2017/0028811A1 newly cited) herein set forth as Jayasundera, in view of Spillner (US2021/0162899A1 previously cited) herein set forth as Spillner, and further in view of FURUI et al (US2020/0391634A1 previously cited) herein set forth as FURUI.
Regarding claim 8, the modification of Jayasundera and Spillner discloses substantially all features set forth in claim 1, Jayasundera or Spillner does not explicitly disclose wherein, when the temperature of the arm of the passenger is greater than or equal to the temperature of the surface of the mounting portion, the controller is configured to maximally control the output of the heater until the temperature of the arm of the passenger becomes the same as the temperature of the surface of the mounting portion.
In the similar field of heater control on a seat, FURUI discloses when the temperature of the arm of the passenger (refer as “body temperature” cited in Paragraph 0069) is greater than or equal to the temperature of the surface (refer to “the surface temperature” in Paragraph 0064 cited above) of the mounting portion (refer to Paragraph 0064 cited: “…First temperature sensor 5 shown in FIG. 2 detects the surface temperature of the seat surface material heated by the first heat generator…”), the controller is configured to maximally control (refer to the “upper limit” cited in Paragraph 0069 below) the output of the heater (refer as “heating element” in Paragraph 0069 cited above) until the temperature of the arm of the passenger (refer as “body temperature” cited in Paragraph 0069) becomes the same (refer as the heating element temperature is reaching body temperature as discussed in paragraph 0069) as the temperature of the surface (refer to “the surface temperature” in Paragraph 0064 cited above) of the mounting portion (refer to Paragraph 0069 cited: “…The lower limit of the temperature close to the occupant's body temperature is, for example, 33° C. The upper limit is, for example 39° C., preferably 37° C., and further preferably 35° C. However, other limits are acceptable as long as the temperature limit can prevent a low-temperature burn and maintain a comfortable warming condition.…”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Jayasundera’s control system with wherein, when the temperature of the arm of the passenger is greater than or equal to the temperature of the surface of the mounting portion, the controller is configured to maximally control the output of the heater until the temperature of the arm of the passenger becomes the same as the temperature of the surface of the mounting portion, as taught by FURUI, in order to provide a better control to the heating, such that a more comfortability and better user experience for the user.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jayasundera et al (US2017/0028811A1 newly cited) herein set forth as Jayasundera, in view of Spillner (US2021/0162899A1 previously cited) herein set forth as Spillner, further in view of FURUI et al (US2020/0391634A1 previously cited) herein set forth as FURUI, and further in view of Martini et al (US2012/0323461A1 previously cited) herein set forth as Martini.
Regarding claim 9, the modification of Jayasundera, Spillner and FURUI discloses substantially all features set forth in claim 8, Jayasundera, Spillner or FURUI does not explicitly disclose wherein, when the temperature of the arm of the passenger becomes the same as the temperature of the surface of the mounting portion, the controller is configured to perform a Proportional-integral control (PI control) on the output of the heater until the temperature of the surface of the mounting portion reaches a preset target set temperature.
However, Claim 8 rejection already discloses the monitoring of the temperature of the arm of the passenger and the temperature of the surface of the mounting portion, also the controller is configured to adjust the output of the heater until the temperature of the surface of the mounting portion reaches a preset target set temperature, but only does not discloses the use of a Proportional-integral control (PI control).
In the similar field of control heater on car, Martini discloses wherein, when the temperature of the arm of the passenger becomes the same (refer as the “magnitude” cited in Paragraph 0040 below) as the temperature of the surface of the mounting portion, the controller is configured to perform a Proportional-integral control (PI control) (refer to “a non-linear proportional control scheme” cited in paragraph 0040 cited below) on the output of the heater until the temperature of the surface of the mounting portion reaches a preset target set temperature (refer to Paragraph 0040 cited: “…The magnitude of the heater performance scalar corresponding to the difference between the preferred minimum coolant temperature and the coolant temperature may be determined using a non-linear proportional control scheme, a proportional-integral control scheme, or another control scheme. FIG. 6 illustrates an exemplary heater performance scalar 630 in relation to a preferred minimum coolant temperature 610 and a coolant temperature 620 as a function of the present vehicle runtime 640 for an internal combustion engine 40 employed in a hybrid powertrain system 20. The magnitude of the heater performance scalar ramps in from an initially high value and changes as a function of the difference between the preferred minimum coolant temperature 610 and the coolant temperature for the present vehicle runtime 620.…”) .
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Jayasundera’s control system with wherein, when the temperature of the arm of the passenger becomes the same as the temperature of the surface of the mounting portion, the controller is configured to perform a Proportional-integral control (PI control) on the output of the heater until the temperature of the surface of the mounting portion reaches a preset target set temperature, as taught by Martini, in order to provide an effective controlled temperature flux between the heat generation and the passenger, such that would use lesser energy and more efficient warming of the passenger.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jayasundera et al (US2017/0028811A1 newly cited) herein set forth as Jayasundera, in view of Spillner (US2021/0162899A1 previously cited) herein set forth as Spillner, and further in view of Stetson (US2018/0185191A1 newly cited) herein set forth as Stetson.
Regarding claim 11, the modification of Jayasundera and Spillner discloses substantially all features set forth in claim 1, Jayasundera or Spillner does not discloses wherein the body temperature sensor is spatially separated from a portion where the heater is disposed by being surrounded by a heat insulating layer.
In the field of sensor placement in a heater element, Stetson discloses wherein the body temperature sensor (#20, fig.6A) is spatially separated from a portion where the heater (#10, fig.6A) is disposed by being surrounded by a heat insulating layer (#12, fig.6A, refer to Paragraph 0026 cited: “…The heating element 10, cloth 12, and temperature sensor 20 will be held against the eyelid with a 100 g beanbag. This will also serve to insulate the temperature sensor from the outside environment, allowing for more accurate temperature readings.…”).
PNG
media_image5.png
339
536
media_image5.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Jayasundera’s control system with wherein the body temperature sensor is spatially separated from a portion where the heater is disposed by being surrounded by a heat insulating layer, as taught by Stetson, in order to provide a better temperature reading such that better and more accurate temperature reading.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jayasundera et al (US2017/0028811A1 newly cited) herein set forth as Jayasundera, in view of Spillner (US2021/0162899A1 previously cited) herein set forth as Spillner, further in view of Martini et al (US2012/0323461A1 previously cited) herein set forth as Martini.
Regarding claim 14, the modification of Jayasundera and Spillner discloses substantially all features set forth in claim 12, Jayasundera or Spillner does not explicitly disclose wherein determining the output of the heater includes: maximally controlling the output of the heater when the temperature of the arm of the passenger is higher than the temperature of the surface of the mounting portion; or performing a Proportional-integral control (PI control) on the output of the heater until the temperature of the surface of the mounting portion reaches a preset target set temperature when the temperature of the arm of the passenger is less than or equal to the temperature of the surface of the mounting portion.
However, Claim 12 rejection already discloses the monitoring of the temperature of the arm of the passenger and the temperature of the surface of the mounting portion, also the controller is configured to adjust the output of the heater until the temperature of the surface of the mounting portion reaches a preset target set temperature, but only does not discloses the use of a Proportional-integral control (PI control).
In the similar field of control heater on car, Martini discloses the use of a Proportional-integral control (PI control) for temperature monitoring and control (refer to Paragraph 0040 cited: “…The magnitude of the heater performance scalar corresponding to the difference between the preferred minimum coolant temperature and the coolant temperature may be determined using a non-linear proportional control scheme, a proportional-integral control scheme, or another control scheme. FIG. 6 illustrates an exemplary heater performance scalar 630 in relation to a preferred minimum coolant temperature 610 and a coolant temperature 620 as a function of the present vehicle runtime 640 for an internal combustion engine 40 employed in a hybrid powertrain system 20. The magnitude of the heater performance scalar ramps in from an initially high value and changes as a function of the difference between the preferred minimum coolant temperature 610 and the coolant temperature for the present vehicle runtime 620.…”) .
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Jayasundera’s control method with wherein, when the temperature of the arm of the passenger becomes the same as the temperature of the surface of the mounting portion, the controller is configured to perform a Proportional-integral control (PI control) on the output of the heater until the temperature of the surface of the mounting portion reaches a preset target set temperature, as taught by Martini, in order to provide an effective controlled temperature flux between the heat generation and the passenger, such that would use lesser energy and more efficient warming of the passenger.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jayasundera et al (US2017/0028811A1 newly cited) herein set forth as Jayasundera, in view of Spillner (US2021/0162899A1 previously cited) herein set forth as Spillner, further in view of Martini et al (US2012/0323461A1 previously cited) herein set forth as Martini, and further in view of FURUI et al (US2020/0391634A1 previously cited) herein set forth as FURUI.
Regarding claim 15, the modification of Jayasundera, Spillner and Martini discloses substantially all features set forth in claim 14, Jayasundera, Spillner or Martini does not explicitly disclose wherein, when the temperature of the arm of the passenger is higher than the temperature of the surface of the mounting portion, the output of the heater is maximally controlled until the temperature of the arm of the passenger reaches the temperature of the surface of the mounting portion.
In the similar field of heater control on a seat, FURUI discloses when the temperature of the arm of the passenger (refer as “body temperature” cited in Paragraph 0069) is greater than or equal to the temperature of the surface (refer to “the surface temperature” in Paragraph 0064 cited above) of the mounting portion (refer to Paragraph 0064 cited: “…First temperature sensor 5 shown in FIG. 2 detects the surface temperature of the seat surface material heated by the first heat generator…”), the controller is configured to maximally control (refer to the “upper limit” cited in Paragraph 0069 below) the output of the heater (refer as “heating element” in Paragraph 0069 cited above) until the temperature of the arm of the passenger (refer as “body temperature” cited in Paragraph 0069) becomes the same (refer as the heating element temperature is reaching body temperature as discussed in paragraph 0069) as the temperature of the surface (refer to “the surface temperature” in Paragraph 0064 cited above) of the mounting portion (refer to Paragraph 0069 cited: “…The lower limit of the temperature close to the occupant's body temperature is, for example, 33° C. The upper limit is, for example 39° C., preferably 37° C., and further preferably 35° C. However, other limits are acceptable as long as the temperature limit can prevent a low-temperature burn and maintain a comfortable warming condition.…”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Jayasundera’s control system with wherein, when the temperature of the arm of the passenger is greater than or equal to the temperature of the surface of the mounting portion, the controller is configured to maximally control the output of the heater until the temperature of the arm of the passenger becomes the same as the temperature of the surface of the mounting portion, as taught by FURUI, in order to provide a better control to the heating, such that a more comfortability and better user experience for the user.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jayasundera et al (US2017/0028811A1 newly cited) herein set forth as Jayasundera, in view of Spillner (US2021/0162899A1 previously cited) herein set forth as Spillner, further in view of Martini et al (US2012/0323461A1 previously cited) herein set forth as Martini, and further in view of FURUI et al (US2020/0391634A1 previously cited) herein set forth as FURUI, and further in view of Ueda et al (US11318862B2 newly cited) herein set forth as Ueda.
Regarding claim 16, the modification of Jayasundera, Spillner, Martini and FURUI discloses substantially all features set forth in claim 15, Jayasundera, Spillner, Martini or FURUI does not explicitly disclose wherein the PI control is performed on the output of the heater until the temperature of the surface of the mounting portion reaches a preset target set temperature after the temperature of the arm of the passenger reaches the temperature of the surface of the mounting portion.
However, Claim 15 rejection already discloses wherein the PI control is performed on the output of the heater until the temperature of the surface of the mounting portion reaches the temperature of the surface of the mounting portion, but only does not discloses a preset target set temperature after the temperature of the arm of the passenger reaches the temperature of the surface of the mounting portion.
In the similar field of heating and cooling control in the vehicle, Ueda discloses the use of a second target temperature after the first target is reach (refer to claim 1 cited: “…the second information indicates that the target temperature when the remaining capacity is equal to or higher than the first remaining capacity threshold is a second target temperature which is higher than the first target temperature, and the controller is configured to execute a first heating process to heat the battery to the first target temperature using the heater, … and the obtained temperature is lower than the first target temperature, and execute a second heating process to heat the battery to the second target temperature using the heater…”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Jayasundera’s control method with the use of second target temperature to control heating, just as taught by Ueda, in order to provide further required heating or extra heating, such that higher temperature can be achieved.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jayasundera et al (US2017/0028811A1 newly cited) herein set forth as Jayasundera, in view of Spillner (US2021/0162899A1 previously cited) herein set forth as Spillner, and further in view of Okamoto et al (US2012/0234932A1 newly cited) herein set forth as Okamoto.
Regarding claim 17, the modification of Jayasundera and Spillner discloses substantially all features set forth in claim 12, Jayasundera or Spillner does not explicitly disclose comparing the temperature of the arm of the passenger with the temperature of the surface of the mounting portion again after a predetermined time elapses since the temperature of the surface of the mounting portion has risen to a preset target set temperature.
However, Claim 12 rejection already discloses the monitoring of the temperature of the arm of the passenger and the temperature of the surface of the mounting portion, also the controller is configured to adjust the output of the heater until the temperature of the surface of the mounting portion reaches a preset target set temperature, but only does not discloses a predetermined time elapses since the temperature of the surface of the mounting portion has risen to a preset target set temperature.
Regarding limitation that “…a predetermined time elapses since the temperature of the surface of the mounting portion has risen to a preset target set temperature …”, the courts have held that where general condition of claim is disposed in the prior art that monitor the temperature different between the surface of the mounting portion and the arm of the passenger, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable range (MPEP 2144.05 IIa),
In the similar field of heating control in a vehicular compartment, Okamoto discloses the use of predetermined time elapses (refer to Paragraph 0019 cited: “…a vehicular heating system which adjusts a heating element surface member temperature of a radiative heater which warms a passenger in accordance with temperature information inside the passenger compartment, in which vehicular heating system, before a predetermined time elapses from when heating by the vehicular heating system is turned ON or at the time of elapse, the heating element surface member temperature is controlled based on a setting for which a first upper threshold value where the passenger will not suffer high temperature burn injuries is set and which is set to increase proportionally or in a monotone functional way in accordance with temperature information inside the passenger compartment at below that upper threshold value, and, after a predetermined time elapses from when heating by the vehicular heating system is turned ON, the heating element surface member temperature is controlled to not more than a second upper threshold value where the passenger will not suffer low temperature burn injuries.…”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Jayasundera’s control method with the use of predetermined time elapses, as taught by Okamoto, in order to reduce the read cycle of the sensor and processing capability requirement, such that would reduce manufacturing cost and increase the life span of the sensors and processing capability.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YEONG JUEN THONG whose telephone number is (571)272-6930. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday.
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, Steven W. Crabb can be reached at 5712705095. 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.
/YEONG JUEN THONG/Examiner, Art Unit 3761 May 22th 2026
/STEVEN W CRABB/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3761
Prosecution Insights