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 Amendment
This Office action has been issued in response to amendment filed 07/07/2025. Claims 1, 4-5, 9, and 15 are amended. Claims 3, 8, 12, and 20 are canceled. Claim 21-22 are new claims. Claims 1-2, 4-7, 9-11, 13-19, and 21-22 are pending, and rejected as detailed below. This action is final as necessitated by amendment.
Response to Arguments
Claim Objection
Amendment to claims 1, 5, and 9 are entered. Therefore the claim objection for claims 1, 5, and 9 have been withdrawn.
Claim rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(a)
Amendment to claims 1, 9, and 15 are entered. Therefore the claim rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) for claims 1, 9, and 15 have been withdrawn.
Claim rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(b)
Amendment to claims 1 and 9 are entered. Therefore the claim rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) for claims 1 and 9 have been withdrawn.
Claim rejection for 35 U.S.C. 103
Applicant argues that even if Ghannam teaches taking images of a tire and determining a change in the tire based on the images, Ghannam is silent as to specifically determining that there is an air hose connected to the tire based on the captured images. Therefore, Ghannam fails to remedy Juzswik in teaching Applicant's dependent claim 8 (now included in Applicant's amended independent claims 1, 9, and 15).
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the rejections of claims 1, 9, and 15 under 35 U.S.C. §103 have been fully considered and not persuasive as previously applied reference Schofield (US 6445287 B1) teaches about the detection of air hose to the valve stem of the wheel. In particular, the amendments to claims 1, 9, and 15 are addressed in the instant office action.
Applicant argues that Ghannam fails to teach that the images from the camera are used to determine that the vehicle is located at an air station. Therefore, Ghannam fails to remedy Juzswik in teaching Applicant's amended independent claims 1, 9, and 15, as well as new claim 22.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the rejections of claims 1, 9, and 15 under 35 U.S.C. §103 have been fully considered and not persuasive as the combination of Ghannam and Schofield teaches the air hose being detected through the images. Furthermore, it is inherent that the vehicle is located at an air station when the air hose is detected via the images. In particular, the amendments to claims 1, 9, and 15 are addressed in the instant office action.
Applicant argues that Schofield fails to teach that the vibration occurs instead of another type of alert (an audio signal) based on the location of the vehicle. Therefore, Scofield fails to remedy Juzswik in teaching Applicant's dependent claim 4. The remaining cited art also fails to remedy these deficiencies of Juzswik and Scofield.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the rejections of claims 4 under 35 U.S.C. §103 have been fully considered and not persuasive as Scofield teaches about audible and visible tire inflation indicators as the primary alters (Col. 11, lines 20-23), and the vibration of the valve stem as an optional alert instead of the primary alters (Col. 13, lines 64-67 & Col. 14, lines 1-6). In particular, the amendments to claims 4 are addressed in the instant office action.
Applicant argues that shaking the steering wheel does not necessarily equate to turning the wheels of the vehicle (depending on the manner in which the shaking of the wheel occurs). For example, the shaking could simply be a vibration of the steering wheel, or the steering wheel may only shake by a sufficiently small amount that does not result in the wheels of the vehicle turning. Further, the vehicle can be a drive- by-wire vehicle and the vehicle can be programmed to prevent the wheels from turning when the vehicle shakes. In fact, causing the wheel to wiggle would be a safety hazard given that the shaking of the wheel is provided as an alert while the vehicle is being driven to indicate that the distance to another vehicle in front is decreasing. Accordingly, it does not logically make sense that Zhu would be describing causing the wheels of the vehicle to wiggle as the vehicle is driving. Therefore, Applicant asserts that Zhu fails to remedy Juzswik in teaching wagging the wheel of the vehicle..
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the rejections of claims 5 under 35 U.S.C. §103 have been fully considered and not persuasive. More specifically, the shake of the steering wheel can also be seen as back-and-forth or side-to-side movement with respect to the turning (side-to-side movement) of the wheel. Furthermore, whether the vehicle uses a traditional mechanical linkage or the drive-by-wire, it is possible to shake the steering wheel with the turning of the wheel. Furthermore, slight turning of the wheel while the vehicle been driven is not considered a safety hazard because vehicular features such as “Lane Keeping Systems” or “Lane Keeping Assist” applies corrective steering to guide the vehicle back into the lane without causing a safety hazard. Furthermore, turning of the wheel that results in the shaking of the steering wheel has been obvious because “a person of ordinary skill has good reason to pursue the known options within his or her technical grasp. If this leads to the anticipated success, it is likely that product is not of innovation but of ordinary skill and common sense” (KSR)
Applicant argues that Zhu fails to teach, in part, "waggling the wheel of the vehicle at a second angle to dislodge an air hose from a valve stem of the tire", wherein the wagging the wheel at an even greater angle to dislodge the air hose.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the rejections of claims 21 under 35 U.S.C. §103 have been fully considered and not persuasive. More specifically, Zhu teaching of the shake of the steering wheel can also be seen as back-and-forth or side-to-side movement with respect to the turning (side-to-side movement) of the wheel thus resulting a second angle. Furthermore, it is obvious when the wheel turns away from the air hose, the turning of the wheel at a second angle results in removal or dislodge of an air hose from the valve stem because “a person of ordinary skill has good reason to pursue the known options within his or her technical grasp. If this leads to the anticipated success, it is likely that product is not of innovation but of ordinary skill and common sense” (KSR)
Specification
The specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o). Correction of the following is required:
Claim 22, line 2; “a second image”.
Claim Objections
Claim 5, line 2; “waggling the wheel of the vehicle at a second angle to dislodge an air hose from a valve stem of the tire.” should read as “waggling the wheel of the vehicle at a second angle to dislodge the air hose from the valve stem of the tire.”
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 22 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.
The term “second image” in claim 22 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “second image” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. It is unclear how “second image” is related or relevant for the invention, the first image, or any operation performed by the processor.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends.
Claim 22 merely states the same limitation of claim 1 and does not further narrow what is claimed in claim 1. Following bold and underline features illustrate the similarities between the claim 1 and claim 22.
Claim 1; detecting, by the processor based on evaluating the first image, coupling of the air hose to a valve stem of the wheel;
Claim 22; receiving, by the processor, from a camera, a second image; and
detecting, by the processor based on evaluating the first image, that the vehicle is located at an air station.
Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 4, 6-7, 15-18, and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Juzswik (US 20160167462 A1), and further in view of Patel (US 20130293371 A1), Ghannam (US 20200391558 A1), Schofield (US 6445287 B1), and Steiner (US 20160361958 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Juzswik teaches (Currently Amended) A method comprising: (Juzswik, at least one para. 0002; “The present invention is related to a tire fill assist method and apparatus that aids a driver in inflating/deflating vehicle tires”)
determining, by a processor in a vehicle, that a tire pressure of a tire of a wheel of the vehicle is initially within a range of air pressure values indicative of an underinflated tire;
receiving, by the processor and from a camera, a first image that includes an air hose;
detecting, by the processor based on evaluating the first image, coupling of the air hose to a valve stem of the wheel;
detecting, by the processor (Juzswik, at least one para. 0046; “The TCM system 10 also includes one or more vehicle-based components 30 for receiving and processing the signals from each TCM sensor 20. The vehicle-based TCM components 30 can, for example, include a TCM receiver/controller 32”) and a tire inflation operation performed upon the tire of the vehicle (Juzswik, at least one para. 0058; “According to the invention, the TPM system 10 is configured to implement a tire fill assist (TFA) mode in response to determining a condition in which the vehicle operator may be inflating or deflating the tire. Since the vehicle operator can only inflate/deflate the tires when the vehicle is stopped, the TFA mode is available only when the TCM sensors 20 are in either the INTERIM mode or PARK mode. In the example embodiment described herein, the TCM sensors 20 determine that a tire fill may be occurring and, in response, set a tire fill request (TFR) flag in the transmitted tire condition message”);
determining, by the processor, (Juzswik, at least one para. 0046; “The TCM system 10 also includes one or more vehicle-based components 30 for receiving and processing the signals from each TCM sensor 20. The vehicle-based TCM components 30 can, for example, include a TCM receiver/controller 32”) during the tire inflation operation (Juzswik, at least one para. 0058; “According to the invention, the TPM system 10 is configured to implement a tire fill assist (TFA) mode in response to determining a condition in which the vehicle operator may be inflating or deflating the tire. Since the vehicle operator can only inflate/deflate the tires when the vehicle is stopped, the TFA mode is available only when the TCM sensors 20 are in either the INTERIM mode or PARK mode. In the example embodiment described herein, the TCM sensors 20 determine that a tire fill may be occurring and, in response, set a tire fill request (TFR) flag in the transmitted tire condition message”), that air is escaping out of the tire (Juzswik, at least one para. 0049; “The TCM system 10 is operative to monitor the operating conditions of the tires 14 as determined from the data received from the TCM sensors 20. These conditions can, for example, include tire inflation pressure, temperature, and whether the tire is in motion. Based on the monitored conditions, the TCM system 10 can provide information/alerts to the vehicle operator, such as the current inflation pressure of the tires or an alert that one or more of the tires has a low pressure condition”);
determining, by the processor and based on determining that the tire pressure is within the range of air pressure values indicative of an underinflated tire (Juzswik, at least one para. 0084 and FIG. 4; “where a determination is made as to whether the tire is over or under filled, (e.g. placard pressure has been exceeded by a predetermined amount, such as by +/−10%). If the tire associated with the sensor 20 under TFA is not yet over or under filled, the process 150 reverts back to step 152 and proceeds from there as described above.”, wherein the placard pressure can be a manufacture recommended operating tire pressure), that the air escaping out of the tire is unintentional; and
issuing, by the processor, an alert based on determining that air is escaping out of the tire (Juzswik, at least one para. 0084; “If the tire associated with the sensor 20 under TFA has been over or under filled, the process 150 proceeds to step 162, and a tire over/under fill alert is issued and then back to step 152 This alert can visual, audible, or a combination of both visual and audible.”) based on determining that the air escaping out of the tire is unintentional.
Juzswik fails to teach determining, by a processor in a vehicle, that a tire pressure of a tire of a wheel of the vehicle is initially within a range of air pressure values indicative of an underinflated tire;
receiving, by the processor and from a camera, a first image that includes an air hose;
detecting, by the processor based on evaluating the first image, coupling of the air hose to a valve stem of the wheel;
based on detecting the coupling of the air hose to the valve stem
that the air escaping out of the tire is unintentional; and
based on determining that the air escaping out of the tire is unintentional.
However, Patel, in the same field of endeavor (Patel, at least one para. 0001; “The disclosed invention relates generally to the management of tire pressures on vehicles. More particularly, the disclosed invention relates to a method and system for notifying the vehicle operator that tire pressure is incorrect and assisting the operator with properly inflating the tires.”) teaches determining, by a processor in a vehicle, that a tire pressure of a tire of a wheel of the vehicle is initially within a range of air pressure values indicative of an underinflated tire (Patel, at least one para. 0023; “In step 30, the operator is made aware by the tire Pressure Monitoring System (TPMS) 10 that the air pressure in one or more tires 16, 16', 22, 22' is below the required level. This notification may be made by various methods as is known in the art, including visual or audio indicators.”);
receiving, by the processor and from a camera, a first image that includes an air hose;
detecting, by the processor based on evaluating the first image, coupling of the air hose to a valve stem of the wheel;
based on detecting the coupling of the air hose to the valve stem
that the air escaping out of the tire is unintentional; and
based on determining that the air escaping out of the tire is unintentional.
Juzswik and Patel are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both of them are in the same field of the monitoring system as the claimed invention. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to have modified the process of issuing the alert of the Juzswik with teaching of Patel. One of the ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification as all the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention. Furthermore, Patel is able to provide an initial low-pressure alert of the tire thus initiating an individual to start the tire inflation operation.
The combination of Juzswik and Patel fails to teach receiving, by the processor and from a camera, a first image that includes an air hose;
detecting, by the processor based on evaluating the first image, coupling of the air hose to a valve stem of the wheel;
based on detecting the coupling of the air hose to the valve stem
that the air escaping out of the tire is unintentional; and
based on determining that the air escaping out of the tire is unintentional.
Ghannam, in the same field of endeavor (Ghannam, at least one para. 0001; “A vehicle may include a tire pressure monitoring system that detects air pressure of tires of the vehicle”) teaches receiving, by the processor and from a camera, a first image (Ghannam, at least one para. 0035; “the computer 24 may transmit and receive messages to and from various devices in and out of the vehicle 20, e.g., tire pressure sensors 28, cameras 32, other sensors 34, etc.”) and (Ghannam, at least one para. 0038; “The cameras 32 include circuits, chips and other electronic components, e.g., image sensors, such as CCD or CMOS sensors. Cameras 32 may be supported by the vehicle 20, e.g., by a side view mirror, within a wheel well, or at any other suitable position on or in the vehicle 20 that permits the cameras 32 to capture images 300, 400 of the tires 26”) that includes an air hose;
detecting, by the processor based on evaluating the first image, coupling of the air hose to a valve stem of the wheel;
based on detecting the coupling of the air hose to the valve stem
that the air escaping out of the tire is unintentional; and
based on determining that the air escaping out of the tire is unintentional.
The combination of Juzswik, Patel, and Ghannam, are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because all of them are in the same field of the monitoring system as the claimed invention. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to have modified the detection of the tire inflation process of the Juzswik with teaching of Ghannam. One of the ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification as all the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention.
The combination of Juzswik, Patel, and Ghannam does not explicitly teach that includes an air hose;
detecting, by the processor based on evaluating the first image, coupling of the air hose to a valve stem of the wheel;
based on detecting the coupling of the air hose to the valve stem
that the air escaping out of the tire is unintentional; and
based on determining that the air escaping out of the tire is unintentional.
Schofield, in the same field of endeavor (Schofield, Col. 1, line 14-17; “This invention relates generally to vehicular function monitoring and display systems. More particularly, the invention is related to a system for assisting the manual inflating of tires while mounted on the wheels of a vehicle”) teaches that includes an air hose; and detecting, by the processor based on evaluating the first image, coupling of the air hose to a valve stem of the wheel and based on detecting the coupling of the air hose to the valve stem (Schofield, Col. 7, lines 66-67 & Col. 8, lines 1-7; “Control 18 may additionally produce outputs to illuminate tire inflation indicator assemblies 19 in response to a tire pressure sensor 20 sensing commencement of a manual tire pressure adjust event such as by sensing a change in pressure of its associated tire indicative of a user of the vehicle inflating/deflating that tire, or sensing depression of the close-out nipple provided in the tire valve stem to allow connection to an air hose/to allow bleed off of tire pressure.”);
The combination of Juzswik, Patel, Ghannam, and Schofield are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because all of them are in the same field of the monitoring system as the claimed invention. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to have modified the detection of the tire inflation process of the Juzswik with teaching of Ghannam and Schofield. One of the ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification as all the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention. Furthermore, the claim would have been obvious because the substitution of one known element (camera) for another (tire pressure sensor) would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art.
The combination of Juzswik, Patel, Ghannam, and Schofield does not explicitly teach that the air escaping out of the tire is unintentional; and
based on determining that the air escaping out of the tire is unintentional.
However, Steiner, in the same field of endeavor (Steiner, at least one para. 0002; “Embodiments described herein generally relate to tire monitoring systems and methods, including determining inflation and/or deflation states of one or more tires”) teaches that the air escaping out of the tire is unintentional (Steiner, at least one para. 0025; “the acceleration sensor 265 can be configured to measure the vibrations generated by air flowing into and/or out of the tire through the valve of the tire and/or of air flowing out of the tire through one or more voids/holes (e.g., a leak) of the tire and/or rim”, wherein the air flowing out of the valve is seen as unintentional action); and
based on determining that the air escaping out of the tire is unintentional (Steiner, at least one para. 0025; “the acceleration sensor 265 can be configured to measure the vibrations generated by air flowing into and/or out of the tire through the valve of the tire and/or of air flowing out of the tire through one or more voids/holes (e.g., a leak) of the tire and/or rim”, wherein the air flowing out of the valve is seen as unintentional action).
The combination of Juzswik, Patel, Ghannam, Schofield, and Steiner are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both of them are in the same field of the monitoring system as the claimed invention. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to have modified the process of issuing the alert of the Juzswik with teaching of Steiner. One of the ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification as all the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention.
Regarding claim 2, Juzswik teaches (Original) The method of claim 1, (Juzswik, at least one para. 0002; “The present invention is related to a tire fill assist method and apparatus that aids a driver in inflating/deflating vehicle tires”)
wherein determining that air is escaping out of the tire comprises (Juzswik, at least one para. 0049; “The TCM system 10 is operative to monitor the operating conditions of the tires 14 as determined from the data received from the TCM sensors 20. These conditions can, for example, include tire inflation pressure, temperature, and whether the tire is in motion. Based on the monitored conditions, the TCM system 10 can provide information/alerts to the vehicle operator, such as the current inflation pressure of the tires or an alert that one or more of the tires has a low pressure condition”):
receiving, by the processor, from a tire pressure sensor located in the tire, (Juzswik, at least one para. 0043; “Each tire 14 has an associated tire condition monitoring (TCM) sensor 20 that is mounted to the wheel of its associated tire in a known manner”) a wireless sensor signal containing information about an air pressure inside the tire (Juzswik, at least one para. 0047; “the TCM controller 32 is a radio frequency hub module (RFHM) that can receive and process wireless signals from the TCM sensors 20”); and
evaluating the information to determine whether the air pressure inside the tire is dropping during the tire inflation operation (Juzswik, at least one para. 0058; “According to the invention, the TPM system 10 is configured to implement a tire fill assist (TFA) mode in response to determining a condition in which the vehicle operator may be inflating or deflating the tire. Since the vehicle operator can only inflate/deflate the tires when the vehicle is stopped, the TFA mode is available only when the TCM sensors 20 are in either the INTERIM mode or PARK mode. In the example embodiment described herein, the TCM sensors 20 determine that a tire fill may be occurring and, in response, set a tire fill request (TFR) flag in the transmitted tire condition message”).
Regarding claim 4, Juzswik teaches (Currently Amended) The method of claim 1, wherein issuing the alert (Juzswik, at least one para. 0042; “the TCM system 10 can provide a tire low pressure alert when inflation pressure falls below a predetermined value or a tire high pressure alert when inflation pressure exceeds a predetermined value”) comprises:
determining a location of the vehicle; and
outputting a haptic feedback signal through a vibration element located in at least one of the wheel of the vehicle or on a body portion of the vehicle instead of emitting an audio signal based on the location of the vehicle.
However, Juzswik does not explicitly teach determining a location of the vehicle; and
outputting a haptic feedback signal through a vibration element located in at least one of the wheel of the vehicle or on a body portion of the vehicle instead of emitting an audio signal based on the location of the vehicle.
Schofield, in the same field of endeavor (Schofield, Col. 1, line 14-17; “This invention relates generally to vehicular function monitoring and display systems. More particularly, the invention is related to a system for assisting the manual inflating of tires while mounted on the wheels of a vehicle”) teaches determining a location of the vehicle (Schofield, Col. 32, lines 11-14; “For example, a flip-down video screen may be displaying a view of a baby in a rear-seat child seat and/or be displaying a GPS data display that guides the driver with regard to direction/local geography.”); and
outputting a haptic feedback signal through a vibration element located in at least one of the wheel of the vehicle or on a body portion of the vehicle (Schofield, Col. 13, lines 64-67 & Col. 14, lines 1-6; “the tire pressure sensor located in each tire on the vehicle can include a solid-state vibrator or trembler (such as the vibration devices common on pagers and cell phones that provide a vibration indication of receipt of a call or of a message, as known in the art). Thus, when, for example, a tire pressure sensor at a particular wheel senses that the tire pressure in that particular tire is at (or close to) the recommended or desired tire pressure, then the air inlet/outlet valve or stalk or valve stem to which an air hose connects is caused to vibrate”) instead of emitting an audio signal based on the location of the vehicle Schofield, Col. 11, lines 20-23; “Optionally, an audible tire inflation indicator can be provided in addition to (or as an alternate to) the visible tire inflation indicators described above for the tire inflation monitoring systems of the present invention.”).
Juzswik and Schofield are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both of them are in the same field of the monitoring system as the claimed invention. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to have modified the process of issuing the alert of the Juzswik with teaching of Schofield. One of the ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification so that the operator of the vehicle can easily detect the rapid rate of change of air pressure within the tire (Schofield, Col. 14).
Regarding claim 6, Juzswik teaches (Original ) The method of claim 1, (Juzswik, at least one para. 0002; “The present invention is related to a tire fill assist method and apparatus that aids a driver in inflating/deflating vehicle tires”) wherein determining that air is escaping out of the tire comprises (Juzswik, at least one para. 0049; “The TCM system 10 is operative to monitor the operating conditions of the tires 14 as determined from the data received from the TCM sensors 20. These conditions can, for example, include tire inflation pressure, temperature, and whether the tire is in motion. Based on the monitored conditions, the TCM system 10 can provide information/alerts to the vehicle operator, such as the current inflation pressure of the tires or an alert that one or more of the tires has a low pressure condition.”):
receiving, by the processor, from an air flow sensor, a wireless sensor signal (Juzswik, at least one para. 0044; “Each TCM sensor 20 further includes a radio transmitter (not shown) for transmitting a wireless tire condition signal”), and
determining, by the processor, based on evaluating the wireless sensor signal that air is escaping out of the tire through a valve stem (Juzswik, at least one para. 0049; “The TCM system 10 is operative to monitor the operating conditions of the tires 14 as determined from the data received from the TCM sensors 20. These conditions can, for example, include tire inflation pressure, temperature, and whether the tire is in motion. Based on the monitored conditions, the TCM system 10 can provide information/alerts to the vehicle operator, such as the current inflation pressure of the tires or an alert that one or more of the tires has a low pressure condition”).
Even though, Juzswik teaches that the wireless signal is received from the TCM sensor 20, Juzswik does not explicitly teach that the wireless signal is received from an air flow sensor. Furthermore, Juzswik teaches about the low pressure condition of the tire, Juzswik does not explicitly teach that the air is escaped through a valve stem.
Steiner, in the same field of endeavor (Steiner, at least one para. 0002; “Embodiments described herein generally relate to tire monitoring systems and methods, including determining inflation and/or deflation states of one or more tires”) teaches an air flow sensor and the air is escaping out of the tire through a valve stem (Steiner, at least one para. 0025; “the acceleration sensor 265 can be configured to measure the vibrations generated by air flowing into and/or out of the tire through the valve of the tire and/or of air flowing out of the tire through one or more voids/holes (e.g., a leak) of the tire and/or rim”).
Juzswik and Steiner are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both of them are in the same field of the monitoring system as the claimed invention. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to have modified the process of issuing the alert of the Juzswik with teaching of Steiner. One of the ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification as all the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention.
Regarding claim 7, Juzswik teaches (Original ) The method of claim 6, (Juzswik, at least one para. 0002; “The present invention is related to a tire fill assist method and apparatus that aids a driver in inflating/deflating vehicle tires”)
wherein issuing the alert comprises (Juzswik, at least one para. 0042; the TCM system 10 can provide a tire low pressure alert when inflation pressure falls below a predetermined value or a tire high pressure alert when inflation pressure exceeds a predetermined value):
emitting an audio signal through at least one of a horn of the vehicle or a speaker of an audio system the vehicle based on determining that air is escaping out of the tire (Juzswik, at least one para. 0014; “According to another aspect, the alerts can include at least one of a vehicle horn chirp, a vehicle light flash, a vehicle instrument panel indication, and a vehicle center console indication”) through the valve stem.
Juzswik does not explicitly teach that through the valve stem.
Steiner, in the same field of endeavor (Steiner, at least one para. 0002; “Embodiments described herein generally relate to tire monitoring systems and methods, including determining inflation and/or deflation states of one or more tires”) teaches through the valve stem (Steiner, at least one para. 0025; “the acceleration sensor 265 can be configured to measure the vibrations generated by air flowing into and/or out of the tire through the valve of the tire and/or of air flowing out of the tire through one or more voids/holes (e.g., a leak) of the tire and/or rim”).
Juzswik and Steiner are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both of them are in the same field of the monitoring system as the claimed invention. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to have modified the process of issuing the alert of the Juzswik with teaching of Steiner. One of the ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification as all the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention.
Regarding claim 15, Juzswik teaches (Currently Amended) A vehicle comprising: (Juzswik, at least one para. 0041 and FIG. 1; “illustrates a vehicle 12 including a tire condition monitoring (TCM) system 10”)
a tire pressure sensor mounted in a wheel of the vehicle (Juzswik, at least one para. 0043 and FIG. 1; “Each tire 14 has an associated tire condition monitoring (TCM) sensor 20 that is mounted to the wheel of its associated tire in a known manner”); and
a tire pressure monitoring system comprising (Juzswik, at least one para. 0042; “the TCM system 10 is designed to measure and monitor tire operating conditions, including pressure and temperature, and to provide indication to the vehicle operator when certain conditions relating to the vehicle tires exist”):
a memory that stores computer-executable instructions (Juzswik, at least one para. 0046; “The TCM controller 32 can, for example, include an ECU comprising a microcomputer, a microprocessor along with necessary peripheral circuitry, discrete circuitry designed to perform the needed functions of the control process, or an application specific integrated circuit (“ASIC”) designed to perform the specific functions of the present invention”); and
a processor configured to access the memory and execute the computer- executable instructions to perform operations comprising (Juzswik, at least one para. 0046; “The TCM system 10 also includes one or more vehicle-based components 30 for receiving and processing the signals from each TCM sensor 20. The vehicle-based TCM components 30 can, for example, include a TCM receiver/controller 32”):
detecting a tire pressure of a tire of the wheel of the vehicle is initially within a range of air pressure values indicative of an underinflated tire;
receiving, from a camera, a first image that includes an air hose;
detecting, based on evaluating the first image, coupling of the air hose to a valve stem of the wheel;
detecting a tire inflation operation performed upon the tire of the vehicle (Juzswik, at least one para. 0058; “According to the invention, the TPM system 10 is configured to implement a tire fill assist (TFA) mode in response to determining a condition in which the vehicle operator may be inflating or deflating the tire. Since the vehicle operator can only inflate/deflate the tires when the vehicle is stopped, the TFA mode is available only when the TCM sensors 20 are in either the INTERIM mode or PARK mode. In the example embodiment described herein, the TCM sensors 20 determine that a tire fill may be occurring and, in response, set a tire fill request (TFR) flag in the transmitted tire condition message”);
determining, during the tire inflation operation, (Juzswik, at least one para. 0083; “The TCM controller 32 thus continues to send the audible/visual TFA mode alerts to the operator. If, at step 156, it is determined that placard pressure has not been achieved, the process 150 proceeds to step 160.”, In other words, controller continuously informs an individual that the tire pressure is within the underinflated condition and has not risen into the inflated condition. As a result, the individual can easily determine that the tire pressure is not holding within the tire) that air is escaping out of the tire (Juzswik, at least one para. 0049; “The TCM system 10 is operative to monitor the operating conditions of the tires 14 as determined from the data received from the TCM sensors 20. These conditions can, for example, include tire inflation pressure, temperature, and whether the tire is in motion. Based on the monitored conditions, the TCM system 10 can provide information/alerts to the vehicle operator, such as the current inflation pressure of the tires or an alert that one or more of the tires has a low pressure condition”);
determining, by the processor and based on determining that the tire pressure is within the range of air pressure values indicative of an underinflated tire (Juzswik, at least one para. 0084 and FIG. 4; “where a determination is made as to whether the tire is over or under filled, (e.g. placard pressure has been exceeded by a predetermined amount, such as by +/−10%). If the tire associated with the sensor 20 under TFA is not yet over or under filled, the process 150 reverts back to step 152 and proceeds from there as described above.”, wherein the placard pressure can be a manufacture recommended operating tire pressure), that the air escaping out of the tire is unintentional; and
issuing, an alert based on determining that air is escaping out of the tire (Juzswik, at least one para. 0084; “If the tire associated with the sensor 20 under TFA has been over or under filled, the process 150 proceeds to step 162, and a tire over/under fill alert is issued and then back to step 152 This alert can visual, audible, or a combination of both visual and audible.”) and based on determining that the air escaping out of the tire is unintentional.
Juzswik fails to teach
detecting a tire pressure of a tire of the wheel of the vehicle is initially within a range of air pressure values indicative of an underinflated tire;
receiving, from a camera, a first image that includes an air hose;
detecting, based on evaluating the first image, coupling of the air hose to a valve stem of the wheel;
that the air escaping out of the tire is unintentional; and
and based on determining that the air escaping out of the tire is unintentional.
However, Patel, in the same field of endeavor (Patel, at least one para. 0001; “The disclosed invention relates generally to the management of tire pressures on vehicles. More particularly, the disclosed invention relates to a method and system for notifying the vehicle operator that tire pressure is incorrect and assisting the operator with properly inflating the tires.”) teaches detecting a tire pressure of a tire of the wheel of the vehicle is initially within a range of air pressure values indicative of an underinflated tire (Patel, at least one para. 0023; “In step 30, the operator is made aware by the tire Pressure Monitoring System (TPMS) 10 that the air pressure in one or more tires 16, 16', 22, 22' is below the required level. This notification may be made by various methods as is known in the art, including visual or audio indicators.”);
receiving, from a camera, a first image that includes an air hose;
detecting, based on evaluating the first image, coupling of the air hose to a valve stem of the wheel;
that the air escaping out of the tire is unintentional; and
and based on determining that the air escaping out of the tire is unintentional.
Juzswik and Patel are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both of them are in the same field of the monitoring system as the claimed invention. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to have modified the process of issuing the alert of the Juzswik with teaching of Patel. One of the ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification as all the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention. Furthermore, Patel is able to provide an initial low-pressure alert of the tire thus initiating an individual to start the tire inflation operation.
The combination of Juzswik and Patel fails to teach receiving, from a camera, a first image that includes an air hose;
detecting, based on evaluating the first image, coupling of the air hose to a valve stem of the wheel;
that the air escaping out of the tire is unintentional; and
and based on determining that the air escaping out of the tire is unintentional.
Ghannam, in the same field of endeavor (Ghannam, at least one para. 0001; “A vehicle may include a tire pressure monitoring system that detects air pressure of tires of the vehicle”) teaches receiving, from a camera, a first image (Ghannam, at least one para. 0035; “the computer 24 may transmit and receive messages to and from various devices in and out of the vehicle 20, e.g., tire pressure sensors 28, cameras 32, other sensors 34, etc.”) and (Ghannam, at least one para. 0038; “The cameras 32 include circuits, chips and other electronic components, e.g., image sensors, such as CCD or CMOS sensors. Cameras 32 may be supported by the vehicle 20, e.g., by a side view mirror, within a wheel well, or at any other suitable position on or in the vehicle 20 that permits the cameras 32 to capture images 300, 400 of the tires 26”) that includes an air hose;
detecting, based on evaluating the first image, coupling of the air hose to a valve stem of the wheel;
that the air escaping out of the tire is unintentional; and
and based on determining that the air escaping out of the tire is unintentional.
The combination of Juzswik, Patel, and Ghannam, are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because all of them are in the same field of the monitoring system as the claimed invention. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to have modified the detection of the tire inflation process of the Juzswik with teaching of Ghannam. One of the ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification as all the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention.
The combination of Juzswik, Patel, and Ghannam does not explicitly teach that includes an air hose;
detecting, based on evaluating the first image, coupling of the air hose to a valve stem of the wheel;
that the air escaping out of the tire is unintentional; and
and based on determining that the air escaping out of the tire is unintentional.
Schofield, in the same field of endeavor (Schofield, Col. 1, line 14-17; “This invention relates generally to vehicular function monitoring and display systems. More particularly, the invention is related to a system for assisting the manual inflating of tires while mounted on the wheels of a vehicle”) teaches that includes an air hose; and detecting, based on evaluating the first image, coupling of the air hose to a valve stem of the wheel (Schofield, Col. 7, lines 66-67 & Col. 8, lines 1-7; “Control 18 may additionally produce outputs to illuminate tire inflation indicator assemblies 19 in response to a tire pressure sensor 20 sensing commencement of a manual tire pressure adjust event such as by sensing a change in pressure of its associated tire indicative of a user of the vehicle inflating/deflating that tire, or sensing depression of the close-out nipple provided in the tire valve stem to allow connection to an air hose/to allow bleed off of tire pressure.”);
The combination of Juzswik, Patel, Ghannam, and Schofield are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because all of them are in the same field of the monitoring system as the claimed invention. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to have modified the detection of the tire inflation process of the Juzswik with teaching of Ghannam and Schofield. One of the ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification as all the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results