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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 03/16/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed on 03/16/2026 has been entered. Claims 1-4, 7, 9-10, 12, 14-16, 18-21, and 23 remain pending in this application. Claims 1, 14, and 20 have been amended. No claims have been newly cancelled or are new.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed 03/16/2026 regarding prior art rejections have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding claim 1, Applicant argues that Yang does not teach the claimed fidelity modes achieved by selectively activating or deactivating antennas on the same radar sensor. However, the Examiner relies on a combination of references to teach these elements. Most critically, the Examiner uses the teaches of Zhang to disclose “wherein the processor is configured to cause the scanning unit to switch between the low fidelity mode and the high fidelity mode based on at least one of the trigger event type or detection of the occupant presence” and relies on Yang to teach “wherein the scanning unit comprises a high fidelity mode in which the scanning unit uses a first number of the plurality of transmitting antennas and the plurality of receiving antennas, and a low fidelity mode in which the scanning unit uses a second number of the plurality of transmitting antennas and the plurality of receiving antennas, and wherein the second number is smaller than the first number”. Therefore, while Zhang is used to teach the use cases of fidelity modes, Yang is merely relied upon to disclose a portion of the mechanisms for each of the fidelity modes. Yang teaches the use of different quantities of activated/deactivated antennas to support the fidelity/resolution modes clearly disclosed by Zhang. Yang further discloses possible arrangements of antennas in the same field of vehicle occupant detection, however this is merely illustrative, as the combination of Maekawa and Zhang disclose all additional claim elements including the radar unit, fidelity modes, and scan order.
Regarding the amendment to claim 1, and similar independent claims, the Examiner maintains the prior art rejection and argues that Maekawa discloses the newly amended elements. Maekawa discloses an execution order based on execution priority which is analogous to the “scan order” of the instant application. The Applicant acknowledges that Maekawa teaches setting execution priority for seats based on door opening/closing for processing. However, the Applicant further argues “Maekawa’s “execution priority” relates to which seats to prioritize for detection processing, but does not disclose scanning the zone association with the trigger event location before other zones of the plurality of zones”. However, the Applicant did not consider the execution order setting unit of Maekawa which sets a scanning order based on execution priority which is further based on trigger events. Therefore, the Examiner maintains the combination of references in the prior art rejection, as presented below.
The same or similar arguments applied to claim 1 are applied to all similar independent claims and their dependent claims.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-4, 9-10, 12, 20-21, and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maekawa (WO 2020166002 A1), hereinafter Maekawa, in view of Zhang (US 20230341535 A1), hereinafter Zhang, in further view of Yang (WO 2023028834 A1), hereinafter Yang.
Regarding claim 1, Maekawa, as shown below, discloses a system comprising the following limitations:
A vehicle comprising (See at least Fig. 1, [0031] “The occupant state detection device 100 is provided in, for example, a control device 3 in the vehicle 1”):
a scanning unit configured to scan and detect an occupant presence in a vehicle interior portion, wherein the vehicle interior portion includes a plurality of zones (See at least [0015] “The execution priority setting unit 21 sets the execution priority P of the occupant status detection process for each of the multiple seats”);
a detection unit including one or more sensors (See at least [0098] “For example, the vehicle 1 has a plurality of doors D (not shown) for getting on and off, and also has sensors (not shown) that detect the opening and closing of each of the plurality of doors D. The resetting necessity determining unit 15 acquires the detection results from these sensors. The reset necessity determining unit 15 determines, based on the acquired detection result, that it is necessary to reset the execution priority P when at least one of the multiple doors D is opened or closed”);
a processor communicatively coupled with the scanning unit and the detection unit (See at least [0108] “That is, each of the functions of the image signal acquisition unit 11, execution order setting unit 12a, occupant status detection unit 13 and reconfiguration necessity determination unit 15 may be realized by a processor”); and
a memory for storing executable instructions, the processor programmed to execute instructions to (See at least [0033] “The memory 32 stores programs for implementing the functions of the image signal acquisition unit 11, the execution order setting unit 12, and the passenger state detection unit 13.”):
determine, using the detection unit, occurrence of a trigger event (See at least [0098] “the vehicle 1 has a plurality of doors D (not shown) for getting on and off, and also has sensors (not shown) that detect the opening and closing of each of the plurality of doors D.”),
determine a scanning unit setting based on the trigger event (See at least [0098] “The reset necessity determining unit 15 determines, based on the acquired detection result, that it is necessary to reset the execution priority P when at least one of the multiple doors D is opened or closed”);
determine a location of the trigger event with respect to the vehicle (See at least [0098] “the vehicle 1 has a plurality of doors D (not shown) for getting on and off, and also has sensors (not shown) that detect the opening and closing of each of the plurality of doors D.”);
determine one or more zones, from the plurality of zones, based on the location of the trigger event (See at least [0098] “the vehicle 1 has a plurality of doors D (not shown) for getting on and off, and also has sensors (not shown) that detect the opening and closing of each of the plurality of doors D.”);
determine, based on the location of the trigger event, a scan order for the one or more zones, wherein the scan order causes a zone associated with the location of the trigger event to be scanned before other zones of the plurality of zones (See at least [0098] “The reset necessity determining unit 15 determines, based on the acquired detection result, that it is necessary to reset the execution priority P when at least one of the multiple doors D is opened or closed, [0023] “The execution order setting unit 23 sets an execution order O of the occupant state detection process for the detection target seats selected by the detection target seat selection unit 22 based on the execution priority P”); and
Maekawa does not explicitly disclose wherein the scanning unit comprises a radar sensor comprising a plurality of transmitting antennas and a plurality of receiving antennas; wherein the memory stores a mapping between a plurality of trigger event types and a respective predefined delay associated with each trigger event type of the plurality of trigger event types; determine that the trigger event is of a first trigger event type; determine a first predefined delay associated with the first trigger event type; output a control signal to the scanning unit after the first predefined delay to scan the vehicle interior portion based on the scanning unit setting and the scan order. However, Zhang, in the same or in a similar field of endeavor, discloses:
wherein the scanning unit comprises a radar sensor comprising a plurality of transmitting antennas and a plurality of receiving antennas (See at least Fig. 1, [0021] “FIG. 1 is a block diagram of an example RF sensing system 105 capable of performing RF sensing in a vehicle or environment as described herein”, [0023] “Additionally, although Tx antenna(s) 115 and Rx antenna(s) 120 are illustrated as being separate antennas, some embodiments may use the same one or more antennas for transmission and reception.”)
wherein the memory stores a mapping between a plurality of trigger event types and a respective predefined delay associated with each trigger event type of the plurality of trigger event types (See at least Fig. 5, [0043] “Embodiments involving detecting a child or pet left in the vehicle, for example, may wait for a threshold period of time before employing RF sensing to determine whether a pet or child is left in the vehicle. […] Longer periods of time can account for cases in which a driver may exit the vehicle momentarily. […] Additionally or alternatively, embodiments may adjust this threshold based on sensor and/or other information regarding the vehicle and/or environmental factors”);
determine that the trigger event is of a first trigger event type (See at least Fig. 5, [0043] “Embodiments involving detecting a child or pet left in the vehicle, for example, may wait for a threshold period of time before employing RF sensing to determine whether a pet or child is left in the vehicle.”);
determine a first predefined delay associated with the first trigger event type (See at least Fig. 5, [0043] “Embodiments involving detecting a child or pet left in the vehicle, for example, may wait for a threshold period of time before employing RF sensing to determine whether a pet or child is left in the vehicle.”);
output a control signal to the scanning unit after the first predefined delay to scan the vehicle interior portion based on the scanning unit setting and the scan order. (See at least Fig. 5 Items 505-515)
wherein the processor is configured to cause the scanning unit to switch between the low fidelity mode and the high fidelity mode based on at least one of the trigger event type or detection of the occupant presence (See at least Fig. 5 Items 515-530, [0041] “Trigger conditions in these embodiments may comprise detecting the opening and/or closing of a vehicle door or window”, [0005] “An example device for providing RF sensing in a vehicle, according to this disclosure, comprises one or more wireless transceivers, a memory, and one or more processors communicatively coupled with one or more wireless transceivers and the memory” Zhang discloses the second trigger event as a object/motion detection)
Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the vehicle occupant system disclosed by Maekawa with the trigger system disclosed by Zhang. One would have been motivated to do so in order to advantageously minimize power consumption (See at least [0044] “For embodiments, such as those involving detecting a child or pet left in the vehicle, which the process of FIG. 5 may occur when the vehicle is powered off, the preliminary use of low-resolution in this manner can help ensure low power used to help meet stringent power consumption requirements of auto manufacturers when a vehicle is turned off”).
The combination of Maekawa and Zhang does not explicitly disclose wherein the scanning unit comprises a high fidelity mode in which the scanning unit uses a first number of the plurality of transmitting antennas and the plurality of receiving antennas, and a low fidelity mode in which the scanning unit uses a second number of the plurality of transmitting antennas and the plurality of receiving antennas, and wherein the second number is smaller than the first number. However, Yang, in the same or in a similar field of endeavor, discloses
wherein the scanning unit comprises a high fidelity mode in which the scanning unit uses a first number of the plurality of transmitting antennas and the plurality of receiving antennas, and a low fidelity mode in which the scanning unit uses a second number of the plurality of transmitting antennas and the plurality of receiving antennas (See at least Figs. 1-2, 6, [0105] “the antenna array 5 of the radar system may include a first antenna 51 and a second antenna 52, and the first antenna 51 can transmit a first transmission wave at a first preset power and a first preset area; the second antenna 52 can transmit a second transmission wave at a second preset power and a second preset area” [0074] “The power of the second transmission wave is higher than that of the first transmission wave.”) and wherein the second number is smaller than the first number (See at least Figs. 1-2, 6, [0105] “the first antenna 51 can transmit a first transmission wave at a first preset power and a first preset area; the second antenna 52 can transmit a second transmission wave at a second preset power and a second preset area, wherein the second antenna 52 may include: a first regional antenna group 521, a second regional antenna group 522, a third regional antenna group 523, a fourth regional antenna group 524 and a fifth regional antenna group 525.”).
Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the vehicle occupant system disclosed by Maekawa with the trigger system disclosed by Zhang with the radar system disclosed by Yang. One would have been motivated to do so in order to advantageously improve detection accuracy (See at least [0048] “This can prevent interference caused by the transmission wave being transmitted to other obstacles in the cabin environment on the one hand, and can improve the detection accuracy of the living being on the other hand.”).
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Maekawa, Zhang, and Yang as shown in the rejection above, discloses all of the limitations of claim 1. Maekawa does not disclose the location of the trigger event is in the vehicle. However, Zhang further discloses
the location of the trigger event is in the vehicle (See at least [0038] “the trigger condition may be a determination that the vehicle has been turned off”).
Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the vehicle occupant system disclosed by Maekawa with the trigger system disclosed by Zhang with the radar system disclosed by Yang. One would have been motivated to do so in order to advantageously minimize power consumption (See at least [0044] “For embodiments, such as those involving detecting a child or pet left in the vehicle, which the process of FIG. 5 may occur when the vehicle is powered off, the preliminary use of low-resolution in this manner can help ensure low power used to help meet stringent power consumption requirements of auto manufacturers when a vehicle is turned off”).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Maekawa, Zhang, and Yang as shown in the rejection above, discloses all of the limitations of claim 1. Maekawa further discloses
the processor is further configured to obtain an occupant status information from the scanning unit in response to scanning the one or more zones (See at least [0022] “The detection target seat selection unit 22 selects one or more seats S (hereinafter referred to as "detection target seats") that are to be subjected to the occupant state detection process among the multiple seats S in the vehicle 1, based on the execution priority P set by the execution priority setting unit 21.”).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Maekawa, Zhang, and Yang, as shown in the rejection above, discloses all of the limitations of claims 1 and 3. Maekawa further discloses
the processor is further configured to deactivate the scanning unit when the occupant status information indicates presence of the occupant (See at least [0074] “the occupant status detection unit 13a first executes occupant status detection processing for the right front seat S1 for X seconds, then executes occupant status detection processing for the left front seat S2 for Y seconds, then executes occupant status detection processing for the right front seat S1 for X seconds, and then executes occupant status detection processing for the right rear seat S3 for Y seconds.” Maekawa discloses performing the scanning function for a definite time before concluding. Additionally, the Examiner notes that the term “when” does not define a cause-and-effect relationship between the deactivation of the scanning unit and the presence of the occupant.).
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Maekawa, Zhang, and Yang, as shown in the rejection above, discloses all of the limitations of claim 1. Maekawa further discloses
the processor is further configured to transmit control instructions, based on the results of the scan, to at least one of: the scanning unit to modify the scanning unit setting, or a vehicle component to control a vehicle component operation (See at least [0004] “the results of detection by an OMS are used to control an airbag.”).
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Maekawa, Zhang, and Yang, as shown in the rejection above, discloses all of the limitations of claims 1 and 9. Maekawa does not disclose the processor is configured to modify the scanning unit setting from a low fidelity mode to a high fidelity mode or from the high fidelity mode to the low fidelity mode based on occupant presence detection. However, Zhang further discloses
the processor is configured to modify the scanning unit setting from a low fidelity mode to a high fidelity mode or from the high fidelity mode to the low fidelity mode based on occupant presence detection (See at least Fig. 5 Items 515-530, [0046] “If an object or motion is detected, the process can move to block 530, where high-resolution object/motion detection is performed”).
Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the vehicle occupant system disclosed by Maekawa with the radar system disclosed by Yang with the trigger system disclosed by Zhang. One would have been motivated to do so in order to advantageously minimize power consumption (See at least [0044] “For embodiments, such as those involving detecting a child or pet left in the vehicle, which the process of FIG. 5 may occur when the vehicle is powered off, the preliminary use of low-resolution in this manner can help ensure low power used to help meet stringent power consumption requirements of auto manufacturers when a vehicle is turned off”).
Regarding claim 12, the combination of Maekawa, Zhang, and Yang, as shown in the rejection above, discloses all of the limitations of claim 1. Maekawa further discloses
the scan order is associated with a sequential order of scanning of the one or more zones (See at least [0029] “The occupant status detection unit 13 sequentially executes occupant status detection processing for the detection target seats selected by the execution order setting unit 12 (more specifically, the detection target seat selection unit 22) one seat at a time based on the execution order O set by the execution order setting unit 12”).
Regarding claim 20, applicant recites limitations of the same or substantially the same scope as claim 1. Accordingly, claim 20 is rejected in the same or substantially the same manner as claim 1, shown above.
Regarding claim 21, the combination of Maekawa, Zhang, and Yang, as shown in the rejection above, discloses all of the limitations of claim 1. Maekawa does not disclose the trigger event types include: rear door opening; front door opening; switching ON or OFF of climate control; trunk opening; opening a window; or a person approaching the vehicle. However, Zhang further discloses
the trigger event types include: rear door opening; front door opening; switching ON or OFF of climate control; trunk opening; opening a window; or a person approaching the vehicle (See at least Fig. 5 Items 515-530, [0041] “Trigger conditions in these embodiments may comprise detecting the opening and/or closing of a vehicle door or window”).
Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the vehicle occupant system disclosed by Maekawa with the radar system disclosed by Yang with the trigger system disclosed by Zhang. One would have been motivated to do so in order to advantageously minimize power consumption (See at least [0044] “For embodiments, such as those involving detecting a child or pet left in the vehicle, which the process of FIG. 5 may occur when the vehicle is powered off, the preliminary use of low-resolution in this manner can help ensure low power used to help meet stringent power consumption requirements of auto manufacturers when a vehicle is turned off”).
Regarding claim 23, applicant recites limitations of the same or substantially the same scope as claim 21. Accordingly, claim 23 is rejected in the same or substantially the same manner as claim 21, shown above.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maekawa, in view of Zhang, in further view of Yang (WO 2023028834 A1), hereinafter Yang.
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Maekawa, Zhang, and Yang as shown in the rejection above, discloses all of the limitations of claim 1. Maekawa does not disclose the vehicle interior portion, the scanning unit operates in the low fidelity mode followed by the high fidelity mode. However, Zhang further discloses
the vehicle interior portion, the scanning unit operates in the low fidelity mode followed by the high fidelity mode (See at least Fig. 5, Items 515-530).
Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the vehicle occupant system disclosed by Maekawa with the radar system disclosed by Yang with the trigger system disclosed by Zhang. One would have been motivated to do so in order to advantageously minimize power consumption (See at least [0044] “For embodiments, such as those involving detecting a child or pet left in the vehicle, which the process of FIG. 5 may occur when the vehicle is powered off, the preliminary use of low-resolution in this manner can help ensure low power used to help meet stringent power consumption requirements of auto manufacturers when a vehicle is turned off”).
Claims 14, 15-16, and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maekawa, in view of Zhang.
Regarding claim 14, Maekawa, as shown below, discloses a system comprising the following limitations.:
determining, by the processor and based on the second trigger event, a plurality of zones in the interior of the vehicle (See at least [0015] “The execution priority setting unit 21 sets the execution priority P of the occupant status detection process for each of the multiple seats”);
determining, by the processor, a scan order for the plurality of zones, wherein the scan order causes a zone associated with the location of the trigger event to be scanned before other zones of the plurality of zones (See at least [0098] “The reset necessity determining unit 15 determines, based on the acquired detection result, that it is necessary to reset the execution priority P when at least one of the multiple doors D is opened or closed, [0023] “The execution order setting unit 23 sets an execution order O of the occupant state detection process for the detection target seats selected by the detection target seat selection unit 22 based on the execution priority P”);
scanning, using the scanning unit, the plurality of zones using a second fidelity based on occurrence of the second trigger event, wherein the first fidelity is lower than the second fidelity (See at least [0098] “The reset necessity determining unit 15 determines, based on the acquired detection result, that it is necessary to reset the execution priority P when at least one of the multiple doors D is opened or closed, [0023] “The execution order setting unit 23 sets an execution order O of the occupant state detection process for the detection target seats selected by the detection target seat selection unit 22 based on the execution priority P”)
Maekawa does not explicitly disclose determining, by a processor using a detection unit, occurrence of a first trigger event; determining, by the processor, a first trigger event type of the first trigger event, from a plurality of trigger event types and wherein each trigger event type, of the plurality of trigger event types, is associated with a predetermined delay; receiving, by the processor from the detection unit, information about occurrence of a second trigger event and wherein the first trigger event and the second trigger event are linked; determining, by the processor, a second trigger event type of the second trigger event, from the plurality of trigger event types; determining, by the processor and after occurrence of the second trigger event, a scanning unit setting of a scanning unit based on the first trigger event and the second trigger event, determining, by the processor, a predetermined delay associated with the second trigger event type outputting, by the processor, a control signal to the scanning unit after the predetermined delay to scan the plurality of zones based on the scanning unit setting; scanning, using the scanning unit, the plurality of zones using a first fidelity based on occurrence of the first trigger event. However, Zhang, in the same or in a similar field of endeavor, discloses:
determining, by a processor using a detection unit, occurrence of a first trigger event (See at least Fig. 5, [0043] “Embodiments involving detecting a child or pet left in the vehicle, for example, may wait for a threshold period of time before employing RF sensing to determine whether a pet or child is left in the vehicle.”, [0005] “An example device for providing RF sensing in a vehicle, according to this disclosure, comprises one or more wireless transceivers, a memory, and one or more processors communicatively coupled with one or more wireless transceivers and the memory”);
determining, by the processor, a first trigger event type of the first trigger event, from a plurality of trigger event types and wherein each trigger event type, of the plurality of trigger event types, is associated with a predetermined delay (See at least Fig. 5, [0043] “Embodiments involving detecting a child or pet left in the vehicle, for example, may wait for a threshold period of time before employing RF sensing to determine whether a pet or child is left in the vehicle. […] Longer periods of time can account for cases in which a driver may exit the vehicle momentarily. […] Additionally or alternatively, embodiments may adjust this threshold based on sensor and/or other information regarding the vehicle and/or environmental factors”);
receiving, by the processor from the detection unit, information about occurrence of a second trigger event and wherein the first trigger event and the second trigger event are linked (See at least Fig. 5, [0043] “Embodiments involving detecting a child or pet left in the vehicle, for example, may wait for a threshold period of time before employing RF sensing to determine whether a pet or child is left in the vehicle. […] Longer periods of time can account for cases in which a driver may exit the vehicle momentarily. […] Additionally or alternatively, embodiments may adjust this threshold based on sensor and/or other information regarding the vehicle and/or environmental factors” Zhang discloses a second trigger event as a second seat, linked at least by environmental factors);
determining, by the processor, a second trigger event type of the second trigger event, from the plurality of trigger event types (See at least Fig. 5, [0043] “Embodiments involving detecting a child or pet left in the vehicle, for example, may wait for a threshold period of time before employing RF sensing to determine whether a pet or child is left in the vehicle. […] Longer periods of time can account for cases in which a driver may exit the vehicle momentarily. […] Additionally or alternatively, embodiments may adjust this threshold based on sensor and/or other information regarding the vehicle and/or environmental factors”);
determining, by the processor and after occurrence of the second trigger event, a scanning unit setting of a scanning unit based on the first trigger event and the second trigger event (See at least Fig. 5 Items 505-515, [0043] “Embodiments involving detecting a child or pet left in the vehicle, for example, may wait for a threshold period of time before employing RF sensing to determine whether a pet or child is left in the vehicle.”),
determining, by the processor, a predetermined delay associated with the second trigger event type (See at least Fig. 5, [0043] “Embodiments involving detecting a child or pet left in the vehicle, for example, may wait for a threshold period of time before employing RF sensing to determine whether a pet or child is left in the vehicle. […] Longer periods of time can account for cases in which a driver may exit the vehicle momentarily. […] Additionally or alternatively, embodiments may adjust this threshold based on sensor and/or other information regarding the vehicle and/or environmental factors”);
outputting, by the processor, a control signal to the scanning unit after the predetermined delay to scan the plurality of zones based on the scanning unit setting (See at least Fig. 5 Items 505-515);
scanning, using the scanning unit, the plurality of zones using a first fidelity based on occurrence of the first trigger event (See at least Fig. 5 Items 515-530, [0041] “Trigger conditions in these embodiments may comprise detecting the opening and/or closing of a vehicle door or window”, [0005] “An example device for providing RF sensing in a vehicle, according to this disclosure, comprises one or more wireless transceivers, a memory, and one or more processors communicatively coupled with one or more wireless transceivers and the memory” Zhang discloses the second trigger event as a object/motion detection); and
Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the vehicle occupant system disclosed by Maekawa with the trigger system disclosed by Zhang. One would have been motivated to do so in order to advantageously minimize power consumption (See at least [0044] “For embodiments, such as those involving detecting a child or pet left in the vehicle, which the process of FIG. 5 may occur when the vehicle is powered off, the preliminary use of low-resolution in this manner can help ensure low power used to help meet stringent power consumption requirements of auto manufacturers when a vehicle is turned off”).
Regarding claim 15, the combination of Maekawa and Zhang, as shown in the rejection above, discloses all of the limitations of claim 1. Maekawa further discloses
the second trigger event occurs at a location, wherein the location is in the vehicle or in a vehicle proximity (See at least [0098] “For example, the vehicle 1 has a plurality of doors D (not shown) for getting on and off, and also has sensors (not shown) that detect the opening and closing of each of the plurality of doors D. The resetting necessity determining unit 15 acquires the detection results from these sensors. The reset necessity determining unit 15 determines, based on the acquired detection result, that it is necessary to reset the execution priority P when at least one of the multiple doors D is opened or closed”).
Regarding claim 16, the combination of Maekawa and Zhang, as shown in the rejection above, discloses all of the limitations of claim 14. Maekawa further discloses
obtaining an occupant status information from the scanning unit in response to scanning the plurality of zones; and based on the occupant status information, transmitting control instructions to at least one of: the scanning unit to modify the scanning unit setting, or a vehicle component to control a vehicle component operation (See at least [0004] “the results of detection by an OMS are used to control an airbag.”).
Regarding claim 18, The combination of Maekawa and Zhang, as shown above, discloses all of the limitations of claim 14. Maekawa additionally discloses
determining the scan order for the scanning unit further based on a historical vehicle usage information (See at least [0054] “the execution priority setting unit 21 sets the execution priority P for the driver's seat to a fifth value”, [0056] “The execution priority setting unit 21 is configured to select an occupied seat in which a child is seated).
Regarding claim 19, The combination of Maekawa and Zhang, as shown above, discloses all of the limitations of claim 14. Maekawa additionally discloses
the scan order is associated with a predetermined sequential order of scanning the plurality of zones (See at least [0062] “the occupant state detection unit 13 sequentially executes the occupant state detection process for each of the multiple seats S in the vehicle 1 based on a predetermined execution order O'.”).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KENNETH W GOOD whose telephone number is (571)272-4186. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Thu 7:30 am - 5:00 pm.
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, Resha H Desai can be reached on (571) 270-7792. 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.
/KENNETH W GOOD/Examiner, Art Unit 3648
/RESHA DESAI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3648
Prosecution Insights