DETAILED ACTION
This non-final action is in response to the reply, filed 30 June 2026, which was in reply to the non-final action, dated 21 April 2026.
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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 21 May 2026, complies with 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the IDS has been considered by the examiner. An initialed copy of the 1449 for is enclosed herewith.
Response to Amendments and Arguments
Claims 1, 3-8, 10-15 and 17-20 are pending. Claims 1, 8 and 15 have been amended.
With regard to the objection to claims 1, 8 and 15 (pgs. 3, Action), applicant’s amendments render the claim objections moot. Accordingly, the objection to claims 1, 8 and 15 has been withdrawn.
With regard to the 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection of claims 1, 8 and 15 (pgs. 3-17, Action), applications arguments are persuasive, but necessitated additional searching and consideration of new grounds of rejection. Accordingly, the new grounds of rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 are: claims 1, 3, 5, 7, 8, 10, 12, 14, 15, 17 and 19 in view of Vladimerou and Tatsumoto; and claims 4, 6, 11, 13, 18, 20 in view of Vladimerou, Tatsumoto, and Darnell as discussed below.
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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
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 non-obviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1, 3, 5, 7, 8, 10, 12, 14, 15, 17 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Publication Number 2021/0064778 to Vladimerou (hereafter V) in view of U.S. Patent Publication Number 2022/0049963 to Tatsumoto et al. (hereafter Tatsumoto).
As per claim 1, V discloses [a] control apparatus (see at least V, Abstract) comprising:
a computer readable memory that stores a history of travel of a vehicle (see at least V, [0029] disclosing that the privacy system 170 includes a memory 210 that stores the communication module 220 and the crypto module 230. The memory 210 is a random-access memory (RAM), read-only memory (ROM), a hard disk drive, a flash memory, or other suitable memory for storing the modules 220 and 230. The modules 220 and 230 are, for example, computer-readable instructions that when executed by the processor 110 cause the processor 110 to perform the various functions disclosed herein. In one or more embodiments, the modules 220 and 230 are embedded in an on-chip memory of the processor 110; claim 3, the telematics data includes the personally identifiable information (PII) associated with the user of the mobile device, the PII including at least a starting point and an end point for a route of the vehicle <interpreted as a history of travel of a vehicle>; [0031] disclosing that the telematics data 250 itself includes, in one or more embodiments, external sensor data (e.g., images, point cloud data, etc.), internal sensor data (e.g., IMU data, velocity, engine information, etc.), infotainment information, navigation system information, GPS location data, and so on. The personally identifiable information (PII) (also referred to herein as PII data) includes any aspect of the telematics data that may individually identify the user either explicitly or implicitly. That is, for example, waypoints in a route associated with a home or business of the user are PII data <interpreted as history of travel of a vehicle>);
a communication interface (see at least V, [0020] disclosing that he mobile device and the vehicle operate in concert to ensure that the telematics data is secure. In one aspect, as the vehicle generates the data, the vehicle can communicate the data to the mobile device associated with a person that is presently riding in the vehicle; [0022]); and
a controller configured to communicate with a terminal apparatus via the communication interface, the terminal apparatus comprising a communication interface (see at least V, [0022] disclosing that the mobile device communicates the secured telematics data as a secure packet that includes the signatures to the cloud-based computing system for storage. The cloud-based system, in one or more approaches, processes the secured data to remove the identifying signatures and simply associate the data with the vehicle and/or the mobile device using an identifier such as the hash or another alpha-numeric identifier generated by the cloud-based system.; [0034] disclosing that the privacy system 170 of the mobile device 310 serves as a primary controller for processing the telematics data 250 while the cloud-computing environment 300 and the vehicle 100 perform other functions that may be, for example, less complex in comparison to the mobile device 310. Thus, the vehicle 100 and the cloud-computing environment 300 may implement separate instances of the communication module 220 while the mobile device 310 implements both the communication module 220 and the crypto module 230),
wherein the controller is configured to, during a first period, output a first history of travel of the vehicle for a first period in response to a history output request (see at least V, [0068] disclosing that the cloud 300 retains the public key of the mobile device 310 in a confidential and secure manner so as to protect the secured data and the PII data included therein. As such, when the cloud 300 decrypts the secured data to provide the telematics data 250 in an original form, the telematics data 250 still includes the sensitive PII data; [0069] disclosing that the cloud 300 filters the telematics data 250 to identify aspects that are potentially classified as PII data and to remove or otherwise obscure the PII data so that the data no longer identifies the user) and
to refrain from outputting a second history of travel of the vehicle for a second period different from the first (see at least V, [0069] disclosing that the cloud 300 filters the telematics data 250 to identify aspects that are potentially classified as PII data and to remove or otherwise obscure the PII data so that the data no longer identifies the user ),
the second period being determined based on information transmitted by the terminal apparatus (see at least V, [0071] disclosing that at 760, the system 170 of the cloud 300 stores the secured data using the identifier as a unique indexing value for subsequent retrieval. In this way, the cloud 300 anonymously and securely stores the telematics data 250 so that the PII data is stored to retain the privacy of the user and while providing for subsequent retrieval by the user independent of a particular vehicle and by authorized third parties as specified by the user < note that ins this situation a second user can submit their key, and not access the first users PPI < interpreted as the history>, < a second user submission of the key is interpreted as a second time, different from the first user>), ... . But, to the extent that V does not teach the following limitation, using the same method from V, Tatsumoto teaches:
the controller is further configured to, during the second period, output the second history in response to the history output request and refrain from outputting the first history (see at least Tatsumoto, [0052]; [0055] disclosing that in step S416, the terminal apparatus 11 makes a display setting or non-display setting of the information on the route. When the permission instruction is received, the controller 21 of the terminal apparatus 11 makes a setting such that the history of the searched route that was searched for in step S404 or the actually travelled route generated from the transition of the positional information transmitted to the server apparatus 12 in step S408 is displayed in accordance with operation by the user. Conversely, when the prohibition instruction is received, the controller 21 makes a setting such that the history of the searched route or the travel route is not displayed even if the user performs an operation. The controller 21 may be configured to make a setting only when user consent is received by the input interface 25 after the user is notified, by the output interface 26, that a setting for display or non-display is being made <it would be obvious to have substituted the methods in V to replace the consent in Tatsumoto>).
V and Tatsumoto are analogous art to claim 1 because they are related to the same field of supporting users in car sharing where vehicles are shared among a plurality of users. V relates to security mechanisms for protecting telematics data, and, for securing personally identifiable information within telematics data (see V, [0001]). Tatsumoto relates to an apparatus that receives and transmits an instruction that prohibits the terminal apparatus from outputting the information on the route when the route has a tendency to be confidential, and an instruction that permits the terminal apparatus to output the information on the route when the route does not have the tendency to be confidential (see at least Tatsumoto, Abstract).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the apparatus, as disclosed in V, to provide the benefit of, during the second period, outputting the second history in response to the history output request and refraining from outputting the first history, as disclosed in Tatsumoto, with a reasonable expectation of success. Doing so would provide the further benefit of enhancing the privacy of different users of the same vehicle.
As per claim 3, the combination of V and Tatsumoto discloses all of the limitations of claim 1, as shown above. V, as modified by Tatsumoto, further discloses the following limitation:
wherein the information transmitted by the terminal apparatus is start information indicating a start of the second period or end information indicating an end of the second period (see at least Tatsumoto, [0089] disclosing that for some types of virtual keys (e.g., those including a command to start a reservation or end a reservation), once the virtual key has been transmitted from a user's phone (portable computing device 112b) to a vehicle and the command(s) successfully executed by the vehicle, security module 374 can be configured to delete the virtual key from the portable computing device so the user cannot use the same virtual key a second time).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the apparatus, as disclosed in V, as modified by Tatsumoto, to provide the benefit of having the information transmitted by the terminal apparatus is start information indicating a start of the second period or end information indicating an end of the second period, as further disclosed in Tatsumoto, with a reasonable expectation of success. Doing so would provide the further benefit of enhancing the privacy of different users of the same vehicle.
As per claim 5, the combination of V and Tatsumoto discloses all of the limitations of claim 3, as shown above. V, as modified by Tatsumoto, further discloses the following limitation:
wherein the controller is configured to receive the start information and the end information from different terminal apparatuses (see at least Tatsumoto, [0089] security module 374 is generally configured to manage virtual keys and other application-specific security related functions, such as, for example, security protocols between portable computing device 112b and vehicle computing devices 112a <interpreted as different terminal devices>).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the apparatus, as disclosed in V, as modified by Tatsumoto, to provide the benefit of receiving the start information and the end information from different terminal apparatuses, as further disclosed in Tatsumoto, with a reasonable expectation of success. Doing so would provide the further benefit of enhancing the privacy of different users of the same vehicle.
As per claim 7, the combination of V and Tatsumoto discloses all of the limitations of claim 1, as shown above. V, as modified by Tatsumoto, further discloses the following limitation:
wherein the history includes information on a searched route, a travel route, and points included in the searched route or the travel route (see at least Tatsumoto, [0028] disclosing that terminal apparatus 11 transmits the route to the server apparatus 12 when the user travels. The route includes a route that was searched for (searched route) or a route actually travelled (travel route). The server apparatus 12 transmits, to the terminal apparatus 11, an instruction (prohibition instruction) to prohibit output of information on the route (simply referred to as the route when no distinction is made between a searched route and a travel route) when the route has a tendency to be confidential (confidentiality tendency) and an instruction (permission instruction) to permit output of the information on the route when the route does not have the confidentiality tendency).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the apparatus, as disclosed in V, as modified by Tatsumoto, to provide the benefit of having the history include information on a searched route, a travel route, and points included in the searched route or the travel route, as further disclosed in Tatsumoto, with a reasonable expectation of success. Doing so would provide the further benefit of enhancing the privacy of different users of the same vehicle.
As per claim 8, similar to claim 1, V discloses [a] system (see at least V, Abstract) comprising:
a control apparatus (see at least V, [0024]; [0034]) and
a terminal apparatus configured to with the control apparatus, (see at least V, [0022];[034]]),
wherein the control apparatus comprises a processor and a memory storing instructions executed by the processor to store a history of travel of a vehicle (see at least V, [0029]; [0031]) , and
during a first period, output a first history of the travel of travel of the vehicle for the first period in response to a history output request (see at least V, [0068]),
the terminal apparatus comprises a communication interface, and the terminal apparatus is configured to transmit via the communication interface information (see at least V, [0020]; [0022]; [0034]) ... , and
the memory further comprises instructions executed by the processor (see at least V, [0029]; [0031])
to, during the first period refrain from outputting a second history of travel of the vehicle for the second period different from the first period (see at least V, [0068]; [0069]),
the second period being determined based on the information transmitted by the terminal device (see at least V, [0071]) ... . But, to the extent that V does not teach the following limitation, using the same method from V, Tatsumoto teaches:
the memory further comprises instructions executed by the processor to, during the second period, output the second history in response to the predetermined instruction and refrain from outputting the first history (see at least Tatsumoto, [0052]; [0055]).
V and Tatsumoto are analogous art to claim 8 because they are related to the same field of supporting users in car sharing where vehicles are shared among a plurality of users. V relates to security mechanisms for protecting telematics data, and, for securing personally identifiable information within telematics data (see V, [0001]). Tatsumoto relates to an apparatus that receives and transmits an instruction that prohibits the terminal apparatus from outputting the information on the route when the route has a tendency to be confidential, and an instruction that permits the terminal apparatus to output the information on the route when the route does not have the tendency to be confidential (see at least Tatsumoto, Abstract).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system, as disclosed in V, to provide the benefit of, during the second period, outputting the second history in response to the history output request and refraining from outputting the first history, as disclosed in Tatsumoto, with a reasonable expectation of success. Doing so would provide the further benefit of enhancing the privacy of different users of the same vehicle.
As per claim 10, similar to claim 3, the combination V and Tatsumoto discloses all of the limitations of claim 8, as shown above. V, as modified by Tatsumoto, further discloses the following limitation:
wherein the information transmitted by the terminal apparatus to the control apparatus is start information indicating a start of the second period or end information indicating an end of the second period (see at least Tatsumoto, [0089]).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system, as disclosed in V, as modified by Tatsumoto, to provide the benefit of having the information transmitted by the terminal apparatus is start information indicating a start of the second period or end information indicating an end of the second period, as further disclosed in Tatsumoto, with a reasonable expectation of success. Doing so would provide the further benefit of enhancing the privacy of different users of the same vehicle.
As per claim 12, similar to claim 5, the combination of V and Tatsumoto disclose all of the limitations of claim 10, as shown above. V, as modified by Tatsumoto, further discloses the following limitation:
wherein the controller apparatus is configured to receive the start information and the end information from different terminal apparatuses (see at least Tatsumoto, [0089]).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system, as disclosed in V, as modified by Tatsumoto, to provide the benefit of receiving the start information and the end information from different terminal apparatuses, as further disclosed in Tatsumoto, with a reasonable expectation of success. Doing so would provide the further benefit of enhancing the privacy of different users of the same vehicle.
As per claim 14, similar to claim 7, the combination of V and Tatsumoto discloses all of the limitations of claim 8, as shown above. V, as modified Tatsumoto further discloses the following limitation:
wherein the history includes information on a searched route, a travel route, and points included in the searched route or the travel route (see at least Tatsumoto, [0028]).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system, as disclosed in V, as modified by Tatsumoto, to provide the benefit of having the history include information on a searched route, a travel route, and points included in the searched route or the travel route, as further disclosed in Tatsumoto, with a reasonable expectation of success. Doing so would provide the further benefit of enhancing the privacy of different users of the same vehicle.
As per claim 15, similar to claims 1 and 8, Y discloses [a]n operating method of a system (see at least Y, Abstract) comprising:
a control apparatus (see at least V, [0024]; [0034]),
and a terminal apparatus configured to communicate with the control apparatus, (see at least Y, [0024]; [0034]),
the operating method comprising: storing, by a processor of the control apparatus, a history of travel of a vehicle (see at least V, [0029]; [0031]), and
during a first period outputting a first history of travel of the vehicle for a first period in response to a history output request (see at least V, [0068]); and
transmitting, by a communication interface of the terminal apparatus, information for differentiating a second period from the first period to the control apparatus (see at least V, [0020]; [0022]; [0034]; [0071]) ... ,
wherein the control apparatus during the first period, refrains from outputting a second history of travel of the vehicle for a second period different from the first (see at least V, [0068]; [0069]),
the second period being determined based on the information transmitted by the terminal apparatus (see at least Yahata, [0048]; [0050]; [0151]; [0152]) , ... . But, to the extent that V does not teach the following limitation, using the same method from V, Tatsumoto teaches:
the control apparatus, during the second period, outputs the second history in response to the predetermined instruction and refrains from outputting the first history (see at least Tatsumoto, [0052]; [0055]).
V and Tatsumoto are analogous art to claim 15 because they are related to the same field of supporting users in car sharing where vehicles are shared among a plurality of users. V relates to security mechanisms for protecting telematics data, and, for securing personally identifiable information within telematics data (see V, [0001]). Tatsumoto relates to an apparatus that receives and transmits an instruction that prohibits the terminal apparatus from outputting the information on the route when the route has a tendency to be confidential, and an instruction that permits the terminal apparatus to output the information on the route when the route does not have the tendency to be confidential (see at least Tatsumoto, Abstract).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system, as disclosed in V, to provide the benefit of, during the second period, outputting the second history in response to the history output request and refraining from outputting the first history, as disclosed in Tatsumoto, with a reasonable expectation of success. Doing so would provide the further benefit of enhancing the privacy of different users of the same vehicle.
As per claim 17, similar to claims 3 and 10, the combination of V and Tatsumoto discloses all of the limitations of claim 15, as shown above. V, as modified by Tatsumoto, further discloses the following limitation:
wherein the information transmitted by the terminal apparatus to the control apparatus is start information indicating a start of the second period or end information indicating an end of the second period (see at least Tatsumoto, [0089]).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system, as disclosed in V, as modified by Tatsumoto, to provide the benefit of having the information transmitted by the terminal apparatus is start information indicating a start of the second period or end information indicating an end of the second period, as further disclosed in Tatsumoto, with a reasonable expectation of success. Doing so would provide the further benefit of enhancing the privacy of different users of the same vehicle.
As per claim 19, similar to claims 5 and 12, the combination of Y and Tatsumoto discloses all of the limitations of claim 17, as shown above. Y, as modified by Tatsumoto, further discloses the following limitation:
wherein the control apparatus receives the start information and the end information from different terminal apparatuses (see at least Tatsumoto, [0089]).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system, as disclosed in V, as modified by Tatsumoto, to provide the benefit of receiving the start information and the end information from different terminal apparatuses, as further disclosed in Tatsumoto, with a reasonable expectation of success. Doing so would provide the further benefit of enhancing the privacy of different users of the same vehicle.
Claims 4, 6, 11, 13, 18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over V and Tatsumoto as applied to claims 1, 3, 10 and 17 above, and further in view of U.S. Patent Publication Number 2017/0134382 to Darnell et al. (hereafter Darnell).
As per claim 4, the combination of V and Tatsumoto discloses all of the limitations of claim 3, as shown above. But, the combination of V as modified by Tatsumoto does not explicitly teach the following limitations taught in Darnell:
wherein the start information or the end information is acquired on the terminal apparatus by a user of the terminal apparatus reserving use of the vehicle (see at least Darnell, [0089] disclosing that virtual keys for multiple available cars are transmitted to a user's phone (portable computing device 112b), once a user has started a reservation for a particular one of the vehicles, security module 374 can be configured to delete virtual keys for any other cars from the portable computing device so the user cannot start a reservation with a second car (at least not without further interaction with the system to ensure that the first reservation has ended and access to and use of the first car terminated)).
V, Tatsumoto and Darnell are analogous art to claim 4 because they are related to the same field of supporting users in car sharing where vehicles are shared among a plurality of users. V relates to security mechanisms for protecting telematics data, and, for securing personally identifiable information within telematics data (see V, [0001]). Tatsumoto relates to an apparatus that receives and transmits an instruction that prohibits the terminal apparatus from outputting the information on the route when the route has a tendency to be confidential, and an instruction that permits the terminal apparatus to output the information on the route when the route does not have the tendency to be confidential (see at least Tatsumoto, Abstract). Darnel relates to systems and methods for controlling access to shared or rented vehicles (see Darnell, [0002]).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method, as disclosed in V, as modified by Tatsumoto, to provide the benefit of having the start information or the end information be acquired on the terminal apparatus by a user of the terminal apparatus reserving use of the vehicle, as disclosed in Darnell, with a reasonable expectation of success. Doing so would provide the benefit of providing secure authentication, with regard to accessing the data (see at least Darnell, [0089]; [0099]).
As per claim 6, the combination of V and Tatsumoto discloses all of the limitations of claim 1, as shown above. But, V as modified by Tatsumoto does not explicitly teach the following limitation taught in Darnell:
wherein the controller is configured to output an instruction to unlock the vehicle upon receiving the start information or to lock the vehicle upon receiving the end information (see at least Darnell, [0088] disclosing that vehicle command module 370 (portable computing device 112b) is generally configured to interact with the vehicle (e.g., vehicle computing device 112a) to transmit commands (e.g., in the form of virtual keys, as described in more detail below) for the vehicle. For example, and as described in the more detail below, vehicle command module 370 can be configured to transmit a virtual key to a vehicle computing device 112a of a corresponding vehicle to begin a reservation with the corresponding vehicle, which virtual key may include commands to unlock door(s), unlock and open the trunk, change the availability state of the vehicle from “available” or “staged” to “rented” or “in use,” and or other commands; [0089]).
V, Tatsumoto and Darnell are analogous art to claim 6 because they are related to the same field of supporting users in car sharing where vehicles are shared among a plurality of users. V relates to security mechanisms for protecting telematics data, and, for securing personally identifiable information within telematics data (see V, [0001]). Tatsumoto relates to an apparatus that receives and transmits an instruction that prohibits the terminal apparatus from outputting the information on the route when the route has a tendency to be confidential, and an instruction that permits the terminal apparatus to output the information on the route when the route does not have the tendency to be confidential (see at least Tatsumoto, Abstract). Darnel relates to systems and methods for controlling access to shared or rented vehicles (see Darnell, [0002]).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method, as disclosed in V, as modified by Tatsumoto, to provide the benefit of having the controller be configured to output an instruction to unlock the vehicle upon receiving the start information or to lock the vehicle upon receiving the end information, as disclosed in Darnell, with a reasonable expectation of success. Doing so would provide the benefit of providing secure authentication, with regard to accessing the data (see at least Darnell, [0089]; [0099]).
As per claim 11, similar to claim 4, the combination of V and Tatsumoto discloses all of the limitations of claim 10, as shown above. But, V as modified by Tatsumoto does not explicitly teach the following limitations taught in Darnell:
wherein the terminal apparatus is configured to acquire the start information or the end information is acquired on the terminal apparatus by a user of the terminal apparatus reserving use of the vehicle (see at least Darnell, [0089]).
Yahata, Tatsumoto and Darnell are analogous art to claim 11 because they are related to the same field of supporting users in car sharing where vehicles are shared among a plurality of users. V relates to security mechanisms for protecting telematics data, and, for securing personally identifiable information within telematics data (see V, [0001]). Tatsumoto relates to an apparatus that receives and transmits an instruction that prohibits the terminal apparatus from outputting the information on the route when the route has a tendency to be confidential, and an instruction that permits the terminal apparatus to output the information on the route when the route does not have the tendency to be confidential (see at least Tatsumoto, Abstract). Darnel relates to systems and methods for controlling access to shared or rented vehicles (see Darnell, [0002]).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method, as disclosed in Yahata, as modified by Tatsumoto, to provide the benefit of having the start information or the end information be acquired on the terminal apparatus by a user of the terminal apparatus reserving use of the vehicle, as disclosed in Darnell, with a reasonable expectation of success. Doing so would provide the benefit of providing secure authentication, with regard to accessing the data (see at least Darnell, [0089]; [0099]).
As per claim 13, similar to claim 6, the combination of V and Tatsumoto discloses all of the limitations of claim 10, as shown above. But, V as modified by Tatsumoto does not explicitly teach the following limitation taught in Darnell:
wherein the controller apparatus is configured to output an instruction to unlock the vehicle upon receiving the start information or to lock the vehicle upon receiving the end information (see at least Darnell, [0088]; [0089]).
V, Tatsumoto and Darnell are analogous art to claim 13 because they are related to the same field of supporting users in car sharing where vehicles are shared among a plurality of users. V relates to security mechanisms for protecting telematics data, and, for securing personally identifiable information within telematics data (see V, [0001]). Tatsumoto relates to an apparatus that receives and transmits an instruction that prohibits the terminal apparatus from outputting the information on the route when the route has a tendency to be confidential, and an instruction that permits the terminal apparatus to output the information on the route when the route does not have the tendency to be confidential (see at least Tatsumoto, Abstract). Darnel relates to systems and methods for controlling access to shared or rented vehicles (see Darnell, [0002]).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method, as disclosed in Yahata, as modified by Tatsumoto, to provide the benefit of having the controller be configured to output an instruction to unlock the vehicle upon receiving the start information or to lock the vehicle upon receiving the end information, as disclosed in Darnell, with a reasonable expectation of success. Doing so would provide the benefit of providing secure authentication, with regard to accessing the data (see at least Darnell, [0089]; [0099]).
As per claim 18, similar to claims 4 and 11, the combination of V and Tatsumoto discloses all of the limitations of claim 17, as shown above. But, V as modified by Tatsumoto does not explicitly teach the following limitations taught in Darnell:
wherein the terminal apparatus acquires the start information or the end information by a user performing a process to reserve use of the vehicle (see at least Darnell, [0089]).
Yahata, Tatsumoto and Darnell are analogous art to claim 18 because they are related to the same field of supporting users in car sharing where vehicles are shared among a plurality of users. V relates to security mechanisms for protecting telematics data, and, for securing personally identifiable information within telematics data (see V, [0001]). Tatsumoto relates to an apparatus that receives and transmits an instruction that prohibits the terminal apparatus from outputting the information on the route when the route has a tendency to be confidential, and an instruction that permits the terminal apparatus to output the information on the route when the route does not have the tendency to be confidential (see at least Tatsumoto, Abstract). Darnel relates to systems and methods for controlling access to shared or rented vehicles (see Darnell, [0002]).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system, as disclosed in Yahata, as modified by Tatsumoto, to provide the benefit of having the start information or the end information be acquired on the terminal apparatus by a user of the terminal apparatus reserving use of the vehicle, as disclosed in Darnell, with a reasonable expectation of success. Doing so would provide the benefit of providing secure authentication, with regard to accessing the data (see at least Darnell, [0089]; [0099]).
As per claim 20, similar to claims 6 and 13, the combination of V and Tatsumoto discloses all of the limitations of claim 17, as shown above. But, V as modified by Tatsumoto does not explicitly teach the following limitations taught in Darnell:
wherein the controller apparatus outputs an instruction to unlock the vehicle upon receiving the start information or to lock the vehicle upon receiving the end information (see at least Darnell, [0088]; [0089]).
Yahata, Tatsumoto and Darnell are analogous art to claim 20 because they are related to the same field of supporting users in car sharing where vehicles are shared among a plurality of users. V relates to security mechanisms for protecting telematics data, and, for securing personally identifiable information within telematics data (see V, [0001]). Tatsumoto relates to an apparatus that receives and transmits an instruction that prohibits the terminal apparatus from outputting the information on the route when the route has a tendency to be confidential, and an instruction that permits the terminal apparatus to output the information on the route when the route does not have the tendency to be confidential (see at least Tatsumoto, Abstract). Darnel relates to systems and methods for controlling access to shared or rented vehicles (see Darnell, [0002]).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system, as disclosed in Yahata, as modified by Tatsumoto, to provide the benefit of having the controller be configured to output an instruction to unlock the vehicle upon receiving the start information or to lock the vehicle upon receiving the end information, as disclosed in Darnell, with a reasonable expectation of success. Doing so would provide the benefit of providing secure authentication, with regard to accessing the data (see at least Darnell, [0089]; [0099]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: U.S. Patent Publication Number 2018/0091930 to Jefferies disclosing at [0015] a method of remotely identifying a specific customer and verifying a reservation or use of a specific rental-carshare (RCS) vehicle for a predetermined period of time, and at [0224] that that when someone borrows the car, the vehicle access and management system may collect data on time driven, miles driven, and driver behavior; U.S. Patent Number 9,872,215 to Igarashi at Abstract, disclosing that a control unit configured to cause each of segments included in streaming data to be delivered to one or more terminal devices in an area including a plurality of overlapping cells to be delivered from a first access point of a first cell in a first time slot and to be delivered from a second access point of a second cell overlapping the first cell in a second time slot different from the first time slot; and U.S. Patent Publication Number 2019/0138952 to Han et al. disclosing at [0073] that the personalization device 233 may provide the encrypted vehicle sharing service use information to the user terminal, and may provide, among the vehicle sharing service use information, the user information (the name, the resident registration number of the user, and the like), the vehicle setting value (a convenience specification, a function, and the like), and reservation time information to the provider terminal to allow the provider to identify them. As such, the personalization device 233 may not provide, among the vehicle sharing service use information, the vehicle driving information (the destination, the route, and the location), the driving distance, and the like to the provider terminal to protect the private information related to the use.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PATRICK M. BRADY III whose telephone number is (571)272-7458. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7:00 am - 4;30 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, Erin Bishop can be reached at 571-270-3713. 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.
PATRICK M. BRADY III
Examiner
Art Unit 3665
/PATRICK M BRADY/ Examiner, Art Unit 3665
/Erin D Bishop/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3665
