DETAILED ACTION
This non-final action is in response to the Appeal Brief, filed 9 April 2026, which was in reply to the final action, dated 22 July 2025, and subsequent advisory action, dated 23 October 2025.
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 Appeal
Applicant’s request for reconsideration of the finality of the rejection of the last Office action is persuasive and, therefore, the finality of that action is withdrawn, per MPEP 706.07(d).
Claims 1, 3-8, 10-15 and 17-20 are pending.
Applicant’s arguments in the appeal brief have been considered, and necessitated additional review, searching and consideration.
Based on the additional consideration, the examiner has objected to independent claims 1, 8 and 15, as discussed below.
With regard to the 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection of the claims (pgs. 6-21, Final Action), in consideration of applicant’s arguments in the appeal belief, prosecution has been re-opened for additional review, searching and consideration. 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 Yahata and Tatsumoto; and claims 4, 6, 11, 13, 18 and 20 in view of Yahata, Tatsumoto and Darnell.
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 8 and 15 are objected to because of the following informalities.
As per claims 1, 8 and 15, the recitation “predetermined instruction” is unclear. Is the “predetermined instruction” predetermined with regard to creation, timing, source, or are the instructions differentiated?
As per claims 1, the recitation “another apparatus” is unclear. It is unclear whether the “another apparatus” is a terminal apparatus, a server or something else?
Appropriate correction and clarification is required.
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 2023/0306092 to Yahata et al. (hereafter Yahata) in view of U.S. Patent Publication Number 2022/0049963 to Tatsumoto et al. (hereafter Tatsumoto).
As per claim 1, Yahata discloses [a] control apparatus (see at least Yahata, Abstract; Fig. 1, showing electronic keys 8 and 9 <interpreted as another apparatus and the terminal apparatus>) comprising:
a computer readable memory (see at least Yahata, [0112] a change to the setting made on the vehicle functions and a history operation by the person who has unlocked are correlated with the key ID of the key used for unlocking, and the resultant is recorded in the key management database recorded in the memory 107 of the vehicle 1 and managed (Step S404); [0115]; [0117]) ... (1) ... ;
a communication interface (see at least Yahata, Fig. 3, showing wide-area network 3 using a wireless communication standard; [0047] disclosing that vehicle 1 can access various types of information by connecting to the Internet that is a wide-area network 3 using a wireless communication standard such as cellular communication 2 called 4G or 5G. The vehicle 1 can also perform near field communication 4 with a device in close proximity using Bluetooth (registered trademark), ultra wide band (UWB) that is an ultra-wide band wireless communication standard, or the like. Further, the vehicle 1 can acquire and update an electronic key with which to use the vehicle 1 from a vehicle management cloud 5 via the Internet); and
a controller configured to transmit and receive and transmit information to and from another apparatus via the communication interface (see at least Yahata, [0048] disclosing that the vehicle 1 can acquire and update an electronic key with which to use the vehicle 1 from a vehicle management cloud 5 via the Internet; [0049] disclosing that the user A owns an information terminal 6, and the user B owns an information terminal 7. The information terminals 6 and 7 store, therein, an electronic key 8 and an electronic key 9 for using the vehicle 1, respectively. The electronic keys 8 and 9 necessary to use the vehicle 1 are generated and acquired by a key management cloud 10 and the information terminals 6 and 7 that communicate bidirectionally <interpreted as sending and receiving> via the Internet; [0055]; [0057] disclosing that the vehicle management cloud 5, the key management cloud 10, the vehicle 1, and the information terminals 6 and 7 may communicate with one another by a communication means other than the Internet that is the wide-area network 3. For example, the near field communication 4 may be used for the unlocking processing <interpreted as information> performed between the vehicle 1 and the information terminals 6 and 7; [0059] disclosing that FIG. 3 is a flowchart illustrating an example of issuing a key for an owner. Here, the description will be given on the assumption that an application for key management is installed in advance on the information terminal 6 of the user A and the application is available. The main purpose of the vehicle management cloud 5 is to transmit and set encrypted key data to the vehicle; [0060] disclosing that he main purpose of the key management cloud 10 is to provide an electronic key management function service to the owner and a user of the vehicle 1),
wherein the controller is configured to, during a first period, output a first history for a first period in response to a predetermined instruction (see at least Yahata, [0048] disclosing that FIG. 1 is a block diagram illustrating an example of the overall configuration of a key management system 100 according to an embodiment of the present disclosure. Here, the description is given on the assumption that a vehicle 1 owned by a user A is used separately by the user A who is the owner of the vehicle 1 and a user B who is a user thereof <note that one of ordinary skill in the art would know that user A’s use of the vehicle occurs at a first period, associated with a first history, and user B uses the vehicle at a different time, at a second period associated with a second history>; [0148] disclosing that FIG. 11 is a diagram illustrating an example of a screen of the car navigation system displayed for the owner. The screen displays a history of destination settings which is a usage history of the car navigation system. The history screen can be displayed by selecting a “MENU” button at the bottom of the screen and selecting a “destination history” button (not illustrated); [0152] disclosing that the differences in settings of the screen display of the car navigation system between FIGS. 11 and 12 is due to a difference in the key type (or key ID) of the key used for unlocking. In this way, according to the key type (or key ID) of the key used for unlocking, in the case of the owner, the owner's history that the owner usually uses is displayed, and, in the case of a temporary user or a joint user, none of the histories are displayed or only the history of the subject user is displayed. The display of the information related to the usage history of the car navigation system is changed according to the key type (or the key ID) of the key used for unlocking <interpreted as a predetermined instruction> in this manner, which makes it possible to prevent another person from viewing the usage history of the subject user and to protect privacy. The function is probably useful particularly in a case where the vehicle 1 is shared with another person) and
to refrain from outputting a second history for a second period different from the first (see at least Yahata, [0048] disclosing that FIG. 1 is a block diagram illustrating an example of the overall configuration of a key management system 100 according to an embodiment of the present disclosure. Here, the description is given on the assumption that a vehicle 1 owned by a user A is used separately by the user A who is the owner of the vehicle 1 and a user B who is a user thereof <note that one of ordinary skill in the art would know that user A’s use of the vehicle occurs at a first period, associated with a first history, and user B uses the vehicle at a different time, at a second period associated with a second history>; [0151] disclosing that In the example of FIG. 12, as the destination history, when the temporary/joint user who has unlocked has set a destination, and where that temporary/joint user has set as the destination or as a transit point are displayed. Portions not corresponding to the subject user's history are not displayed <interpreted as refrain from outputting>, or are displayed with an asterisk “*****” so that the content is not recognizable. Thus, the temporary/joint user can easily select the same destination in his/her past usage history; [0152])
the second period being determined based on information transmitted by a terminal apparatus (see at least Yahata, [0048]; [0050] disclosing that in a case where the user A who is the owner of the vehicle 1 permits the user B who is another person to use the vehicle 1, the user A issues the electronic key 9 for a temporary user with the key management cloud 10, and the user A transmits the electronic key 9 to the information terminal 7 of the user B; [0151]; [0152]), and
the controller is further configured 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 Yahata, [0048]; [0151]; [0152]). But Yahata does not explicitly teach the following limitation taught in Tatsumoto:
(1) memory ... configured to store a history of travel of a vehicle (see at least Tatsumoto Fig. 2, showing memory 22; [0036] disclosing that the functions of the terminal apparatus 11 are achieved by a processor included in the controller 21 executing a program. The program may be recorded on a computer readable recording medium; [0052] disclosing that n step S410, the server apparatus 12 processes the confidentiality request for the route. The controller 31 of the server apparatus 12 performs processing corresponding to the presence or absence of the confidentiality request received in step S402. When there is a confidentiality request, the controller 31 stores, in the memory 32, the information on the confidentiality request for the searched route that was searched for in step S404 or the travel route specified by the transition of the positional information received in step S408. If the searched route and the travel route differ, the information of the confidentiality request for both routes is stored in the memory 32. For example, for each point included in the route, the controller 31 stores a score indicating the confidentiality request in the memory 32)
Yahata 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. Yahata relates to a control method in a first computer configured to access a database managing information on vehicles and electronic keys (see at least Yahata, Abstract). 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 Yahata, to provide the benefit of having a memory configured to store a history of travel of a vehicle, 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 Yahata and Tatsumoto discloses all of the limitations of claim 1, as shown above. Yahata 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 Yahata, [0048] disclosing that FIG. 1 is a block diagram illustrating an example of the overall configuration of a key management system 100 according to an embodiment of the present disclosure. Here, the description is given on the assumption that a vehicle 1 owned by a user A is used separately by the user A who is the owner of the vehicle 1 and a user B who is a user thereof ; [0050] disclosing that in a case where the user A who is the owner of the vehicle 1 permits the user B who is another person to use the vehicle 1, the user A issues the electronic key 9 for a temporary user with the key management cloud 10, and the user A transmits the electronic key 9 to the information terminal 7 of the user B; [0165] In response to the vehicle 1 returned (Step S608: Yes in the branch processing as to whether the vehicle 1 has been returned), the computing unit 106 of the vehicle 1 counts the total distance traveled with the key of the user, the route information, and the total utilization time from the start of actual use to the end of use, and transmits the result to the key management cloud 10 via the communication unit 108 (Step S609)).
As per claim 5, the combination of Yahata and Tatsumoto discloses all of the limitations of claim 3, as shown above. Yahata 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 Yahata, [0049]; [0165] disclosing that to the vehicle 1 returned (Step S608) Yes in the branch processing as to whether the vehicle 1 has been returned), the computing unit 106 of the vehicle 1 counts the total distance traveled with the key of the user, the route information, and the total utilization time from the start of actual use to the end of use, and transmits the result to the key management cloud 10 via the communication unit 108 (Step S609)).
As per claim 7, the combination of Yahata and Tatsumoto discloses all of the limitations of claim 1, as shown above. 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).
As per claim 8, similar to claim 1, Yahata discloses [a] system (see at least Yahata; Fig. 1, Abstract) comprising:
a control apparatus (see at least Yahata, Fig. 1, showing cloud management 10, and information terminals 6 and 7; [0057]) and
a terminal apparatus configured to communicate information with each other, (see at least Yahata, Fig. 1 showing information terminals 6 and 7 <interpreted as terminal apparatus>; [0048]; [0049]; [0055]; [0057]; [0059]; [0060]), ... (1) ... , and
and, output a first history of the travel of a vehicle for the first period in response to a predetermined instruction during a first period (see at least Yahata, [0048]; [0148]; [0152]),
the terminal apparatus comprises a communication interface, and the terminal apparatus is configured to transmit, via the communication interface information (see at least Yahata, [0048]; [0049]; [0055]; [0057]; [0059]; [0060]) ... , and
the memory further comprises instructions executed by the processor (see at least Yahata, [0054]; [0055] The key management cloud 10 includes a communication unit 1001 for communicating with another computer on the communication network, a memory 1002 in which information regarding a vehicle and a user and a management program thereof are recorded, and a computing unit 1003 for performing various data processing)
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 Yahata, [0048]; [0151]; [0152]),
the second period being determined based on the information transmitted by the terminal device (see at least Yahata, [0048]; [0050]; [0151]; [0152]),
the memory further comprise 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 Yahata, [0048]; [0151]; [0152]). But Yahata does not explicitly teach the following limitation taught in Tatsumoto:
(1) 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 Tatsumoto, Fig. 2, showing memory 22 of terminal apparatus 11; Fig. 3, showing memory 32, of server apparatus 12; [0052]; [0036]),
Yahata 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. Yahata relates to a control method in a first computer configured to access a database managing information on vehicles and electronic keys (see at least Yahata, Abstract). 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 Yahata, to provide the benefit of having a processor and a memory storing instructions executed by the processor to store a history of travel of a vehicle, 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 Yahata and Tatsumoto discloses all of the limitations of claim 8, as shown above. Yahata 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 Yahata, [0048]; [0050]; [0165]).
As per claim 12, similar to claim 5, the combination of Yahata and Tatsumoto disclose all of the limitations of claim 10, as shown above. Yahata 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 Yahata, [0049] ; [0165]).
As per claim 14, similar to claim 7, the combination of Yahata and Tatsumoto discloses all of the limitations of claim 8, as shown above. 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]).
As per claim 15, similar to claims 1 and 8, Yahata discloses [a]n operating method of a system (see at least Yahata, Fig. 1, Fig. 7; Abstract) comprising:
a control apparatus apparatus (see at least Yahata, Fig. 1, showing cloud management 10, and information terminals 6 and 7; [0057])
and a terminal apparatus configured to communicate information with each other, (see at least Yahata, Fig. 1 showing information terminals 6 and 7 <interpreted as terminal apparatus>; [0048]; [0049]; [0055]; [0057]; [0059]; [0060]),
the operating method comprising:... (1) ... , and
during a first period outputting a first history for a first period in response to a predetermined instruction during the first period (see at least Yahata, [0048]; [0148]; [0152]); and
transmitting, by a communication interface of the terminal apparatus, information for differentiating a second period from the first period to the control apparautus (see at least Yahata, [0048]; [0151]; [0152]) ... ,
wherein the control apparatus refrains from outputting a second history of travel of the vehicle for a second period different from the first (see at least Tatsumoto, [0055]; [0057]),
the second period being determined based on the information transmitted by the terminal apparatus (see at least Yahata, [0048]; [0050]; [0151]; [0152]) , and
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 Yahata, [0048]; [0151]; [0152]). But, Yahata does not explicitly teach the following limitation taught in Tatsumoto:
(1) storing, by the control apparatus, a history of travel of a vehicle (see at least Tatsumoto, Fig. 2, showing memory 22 of terminal apparatus 11; Fig. 3, showing memory 32, of server apparatus 12; [0052]),
Yahata 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. Yahata relates to a control method in a first computer configured to access a database managing information on vehicles and electronic keys (see at least Yahata, Abstract). 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 Yahata, to provide the benefit of storing a history of travel of a vehicle, 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 Yahata and Tatsumoto discloses all of the limitations of claim 15, as shown above. Yahata 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 Yahata, [0048]; [0050]; [0165]).
As per claim 19, similar to claims 5 and 12, the combination of Yahata and Tatsumoto discloses all of the limitations of claim 17, as shown above. Yahata further discloses the following limitation:
wherein the control apparatus receives the start information and the end information from different terminal apparatuses (see at least Yahata, [0049] ; [0165]).
Claims 4, 6, 11, 13, 18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yahata 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 Yahata and Tatsumoto discloses all of the limitations of claim 3, as shown above. But, neither Yahata nor Tatsumoto 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)).
Yahata, 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. Yahata relates to a control method in a first computer configured to access a database managing information on vehicles and electronic keys (see at least Yahata, Abstract). 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 6, the combination of Yahata and Tatsumoto discloses all of the limitations of claim 1, as shown above. But, neither Yahata nor Tatsumoto 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]).
Yahata, 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. Yahata relates to a control method in a first computer configured to access a database managing information on vehicles and electronic keys (see at least Yahata, Abstract). 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 11, similar to claim 4, the combination of Yahata and Tatsumoto discloses all of the limitations of claim 10, as shown above. But, neither Yahata nor Tatsumoto 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. Yahata relates to a control method in a first computer configured to access a database managing information on vehicles and electronic keys (see at least Yahata, Abstract). 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 Yahata and Tatsumoto discloses all of the limitations of claim 10, as shown above. But, neither Yahata nor Tatsumoto 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]).
Yahata, 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. Yahata relates to a control method in a first computer configured to access a database managing information on vehicles and electronic keys (see at least Yahata, Abstract). 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 Yahata and Tatsumoto discloses all of the limitations of claim 17, as shown above. But, neither Yahata nor Tatsumoto 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. Yahata relates to a control method in a first computer configured to access a database managing information on vehicles and electronic keys (see at least Yahata, Abstract). 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 20, similar to claims 6 and 13, the combination of Yahata and Tatsumoto discloses all of the limitations of claim 17, as shown above. But, neither Yahata nor Tatsumoto 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. Yahata relates to a control method in a first computer configured to access a database managing information on vehicles and electronic keys (see at least Yahata, Abstract). 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]).
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
Prosecution Insights