DETAILED ACTION This office action is in respons e to the application filed on June 23, 2023 . Claims 15 and 16 have been cancelled. Accordingly, c laims 1 - 14 and 17 - 19 are pending. 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. Election/Restrictions Claims 10 – 14 and 17 – 19 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse of Group I (Fig. 1) drawn to claims 1 – 9 in the reply filed on March 3, 2026. Priority Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. JP2020-217241 , filed on December 25, 2020, parent Application No. JP2021-018193, filed on February 8, 2021 and parent Application No. JP2021-018194, filed on February 8, 2021 . Information Disclosure Statement The i nformation disclosure statements (IDS) were submitted on June 23, 2023 and July 8, 2024 . The submissions are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement s are being considered by the E xaminer. Specification The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed. The following title is suggested: SENSOR SYSTEM CAPABLE OF DETECTING DIRT CLAIM INTERPRETATION The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f): (f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof. The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph: An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof. The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked. As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph: (A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function; (B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and (C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function. Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: a light receiving unit configured to receive light from a detection target in claim 1, a cleaner capable of cleaning the transmissive part in claim 1, a cleaner control unit configured to control the cleaner, wherein the cleaner control unit is configured not to actuate the cleaner in claim 1, a dirt determining unit configured to determine whether dirt is attached in claims 2 - 5, the cleaner control unit is configured not to input the detection information in claim 2, she cleaner control unit is configured not to allow the dirt determining unit in claims 3 and 4, the cleaner control unit is configured to actuate the cleaner… the cleaner control unit is configured not to actuate the cleaner… in claim 5, a weather information acquiring unit configured to output weather information in claim 6, a predetermined time determining unit configured to determine the predetermined time in claims 6 - 8, and the cleaner control unit is configured to permit actuation of the cleaner in claim 9. Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. A review of the specification shows that the following appears to be the corresponding structure described in the specification for the 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph limitation: The light receiving unit is described in paragraph [ 0058 ], “ a camera, a radar, a LiDAR, a gating camera ” , which provides the structure to perform the function. The cleaner is described in paragraph [0060], “The cleaner 40 ejects cleaning liquid onto the outer lens 32 to remove dirt such as mud or dust attached to the outer lens 32”, which provides the structure to perform the function. The cleaner control unit is described in paragraph s [0061] and [0062], “ the cleaner control unit 25 transmits a drive signal to the cleaner 40 to actuate the cleaner 40” and “ The description ‘drive of the cleaner 40 is complete’ means when the cleaner control unit 25 transmits a stop signal to the cleaner 40, when the cleaner control unit 25 acquires a signal indicating that the drive has stopped from the cleaner 40, when the cleaner control unit 25 stops supply of power for actuating the cleaner 40, after a certain period of time has elapsed since the drive signal is transmitted to the cleaner 40”, which provides the algorithm for performing the function. The dirt determination unit is described in paragraphs [0098] and [0099], “A dirt determination method by the dirt determining unit 12 will be described with reference to FIG. 4”, which provides the algorithm for performing the function. The weather information acquiring unit is described in paragraph [0081], “outputs weather information including at least one of temperature, humidity, or air pressure”, which provides the algorithm for performing the function. The predetermined time determining unit is described in paragraphs [0081], “determine a predetermined time during which the cleaner 40 is not actuated, based on the weather information” and paragraph [0083], “the latitude of the current position can be specified based on GPS information. The closer to the equator and the lower the latitude is, the more difficult it is for the cleaning liquid to remain, so the predetermined time can be set shorter”, which provides the algorithm for performing the function. If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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 for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action: A person shall be entitled to a patent unless – (a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claims 1 , 5, 7 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by NAKAZAWA MISAKO (WO 2019022038 A1) referred to as MISAKO hereinafter. Regarding claim 1 , MISAKO discloses a sensor system (Fig. 1, page 3, paragraph, 4, external sensor 6 is a sensor capable of acquiring information outside the host vehicle ) comprising: a sensor having a light receiving unit configured to receive light from a detection target (page 3, paragraph 7, LiDAR (i.e. light receiving unit) is a sensor that emits non-visible light in front of it and acquires (i.e. receives) information such as the distance to an object (i.e. detection target) , the shape of an object, the material of an object, the color of an object, and the like based on the emitted light and return light ) via a transmissive part (page 23 , paragraph 7 , The external sensor 6 such as LiDAR 6f, 6b, 6r, 6 l may have a detection surface and a cover covering the detection surface. The cleaner for cleaning the external sensor 6 may be configured to clean the detection surface (i.e. transmissive part) , or may be configured to clean the cover (i.e. transmissive part) covering the sensor ) ; a cleaner capable of cleaning the transmissive part (page 5, paragraph 4, The vehicle 1 has a cleaner system 100 (i.e. cleaner), which is a system for removing foreign matter such as water droplets, mud, dust and the like adhering to the object. T he cleaner system 100 includes a front LiDAR cleaner (hereinafter referred to as front LC) 103, LiDAR cleaner (hereinafter referred to as post LC) 104, right LiDAR cleaner (hereinafter referred to as right LC) 105, left LiDAR cleaner (hereinafter referred to as left LC) 106) ; and a cleaner control unit configured to control the cleaner (Fig. 3, page 5, paragraph 8, The actuators provided to the respective cleaners 101 to 109 b are electrically connected to the cleaner control unit 116) , wherein the cleaner control unit is configured not to actuate the cleaner within a predetermined time after drive of the cleaner is complete (page 20, paragraph 2, The dirt judging unit 3122 judges the dirt degree of the objects to be cleaned 1f, 1b, 6f, 6b, 6r, 6 l , 7r, 7 l , 9c, and when it is judged that the dirt is dirty, the corresponding cleaners 101 to 109b operate. Page 22, paragraph 7, when the vehicle control unit 3 determines that the predetermined interval has elapsed from the previous activation date and time of the corresponding cleaners 101 to 109b (i.e. predetermined time) , the operation determination unit 3121 prohibits (i.e. not actuate) the operation request signal requesting the operation of the corresponding cleaners 101 to 109b) . Regarding Claim 5, MISAKO discloses claim 1. MISAKO further discloses further comprising: a dirt determining unit configured to determine whether dirt is attached to the transmissive part ( Fig. 21, page 20, paragraph 2, The dirt judging unit 3122 judges the dirt degree of the objects to be cleaned 1f, 1b, 6f, 6b, 6r, 61, 7r, 71, 9c, and when it is judged that the dirt is dirty, the corresponding cleaners 101 to 109b operate ) , based on detection information of the sensor ( page 20, paragraph 3, when the dirt determining unit 3122 determines that the front LiDAR 6f is dirty based on the signal output from the front LiDAR 6f , where the dirt signal (i.e. detection information) is input from the dirt sensor capable of detecting dirt of the front LiDAR 6f) , wherein the cleaner control unit is configured to actuate the cleaner based on an output of the dirt dete rm ining unit ( p age 20, paragraph 2, The dirt judging unit 3122 judges the dirt degree of the objects to be cleaned 1f, 1 b, 6f, 6b, 6r, 61, 7r, 71, 9c, and when it is judged that the dirt is dirty, the corresponding cleaners 101 to 109b operate) , and wherein the cleaner control unit is configured not to actuate the cleaner regardless of an output of the dirt determining unit within the predetermined time after the drive of the cleaner is complete ( Page 22, paragraph 7, when the vehicle control unit 3 determines that the predetermined interval has elapsed from the previous activation date and time of the corresponding cleaners 101 to 109b (i.e. predetermined time) , the operation determination unit 3121 prohibits (i.e. not actuate regardless) the operation request signal requesting the operation of the corresponding cleaners 101 to 109b ) . Regarding Claim 7, MISAKO discloses claim 1. MISAKO further discloses further comprising: a predetermined time determining unit configured to determine the predetermined time according to a latitude of a current position (Page 22, paragraph 3, When the cleaner system 3100 determines from the location information acquisition unit 3125 (i.e. latitude of current position) that acquires the geographical position of the own vehicle 1 that the own vehicle 1 is in the area where there is a high possibility of people being present, the cleaners 101 to 109b Prohibit the operation of (i.e. predetermined time) ) . Regarding Claim 8 , MISAKO discloses claim 1. MISAKO further discloses wherein the sensor system is mounted on a vehicle (page 4, paragraph 5, FIG. 1, the vehicle 1 has a front LiDAR 6f, a rear LiDAR 6b, a right LiDAR 6r, a left LiDAR 6 l ) , and wherein the sensor system comprises a predetermined time determining unit configured to determine the predetermined time according to a traveling speed of the vehicle acquired from the vehicle (page 2 1 , paragraph 3 , The vehicle speed sensor 3124 (i.e. traveling speed of vehicle) detects the vehicle speed of the vehicle 1 and outputs a specific vehicle speed signal to the prohibition determination unit 3121 when the vehicle speed is less than a predetermined vehicle speed (i.e. predetermined time) . In the state where the specific vehicle speed signal is input from the vehicle speed sensor 3124, the prohibition determination unit 3121 does not output the operation signal to the corresponding cleaners 101 to 109 b even if the operation request signal is input from the dirt determination unit 3122 . When the specific vehicle speed signal is input from the vehicle speed sensor 3124 and the operation request signal is input from the dirt determination unit 3122, the prohibition determination unit 3121 outputs an operation signal to the corresponding cleaners 101 to 109 b.) . 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 2 - 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over NAKAZAWA MISAKO (WO 2019022038 A1) in view of DAKEMOTO ( US 2019 / 0315353 A1 ) referred to as DAKEMOTO hereinafter. Regarding Claim 2, MISAKO discloses claim 1. MISAKO further discloses further comprising: a dirt determining unit configured to determine whether dirt is attached to the transmissive part (Fig. 21, page 20, paragraph 2, The dirt judging unit 3122 judges the dirt degree of the objects to be cleaned 1f, 1b, 6f, 6b, 6r, 61, 7r, 71, 9c, and when it is judged that the dirt is dirty, the corresponding cleaners 101 to 109b operate ), based on detection information of the sensor ( page 20, paragraph 3, when the dirt determining unit 3122 determines that the front LiDAR 6f is dirty based on the signal output from the front LiDAR 6f , where the dirt signal (i.e. detection information) is input from the dirt sensor capable of detecting dirt of the front LiDAR 6f), wherein the cleaner control unit is configured to input the detection information of the sensor to the dirt determining unit (page 5, paragraphs 10-11, the cleaner control unit 116 includes an operation request generation unit 121, which is connected to the dirt sensor 123 that outputs a dirt signal to the operation request generation unit 121 when it determines that the detection target is dirty) within the predetermined time after the drive of the cleaner is complete ( Page 20 , paragraph 4 , The prohibition determination unit 3121 outputs an operation signal for operating the cleaners 101 to 109b when the corresponding cleaners 101 to 109b are operated (i.e. predetermined time). The prohibition determination unit 3121 does not output an operation signal to the cleaners 101 to 109b when the corresponding cleaners 101 to 109b are not operated (i.e. predetermined time) ) . MISAKO does not specifically teach to not input detection information. Therefore, MISAKO fails to explicitly teach the cleaner control unit is configured not to input the detection information of the sensor to the dirt determining unit within the predetermined time after the drive of the cleaner is complete . However, DAKEMOTO teaches the cleaner control unit is configured not to input the detection information of the sensor to the dirt determining unit within the predetermined time after the drive of the cleaner is complete (Par. [0178] When a predetermined timing has arrived, the CPU starts the processing from Step 1100 ( determine whether or not dirt of the protective window 411 corresponding to at least one of “the radar sensor 61 ) of FIG. 11, and proceeds to Step 1105 to determine whether or not the value of the cleaning start flag F5 is “0”. When the value of the cleaning start flag F5 is not “0”, the CPU determines “No” in Step 1105 (i.e. not to input) , and directly proceeds to Step 1195 to temporarily end this routine). References MISAKO and DAKEMOTO are considered to be analogous art because they relate to cleaning systems on vehicles. Therefore, it would be obvious to one possessing ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to specify to not input detection information as taught by DAKEMOTO in the invention of MISAKO. This modification would allow the vehicle speed to determine the operation of the cleaner (See DAKEMOTO , page 6 paragraph 6). Regarding Claim 3 , MISAKO discloses claim 1. MISAKO further discloses further comprising: a dirt determining unit configured to determine whether dirt is attached to the transmissive part (Fig. 21, page 20, paragraph 2, The dirt judging unit 3122 judges the dirt degree of the objects to be cleaned 1f, 1b, 6f, 6b, 6r, 61, 7r, 71, 9c, and when it is judged that the dirt is dirty, the corresponding cleaners 101 to 109b operate ) , based on detection information of the sensor ( page 20, paragraph 3, when the dirt determining unit 3122 determines that the front LiDAR 6f is dirty based on the signal output from the front LiDAR 6f , where the dirt signal (i.e. detection information) is input from the dirt sensor capable of detecting dirt of the front LiDAR 6f) , wherein the cleaner control unit is configured to allow the dirt determining unit to perform determination of dirt within the predetermined time after the drive of the cleaner is complete ( Page 20 , paragraph 4 , The prohibition determination unit 3121 outputs an operation signal for operating the cleaners 101 to 109b when the corresponding cleaners 101 to 109b are operated (i.e. predetermined time). The prohibition determination unit 3121 does not output an operation signal to the cleaners 101 to 109b when the corresponding cleaners 101 to 109b are not operated (i.e. predetermined time)) . MISAKO does not specifically teach to not allow performing of dirt detection. Therefore, MISAKO fails to explicitly teach the cleaner control unit is configured to not allow the dirt determining unit to perform determination of dirt within the predetermined time after the drive of the cleaner is complete . However, DAKEMOTO teaches the cleaner control unit is configured to not allow the dirt determining unit to perform determination of dirt within the predetermined time after the drive of the cleaner is complete (Par. [0178] When a predetermined timing has arrived, the CPU starts the processing from Step 1100 ( determine whether or not dirt of the protective window 411 corresponding to at least one of “the radar sensor 61 ) of FIG. 11, and proceeds to Step 1105 to determine whether or not the value of the cleaning start flag F5 is “0”. When the value of the cleaning start flag F5 is not “0”, the CPU determines “No” in Step 1105 (i.e. not allow determining dirt) , and directly proceeds to Step 1195 to temporarily end this routine). References MISAKO and DAKEMOTO are considered to be analogous art because they relate to cleaning systems on vehicles. Therefore, it would be obvious to one possessing ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to specify to not allow determining of dirt as taught by DAKEMOTO in the invention of MISAKO. This modification would allow the vehicle speed to determine the operation of the cleaner (See DAKEMOTO , page 6 paragraph 6). Regarding Claim 4 , MISAKO discloses claim 1. MISAKO further discloses further comprising: a dirt determining unit configured to determine whether dirt is attached to the transmissive part ( Fig. 21, page 20, paragraph 2, The dirt judging unit 3122 judges the dirt degree of the objects to be cleaned 1f, 1b, 6f, 6b, 6r, 61, 7r, 71, 9c, and when it is judged that the dirt is dirty, the corresponding cleaners 101 to 109b operate ) , based on detection information of the sensor ( page 20, paragraph 3, when the dirt determining unit 3122 determines that the front LiDAR 6f is dirty based on the signal output from the front LiDAR 6f , where the dirt signal (i.e. detection information) is input from the dirt sensor capable of detecting dirt of the front LiDAR 6f) , wherein the cleaner control unit is configured to allow the dirt determining unit to output a result of determination of dirt within the predetermined time after the drive of the cleaner is complete ( Page 20 , paragraph 4 , The prohibition determination unit 3121 outputs an operation signal for operating the cleaners 101 to 109b when the corresponding cleaners 101 to 109b are operated (i.e. predetermined time). The prohibition determination unit 3121 does not output an operation signal to the cleaners 101 to 109b when the corresponding cleaners 101 to 109b are not operated (i.e. predetermined time)) . MISAKO does not specifically teach to not allow dirt detection results. Therefore, MISAKO fails to explicitly teach the cleaner control unit is configured not to allow the dirt determining unit to output a result of determination of dirt within the predetermined time after the drive of the cleaner is complete . However, DAKEMOTO teaches the cleaner control unit is configured not to allow the dirt determining unit to output a result of determination of dirt within the predetermined time after the drive of the cleaner is complete (Par. [0178] When a predetermined timing has arrived, the CPU starts the processing from Step 1100 ( determine whether or not dirt of the protective window 411 corresponding to at least one of “the radar sensor 61 ) of FIG. 11, and proceeds to Step 1105 to determine whether or not the value of the cleaning start flag F5 is “0”. When the value of the cleaning start flag F5 is not “0”, the CPU determines “No” in Step 1105 (i.e. not allow result of determining dirt) , and directly proceeds to Step 1195 to temporarily end this routine). References MISAKO and DAKEMOTO are considered to be analogous art because they relate to cleaning systems on vehicles. Therefore, it would be obvious to one possessing ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to specify to not allow dirt determining dirt results as taught by DAKEMOTO in the invention of MISAKO. This modification would allow the vehicle speed to determine the operation of the cleaner (See DAKEMOTO , page 6 paragraph 6). Claims 6 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over NAKAZAWA MISAKO (WO 2019022038 A1) in view of KAWAMURA KAZUKI ( WO 2019172306 A1 ) referred to as KAZUKI hereinafter. Regarding Claim 6, MISAKO discloses claim 1. MISAKO further discloses further comprising: a weather information acquiring unit configured to output weather information (page 3, paragraph 4, the external sensor 6 may be provided with a weather sensor (i.e. weather information acquiring unit) that detects a weather condition (i.e. weather information)) , and a predetermined time determining unit configured to determine the predetermined time (page 22, paragraph 7, when the vehicle control unit 3 (i.e. predetermined time determining unit) determines that the predetermined interval has elapsed (i.e. predetermined time) from the previous activation date and time of the corresponding cleaners 101 to 109b, the operation determination unit 3121 prohibits the operation request signal requesting the operation of the corresponding cleaners 101 to 109b) . MISAKO does not specifically disclose weather information comprising at least one of temperature, humidity, or air pressure, Therefore, MISAKO fails to explicitly tea ch weather information comprising at least one of temperature, humidity, or air pressur e, and a predetermined time determining unit configured to determine the predetermined time, based on the weather information. However, KAZUKI teaches weather information comprising at least one of temperature, humidity, or air pressure (page 3, paragraph 3, the external sensor 6 may include a weather sensor that detects the weather condition (i.e. weather information) ), and a predetermined time determining unit configured to determine the predetermined time, based on the weather information (page 11 , paragraph 3 , the cleaner control unit 1116 can appropriately change the predetermined value L 1 according to the road condition and the weather condition during traveling . S ince highly sensitive sensing is required even in the case of rainy weather (i.e. humidity) , it is preferable to increase the predetermined value L 1 compared to the case of fine weather ). References MISAKO and KAZUKI are considered to be analogous art because they relate to cleaning systems on vehicles. Therefore, it would be obvious to one possessing ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to specify weather information comprising at least one of temperature, humidity, or air pressure as taught by KAZUKI in the invention of MISAKO. This modification would allow information outside the host vehicle including the surrounding environment of the vehicle to be acquired (See KAZUKI, page 3 paragraph 3 ). Regarding Claim 9 , MISAKO discloses claim 1. MISAKO further discloses wherein the sensor system is mounted on a vehicle (page 4, paragraph 5, FIG. 1, the vehicle 1 has a front LiDAR 6f, a rear LiDAR 6b, a right LiDAR 6r, a left LiDAR 6l) having a vehicle control unit (page 2, paragraph 7, FIG. 2, the vehicle system 2 wirelessly communicates with the vehicle control unit 3), and wherein the cleaner control unit is configured to permit actuation of the cleaner when a signal is acquired from the vehicle control unit ( page 2 1 , paragraph 3 , The vehicle speed sensor 3124 (i.e. traveling speed of vehicle) detects the vehicle speed of the vehicle 1 and outputs a specific vehicle speed signal to the prohibition determination unit 3121 when the vehicle speed is less than a predetermined vehicle speed (i.e. predetermined time)) . MISAKO does not specifically disclose the vehicle is stopped. Therefore, MISAKO fails to explicitly tea ch the cleaner control unit is configured to permit actuation of the cleaner when a signal, which indicates that the vehicle is stopped, is acquired from the vehicle control unit. However, KAZUKI teaches the cleaner control unit is configured to permit actuation of the cleaner when a signal, which indicates that the vehicle is stopped, is acquired from the vehicle control unit (page 9 , paragraph 2 , If it is determined that the vehicle speed is equal to (i.e. indicating vehicle stopped) or lower than the predetermined value V1 (Yes in Step S3) , the cleaner control unit 116 operates all the cleaner units 110 in Step S14. That is, the cleaner control unit 116 cleans all the external sensors 6). References MISAKO and KAZUKI are considered to be analogous art because they relate to cleaning systems on vehicles . Therefore, it would be obvious to one possessing ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to specify actuation of cleaner based on vehicle speed as taught by KAZUKI in the invention of MISAKO . This modification would allow the vehicle speed to determine the operation of the cleaner (See KAZUKI , page 6 paragraph 6 ). Conclusion The prior art references made of record are not relied upon but are considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Kline et al. ( US 2019/0322245 A1 ) teaches a system that determines parameters for a cleaning event based on sensed information, operating parameters of the vehicle, or environmental information then cleans the sensors to allow for safe operation of the vehicle . FREDERICK et al. (US 2020/0047717 A1) teaches cleaning obstructions for the sensors of the autonomous vehicle by retrieving real-time weather data outside the autonomous vehicle. KIM et al. (US 2021/0125008 A1) teaches a system that determines whether each region of an outer cover corresponding to a location of each of the plurality of sensors is contaminated on the basis of the pieces of detection data and a cleaning device for cleaning an outer surface of the automotive sensor. Any inquiry concerning this communication should be directed to SUSAN E HODGES whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)270-0498 . The E xaminer can normally be reached on Monday - Friday from 8:00 am (EST) to 4:00 pm (EST). If attempts to reach the E xaminer by telephone are unsuccessful, the E xaminer's supervisor, Brian T. Pendleton FILLIN "Insert your SPE’s name." \* MERGEFORMAT , can be reached on FILLIN "Insert your SPE’s area code and phone number." \* MERGEFORMAT (571) 272-7527 . The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://portal.uspto.gov/external/portal . Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). /Susan E. Hodges/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2425