DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Status of Claims
This office action is in response to application number 18/296, 891 filed on 04/06/2023, in which Claims 1-15 are presented for examination.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55, for Application No. DE10 2022 203 459.7.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 4/6/2023, the information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 4/27/2023, and the information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 11/7/2023 have been received and considered by the examiner.
Specification
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because:
It contains legalese, "comprises" (lines 2 and 4) and
it contains a typo, "signal on user" should be "signal based on user" (lines 5 and 6).
A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
Pg. 2, para 0009 and 0011; pg. 4, para 0020; pg. 8, para 0038; pg. 9, para 0041: "signal on" should be "signal based on",
Pg. 11, para 0058; pg. 13, para 0069: "vehicle door 11" should be "vehicle door 10",
Pg. 11, para 0059: "FIG. 2" should be "FIG. 2 and 3",
Pg. 11, para 0061: should include "FIG. 4 and FIG. 5" and
Pg. 12, para 0066: "element 10" should be "element 11".
Appropriate correction is required.
The use of the term "Ford Mustang Mach-E," [pg. 1, para 00005], which is a trade name or a mark used in commerce, has been noted in this application. The term should be accompanied by the generic terminology; furthermore the term should be capitalized wherever it appears or, where appropriate, include a proper symbol indicating use in commerce such as ™, SM , or ® following the term.
Although the use of trade names and marks used in commerce (i.e., trademarks, service marks, certification marks, and collective marks) are permissible in patent applications, the proprietary nature of the marks should be respected and every effort made to prevent their use in any manner which might adversely affect their validity as commercial marks.
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 5, 7-10, 13, and 15 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1 (lines 9-10), 5 (line 3), 7 (lines 3-4), 8 (lines 3-4), 13 (line 3), and 15 (line 3): "signal on" should be "signal based on",
Claim 9 (line 2): "for controlling" should be "controlling", and
Claim 10 (lines 5 and 9): "in a second functional state of the vehicle door" should be "in response to an operating signal of the at least one first operating device in a second functional state of the vehicle door" or similar.
Appropriate correction is required.
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:
"control device for" and "control device is configured to" in Claim 1 (lines 6 and 12), 7 (line 5), 8 (line 5), 9 (line 3), 10 (line 2), 11 (line 2), 12 (line 2), and 13 (lines 4-5).
Corresponding structure is identified in the specification and drawings. The specification describes the “control device” as a device for receiving, evaluating, and sending signals, for example [pg. 10, para 0056], “A control device 15 serves for controlling closing functions and opening functions of the vehicle door 10 and therefor controls the door drive 17 and the electric door lock 16. The control device 15 also serves for evaluating operating signals that are obtained via the control element 11” and [pg. 11, para 0057], “When the user N approaches the vehicle, a communication with the control device 15 can be initiated, during which the control device 15 sends an authentication request to the external authentication device 2 and, if the response is positive, authenticates the user.” Further FIG. 1 shows the control device as a component of the door and connected to the control element. The “control device” will be interpreted as a device with hardware and the capability for sending, receiving, and evaluating signals.
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.
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-2, 5, and 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and (a)(2) as being anticipated by Budzynski et al, PG Pub US-2003/0029210-A1 (herein "Budzynski").
Regarding Claim 1, Budzynski discloses: (Currently Amended) An assembly of a vehicle[[ (1)]], comprising a vehicle door[[ (10)]]. See [Budzynski, FIG. 1 and pg. 1, para 0023], which shows a vehicle with a door, handle, and locking system, “FIG. 1 schematically shows a motor vehicle 1 with a motor vehicle door lock system 2 as claimed in the invention. The motor vehicle door lock system 2 has especially several vehicle locks 3, especially for the vehicle doors 4, the rear hatch, the hood and the like, with installation positions which are shown schematically in FIG. 1.”
Budzynski further discloses: a control element[[ (11)]] arranged on a door portion . See [Budzynski, FIG. 2 and pg. 2, para 0028], which describes a vehicle door handle with a lock, an outer face, and an inner face, “One outside door handle arrangement 9 is assigned to at least each motor vehicle door lock 3 of the motor vehicle side doors 4, as shown in FIG. 1. FIG. 2 shows the outside door handle arrangement 9 of the driver's door with an integrated lock cylinder 7 which is supported for example in a guide element 11. But the lock cylinder 7 and its guide element 11 can also be omitted if necessary,” and [Budzynski, FIG. 3 and pg. 2, paras 0031-0032], which further describes the sensor and various sensing elements on the inside and outside of the vehicle door handle, “[0031] FIG. 3 shows in a schematic overhead view an outside door handle arrangement 9 which is described for example as with regard to FIG. 2, but can also be made without the lock cylinder 7. [0032] In the outside door handle arrangement 9, as is shown in FIG. 3, a sensor 12 is assigned to the outside door handle 10. Especially here a deformation-sensitive, force-sensitive and/or pressure-sensitive sensor element 13 is located on the outside door handle 10, as shown in FIG. 3, or is connected to it or integrated into it in some other way.”
Budzynski further discloses: a control device[[ (15)]] for controlling a closing function for closing the vehicle door[[ (10)]] and an opening function for opening the vehicle door[[ (10)]]. See [Budzynski, pg. 3, para 0041], which explains that the vehicle door includes an evaluation and a control electronics, “[0041] Alternatively or in addition, the evaluation electronics 17 can be at least partially integrated into an assigned motor vehicle door 4 or central motor vehicle or control electronics 18 of the motor vehicle 1 which is shown in FIG. 1.” See also [Budzynski, pg. 3, paras 0049-0050], which further explains that the evaluation and control electronics can receive and interpret signals for locking, unlocking, opening, and closing the vehicle door, “[0049] The evaluation and preparation of an actuation signal C as claimed in the invention can take place especially by the evaluation electronics 17. But evaluation can alternatively also take place in the control electronics 18 or in some other means of the motor vehicle 1. [0050] Depending on the configuration, it is not necessary for the actuation signal C to be produced or output. Rather the actuation signal C can also be defined as the logic state of the control, especially of the control electronics 18 or the like. Depending on this logic state, the assigned motor vehicle door lock 3, as already explained, can be locked and unlocked, opened and closed.”
Budzynski further discloses: wherein the control element[[ (11)]] includes at least one first operating device [[(12) ]]for generating an operating signal on user operation at the outer portion . See [Budzynski, pg. 2, para 0036], which describes the sensor on the inner side of the vehicle door handle, “[0036] The sensor element 13 in the embodiment as shown in FIG. 3 is located on the inside wall or the inner side 15 of the outside door handle 10 facing the engagement space 14. In particular, the sensor element 13 covers the inner side 15 and/or the adjoining areas of the outside door handle 10 over a large area, preferably essentially completely.” See also [Budzynski, pg. 4, para 0058], which explains the pressure detecting region on the outer side of the vehicle door handle, “[0058] One aspect is that a pressure load on the outside door handle 10--indicated essentially by the arrow 20--can be detected, especially in addition. Especially pressing, for example of the hand of an operator which is not shown, on the outside door handle 10 in the preferably marked area 21 on the outside 22 or other suitable area of the outside door handle 10 can be detected. The pressure load 20 can be detected in addition or alternatively to detection of the tensile load 19.” Finally see [Budzynski, pg. 4, paras 0059-0061], which further explains that a pressure load and a tensile load can be detected and evaluated. And further that corresponding signals can be evaluated within a predetermined time window, or interval, against a threshold to determine vehicle door opening or closing and outputting a signal for actuating the vehicle door lock, “[0059] In particular, the detection of a pressure load 20 can take place by a corresponding evaluation of the signals A and B which have already been used to detect the tensile load 19, as shown in FIG. 5. When the second signal B occurs first and afterwards the first signal A, especially within a predetermined time window or interval, as indicated in FIG. 5a), this can be evaluated as a locking signal D, as shown in FIG. 5b). The locking signal D however can also be produced or output only after detection of the first signal A within a time window which is not shown, as in the case as shown in FIG. 5c). […]. [0060] But, as already explained, detection of a pressure load 20 of the outside door handle 10 or its preferably especially sensitive section 21, which load is sufficient for executing a function and which optionally exceeds a predetermined response threshold, can also conventionally take place in some way other than by detection and evaluation of the signals A, B, for example by means of the sensor 12 or an additional sensor. [0061] When a pressure load 20 is detected or when the closing signal D is present, it is provided that the assigned motor vehicle door lock 3 or especially all the motor vehicle door locks 3 are locked, therefore especially a central interlock which is not shown or the like is activated. When the motor vehicle door locks 3 are made as locks which can be opened by motor or electric locks, locking can also take place if necessary solely using circuity.”
Budzynski further discloses: wherein the control device[[ (15)]] is configured to trigger a closing function for closing the vehicle door[[ (10)]] with reference to an operating signal of the at least one first operating device[[ (12)]] and to trigger an opening function for opening the vehicle door with reference to an operating signal of the at least one second operating device[[ (13)]]. See [Budzynski , pgs. 2-3, para 0024], which explains that the vehicle door lock can be automatically actuated using a motor, “Preferably each motor vehicle lock 3 can be locked and unlocked by a motor, especially an electric motor, by means of a known central interlock system or a central interlock drive. In the version as an electric lock, which is provided especially in the motor vehicle locks 3 of the vehicle side doors 4, each motor vehicle lock 3 additionally has the possibility of motorized opening, therefore lifting of the detent pawl which is not shown, by means of an opening drive which is not shown. Locking and unlocking can also be accomplished accordingly only using circuitry.” See again [Budzynski, pg. 4, paras 0059-0061], which further explains that a pressure load and a tensile load can be detected and evaluated. And further that corresponding signals can be evaluated within a predetermined time window, or interval, against a threshold to determine vehicle door opening or closing and outputting a signal for actuating the vehicle door lock.
Regarding Claim 2, Budzynski discloses the limitations of Claim 1.
Budzynski further discloses: (Currently Amended) […] wherein the control element[[ (11)]] is rigidly arranged on the door portion [Budzynski, pg. 2, para 0039], which explains that the vehicle door handle is rigidly connected to the vehicle door, “The outside door handle 10 is made stationary, i.e. it is rigidly connected to the assigned motor vehicle door 4 or the assigned door area 16 or other parts of the outside door handle arrangement 9.”
Regarding Claim 5, Budzynski discloses the limitations of Claim 1.
Budzynski further discloses: (Currently Amended) […] wherein the at least one first operating device[[ (12)]] and/or the at least one second operating device[[ (13)]] include a proximity sensor for generating an operating signal on approach of an object, a touch sensor for generating an operating signal when touched by an object and/or a force sensor for generating an operating signal in dependence on a force exerted by an object. See [Budzynski , pg. 5, para 0078], which explains that the vehicle door handle can include a capacitive sensor for proximity sensing and detecting an approaching hand, “Another advantage of the electrode arrangement 30 or when using a capacitive sensor 12 to sense actuation of the outside door handle 10 is that at the same time proximity sensing can also be accomplished. For example, with the electrode arrangement 30, by changing the electrical capacitances it can be detected when the hand (not shown) of an operator reaches into the engagement space 14. Accordingly therefore only one sensor 12 is necessary both for actuation sensing and also proximity sensing.” See also [Budzynski, pg. 2, para 0034], which explains the vehicle door handle sensor can be a piezo electric sensor for detecting handle actuation, “The sensor 12 or the sensor element 13 has a minimum, or, especially when using a piezo element, no power demand at all, so that there is a power demand which is small anyway for the evaluation which is especially continually carried out on a repeated basis for checking whether actuation of the outside door handle 10 has been detected,” and [Budzynski, pg. 3, para 0043], which explains that the sensor can be used for sensing touch or actuation by a hand and generating a corresponding signal, “According to one preferred development, the sensor 12 and the optional evaluation electronics 17 are made such that it is possible to differentiate between initial touching and actual actuation of the outside door handle 10 by the hand of an operator which is not shown. In particular, the intensity of the measurement signal change at the sensor 12, therefore for example the intensity of the deformation of the outside door handle 10, is detected and evaluated. Here the increase of the deformation over time and/or the time interval between exceeding certain response thresholds can also be considered in order for example to detect the conventional rising of measurement values or changing of measurement values during the normal course of touching and subsequent activation of the outside door handle 10.” Finally see [Budzynski, pg. 2, para 0032], which explains that the vehicle door handle sensor can include force, pressure, or deformation sensors, “In the outside door handle arrangement 9, as is shown in FIG. 3, a sensor 12 is assigned to the outside door handle 10. Especially here a deformation-sensitive, force-sensitive and/or pressure-sensitive sensor element 13 is located on the outside door handle 10, as shown in FIG. 3, or is connected to it or integrated into it in some other way.”
Regarding Claim 11, Budzynski discloses the limitations of Claim 1.
Budzynski further discloses: (Currently Amended) […] wherein the control device[[ (15)]] is configured to evaluate an operating time and/or an operating pattern with reference to the operating signal of the at least one first operating device[[ (12)]] and to trigger a first closing function or a second closing function in dependence on the operating time and/or the operating pattern, and/or to evaluate an operating time and/or an operating pattern with reference to the operating signal of the at least one second operating device[[ (13)]] and to trigger a first opening function or a second opening function in dependence on the operating time and/or the operating pattern. See [Budzynski, pg. 3, paras 0046-0048], which explain that a first and a second signal are used to detect a time frame of vehicle door handle actuation and a third signal, used for locking or unlocking, is determined based on the first and second signals and access authorization or detection. Further, different patterns or length of door handle pulling can lock or unlock the vehicle door lock, “[0046] When the outside door handle 10 is released, a second signal B is output, as is likewise indicated in FIG. 4a). The second signal B is also present only for a short time. [0047] The start and end of actuation of the outside door handle 10 are derived from the first signal A and the second signal B. Accordingly, depending on the detection of the first signal A and the detection of the second signal B an actuation signal C is determined, […]. Depending on the actuation signal C, the motor vehicle door lock 3 assigned to the actuated outside door handle 10 is opened by motor, if the motor vehicle door lock 3 is already unlocked and/or the corresponding access authorization is present or is detected by the control electronics 18. [0048] The unlocking of the motor vehicle door lock 3 can also be switched by actuating the outside door handle 10. For example, it can be provided that by simply briefly pulling on the outside door handle the motor vehicle door lock 3 is unlocked and by pulling for a longer time or pulling twice motorized opening of the motor vehicle door lock 3 takes place. It can be assumed in any case that there is corresponding access authorization.” See also [Budzynski, pg. 3, paras 0052-0055], which further explains that the first and second signals can be detected using the piezo electric element and compared to a threshold for the rate of change of the signal to determine actuation, “[0052] In the embodiment the first signal A and the second signal B have opposite polarities and opposite time responses. This facilitates detection. Advantageously this behavior occurs in the preferably used piezo element and capacitive evaluation. [0053] Detection can take place for example by detecting a certain (positive or negative) threshold value of a (positive or negative) rate of change--therefore time derivation--and/or an integral value or the like being exceeded in the signal made available by the sensor 12 or the sensor element 13 and by its being evaluated as the first signal A or the second signal B. Of course, here other suitable detection criteria or algorithms can also be used. [0054] […]. [0055] Furthermore, the actuation sensing as claimed in the invention can also take place when the sensor 12 or the sensor element 13 makes available a signal which for example is present for the entire duration of actuation of the outside door handle 10, optionally with certain fluctuations. This is the case for example in a sensor 12 or sensor element 13 in which the sensor signal is proportional to the acting force or the acting pressure. The first signal A can be detected for example as the edge--great rise over time--of the sensor signal and the second signal B as the opposite edge--great drop over time--of the sensor signal.”
Regarding Claim 12, Budzynski discloses the limitations of Claim 11.
Budzynski further discloses: (Currently Amended) […] wherein the control device[[ (15)]] is configured to compare the operating time with a threshold value. See again [Budzynski, pg. 4, paras 0059-0061], which further explains that a pressure load and a tensile load can be detected and evaluated. And further that corresponding signals can be evaluated within a predetermined time window, or interval, against a threshold to determine vehicle door opening or closing and outputting a signal for actuating the vehicle door lock.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 3 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Budzynski in view of Khlifi, DE-102016220084-A1 (herein "Khlifi").
Regarding Claim 3, Budzynski discloses the limitations of Claim 1.
Budzynski further discloses: (Currently Amended) […] and/or controlling a door lock[[ (16)]] for locking the vehicle door[[ (10)]] in a closed position. See again [Budzynski, pg. 3, para 0041], which explains that the vehicle door includes an evaluation and a control electronics and [Budzynski, pg. 3, paras 0049-0050], which further explains that the evaluation and control electronics can receive and interpret signals for locking, unlocking, opening, and closing the vehicle door. See also [Budzynski, pg. 4, para 0061], which explains that when the closing signal is received the vehicle door lock is locked, “When a pressure load 20 is detected or when the closing signal D is present, it is provided that the assigned motor vehicle door lock 3 or especially all the motor vehicle door locks 3 are locked, therefore especially a central interlock which is not shown or the like is activated. When the motor vehicle door locks 3 are made as locks which can be opened by motor or electric locks, locking can also take place if necessary solely using circuity.”
Budzynski does not disclose: (Currently Amended) […] wherein the triggering of the closing function comprises: controlling a door drive[[ (17)]] for carrying out an automatic closing movement of the vehicle door[[ (10)]], controlling a door drive[[ (17)]] for carrying out a servo-electrically supported closing movement of the vehicle door[[ (10)]] […].
However, Khlifi teaches: (Currently Amended) […] wherein the triggering of the closing function comprises: controlling a door drive[[ (17)]] for carrying out an automatic closing movement of the vehicle door[[ (10)]], controlling a door drive[[ (17)]] for carrying out a servo-electrically supported closing movement of the vehicle door[[ (10)]] […]. See [Khlifi, pg. 12, para 0013], which explains that a sensor and a servo motor can be used for detecting a user and adjusting a vehicle door, “For tailgates of a motor vehicle strikes DE 10 2013 010 994 A1 a control method and an actuating device for a vehicle door, where a tailgate of a motor vehicle between an open position and a closed position by means of a servomotor should be adjustable. By means of a sensor unit, a movement of a body part of the upper body of a vehicle user is detected, which is located in the vicinity of the vehicle. Based on this, a test signal is generated and compared with a predetermined reference signal which is characteristic of a predetermined movement pattern of the body part. If the test signal corresponds to the reference signal, the adjustment of the vehicle door is initiated.” See also [Khlifi, pg. 14, para 0034], which explains that the vehicle doors can be equipped with motors for automatic opening and closing as determined and controlled by a controller, using sensors for detecting an approaching hand, “Returning to 1 are the doors 2 of the motor vehicle each with an electric Motor comprehensive drive device 9 provided via the automatic opening and closing of the respective door 2 is possible. The operation of the drive device is controlled 9 from a controller 10 , which is designed to carry out the method according to the invention, in the present case therefore the radar data of the radar sensors 4a to 4d evaluated in unlocked vehicle to the effect whether a hand approaches the door handle, as by 3 is explained in more detail. There is shown a hand 11 that follow the arrow 12 the door handle 3 approaches and is in the coverage area 13 of the radar sensor 4 located.”
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify Budzynski with Khlifi to include a motor drive for opening or closing the vehicle door or a servo assisted movement. Doing so allows for automation in coordination with other systems including driver assistance systems that utilize collision avoidance mechanisms, approach and exit alerts or warnings [Khlifi, pg. 12, paras 0007-0008]. Additionally, a drive or assist can improve opening of heavy doors [Khlifi, pg. 12, para 0011] or doors with insufficient handle or grip area [Khlifi, pg. 13, para 0017].
Regarding Claim 4, Budzynski discloses the limitations of Claim 1.
Budzynski further discloses: (Currently Amended) […] and/or for opening the door lock[[ (16)]]. See again [Budzynski, pg. 3, para 0041], See again [Budzynski, pg. 3, para 0041], which explains that the vehicle door includes an evaluation and a control electronics and [Budzynski, pg. 3, paras 0049-0050], which further explains that the evaluation and control electronics can receive and interpret signals for locking, unlocking, opening, and closing the vehicle door.
Budzynski does not disclose: (Currently Amended) […] wherein the triggering of the opening function comprises: controlling a door drive[[ (17)]] for carrying out an automatic opening movement of the vehicle door[[ (10)]], controlling a door drive[[ (17)]] for carrying out a servo-electrically supported opening movement of the vehicle door[[ (10)]] […].
However, Khlifi teaches: (Currently Amended) […] wherein the triggering of the opening function comprises: controlling a door drive[[ (17)]] for carrying out an automatic opening movement of the vehicle door[[ (10)]], controlling a door drive[[ (17)]] for carrying out a servo-electrically supported opening movement of the vehicle door[[ (10)]] […]. See again [Khlifi, pg. 12, para 0013], which explains that a sensor and a servo motor can be used for detecting a user and adjusting a vehicle door and [Khlifi, pg. 14, para 0034], which explains that the vehicle doors can be equipped with motors for automatic opening and closing as determined and controlled by a controller, using sensors for detecting an approaching hand.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify Budzynski with Khlifi to include a motor drive for opening or closing the vehicle door or a servo assisted movement. Doing so allows for automation in coordination with other systems including driver assistance systems that utilize collision avoidance mechanisms, approach and exit alerts or warnings [Khlifi, pg. 12, paras 0007-0008]. Additionally, a drive or assist can improve opening of heavy doors [Khlifi, pg. 12, para 0011] or doors with insufficient handle or grip area [Khlifi, pg. 13, para 0017].
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Budzynski in view of Scheiern et al., PG Pub US-2019/0169893-A1 (herein "Scheiern"), Ziegler, DE-102016112129-A1 (herein "Zeigler"), and Peterson et al., PG Pub US-2022/0266796-A1 (herein "Peterson").
Regarding Claim 6, Budzynski discloses the limitations of Claim 1.
Budzynski further discloses: (Currently Amended) […] wherein the at least one first operating device[[ (12)]] and/or the at least one second operating device[[ (13)]] include […] and/or a piezoelectric sensor. See again [Budzynski, pg. 2, para 0034], which explains the vehicle door handle sensor can be a piezo electric sensor for detecting handle actuation.
Budzynski does not disclose: (Currently Amended) […] capacitive sensor, an inductive sensor, a radar sensor, an optical sensor, an ultrasonic sensor […].
However, Scheiern teaches: (Currently Amended) […] capacitive sensor, an inductive sensor, […]. See [Scheiern, pg. 9, para 0051], which explains that the vehicle door handle can include a capacitive and an inductive sensor, “For example, while the door handle assembly 10 illustrated in the attached figures is depicted, and has been described, as having a capacitive sensor 46 positioned adjacent to the rear surface 14R of the wall 14G of the handle base 14 and an inductive sensor positioned adjacent to a portion of a wall of the grip cover 12, it will be understood that embodiments in which both sensors 46, 62 are capacitive sensors, in which both sensors 46, 62 are inductive sensors, and/or in which the sensor positioned adjacent to the rear surface 14R of the rear wall 14G of the handle base 14 is an inductive sensor and the sensor positioned adjacent to a portion of a wall of the grip cover 12 is a capacitive sensor, are all contemplated by this disclosure.”
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify Budzynski with Scheiren to use a capacitive and an inductive sensor. Doing so improves existing vehicle door handles, especially in vehicles with keyless entry, by providing sensors and more specifically, multiple sensors that can provide two detection levels for proximity and changes to the interaction with the surface using a second type of sensor for grip detection [Scheiren, pg. 1, paras 0003-0004].
However, Ziegler teaches: (Currently Amended) […] an optical sensor, […]. See [Ziegler, pgs. 12-13, para 0015], which explains that the vehicle door handle can include a mechanical, thermoelectric, resistive piezoelectric, inductive, optical, or magnetic sensor, “It can be provided in the context of the invention that at least one sensor is designed such that the sensor detects a touch of the handle or an approach of the handle by the user. According to the invention it can be provided that the sensor of the adjusting element and / or the second sensor of the electronic unit are designed as a contact sensor and / or as a proximity sensor. It is particularly advantageous that the sensor is a capacitive sensor. The invention further comprises that the sensor of the adjusting element and / or the sensor of the electronic unit communicate with the user by an alternative operating principle. For example, the use of a mechanical, thermoelectric, resistive piezoelectric, inductive, optical or even magnetic sensor is conceivable.”
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify Budzynski with Ziegler to include an optical sensor. Doing so allows detecting a variety of interactions including touch or approach [Ziegler, pgs. 12-13, para 0015] or triggering a security system [Ziegler, pg. 13, para 0021], which improves the simplification of the door handle, especially in use for keyless entry systems [Ziegler, pg. 12, para 0002].
However, Peterson teaches: (Currently Amended) […] a radar sensor, […], an ultrasonic sensor […]. See [Peterson, pg. 3, para 0060], which explains that the vehicle door handle can include a radar, ultrasonic, or capacitive sensor, “The sensor device may utilize various sensing means to determine the hand position, gesture, proximity, etc., such as, for example, time of flight sensing, radar, ultrasonic and/or capacitive sensing. Preferably, the sensor device comprises an IR sensor array that can detect gesture, proximity, etc. via a small sensor package that can be packaged within a door handle or the like. The sensor device may have a sensing range of at least 200 mm, such as at least 250 mm or at least 300 mm.”
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify Budzynski with Peterson to include a radar and an ultrasonic sensor. Doing so allows the system, or handle, to detect both proximity and gestures and differentiate inputs for controlling a vehicle door or door lock [Peterson, pg. 1, para 0004 and pg. 3, para 0060].
Claims 7-8 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Budzynski in view of Xia et al., CN-110485837-B (herein "Xia").
Regarding Claim 7, Budzynski discloses the limitations of Claim 1.
Budzynski does not disclose: (Currently Amended) […] wherein the at least one first operating device[[ (12)]] is configured to generate a first operating signal on user operation on a first control surface
However, Xia teaches: (Currently Amended) […] wherein the at least one first operating device[[ (12)]] is configured to generate a first operating signal on user operation on a first control surface is configured to trigger a first closing function in response to the first operating signal and to trigger a second closing function different from the first closing function in response to the second operating signal. See [Xia, pg. 16], which explains that the first touch sensor on the vehicle door handle first portion senses touch on the outside of the handle and generates a signal to unlock the door, “Since the first touch sensor 3 is disposed on the first portion 22, a human hand touches the outer side of the handle 2 to generate a touch signal from the first touch sensor 3, so as to unlock the vehicle door.” Again [Xia, pg. 16], further explains that the vehicle door handle includes an outer and inner surface, corresponding to outer and inner portions, for generating first and second touch signals to identify door opening and closing and trigger door handle unlocking or locking and withdrawing or extension, “In one possible design, the handle 2 has an outer sensing surface and an inner sensing surface which are opposite to each other, the first portion 22 is close to the outer sensing surface, the second portion 21 is close to the inner sensing surface, the first touch sensor 3 is used for detecting a touch signal of the outer sensing surface to form a first touch signal, and the second touch sensor 4 is used for detecting a touch signal of the inner sensing surface to form a second touch signal. […]. The outer sensing surface is arranged on the surface of the outer side of the handle 2, and the first part 22 is close to the outer sensing surface, so that the first touch sensor 3 is prevented from being directly arranged on the outer sensing surface to cause damage to the sensor. The handle is arranged in to interior response face and is close to the surface of connecting piece one side, the one side relative with the outside of handle promptly, and second part 21 is close to interior response face to make after the door unblock, when the door was opened and close to the staff, all need the finger at least part hold the inside of handle 2, and interior response face department promptly just can realize opening and close the door. So set up second touch sensor 4 in this part, can guarantee to open and close the door when, must trigger the second touch signal, just can avoid the circumstances of door shutting, handle assembly withdrawal to take place when the false trigger first touch signal. […]. […] when the second touch signal is detected, the control handle assembly maintains the extending state and maintains the locking or unlocking state of the vehicle door; when the second touch signal is not detected, the control handle assembly is retracted and the vehicle door is locked. Before detecting the second touch signal, firstly, judging whether the first touch signal is detected, and if so, then, detecting the second touch signal; if not, the control handle assembly maintains the extending state, and the vehicle door maintains the unlocking state. The method comprises the following steps before detecting the touch signal of the handle assembly: judging whether the vehicle door is in a locked state, when the vehicle door is in the locked state, controlling the handle assembly to stretch out of the vehicle door after detecting the first touch signal, controlling the vehicle door to be unlocked, and then executing the step of detecting the touch signal; and when the vehicle door is in an unlocked state, directly executing the step of detecting the touch signal.”
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify Budzynski with Xia to include multiple signals and different corresponding operations using different surfaces of the handle. Doing so ensures that the door is not mistakenly opened, or closed, or a false signal is not triggered by enhancing the accuracy of the interaction, or touch, with the door handle through multiple surfaces, which can cover different areas or sizes [Xia, pg. 16].
Regarding Claim 8, Budzynski discloses the limitations of Claim 1.
Budzynski does not disclose: (Currently Amended) […] wherein the at least one second operating device[[ (13)]] is configured to generate a first operating signal on user operation on a first control surface (15)]] is configured to trigger a first opening function in response to the first operating signal and to trigger a second opening function different from the first opening function in response to the second operating signal.
However, Xia teaches: (Currently Amended) […] wherein the at least one second operating device[[ (13)]] is configured to generate a first operating signal on user operation on a first control surface See again [Xia, pg. 16], which explains that the first touch sensor on the first vehicle door handle portion senses touch on the outside of the handle and generates a signal to unlock the door. Further a second touch sensor generates a second touch signal for extending the door handle. Finally, the vehicle door handle includes an outer and inner surface, corresponding to outer and inner portions, for generating the first and second touch signals to identify door opening and closing and trigger door handle unlocking or locking and withdrawing or extension.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify Budzynski with Xia to include multiple signals and different corresponding operations using different surfaces of the handle. Doing so ensures that the door is not mistakenly opened, or closed, or a false signal is not triggered by enhancing the accuracy of the interaction, or touch, with the door handle through multiple surfaces, which can cover different areas or sizes [Xia, pg. 16].
Regarding Claim 10, Budzynski discloses the limitations of Claim 1.
Budzynski does not disclose: (Currently Amended) […] wherein the control device[[ (15)]] is configured to trigger a first closing function in response to an operating signal of the at least one first operating device[[ (12)]] in a first functional state of the vehicle door[[ (10)]] and to trigger a second closing function different from the first closing function in a second functional state of the vehicle door[[ (10)]], and/or to trigger a first opening function in response to an operating signal of the at least one second operating device[[ (13)]] in a first functional state of the vehicle door[[ (10)]] and to trigger a second opening function different from the first opening function in a second functional state of the vehicle door[[ (10)]].
However, Xia teaches: (Currently Amended) […] wherein the control device[[ (15)]] is configured to trigger a first closing function in response to an operating signal of the at least one first operating device[[ (12)]] in a first functional state of the vehicle door[[ (10)]] and to trigger a second closing function different from the first closing function in a second functional state of the vehicle door[[ (10)]], and/or to trigger a first opening function in response to an operating signal of the at least one second operating device[[ (13)]] in a first functional state of the vehicle door[[ (10)]] and to trigger a second opening function different from the first opening function in a second functional state of the vehicle door[[ (10)]]. See [Xia, pg. 14, which explains that the vehicle door handle, with inner and outer portions, detects a first and second touch signal and compares to a retracted or withdrawn state for determining if the handle should stay extended or extends, “In a possible design, when the handle assembly detects the first touch signal and the second touch signal simultaneously in the state that the handle extends out of the vehicle door, the handle assembly maintains the state that the handle extends out of the vehicle door, and the handle can open and close the vehicle door. In one possible design, the handle has first and second oppositely disposed portions, the first portion being located on an outer side of the handle; in a locked state, the second portion is hidden in the door, and in an unlocked state, the second portion protrudes from the door; the first touch sensor is disposed on the first portion and the second touch sensor is disposed on the second portion.” Again [Xia, pg. 14], further explains that it is determined the state of the vehicle door as unlocked or locked and a first and second touch to determine locking or unlocking, and retracting, extending, or maintaining the vehicle door handle position, “In one possible design, when the second touch signal is detected, the handle assembly is controlled to mai