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 .
Claim Objections
Claim(s) 5 is/are objected to because of the following informalities:
In re claim 5; “wherein the plurality of tools includes a relay board that that is connected to the central computing device and to the automotive embedded device” seems to contain a typographical error. It is suggested that the claim language be changed to recite; “wherein the plurality of tools includes a relay board that is connected to the central computing device and to the automotive embedded device”. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 8, and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being unpatentable over Michalakis (US-20210118246-A1).
1. Michalakis (US-20210118246-A1) discloses A system of testing [0100; FIG.14] Developers may use the vehicle developer device 300′ to test and evaluate both software code and hardware devices. an automotive embedded device, the automotive embedded device being hardware [0100] embedded in an automotive component [0027, 0064] … the vehicle developer device is configured as a small vehicle developer device that has all necessary hardware components and connectors for one or more real vehicle electronic control units (ECU) that are deployed in a particular vehicle... a hardware component that operates as a miniature version of a full-scale vehicle, and includes ECUs and peripheral devices such as sensors and actuators of an actual vehicle that is being evaluated. the system comprising:
a processor-based central computing device [0078] FIG. 11A, the developer computing device 101 (or other additional computing devices) may include a processor 166, input/output hardware 168, network interface hardware 170, a data storage component 172, and a non-transitory memory component 160… [claim 5] wherein the plurality of electronic control units comprises an autonomous driving module comprising one or more processors, and one or more memory modules storing instructions that when executed by the autonomous driving module, causes the vehicle developer device to autonomously drive within an environment;
a plurality of tools [claim 6] wherein the plurality of peripheral devices comprises a plurality of actuators and a plurality of sensors., controlled by the central computing device, that supplement the testing of the automotive embedded device [0046] For example, the vehicle developer device may be manipulated to generate inputs to various sensors to prompt situations for the UI scenes… [0064] vehicle developer device… includes ECUs and peripheral devices such as sensors and actuators of an actual vehicle that is being evaluated. The vehicle developer device allows developers to quickly design and evaluate both hardware and software for vehicles.;
a testing structure that holds and connects [0027, 0065] vehicle developer device that has all necessary hardware components and connectors for one or more real vehicle electronic control units (ECU) that are deployed in a particular vehicle… vehicle developer device 100 is defined by a set of specifications for being connected to a developer computing device 101 (FIG. 3). the central computing device, the automotive embedded device, the automotive component, and the plurality of tools [0049]The developer computing device 101 runs the UI design tool described above. In some embodiments, it may also include the UI simulator described above with respect to FIG. 2. The developer computing device 101 may be any type of computing device, such, without limitation, as a desktop, a laptop, a tablet, and the like. [0090] ...In such embodiments, the vehicle developer device 100 may be configured as an evaluation board, for example..; and
a processor-based remote computing device that is disposed physically separate from the testing structure, the remote computing device and the central computing device communicating through a network [0066; FIG.10] The management computing device 102 is controlled via a network connection to a developer computing device 101. For example, the developer computing device 101 may be communicatively coupled to the management computing device 102 by a wired or wireless connection. The target ECU(s), which may include any number and type of ECUs, may be installed and connected to the management computer by any method such as, without limitation, Ethernet., wherein
the remote computing device controls, over the network [0066; FIG.10], the central computing device (i) to cause the automotive embedded device to function [0049] the vehicle developer device 100 includes all ECUs, sensors, connectors and actuators of an actual vehicle so that a fully functioning miniature vehicle may be tested. and (ii) to perform the testing of the automotive embedded device [0064] The vehicle developer device allows developers to quickly design and evaluate both hardware and software for vehicles. FIG. 10 schematically depicts an example vehicle developer device., and
the remote computing device further controls, over the network [0066], in performing the testing of the automotive embedded device, the central computing device to cause the plurality of tools to provide (i) a plurality of varying physical conditions under which the automotive embedded device is tested [0041] … vehicle developer device includes a UI simulator, which receives scenes at block 58 and simulates how scenes generated by the UI design tool will look and react in a vehicle environment. The UI simulator may run on the same computing device as the UI design tool, or may run on a different computing device. At block 60, in some embodiments, the UI simulator may simulate various peripheral inputs and peripheral outputs, error messages, and sensor data to simulate an interaction with the scenes of the UI. For example, the UI simulator may simulate the vehicle receiving a phone call, one or more doors being open, a potential accident, and any other number of situations a vehicle may encounter. Thus, UI simulator may emulate the various ECUs and peripheral devices of the simulated vehicle. and (ii) a plurality of mechanisms that observe and obtain testing results [0043] Feedback from the results of the simulation at block 60 in the form of evaluation data may be provided back to the UI design tool. The feedback may be performance related using metrics, such as how quickly scenes transitioned between one another, if any errors were reported, if the simulated UI affected simulated ECUs, if inputs using the simulated UI were properly received by the simulated ECUs…
8. Michalakis (US-20210118246-A1) discloses A computing apparatus for testing an automotive embedded device, the automotive embedded device being hardware embedded in an automotive component, the computing apparatus comprising: a transceiver [0079] The network interface hardware 170 may include any wired or wireless networking hardware for communicating with the management computing device 102, such as a modem, LAN port, wireless fidelity (Wi-Fi) card, WiMax card, mobile communications hardware, and/or other hardware for communicating with other networks and/or devices. configured to transmit and receive data over a network [0066]; a processor; an electronic data storage storing programming [0078] may include a processor 166, input/output hardware 168, network interface hardware 170, a data storage component 172, and a non-transitory memory component 160.; and a bus configured to transfer data among the electronic data storage [0070] The vehicle developer device 100 further includes a communications bus 107 that is the same as the communications bus on the vehicle that is being replicated. As a non-limiting example, the communications bus 107 may be a CAN bus, the transceiver, and the processor, rendering the processor cooperatively operable with the electronic data storage and the transceiver to execute the programming [0079] The processor 166 may include any processing component configured to receive and execute computer readable code instructions (such as from the data storage component 172 and/or memory component 160).
Regarding the remaining limitation(s); The limitation(s) are similar in scope to those disclosed in the system of claim(s) 1 and are therefore rejected under the same premise, for more information please see the rejection in re claim(s) 1.
15. Regarding the limitation(s); The limitation(s) are similar in scope to those disclosed in the system of claim(s) 8 and are therefore rejected under the same premise, for more information please see the rejection in re claim(s) 8.
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 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.
Claim(s) 2, 9 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable Michalakis (US-20210118246-A1), as applied to claim 1, 8 and 15 above and further in view of Ito (US-20220319240-A1.
2. Michalakis (US-20210118246-A1) discloses The system of testing according to claim 1, wherein
****, and
the automotive embedded device is tested while the automotive component operates in a simulated driving environment [0041] In some embodiments, the vehicle developer device includes a UI simulator, which receives scenes at block 58 and simulates how scenes generated by the UI design tool will look and react in a vehicle environment...
Michalakis lacks the following underlined limitations:
the testing structure is provided in a building, and
Regarding the limitation; “…provided in a building”, Ito (US-20220319240-A1) discloses in a similar invention field of endeavor, a consideration for [0055] FIG. 1 is a schematic diagram describing the outline of the management system for the analysis device according to this embodiment. The management system according to this embodiment is a system that manages a maintenance schedule of an analysis device which analyzes components included in exhaust gas emitted from a vehicle, such as a car, or a specimen which is a portion of the vehicle. In the example illustrated in FIG. 1, for example, a plurality of buildings 1 to 3 are provided in a car manufacturing factory or a test site, and a plurality of analysis devices are installed in each of the buildings 1 to 3.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time the instant application was effectively filed to adapt the modified system of Michalakis to include wherein the system is provided in a building with a reasonable expectation for success, as taught by Ito, for the benefit of providing a structure which houses and protects and testing system from external environmental conditions and affects.
9. Regarding the limitation(s); The limitation(s) are similar in scope to those disclosed in the system of claim(s) 2 and are therefore rejected under the same premise, for more information please see the rejection in re claim(s) 2.
16. Regarding the limitation(s); The limitation(s) are similar in scope to those disclosed in the system of claim(s) 2 and are therefore rejected under the same premise, for more information please see the rejection in re claim(s) 2.
Claim(s) 3, 10 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable Michalakis (US-20210118246-A1), as applied to claim 1, 8 and 15 above and further in view of Tagami (US-20140318229-A1).
3. Michalakis (US-20210118246-A1) discloses The system of testing according to claim 1, wherein
****, and
the automotive embedded device is tested while the automotive component operates in an actual driving environment [0027] As one example, a version of the vehicle developer device may resemble a small version of a vehicle so it can be placed on the ground and tested on a course (e.g., a miniature roadway). [0046] For example, the vehicle developer device may be driven or otherwise operated in a scaled environment that provides scaled buildings, roads, road agents (e.g., vehicles, pedestrians, cyclists, and the like), signs, and traffic lights.
Michalakis lacks the following underlined limitations:
…wherein the testing structure is provided in a vehicle
Regarding the limitation; “…provided in a vehicle”, Tagami (US-20140318229-A1) discloses in a similar invention field of endeavor, a consideration for [0025] Test articles of automotive components of various kinds are installed on the test article installation vehicle body 2. In the present embodiment, an electric power steering system (EPS) 40, and a rear wheel drive module 50 that drives the axle 23S for the left rear wheel and the axle 24S for the right rear wheel with the use of the electric motors are installed, as the test articles, on the test article installation vehicle body 2.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time the instant application was effectively filed to adapt the modified system of Michalakis to include wherein the system is provided in a vehicle with a reasonable expectation for success, as taught by Tagami, for the benefit of providing a structure which houses and protects and testing system from external environmental conditions and affects.
10. Regarding the limitation(s); The limitation(s) are similar in scope to those disclosed in the system of claim(s) 3 and are therefore rejected under the same premise, for more information please see the rejection in re claim(s) 3.
17. Regarding the limitation(s); The limitation(s) are similar in scope to those disclosed in the system of claim(s) 3 and are therefore rejected under the same premise, for more information please see the rejection in re claim(s) 3.
Claim(s) 4 and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable Michalakis (US-20210118246-A1), as applied to claim 1 and 8 above and further in view of Maistrenko (US-20250005971-A1).
4. Michalakis (US-20210118246-A1) discloses The system of testing according to claim 1, wherein
the remote computing device and the central computing device communicating through the network [0066; FIG.10] The management computing device 102 is controlled via a network connection to a developer computing device 101. For example, the developer computing device 101 may be communicatively coupled to the management computing device 102 by a wired or wireless connection. The target ECU(s), which may include any number and type of ECUs, may be installed and connected to the management computer by any method such as, without limitation, Ethernet includes
*****.
Michalakis lacks the following underlined limitations:
…communicating through a proprietary cloud
Regarding the limitation; “…communicating through a proprietary cloud”, Maistrenko (US-20250005971-A1) discloses in a similar invention field of endeavor, a consideration for [0069] In FIG. 4, a remote PC 421 is connected through a proprietary cloud network 423 such as Amazon Web Service (AWS) to provide control and testing commands to the bench development/test environment 411 (and a corresponding central PC) in the building 401...
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time the instant application was effectively filed to adapt the modified system of Michalakis to include communicating through a proprietary cloud with a reasonable expectation for success, as taught by Maistrenko, for the benefit of providing a communication means between system components.
11. Regarding the limitation(s); The limitation(s) are similar in scope to those disclosed in the system of claim(s) 4 and are therefore rejected under the same premise, for more information please see the rejection in re claim(s) 4.
Claim(s) 5, 12, and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable Michalakis (US-20210118246-A1), as applied to claim 1, 8 and 15 above and further in view of Zaleski (US-4831560-A).
5. Michalakis (US-20210118246-A1) discloses The system of testing according to claim 1, wherein
the plurality of tools [claim 6] wherein the plurality of peripheral devices comprises a plurality of actuators and a plurality of sensors
****
that that is connected to the central computing device and to the automotive embedded device [0046] For example, the vehicle developer device may be manipulated to generate inputs to various sensors to prompt situations for the UI scenes… [0064] vehicle developer device… includes ECUs and peripheral devices such as sensors and actuators of an actual vehicle that is being evaluated. The vehicle developer device allows developers to quickly design and evaluate both hardware and software for vehicles, and
****.
Michalakis lacks the following underlined limitations:
…includes a relay board …the varying physical conditions under which the automotive embedded device is tested include starting and stopping of power to the automotive embedded device via the relay board
Regarding the limitation; “…a relay board …starting and stopping of power …via the relay board”, Zaleski (US-4831560-A) discloses in a similar invention field of endeavor, a consideration for [col.12 l.10] The closing of relay 130 completes a circuit between the tester via terminal 132 and the vehicle power via terminal 124 to provide operating power to the tester. …, and the activity monitor 128... Upon closing of the power relay, the tester becomes active and monitors the data it receives on line 126 for malfunction conditions.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time the instant application was effectively filed to adapt the modified system of Michalakis to include starting and stopping power to a vehicle component via a relay board with a reasonable expectation for success, as taught by Zaleski, for the benefit of providing an electrical component capable of controlling a flow of power to system components according to predetermined operational behaviors.
12. Regarding the limitation(s); The limitation(s) are similar in scope to those disclosed in the system of claim(s) 5 and are therefore rejected under the same premise, for more information please see the rejection in re claim(s) 5.
18. Regarding the limitation(s); The limitation(s) are similar in scope to those disclosed in the system of claim(s) 5 and are therefore rejected under the same premise, for more information please see the rejection in re claim(s) 5.
Claim(s) 6-7, 13-14 and 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable Michalakis (US-20210118246-A1), as applied to claim 1, 8, and 15 above and further in view of Borgwardt (US-20130162378-A1) and Miller (US-20120226408-A1).
6. Michalakis (US-20210118246-A1) discloses The system of testing according to claim 1, wherein
the varying physical conditions under which the automotive embedded device is tested include [0041] … vehicle developer device includes a UI simulator, which receives scenes at block 58 and simulates how scenes generated by the UI design tool will look and react in a vehicle environment. The UI simulator may run on the same computing device as the UI design tool, or may run on a different computing device. At block 60, in some embodiments, the UI simulator may simulate various peripheral inputs and peripheral outputs, error messages, and sensor data to simulate an interaction with the scenes of the UI. For example, the UI simulator may simulate the vehicle receiving a phone call, one or more doors being open, a potential accident, and any other number of situations a vehicle may encounter. Thus, UI simulator may emulate the various ECUs and peripheral devices of the simulated vehicle
(i) **** and
(ii) ****.
Michalakis lacks the following underlined limitations:
(i) tripping and resetting of a circuit breaker that controls power to the automotive component and
(ii) connecting and disconnecting of a wire to the automotive component
Regarding the limitation; “…tripping and resetting of a circuit breaker that controls power”, Borgwardt (US-20130162378-A1) discloses in a similar invention field of endeavor, a consideration for [0034] A reliable functioning of the power circuit breaker 10 is ensured. For this purpose, the power circuit breaker 10 performs a self-test at regular intervals, during which self-test the mechanical functional capability of the components necessary for tripping the trip mechanism 36 is also tested. In this way, it is ensured that, when a trip signal is present in the lines 16, no mechanical problems such as jamming or freezing lead to the mechanical transfer of the signal for actuating the trip element 34 being blocked.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time the instant application was effectively filed to adapt the modified system of Michalakis to include tripping and resetting of a circuit breaker that controls power with a reasonable expectation for success, as taught by Borgwardt, for the benefit of ensuring [0034] no mechanical problems such as jamming or freezing lead to the mechanical transfer of the signal for actuating the trip element 34 being blocked.
Regarding the limitation; “…connecting and disconnecting of a wire”, Borgwardt (US-20130162378-A1) discloses in a similar invention field of endeavor, a consideration for [claim 1] …configured to trip a trip mechanism via a plunger, the trip mechanism being configured to, when tripped, disconnect two contacts of the power circuit breaker via which the current flows;
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time the instant application was effectively filed to adapt the modified system of Michalakis to include connecting and disconnecting of electrical contacts with a reasonable expectation for success, as taught by Borgwardt, for the benefit of providing a means for connecting or disconnecting two electrical contacts and thereby enabling a system to ensure [0034] no mechanical problems such as jamming or freezing lead to the mechanical transfer of the signal for actuating the trip element 34 being blocked.
However, while Borgwardt discloses connecting and disconnecting of electrical contacts discussed above, Borgwardt is silent as to distinctly disclosing “…a wire”;
Regarding the limitation underlined above; Miller (US-20120226408-A1) discloses in a similar invention field of endeavor, a consideration for [0064] In the embodiment where the pins 634 and 636, and the wire 638 may all be parts of one piece, ... Where the pins 634 and 636, and wire 638 are separate pieces, the wire 638 and the switches 644 (including contacts 650) are all controlled by the same control input 648. When the switches 644 are in a closed state, then wire 648 is disengaged from any connection to pins 640, ... If the switches 644 are in the open position, then the wire 638 is connected to pins 634 and 636, …, the control input 648 may be manually manipulated by a user to open the switches 644 and engage the connection of the wire 648 with pins 634 and 636, or to close the switches 644 and disengage the connection of the wire 648 from pins 634 and 636. This may be done using reciprocal movement of the contacts 650 (to make contact or not make contact) and the wire 648 via known methods.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time the instant application was effectively filed to adapt the modified system of Michalakis to include connecting and disconnecting of a wire with a reasonable expectation for success, as taught by Miller, for the benefit of providing a means for connecting or disconnecting electrical contacts used in control systems.
7. Michalakis (US-20210118246-A1) discloses The system of testing according to claim 6, wherein the plurality of mechanisms for observing and obtaining test results include:
a web camera, a speaker, a microphone, an automotive bus adapter [0070, 0096] The example vehicle developer device 300′ also includes side slots 338 or ports for receiving additional sensors that may be found on the side of an actual vehicle, such as cameras, for example. Any sensor may be plugged into these side slots 338 for testing and evaluation. Upon insertion, the sensor is coupled to the communications bus and ready to communicate with the ECUs, a device simulating movements [0032] By way of the vehicle developer device, the UI developer engine has access to sound, seat haptics, sensors… of the vehicle, [claim 9; 0078] the developer computing device 101 (or other additional computing devices) may include a processor 166, input/output hardware 168… The input/output hardware 168 may include an electronic display device, keyboard, mouse, printer, camera, microphone, sound emitting device (e.g., speaker), touch-screen, and/or other device for receiving, sending, and/or presenting data. and testing software [0094] Developers may create and test software on the vehicle developer device, and even have the vehicle developer device drive around to test different scenarios.
13. Regarding the limitation(s); The limitation(s) are similar in scope to those disclosed in the system of claim(s) 6 and are therefore rejected under the same premise, for more information please see the rejection in re claim(s) 6.
14. Regarding the limitation(s); The limitation(s) are similar in scope to those disclosed in the system of claim(s) 7 and are therefore rejected under the same premise, for more information please see the rejection in re claim(s) 7.
19. Regarding the limitation(s); The limitation(s) are similar in scope to those disclosed in the system of claim(s) 6 and are therefore rejected under the same premise, for more information please see the rejection in re claim(s) 6.
20. Regarding the limitation(s); The limitation(s) are similar in scope to those disclosed in the system of claim(s) 7 and are therefore rejected under the same premise, for more information please see the rejection in re claim(s) 7.
Conclusion
It should be noted that there exists prior art which is pertinent to significant though unclaimed features of the defined invention or directed to the state of art. The following is a brief description of relevant prior art cited but not applied:
Cacabelos (US-20160247331-A1) discloses in a similar invention, a consideration for [0034] The data collector 104 can include a device or system that receives (e.g., collects) VDV from a vehicle, such as the vehicle 102, stores the VDV in a computer-readable medium, and provides the VDV to the TDS computing device 114 or some other element within the system 100. The data collector 104 can communicatively couple to the vehicle 102 by the vehicle interface link 126. The data collector 104 can communicatively couple to the vehicle 136 by the vehicle interface link 138 or to other vehicles (not shown). The data collector 104 can be configured to communicatively couple with one vehicle at a time or more than one vehicle at a time… [claim 2] The method of claim 1, wherein the plurality of vehicle data values include vehicle data values selected from the group consisting of (i) a diagnostic trouble code, (ii) a vehicle data value associated with a parameter identifier (PID), and (iii) an electrical measurement of a component installed in the first vehicle.
Shiga (US-20200094845-A1) discloses in a similar invention, a consideration for [0008] A driving evaluation apparatus according to an embodiment of the present invention includes a driving evaluation apparatus comprising: a communication device configured to be able to communicate through a network with at least one of a vehicle-mounted device installed in a vehicle that is under automatic driving control and a mobile terminal of a passenger who is riding in the vehicle; and a processor configured to send a signal for displaying a query for evaluating the driving of the vehicle on at least one of the vehicle-mounted device and the mobile terminal to at least one of the vehicle-mounted device and the mobile terminal by controlling the communication device, and receive a reply to the query from the passenger from at least one of the vehicle-mounted device and the mobile terminal by controlling the communication device.
See PTO-892: Notice of references cited.
Contact
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATTHEW JOHN MOSCOLA whose telephone number is (571)272-6944. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-5:30.
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, Abby Flynn can be reached on (571) 272-9855. 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.
/M.J.M./Examiner, Art Unit 3663
/ABBY J FLYNN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3663