Response to Amendment
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 .
The amendment and accompanied remark dated 7/14/26 has been received and made of record.
As per the claims 1-20 rejection under 35 USC 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. These claims are directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. This rejection has been with based claims and remarks and/or responses.
As per applicant arguments with respect to claims 1 and 13, regarding the newly added limitation, the argument are moot in view of new grounds of rejection.
For example, applicant alleges the cited art fails to disclose newly amended claims 1 and 13.
In response examiner newly cited reference Vemury discloses wherein the CBP server is further configured to cross-correlate cell phone location history of a cell phone within the vehicle (see par. 0124) with the occupant responses to the VA CBP interview queries (0117) pertaining to occupant location history to determine a validation status(see par. 0174).
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, 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.
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.
Claims 1-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Channah et al. U.S. Patent No. 10,846,809[hereinafter Channah] in view of King et al. U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2025/0078515[hereinafter King] and further in view of Vemury; Arun U.S. Patent Application Publication No. US 20190043148 [herein after Vemury].
As per claim 1, and 13 discloses a communication system to managing a border crossing, comprising:
a server [automated Border Inspection system 200] for processing a plurality of vehicles, wherein at least one vehicle comprises: an in-vehicle processor configured to:
automatically establish a vehicle-to-border communication link with the CBP server in response to the vehicle crossing into a geo-fenced area associated with a CBP checkpoint(border crossing point )(see fig. 3, 4 col. 21-45, where the automated border inspection system receives first data identifying a vehicle and one or more passengers for the vehicle that are requesting to cross a particular border (302)., lines steps 302);
grant the CBP server temporary control of internal and external predetermined vehicular devices associated with the vehicle to determine occupant and cargo identification information(see col. 22, lines 6-28);
automatically receive granted access to a fast pass lane in response to the occupant and cargo identification information being validated by the CBP serve( see col. 22, lines 57-65, where generate instructions to guide the vehicle to a particular lane, e.g., a secondary inspection lane or fast lane).
Channah does not explicitly disclose receive automated virtual assistant (VA) CBP interview queries, generated by the CBP server, for each identified occupant, wherein occupant responses to the queries are analyzed by the CBP server to provide validation of the occupant and cargo identification information .
King disclose receive automated virtual assistant (VA) CBP interview queries, generated by the CBP server, for each identified occupant, wherein occupant responses to the queries are analyzed by the CBP server to provide validation of the occupant and cargo identification information (see par. 0035, where he virtual assistant feature receives prompts from the user and provides responses relating to the prompts. For example, in response to questions relating to the cargo, the virtual assistant feature, as executed by the device electronic processor 310, retrieves the relevant information and displays the information or announces the information.). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of King into the system of Channa because the virtual assistant feature facilitates interaction with CBP server and provides virtual assistance feature on the portable communications device associated the vehicle passenger in order to receive an automated The virtual assistant feature can receive voice, gesture, and/or text prompts from a user of the portable communications device 120 and perform actions or provide responses accordingly. For example, the virtual assistant feature may include a partial or full machine learning capability such that the functions and/or responses may be trained and deployed during the use of the virtual assistant feature.
The system of Channah -King does not explicitly disclose wherein the CBP server is further configured to cross-correlate cell phone location history of a cell phone within the vehicle with the occupant responses to the VA CBP interview queries pertaining to occupant location history to determine a validation status.
Vemury discloses wherein the CBP server is further configured to cross-correlate cell phone location history of a cell phone within the vehicle (see par. 0124) with the occupant responses to the VA CBP interview queries (0117) pertaining to occupant location history to determine a validation status(see par. 0174). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Vemury into the system of Channa-King, thus prior to arriving for security screening an individual may use his/her smartphone to provide responses (answers) to border control questions, such as those included on U.S. Customs and Border Protection Declaration Form 6059B, responsive to receipt of the linking information the linking module can use the linking information to merge the provided information, so it is interrelated. In this way the touchpoint or the front end system or central system on its behalf are made aware that the provided answers are associated with the information collected by the touchpoint without manually input.
As per claim 2 and 14 Channah discloses he communication system of claim 1 wherein, prior to automatically establishing the vehicle-to-border communication link, the in-vehicle processor is configured to:
register a user and vehicle to a fast pass CBP application, the registration including granting of access permissions for validating a vehicle, occupants of the vehicle and content of the vehicle; and automatically establish the vehicle-to-border communication link within a predetermined geo-fence of a border crossing for registered users and vehicles, the vehicle-to-border communication link automatically connecting vehicular communication devices and personal communication devices within the vehicle to the CBP server.(see fig. 3 and col. 32, lines 6-49)
as per claim 3, King discloses The communication system of claim 1, wherein the CBP server performs analytics to detect inconsistencies between responses to the VA CBP interview queries and the occupant and cargo identification information determined by the internal and external predetermined vehicular devices, and the CBP server further generates additional VA CBP interview queries based on the inconsistencies (see par. 0035)
as per claim 4, King discloses the communication system of claim 3, wherein the analytics include applying scoring and weighting factors are applied to predetermined identification pre-check parameters associated with the VA CBP interview queries (see par. 0035).
As per claim 5 King discloses the communication system of claim 1, wherein the internal and external predetermined vehicular devices associated with the vehicle comprise:
an in-vehicle camera, an on-vehicle camera, and a scanner(see par. 0019); and
wherein images and scanned information are uploaded to the CBP server and used as a basis for generating at least one VA CBP interview query(see par. 0035).
As per claim, 6 King discloses the communication system of claim 1, wherein the CBP server is further communicatively coupled to an external database for verifying at least one response of the responses to the VA CBP interview queries (see par. 0035).
As per claim 7, Channah discloses the communication system of claim 6, wherein the external database comprises at least one of: vehicular registration databases, immigration databases, criminal background check databases, pharmacy location databases, and vehicular location databases(see fig.2 and col. 14, lines 50-67).
As per claim 8, Channah discloses the communication system of claim 1, wherein the in-vehicle processor is further configured to: automatically detect changes in one or more of: vehicle door position, vehicle window position, vehicle trunk position, and vehicle seat position wherein a change in position is communicated to the CBP server(see fig. 1c and col. 9, lines 20-28).
As per claim 9, Channah discloses the communication system of claim 1, wherein the CBP server generates directions for the vehicle in response to a validation status, comprising one of: a fast pass lane with no further CBP check in response to an all-clear validation( see col. 22, lines 57-65, where generate instructions to guide the vehicle to a particular lane, e.g., a secondary inspection lane or fast lane);
an electronic follow-up checkpoint in response to in response to an incomplete validation; and a manual in-person checkpoint managed by CBP personnel for a failed validation( see col. 22, lines 57-65, where generate instructions to guide the vehicle to a particular lane, e.g., a secondary inspection lane or fast lane).
As per claim 10, King discloses the communication system of claim 1, wherein one or more audio profiles are generated in response to verbal responses to the VA CBP interview queries, and the one or more audio profiles are associated with images of occupants within the vehicle.
As per claim 11, King discloses the communication system of claim 1, wherein automated duty/tax is calculated and charged based on detecting, by the CBP server, that cargo limits of the vehicle are exceeded(see par. 0031, 0036).
As per claim 12, King discloses the communication system of claim 1, wherein the CBP server is further configured to: cross-correlate cell phone location history of a cell phone within the vehicle with occupant responses to the VA CBP interview queries pertaining to occupant location history(see par. 0032, 0035).
As per claim 15, King discloses the method of claim 13, wherein the VA CBP interview queries are generated for in-vehicle playout at a communication device within the vehicle while passing through the geo-fenced area(see par. 0035)
As per claim 16, King discloses the method of claim 15, wherein the VA CBP interview queries are customized for each occupant based on the occupant and cargo identification information(see fig. 4 and par. 0028).
As per claim 17, King discloses the method of claim 13, wherein granting the CBP server temporary control of internal and external predetermined vehicular devices associated with the vehicle comprises granting the CBP server temporary control of internal and external vehicular cameras, sensors, scanners and communication devices associated with the vehicle to determine occupant and cargo identification information(see par. 0028)
As per claim 18, king discloses the method of claim 17, wherein validating further comprises: generating VA CBP queries for verification of the occupant and cargo identification information; and comparing responses to the VA CBP queries pertaining to the occupant and cargo identification information to determine a validation status(see par. 0035)
As per claim 19 , Channah discloses the method of claim 13, further comprising: automatically controlling a verified autonomous vehicle including verified occupants and verified vehicle cargo to a fast pass lane. ( see col. 22, lines 57-65, where generate instructions to guide the vehicle to a particular lane, e.g., a secondary inspection lane or fast lane).
As per claim 20, Channah discloses the method of claim 13, further comprising: generating, by the CBP server, directions for the vehicle in response to a validation status, the direction comprising one of: a fast pass lane with no further CBP check in response to an all-clear validation; an electronic follow-up checkpoint in response to in response to an incomplete validation ( see col. 22, lines 57-65, where generate instructions to guide the vehicle to a particular lane, e.g., a secondary inspection lane or fast lane).; and a manual checkpoint managed by in-person CBP personnel for a failed validation( see col. 22, lines 57-65, where generate instructions to guide the vehicle to a particular lane, e.g., a secondary inspection lane or fast lane).
As per claims 21, and 22 King discloses the communication system of claim 1, wherein the vehicle-to-border communication link with the CBP server is a wireless vehicle-to-border communication link(see pars 0019-0020).
As per claim 23 and 24 Channah discloses the communication system of claim 1, wherein the automatically receive granted access to a fast pass lane in response to the occupant and cargo identification information being validated by the CBP server further comprises: automatically receive granted access to a fast pass lane, without requiring the vehicle to stop, in response to the occupant and cargo identification information being validated by the CBP server( see col. 22, lines 57-65, where generate instructions to guide the vehicle to a particular lane, e.g., a secondary inspection lane or fast lane).
As per claims 25., Channah discloses the communication system of claim 1, wherein the VA CBP interview queries, generated by the CBP server, are played out at one of the internal or external predetermined vehicular devices located on the vehicle while passing through the geo-fenced area( see col. 22, lines 57-65, where generate instructions to guide the vehicle to a particular lane, e.g., a secondary inspection lane or fast lane).
As per claim 26, Channah discloses the method of claim 13, wherein the in-vehicle processor is further configured to: automatically detect changes in one or more of: vehicle door position, vehicle window position, vehicle trunk position, and vehicle seat position wherein a change in position is communicated to the CBP server.(see col. 6, lines 27-30, the system may include a vehicle detector to detect movement of a vehicle, and cause the camera to store image data representing an image of the vehicle in response to detecting movement of the vehicle.
As per claim 27 and 28 Channah discloses the communication system of claim 1, wherein, in response to receiving granted access to a fast pass lane, the in-vehicle processor is further configured to: display a notification on one or more of the internal and external predetermined vehicular devices located on the vehicle ( see col. 22, lines 57-65, where generate instructions to guide the vehicle to a particular lane, e.g., a secondary inspection lane or fast lane).
.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ABDULLAHI ELMI SALAD whose telephone number is (571)272-4009. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30AM-6:PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Faruk Hamza can be reached at 571-272-7969. 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.
/ABDULLAHI E SALAD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2466
Prosecution Insights