DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Arguments
2. Applicant’s contention (see pages 7-8 filed 20 March 2026) with respect to the rejection of the independent claims under 35 U.S.C. 102 has been fully considered and is persuasive in view of the amendments provided. Therefore, the rejection of the independent claims under 35 U.S.C. 102 has been withdrawn.
Subsequently, the prior art rejections of all claims dependent therefrom are withdrawn.
However, upon further consideration, new grounds of rejection are warranted (see below).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
3. 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.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable Duer (US 2016/0055116), and further in view of Hartmann (US 2013/0205145).
Regarding claims 1, 10, and 18, Duer discloses a control apparatus and associated method, applied to a controller in a vehicle (vehicle communication architecture configured to implement various vehicle controls; Duer at abstract, Fig. 1, 0004), wherein the vehicle comprises an electronic control unit (vehicle comprising a plurality of interconnected ECUs; Duer at Fig. 1, 0009, 0012, 0020), and the apparatus comprises:
At least one processor (remote server and in-vehicle ECUs contains at least one processor; Duer at Fig. 1, 0002)
One or more memories coupled to the at least one processor and storing programming instructions for execution by the at least one processor (ECUs contain programmed memories for execution of communication via processor; Duer at 0002) to:
Generate, by the controller, a packet (data sent from remote source via packet, intercommunication among vehicle ECUs on network accomplished via packets; Duer at 0012, 0013, 0028), wherein the packet comprises a plurality of bits and control information (CGM issued packet comprised of multibyte data including address and control messages; Duer at 0028), the plurality of bits indicate whether the electronic control unit controls a plurality of objects based on the control information (permission or denial for addressed ECUs to implement or not implement vehicle control; Duer at 0003, 0028), the plurality of bits are in a one-to-one correspondence with the plurality of objects (address and message bits are in correspondence with intended ECU and subsequent control, e.g. 0101; Duer at 0027, 0028, 0031), and at least one object of the plurality of objects is an actuator or a function (vehicle propulsion, body, electronic control; Duer at 0018, 0027, 0028)
Send, by the controller, the packet to the electronic control unit (packet for control sent from CGM to targeted at least one ECU; Duer at 0027, 0028).
It cannot be ascertained from the disclosure of Duer if each bit in the message code of the plurality of bits corresponds to a different object among the plurality of objects and indicates whether the electronic control unit controls the object based on the control information.
Hartmann teaches a vehicle controller network, wherein each bit in the plurality of bits corresponds to one of a plurality of objects and indicates whether the control unit maintains a function or ceases control (Hartmann at claim 5).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill before the time of the claimed invention to augment the base message as disclosed by Duer with the bit specific control of Hartmann. Doing so would provide updates on control information and activate/deactivate an actuator or function as necessary.
Regarding claims 2, 11, and 19, Duer discloses wherein the plurality of bits comprise at least one valid bit, the at least one valid bit indicates to the electronic control unit to control at least one first object in the plurality of objects based on the control information, and the at least one valid bit is in a one-to-one correspondence with the at least one first object (valid/invalid data indication in message; Duer at 0032).
Regarding claims 3, 12, and 20, Duer discloses wherein the plurality of bits comprise at least one invalid bit, the at least one invalid bit indicates to the electronic control unit not to control at least one second object in the plurality of objects based on the control information, and the at least one invalid bit is in a one-to-one correspondence with the at least one second object (denial of permission for control of an ECU via message; Duer at 0003).
Regarding claims 4 and 13, Duer discloses wherein the packet further comprises a synchronization bit, the control information is one piece of control information, and
the synchronization bit indicates to the electronic control unit to control the plurality of objects
based on the one piece of control information (message can include for the ECU to implement coordinated control of multiple vehicle components; Duer at 0018).
Regarding claims 5 and 14, Duer discloses wherein the packet further comprises
information indicating the plurality of objects (addresses and intended components to control; Duer at 0018).
Regarding claim 6, Duer discloses wherein the programming instructions are
for execution by the at least one processor to determine, by the controller, the plurality of objects and the control information based on a user input (user input transformed to implemented control multiple components; Duer at 0018).
Regarding claims 7 and 15, Duer discloses wherein the controller comprises at least
one of the following: a vehicle body domain controller, a cockpit domain controller, an intelligent driving domain controller, a vehicle control domain controller, and a vehicle controller (Duer at 0018, 0019).
Regarding claims 8 and 16, Duer discloses wherein the actuator comprises at least
one of the following: a window, a light, a chassis actuator, an energy system component, and a sensor (vehicle electronics and dynamic control; Duer at 0018, 0019).
Regarding claims 9 and 17, Duer discloses the function comprises at least one of the following: a vehicle-mounted device control function, a vehicle body component control function, a charging control function, and a sensor control function (vehicle electronics and dynamic control; Duer at 0018, 0019).
Conclusion
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JONATHAN M DAGER whose telephone number is (571)270-1332. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 0830-1730.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor Angela Ortiz can be reached on 571-272-1206. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JONATHAN M DAGER/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3663
08 April 2026
Prosecution Insights