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 .
Response to Amendment
This action is in response to the RCE filed on 01/28/2026 and the amendments and remarks filed on 12/29/2025. Claims 1 and 4-20 are pending. Claims 1, 4, 6, and 9 have been amended. Claims 11-20 have been added. The 35 U.S.C. 112 rejection to claim 4 has been withdrawn in light of the instant amendments.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments appear to be directed solely to the amended subject matter which have been considered and addressed as detailed below under Claim Rejections.
Claim Objections
Claim 8 is objected to because of the following informalities: “the third components comprise at least one of displays, light sources window dimming and roof dimming” is missing a comma at “light sources, window dimming”. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 4-7, 9-14, and 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Penilla (US 20190265868) (hereinafter referred to as ‘868) in view of Penilla (US 10535341) (hereinafter referred to as ‘341).
Regarding claim 1, ‘868 teaches a computer-implemented method for controlling components having a somatic, optical, acoustic, and/or olfactory effect on a user in an interior of a motor vehicle (see users in vehicle in Fig. 19), the method comprising:
partitioning the interior into different zones (par. 257 and Fig. 19, “the area and zone around each seat in the vehicle is viewed as a custom environment or area zone in which the vehicle allows the passenger to access certain functions”), each of the zones having at least first, second and third components (par. 257, “A passenger can control seat positioning, can control air conditioning, can control audio settings, can control heat for the seat, can control audio settings, can control video feeds, can control applications of the vehicle, can control applications of the vehicle or the mobile device which are then shared to the displays of the vehicle, and other controls that provide a custom environmental control zone for the passengers”), the first components being controllable to plural settings each of which produces a different olfactory effect in the respective zone (air conditioning, which could be considered to effect scents), the second components being controllable to plural settings each of which produces a different acoustic effect in the respective zone (audio settings) and the third components being controllable to plural settings each of which produces a different optical effect in the respective zone (video feeds, displayed applications);
displaying to the user setting groups in each of the zones (mobile devices in Fig. 19), with each of the setting groups comprising an olfactory effect, an acoustic effect and an optical effect produced respectively by the first, second and third components in the respective zone (par. 256, “In this example, the mobile devices are in communication with vehicle electronics which provide access to some, or a subset of vehicle system settings, metrics, data, and functionalities”),
and controlling the components based on a user input selecting one of the displayed setting groups, thereby achieving specific olfactory, acoustic and optical effects produced by the first, second and third components in the respective zone based on the selected setting group (par. 102, "In some embodiments, a passenger is provided with the option to change all or a select group or set of his settings to his previous/prior elections or to his favorite elections/selections based on a match to current environmental circumstances/context, and based on learned behavior").
‘868 fails to teach the displayed setting groups are selected for display based at least on a state of the user determined using a camera filming the user's face. ‘868 instead only teaches the displayed setting groups are selected for display based on current environmental circumstances/context and learned behavior.
However, ‘341 teaches the displayed setting groups are selected for display based at least on a state of the user determined using a camera filming the user's face (column 22 line 10, “one or more cameras may also detect facial patterns, which may be used to detect mood or reinforce a determination that a particular mood is present in the driver or occupant of the vehicle”; column 48 line 50, “recommendations that can be provided to the user, based on one or more of the user's voice tone, mood, learned prior settings, use patterns, predictions, and combinations thereof”).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified ‘868 to incorporate the teachings of ‘341 to include using a camera to determine a mood, which would “provide further customized vehicle response and/or recommendations to the user of the vehicle” (column 2 line 56). Monitoring the user’s mood would allow ‘868 to better recommend setting groups.
Regarding claim 4, the combination of ‘868 and ‘341 teaches the method of claim 1. ‘868 further teaches the setting groups displayed to the user are also selected for display based on a time or a time of day (par. 42, “In some implementations, the history of when the control settings were implemented in the vehicle include one or more of a time of day of when the control settings are implemented”; par. 43, “the history of when the control settings are implemented is accessed to identify learned patterns, the learned patterns being used to identify one or more recommended settings to implement in the vehicle via the wireless device from time to time, wherein the one or more recommendations are provided to the user interface of the wireless device”—furthermore, since historical time information is used to recommend settings, it can be reasonably assumed that the current time is also taken into account when recommending settings).
Regarding claim 5, the combination of ‘868 and ‘341 teaches the method of claim 1. ‘868 further teaches the zones each comprise one or more seats (see zones encompassing each seat in Fig. 19).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of ‘868 and ‘341 teaches the method of claim 5. ‘868 further teaches the zones comprise a first zone with one or more front seats and a second zone with one or more rear seats (see zones encompassing each seat in Fig. 19).
Regarding claim 7, the combination of ‘868 and ‘341 teaches method of claim 1. ‘868 further teaches the partitioning is performed as a function of a partitioning user input (par. 238, “the passenger can identify the seat in which the passenger is seated, such that the controls can be customized for that specific seat”).
Regarding claim 9, ‘868 teaches a motor vehicle (see users in vehicle in Fig. 19) comprising:
an interior space defining plural separate zones (par. 257 and Fig. 19, “A passenger can control seat positioning, can control air conditioning, can control audio settings, can control heat for the seat, can control audio settings, can control video feeds, can control applications of the vehicle, can control applications of the vehicle or the mobile device which are then shared to the displays of the vehicle, and other controls that provide a custom environmental control zone for the passengers”);
each of the zones having a first component configured to have an olfactory effect on a user in the respective zone (air conditioning, which could be considered to effect scents), a second component configured to have an acoustic effect on a user in the respective zone (audio settings), and a third component configured to have an optical effect on a user in the respective zone (video feeds, displayed applications);
and a controller that controls the components in the zones independently of one another based on input to the controller by the user, the controller being configured to permit a user to choose a group of effects associated with one of a plurality of setting groups displayed to the user (par. 102, " In some embodiments, a passenger is provided with the option to change all or a select group or set of his settings to his previous/prior elections or to his favorite elections/selections based on a match to current environmental circumstances/context, and based on learned behavior"),
‘868 fails to teach the plurality of setting groups displayed to the user being selected from a collection of preselected setting groups based at least on a state of the user determined using a camera filming the user's face. ‘868 instead only teaches the displayed setting groups are selected for display based on current environmental circumstances/context and learned behavior
However, ‘341 teaches the plurality of setting groups displayed to the user being selected from a collection of preselected setting groups based at least on a state of the user determined using a camera filming the user's face (column 22 line 10, “one or more cameras may also detect facial patterns, which may be used to detect mood or reinforce a determination that a particular mood is present in the driver or occupant of the vehicle”; column 48 line 50, “recommendations that can be provided to the user, based on one or more of the user's voice tone, mood, learned prior settings, use patterns, predictions, and combinations thereof”).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified ‘868 to incorporate the teachings of ‘341 to include using a camera to determine a mood, which would “provide further customized vehicle response and/or recommendations to the user of the vehicle” (column 2 line 56). Monitoring the user’s mood would allow ‘868 to better recommend setting groups.
Regarding claim 10, the combination of ‘868 and ‘341 teaches the motor vehicle of claim 9. ‘868 further teaches the at least one control device comprises at least two control devices accessible respectively from front and rear seats of the motor vehicle (par. 244, “FIG. 18A shows an example of vehicle, where a plurality of passengers are seated, and passengers may have their own mobile devices…Some vehicles may have one or more interfaces for providing information regarding the vehicle functionality”; see Fig. 19, mobile devices for each passenger).
Regarding claim 11, the combination of ‘868 and ‘341 teaches the method of claim 1. ‘868 further teaches the setting groups displayed to the user are also selected based on a season (par. 84, "the settings can be predictive based on settings in past, the current environment (e.g., outside temp, inside temp, season of year, time of day, etc.)).
Regarding claim 12, the combination of ‘868 and ‘341 teaches the method of claim 1. ‘868 further teaches the setting groups displayed to the user are also selected based on a current location of the vehicle (par. 42, “In some implementations, the history of when the control settings were implemented in the vehicle…a geo-location of when the controls settings are implemented”; par. 43, “the history of when the control settings are implemented is accessed to identify learned patterns, the learned patterns being used to identify one or more recommended settings to implement in the vehicle via the wireless device from time to time, wherein the one or more recommendations are provided to the user interface of the wireless device”).
Regarding claim 13, the combination of ‘868 and ‘341 teaches the method of claim 1. ‘868 fails to explicitly teach the setting groups displayed to the user are also selected based on a destination location to which a journey for the vehicle is planned.
‘868 does teach saving a user history, which includes historical destinations, in order to preemptively change vehicle controls (par. 223, “The system, by using prior data points has stored assumptions based on conditions, the day it is, the temperature of the environment and historical events, that the user will most likely start the vehicle's engine between 803 am and 805 am, and if the temperature is in the 30 s inside the vehicle, the user will most likely set the interior temperature to between 70 and 80 degrees, it is not likely that the user will use the are conditioning unit, if there is ice on the windshield, the user will most likely defrost the windshield for 7 minutes before departure, the user usually drives between 15 and 18 miles at this time of day, the user typically starts the vehicle again in the afternoon between 505 pm and 510 pm, if the temperature is in the mid 70 s, the user usually activates the AC and sets the temperature to 65 degrees, typical weekend behavior, the user typically makes frequents stops, does not have a set time the vehicle is started, uses certain APPs at certain times and has a history of certain destinations as recorded by GPS”). ‘868 also teaches using a scheduled destination to preemptively change vehicle controls (par. 224, “The decision and action engine 2218 will attempt, using a degree of confidence to anticipate what the user will want to do in terms of engine start and stop, location destinations, preferences of temperature, driving habits and poll vehicle capacities to ensure the intended path the user usually takes is attainable. For example, the user usually drives a distance in the morning at a certain time, however, the vehicle's fuel supply will not allow for that distance to be traveled. Thus, the decision and action engine polls the user as a reminder that the user should begin their intended travel sooner than usual to allow for refueling time”). ‘868 does not mention using the destination data for the environment settings.
However, ‘341 teaches the setting groups displayed to the user are also selected based on a destination location to which a journey for the vehicle is planned (column 24 line 15, “fatigue can be determined in numerous ways or combination of ways, for example, (1) length of driving, (2) GPS destination distance, (3) how long has the car been on last time since the car stopped, (3) driving patterns, (4) hitting road dividers, (5) not staying in the lines, (6) impaired speech, (7) car can give driver a test and measure accuracy, tone, slurring, seated position, (8) known angles of the head vs the body suggesting sleeping, (9) measuring nodding off, (10) audio detection, (11) listening for snoring, (12) listening for delirious speech”—the destination is used to help determine mood, which is then used to recommend settings).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the combination of ‘868 in view of ‘341 to further incorporate the teachings of ‘341 to include using a destination in order to better determine the user’s mood, which is then used to recommend settings. This would “provide further customized vehicle response and/or recommendations to the user of the vehicle” (column 2 line 56). Monitoring the user’s mood would allow ‘868 to better recommend setting groups.
Regarding claim 14, the combination of ‘868 and ‘341 teaches the method of claim 1. ‘868 further teaches the setting groups displayed to the user are also selected based on weather (par. 84, "the settings can be predictive based on settings in past, the current environment (e.g., outside temp, inside temp, season of year, time of day, etc.)).
Regarding claim 19, the combination of ‘868 and ‘341 teaches the method of claim 1. ‘868 further teaches the displayed setting groups are selected for display from a collection of preselected setting groups (par. 102, "In some embodiments, a passenger is provided with the option to change all or a select group or set of his settings to his previous/prior elections or to his favorite elections/selections based on a match to current environmental circumstances/context, and based on learned behavior”).
Regarding claim 20, the combination of ‘868 and ‘341 teaches the method of claim 1. ‘868 fails to teach the state of the user is determined as being one of stressed, tense, relaxed, or sleepy.
However, ‘341 teaches the state of the user is determined as being one of stressed, tense, relaxed, or sleepy (column 18 line 37, “the mood of the user can include, without limitation, one or more of a normal mood, a frustrated mood, an agitated mood, an upset mood, a hurried mood, an urgency mood, a rushed mood, a stressed mood, a calm mood, a passive mood, a sleepy mood, a happy mood, an excited mood, or combinations of two or more thereof”).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified ‘868 to incorporate the teachings of ‘341 to include determining a mood, which would “provide further customized vehicle response and/or recommendations to the user of the vehicle” (column 2 line 56). Monitoring the user’s mood would allow ‘868 to better recommend setting groups.
Claim(s) 8 and 15-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ‘868 in view of ‘341, and further in view of Goldman-Shenhar (US 20170285641).
Regarding claim 8, the combination of ‘868 and ‘341 teaches the method of claim 1. ‘868 further teaches (par. 27, “systems for controlling volume of speakers proximate to the seat”), and the third components comprise at least one of displays (par. 27, “systems for controlling video to be displayed proximate to the seat”), light sources (par. 27, “systems for controlling lighting proximate to the seat”), window dimming (par. 27, “systems for controlling digital glare of a window proximate to the seat’) and roof dimming.
‘868 fails to teach the first components comprise fragrance sources.
However, Goldman-Shenhar teaches the first components comprise fragrance sources (par. 163, smells; Table 1, “Affects, for instance, sounds, smell or aromas that the vehicle can be configured to provide (e.g., lavender, mint)”).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the combination of ‘868 in view of ‘341 to incorporate the teachings of Goldman-Shenhar, which states, “By the contextual modes selected, and associated settings, user enjoyment and comfort with vehicle user is increased” (par. 198), and “By the contextual modes selected, and associated settings, user enjoyment and comfort with vehicle user is increased” (par. 198). Systems to control fragrances can already be found in commercial vehicles and would have been an obvious improvement to ‘868 in order to allow increased customization and comfort to the user.
Regarding claim 15, the combination of ‘868 and ‘341 teaches the method of claim 1. Both ‘868 and ‘341 fail to teach the setting groups displayed to the user are also selected based on a user appointment.
‘868 does teach using a user appointment to preemptively change the vehicle controls (par. 222). ‘341 teaches using a user appointment to provide contextual recommendations (column 38 line 61).
Goldman-Shenhar teaches the setting groups displayed to the user are also selected based on a user appointment (“par. 127, "The user state can also be based on a user itinerary, calendar, or schedule stored at the vehicle—database module 370, for instance—or a device 50 distinct from the vehicle. The module 320 can be configured to determine, based on pre-established data, that the user tends to be in a lively, attentive mood after leaving his in-laws' house, for instance”; par. 11, “based on a user-state, an appropriate contextual mode, and initiating setting of multiple vehicle and non-vehicle settings based on the contextual mode determined”).
While Goldman-Shenhar teaches the settings are automatically selected, when in combination with ‘868 and ‘341, one of ordinary skill in the art would realize that the user appointment could be used to determine recommended settings instead of automatically applying them, since Goldman-Shenhar teaches that the user state can be affected by appointments.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the combination of ‘868 and ‘341 to incorporate the teachings of Goldman-Shenhar, which states, “By the contextual modes selected, and associated settings, user enjoyment and comfort with vehicle user is increased. Ease of vehicle use is increased by allowing implementation of custom modes automatically based on the circumstances” (par. 198). Using the user appointment would allow for another way to determine the user’s state.
Regarding claim 16, the combination of ‘868 in view of ‘341 and Goldman-Shenhar teaches the method of claim 15. ‘868 further teaches the user appointment is read from a user calendar stored on a smartphone (par. 222, “the user's local or network-stored calendar should be polled to determine how the user's schedule might impact the system's pending actions. For instance, if the system had determined that the user typically starts his vehicle at 8 am but the user's calendar shows a meeting at 730 am located at a location that does not match the current location, the vehicle may assume that the car should be started at 725”).
Regarding claim 17, the combination of ‘868 in view of ‘341 and Goldman-Shenhar teaches the method of claim 15. Both ‘868 and ‘341 fail to teach the displayed setting groups include at least one setting group configured to improve user relaxation based on a determination that the user appointment occurred in the past.
‘341 does teach using a user appointment to provide contextual recommendations (par. 38 line 61).
Goldman-Shenhar teaches the displayed setting groups include at least one setting group configured to improve user relaxation based on a determination that the user appointment occurred in the past (par. 127, "The user state can also be based on a user itinerary, calendar, or schedule stored at the vehicle—database module 370, for instance—or a device 50 distinct from the vehicle. The module 320 can be configured to determine, based on pre-established data, that the user tends to be in a lively, attentive mood after leaving his in-laws' house, for instance”; claim 10, “the contextual mode determined is configured to promote a relaxing atmosphere for the user in a vehicle”).
While Goldman-Shenhar teaches the settings are automatically selected, when in combination with ‘868 and ‘341, one of ordinary skill in the art would realize that the user appointment could be used to determine recommended settings instead of automatically applying them, since Goldman-Shenhar teaches that the user state can be affected by appointments.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the combination of ‘868 and ‘341 to incorporate the teachings of Goldman-Shenhar, which states, “By the contextual modes selected, and associated settings, user enjoyment and comfort with vehicle user is increased. Ease of vehicle use is increased by allowing implementation of custom modes automatically based on the circumstances” (par. 198). Using the user appointment would allow for another way to determine the user’s state.
Regarding claim 18, the combination of ‘868 in view of ‘341 and Goldman-Shenhar teaches the method of claim 15. Both ‘868 and ‘341 fail to teach the displayed setting groups include at least one setting group configured to promote the user's alertness based on a determination that the user appointment is scheduled to occur in the future.
‘868 does teach using a user appointment to preemptively change the vehicle controls (par. 222). ‘341 teaches using a user appointment to provide contextual recommendations (column 38 line 61).
Goldman-Shenhar teaches the displayed setting groups include at least one setting group configured to promote the user's alertness based on a determination that the user appointment is scheduled to occur in the future (par. 127, "The user state can also be based on a user itinerary, calendar, or schedule stored at the vehicle—database module 370, for instance—or a device 50 distinct from the vehicle. The module 320 can be configured to determine, based on pre-established data, that the user tends to be in a lively, attentive mood after leaving his in-laws' house, for instance”; par. 171 and Table 1, “User in a hurry” or “User in a busy or productive state”).
Goldman-Shenhar does not explicitly give an example scenario of determining a user state based on an appointment scheduled in the future. The example of the in-law’s house occurs after the user leaves the in-law’s house, so it is based on a past appointment. However, it can be implied that Goldman-Shenhar’s system also takes into account future appointments. Goldman-Shenhar discloses, “For instance, the vehicle can determine that the user is in a before-work-type of mood based simply on the fact that the user is apparently driving to work in the morning as usual, such as based on location and time of week/day” (par. 128). This illustrates how Goldman-Shenhar uses future events to determine the state. Therefore, it can be assumed that “based on a user itinerary, calendar, or schedule stored at the vehicle” includes based on a future appointment.
While Goldman-Shenhar teaches the settings are automatically selected, when in combination with ‘868 and ‘341, one of ordinary skill in the art would realize that the user appointment could be used to determine recommended settings instead of automatically applying them.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the combination of ‘868 and ‘341 to incorporate the teachings of Goldman-Shenhar, which states, “By the contextual modes selected, and associated settings, user enjoyment and comfort with vehicle user is increased. Ease of vehicle use is increased by allowing implementation of custom modes automatically based on the circumstances” (par. 198). Using the user appointment would allow for another way to determine the user’s state.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MINATO LEE HORNER whose telephone number is (571)272-5425. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5.
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, Christian Chace can be reached at (571) 272-4190. 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.L.H./Examiner, Art Unit 3665 /CHRISTIAN CHACE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3665