DETAILED ACTION
This communication responsive to the Application No. 18/427,828 filed on January 31, 2024. A preliminary amendment was filed on 04/15/2024 in which claims 4-5, 9 and 13-14 have been amended, and claims 10-12 have been canceled. Claims 1-9 and 13-15 are pending and are directed towards IN-VEHICLE INFOTAINMENT APPLICATION LOGIN METHOD, APPARATUS/DEVICE, AND SYSTEM.
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 .
Specification
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because it has a TSP acronym that should be defined. 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).
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.
Claim Objections
Claims 13-15 objected to because of the following informalities:
Claims 13-15 seems to be independent claims. However, the claims show some dependency into claims 1 and 13. Examiner suggested that if these claims, were intended to be independent claims, to explicitly incorporate all limitations of claims 1 and 13 in the body of claim 13-15 respectively, to avoid this type of confusion. Otherwise, a proper preamble should be cited in each of these claims.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claims 1-9 and 13-15 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claims 1 and 7 recites the limitation “the first temporary authorization code being a temporary authorization code corresponding to the first eigenvalue ID” which is vague and not clear. it is not understood whether “a temporary authorization code” recited here is the same as the code recited in the previous limitation “and a temporary authorization code corresponding to each of the plurality of eigenvalue IDs” or a different code!!. Also, it is not clear if there are a plurality of temporary authorization codes corresponding to each of the plurality of eigenvalue IDs, or is it only one single code that correspond to all plurality of eigenvalue IDs.
Claim 4 recites the limitation " the second medium being any unlocking medium that is not bound to the in-vehicle infotainment application account of the user…". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 5 recites the limitation "…comprising the in-vehicle infotainment application account of the user, a third-party application account…". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 6 recites the limitation "… the in-vehicle infotainment application account of the user…". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 6 recites the limitation “…so that the server of each third-party application performs login with a third-party application account of the user” which is vague and not clear. it is not understood if “a third-party application account of the user” is this claim is referring to the same “third-party application account of the user” recited in claim 5, or different one.
Claims 13 and 14 recite the limitation "The in-vehicle infotainment application login…". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim, given that claims 13 and 14 are independent claims.
Claim 15 recites the limitation "The in-vehicle infotainment…". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim, given that claim 15 is an independent claim.
Claims 2-3 and 8-9 rejected by dependency.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter.
The claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claim(s) does/do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because the recited “computer readable storage medium” fails to exclude non-transitory embodiments.
The broadest reasonable interpretation of a “computer readable storage medium” typically covers both forms of non-transitory media and transitory propagating signals per se in view of the ordinary and customary meaning of computer-readable media noting that the present specification does not explicitly define the term “computer readable storage medium” but only provides non-limiting examples of computer readable storage medium (see Spec para [0171]). A signal does not constitute statutory subject matter, because it is neither a process, a machine, an article of manufacture, nor a composition of matter, and therefore does not fall within any of the statutory classes of invention. See In re Nuijten, 500 F.3d 1346, 1356-57 (Fed. Cir. 2007), and MPEP § 2106.03(1). See also “Subject Matter Eligibility of Computer Readable Media”, 1351 Off. Gaz. Pat. Office. When a claim encompasses both statutory and non-statutory subject matter, the claim as a whole is considered to be directed to non-statutory subject matter. See MPEP § 2106(11).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-9 and 13-15 allowable over prior art. As allowable subject matter has been indicated, applicant's reply must either comply with all formal requirements or specifically traverse each requirement not complied with. See 37 CFR 1.111(b) and MPEP § 707.07(a).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
A. Li et al. CN 105791388 B published on 03/22/2019 directed to in-vehicle infotainment system remote activation method of the vehicle network system.
B. Timo et al. EP 3277010 A1 published on 01/31/2018 directed to Method For Providing Authenticated Connection Between Infotainment System And Smartphone In Car, Involves Exchanging Application-related Access Data Between First Application And Server Application Via Authenticated Connection.
C. Ahmed et al. US 2015/0120402 A1 directed to method for enabling after hour vehicle pick up.
D. Li et al. WO 2022156443 A1 published on 07/28/2022 directed to in-vehicle infotainment product connection method.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KHALID M ALMAGHAYREH whose telephone number is (571)272-0179. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 8AM-5PM EST & Friday variable.
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, RUPAL DHARIA can be reached at (571)272-3880. 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.
Respectfully Submitted
/KHALID M ALMAGHAYREH/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2492