DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Status of Claims
Claims 1-20 are pending.
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) 1-3, 5, 6, 8-10, 12, 13, 15-17, 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Deuel et al. [US 20230302374].
As to claim 1. Deuel discloses A method, comprising:
determining a class of a vehicle, [0048] system 100 determines the type of vehicle, at a charging point, [fig. 2, 0035] at a charging device 106 at an entertainment system 100;
determining a level of content to deliver to the vehicle, based on the class of the vehicle, [0048] determine the type of content to deliver based on the determined type of vehicle; and
delivering the level of the content to the vehicle when the vehicle is charging at the charging point, [0044, 0048] present content 134 to the vehicle.
As to claim 2. Deuel discloses The method of claim 1, comprising:
determining one or more options that are enabled on the vehicle, [0047] determine a user preference; and
further determining the level of the content based on the one or more options, [0047] content provided based on user preference.
As to claim 3. Deuel discloses The method of claim 1, comprising: determining a type of the content to deliver to the vehicle, wherein the type of the content is based on a number of occupants in the vehicle, [0046] content delivered synchronized for two or more users inside the vehicle.
As to claim 5. Deuel discloses The method of claim 1, comprising: determining a length of the content to deliver to the vehicle, based on an estimated amount of time the vehicle is charging at the charging point, [0047] content based on charging time.
As to claim 6. Deuel discloses The method of claim 1, comprising: receiving a requested level of the content; determining that the class of the vehicle does not qualify for the requested level of the content; and providing an offer to an occupant of the vehicle to upgrade the vehicle to receive the requested level of the content, [0033] user selects content to purchase.
As to claim 8. Deuel discloses A system, comprising: a processor, [fig. 6, 0053] processing element 166 for system 100; and a memory, [fig. 6, 0053] memory 168, wherein the processor and the memory are communicably coupled, [fig. 6], wherein the processor: implements the steps, [0055] as claim in claim 1, and are rejected using the same prior arts and reasoning as to that of claim 1 above.
As to claims 9, 10, 12, 13 are rejected using the same prior arts and reasoning as to that of claims 2, 3, 5, 6, respectively.
As to claim 15. Deuel discloses A computer-readable storage medium comprising instructions that, when read by a processor, cause the processor to perform, [claim 18]: the steps as claim in claim 1, and are rejected using the same prior arts and reasoning as to that of claim 1 above.
As to claims 16, 17, 19 are rejected using the same prior arts and reasoning as to that of claims 2, 3, 5, respectively.
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.
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) 4, 11, 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Deuel in view of Bove et al. [WO 2024124230A1].
As to claim 4. Deuel fails to disclose The method of claim 1, comprising: determining when the charging at the charging point is complete; and in response to an undelivered portion of the content, transferring the undelivered portion to a device associated with an occupant of the vehicle.
Bove teaches a method and system for providing media content items for display on a user device when a vehicle is connected to a charge port, [fig. 3, 0048]; wherein the system determines a media content for display on a device 102, [fig. 1, 3, 0050]; wherein the system determines that the battery reached a target SOC, [fig. 6] step 632, and the vehicle’s operating mode changed, [fig. 6, 0073] step 640 including changing into driving mode, [0073], the system changes the setting for display of the media content, [fig. 4] step 646, including transferring the media content to a mobile device, [0024], or another screen, [0077].
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Deuel with that of Bove so that the user can finish the media content.
As to claims 11, 18 are rejected using the same prior arts and reasoning as to that of claim 4.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7, 14, 20 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BENYAM HAILE whose telephone number is (571)272-2080. The examiner can normally be reached 7:00 AM - 5:30 PM Mon. - Thur..
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, Steven Lim can be reached at (571)270-1210. 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.
/Benyam Haile/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2688
Prosecution Insights