Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/431,806

STANDBY MODE FOR MONITORING VEHICLE SURROUNDINGS

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Feb 02, 2024
Examiner
TO, TUAN C
Art Unit
3661
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Toyota Motor Engineering & Manufacturing North America, Inc.
OA Round
2 (Non-Final)
86%
Grant Probability
Favorable
2-3
OA Rounds
2y 11m
To Grant
96%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 86% — above average
86%
Career Allow Rate
853 granted / 993 resolved
+33.9% vs TC avg
Moderate +10% lift
Without
With
+9.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 11m
Avg Prosecution
14 currently pending
Career history
1007
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
13.4%
-26.6% vs TC avg
§103
53.9%
+13.9% vs TC avg
§102
8.6%
-31.4% vs TC avg
§112
16.1%
-23.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 993 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 . Claim Rejections - 35 USC §103 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103(a) 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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. Claims 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Nagata (US 2021/0245711 A1). The applied reference has a common assignee with the instant application. Based upon the earlier effectively filed date of the reference, it constitutes prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2). This rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 might be overcome by: (1) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(a) that the subject matter disclosed in the reference was obtained directly or indirectly from the inventor or a joint inventor of this application and is thus not prior art in accordance with 35 U.S.C.102(b)(2)(A); (2) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(b) of a prior public disclosure under 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(B); or (3) a statement pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) establishing that, not later than the effective filing date of the claimed invention, the subject matter disclosed and the claimed invention were either owned by the same person or subject to an obligation of assignment to the same person or subject to a joint research agreement. See generally MPEP § 717.02. Regarding claim 17, Nagata discloses a proximity-based vehicle security system in which the vehicle sensors (120), which includes one or more cameras (120a, 120b), of the vehicle (102a-b) capture the unusual activity or object in the environment surrounding the vehicle (see paragraph 0021; 0033); an electronic control unit, which is the ECU (112), coupled to the vehicle sensors (120) configured to receive the surrounding environment data (e.g., image data) from the objects within the surrounding environment of the vehicle (102a, 102b); wherein the ECU (112) is specifically designed for sensing, detecting, measuring and/or otherwise determining or obtaining the various parameters to detect an unusual activity or object and activate various sensors and cameras surrounding the vehicle 102a (see paragraphs 0025, and 0026). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the proximity-based vehicle security system as taught by Nagata to arrive at the claimed invention. A person of ordinary skill, ordinary creativity would have been motivated to do so, with a reasonable expectation of success, for the purpose of recording a suspicious activity from a vehicle adjacent to the host vehicle when the suspicious vehicle is in the field-of-view and stopping when it stays out of the field-of-view, and therefore saving significant memory as well as energy as compared to “always-on” recording. Regarding claim 18, in Nagata, the security system, which includes the electronic control unit (112), tracks and follows the unusual activity or object as the objects exits the field-of-view of the vehicle camera by additionally activating another camera in proximity to the vehicle (see paragraph 0017). The ECU (112) is configured to detect an unusual activity or object and activate various sensors and cameras surrounding the vehicle (102a) (see paragraph 0025). Regarding claim 19, in Nagata, the vehicle (102a, 102b) may be an electric vehicle (see paragraph 0023), and the vehicle (102c) is the vehicle moves in proximity of the vehicle (102a, 102b). The vehicle (102c) is not defined as an electric vehicle. The vehicle (102c) is identified as the object within the surrounding environment. Regarding claim 20, in Naga the vehicle (102c) is shown as a lead vehicle and the vehicle (102) appears to be a follow vehicle (see Fig. 5). Allowable Subject Matter The applicant’s amendment and remarks have been fully considered and persuasive. The prior art rejection applicable to claims 1-12, and 14-16 has been withdrawn. Claims 1-12, 14-16, and 21 are now set in a condition for allowance. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 17-20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. Conclusions Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Tuan C To whose telephone number is (571) 272-6985. The examiner can normally be reached on from 6:00AM to 2:30PM. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Vivek D Koppikar, can be reached on (571) 272-5109. 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). /TUAN C TO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3667
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 02, 2024
Application Filed
Sep 27, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Nov 12, 2025
Response Filed
Jan 27, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Apr 08, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary
Apr 08, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12589737
VEHICLE SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR PEDESTRIAN ROAD CROSSING PREDICTIONS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12583460
DRIVING SUPPORT DEVICE, METHOD, AND COMPUTER PROGRAM FOR SUPPORTING DRIVING
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12583452
CONTROLLER AND CONTROL METHOD OF RIDER SUPPORT SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12562054
AUTONOMOUS VEHICLE AND CENTER CONTROL SYSTEM (AVCCS) FOR DRONE/TELE DRIVING OR DIGITAL TWINS
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12545112
MANAGING CONTENT DISPLAYED IN A VEHICLE
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

2-3
Expected OA Rounds
86%
Grant Probability
96%
With Interview (+9.9%)
2y 11m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 993 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month