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 .
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on December 22nd, 2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Response to Arguments and Amendments
Applicant’s arguments and amendments, filed February 5th, 2026, with respect to the rejections of claims 1-4 and 6 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Furthermore, upon further search and consideration of additional limitations in the amended claims, along with newly added claims 7-8, a new ground(s) of rejection is made below.
Applicant emphasizes that characteristics of a selected route being based on suitability for treating the health condition of a user is distinct from the disclosure of Inoue. Examiner respectfully disagrees with this assertion in the claims as written. As noted in the 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejections below, the terminology involving “characteristics” and “suitable” are indefinite in their description of the invention. The claim(s) as written cover too broad a scope, where Inoue’s disclosure of selectable routes based on values associated with a wearable terminal of the user clearly supports each function and component in the claimed system (as referenced in the 102 rejections below). It is unclear to the Examiner what specific “characteristics” are being mentioned, and what exactly is meant by a route being “suitable for treating the health condition of the user”. For at least these reasons, the 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) rejections are maintained, and further includes newly added claims 7-8.
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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1 and 4-8 (along with claims 2-3 due to dependency) are 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.
The term “characteristics” in claims 1 and 6, “suitable” in claims 1 and 4-6, “proximity” in claims 6-7, “availability” in claim 6, “tired” in claim 7 and “more comfortable” in claim 8 are relative terms which render the claims indefinite. The terms “characteristics”, “suitable”, “proximity”, “availability”, “tired” and “more comfortable” are not defined by the claims, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claims 1-4 and 6-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Inoue (JP Patent Pub. No. 2009-36618A).
Regarding Claim 1, Inoue discloses a travel route presentation system (See 0008, “[…] path presentation means for presenting with a corresponding health promotion index, a selected path, and a past selected path recording means for storing a health promotion index presented corresponding to the path […]”) comprising:
a processor (See 0026, “[…] route search processing unit 114, a route guidance processing unit 116, a map database 118, and a past selected route recording unit 120.”); and
a memory storing executable instructions (See 0026 as referenced above) that cause the processor to
acquire predetermined information on a user from a wearable terminal worn by the user (See 0006, “[…] proposed based on the pedometer information carried by the user […] a walking schedule is proposed based on information contained in the user's mobile terminal, for example, a calorie consumption database and walking information.” See also 0086, “[…] a determination is made as to whether it is possible to propose health improvement by personal adaptation […] it is determined whether or not information on a previously selected route regarding the user who has input the destination is recorded in the past selected route recording unit […] a health improvement route is proposed in accordance with the user's preference.” See also 0054, “[…] an item that is easy for the user who sets the destination to draw attention, for example, calorie consumption, number of steps, walking time, walking distance, etc., as described above, can be used to call attention to health for each user.” Examiner notes a pedometer is capable of acquiring at least a heart rate or pulse of the user, and more advanced versions may also track body temperature. Furthermore, this device is carried by the user and is disclosed as a mobile terminal, thus being a wearable terminal. Furthermore, examiner notes the determination unit obtaining user preferences with regards to health improvements when selecting a route that may affect aspects of their health is the acquisition unit acquiring predetermined information on a user);
estimate a health condition of the user based on the predetermined information on the user (See 0008-0011, “[…] health promotion index calculating means for calculating a health promotion index relating to health promotion based on a route from the place to the destination […] calculating the health promotion index hand […] based on the health promotion index stored in the recording means, select the health promotion index to be presented […] computing the health promotion indicators selected […] the proposal for a health improvement can be performed with respect to a user.” Examiner notes the health promotion index calculator uses the information on the user to compute a health promotion index, thus being the estimation unit);
select at least one travel route from a current location of a vehicle to a destination based on the estimated health condition of the user, the at least one travel route is being selected based on characteristics of the at least one travel route that are suitable for treating the health condition of the user (See 0086 as referenced above. See also 0037, “[…] route search unit 1144 searches for a travel route by a car from the current position to the destination based on the vehicle position information input by the GPS device 102 and the destination information input by the destination setting unit […]” See also 0054, “A route to go to the destination is selected based on the value related to the alert item on the ground. Since the user can select from a plurality of routes, the degree of freedom of route selection can be expanded.” Examiner notes both the limitations of “within the vicinity” and “suitable for treating” are extremely broad and do not limit the scope of the invention, and under broadest reasonable interpretation, each of the routes and destinations selected can be within the vicinity of a facility suitable for treating the user’s health condition); and
display the at least one selected travel route from the current location to the destination on a display monitor provided in the vehicle, the at least one selected travel route having characteristics that are suitable for treating the health condition of the user (See 0054 and 0086 as referenced above. See also 0018, “[…] route presentation determination for determining whether to present a route from the position of the route guidance device to the destination […]” See also 0026, “[…] a display unit 106 as a route presentation unit […]”).
Regarding Claim 2, Inoue further discloses the travel route presentation system according to claim 1, wherein the predetermined information includes at least one of a pulse rate, a heart rate, and a body temperature of the user (See 0006, “[…] proposed based on the pedometer information carried by the user […] a walking schedule is proposed based on information contained in the user's mobile terminal, for example, a calorie consumption database and walking information.” Examiner notes a pedometer is capable of acquiring at least a heart rate or pulse of the user, and more advanced versions may also track body temperature).
Regarding Claim 3, Inoue further discloses the travel route presentation system according to claim 1, wherein the predetermined information on the user is input via an operation terminal owned by the user (See 0006 as referenced above and, “[…] user's portable terminal is necessary.” Examiner notes this terminal refers to the same mobile terminal that acquires information on the user).
Regarding Claim 4, Inoue further discloses the travel route presentation system according to claim 1, further comprising:
a database configured to store combinations of the health condition of the user and information on a plurality of facilities for treating the health condition of the user, wherein the executable instructions further cause the processor to (See 0071, “[…] searches for the travel route by the car to the set destination based on the map information stored in the map database […]” See also 0020, “[…] health promotion index stored in the past selected route recording step, and the selected health promotion index is calculated.” See also 0008, “[…] selected path based on the health promotion index stored in the recording means, select the health promotion index to be presented to said path presenting means, one of said computing the health promotion indicators selected.” Examiner notes all previously selected routes by a user based on the health promotion index are stored, and a database containing each route in association with the respective health promotion index is included on a map of the environment, where each route is selectable, thus being the same as a database storing combinations of user health conditions and a plurality of facilities/destinations)
extract a location of the facility suitable for treating the estimated health condition of the user from among the plurality of facilities from the database (See 0008, 0020, 0054 and 0071 as referenced above. Examiner notes extracting a location of a facility is the same as the processing unit selecting a travel route to a destination), and
select a travel route for traveling near the extracted location of the facility suitable for treating the estimated health condition of the user (See 0037, 0054 and 0086 as referenced above).
Regarding Claim 6, Inoue further discloses the travel route presentation system according to claim 1, wherein:
the characteristics of the at least one travel route suitable for treating the health condition of the user include proximity to a hospital, presence of scenery along the travel route, or availability of a rest stop (See 0035, “[…] a station, a restaurant or the like is designated as the destination.” Examiner notes a station can be a rest stop or a scenic area).
Regarding Claim 7, Inoue further discloses the travel route presentation system according to claim 1, wherein:
executable instructions further cause the processor to
select the at least one travel route that is in proximity to a rest area in response to the estimated health condition indicating that the user is tired (See 0037, 0054 and 0086 as referenced above. See also 0098, “[…] when determining whether or not to propose a health improvement route, the health improvement route proposal availability determination unit 122 includes a breakdown of rejection reasons accumulated in the past proposal status accumulation unit 124, specifically an emergency instruction (urgentness), bad weather (weather), poor physical condition (physical condition), presence of passengers, and other past proposals” Examiner notes the user being tired is the same as being in poor physical condition).
Regarding Claim 8, Inoue further discloses the travel route presentation system according to claim 1, wherein:
the at least one selected travel route provides the user with more comfortable driving according to the estimated health condition of the user (See 0003, “[…] the health management of individuals is a very important factor for people to live comfortably.” Examiner notes per the 112(b) rejection above, “more comfortable driving” is an indefinite, open-ended limitation that is disclosed by Inoue as the motivation for the invention).
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 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Inoue (JP Patent Pub. No. 2009-36618A) in view of Takebayashi (US Patent Pub. No. 2019/0283623 A1).
Regarding Claim 5, Inoue discloses the travel route presentation system according to claim 1, but does not explicitly disclose wherein:
the vehicle is a battery electric vehicle; and
the selection unit is further configured to further select a charging facility from among a plurality of charging facilities as the destination of the vehicle, the selected charging facility being the charging facility located nearest to a facility suitable for treating the estimated health condition of the user from among a plurality of charging facilities.
Takebayashi, in a similar field of endeavor, teaches the vehicle is a battery electric vehicle (See 0029, “[…] an electric vehicle such as a plug-in hybrid car incorporating a chargeable battery.”); and
the selection unit is further configured to further select a charging facility from among a plurality of charging facilities as the destination of the vehicle, the selected charging facility being the charging facility located nearest to a facility suitable for treating the estimated health condition of the user from among a plurality of charging facilities (See 0029, “[…] energy replenishing place is a charging spot when the energy is electric energy […] based on attribute information of occupants (including a driver and fellow occupants) of the vehicle 104, a list of charging spots probably appropriate for the occupants is displayed […]” See also 0084, “[…] a charging spot having a nearby surrounding facility regarded as appropriate for an occupant can be presented to the occupant.”).
In view of Takebayashi’s teachings, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include, with the travel route presentation system for a vehicle to select a route based on the health condition of a user as disclosed by Inoue, the vehicle to be an electric vehicle, and the target destinations to include charging stations nearest to suitable facilities, with a reasonable expectation of success, since electric vehicles are merely vehicles powered by batteries and operating on electric power, and they obviously need to charge in order to continue operations, thus having charging stations included in the database storing selected routes near facilities would allow the vehicle’s functions to persist given low battery conditions as well as in other operational states.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Bryant Tang whose telephone number is (571)270-0145. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5 CST.
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, Thomas Worden can be reached at (571)272-4876. 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.
/BRYANT TANG/Examiner, Art Unit 3658
/JASON HOLLOWAY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3658