Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 9/29/2025 has been entered.
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 Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see 5-7, filed 9/29/2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-4 and 7-9 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by FALKSON et al. (US 20180201226 A1) have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of newly found prior art.
The remaining rejection(s) of the claim(s) under 35 U.S.C. 103 are modified to meet the amended limitations.
Applicant argues the following:
Falkson fails to disclose or render obvious, among other things, at least the features of (i) a remote control key comprising a fingerprint recognition sensor configured to detect fingerprint information, (ii) transferring first bio-information from the remote control key, (iii) comparing the first bio-information with second or third bio-information stored in a server or vehicle memory, and, (iv) based on a determination that the first bio-information is identical to the second bio-information, setting a vehicle environment parameter that includes at least one of seat position, steering wheel position, or interior temperature.
Given that amended limitations have changed the scope of the claims, these arguments are persuasive however specific details are covered within the modified rejections below.
Furthermore, FALKSON clearly teaches [0192] using at least one remote control key (i.e. smartphone with application [0051, 0141, 0159] which is used as a key/fob type device to operate vehicle controls) including a biometric type sensing component (i.e. to receive an audio sample in an application) which would collect an audio sample to be sent to vehicle via a wireless connection (i.e. as described throughout specification of FALKSON [0140]), to then perform various functions using such biometric data for vehicle operations. The biometric data collected is processed for comparison purposes [0194, 0202] using various functions to determine if biometric data inputted and collected is identical or not to another set of biometric data previously inputted, for the purpose of performing a vehicle parameter setting, such as control features. The further amendment to the vehicle environmental parameter is handled by the secondary reference of HUANG as discussed below in the corresponding rejection.
[0192] The method may begin at step 2001, at which point the vehicle may wait for the reception of audio at one or more microphones placed in or around the vehicle. An audio sample may be received by a processor onboard the vehicle at step 2002. For example, a user may enter an audio sample in an application on a smartphone and send the audio to the vehicle via a connection. Otherwise, the vehicle may receive audio through an onboard microphone placed in or around the vehicle. For example, the vehicle may constantly be interpreting received audio via its onboard microphones for one or more key words phrases which may activate the recording of an audio sample.
[0194] At or near the same time as the audio sample is sent to the network connected server, the vehicle's onboard processor may begin processing the audio sample onboard the vehicle, performing a voice biometric analysis at step 2003. After performing a voice biometric analysis in step 2003, the onboard processor may compare the analysis results with voiceprints associated with user profiles stored onboard the vehicle and generate an ‘onboard match score’ at step 2004. For example, a vehicle may have a number of associated users with varying degrees of permission levels. Each associated user may have a user profile stored on the onboard database and each user profile stored on the onboard database may be associated with a voiceprint file stored onboard the vehicle. Such voiceprint files may be used via voice biometric analysis to verify a speaker in or around the vehicle, or a speaker communicating with the vehicle via other means.
[0202] Such a database 2050 may be stored onboard a vehicle and used to compare an onboard match score with a match score received from the server. The database 2050 may comprise information such as an example local result (e.g. a ‘High Yes’ generated by the onboard voice biometric analysis system indicating a match score for a particular user ID); a cloud result (e.g. a ‘High Yes’ received from the server indicating a match score for a particular user ID); and a result (i.e. whether the verification is a success, whether the user should retry and submit a new audio sample, or whether the verification failed).
Applicant also argues the following:
Instead, Falkson describes permission-based control mechanisms-i.e., enabling or disabling features based on user role or seat location, not biometric identity. See Falkson at [0136]. Falkson discusses detecting a speaker's location using voice localization techniques and applying predefined access rules based on seat occupancy (e.g., disabling radio control for rear- seat passengers). See id., at [0048]-[0051], [0136], and [0166]. However, Falkson does not disclose or suggest any comparison of biometric data, let alone fingerprint-based identification, nor does it teach configuring personalized vehicle environment parameters based on such a comparison.
In contrast, amended claim 1 recites using fingerprint recognition to identify a specific user and personalize the vehicle environment accordingly. This personalization is not merely enabling or disabling access-it involves actively configuring physical and environmental settings (e.g., seat position, steering wheel position, cabin temperature) based on the identified user's biometric profile. This is a fundamentally different technical approach than Falkson's generalized access control based on seat location or voice detection.
Applicant has amended claim limitations to further detail the specific type of biometric data used such as fingerprint data. This modified limitation is met by the secondary reference which clearly teaches user verification using fingerprint data. FALKSON, however, does suggest at minimum, the use of fingerprint data such as in [0131] [0200], wherein one of ordinary skill in the art would understand that alternative verification means such as fingerprint scan, does indeed suggest using at least one type of fingerprint recognition sensing device configured to detect user fingerprint data.
FALKSON further teaches that several vehicle features, may be controlled or manipulated based on user identification, including but not limited to a position of a driver seat [0187] based on identity of speaker (i.e. identified user – which could be identified in an alternative biometric information, such as voice or fingerprint). Amended claim 1, does not restrict the user to using only a single type of biometric data.
However, amended claim 1, now further defines the vehicle environment parameter to include various vehicle functions/features such as seat position, steering wheel position or a vehicle’s interior temperature, all of which are read on by a secondary reference.
Additionally, biometric (i.e. bio-information) is commonly interpreted in the art as including voice, fingerprint, facial information based on data patterns.
FALKSON clearly teaches using a commonly accepted definition of biometric data of a user for vehicle functions.
Applicant also argues the following:
Moreover, the claimed vehicle environment parameter is user-specific, corresponding to the fingerprint-derived identity of the user. Falkson, by contrast, applies static rules that do not vary based on individual identity. For example, rear-seat passengers are denied certain controls regardless of who they are. See Falkson at [0136]. Thus, Falkson discloses enforcing access control based on seat occupancy, not on biometric identification or matching.
[0136] For example, a passenger in the rear, passenger-side seat may speak a command to a vehicle artificial intelligence (“AI”) assistant. The voice of the passenger may be picked up to some degree by a number of microphones placed around the vehicle cabin. By comparing the difference in strength between the microphones, a processor may be operable to detect the exact seat in which the passenger sits. Such a system may operate to solve a number of user permission issues. For example, an owner of the vehicle may set a number of user preferences, such as disabling the ability for a passenger in the backseat to adjust the radio, to control the air conditioner, etc. Alternatively, the system may detect a speaker is sitting in the driver's seat and give only that voice the ability to activate certain driving control features.
In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., vehicle environment parameter is user-specific, corresponding to the fingerprint-derived identity of the user or static rules that do vary based on individual identity) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993). The claims as amended do not clearly restrict out, what Applicant is arguing. FALKSON teaches various different functions capable of being applied during operation, similarly to FALKSON teaching that fingerprint data could be used as an alternative to voice/audio samples.
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 (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.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1-4, 7-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over FALKSON et al. (US 20180201226 A1) in view of HUANG et al. (US 20090284359 A1).
Re claim 1. FALKSON discloses (abstract) a vehicle (FIG.1-20) comprising:
a remote control key 1370/1600 [0159] including:
a biometric sensor 1609 (i.e. voice biometric collected by application on smartphone using microphone [0141] to be sent over toe vehicle – FIG.16B – window 1609 shows a visual representation of an audio sample) configured to recognize bio-information 2002 of a user, [0192]
a key communication module 1373 (i.e. wireless connections via network require at least one type of wireless communication module) configured to perform wireless communication with the vehicle, and [0041]
at least one functional button 1601-1606 (FIG.16A-16B) configured to control an operation [0071] of the vehicle through wireless communication with the vehicle (buttons are required for operation) [0159]; and
a vehicle controller 1310 [0142] configured to:
compare first bio-information 2002 transferred from the remote control key [0192] with (i) second bio-information stored in a server 2008/1380 [0193-0196] or (ii) third bio-information stored in a vehicle memory 2003/2050, and [0194]
determine whether the first bio-information is identical to or different from the second bio-information or the third bio-information, [0202]
based on a determination that the first bio-information is identical to or different from the second or third bio-information, selectively perform a function (i.e. one or more vehicle features being enabled thru use of setting permissions for a user registered to operate the vehicle) corresponding to a control signal of the functional button [0159-0163] transmitted from the remote control key, [0200] and
based on the first bio-information being identical to the second bio-information [0136], set a vehicle environment parameter (i.e. features capable of being operated within vehicle operating environment) corresponding to the first bio-information.
FALKSON clearly suggests [0200] using an alternative user verification means including fingerprint scan instead of a voice biometric analysis. One of ordinary skill in the art would understand that of the commonly known biometric data used for verification, fingerprint is among the most commonly used biometric data patterns used with mobile devices such as smartphones, to verify identity of user of the mobile device. Mobile devices such as smartphones are known to contain biometric identifying sensors, such as fingerprint scanners.
However, FALKSON fails to explicitly disclose:
wherein the biometric sensor comprises a fingerprint recognition sensor configured to detect fingerprint information, and
wherein the vehicle environment parameter comprises at least one of a position of a seat, a position of a steering wheel, or an interior temperature of the vehicle.
HUANG teaches (abstract) in a similar field of invention, in the field of vehicle setting based on driver identification systems (FIG.1) wherein a biometric sensor 160 comprising a fingerprint recognition sensor [0006, 0031, 0051] configured to detect fingerprint information, which is also capable of detecting voice as biometric characteristics input from a user.
Furthermore, HUANG teaches [0007] using driver profiles including a set of preferred driver settings for various vehicle cabin components including one of a position of a seat, a position of a steering wheel, or an interior temperature of the vehicle, for the purpose of adjusting vehicle environmental parameters [0028-0030] as desired or needed by an identified driver of the vehicle, such that each verified driver or user of a vehicle has their own unique profile so that vehicle parameters can be modified for each driver/user.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to try using fingerprint recognition sensor as taught by HUANG instead of the voice recognition of FALKSON given that FALKSON also suggests the alternative of using fingerprint information in order to properly verify a user to adjust vehicle environmental parameters based on driver profiles determined from such biometric data (i.e. fingerprint), including one of a position of a seat, a position of a steering wheel, or an interior temperature of the vehicle.
Re claim 2. FALKSON discloses [0159] the vehicle of claim 1, wherein:
the vehicle controller is configured to, based on the first bio-information being identical to the third bio-information, perform the function corresponding to the control signal of the function button of the remote control key.
Re claim 3. FALKSON discloses [0196, 0202] the vehicle of claim 2, wherein:
the vehicle controller is configured to, based on the first bio-information being different from the third bio-information, determine whether the first bio-information is identical to or different from the second bio-information.
Re claim 4. FALKSON discloses the vehicle of claim 3, wherein:
the vehicle controller is configured to, based on the first bio-information being identical to the second bio-information, perform the function corresponding (i.e. various functions can be performed by way of permissions, control functions such as unlock and start car) to the control signal [0160-0163] of the function button of the remote control key.
Re claim 7. FALKSON discloses [0200-0202] the vehicle of claim 1, wherein:
the vehicle controller is configured to, based on the first bio-information being different from the second bio-information, ignore the control signal of the function button (i.e. further control commands would not be processed) transmitted from the remote control key.
Re claim 8. FALKSON discloses (FIG.13A-B) a server 1380 configured to perform wireless communication with the vehicle according to claim 1, the server comprising:
a server communication module 1383 configured to perform wireless communication with the key communication module (FIG.13B);
a server memory 1382 configured to store a plurality of pieces of bio-information matched with vehicle information; and
a server controller 1381 configured to compare bio-information received through the server communication module with bio-information stored in the server memory and transfer matching information to the remote control key. [0144-0145]
Re claim 9. FALKSON discloses [0200] the vehicle of claim 7, wherein:
the vehicle controller is configured to, based on the first bio-information being different from the second bio-information, transmit an alarm 2012 to a device associated with the user.
Re claim 10. However, FALKSON fails to explicitly disclose:
the vehicle of claim 9, wherein:
the alarm indicates that the control signal is received from an another remote control key different from the remote control key.
A person of ordinary skill in the art would have had good reason to pursue the known option of giving the user control over specific vehicle features only when a proper remote control key is used. It would require no more than "ordinary skill and common sense," to thereby use the system of FALKSON to prevent another, unauthorized remote control key to be used, and use the alarm when an attempt to use another remote control key different from the remote control key which is authorized, so as to alert the proper user.
Re claim 11. FALKSON as modified by HUANG (as applied for claim 1) [0007] the vehicle of claim 1, wherein the vehicle environment parameter comprises a position of a seat of the vehicle.
HUANG teaches [0007] using driver profiles including a set of preferred driver settings for various vehicle cabin components including one of a position of a seat, a position of a steering wheel, or an interior temperature of the vehicle, for the purpose of adjusting vehicle environmental parameters [0028-0030] as desired or needed by an identified driver of the vehicle, such that each verified driver or user of a vehicle has their own unique profile so that vehicle parameters can be modified for each driver/user.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to try using fingerprint recognition sensor as taught by HUANG instead of the voice recognition of FALKSON given that FALKSON also suggests the alternative of using fingerprint information in order to properly verify a user to adjust vehicle environmental parameters based on driver profiles determined from such biometric data (i.e. fingerprint), including one of a position of a seat, a position of a steering wheel, or an interior temperature of the vehicle.
Re claim 12. FALKSON as modified by HUANG (as applied for claim 1) [0007] the vehicle of claim 1, wherein the vehicle environment parameter comprises a position of a steering wheel of the vehicle.
HUANG teaches [0007] using driver profiles including a set of preferred driver settings for various vehicle cabin components including one of a position of a seat, a position of a steering wheel, or an interior temperature of the vehicle, for the purpose of adjusting vehicle environmental parameters [0028-0030] as desired or needed by an identified driver of the vehicle, such that each verified driver or user of a vehicle has their own unique profile so that vehicle parameters can be modified for each driver/user.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to try using fingerprint recognition sensor as taught by HUANG instead of the voice recognition of FALKSON given that FALKSON also suggests the alternative of using fingerprint information in order to properly verify a user to adjust vehicle environmental parameters based on driver profiles determined from such biometric data (i.e. fingerprint), including one of a position of a seat, a position of a steering wheel, or an interior temperature of the vehicle.
Re claim 13. FALKSON as modified by HUANG (as applied for claim 1) [0007] the vehicle of claim 1, wherein the vehicle environment parameter comprises an interior temperature of the vehicle.
HUANG teaches [0007] using driver profiles including a set of preferred driver settings for various vehicle cabin components including one of a position of a seat, a position of a steering wheel, or an interior temperature of the vehicle, for the purpose of adjusting vehicle environmental parameters [0028-0030] as desired or needed by an identified driver of the vehicle, such that each verified driver or user of a vehicle has their own unique profile so that vehicle parameters can be modified for each driver/user.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to try using fingerprint recognition sensor as taught by HUANG instead of the voice recognition of FALKSON given that FALKSON also suggests the alternative of using fingerprint information in order to properly verify a user to adjust vehicle environmental parameters based on driver profiles determined from such biometric data (i.e. fingerprint), including one of a position of a seat, a position of a steering wheel, or an interior temperature of the vehicle.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
SAKAI et al. (US 20040225419 A1) teaches (abstract) in a similar field of invention, using fingerprint information to identify a vehicle user for the purpose of operating specific vehicle functions, i.e. vehicle settings such as seat position, position of steering wheel and cabin temperature. This prior art reference could have been also applied as a secondary reference.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CARLOS E GARCIA whose telephone number is (571)270-1354. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 9-6pm F 9-5pm.
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, Brian Zimmerman can be reached at (571) 272-3059. 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.
CARLOS E. GARCIA
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2686
/Carlos Garcia/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2686 10/14/2025