DETAILED ACTION
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 .
Introduction
This is a response to applicant’s submissions filed on June 17, 2026. Claims 1-5, 8-12, and 14-20 are pending.
Examiner' s Note
Examiner has cited particular paragraphs / columns and line numbers or figures in the references as applied to the claims below for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested from the applicant, in preparing the responses, to fully consider the references in their entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the examiner. Applicant is reminded that the Examiner is entitled to give the broadest reasonable interpretation to the language of the claims. Furthermore, the Examiner is not limited to Applicants' definition which is not specifically set forth in the disclosure.
Response to Arguments
All of applicant’s arguments filed June 17, 2026 have been considered.
Regarding applicant’s argument that Higuchi does not disclose analyzing vehicle network messages communicated on a controller area network bus of parked vehicles (Applicant’s Response, pgs. 8-9), the examiner respectfully disagrees. It is noted that paragraph 0023 of the instant application applicant has indicated that messages on the data bus can include information generated by sensors (i.e., sensor data). Higuchi discloses using the sensor data received to determine a safety score in paragraph 0053, determining an adjusted utility scored based on the safety score in paragraph 0059, and selecting a parking space based on the adjusted utility score in paragraph 0077. Thus, Higuchi discloses analyzing sensor data (i.e., messages) which has been sent over a vehicle CAN bus to determine a safe parking location.
Regarding applicant’s argument that Higuchi does not teach using controller area network bus messages as an input to its parking safety determination (Applicant’s Response, pg. 9), the examiner respectfully disagrees. It is noted that paragraph 0023 of the instant application applicant has indicated that messages on the data bus can include information generated by sensors (i.e., sensor data). Higuchi discloses using the sensor data received to determine a safety score in paragraph 0053, determining an adjusted utility scored based on the safety score in paragraph 0059, and selecting a parking space based on the adjusted utility score in paragraph 0077. Thus, Higuchi discloses analyzing sensor data (i.e., messages) which has been sent over a vehicle CAN bus to determine a safe parking location.
Regarding applicant’s argument that Penilla does not teach or suggest analyzing vehicle network messages communicated on controller area network buses of vehicles parked at a plurality of parking locations (Applicant’s Response, pg. 9). It is noted that Penilla was not used to teach this limitation and Higuchi was used instead.
Regarding applicant’s argument that Penilla does not teach monitoring or analyzing raw vehicle internal network activity occurring on a controller area network bus of parked vehicles (Applicant’s Response, pg. 9). It is noted that Penilla was not used to teach this limitation and Higuchi was used instead.
Regarding applicant’s argument that Osborne does not teach or suggest a controller area network bus and analyzing parked-vehicle network messages across a plurality of parking locations (Applicant’s Response, pg. 11). It is noted that Osborne was not used to teach this limitation and Higuchi was used instead.
Regarding applicant’s argument that Higuchi does not teach using parked-vehicle controller area network bus messages, including oxygen sensor data indicating catalytic converter tampering, as the basis for reason information used to recommend a safe parking location (Applicant’s Response, pg. 11), the examiner respectfully disagrees. Higuchi discloses using the sensor data received to determine a safety score in paragraph 0053. Thus, Higuchi discloses analyzing sensor data which has been sent over a vehicle CAN bus to determine a safe parking location. Osborne teaches that tampering with a catalytic converter will trigger an oxygen sensor in the exhaust. As modified, Higuchi’s sensor data includes the oxygen sensor data for detecting that the catalytic converter has been tampered with. One of ordinary skill would use oxygen sensor data, which indicates catalytic converter tampering, to determine if a parking location is safe as it is well known that tampering with a catalytic converter is a crime.
Claim Objections
Claims 3, 10, and 17 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 3, line 2, "vehicle network messages" should read "the vehicle network messages".
In claim 10, line 2, "vehicle network messages" should read "the vehicle network messages".
In claim 17, lines 2-3, "vehicle network messages" should read "the vehicle network messages".
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1-3, 5, 7-10, 12, 14-17, and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Higuchi (US 2022/0136847) in view of Penilla (US 9,230,440).
Regarding claims 1, 8, and 15, Higuchi discloses a system comprising:
a processor (Higuchi, [0032] regarding one or more processors); and
a memory in communication with the processor (Higuchi, [0032] regarding one or more memory modules that can be accessed by the one or more processors), the memory having a safe parking recommendation module having instructions that, when executed by the processor, cause the processor to:
analyze, by the processor, vehicle network messages communicated on controller area network buses of vehicles parked at a plurality of parking locations (Higuchi, [0053] regarding determining a safety score associated with each of the available parking spaces identified based on data received by the sensor data reception module, [0037] regarding the sensor data reception module receiving sensor data from one or more connected vehicles, [0025] regarding each of the vehicle sensors being coupled to the communication path, [0022] regarding the communication path comprising a CAN bus, & [0056-0057] regarding determining when a connected vehicle is parked and using the parking location in the safety score determination);
determine a safe parking location for a vehicle from a plurality of parking locations based on reason information, wherein the reason information is based on the vehicle network messages analyzed by the processor (Higuchi, [0059] regarding an adjusted utility score being based on the safety score & [0077] regarding selecting a parking space from among the available parking spaces identified based on the adjusted utility score), and
cause the vehicle to autonomously maneuver to the safe parking location (Higuchi, [0067] regarding the vehicle being driven autonomously to the selected parking space).
Higuchi does not disclose the vehicle network messages comprising at least one of vehicle horn data, vehicle lock data, or vehicle lamp data.
Penilla teaches that sensor data can include sounding a horn, turning on lights, flashing lights, and sounding alarms (Col. 14, lines 51-56).
Higuchi and Penilla are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of safe parking locations. 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 Higuchi to incorporate using horn, light, and alarm sensor data to determine a safe parking location, as disclosed by Penilla, with a reasonable expectation of success because doing so would yield the predictable result of increasing the safety determination by having data that came from cars located at the parking location.
Therefore, Higuchi, as modified, teaches the vehicle network messages comprising at least one of vehicle horn data, vehicle lock data, or vehicle lamp data.
Regarding claims 2, 9, and 16, Higuchi in view of Penilla teaches the system, method, and non-transitory computer-readable medium as claimed in claims 1, 8, and 15, respectively. Higuchi further teaches wherein the reason information is determined by vehicles parked at the plurality of parking locations and then transmitted to a remote server (Higuchi, [0034] regarding the utility score determination module being stored in the vehicle & [0016] regarding the connected vehicles and the server being communicatively coupled).
Regarding claims 3, 10, and 17, Higuchi in view of Penilla teaches the system, method, and non-transitory computer-readable medium as claimed in claims 1, 8, and 15, respectively. Higuchi further teaches wherein the reason information is determined by a remote server upon receiving vehicle network messages from vehicles parked at the plurality of parking locations (Higuchi, [0034] regarding one or more memory modules 304 including a utility score determination module, [0032] regarding the server comprising the one or more memory modules 304, & [0016] regarding the connected vehicles and the server being communicatively coupled).
Regarding claims 5, 12, and 19, Higuchi in view of Penilla teaches the system, method, and non-transitory computer-readable medium as claimed in claims 1, 8, and 15, respectively. Higuchi further teaches wherein the safe parking recommendation module further includes instructions that, when executed by the processor, cause the processor to determine the safe parking location based further upon one or more of: a location of the vehicle and a destination of the vehicle (Higuchi, [0045] regarding determining one or more available parking spaces based on the desired destination).
Regarding claims 7, 14, and 20, Higuchi in view of Penilla teaches the system, method, and non-transitory computer-readable medium as claimed in claims 1, 8, and 15, respectively. Higuchi further teaches wherein the safe parking recommendation module further includes instructions that, when executed by the processor, cause the vehicle to display, via a display device located within the vehicle, a location of the safe parking location (Higuchi, [0029] regarding displaying navigation information to direct a driver to a parking space selected by the server on a screen).
Claims 4, 11, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Higuchi in view of Penilla, and further in view of Osborne (How to Know if Your Catalytic Converter Was Stolen: 7 Signs).
Regarding claims 4, 11, and 18, Higuchi in view of Penilla teaches the system, method, and non-transitory computer-readable medium as claimed in claims 1, 8, and 15, respectively, but fail to explicitly disclose wherein the vehicle network messages further include oxygen sensor data indicating tampering of catalytic converters of vehicles parked at the plurality of parking locations.
Osborne teaches a missing catalytic converter would trigger an oxygen sensor in the exhaust resulting a warning light showing up on the dashboard (An engine warning light shows up on your dashboard).
Higuchi and Osborne are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of vehicle sensors. 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 Higuchi, as modified, to incorporate using an oxygen sensor, which determines a catalytic converter is missing, to determine a parking a location, as disclosed by Osborne, with a reasonable expectation of success because doing so would yield the predictable result of increasing the safety determination by using oxygen sensor data that came from cars located at the parking location.
Therefore, Higuchi, as modified, teaches wherein the vehicle network messages further include oxygen sensor data indicating tampering of catalytic converters of vehicles parked at the plurality of parking locations (Higuchi, would use oxygen sensor data from Osborne, in addition to the vehicle network message, to determine a safe parking location).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALEX GRIFFIN whose telephone number is (703)756-1516. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 7:30am - 5:30pm.
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, ERIN BISHOP can be reached at (571)270-3713. 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.
/ALEX B GRIFFIN/ Examiner, Art Unit 3665
/Erin D Bishop/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3665
Prosecution Insights