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 .
Response to Arguments
The applicant respectfully argues
Rafferty fails to teach or disclose that each second interface element is configured to receive user input specifying a value of an attribute of the plurality of attributes, as recited in claims 1 and 11, specifically, the toggle box 406 of Rafferty is not configured to receive user input specifying a value of an attribute;
Rogers fails to cure or remedy the deficiency of Rafferty.
The examiner respectfully both agrees and disagrees for the following reasons, as explained below
the 12/12/2025 office action contends the prior art of Rafferty discloses that each second interface element is configured to receive user input specifying a value of an attribute of the plurality of attributes, as required by claims 1 and 11. Specifically, Rafferty teaches the claim limitation of one or more second interface elements (as shown in fig. 4-5; systems engaged block 404, transmission status block 416) configured to receive user input (via. toggle box 406; via. Transmission gear selection lever (shown in fig. 1, not numbered), indicating automatic mode/manual mode and gear selected, as suggested in [0044-0045]) specifying at least a portion of the plurality of attributes (as indicated in fig. 4-5). Here, it should be noted that the second interface elements (404, 416) are configured to receive user input (via. toggle box 406; via. Transmission gear selection lever (shown in fig. 1, not numbered). While Rafferty's toggle box 406 may only indicate system status (such as when the vehicle is in automatic mode vs manual mode), that system status is input (at least in some instances, such as when the vehicle is in manual mode) via. Transmission gear selection lever (shown in fig. 1, not numbered) and this information is further displayed via. Transmission status box 416, which displays not only which mode the vehicle is in (manual vs automatic) but also which gear is selected (note: in manual mode, the vehicle driver/operator manually selected the driving gear, as is known in the art). Here, at the very least, the manual selection of the gear is a user input, and the transmission status box 416 displays a value of that attribute, such as 1st gear, 2nd gear, or even 5th gear. It is in this way that the prior art of Rafferty meets the required limitation, as presented in claims 1 and 11;
The examiner agrees with the applicant in that the prior art of Rogers fails to teach of disclose the limitation that each second interface element is configured to receive user input specifying a value of an attribute of the plurality of attributes, as required by claims 1 and 11. However, the prior art of Rogers is also not relied upon to teach or disclose the required limitation of each second interface element is configured to receive user input specifying a value of an attribute of the plurality of attributes, since this limitation seems to be disclosed by Rafferty, as explained above, and also in the rejection below.
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.
Claims 1, 3-5, 7, 10-11, 13-15, 17 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rafferty et al. (U.S. 20200247426) in view of Rogers (U.S. 20140300555).
In re claim 1, Rafferty teaches a vehicle (fig. 1-4; abstract; vehicle 10; [0015]), comprising:
a drivetrain (fig. 4, drive train block 408; the vehicle may actively power or disengage one or more wheels (e.g., an adjustment to a four-wheel drive mode from a two-wheel drive mode and vice-versa), may initiate one or systems (e.g., a traction control system, a vehicle stability control system, etc.), may activate one or more dampers; [0016]);
a suspension (as suggested in [0016]; note: dampers are part of vehicle suspension systems and are used to dampen/reduce vibrations, as is known in the art);
a touchscreen device (fig. 1; display 104; [0015]); and
an in-vehicle control system (as shown in fig. 1 and fig. 4-5; system 100; [0015; 0044]) configured to:
define a plurality of drive modes (as indicated in fig. 4-5, normal and off-road drive modes; normal mode; [0044]; off-road operating mode; [0050]),
each drive mode specifying a plurality of attributes (as indicated in systems engaged block 404 (note: toggle box 406 indicating engagement), clinometer 410, drive train block 408, and transmission status block 416, as shown in fig. 4-5 and indicated in [0044-0045]) of at least one of
the drivetrain (see above) or
the suspension (see above);
display, on the touchscreen device, an interface (as shown in fig. 4-5; GUI 400; [0044]) including:
one or more first interface elements (as shown in fig. 4-5, systems status block 402) configured to
receive a selection of a selected drive mode of the plurality of drive modes (fig. 3; 304, determine the corresponding driving mode based on the driving mode input signal; [0039]); and
one or more second interface elements (as shown in fig. 4-5; systems engaged block 404, transmission status block 416) associated with the selected drive mode (as shown in fig. 4-5; transmission status block 416 shows selected drive mode (automatic vs manual) and also displays a value of the current gear, 1st, 2nd, etc.), each second interface element configured to
receive user input (via. toggle box 406; via. transmission gear selection lever (shown in fig. 1, not numbered), indicating automatic mode/manual mode and gear selected, as suggested in [0044-0045]) specifying a value of an attribute of the plurality of attributes (a value of the current gear, 1st, 2nd, etc., as shown in fig. 4-5 and explained above);
for each second interface element of the one or more second interface elements (404, 416);
receive a first user input (as indicated in fig. 4-5 and [0013], selection of automatic vs manual mode) indicating a displacement of the second interface element from a home position (automatic mode, as indicated in fig. 4) to one of a first position (manual mode, as indicated in fig. 4) and a second position (as indicated via. fig. 4-5, two modes are shown, automatic mode can be considered to be both a home position (or starting position) and a second position), the home position having home coordinates on the touchscreen device (necessarily present, as indicated in fig. 4-5);
temporarily displace the second interface element from the home position in response to the first user input (i.e. selection of manual mode, as suggested via. fig. 5, and as explained above);
adjust the value of an attribute of the plurality of attributes according to the first user input (i.e. the value of the current gear selected, such as 1st, 2nd, etc. as indicated via. fig. 5); and
return the second interface element to the home position in response to a second user input (i.e. selection of automatic mode, as suggested via. fig. 4, and as explained above); and
configure the at least one of the drivetrain (as indicated in fig. 4-5) or the suspension of the vehicle according to the selected drive mode (as indicated in fig. 4-5) and the user input received through the one or more second interface elements (as indicated in fig. 4-5, and explained above).
While Rafferty suggests the below features, Rafferty lacks explicitly and unambiguously stating
temporarily displacing the each second interface element from a home position in response to the first user input; and
returning the each second interface element to the home position.
Rogers teaches an analogous touchscreen device, having and a display and an interface (as shown in fig. 1-6) and further teaches
receiving a first user input indicating displacement of the interface element (activating a moveable mask at a home position on the touchscreen display, searching the touchscreen by touching and dragging the mask until it covers the control function; [0007]);
temporarily displacing the
returning the
One having an ordinary level of skill in the art would have found it obvious to apply the teachings of Rogers to either of the first interface element or the second interface element of the interface.
Further, one having an ordinary level of skill in the art also would have found it obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Rafferty, to incorporate a moveable mask, as clearly suggested and taught by Rogers, in order to allow the use of the movable software based mask that can always be found at a predetermined home position, thus eliminating the need to search for it in the dark ([0037]).
In re claim 3, Rafferty and Rogers teach the vehicle of claim 1, and Rafferty further suggests wherein:
the first position (manual mode, as indicated in fig. 4) has first coordinates on the touchscreen device (as indicated via. fig. 4-5);
the second position has second coordinates on the touchscreen device (as explained above);
the first user input (the display 104 may be a touchscreen that, in addition to providing optical information, detects the presence and location of a tactile input upon a surface of or adjacent to the display; [0026]; system 100 may be further configured to receive a user response (e.g., user input signal) to the notification of the adjustment to the corresponding driving mode. The user may generate a user input signal using, for example, the input device 112 and/or the display 104; [0055]) comprises:
placing a finger on the second interface element (inherent as suggested in fig. 4-5 and [0026, 0055]); and
sliding the second interface element (inherent as suggested in fig. 4-5 and [0026, 0055])
in a first direction to the first position (inherent as suggested in fig. 4-5 and [0026, 0055]) or
in a second direction to the second position (inherent as suggested in fig. 4-5 and [0026, 0055]),
the second direction being opposite to the first direction (inherent as suggested in fig. 4-5 and [0026, 0055]); and
the second user input comprising
removing the finger from the second interface element (inherent as suggested in fig. 4-5 and [0026, 0055], and as commonly known in the art).
In re claim 4, Rafferty and Rogers teach the vehicle of claim 3, and Rafferty further suggests wherein
the first direction is right and the second direction is left (inherent as suggested in fig. 4-5 and [0026, 0055], and since basic touchscreen operation is commonly known in the art); or
the first direction is up and the second direction is down (inherent as suggested in fig. 4-5 and [0026, 0055], and since basic touchscreen operation commonly known in the art).
In re claim 5, Rafferty and Rogers teach the vehicle of claim 1, and Rafferty further teaches wherein
the plurality of attributes include
properties of at least one of traction control and stability control (as explained in claim 1 above, the vehicle…may initiate one or systems (e.g., a traction control system, a vehicle stability control system, etc.); [0016]).
In re claim 7, Rafferty and Rogers teach the vehicle of claim 1, and Rafferty further teaches wherein
each second interface element displays a current value for an attribute (i.e. systems status block 402, systems engaged block 404, drivetrain block 408, clinometer 410, transmission status block 416; as indicated in fig. 4, here, transmission status box 416, which displays not only which mode the vehicle is in (manual vs automatic) but also which gear is selected (note: in manual mode, the vehicle driver/operator manually selected the driving gear, as is known in the art). Here, at the very least, the manual selection of the gear is a user input, and the transmission status box 416 displays a value of that attribute, such as 1st gear, 2nd gear, or even 5th gear. Further, the value of the gear selected, is a current value) of the plurality of attributes (as indicated in fig. 4-5 and explained above in claim 1).
In re claim 10, Rafferty and Rogers teach the vehicle of claim 4, and Rafferty further teaches wherein:
the second interface element is displaced to the first position (automatic mode, as indicated in fig. 4),
; and
the second interface element is displaced to the second position (manual mode, as indicated in fig. 4),
.
Rafferty also teaches
when an interface element is displaced to one location,
increasing a value associated with the interface element (as indicated via. fig. 4-5, changing gears from 2nd gear to 3rd gear; note: number of gear is increased); and
when that same interface element is displaced to another, different location,
decreasing a value associated with the interface element (as indicated via. fig. 4-5, changing gears from 2nd gear to 1st gear; note: number of gear is decreased).
However, Rafferty lacks explicitly teaching
when the second interface element is displaced to the first position (automatic mode, as indicated in fig. 4),
the value of the attribute (mode) is increased; and
when the second interface element is displaced to the second position (manual mode, as indicated in fig. 4),
the value of the attribute (mode) is decreased.
However, one having an ordinary level of skill would have readily recognized how the driving mode (automatic vs manual), as indicated in fig. 4-5 and explained above, correspond with the selected gear (as further indicated in fig. 4-5), and how the value of the selected gear increases according to one displacement and decreases according to another, different displacement. This being the case, it seems likely that one having ordinary level of skill would have found it rather obvious to increase or decrease the value of an attribute according to a displacement of an interface element (such as a second interface element) from one position, to another, different position.
In re claim 11, the features of claim 11 are substantially the same as claim 1, and as such, claim 11 is rejected on substantially the same grounds and motivation as explained in claim 1 above.
In re claim 13, see claims 3 and 11 above.
In re claim 14, see claims 4 and 13 above.
In re claim 15, see claims 5 and 11 above.
In re claim 17, see claims 7 and 11 above.
In re claim 21, see claims 10 and 14 above
Claims 2 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rafferty et al. (U.S. 20200247426) in view of Rogers (U.S. 20140300555) and in further view of Lubbers et al. (U.S. 20170080948).
In re claim 2, Rafferty and Rogers teach the vehicle of claim 1, but fail to teach wherein
the plurality of attributes include
a ride height of the suspension,
a stiffness of the suspension, and
a damping of the suspension.
Lubbers teaches a vehicle mode adjusting system (abstract) that can adjust a vehicle suspension height (drive mode controller 100 may operate actuation system 50 to…lower the suspension; [0037]; drive mode controller 100 may fine-tune the stiffness and/or height of suspension system 58; [0050]) and further teaches wherein the plurality of attributes (wheel slip, suspension height, wheel articulation, and/or other actuator settings; [0055]) include
a ride height of the suspension (as indicated in [0037; 0050; 0055])
a stiffness of the suspension (drive mode controller 100 may fine-tune the stiffness and/or height of suspension system 58; [0050]), and
a damping of the suspension.
Thus it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the teachings of Rafferty, to incorporate wherein the plurality of attributes include a ride height of the suspension, as clearly suggested and taught by Lubbers, such that drive mode controller 100 may activate the autonomous driving function to take control of the vehicle when a hazard on the road surface is detected ([0054]) and in order to enable other vehicles/drivers to take necessary measures before entering the respective road regions ([0055]).
In re claim 12, see claims 2 and 11 above.
Claims 6 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rafferty et al. (U.S. 20200247426) in view of Rogers (U.S. 20140300555) and in further view of in view of Lee et al. (U.S. 20190079717).
In re claim 6, Rafferty and Rogers teach the vehicle of claim 1, but fail to teach wherein
the plurality of attributes include at least one of
a brake pedal response,
a regenerative braking behavior, and
an accelerator pedal response.
Lee further teaches wherein analogous touchscreen (touchscreen; [0178]), including an analogous interface (necessarily present with the touchscreen) has a plurality of analogous attributes include
at least one of
a brake pedal response (Each of the acceleration input unit 530 and the brake input unit 570 may take the form of a pedal. In some implementations, the acceleration input unit or the break input unit may be configured as a touch screen, a touch pad, or a button; [0178]),
a regenerative braking behavior, and
an accelerator pedal response (Each of the acceleration input unit 530 and the brake input unit 570 may take the form of a pedal. In some implementations, the acceleration input unit or the break input unit may be configured as a touch screen, a touch pad, or a button; [0178]).
Thus it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the teachings of Rafferty, to incorporate an analogous vehicle system having a user interface, including a plurality of attributes including at least one of a brake pedal response, a regenerative braking behavior and an accelerator pedal response, as clearly suggested and taught by Lee, in order to allow a user to safely manipulate a user interface apparatus having a plurality of displays ([0009]) and to provide a user interface apparatus which allows a user to conveniently change a control target from among a plurality of displays ([0010]).
In re claim 16, see claims 11 and 6 above.
Claims 8 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rafferty et al. (U.S. 20200247426) in view of Rogers (U.S. 20140300555) and in further view of Park et al. (U.S. 20220176996).
In re claim 8, Rafferty and Rogers teach the vehicle of claim 1, but fail to further teach wherein the in-vehicle control system is configured to
adjust a sensitivity of the touchscreen device in response to the selection of the selected drive mode.
Park teaches an analogous vehicle, having a plurality of driving modes (autonomous driving mode [0007]; driver driving mode [0014]), and further teaches
adjust a sensitivity (brightness; claim 10) of the touchscreen device (HUD; claim 10) in response to the selection of the selected drive mode (claim 10).
Thus it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the teachings of Rafferty, to incorporate adjust a sensitivity of the touchscreen device in response to the selection of the selected drive mode, as clearly suggested and taught by Park, such that visibility of the HUD is improved ([0006]).
Claims 9 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rafferty et al. (U.S. 20200247426) in view of Rogers (U.S. 20140300555) and in further view of Eom et al. (U.S. 20200114763).
In re claim 9, Rafferty and Rogers teach the vehicle of claim 1, but fail to teach wherein the in-vehicle control system is configured to
adjust a size of a touch-sensitive region of the touchscreen device associated with at least one of
the one or more first interface elements or
the one or more second interface elements
in response to the selection of the selected drive mode.
Eom teaches an analogous vehicle having a plurality of driving modes (autonomous driving mode and a normal driving mode ([0007]) and a vehicle display device (abstract; fig. 1-7; [0007]) and further teaches wherein the in-vehicle control system is configured to
adjust a size (as indicated in fig. 2-7 and fig. 12) of a touch-sensitive region (touch screen including a touch panel; [0065]) of the touchscreen device (touch screen; [0065]) associated with at least one of
the one or more first interface elements (as explained above in claim 1) or
the one or more second interface elements (as explained above in claim 1)
in response to the selection of the selected drive mode ([0066-0068]).
Thus it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the teachings of Rafferty, to incorporate adjusting a size of a touch-sensitive region of the touchscreen device associated with at least one of the one or more first interface elements or the one or more second interface elements in response to the selection of the selected drive mode, as clearly suggested and taught by Eom, in order to provide a user-customized display size depending on an autonomous driving mode and a normal driving mode ([0007]).
In re claim 19, see claims 11 and 9 above.
Conclusion
The prior art of Simmons et al. (U.S. 20210291832) teaches a system for assisting in aligning a vehicle for hitching with a trailer includes a vehicle steering system, a wireless communication module, a detection system outputting a signal including scene data of an area to a rear of the vehicle, and a controller. The controller receives, via the wireless communication module, an automated hitching initiation command from an external wireless device, receives the scene data and identifying the trailer within the area to the rear of the vehicle, derives a backing path to align a hitch ball mounted on the vehicle to a coupler of the trailer, and controls the vehicle steering system to maneuver the vehicle including reversing along the backing path (abstract). Simmons further teaches a touchscreen display featuring a slider, having a home position, and a position of the slider corresponding with a value (as indicated in fig. 18-20).
The prior art of Kalaboukis et al. (U.S. 20200111103) teaches a user device includes a touchscreen, a camera, and a client application. The client application is structured to provide a first view of a first user through a first camera input of the camera device, a first user image displayed on the display, provide a second view of a second user through a second camera input of the camera device, a second user image displayed on the display, receive a transaction amount, detect a slide of a user input member from the first user image to the second user image displayed on the touchscreen, and in response to detecting the slide of the user input member from the first user image to the second user image on the touchscreen, initiate a transfer of funds from a first user account associated with the first user to a second user account associated with the second user equal to the transaction amount (abstract). Kalaboukis further teaches wherein the touchscreen display features a slider, having a home position, and a position of the slider corresponding with a value (fig. 5-6).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN D BAILEY whose telephone number is (571)272-5692. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5.
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, Logan Kraft can be reached at 571-270-5625. 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.
/JOHN D BAILEY/Examiner, Art Unit 3747
/LINDSAY M LOW/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3747