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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the pending claims have been considered but are moot because of the new ground of 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 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.
Claim(s) 6-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fan (US 2024/0184497 A1).
6. Fan discloses a combination of a vehicle electronic control unit (ECU) and an operation terminal (portable electronic device such as smartphone/tablet with flat-plate display), comprising:
the vehicle ECU (vehicle control system 110 with processor, memory, in-vehicle eye tracker 116, cameras 112, IMU, and wireless transceivers; [0063]; FIGS. 1–3) including a first processor (vehicle processor system), a first communication interface (wireless transceivers, Bluetooth/Wi-Fi/CAN-bus), and a first input-output interface configured to receive image data from a gaze sensor (in-vehicle eye tracker 116 and/or cameras 112) that is mounted in a vehicle cabin and configured to capture a face of an occupant (an eye tracker 116... to identify... a viewing angle... of the passengers"; eye gaze direction determined by in-vehicle eye tracker), [0064], [0112]; and
the operation terminal (portable electronic device 300 with flat display, gyro sensor as part of IMU 346/348, second processor system, second communication interface (Bluetooth/Wi-Fi), and second input-output interface; [0070], [0082]-[0084], [0129]; FIGS. 2–3), the display and the gyro sensor connected to the second input-output interface, and the second communication interface configured to wirelessly communicate with the first communication interface (express wireless integration and data exchange between portable device and vehicle control system; [0070]-[0071], [0081]), wherein
the first processor is configured to calculate a gaze direction of the occupant based on the image data acquired by the gaze sensor (in-vehicle eye tracker calculates/determines eye gaze direction/viewing angle; [0064]) and
the second processor is configured to:
detect a first angle of a surface of the display with respect to a vertical direction based on a detection value of the gyro sensor (IMU/gyro in portable device detects tilt angle β relative to vertical reference; unhealthy if 15°–90° from vertical; [0012]-[0016], [0027], [0109]; FIG. 7),
detect a second angle of the gaze direction of the occupant with respect to a horizontal direction based on the calculated gaze direction transmitted by the first communication interface to the second communication interface (gaze direction from in-vehicle eye tracker wirelessly shared/used by device processor; applied to same unhealthy ranges — 0°–75° relative to horizontal for downward gaze; [0012]-[0016], [0027], [0109]; FIG. 7),
determine whether the first angle is outside a first range and the second angle is outside a second range, the first range being from -a to +a where +a represents a forward inclination from the vertical direction... and -a represents a behind inclination... the a being a value between 20 and 40 (Fan teaches first range healthy only ~ -15° to +15° from vertical (unhealthy outside, i.e., 15°–90° from vertical); [0012]-[0016], [0027], [0109]; Claims 6, 14. The exact 20–40° is an obvious optimization of the disclosed result-effective variable for typical comfortable vs. lap-held phone posture; MPEP § 2144.05(II)), the second range being from 0° to +B where +B represents a downward inclination from the horizontal direction... the B being a value between 20 and 40 (Fan teaches second range healthy only above ~75°–85° from horizontal (unhealthy outside, i.e., downward gaze 0°–75° from horizontal); [0012]-[0016], [0027], [0109]; Claims 5, 14. Exact 20–40° downward threshold is obvious tuning for reliable lap-held detection without false positives on brief glances), and
execute at least one of the following limiting operations in response (interventions when unhealthy posture detected; [0010], [0091]; FIGS. 13–17): (i) not displaying input characters input by the occupant on the display (lock screen prevents input/keyboard display), (ii) disabling an e-mail transmission operation input by the occupant via the display (lock screen or pause necessarily disables sending; obvious variant), (iii) displaying a white image on the entirety of the display (turn off screen / blank prompt overlay blocks entire display; obvious to use white blanking as common alternative to black), (iv) not displaying a moving image on the display (pause/resume content or turn off screen prevents moving video; [0010], [0091], [0125]-[0128]; FIGS. 13–17);
7. Fan discloses the combination of the vehicle ECU and the operation terminal according to claim 6, wherein the second processor is configured to execute the limiting operations (i) and (iii) or execute the limiting operations (ii) and (iv) (Obvious to implement the claimed pairs for the same posture-correction purpose), [0010], [0091], [0125]-[0128]; FIGS. 13–17);
8. Fan discloses the combination of the vehicle ECU and the operation terminal according to claim 6, wherein a = 15° (vertical) and B ≈ 75°–85° (horizontal threshold), with ranges configurable. The sub-range a = 25–35° is an obvious optimization within the disclosed range for typical human holding angles as discussed above; MPEP § 2144.05(II).
9. Fan discloses the combination of the vehicle ECU and the operation terminal according to claim 6, B = 25–35° is an obvious optimization within Fan’s 0–75° downward gaze range for reliable detection of confirmed lap-held distraction vs. brief glances as discussed above; MPEP § 2144.05(II).
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Please see attached USPTO form PTO-892.
Filing of New or Amended Claims
The examiner has the initial burden of presenting evidence or reasoning to explain why persons skilled in the art would not recognize in the original disclosure a description of the invention defined by the claims. See Wertheim, 541 F.2d at 263, 191 USPQ at 97 (“[T]he PTO has the initial burden of presenting evidence or reasons why persons skilled in the art would not recognize in the disclosure a description of the invention defined by the claims.”). However, when filing an amendment an applicant should show support in the original disclosure for new or amended claims. See MPEP § 714.02 and § 2163.06 (“Applicant should specifically point out the support for any amendments made to the disclosure.”). Please see MPEP 2163 (II) 3. (b)
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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.
Correspondence
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SENG H LIM whose telephone number is (571)270-3301. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday (9-5).
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, David L. Lewis can be reached at (571) 272-7673. 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.
/Seng H Lim/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715