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 .
This action is in response to the amendments filed on 11/06/2025 in which claims 1, 3, and 5-8 are pending and addressed below.
Response to Amendment
Applicant has amended the specification to overcome the objections to the drawings. Accordingly, the previous drawing objections have been withdrawn.
Applicant has amended the title of the invention to overcome the objection to the title. Accordingly, the objection to the title has been withdrawn.
Applicant has amended the claims to overcome the claim objections. Accordingly, the previous claim objections have been withdrawn.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 11/06/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
With respect to the prior art rejections:
Applicant argues on page 7 of the remarks that “the cited references fail to describe all of the features recited in amended independent Claim 1” because “the cited references fail to disclose or suggest a processor that is configured to reduce the acceleration of the vehicle when the estimated emotion of the occupant changes from the sleeping state to the arousal state and is uncomfortable, and to adjust the acceleration of the vehicle to manage the sleeping and arousal states of the occupant to allow the occupant to spend optimally in a cabin.”
In response to applicant’s arguments, the examiner respectfully disagrees that cited references fail to disclose all features of the amended independent claim. Kume discloses a processor is configured to reduce the acceleration of the vehicle when the estimated emotion of the occupant changes from the sleeping state to the arousal state and is uncomfortable because Kume discloses deceleration control in response to determining an occupant has transitioned from sleeping to being awake (Kume [0165]-[0166]). Kume also discloses controlling the acceleration of the vehicle to prevent occupants from feeling anxiety (Kume [0162], [0036]). Under broadest reasonable interpretation, an occupant being uncomfortable includes an occupant feeling anxious. Further, Kume discloses “adjust the acceleration of the vehicle to manage the sleeping and arousal states of the occupant to allow the occupant to spend optimally in a cabin” because Kume discloses adjusting acceleration based on whether an occupant is in a sleeping state or an awake state (Kume [0165]-[0166]). Kume also discloses controlling acceleration of the vehicle to prevent an occupant from feeling anxiety and to prevent the occupant’s sleep from being disturbed (Kume [0162], [0189]). Therefore, Katoh in view of Kume teach all elements of the amended independent claim.
Applicant’s arguments have been fully considered and have been found not persuasive.
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.
Claims 1, 3, and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Katoh, U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2022/0169284 A1 in view of Kume et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2024/0294188 A1 (hereinafter Kume).
Regarding claim 1, Katoh discloses a driving support apparatus (Katoh Fig. 1)
comprising a processor configured to (see at least Katoh [0144]: “The vehicle control device and the process according to the present disclosure may be achieved by a dedicated computer provided by constituting a processor and a memory programmed to execute one or more functions embodied by a computer program.”):
obtain biometric information for at least one occupant on a vehicle (see at least Katoh [0071]: “The stress estimation unit 65 is configured to estimate whether or not the occupant is stressed based on biometric information indicating the emotions of the occupant in the autonomously driven vehicle 3.”);
estimate emotion of the occupant based on the biometric information (see at least Katoh [0091]: “Negative emotions may be estimated based on the signal from the biological sensor 43 instead of the facial image.”),
the estimated emotion including uncomfortable, comfortable (see at least Katoh [0090]: “Here, a process for estimating at least one of a person's negative emotions, such as anxiety, contempt, disgust, anger, fear, discomfort, tension, and risk, using the known techniques described above is performed.”; under broadest reasonable interpretation an occupant is comfortable in the absence of discomfort),
and control acceleration of the vehicle based on the estimated emotion of the occupant (see at least Katoh [0104]: “Further, as shown in FIG. 5, when another vehicle that is the stress target S, for example, another vehicle loaded with a large construction machine, is traveling in front of the own vehicle 3 in the same lane, the own vehicle 3 may be decelerated to increase the inter-vehicle distance. On the contrary, when another vehicle which is the stress target S is traveling behind the own vehicle 3, the speed of the own vehicle 3 may be increased to increase the inter-vehicle distance.”).
Katoh fails to expressly disclose reducing the acceleration when the occupant changes from the sleeping state to the arousal state. However, Kume teaches
the estimated emotion including…an arousal state of the occupant, and a sleeping state of the occupant (see at least Kume [0090]: “The in-vehicle camera 45 is a detection unit that detects statuses of occupants (driver and passengers). The occupant's status includes an awake or asleep state, a sight line, a seating position, a posture (behavior), and the like of the occupant.”; an arousal state corresponds to an awake state, as evidenced by instant application page 17, line 4);
wherein the processor is configured to reduce the acceleration of the vehicle when the estimated emotion of the occupant changes from the sleeping state to the arousal state and is uncomfortable (see at least Kume [0165]-[0166]: “After executing acceleration control in step S122 (5 in FIG. 7), the control unit 70 determines whether at least one of the occupants is awake based on image data of the occupants acquired by the in-vehicle camera 45 in step S123a (5a in FIG. 7). When making a positive determination in step S123a, the control unit 70 executes the second deceleration control in step S123e (5a in FIG. 7). In the second deceleration control, when an occupant is awake after the acceleration control as described above, vehicle speed is decelerated to a predetermined vehicle speed (for example, 100 km/h).”; [0162]: “As a result, even when the driver is sleeping, acceleration control is prohibited when there is a passenger being awake, and thus the passenger being awake is prevented from feeling anxiety due to acceleration.”; [0036]: “Since the automatic driving level 4 or higher involves no surrounding monitoring obligation, when the set vehicle speed is changed to a relatively high side, the driver may feel anxiety even during the automatic driving. On the other hand, when the driver is sleeping during the automatic driving, the driver will not feel anxiety even when the vehicle speed setting is changed to a relatively high side.”; under broadest reasonable interpretation an occupant being uncomfortable includes an occupant feeling anxiety),
and to adjust the acceleration of the vehicle to manage the sleeping and arousal states of the occupant to allow the occupant to spend optimally in a cabin (see at least Kume [0165]-[0166]: “After executing acceleration control in step S122 (5 in FIG. 7), the control unit 70 determines whether at least one of the occupants is awake based on image data of the occupants acquired by the in-vehicle camera 45 in step S123a (5a in FIG. 7). When making a positive determination in step S123a, the control unit 70 executes the second deceleration control in step S123e (5a in FIG. 7). In the second deceleration control, when an occupant is awake after the acceleration control as described above, vehicle speed is decelerated to a predetermined vehicle speed (for example, 100 km/h).”; [0162]: “As a result, even when the driver is sleeping, acceleration control is prohibited when there is a passenger being awake, and thus the passenger being awake is prevented from feeling anxiety due to acceleration.”; [0189]: “As a result, when the occupant is sleeping at the automatic driving level 4, the degree of acceleration/deceleration is reduced, making it possible to reduce movement of the vehicle 10 and prevent occupant's sleep from being disturbed.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to combine the apparatus disclosed by Katoh with the acceleration reduction taught by Kume with reasonable expectation of success. Kume is directed towards the related field of performing acceleration control based on the sleeping state of an occupant. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to modify Katoh with the acceleration reduction taught by Kume to reduce anxiety of an awake occupant (see at least Kume [0048]: “According to the second disclosure, vehicle speed in the second automatic driving state is changed depending on an awake state of an occupant, surrounding environment during traveling, or an execution status of a second task of the occupant, thereby the occupant can view surrounding scenery in a relaxed and anxiety-free manner.”).
Regarding claim 3, Katoh in view of Kume teach all elements of the driving support apparatus according to claim 1 as explained above. Katoh further discloses wherein the processor is configured to:
obtaining gaze information about an eye of the occupant (see at least Katoh [0051]: “Thus, the interior camera 41 can photograph a face including an eyeball and detect the direction of the line of sight from the center position of the pupil of the eyeball, for example.”);
estimate the emotion of the occupant based on the gaze information and the biometric information (see at least Katoh [0024]: “On the other hand, according to an example embodiment, it is estimated whether or not the occupant is stressed based on the biometric information indicating the occupant's feelings, and when it is estimated that the occupant is stressed, the stress target outside the vehicle is identified based on the information on the direction of the person's line of sight.”; [0096]: “That is, when the passenger T has stress such as anxiety about the stress target S, it is conceivable that the passenger T looks at the stress target S or turns a face to the stress target S many times or stares at a certain direction for a long time.”).
Regarding claim 8, Katoh in view of Kume teach all elements of the driving support apparatus according to claim 1 as explained above. Kume further teaches
wherein the processor is configured to control the acceleration of the vehicle to be greater when the occupant is comfortable and remaining in the sleeping state than when the occupant is comfortable and changing from the sleeping state to the arousal state (see at least Kume [0166]-[0168]: “In the second deceleration control, when an occupant is awake after the acceleration control as described above, vehicle speed is decelerated to a predetermined vehicle speed (for example, 100 km/h)…As a result, executing the second deceleration control (reducing the second vehicle speed) allows the occupant being awake to view surrounding scenery relaxedly.”; [0036]: “On the other hand, when the driver is sleeping during the automatic driving, the driver will not feel anxiety even when the vehicle speed setting is changed to a relatively high side.”; [0041]: “According to the first disclosure, in the second automatic driving state, when a driver is determined to be asleep, acceleration control is executed, and thus vehicle speed setting can be changed to a higher side within speed limit without causing anxiety to the driver.”).
Claims 5-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Katoh in view of Kume, and further in view of Chan et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2016/0264131 A1 (hereinafter Chan).
Regarding claim 5, Katoh in view of Kume teach all elements of the driving support apparatus according to claim 1 as explained above. Katoh in view of Kume fail to expressly disclose reducing the acceleration stepwise to change the emotion of the occupant from uncomfortable to comfortable. However, Chan teaches wherein the processor is configured to
reduce the acceleration of the vehicle stepwise until the estimated emotion of the occupant becomes comfortable from uncomfortable (see at least Chan [0066]: “Alternatively, processing circuit 150 may present one or more vehicle operation commands or receive a vehicle operation command from the uncomfortable occupant A. For example, occupant A may input: “Please drive slower than the speed limit; brake slowly; and take corners gradually.” Here, occupant A is defining vehicle operating parameters for the vehicle. Processing circuit 150 may provide these commands to one or more vehicle systems and check in with occupant A after a few minutes (or another predefined time period) to see if they are more comfortable. If occupant A indicates that they are not, additional vehicle operation commands may be provided or an affirmative act to deactivate robotic driving mode may be provided.”; Chan teaches the acceleration is reduced stepwise because after providing the initial commands to decelerate, the processing circuit checks if the occupant is more comfortable and provides the further vehicle operation commands if the occupant remains uncomfortable).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to combine the apparatus disclosed by Katoh in view of Kume with the acceleration reduction taught by Chan with reasonable expectation of success. Chan is directed towards the related field of vehicle operation control based on occupant monitoring. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to modify Katoh in view of Kume with the acceleration reduction taught by Chan to monitor and respond to reactions of vehicle occupants (see at least Chan [0018]: “However, particularly during the introduction of self-driving vehicles, some operators of and passengers in such vehicles may find some of the vehicle's actions unexpected, unpleasant, or even frightening. As such, various embodiments disclosed herein relate to enabling a self-driving vehicle to monitor and respond to the reactions of some or all of the occupants of the vehicle.”).
Regarding claim 6, Katoh in view of Kume and Chan teach all elements of the driving support apparatus according to claim 5 as explained above. Kume further teaches wherein the processor is configured to
set the acceleration of the vehicle for each occupant (see at least Kume [0160]: “For the first and second embodiments, when determining that one or more passenger other than the driver exists as an occupant, and when determining that at least one passenger is awake, based on detection results of the in-vehicle camera 45 (detection unit), the control unit 70 should prohibit execution of the acceleration control.”).
Regarding claim 7, Katoh in view of Kume and Chan teach all elements of the driving support apparatus according to claim 5 as explained above. Katoh further teaches wherein the processor is configured to
estimate the emotion of the occupant during automatic driving of the vehicle (see at least Katoh [0020]: “The stress estimation unit is configured to estimate whether or not the occupant is stressed based on biometric information indicating the emotions of the occupant in the autonomously driven vehicle.”).
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ELIZABETH J SLOWIK whose telephone number is (571)270-5608. The examiner can normally be reached MON - FRI: 0900-1700.
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, ANISS CHAD can be reached at (571)270-3832. 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.
/ELIZABETH J SLOWIK/Examiner, Art Unit 3662
/ANISS CHAD/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3662