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 .
Status of Claims
Applicant filed remarks on 06/29/2026. Claims 1-10 are pending examination.
Response to Arguments
Regarding the claim rejections under 35 USC 103: Applicant's arguments filed 06/29/2026 with respect to Okuyama (US 20140292692 A1) in view of BMW (2019 BMW X5 - Photos_2) have been fully considered but they are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument in view of Citroen (US4701629A) in view of Yukawa et al. (US20080109132A1).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. § 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claim 8 depends from claim 6 and recites “wherein the cursor buttons are chamfered in a manner tapering to the depression.” The term “depression” / “relief depression” is first introduced in claim 7, not claim 6. Claim 8 therefore lacks antecedent basis for “the depression,” and it is unclear whether claim 8 is intended to depend from claim 7 (or from claim 7 via claim 6), or whether a different depression is meant.
For purposes of applying prior art, claim 8 is treated as if it depended from claim 7 (cursor buttons + touch element in a relief depression), consistent with the published detailed description at ¶¶ [0033] (cursor buttons 34 “chamfered in a manner tapering to the depression 38”).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim 1-2 and 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Citroen (US4701629A), hereinafter referred to as Citroen.
Regarding claims 1, 9, and 10, Citroen discloses
An operating unit for arrangement on a steering wheel in a motor vehicle ( “FIG. 7 illustrates a variant in which the device is implanted in the center of the steering-wheel.” [Col.2 ln 18-20])
a plurality of operating elements of a first functional group (“On the roof is provided a key 14f controlling the horn, as well as the key 14g controlling the lighting inside the vehicle. “ [Col.2 ln 59-61]);
a plurality of operating elements of a second functional group (“For example, a key 14a is provided at the front of the bonnet of the support and controls the lights of the vehicle.” [Col.2 ln 36-38]; “at the rear end of the boot are provided a key 14l controlling the emergency lights and key 14m controlling an extra indicator-rear light called "fog light". “ [Col.3 ln 5-7]).
a relief-shaped main body having a central plateau, an upper bevel and a lower bevel (“ Citroen this as illustrated in Fig. 1. Fig.5 and Fig.)
Examiner note: The Examiner interprets the claimed central plateau as the roof surface of support 12 on which rectangular roof keys 14f and 14g sit (col. 2, lines 59–61; FIG. 1), and interprets the claimed upper bevel and lower bevel as the inclined bonnet-front and boot-end surfaces carrying second-group keys 14a (bonnet) and 14l / 14m (boot) (col. 2, lines 36–38; col. 3, lines 5–7; FIG. 1), in light of the low-relief / inclined-surface discussion at col. 3, lines 15–30.
wherein the operating elements of the first functional group are arranged in the central plateau (“On the roof is provided a key 14f controlling the horn, as well as the key 14g controlling the lighting inside the vehicle. “ [Col.2 ln 59-61])
and the operating elements of the second functional group are arranged in the upper bevel and the lower bevel (“For example, a key 14a is provided at the front of the bonnet of the support and controls the lights of the vehicle[Col.2 ln 36-38]; “at the rear end of the boot are provided a key 14l controlling the emergency lights and key 14m controlling an extra indicator-rear light called "fog light". [Col.3 ln 5-7]).
Regarding claim 2, Citroen discloses
wherein the upper bevel and the lower bevel are chamfered with respect to the central plateau (see at least Fig. 1, Fig.5 and Fig. 7, [10, 12]).
Examiner note: The Examiner interprets “the upper bevel and the lower bevel are chamfered with respect to the central plateau” as reading on those inclined / low-relief transitions from the roof plateau down to the bonnet and boot surfaces, in light of col. 3, lines 15–30 (low relief; incline / accentuate inclination of surfaces) and claim 2 (low-relief form). FIG. 1 makes the chamfered step-down from roof to bonnet/boot visually apparent; FIG. 7 shows the corresponding relief body when implanted at the steering-wheel center.
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.
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 3–8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Citroen in view of Yukawa et al. (US20080109132A1), hereinafter referred to as Yukawa.
Regarding claim 3, Citroen does not explicitly disclose
wherein the operating elements of the second functional group comprise one or more of: operating elements for controlling a playback volume; or operating elements for gradually changing a playback title.
However, Yukawa does teach
wherein the operating elements of the second functional group comprise one or more of: operating elements for controlling a playback volume; or operating elements for gradually changing a playback title (“The driver may also actuate first and second touch-sensitive zones 73-2 and 73-8, respectively, on the touchpad 65 in order to raise and lower the volume of the radio.” — [0037], FIG. 7; “the driver may actuate the right-side touch-sensitive zone 73-6 in order to advance to the next track.” — [0045], FIG. 8; “in an audio control mode, two of the switches may be used to increase or decrease the volume” — [0024], FIG. 2 discussion).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Citroen so that the operating elements of the first functional group comprise one or more of: operating elements for list navigation and/or menu control; operating elements for selecting a source for a playback of media contents; or operating elements for controlling a telephone function as taught by Yukawa, because Yukawa teaches dedicating a first switch cluster to function-selection / menu / phone / nav / audio-source type controls separate from volume adjustments, improving organized eyes-free HMI on the steering wheel, with a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding claim 4, Citroen does not explicitly disclose
wherein the operating elements of the first functional group comprise one or more of: operating elements for list navigation and/or menu control; operating elements for selecting a source for a playback of media contents; or operating elements for controlling a telephone function.
However, Yukawa does teach
wherein the operating elements of the first functional group comprise one or more of: operating elements for list navigation and/or menu control; operating elements for selecting a source for a playback of media contents; or operating elements for controlling a telephone function (“A first set of function selection switches 22 are disposed on the left side of the wheel” — [0018], FIG. 2; “an indicia is provided for an audio system, a climate control system, a phone system and a navigation system 36.” — [0020], FIG. 3; menu scroll / HDD-source music search via SW controls — [0036], [0023], FIGS. 3, 8; circular-trace gesture “scroll though one or more menus” — [0036], FIG. 7).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Citroen so that the operating elements of the first functional group comprise one or more of: operating elements for list navigation and/or menu control; operating elements for selecting a source for a playback of media contents; or operating elements for controlling a telephone function as taught by Yukawa, because Yukawa teaches dedicating a first switch cluster to function-selection / menu / phone / nav / audio-source type controls separate from volume adjustments, improving organized eyes-free HMI on the steering wheel, with a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding claim 5, Citroen discloses
wherein the operating elements for the list navigation and/or the menu control comprise a plurality of cursor buttons, wherein: one cursor button of the plurality of cursor buttons is arranged on an upper edge of the central plateau, one cursor button is arranged on a lower edge of the central plateau, one cursor button is arranged on a left-hand edge of the central plateau, and one cursor button is arranged on a right-hand edge of the central plateau. (see at least Fig. 1, Fig.5 and Fig. 7).
Examiner note: Citroën FIGS. 1 and 7 are cited because they show keys seated on and about the central operating face of the hub-mounted support. The Examiner interprets the claimed cursor-button layout (upper / lower / left / right edges of the central plateau) as reading on keys arranged around the edges of that central (roof / hub) face in FIGS. 1 and 7. FIGS. 1 and 7 are referenced to make clear the center-of-steering-wheel implant (FIG. 7) and edge seating on the plateau face (FIG. 1).
Regarding claim 6, Citroen discloses
wherein the plurality of cursor buttons are raised in a relief manner with respect to the central plateau ( see at least Fig. 1 and Fig. 7 “to further reinforce the tactile recognition of the keys by affixing thereon conventionally chosen raised designs”[]) (operating knobs arranged on / protruding from the upper plate — [0009], [0037]).
Regarding claim 7, Citroen discloses
a touch operating element which is arranged in a relief depression in the central plateau, wherein the depression is arranged, with the touch operating element, between the cursor buttons. ( see at least Fig. 1, Fig.5 and Fig. 7).
Examiner note: Citroën FIGS. 1 and 7 are cited because they show a central operating region of the hub / plateau face with surrounding keys. The Examiner interprets the claimed touch element in a relief depression between cursor buttons as reading on a recessed / central touch-type element on the plateau face.
Regarding claim 8 Citroen discloses
wherein the cursor buttons are chamfered in a manner tapering to the depression. ( see at least Fig. 1, Fig.5 and Fig. 7).
Examiner note: Citroën FIGS. 1 and 7are cited because they show inclined / stepped surfaces of the relief body and keys relative to lower or recessed regions of the central operating face. The Examiner interprets “chamfered in a manner tapering to the depression” as reading on those inclined approaches toward a recessed / central depressed region (col. 3, lines 15–30; claim 14; col. 5).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AHMED ALKIRSH whose telephone number is (703) 756-4503. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00 am-5:00 pm EST.
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, FADEY JABR can be reached on (571) 272-1516. 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.
/A.A./Examiner, Art Unit 3668
/Fadey S. Jabr/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3668
