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
This Office Action is in response to Application No. 18/555452. Claims 1-17 are presented for examination and are currently pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the independent claim(s) have been considered but 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.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 3, 6, 12 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lota (US 2018/0154799) in view of Moon (US 2020/00740640).
Regarding claim 1, Lota teaches an adjustment system for a vehicle, comprising:
at least one adjusting device for the power-operated adjustment of at least one interior component to be arranged in the interior of the vehicle (“The one or more actuators 124 may be electric motors for moving seats in the vehicle in the longitudinal, lateral or vertical direction. In some embodiments, at least one of the one or more actuators may be operated to change the angular orientation of the seatback of a seat with respect to the seating surface of the seat in the vehicle.” [0037]),
at least one electronic obstacle-detection device for detecting a potential obstacle in an adjustment path of the at least one interior component during a power-operated adjustment of the at least one interior component in the interior of the vehicle (“The proximity sensor 116 detects a distance between the proximity sensor 116 and an object nearby and communicates the proximity information to the one or more processors 102. … The proximity sensor 116 may be located at the back of a seat to detect an object behind the seat as shown in FIG. 2A.” [0032]; “The pressure sensor 118 may be also used to detect the presence of an object in the seat.” [0033]; “The one or more cameras 122 may be used to capture an image of a seat arrangement inside the vehicle to determine whether any object is present in one of the seats.” [0035]), wherein the at least one obstacle-detection device is configured to generate at least one obstacle signal on detection of a potential obstacle in the adjustment path (“Signals from the proximity sensor 116 and/or the pressure sensor 118 may be transmitted to the one or more processors 102. Then, the processors 102 may control the operation of the first, second and third actuators 124 based on the received signals. For example, the processors 102 may instruct the first, second, and third actuators 124 to limit or reduce the movement … when the pressure sensor 118 detects a pressure, or the proximity sensor 116 detects an object within a predetermined distance.” [0045]), and
control electronics, which are configured to generate at least one control signal in response to the at least one obstacle signal for outputting a visually perceptible obstacle indication of the potential obstacle (“The speaker 120 may provide information to an occupant of the vehicle seat adjustment system 100 about adjustment of one or more seats in the vehicle. For example, the speaker 120 may provide an alarm to the occupant when one of the seats in the vehicle is being adjusted. In another example, the speaker 120 may provide an alarm to the occupant when an object is detected in a path along which a seat is moving.” [0034]; “The screen 108 may be located on the head unit of the vehicle such that a driver of the vehicle may easily see the screen 108 while seated in the driver seat.” [0028]).
Lota, however, does not explicitly teach control electronics, wherein the generate at least one control signal in response to the at least one obstacle signal for outputting a visually perceptible obstacle indication of the potential obstacle for a user at least one of a) an interior region of the interior of the vehicle, in which the potential obstacle is present, and b) an object region of the interior object, on which the interior object would collide with the potential obstacle during an adjustment along the adjustment path.
Lota, on the one hand, discloses that “The screen 108 may output … seat arrangement data in response to a selection of a corresponding function.” [0028]; and that “the speaker 120 may provide an alarm to the occupant when an object is detected in a path along which a seat is moving.” [0034].
Moon, on the other hand and in analogous art, teaches wherein the generate at least one control signal in response to the at least one obstacle signal for outputting a visually perceptible obstacle indication of the potential obstacle for a user at least one of a) an interior region of the interior of the vehicle, in which the potential obstacle is present ( “the processor 105 may turn on a first lamp inside the vehicle to illuminate a location to which the object has fallen in response that the passenger searches for the object and a result value of an illumination sensor inside the vehicle is smaller than a preset value.” [0020]; “the fallen object detection device may turn on a first lamp inside the vehicle (for example, a lamp installed an upper portion inside the vehicle) to illuminate the location to which the object has fallen (S901).” [0136]; “For example, when the passenger searches for a ‘hat’ 601 which has fallen inside the vehicle, the fallen object detection device may turn on a first lamp 602 installed inside the vehicle to illuminate the location to which the ‘hat’ 601 has fallen, so that the passenger can recognize the location of the fallen ‘hat’ 601.” [0106]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to combine the seat adjustment and obstacle detection system of Lota with the technique of illuminating the location of an object as taught by Moon. Lota discloses a power-operated seat adjustment system equipped with sensors (such as proximity, pressure, and cameras) that detect obstacles in the adjustment path and alert the user via audio or visual means when an obstacle is present. Moon teaches a technique of illuminating the specific location within a vehicle where an object is present, by activating a lamp to highlight the area where the object has fallen, thus making it easier for the user to find the object. Applying the known technique of spatially illuminating an object’s location from Moon to Lota’s obstacle detection and seat adjustment system is nothing more than the predictable use of prior art elements according to their established functions. This combination would yield the predictable result of improving user awareness of the precise location of obstacles in the adjustment path of a seat, thereby enhancing safety and convenience when adjusting vehicle interior components. Thus, it would have been obvious to modify Lota’s system to output a visually perceptible obstacle indication at the interior region of the vehicle where the potential obstacle is present, as taught by Moon.
Regarding claim 3, Lota/Moon teaches the adjustment system according to claim 1, wherein the at least one obstacle signal contains information about at which of at least one of interior region and object region the visually perceptible indication is to be output (“The proximity sensor 116 may be located at the back of a seat to detect an object behind the seat as shown in FIG. 2A. In another example, the proximity sensor 116 may be located on a seatback or a seating surface of a seat to detect if an object is in that seat. In yet another example, the proximity sensor 116 may be located at the side of the seat ( +/-y direction). In some embodiments, the vehicle seat adjustment system 100 may be configured to determine the presence of an object on a seat of a vehicle based on an output signal output from the proximity sensor.” [0032] [0045]; and “Referring still to FIG. 1, the vehicle seat adjustment system 100 comprises a screen 108 for providing visual output such as, for example, maps, navigation, entertainment, seat arrangements or a combination thereof. The screen 108 may be located on the head unit of the vehicle such that a driver of the vehicle may easily see the screen 108 while seated in the driver seat.” [0028] [0051] in Lota).
Regarding claim 6, Lota/Moon teach the adjustment system according to claim 1, wherein the adjustment system is adapted and provided for the adjustment of at least two different interior objects, and the obstacle-detection device is configured to vary the at least one obstacle signal in dependence on the interior object for which the potential obstacle was detected ([0042], [0047], [0059] multiple seats, actuators on Lota).
Regarding claim 12, Lota/Moon teach the adjustment system according to claim 1, wherein the obstacle-detection device comprises at least one of at least one camera, at least one radar sensor and at least one lidar sensor ([0032], [0035] camera, radar, ultrasonic, etc. on Lota).
Regarding claim 13, Lota/Moon teaches a vehicle with an adjustment system according to claim 1 ([0001], [0020], [0040] on Lota).
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lota (US 2018/0154799) in view of Moon (US 2020/00740640); and further in view of Robarts (WO 2017007643).
Regarding claim 2, Lota/Moon explicitly teach all the claim limitations except for the adjustment system according to claim 1, wherein the visually perceptible obstacle indication is also output on a mobile terminal of the user.
Robarts, in analogous art, teaches wherein the visually perceptible obstacle indication is also output on a mobile terminal of the user (“In accordance with an embodiment, an indication of a detected object appears on the periphery of the mobile device display surface. The indication of the detected object comprises the direction and the proximity of the detected objects.”; abstract, [0029]).
A person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the vehicle seat adjustment and obstacle detection system of Lota may be advantageously combined with the mobile device-based obstacle indication techniques of Robarts to further enhance user awareness and safety. Lota teaches a vehicle seat adjustment system that employs sensors (e.g., proximity, pressure, cameras) to detect obstacles in the seat adjustment path and provides alerts or visual indications via in-vehicle displays or speakers. Robarts, on the other hand, discloses a system in which a mobile device, such as a smartphone, uses its onboard sensors to detect obstacles in the user’s environment and outputs visually perceptible obstacle indications directly on the device’s display as overlays, with the position and appearance of the indicator corresponding to the location of the obstacle.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine the obstacle detection capabilities of Lota’s system with the visual indication methods of Robarts, such that obstacle information detected in the vehicle (e.g., in the seat adjustment path) could be transmitted to a user’s mobile device and displayed as a visually perceptible indicator on the mobile device screen. This combination would provide the user with immediate, context-aware obstacle alerts not only via the vehicle’s built-in systems but also on their personal mobile device, thereby increasing the flexibility and effectiveness of obstacle notifications and improving overall vehicle safety and user experience.
Regarding claim 5, Lota/Moon explicitly teach all the claim limitations except for the adjustment system according to claim 1, wherein the control electronics are configured to vary the at least one visually perceptible obstacle indication in dependence on at least one of the kind and the size of the detected potential obstacle.
Robarts, in analogous art, teaches wherein the control electronics are configured to vary the at least one visually perceptible obstacle indication in dependence on at least one of the kind and the size of the detected potential obstacle (“For example, the size of the indication of the detected object may increase for larger detected objects. A determined velocity of the object may be displayed by including a vector, the size of the vector being proportional to the velocity of the detected object, by changing the color of the indication, by making the object flash, or any other similar methods. The type of detected object may be displayed, for example, by an icon.” [0030], [0035], Claim 10).
A person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the seat adjustment and obstacle detection system of Lota can be advantageously combined with the mobile device-based obstacle indication techniques of Robarts to enhance user awareness and safety. Lota teaches a vehicle seat adjustment system that detects obstacles in the seat adjustment path using various sensors and provides alerts or visual indications via in-vehicle displays. Robarts, in contrast, discloses a mobile device system that detects obstacles using onboard sensors and outputs visually perceptible obstacle indications on the device display, with the appearance of the indication (such as its size, shape, or icon) varying based on the kind and size of the detected obstacle.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine Lota’s obstacle detection capabilities with Robarts’ dynamic visual indication methods, such that obstacle information detected by the vehicle system could be transmitted to a user’s mobile device and displayed as a visually perceptible indicator whose appearance (e.g., size or icon) varies according to the type or size of the obstacle. This combination would provide users with immediate, context-aware, and detailed obstacle alerts both via the vehicle’s built-in systems and their personal mobile devices, thereby improving the effectiveness and clarity of obstacle notifications and enhancing overall vehicle safety and user experience.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4, 7-11, 14, 15, 16 and 17 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RAMON A MERCADO whose telephone number is (571)270-5744. The examiner can normally be reached Mo-Th: 5:30AM-4PM.
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 Yi can be reached on 5712707519. 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.
/Ramon A. Mercado/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3658