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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 08/28/2026 has been entered.
Claim Objections
Claims 10 and 11 are objected to because of the following informalities: line 6 of claim 10 discloses “wherein, the second comprises (i) a fixed…” It seems there is a typographical error (e.g. “the second” should be “the second sensor”). Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 20-22, and 26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2009/0115748 A1 to Tanaka and US 2006/0012584 A1 to Vassallo et al. (Vassallo).
As to claim 1, Tanaka discloses a dial controller (1001) for a vehicle(see Fig. 3; Par. 0035]) comprising:
a rotatable dial (23) that is (i) rotatable about an axis of rotation (1001R or 1002R) (Figs. 1, 4-6, 9, Pars. 31-32), and (iii) movable along a plane parallel to the axis of rotation (Figs. 1, 4-6, 9, Pars. 31-32);
a first sensor (5) operably connected to the rotatable dial (23) (Figs. 1, 4-6, 9, Par. 45, see also Pars. 31-32), the first sensor producing an output that is a function of rotation of the rotatable dial about the axis of rotation (Figs. 1, 4-6, 9, Par. 45, see also Pars. 31-32); and
a third sensor (7A-7D) operably connected to the rotatable dial (23) (Figs. 1, 4-6, 9, Par. 45, see also Pars. 31-32), the third sensor (7A-7D) producing an output that is a function of movement of the rotatable dial along the plane parallel to the axis of rotation (Figs. 1, 4-6, 9, Par. 45, see also Pars. 31-32).
Tanaka does not expressly disclose (ii) the rotatable dial linearly movable along a line parallel to the axis of rotation, and a second sensor operably connected to the rotatable dial, the second sensor being a linear displacement sensor producing an output that is a function of extent of movement and position of the rotatable dial along the line parallel to the axis of rotation.
Vassallo discloses (ii) the rotatable dial (26) linearly movable along a line parallel to the axis of rotation (axis B, axis Z) (Figs. 6-8, Pars. 71, 74, 78, 90), and a second sensor (e.g. linear sensor to detect movement along axis Z) operably connected to the rotatable dial (26)( Figs. 6-8, Pars. 71, 74, 78, 90), the second sensor being a linear displacement sensor producing an output that is a function of extent movement and position of the rotatable dial along the line parallel to the axis of rotation (axis B, axis Z)( Figs. 6-8, Pars. 71, 74, 78, 90).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified Tanaka with the teaching of Vassallo to allow the user to select functions, settings, modes, or options with much greater ease and without having to take his or her hand off the knob as suggested by Vassallo (Par. 9).
As to claim 20, Tanaka in view of Vassallo teaches the dial controller of claim 1 above. The limitation of claim 20 is substantially similar to claim 1. Accordingly, claim 20 is rejected based on same analysis as claim 1. Tanaka further discloses a user interface for a vehicle comprising: a panel (dashboard surface) (Fig. 3, Par. 35), a display (Fig. 3, Par. 35); a dial controller (1001) in communication with the display (Fig. 3, Pars. 35, 39, 42), the dial controller comprising: a rotatable dial (23) disposed above the panel (Figs. 1-6, Par. 35).
As to claim 2, Tanaka discloses a selector button (10) proximate the rotatable dial (23) (Figs. 1, 4-6, 9, Pars. 34, 44, see also Pars. 31-32), the selector button (10) being depressible along the axis of rotation of the rotatable dial (23) (Figs. 1, 4-6, 9, Pars. 34, 44, 57, see also Pars. 31-32); and a fourth sensor (6) operably connected to the selector button (10) (Figs. 1, 4-6, 9, Pars. 34, 44, 57, see also Pars. 31-32), the fourth sensor (6) producing an output that is a function of depression of the selector button (Figs. 1, 4-6, 9, Pars. 34, 44, 57, see also Pars. 31-32).
As to claim 21, Tanaka in view of Vassallo teaches the dial controller of claim 2 above. The limitation of claim 21 is substantially similar to claim 2. Accordingly, claim 21 is rejected based on same analysis as claim 2.
As to claim 3, Tanaka discloses the rotatable dial (23) encircles the selector button (10) about the axis of rotation of the rotatable dial (Figs. 1, 4-6, 9, Pars. 34, 44, 57, see also Pars. 31-32); the selector button (10) intersects the axis of rotation of the rotatable dial (23) as the rotatable dial (23) rotates about the axis of rotation (Figs. 1, 4-6, 9, Pars. 34, 44, 57, see also Pars. 31-32), the selector button does not rotate about the axis of rotation (Figs. 1, 4-6, 9, Pars. 34, 44, 57, see also Pars. 31-32); and the selector button is biased along the axis of rotation away from being depressed (Figs. 1, 4-6, 9, Pars. 34, 44, 57, see also Pars. 31-32).
As to claim 22, Tanaka discloses the display (15) displays a menu of functions to use or control (Fig. 3, Pars. 35-37); rotation of the rotatable dial about the axis of rotation chooses a function from a menu of functions to use or control (Fig. 3, Pars. 35-37); and depression of the selector button confirms the choice and allows use or control of the chosen function (Fig. 3, Pars. 35-37, 44); and rotation of the rotatable dial about the axis of rotation controls a controllable aspect of the :hosen function (Figs. 3-5, Pars. 35-37, 44).
As to claim 26, Tanaka as modified discloses movement of the rotatable dial (Vassallo’s 26) along the line parallel to the axis of rotation (Vassallo’s axis A, axis B, axis Z) of the rotatable dial (26) causes the display (14) to change from displaying one menu of functions to use or control to displaying another menu of functions to use or control (Vassallo’s Figs. 1, 6-8, Pars. 25-28, see also Pars. 71, 74, 78, 90). See claim 1 motivation above.
Claim(s) 27 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2009/0115748 A1 to Tanaka and US 2006/0012584 A1 to Vassallo et al. (Vassallo); in view of US 2022/0024491 A1 to Lee et al. (Lee).
As to claim 27, Tanaka as modified discloses movement of the rotatable dial along the line parallel to the axis of rotation of the rotatable dial causes the dial controller to control movement in the vehicle (Tanaka’s Fig. 3, Par. 37, Vassallo Figs. 1, 6-8, Pars. 71, 74, 78, 90)
Tanaka as modified does not expressly disclose movement of the rotatable dial causes the dial controller to control movement of the vehicle; movement of the rotatable dial along the plane parallel to the axis of rotation causes the vehicle to move forward or reverse; and rotation of the rotatable dial about the axis of rotation causes the vehicle to turn.
Lee discloses movement of the rotatable dial causes the dial controller to control movement of the vehicle (Fig. 19, Pars. 206-208); movement of the rotatable dial along the plane parallel to the axis of rotation causes the vehicle to move forward or reverse (Fig. 19, Pars. 206-208); and rotation of the rotatable dial about the axis of rotation causes the vehicle to turn (Fig. 19, Pars. 206-208)
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified Tanaka with the teaching of Lee to provide an improved method for controlling a vehicle as suggested by Lee (Par. 6).
Claim(s) 31 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2009/0115748 A1 to Tanaka and US 2006/0012584 A1 to Vassallo et al. (Vassallo); in view of US 2020/0150766 A1 to Bagley et al. (Bagley).
As to claim 31, Tanaka as modified discloses the rotatable dial (Vassallo’s 26), the selector button (Vassallo’s 26), and the fourth sensor (Vassallo’s 88) are all disposed above the panel (Vassallo’s 12) (Figs. 1-3, Par. 49). See claim 1 motivation above.
Tanaka does not expressly disclose the display is disposed below but visible through the panel.
Bagley discloses the display (40) is disposed below but visible through the panel (14) (Figs. 1-2, Pars. 20, 23, 41).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified Tanaka with the teaching of Bagley to provide an intuitive inputting device.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6, 9-11, 13-15, 18-19, 24, and 28 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.
None of the cited prior arts teaches:
a stepper motor (62) comprising a shaft (64) and a gear (66) attached to the shaft (64) (Fig. 6); wherein, the rotatable dial (38) is attached to a first end of a cylinder (54) through which the axis of rotation (48) extends (Fig. 6); wherein, the cylinder (54) further comprises a second end and a gear (60) at the second end that is operably connected to the gear of the stepper motor (66)(Fig. 6); wherein, rotation of the rotatable dial (38) about the axis of rotation (48) causes the cylinder (54) to rotate and thus the gear (60) at the second end of the cylinder to rotate (Fig. 6); wherein, rotation of the gear (60) of the cylinder (54) causes the gear of the stepper motor (66) to rotate (Fig. 6), and rotation of the gear of the stepper motor (66) causes the shaft of the stepper motor (64) to rotate (Fig. 6); wherein, the first sensor (40) is positioned relative to the stepper motor (62) to generate an output that is a function of a fraction of a revolution of the shaft (64) (Fig. 6); wherein, the stepper motor (64) resists rotation of the shaft (64) and thus rotation of the rotatable dial (38) at each fraction of the revolution of the shaft (64) (Fig. 6); and wherein, a torque applied to the rotatable dial (38) is required to overcome the resistance (Fig. 6), with all the limitation cited in claim 6.
None of the cited prior arts teaches:
a second cylinder (72) through which the axis of rotation (48) of the rotatable dial (38) extends (Fig. 6), the second cylinder (72) comprising a first end (74) around which the rotatable dial (38) rotates and a second end (76) from which an extension (78) extends (Fig. 6), the extension (78) terminating in a sensor contacting surface (80) that contacts the second sensor (42) (Fig. 6); wherein, the second sensor (42) comprises (i) a fixed part (82) statically attached to a fixed base (46) of the dial controller (36) (Fig. 6) and (ii) a movable part (84) that contacts the sensor contacting surface (80) of the second cylinder (72) (Fig. 6), the movable part (84) being movable relative to the fixed part (82) (Fig. 6), and movement of the movable part (84) of the second sensor (42) relative to the fixed part (82) of the second sensor (42) alters the output of the second sensor (42) (Fig. 6); wherein, the movable part (84) is biased toward the sensor contacting surface (80) of the second cylinder (72) (Fig 6); and wherein, movement of the rotatable dial (38) along the line parallel (96) to the axis of rotation (48) of the rotatable dial (38) causes the second cylinder (72)to move and thus the movable part (84) of the second sensor (42) (Fig. 6), with all the limitation cited in claims 10 and 24, respectively.
None of the cited prior arts teaches:
a fixed base (46) to which the third sensor (44) is attached (Fig. 8); and a second base (106) to which the rotatable dial (38) is attached (Fig. 8), the second base (106) (i) comprising a sensor contacting surface (140) (Fig. 8) and (ii) movable along the plane (128) parallel to the axis of rotation (48) (Fig. 8); wherein, the third sensor (44) is a linear displacement sensor (Fig. 8) comprising (i) a fixed part (142) statically attached to the fixed base (46) (Fig. 8) and (ii) a movable part (144) that contacts the sensor contacting surface (140) of the second base (106) (Fig. 8), the movable part (144) being movable relative to the fixed part (142) (Fig. 8), and the output that the third sensor (44) produces is a function of position of the movable part (144) relative to the fixed part (142) (Fig. 8); wherein, the movable part (144) of the third sensor (44) is biased toward the sensor contacting surface (140) of the second base (106) (Fig. 8); and wherein, movement of the second base (106) along the plane (128) parallel to the axis of rotation (48) of the rotatable dial (38) causes the movable part (144) of the third sensor (44) to move (Fig. 8), with all the limitation cited in claims 13 and 28.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-3, 20-22, 26-27, and 31 have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection.
Examiner notes that the new claim elements are now addressed by reference Vassallo as necessitated by amendments. Please see above for full basis of rejection as taught by Tanaka in view of Vassallo.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
US 8,264,338 B2 to Leon teaches a combination shifter and engine start apparatus for a vehicle includes a control knob rotatable to a plurality of positions to actuate for at least one of starting and stopping of an associated engine of the vehicle.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JARURAT SUTEERAWONGSA whose telephone number is (571)270-7361. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Thursday, 8:30AM to 4:00PM, 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, Chanh Nguyen can be reached at 571-272-7772. 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.
/JARURAT SUTEERAWONGSA/Examiner, Art Unit 2623
/CHANH D NGUYEN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2623
