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 .
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “external devices” and “processing module” in claim 1.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-10 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the enablement requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to enable one skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and/or use the invention.
Claim 1 recites a “visibility value controller” which is not a commonly known term in the art nor was it explained in the specification in such a way as to enable one of ordinary skill in the art to make and/or use the invention.
For purposes of examination the “visibility value controller” will be interpreted to mean a device to detect the visibility level of its surroundings.
Claims 2-10 are rejected for being dependent from claim 1 and therefore having the same antecedent basis problems that claim 1 contains.
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.
Claims 1-10 are 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 (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the visibility value controller" in claim 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the AVAS (Acoustic Vehicle Alert System)" in claim 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the alert mode" in claim 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 2-10 are rejected for being dependent from claim 1 and therefore having the same antecedent basis problems that claim 1 contains.
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, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maekawa (US 20050200462) in view of Lipp (US 20100208915).
Regarding claim 1, A method of sound alerting for low-noise vehicles (TS), containing the stages during which: a) using external devices installed on the vehicle, input data parameters are obtained which include at least the following information: on activation / deactivation of the vehicle, (Maekawa: figure 3, step S340)
information on the selected mode of movement of the vehicle, (“Reference numeral 1356 denotes a driving-mode detecting unit that detects a driving mode.” Maekawa: paragraph 104)
information on the vehicle speed, (“However, it is also possible to detect presence of a pedestrian or the like around the vehicle using a speed sensor provided in the vehicle in a situation other than such a situation in which presence of a pedestrian is judged according to an area (a city or a suburb)” Maekawa: paragraph 134)
information on the geolocation zone in which the vehicle is located, (Maekawa: figure 14, steps S415 and S420)
information on the current time of day, (Maekawa: figure 14, steps S440 and S450)
information on the position of the visibility value controller; (Maekawa: figure 14, steps S470 and S475)
c) the received data are processed at the stages a) and b) using a processing module, as a result of which a sound signal is generated for the alert mode depending on the values of the data of the input parameters and the sound data packet, and the alert volume level depending on information on the current time of day, information on the geolocation zone in which the vehicle is located, and the information on the position of the visibility value controller; (“[0158] Moreover, according to the present invention, there is an effect that it is possible to notify presence of the vehicle to a notifying object surely with the notifying units using sound and light. [0159] Furthermore, according to the present invention, there is an effect that it is possible to given an alarm to a pedestrian based on an appropriate alarm type according to a traveling time frame of the vehicle. [0160] Moreover, according to the present invention, there is an effect that it is possible to give an alarm to a pedestrian based on an appropriate alarm type according to brightness around the vehicle at the time when the vehicle travels. [0161] Furthermore, according to the present invention, there is an effect that it is possible to give an alarm to a pedestrian based on an appropriate alarm type according to a sound volume outside the vehicle at the time when the vehicle is traveling. [0162] Moreover, according to the present invention, there is an effect that it is possible to given an alarm to a pedestrian based on an appropriate alarm type according to a state of congestion in a traveling area of the vehicle. [0163] Furthermore, according to the present invention, there is an effect that it is possible to give an alarm to a pedestrian according to an appropriate alarm type based on the judging unit that is selected preferentially. [0164] Moreover, according to the present invention, there is an effect that it is possible to secure safety for a pedestrian (a notifying object) surely. [0165] Furthermore, according to the present invention, there is an effect that it is possible to give an alarm to a pedestrian (a notifying object) at appropriate timing according to a road on which the vehicle is planned to travel (map information) and a road on the vehicle is traveling. [0166] Since it is judged whether a traveling location of the vehicle is in a city based on a traveling location (map information) of the vehicle searched by the map-information acquiring unit, there is an effect that it is possible to given an alarm to a pedestrian based on an appropriate alarm type. When a traveling location of the vehicle is in an area other than a city (the suburb, etc.), generation of a sound by the vehicle-presence-sound generating unit is kept to a necessary minimum, there is an effect that it is possible to maintain a silence characteristic. In addition, since notifying by sound is also performed in the suburb or the like as required, there is an effect that it is possible to perform notifying based on a most appropriate alarm type.” Maekawa: paragraphs 158-166)
d) a sound alerting is carried out using a vehicle speaker system with a set volume and a set sound mode, determined at step c). (“Main characteristics of the vehicle-presence notifying apparatus according to the fourth embodiment will be explained as follows. A vehicle-presence notifying apparatus 1000 has a function of judging whether it is necessary to notify presence of its vehicle to people around the vehicle according to a traveling environment thereof. When it is necessary to notify the presence of the vehicle to the people, the vehicle-presence notifying apparatus 1000 selects a combination of notifying units with different notifying forms (e.g., a head light 1340 and a speaker 1350) and performs appropriate notifying to a notifying object like a pedestrian based on the selected combination.” Maekawa: paragraph 93)
The claimed b) a sound data packet containing at least two event sounds, a parking sound, a forward motion sound consisting of four separate layers, and a reverse movement sound is received from the AVAS (Acoustic Vehicle Alert System) computing unit is not specifically disclosed by Maekawa. Lipp discloses an external alerting system for a vehicle based on the detected vehicle state and surrounding state that teaches selecting a subset of sounds for alerting based on the vehicle’s velocity state and multiple states for a forward velocity (“At block 306, the vehicle sound simulation system 102 selects at least a subset of target sounds based on the determined vehicle velocity state. In an illustrative embodiment, the vehicle sound simulation system 102 can select a subset of sounds that corresponds exclusive to each determined vehicle velocity state” Lipp: paragraph 20; (velocity would include speed and direction, therefore including reverse, forward, etc.) & “At block 308, the vehicle sound simulation system 102 processes the selected subset based additional information. The type of additional information utilized by the vehicle sound simulation system 102 can vary according to the determine vehicle velocity state or based on other vehicle state information. In one aspect, the vehicle sound simulation system 102 can determine whether the vehicle has crossed a velocity traditionally associated with a gear shift in vehicle. If so, the vehicle sound simulation system 102 can select a sound indicative of an "up shifting" transmission or a "down shifting" transmission. In another aspect, the vehicle sound simulation system 102 can determine whether a target sound has been previously generated within a time window. If so, the vehicle sound simulation system 102 may select another target sound or keep a count of the number of times the sound has been repeated (assuming that the vehicle sound simulation system 102 incorporates a repetition threshold)” Lipp: paragraph 22). Modifying Maekawa to include different sounds based on a vehicle velocity state would increase the overall capabilities of the system. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Maekawa according to Lipp.
Regarding claim 2, The method of claim 1, characterized by that the information on the selected vehicle movement mode is selected from the following group: forward vehicle movement, reverse vehicle movement, or parking. (“At block 306, the vehicle sound simulation system 102 selects at least a subset of target sounds based on the determined vehicle velocity state. In an illustrative embodiment, the vehicle sound simulation system 102 can select a subset of sounds that corresponds exclusive to each determined vehicle velocity state” Lipp: paragraph 20; (velocity would include speed and direction, therefore including reverse, forward, etc.)
Regarding claim 3, The method according to claim 1, characterized by the fact that the sound alert mode is selected from the following group: the sound mode of the vehicle activation, the sound mode of the vehicle parking, the sound mode of the forward movement of the vehicle at a speed from 0 to the maximum speed, the sound mode of the reverse movement of the vehicle, the sound mode of the vehicle deactivation. (“At block 306, the vehicle sound simulation system 102 selects at least a subset of target sounds based on the determined vehicle velocity state. In an illustrative embodiment, the vehicle sound simulation system 102 can select a subset of sounds that corresponds exclusive to each determined vehicle velocity state” Lipp: paragraph 20; (velocity would include speed and direction, therefore including reverse, forward, etc.) & “At block 308, the vehicle sound simulation system 102 processes the selected subset based additional information. The type of additional information utilized by the vehicle sound simulation system 102 can vary according to the determine vehicle velocity state or based on other vehicle state information. In one aspect, the vehicle sound simulation system 102 can determine whether the vehicle has crossed a velocity traditionally associated with a gear shift in vehicle. If so, the vehicle sound simulation system 102 can select a sound indicative of an "up shifting" transmission or a "down shifting" transmission. In another aspect, the vehicle sound simulation system 102 can determine whether a target sound has been previously generated within a time window. If so, the vehicle sound simulation system 102 may select another target sound or keep a count of the number of times the sound has been repeated (assuming that the vehicle sound simulation system 102 incorporates a repetition threshold)” Lipp: paragraph 22).
Regarding claim 4, The method according to claim 3, characterized by the fact that the sound mode of activation on the vehicle is selected based on the input parameters of the data containing the information on activation on the vehicle. (Maekawa: figure 3, step S340)
Regarding claim 5, The method according to claim 3, characterized by the fact that the sound mode of the vehicle parking is selected based on the input parameters of the data containing the information on the vehicle parking. (“At block 306, the vehicle sound simulation system 102 selects at least a subset of target sounds based on the determined vehicle velocity state. In an illustrative embodiment, the vehicle sound simulation system 102 can select a subset of sounds that corresponds exclusive to each determined vehicle velocity state” Lipp: paragraph 20; (velocity would include speed and direction, therefore including reverse, forward, etc. and would also necessarily include the times when the vehicle is parking).
Regarding claim 6, The method according to claim 3, characterized by that the sound mode of the vehicle moving forward at a speed from 0 to the maximum speed is selected based on the input data parameters containing the information on the value of the vehicle speed. (“At block 306, the vehicle sound simulation system 102 selects at least a subset of target sounds based on the determined vehicle velocity state. In an illustrative embodiment, the vehicle sound simulation system 102 can select a subset of sounds that corresponds exclusive to each determined vehicle velocity state” Lipp: paragraph 20; (velocity would include speed and direction, therefore including reverse, forward, etc.) & “At block 308, the vehicle sound simulation system 102 processes the selected subset based additional information. The type of additional information utilized by the vehicle sound simulation system 102 can vary according to the determine vehicle velocity state or based on other vehicle state information. In one aspect, the vehicle sound simulation system 102 can determine whether the vehicle has crossed a velocity traditionally associated with a gear shift in vehicle. If so, the vehicle sound simulation system 102 can select a sound indicative of an "up shifting" transmission or a "down shifting" transmission. In another aspect, the vehicle sound simulation system 102 can determine whether a target sound has been previously generated within a time window. If so, the vehicle sound simulation system 102 may select another target sound or keep a count of the number of times the sound has been repeated (assuming that the vehicle sound simulation system 102 incorporates a repetition threshold)” Lipp: paragraph 22).
Regarding claim 7, The method according to claim 3, characterized by that the sound mode of the vehicle reverse movement mode is selected based on the input data parameters containing the information on the selected mode of the vehicle reverse movement mode. (“At block 306, the vehicle sound simulation system 102 selects at least a subset of target sounds based on the determined vehicle velocity state. In an illustrative embodiment, the vehicle sound simulation system 102 can select a subset of sounds that corresponds exclusive to each determined vehicle velocity state” Lipp: paragraph 20; (velocity would include speed and direction, therefore including reverse, forward, etc. and would also necessarily include the times when the vehicle is reversing).
Regarding claim 8, The method according to claim 3, characterized by the fact that the sound mode of deactivation of the vehicle is selected based on the input parameters of the data containing the information on deactivation of the vehicle. (Maekawa: figure 3, step S340)
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maekawa in view of Lipp and further in view of Official Notice.
Regarding claim 9, The method according to claim 1, characterized by that four separate layers are a high-frequency layer, a main layer, a low-frequency layer, and a modulation layer is not specifically disclosed by Maekawa and Lipp. Examiner takes Official Notice that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to split a sound into different frequency layers including low, main, high, and a modulation layer. Modifying Maekawa and Lipp to include these layers would increase the overall flexibility of the system by allowing for more customization of the alert sounds. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Maekawa and Lipp according to Official Notice.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 10 is 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 and all 112 rejections were overcome.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 10, the prior art does not disclose nor teach the splitting of an alert sound for the external surroundings of a vehicle to be split into four separate layers including a low, main, and high frequency layer and a modulation layer wherein all four layers are processed independently of each other.
Conclusion
Related Art:
US 20140056438 A1 – external alerting system for a vehicle
US 20150054642 A1 – different external sounds based on different operations of a vehicle
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TRAVIS R HUNNINGS whose telephone number is (571)272-3118. The examiner can normally be reached M: 6-7:30a, 9:30a-4:45p, 8:30-10p; T: 6-7:30a, 12-4p, 7:30p-12a; W: 6-7:30a, 9:30a-4:45p; H: 6-7:30a, 8:15a-4:45p; F: 12:00-4:45p.
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, Davetta Goins can be reached at 571-272-2957. 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.
/TRAVIS R HUNNINGS/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2689