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 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) 10, 11, 13, 16, 18 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KURAMOCHI (EP 3747748 A1) in view of UNANNOUNCED (CN 112776923 A).
Regarding claim 10, KURAMOCHI discloses
A method for unlocking a seat bench of a single-track motor vehicle (Pages 2 and 3; paragraph 20-seat 19, serving as a lid member over storage portion 25 of a single-track motorcycle 1)
using at least one actuator that actuates a locking element, (Pages 2 and 3; paragraph 20-using at least one actuator 202 that actuates a locking element seat catch mechanism 30 with lock plate 34 and hook 21), the method comprising the steps of: a. detecting, via sensors for detecting corresponding operating parameters of the single-track motor vehicle, the corresponding operating parameters by way of the sensors; (Page 6, paragraph 61- communication antenna 201; switch operation detection portion 101, an authentication status of smart key 200 used for motorcycle see FIG. 6); b. comparing, via a controller, detected corresponding operating parameters with a respective corresponding defined value, wherein at least one defined value for the corresponding operating parameters is stored in the controller, and determining that the detected operating parameter corresponds to the corresponding defined value and that a driver actuates the actuating element, and controlling the actuator such that the seat bench is unlocked by the locking element,
(Pages 6 & 7; paragraphs 63 through 67- stored authentication credentials in ECU 100, wherein when the detected parameter corresponds to the defined value smart key authentication completed and a driver actuates the actuating element operates foot switch 50, the controller controls the actuator (202) such that the seat bench is unlocked by the locking element cable 35 pulls lock plate 34, releasing hook 21, and seat 19 opens automatically). KURAMOCHI does not explicitly disclose that the actuating element is formed on the seat bench, or (ii) continuously detecting multiple operating parameters and comparing them to corresponding stored defined values as preconditions for seat unlocking.
UNANNOUNCED teaches a method for unlocking a vehicle seat barrel lock, wherein a controller determines the target state of the vehicle by detecting multiple operating parameters, (Page 4, paragraphs 48-50- the vehicle is in a stationary state, the vehicle is in a brake is pressed, and the pressing force on the seat barrel is less than a predetermined pressure threshold on the seat). The seat barrel lock is unlocked only when the detected parameters correspond to the respective defined values and a driver actuates a target key (see Description; Claim 1). UNANNOUNCED further teaches that the target key can be set at any position of the vehicle (Page 4, paragraph 52).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify KURAMOCHI ’s seat unlocking method to further require that multiple vehicle operating parameters such as wheel speed equal to zero, brake engaged, and seat unoccupied, match corresponding stored defined values before permitting seat unlocking, as taught by UNANNOUNCED, in order to prevent unintentional seat release during vehicle operation and to improve rider safety.
Regarding claim 11, KURAMOCHI discloses
wherein the actuating element is a handle, a lever, a sensor, an induction loop, a switch or a pushbutton, (Page 7, paragraph 65- foot switch 50 as an unlocking operation portion can be disposed at various positions near the lower portion of the motorcycle 1.)
Regarding claim 13, KURAMOCHI discloses wherein a detected radio key is determined as the operating parameter and the defined value is a detected radio key within a specified distance from a radio receiver. (Fig. 6, Pages 6 & 7; paragraphs 63 through 67- smart key 200 is a wireless portable key authenticated by ECU 100 via wireless communication through communication antenna 201. The seat is unlocked only when the smart key 200 (radio receiver) is detected within the wireless communication range of antenna 201 and mutual authentication is completed.)
Regarding claim 16, the combination of KURAMOCHI and UNANNOUNCED teach wherein a wheel rotational speed of the vehicle is determined as the operating parameter and the defined value is a wheel rotational speed of 0. (UNANNOUNCED- Page 4, paragraph 48; teaches that the vehicle’s wheel speed is detected, and when the wheel speed is zero, the vehicle is determined to be in a stationary state, which is a required precondition for unlocking the seat barrel lock).
Regarding claim 18, KURAMOCHI discloses that after unlocking, the seat bench (seat 19) is automatically opened to a predetermined angle. Specifically, (Pages 2-3, paragraph 20- the hinge mechanism 150 is provided with a spring that energizes the seat 19 to the opening direction, and the seat opens automatically when the hook 21 is released from the seat catch mechanism 30).
While KURAMOCHI employs a spring rather than an electric motor for the opening action, substituting the spring-driven opening mechanism with an electric motor to achieve the same automatic opening result would have been obvious as a simple substitution of one known mechanism for another, yielding the predictable result of automatic seat opening with the added benefit of controllable opening speed and angle. See KSR Int’l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 416 (2007).
Regarding claim 19, the same rejection applies as provided above for claim 10.
Claim(s) 12 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KURAMOCHI (EP 3747748 A1) in view of UNANNOUNCED (CN 112776923 A) and further in view of CHEN (CN 109637870 A).
Regarding claim 12, the combination of KURAMOCHI and UNANNOUNCED does not explicitly disclose that a status of an ignition is determined as an operating parameter and that the defined value is an ignition switched on.
CHEN teaches (Page 2, paragraph 13- a keyless ignition switch for motorcycles wherein the cushion lock can only be opened when the gear switch is rotated to the “SEAT” position, which requires the vehicle to be in a powered-on (electrified) state. The gear switch can only rotate under the electrifying condition.) In other words, CHEN requires the ignition to be switched on before the seat/cushion lock is accessible.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to further modify KURAMOCHI in view of UNANNOUNCED to require the ignition to be switched on as an additional operating parameter for seat unlocking, as taught by CHEN, in order to provide an additional layer of security by preventing seat bench access when the vehicle is powered off and not in active use.
Regarding claim 14, KURAMOCHI discloses the smart key 200 must be within wireless communication range but does not explicitly state the specified distance is within two meters.
CHEN teaches an electronic remote controller that communicates with the vehicle’s control sensor within a range of 1.2 meters (Page 4, paragraph 28- when remote controller close to the vehicle ignition lock 1.2 range1). This distance is close to and within the claimed “two meters.”
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to configure the wireless communication range of KURAMOCHI ’s smart key system to be within two meters, since CHEN demonstrates that a short-range communication distance of approximately 1.2 meters is suitable for keyless vehicle systems.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over KURAMOCHI in view of UNANNOUNCED, as applied to claim 10 above, and further in view of Konno (US 2004/0090307 A1).
Regarding claim 15, the combination of KURAMOCHI and UNANNOUNCED does not explicitly disclose that a status of an ignition lock is determined as an operating parameter and that the defined value is a key inserted into the ignition lock.
Konno teaches ([0036]–[0038], [0044]; FIGS. 3–4; a motorcycle anti-theft device wherein a remote control holder 24 is integrated with a handlebar locking module 12, and a remote control setting detection switch 31 inside the holder detects when the remote control key A is physically inserted. The main relay driving circuit 46 is operated, which enables the starting of engine only when the remote control key A is verified via ID matching AND the detection switch 31 confirms the key is inserted into the holder).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to further modify KURAMOCHI in view of UNANNOUNCED to include detection of a key inserted into an ignition lock as an additional operating parameter for seat unlocking, as taught by Konno, in order to ensure that the authorized user is physically present at the vehicle and actively engaged with the ignition system before permitting seat bench access, thereby providing an enhanced anti-theft measure.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over KURAMOCHI in view of UNANNOUNCED, as applied to claim 10 above, and further in view of MORI (US 2016/0090137 A1).
Regarding claim 17, the combination of KURAMOCHI in view of UNANNOUNCED teach wherein the seat bench has an occupancy sensor and an unoccupied seat bench is determined as a defined value. (UNANNOUNCED, page 4, paragraph 50; measures the pressing force on the seat barrel against a predetermined pressure threshold, and when the pressure is below the threshold, the seat is determined to be unoccupied, which is a required precondition for seat unlocking.) This pressure measurement on the seat barrel functions as an occupancy sensor. However, the combination of KURAMOCHI and UNANNOUNCED does not explicitly disclose that a motor speed is determined as an operating parameter and that a defined value is a motor speed greater than 0.
MORI teaches ([0081]; FIG. 5; a motorcycle ECU 100 connected to an Ne sensor 103 for detecting engine rotational speed as one of multiple operating parameters for conditional control of a motorcycle seat mechanism).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to further modify KURAMOCHI in view of UNANNOUNCED to include determining a motor speed as an operating parameter and requiring a motor speed greater than zero as a defined value, as taught by MORI, in order to confirm that the vehicle’s engine is running and the electrical systems are fully active before permitting seat bench unlocking and ensure the seat is released only when the driver is off the seat with the engine running.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 10-19 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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVETTA W GOINS whose telephone number is (571)272-2957. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday; 7:30 AM to 5:30 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.
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.
/DAVETTA W GOINS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2689
Prosecution Insights