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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks, filed 10/16/2025, with respect to the rejections of claims 1-10 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) have been fully considered and are persuasive in view of the amendments to the claims. Therefore, the rejections have been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new grounds of rejection is made.
It is noted that the interpretation of the claims under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) has been withdrawn in view of the amendments to the claims.
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.
Claims 1-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kuehner et al. (hereafter Kuehner)(US PgPub 2023/0339431) and in view of Kiyokazu (JP 2005096171 A).
Regarding claim 1, Kuehner discloses a vehicle control apparatus comprising a processor (Figure 1) configured to: detect a person around a vehicle (Figure 1, Element 120 and Paragraph 0023 where the vehicle control system detects a user within a specified distance or communication range to the vehicle); start a camera mounted on the vehicle when the person is detected around the vehicle (Figure 1, Elements 121, 124 and Paragraphs 0022, 0024, 0025, 0026, 0027 and 0034 where the vehicle includes camera 124 for capturing facial images of the approaching user); authenticate the person detected as a user of the vehicle by using an image captured by the camera and decide authentication completion under a condition that authentication is established an authentication criterion number of times or more (Figure 1, Element 121 and Paragraphs 0022, 0024, 0025, 0026, 0027 and 0034 where the user is authenticated when captured facial images/features match stored facial images/features); and bring an openable and closeable object operation unit into operation when the processor decides authentication completion, the openable and closeable object operation unit at least releasing a lock of an openable and closeable object or executing an opening operation of opening the openable and closeable object, the openable and closeable object being included in the vehicle (Figure 1, Elements 111, 120, 123 and Paragraphs 0019, 0021, 0022, 0031, 0032, 0033 and 0035 where vehicle door(s) are unlocked based on authenticating the approaching user). Kuehner discloses facial recognition of the user but does not specifically disclose wherein the processor is configured to determine that a motion of the person is a motion of getting in the vehicle when the image captured by the camera includes an image of a face of the person facing front, and to change a setting of face authentication based on a result of the determination. In the same field of endeavor, Kiyokazu discloses a vehicle door control system where user intent is determined by detecting that a face of the user is facing front as the user approaches a vehicle door (Page 9, Paragraph (6)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the user intent determination based on a face of the user facing front of Kiyokazu to the vehicle system of Kuehner, thereby authenticating a face of the user by further determining that the user is facing front as the user approaches the vehicle, motivation being to determine user intent while preventing false door openings, conserving system resources and increasing vehicle safety.
Regarding claim 2, Kuehner discloses wherein the processor is configured to obtain an image of one frame included in the captured image and perform the authentication once on a basis of whether or not the obtained image of the one frame includes the face image of the user of the vehicle (Figure 1, Element 121 and Paragraphs 0022, 0024, 0025, 0026, 0027 and 0034 where the user is authenticated when captured facial images/features match stored facial images/features from a frame of the imaging data).
Regarding claim 3, Kuehner discloses wherein the processor is configured to determine whether or not the motion of the person detected corresponds to a specific pattern, decide the authentication completion under a condition that the authentication is established the authentication criterion number of times or more when the motion of the person detected corresponds to the specific pattern, and decide the authentication completion under a condition that the authentication is established a smaller number of times than the authentication criterion number of times when the motion of the person detected does not correspond to the specific pattern (Figure 1, Elements 122, 125, Figure 5 and Paragraphs 0019-0035 and 0066-0068 where the vehicle completes authentication and corresponding vehicle door unlocking when authorized user trajectory has been confirmed).
Regarding claim 4, Kuehner discloses wherein the processor is configured to determine whether or not the motion of the person detected corresponds to the specific pattern on a basis of at least one of a position of the image of the person in the captured image and a change of the position of the image of the person in the captured image (Figure 1, Elements 122, 125, Figure 5 and Paragraphs 0019-0035 and 0066-0068 where a trajectory of the approaching user is detected by using image data from camera 125. A door corresponding to user trajectory is unlocked).
Regarding claim 5, Kuehner discloses wherein the specific pattern is a motion of passing through an image capturing range of the camera of the vehicle, and when the captured image includes a person who is imaged at a left end or a right end of the image capturing range of camera, the processor is configured to determine that the motion of the person detected corresponds to the specific pattern (Figure 1, Elements 122, 125, Figure 5 and Paragraphs 0019-0035 and 0066-0068 where a trajectory of the approaching user is detected and tracked by using image data from camera 125. A door corresponding to user trajectory is unlocked).
Regarding claim 6, Kuehner discloses wherein, when a first image captured by imaging the person detected after the camera is started includes the image of the face of the person facing front detected, the processor is configured to determine that the motion of the person detected does not correspond to the specific pattern (see rejection for claim 1 and Figure 1, Elements 124, 125, Figure 5 and Paragraphs 0019-0035 and 0066-0068 where both facial detection and trajectory detection are performed. Authentication and door unlocking occurs when both detections are satisfied).
Regarding claim 7, Kuehner discloses wherein the processor is configured to obtain movement speed of the person detected and determine that the motion of the person detected does not correspond to the specific pattern when the movement speed decreases as the person detected approaches the vehicle (Figure 1, Elements 124, 125, Figure 5 and Paragraphs 0019-0035 and 0066-0068 where speed of the user is determined in the trajectory calculations. Increases and decreases in speed indicate user intention. A stationary user at a predetermined distance away from the vehicle will not initiate door unlocking).
Regarding claim 8, Kuehner discloses wherein the processor is configured to obtain movement speed of the person detected and decide the authentication completion under both conditions that the movement speed decreases as the person detected approaches the vehicle, and the authentication is established the authentication criterion number of times or more (Figure 1, Elements 124, 125, Figure 5 and Paragraphs 0019-0035 and 0066-0068 where speed of the user is determined in the trajectory calculations. Increases and decreases in speed indicate user intention. Decreasing speed while approaching the vehicle initiates vehicle door unlocking).
Method claim 9 is drawn to the method of using the corresponding apparatus claimed in claims 1-8. Therefore method claim 9 corresponds to apparatus claims 1-8 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used above.
Regarding claim 10, see obviousness rejections for claims 1-8 which disclose all of the claimed limitations.
Regarding claim 11, see rejection for claim 1 which discloses all of the claimed limitations. It is noted that “control an execution mode of face authentication based on a result of the determination” is read on by “change a setting of face authentication based on a result of the determination” where a face of the user facing front is authenticated and vehicle doors are opened/unlocked.
Regarding claim 12, see rejection for claim 9 which discloses all of the claimed limitations. It is noted that “control an execution mode of face authentication based on a result of the determining” is read on by “changing a setting of face authentication based on a result of the determining” where a face of the user facing front is authenticated and vehicle doors are opened/unlocked.
Regarding claim 13, see rejection for claim 10 which discloses all of the claimed limitations. It is noted that “control an execution mode of face authentication based on a result of the determination” is read on by “change a setting of face authentication based on a result of the determination” where a face of the user facing front is authenticated and vehicle doors are opened/unlocked.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THOMAS D ALUNKAL whose telephone number is (571)270-1127. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9AM-5PM.
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, BRIAN ZIMMERMAN can be reached at 571-272-3059. 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.
/THOMAS D ALUNKAL/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2686
Prosecution Insights