Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
2. This is in response to Application filed 07/02/26. Claims 1 – 7 has been Examined and are now pending.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
3. The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
4. Claim(s) 1 - 3, 6 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Takatsuna US 20220066768 A1.
Regarding claims 1 and 7, Takatsuna anticipates a vehicle information processing device comprising a processor configured to perform download by receiving update software for an electronic control device mounted on a vehicle [0008, “…A software update device … is configured to control software update of an electronic control unit mounted on a vehicle….”];
perform installation [see 0041,]by causing the electronic control device to store the update software [0008, shows downloading update and storing/storage; also see 0041];
perform activation by validating the update software [0041 - 0042, “…and a phase of activation in which the updated version of the software installed in the update-target electronic control unit is activated…”, also see in 0042 performed and verified i.e. validating]; and
make a notification of which stage among the download, the installation, and the
activation a trouble has occurred in when update to the update software is not successfully
completed, wherein the update to the update software is completed when all of the download,
the installation, and the activation are completed [0058, see “… a function of notifying the server 1 of completion of downloading, and a function of transmitting error information to the server 1 when an error occurs], also refer to 0061 showing activation process and downloading and 0074.
Regarding claim 2, the vehicle information processing device according to claim 1, wherein the notification includes information that indicates the electronic control device for which the update to the updated software is not successfully completed [0058, shows both transmitting notification when completed and when there’s an error], also see [0080, which also teaches, “… notifying that the software update process has been suspended..”].
Regarding claim 3, the vehicle information processing device according to claim 1, wherein:
the processor is configured to perform a verification as to whether the update software
is compatible with the vehicle when the update to the update software is performed; and the notification includes information that indicates a result of the verification [0055, see update confirmation].
Regarding claim 6, the vehicle information processing device according to claim 1, wherein the processor is configured to make the notification using an error code allocated in advance to each of the download, the installation, and the activation [0058, shows transmitting error information].
7. Claim(s) 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takatsuna US 20220066768 A1. as applied in claim 1 and further in view Okamoto et al. US 20220365772 A1.
Regarding claim 5 Takatsuna doesn’t explicitly disclose wherein the notification includes information that indicates a state of a battery mounted on the vehicle when the update to the update software is performed.
However, Okamoto in a similar configuration and analogous art discloses in 0031, meeting installable conditions by “…determining that the remaining battery level of the in-vehicle battery is equal to or greater than a predetermined capacity…”.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to filling the invention to be able to determine battery conditions prior to installation by combining Takatsuna and Okamoto because it would enable being able to perform updated under installable conditions as suggested by Okamoto [0031].
Response to Arguments
Claim 4 is still rejected as depending upon a rejected based claim And regarding Applicants’ arguments filed 07/02/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues on the first page of his arguments that,
“…Takatsuna only discloses general error handling, such as transmitting the error information to the server when an error occurs in completion of downloading (and)
…fails to identify "which stage among the download, the installation, and the activation a trouble has occurred in when update to the update software is not successfully completed" as recited in the independent claims…”.
Examiner disagrees Taktsuna clearly discloses transmitting errors to the server as well a notifying if and when completion is done in 0058 and in addition to that in 0074 denotes when an error has occurred in the OTA software (OVER THE AIR) this clearly is directed to transmission and downloading errors. 0074 also shows “…The control unit 38 may determine that the state is not the state where the data is downloadable when the control unit 38 detects at least one of an event …”. Applicant’s claims doesn’t preclude or exclude this inclusive definition.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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.
Correspondence Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Chuck Kendall whose telephone number is 571-272-3698. The examiner can normally be reached on 10:00 am - 6:30pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Hyung Sough can be reached on 571-272-6799. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only [0060 – 0080].
For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/CHUCK O KENDALL/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2192
Prosecution Insights