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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 5/14/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-20 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.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 6, 7, 9, 11, 12, 16, 17, 19 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ikeda et al. (US 2024/0026647 A1) and Camhi et al. (US 2020/0047687 A1).
For claims 1, 11 and 20, Ikeda discloses an apparatus comprising: a transceiver (Fig. 5, Para. 0064, 0068, communication device) configured to:
obtain a first user instruction instructing to enable an automatic vehicle hold function (Fig. 2, 3, abstract, para. 0019, 0030, 0036, 0037, 0041, where instruction to enable or disable the automatic vehicle hold function is obtained); and
obtain status information of a vehicle (Fig. 2, 3, para. 0042, 0057, where the vehicle condition data is obtained);
a controller coupled to the transceiver and configured to:
control, based on the first user instruction, an automatic vehicle hold system to switch to a enabled state (Para. 0025, 0054, where the control function may be activated); and
switch, based on the status information meeting a first condition, the automatic vehicle hold system from the disable state to an enabled state (Fig. 2, 3, Para. 0007, 0020, 0024, where the automatic vehicle hold system status may be monitored and determined and switch from disable to enabled),
wherein, in the enabled state, the controller is powered on and the automatic vehicle hold system does not perform an automatic vehicle hold operation before obtaining a second user instruction confirming performance of the automatic vehicle hold operation (Fig. 2, 3, where the steps monitors and obtain second user instruction, such as based on the parking brake or operation amount of braking operation to confirming performance of the automatic vehicle hold operation).
Ikeda does not specifically disclose the automatic vehicle hold system switches from a sleep state to the wake-up state, wherein, in the sleep state, a controller of the automatic vehicle hold system operates in a low-power mode and performs no automatic vehicle hold operation, and wherein, in the wake-up state, the controller is powered on under control of a wake-up circuit or a wake-up chip. Camhi in the same field of the art discloses switching a vehicle component or function from a sleep state to the wake-up state, wherein, in the sleep state, a component of the vehicle system operates in a low-power mode and performs no operation, and wherein, in the wake-up state, the controller is powered on under control of a wake-up circuit or a wake-up chip (Abstract, para. 0003, 0004, 0026, where the function can be switched between low-power mode to wake-up mode). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present claimed invention to modify the invention of Maeda to configure the automatic vehicle hold system switches from a sleep state to the wake-up state, wherein, in the sleep state, a controller of the automatic vehicle hold system operates in a low-power mode and performs no automatic vehicle hold operation, and wherein, in the wake-up state, the controller is powered on under control of a wake-up circuit or a wake-up chip, as taught by Camhi to deactivate undesired vehicle functions or features based on operator preference and to preserve power.
For claims 2 and 12, Ikeda, as modified discloses the apparatus of claims 1 and 11, wherein the controller further configured to:
obtain a user intention when the status information of the vehicle meets a first condition; and switch, based on the user intention, the status (Fig. 2, 3, where the driver intention is identified and control is performed).
For claims 6 and 16, Ikeda, as modified, discloses the apparatus of claims 2 and 12, wherein the first condition comprises a brake pedal stroke is greater than a first threshold, a brake pedal force is greater than a second threshold, brake system pressure is greater than a third threshold, a vehicle speed is 0, an accelerator pedal stroke is 0, or an accelerator pedal force is 0 (Para. 0049-0053, where the accelerator operation amount is monitored).
For claims 7 and 17, Ikeda, as modified, discloses the apparatus of claims 2 and 12, wherein the first condition further comprises the automatic vehicle hold system is fault-free, a vehicle door is in a closed state, or a seat belt of a user is fastened (Para. 0035, 0045, 0046, where the system determine the operator presence based on seat belt and vehicle door status).
For claims 9 and 19, Ikeda, as modified, discloses the apparatus of claims 1 and 11, wherein the controller is further configured to control, based on a third user instruction or when the status information of the vehicle meets a third condition, the automatic vehicle hold system to switch to a sleep state, wherein the third user instruction instructs to disable the automatic vehicle hold function, and wherein the third condition comprises an accelerator pedal stroke is not 0, an accelerator pedal force is not 0, a gear is a park gear, or an electric parking brake is enabled (Para. 0050, where when the user operate the accelerator, the automatic vehicle hold function switches to disengaged state).
Claim(s) 3, 4, 13, and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ikeda et al. (US 2024/0026647 A1) and Camhi et al. (US 2020/0047687 A1), as applied to claims 2 and 12 above, and further in view of Maeda et al. (US 2022/0111855 A1).
For claims 3 and 13, Ikeda, as modified discloses the apparatus of claims 2 and 12, but does not specifically disclose send first prompt information to prompt a user to confirm performing an automatic vehicle hold operation; and obtain, from the user and in response to the first prompt information, a second user instruction; control the automatic vehicle hold system to switch to an activated state when the second user instruction instructs to confirm performing the automatic vehicle hold operation. Maeda in the same field of the art discloses send first prompt information to prompt a user to confirm performing an automatic vehicle hold operation; and obtain, from the user and in response to the first prompt information, a second user instruction; control the automatic vehicle hold system to switch to an activated state when the second user instruction instructs to confirm performing the automatic vehicle hold operation (Fig. 7, para. 0098-0102, where the vehicle interface display the status of the feature to the occupant, prompted and confirmed by the occupant to activate the function).
For claims 4 and 14, Ikeda, as modified discloses the apparatus of claims 3 and 13, wherein the controller is further configured to: control the automatic vehicle hold system to switch to a sleep state when the second user instruction instructs to disable the automatic vehicle hold function (Fig. 2, 3, para. 0007, 0020, 0024, where the steps determines and verify if the function should be disabled).
Claim(s) 5 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ikeda et al. (US 2024/0026647 A1) and Camhi et al. (US 2020/0047687 A1) as applied to claims 2 and 12 above, and further in view of Urano et al. (US 2018/0105184 A1).
For claims 5 and 15, Ikeda, as modified, discloses the apparatus of claims 2 and 12, but does not specifically disclose the transceiver is further configured to: send second prompt information when the status information of the vehicle does not meet the first condition, and wherein the second prompt information is notifies a user of the status information of the vehicle that does not meet the first condition. Urano in the same field of the art discloses the transceiver is further configured to: send second prompt information when the status information of the vehicle does not meet the first condition, and wherein the second prompt information is notifies a user of the status information of the vehicle that does not meet the first condition (Para. 0014, 0103, 0104, where the driver is notified when a condition for certain vehicle operating function is not satisfied). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present claimed invention to modify the invention of Ikeda to send second prompt information when the status information of the vehicle does not meet the first condition, and wherein the second prompt information is notifies a user of the status information of the vehicle that does not meet the first condition, as taught by Urano so effectively inform the driver of the status and conditions of the vehicle control functions.
Claim(s) 8 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ikeda et al. (US 2024/0026647 A1) and Camhi et al. (US 2020/0047687 A1) as applied to claims 2 and 12 above, and further in view of Motin et al. (US 2022/0055581 A1).
For claims 8 and 18, Ikeda, as modified, discloses the apparatus of claims 1 and 11, but does not specifically disclose the controller is further configured to enable an electric parking brake when the status information of the vehicle meets a second condition, and wherein the second condition comprises a seat belt of a user is in an unlocked state, at least one vehicle door is in an open state, working time of the automatic vehicle hold system exceeds a fourth threshold, or the user leaves the vehicle. Motin in the same field of the art discloses the controller is further configured to enable an electric parking brake when the status information of the vehicle meets a second condition, and wherein the second condition comprises a seat belt of a user is in an unlocked state, at least one vehicle door is in an open state, working time of the automatic vehicle hold system exceeds a fourth threshold, or the user leaves the vehicle (Para. 0061, where command is sent to activate electric parking brake when the vehicle is at park state and seat belt unbuckled). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present claimed invention to modify the invention of Maeda to enable an electric parking brake when the status information of the vehicle meets a second condition, and wherein the second condition comprises a seat belt of a user is in an unlocked state, at least one vehicle door is in an open state, working time of the automatic vehicle hold system exceeds a fourth threshold, or the user leaves the vehicle, as taught by Motin to increase the convenient and safety for the driver to safely hold the vehicle while parked.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
(US 2020/010843 A1) Suzuki et al. discloses a vehicle control device activating automatic vehicle hold function and monitoring driver intention and vehicle conditions.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Sze-Hon Kong whose telephone number is (571)270-1503. The examiner can normally be reached 9 AM-5 PM Mon-Fri.
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, Abby Lin can be reached at (571) 270-3976. 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.
/SZE-HON KONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3657
Prosecution Insights