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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
1. A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 3/4/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
2. Claims 1-20 are currently pending.
3. Claims 1-3, 5, 8, 14, and 19-20 are currently amended.
Information Disclosure Statement
4. The Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) submitted on 3/4/2026 has been considered by the Examiner.
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.
5. Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
6. The limitation in Claim 20 with new matter recites: “determining the one or more alternative movements comprises: determining that the future pricing discount is distinct from a previous pricing discount associated with a previous pricing element; and determining the one or more alternative movements based at least in part on determining that the future pricing discount is distinct from the previous pricing discount.” The Applicant has not specifically pointed out where the amended claim is supported, nor does there appear to be a written description of the claim limitation for determining the future pricing discount is distinct from a previous discount and determining the alternative movements is distinct from the previous pricing discounts in the application filed.
The amendment narrows because there are two distinct pricing discounts based on alternative movements. The specification determines the current optimization score is different than the previous optimization score to determine discounts currently available to the driver. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the previous optimization score that is different from the current optimization score is not equivalent to the previous pricing discount that is different from the future pricing discount. As such, there is no indication in the specification that the invention had possession of for determining the future pricing discount is distinct from a previous discount and determining the alternative movements is distinct from the previous pricing discounts.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
7. 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.
8. 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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
9. 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.
10. Claims 1 and 3-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oduor (US 20180122016 A1) in view of Ramirez (US 20180374113 A1).
11. Regarding Claim 1, Oduor teaches a method comprising: receiving, at a computing system from a mobile computing system, while the mobile computing system is nonstationary, sensor data representing one or more movements of the mobile computing system that occurred during a first time (Oduor: [0037] and [0040] Note that using real-time sensor data to determine the movement of the vehicle is equivalent to performing the functions of the mobile computing system while it is nonstationary.);
Determining, at the computing system, while the mobile computing system is nonstationary, a quality value based at least in part on the one or more movements of the mobile computing system (Oduor: [0023], [0051], and [0054]);
A pricing element based at least in part on the quality value (Oduor: [0013] and [0059]);
And generating, at the computing system, while the mobile computing system is nonstationary, instructions to present a data element on a display, of the mobile computing system…; and transmitting the instructions from the computing system to the mobile computing system while the mobile computing system is nonstationary… (Oduor: [0058]).
Oduor fails to explicitly teach an alternative quality value associated with an alternative pricing element corresponding to a future pricing discount; one or more alternative movements of the mobile computing system that, upon implementation at a second time subsequent to the first time, result in the alternative quality value; and the data element comprising an indication of at least one of the one or more alternative movements of the mobile computing system and the future pricing discount; and transmitting the instructions to the mobile computing system… to cause the display of the mobile computing system to present the data element.
However, in the same field of endeavor of insurance premiums, Ramirez teaches an alternative quality value associated with an alternative pricing element corresponding to a future pricing discount; one or more alternative movements of the mobile computing system that, upon implementation at a second time subsequent to the first time, result in the alternative quality value (Ramirez: [0068]);
And generating, at the computing system, while the mobile computing system is nonstationary, instructions to present a data element on a display, of the mobile computing system, the data element comprising an indication of at least one of the one or more alternative movements of the mobile computing system and the future pricing discount; and transmitting the instructions from the computing system to the mobile computing system while the mobile computing system is nonstationary to cause the display of the mobile computing system to present the data element (Ramirez: [0068] and [0141]).
Oduor and Ramirez are considered to be analogous to the claim invention because they are in the same field of insurance premiums. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Oduor to incorporate the teachings of Ramirez to determine an alternative quality value associated with an alternative pricing element corresponding to a future pricing discount and determine an alternative movement because it provides the benefit of having an option for the driver to improve the safety of the vehicle and reduce the cost of insurance. Updating the insurance in real-time compels the driver to adjust their driving habits to mitigate a risk of accidents or dangerous driving conditions as explained in [0004] and [0068] of Ramirez.
12. Regarding Claim 3, Oduor and Ramirez remains as applied above in Claim 1, and further, Ramirez teaches transmitting, from the computing system to the mobile computing system while the mobile computing system is nonstationary, second instructions to control one or more vehicle components to implement at least one of the one or more alternative movements at a vehicle at which the mobile computing system is configured (Ramirez: [0115] and [0137]).
13. Regarding Claim 4, Oduor and Ramirez remains as applied above in Claim 3, and further, Ramirez teaches the one or more vehicle components comprise one or more of: an engine control system, a braking control system, a transmission control system, or a suspension control system (Ramirez: [0115]).
14. Regarding Claim 5, Oduor and Ramirez remains as applied above in Claim 1, and further, Ramirez teaches transmitting, from the computing system to the mobile computing system while the mobile computing system is nonstationary, a vehicle operation profile comprising control data for controlling, based at least in part on at least one of the one or more alternative movements, one or more vehicle components at a vehicle at which the mobile computing system is configured (Ramirez: [0115] and [0137]).
15. Regarding Claim 6, Oduor and Ramirez remains as applied above in Claim 1, and further, Oduor teaches the pricing element comprises one or more of: a vehicle insurance rate, a vehicle insurance discount, a vehicle usage rate, or a vehicle usage discount (Oduor: [0013] and [0059]).
16. Regarding Claim 7, Oduor and Ramirez remains as applied above in Claim 1, and further, Oduor teaches the computing system is one of: a mobile communication device, a computer module removable affixed to a vehicle at which the mobile computing system is configured, or an engine control unit configured at the vehicle at which the mobile computing system is configured (Oduor: [0065] and [0066]).
17. Regarding Claim 8, Oduor teaches a non-transitory computer-readable medium comprising instructions that, when executed by one or more computer processors, cause the one or more computer processors to perform operations comprising (Oduor: [0027] and [0069]):
Receiving, from a mobile computing system, while the mobile computing system is nonstationary, sensor data representing one or more movements of the mobile computing system that occurred during a first time (Oduor: [0037] and [0040] Note that using real-time sensor data to determine the movement of the vehicle is equivalent to performing the functions of the mobile computing system while it is nonstationary.);
Determining, while the mobile computing system is nonstationary, a quality value based at least in part on the one or more movements of the mobile computing system (Oduor: [0023], [0051], and [0054]);
A pricing element based at least in part on the quality value (Oduor: [0013] and [0059]);
And generating, while the mobile computing system is nonstationary, instructions to present a data element on a display of the mobile computing system …; and transmitting the instructions to the mobile computing system while the mobile computing system is nonstationary… (Oduor: [0058]).
Oduor fails to explicitly teach an alternative quality value associated with an alternative pricing element corresponding to a future pricing discount; one or more alternative movements of the mobile computing system that, upon implementation at a second time subsequent to the first time, result in the alternative quality value; and the data element comprising an indication of at least one of the one or more alternative movements of the mobile computing system.
However, in the same field of endeavor of insurance premiums, Ramirez teaches an alternative quality value associated with an alternative pricing element corresponding to a future pricing discount; one or more alternative movements of the mobile computing system that, upon implementation at a second time subsequent to the first time, result in the alternative quality value (Ramirez: [0068]);
And generating, at the computing system, while the mobile computing system is nonstationary, instructions to present a data element on a display, of the mobile computing system, the data element comprising an indication of at least one of the one or more alternative movements of the mobile computing system and the future pricing discount; and transmitting the instructions from the computing system to the mobile computing system while the mobile computing system is nonstationary to cause the display of the mobile computing system to present the data element (Ramirez: [0068] and [0141]).
Oduor and Ramirez are considered to be analogous to the claim invention because they are in the same field of insurance premiums. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Oduor to incorporate the teachings of Ramirez to determine an alternative quality value associated with an alternative pricing element corresponding to a future pricing discount and determine an alternative movement because it provides the benefit of having an option for the driver to improve the safety of the vehicle and reduce the cost of insurance. Updating the insurance in real-time compels the driver to adjust their driving habits to mitigate a risk of accidents or dangerous driving conditions as explained in [0004] and [0068] of Ramirez.
18. Regarding Claim 9, Oduor and Ramirez remains as applied above in Claim 8, and further, Oduor teaches the sensor data comprises data received from one or more sensors configured at a vehicle at which the mobile computing system is configured (Oduor: [0037] and [0040]).
19. Regarding Claim 10, Oduor and Ramirez remains as applied above in Claim 9, and further, Oduor teaches the one or more sensors comprise one or more of: a camera, a lidar sensor, a radar sensor, a sonar sensor, an inertial sensor, a location sensor, an audio sensor, or an environment sensor (Oduor: [0038]).
20. Regarding Claim 11, Oduor and Ramirez remains as applied above in Claim 8, and further, Oduor teaches determining a user based at least in part on data received with the sensor data (Oduor: [0033] and [0067]);
And determining the quality value further based at least in part on user data associated with the user (Oduor: [0056] Note that user data is equivalent to the aggregated subject driver score that is continuously updated.).
21. Regarding Claim 12, Oduor and Ramirez remains as applied above in Claim 11, and further, Ramirez teaches determining, based at least in part on the user data, a vehicle operation profile comprising control data for controlling one or more vehicle components at a vehicle at which the mobile computing system is configured; and transmitting the vehicle operation profile to the mobile computing system while the mobile computing system is nonstationary (Ramirez: [0115] and [0137]).
22. Regarding Claim 13, Oduor and Ramirez remains as applied above in Claim 8, and further, Ramirez teaches transmitting, to the mobile computing system while the mobile computing system is nonstationary, second instructions to control one or more vehicle components at a vehicle at which the mobile computing system is configured (Ramirez: [0115] and [0137]).
23. Regarding Claim 14, Oduor teaches a system comprising: one or more processors; and a non-transitory memory storing computer-executable instructions that, when executed, cause the one or more processors to perform operations comprising (Oduor: [0027] and [0069]):
Receiving, from a mobile computing system, while the mobile computing system is nonstationary, sensor data representing one or more movements of the mobile computing system that occurred during a first time (Oduor: [0037] and [0040]);
Determining, while the mobile computing system is nonstationary, a quality value based at least in part on the one or more movements of the mobile computing system (Oduor: [0023], [0051], and [0054]);
A pricing element based at least in part on the quality value (Oduor: [0013] and [0059]);
And generating, while the mobile computing system is nonstationary, instructions to present a data element on a display of the mobile computing system…; and transmitting the instructions to the mobile computing system while the mobile computing system is nonstationary… (Oduor: [0058]).
Oduor fails to explicitly teach an alternative quality value associated with an alternative pricing element corresponding to a future pricing discount; one or more alternative movements of the mobile computing system that, upon implementation at a second time subsequent to the first time, result in the alternative quality value; and the data element comprising an indication of at least one of the one or more alternative movements of the mobile computing system and the future pricing discount; and transmitting the instructions to the mobile computing system… to cause the display of the mobile computing system to present the data element.
However, in the same field of endeavor of insurance premiums, Ramirez teaches an alternative quality value associated with an alternative pricing element corresponding to a future pricing discount; one or more alternative movements of the mobile computing system that, upon implementation at a second time subsequent to the first time, result in the alternative quality value (Ramirez: [0068]);
And generating, at the computing system, while the mobile computing system is nonstationary, instructions to present a data element on a display, of the mobile computing system, the data element comprising an indication of at least one of the one or more alternative movements of the mobile computing system and the future pricing discount; and transmitting the instructions from the computing system to the mobile computing system while the mobile computing system is nonstationary to cause the display of the mobile computing system to present the data element (Ramirez: [0068] and [0141]).
Oduor and Ramirez are considered to be analogous to the claim invention because they are in the same field of insurance premiums. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Oduor to incorporate the teachings of Ramirez to determine an alternative quality value associated with an alternative pricing element corresponding to a future pricing discount and determine an alternative movement because it provides the benefit of having an option for the driver to improve the safety of the vehicle and reduce the cost of insurance. Updating the insurance in real-time compels the driver to adjust their driving habits to mitigate a risk of accidents or dangerous driving conditions as explained in [0004] and [0068] of Ramirez.
24. Regarding Claim 15, Oduor and Ramirez remains as applied above in Claim 14, and further, Ramirez teaches transmitting, to the mobile computing system while the mobile computing system is nonstationary, second instructions to control one or more vehicle components at a vehicle at which the mobile computing system is configured (Ramirez: [0115] and [0137]).
25. Regarding Claim 16, Oduor and Ramirez remains as applied above in Claim 15, and further, Ramirez teaches the one or more vehicle components comprise at least one of one or more autonomous vehicle components or one or more semi-autonomous vehicle components (Ramirez: [0115]).
26. Regarding Claim 17, Oduor and Ramirez remains as applied above in Claim 14, and further, Oduor teaches the pricing element comprises one or more of: a vehicle insurance rate, a vehicle insurance discount, a vehicle usage rate, or a vehicle usage discount (Oduor: [0013] and [0059]).
27. Regarding Claim 18, Oduor and Ramirez remains as applied above in Claim 14, and further, Oduor teaches the sensor data comprises data received from one or more sensors configured at a vehicle at which the mobile computing system is configured (Oduor: [0037] and [0040]).
28. Regarding Claim 19, Oduor and Ramirez remains as applied above in Claim 18, and further, Ramirez teaches the determining the alternative quality value comprises: determining that the quality value is distinct from a previous quality value associated with one or more previous movements of the mobile computing system (Ramirez: [0035], [0046], and [0046]);
And determining the alternative quality value based at least in part on determining that the quality value is distinct from the previous quality value (Ramirez: [0068]).
29. Regarding Claim 20, Oduor and Ramirez remains as applied above in Claim 14, and further, Ramirez teaches determining the one or more alternative movements comprises: determining that the future pricing discount is distinct from a previous pricing discount associated with a previous pricing element; and determining the one or more alternative movements based at least in part on determining that the future pricing discount is distinct from the previous pricing discount; one or more alternative movements of the mobile computing system that, upon implementation at a second time subsequent to the first time, result in the alternative quality value (Ramirez: [0068] Note that determining a monetary benefit for a less risky route is equivalent to determining the future pricing discount distinct from a previous pricing discount. Also, the alternate movements are determined because the less risky alternate route (compared to the initial route risk) is selected based on the monetary benefit.).
30. Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oduor (US 20180122016 A1), in view of Ramirez (US 20180374113 A1), and in further view of Cabral (US 20110264366 A1).
31. Regarding Claim 2, Oduor and Ramirez remains as applied above in Claim 1.
Oduor and Ramirez fail to explicitly teach determining a time period of implementing at least one of the one or more alternative movements associated with applying the future pricing discount; wherein the data element further comprises the time period.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Cabral teaches determining a time period of implementing at least one of the one or more alternative movements associated with applying the future pricing discount; wherein the data element further comprises the time period (Cabral: [0056] Note the time to complete the alternative route is displayed in Fig. 5.).
Oduor, Ramirez, and Cabral are considered to be analogous to the claim invention because they are in the same field of vehicle navigation. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Oduor and Ramirez to incorporate the teachings of Cabral for the display element to comprise a time period of implementing the alternative movements because it provides the benefit of displaying the time differences between the initial and alternate routes to increase the awareness of the driver when selecting a route, as explained in [0050] and [0056] of Cabral.
Response to Arguments
32. Applicant’s arguments with respect to Claims 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. Ramirez (US 20180374113 A1) has been applied to teach the amended subject matter of the data element comprising an indication of alternative movements and future pricing discount in the rejection above as cited in at least paragraphs [0068] and [0141]. Ramirez teaches to display alternative routes and to transmit insurance incentives to the user for taking the alternative route.
33. Oduor (US 20180122016 A1), in view of Ramirez (US 20180374113 A1), and in further view of Cabral (US 20110264366 A1) teaches all aspects of the invention. The rejection is modified according to the newly amended language but still maintained with the current prior art of record.
34. Claims 1-20 remain rejected under their respective grounds and rational as cited above, and as stated in the prior office action which is incorporated herein. Also, although not specifically argued, all remaining claims remain rejected under their respective grounds, rationales, and applicable prior art for these reasons cited above, and those mentioned in the prior office action which is incorporated herein.
Conclusion
35. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL T SILVA whose telephone number is (571)272-6506. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Tues: 7AM - 4:30PM ET; Wed-Thurs: 7AM-6PM ET; Fri: OFF.
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, Angela Ortiz can be reached at 571-272-1206. 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.
/MICHAEL T SILVA/Examiner, Art Unit 3663
Prosecution Insights