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, see pages 8-14, with respect to the rejection of claims 1-12 under 35 U.S.C. 101 and 112(b) have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejections have been withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments, see pages 14-17, with respect to the rejection of claim 9 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that Fujisawa (JP 2013-220743 A) does not disclose “the determination unit is configured to determine the type of collision based on the relational information…wherein the relational information is provided based on a relationship that the lateral-direction acceleration is higher than the longitudinal-direction acceleration in the second type of collision” as previously recited in cancelled claims 8 and 9. Applicant reasons that Figure 3 of Fujisawa merely illustrates comparing the longitudinal accelerations Ax between collision types, but “does not provide any indication of a value of the longitudinal acceleration Ax relative to a value of the lateral acceleration Ay for a respective collision.” Applicant’s argument is not persuasive because Fujisawa teaches that certain types of collisions may have a higher need for airbags, such as when there is a change in lateral acceleration and the vehicle passengers require deployment of side curtain airbags in addition to the front-facing airbag [0003-0005]. Fujisawa illustrates, for example, a collision of the type having the higher need in Figure 2b. Figure 3 shows the corresponding relation between the longitudinal acceleration Ax and the lateral acceleration Ay corresponding to each collision type shown in Figure 2. as shown in Figure 3, the lateral direction acceleration is higher than the longitudinal direction acceleration for the collision type corresponding to Figure 2c. Fujisawa teaches that "The determination unit 22 determines the collision type of the vehicle 1 by utilizing the fact that the longitudinal acceleration Ax and the lateral acceleration Ay generated in the vehicle 1 differ depending on the collision type. Here, the determination unit 22 acquires the longitudinal acceleration Ax and the lateral acceleration Ay detected by the acceleration sensor 21 as coordinate values (Ax, Ay), and determines which area of the determination map in Figure 4 the acceleration Ax and the lateral acceleration Ay correspond to determine the type of collision" [see Fujisawa 0030]. Thus, Fujisawa does not merely compare the longitudinal accelerations between collision types and instead determination unit 22 determines the coordinates of the longitudinal direction acceleration and the lateral direction acceleration to locate the collision type according to its position along the relational curves shown in Figure 3.
Applicant additionally argues, see pages 17-20, that Saito (JP 2013-132922 A) does not disclose “the relational information includes activation threshold information that defines an activation threshold for determining occurrence of the first type of collision” and therefore cannot disclose “the activation threshold information is provided based on a relationship such that the longitudinal-direction acceleration corresponding to the activation threshold decreases as a collision angle, which is an angle between a center line of the vehicle and a direction of travel of another vehicle that has collided with the vehicle, increases.” In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). In this case, Iguchi (US Patent Application Publication 2019/0293679) is relied upon for disclosure of separating collision type discrimination [see Iguchi 0005-0006].
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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) 1, 4-5, 7 and 10-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iguchi (US Patent Application Publication 2019/0293679) in view of Fujisawa (JP 2013-220743 A)..
Regarding claim 1, Iguchi discloses a collision determination device for determining a type of collision of a vehicle, comprising:
an acceleration acquisition unit configured to acquire a longitudinal-direction acceleration and a lateral-direction acceleration output from side sensors provided on left and right sides of a vehicle body, which detect the longitudinal-direction acceleration and the lateral-direction acceleration [0030-0032, as shown in Figure 1],
a determination unit configured to determine a type of collision based on relational information indicating a relationship of the longitudinal-direction acceleration and the lateral-direction acceleration detected by the acceleration acquisition unit to the longitudinal-direction acceleration and the lateral-direction acceleration according to the type of collision, wherein the collision determination device is configured to activate the occupant protection device in response to determining that the type of collision is the first type of collision and requires activation of the occupant protection device [0005-0006, 0059, 0068-0069].
Iguchi does not disclose the determination unit is configured to determine the type of collision based on the relational information provided to distinguish between a first type of collision and a second type of collision in a two-dimensional coordinate space with a first axis indicating the longitudinal-direction acceleration and a second axis indicating the lateral-direction acceleration, and the first type of collision has a higher need for activation of an occupant protection device for frontal collisions than the second type of collision, wherein the relational information is provided based on a relationship that the lateral-direction acceleration is higher than the longitudinal-direction acceleration in the second type of collision, wherein the relational information includes activation threshold information that defines an activation threshold for determining occurrence of the first type of collision, and the activation threshold information is provided based on a relationship such that the longitudinal-direction acceleration corresponding to the activation threshold decreases as the lateral-direction acceleration increases from a low acceleration region to a high acceleration region.
Fujisawa discloses a determination unit (22) configured to determine a type of collision based on relational information provided to distinguish between a first type of collision and a second type of collision in a two-dimensional coordinate space with a first axis indicating longitudinal-direction acceleration and a second axis indicating lateral-direction acceleration [0009-0011], and
the first type of collision has a higher need for activation of an occupant protection device for frontal collisions than the second type of collision [0003-0005],
wherein the determination unit is configured to determine the type of collision based on relational information that is provided based on a relationship that the lateral-direction acceleration is higher than the longitudinal-direction acceleration in the second type of collision [0029, as shown in Figure 3],
wherein the relational information includes activation threshold information that defines an activation threshold (X1) for determining occurrence of the fist type of collision [0031], and
the activation threshold information is provided based on a relationship such that the longitudinal-direction acceleration corresponding to the activation threshold decreases as the lateral-direction acceleration increases from a low acceleration region to a high acceleration region [0049, as shown in Figure 6].
Fujisawa teaches that in the full-wrap frontal collision, the entire width of the front of the vehicle body collides with an object, whereas in the offset frontal collision, only a portion of the width of the front of the vehicle body collides with an object [0003]. The offset frontal collision generates a yawing movement of the vehicle so that vehicle occupants are moved in the side-to-side direction in addition to the forward direction in contrast to the full-wrap frontal collision which results only in forward movement of the vehicle occupants [0004]. Fujisawa teaches that the curtain airbags that are deployed from the sides of the vehicle are therefore needed in addition to front airbags at the front of the vehicle in the event of an offset frontal collision [0004-0005].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the determination disclosed by Fujisawa with the device disclosed by Iguchi to selectively deploy occupant protection device in accordance with the type of frontal collision in which it is most likely to be necessary.
Regarding claims 4 and 10, Iguchi further discloses wherein the determination unit is configured to determine whether the first type of collision has occurred after determining that a collision that has occurred is of a different type than the second type of collision [as shown in Figure 5, the collision determination unit 236 determines whether the full-overlap collision has occurred in step S508 after determining that the collision is of a different type than a pole, oblique or low-overlap collision in step S506].
Regarding claim 7, Iguchi discloses an activation control device for controlling activation of an occupant protection device to be mounted to a vehicle, comprising:
side sensors provided on left and right sides of a vehicle body, which detect the longitudinal-direction acceleration and the lateral-direction acceleration [0030-0032, as shown in Figure 1]; and
an electronic control device configured to acquire the longitudinal-direction acceleration and the lateral-direction acceleration output from the side sensors to control activation of the occupant protection device [0030-0032, as shown in Figure 1], wherein
the electronic control device comprises:
an acceleration acquisition unit configured to acquire a longitudinal-direction acceleration and a lateral-direction acceleration output from side sensors [0030-0032, as shown in Figure 1]; and
a determination unit configured to determine whether to activate the occupant protection device for frontal collisions based on relational information indicating a relationship of the longitudinal-direction acceleration and the lateral-direction acceleration detected by the acceleration acquisition unit to the longitudinal-direction acceleration and the lateral-direction acceleration according to a type of collision, wherein the collision determination device is configured to activate the occupant protection device in response to determining that the type of collision is the first type of collision and requires activation of the occupant protection device [0005-0006, 0059, 0068-0069].
Iguchi does not disclose the determination unit is configured to determine the type of collision based on the relational information provided to distinguish between a first type of collision and a second type of collision in a two-dimensional coordinate space with a first axis indicating the longitudinal-direction acceleration and a second axis indicating the lateral-direction acceleration, and the first type of collision has a higher need for activation of an occupant protection device for frontal collisions than the second type of collision, wherein the relational information is provided based on a relationship that the lateral-direction acceleration is higher than the longitudinal-direction acceleration in the second type of collision, wherein the relational information includes activation threshold information that defines an activation threshold for determining occurrence of the first type of collision, and the activation threshold information is provided based on a relationship such that the longitudinal-direction acceleration corresponding to the activation threshold decreases as the lateral-direction acceleration increases from a low acceleration region to a high acceleration region.
Fujisawa discloses a determination unit (22) configured to determine a type of collision based on relational information provided to distinguish between a first type of collision and a second type of collision in a two-dimensional coordinate space with a first axis indicating longitudinal-direction acceleration and a second axis indicating lateral-direction acceleration [0009-0011], and
the first type of collision has a higher need for activation of an occupant protection device for frontal collisions than the second type of collision [0003-0005],
wherein the determination unit is configured to determine the type of collision based on relational information that is provided based on a relationship that the lateral-direction acceleration is higher than the longitudinal-direction acceleration in the second type of collision [0029, as shown in Figure 3],
wherein the relational information includes activation threshold information that defines an activation threshold (X1) for determining occurrence of the fist type of collision [0031], and
the activation threshold information is provided based on a relationship such that the longitudinal-direction acceleration corresponding to the activation threshold decreases as the lateral-direction acceleration increases from a low acceleration region to a high acceleration region [0049, as shown in Figure 6].
Fujisawa teaches that in the full-wrap frontal collision, the entire width of the front of the vehicle body collides with an object, whereas in the offset frontal collision, only a portion of the width of the front of the vehicle body collides with an object [0003]. The offset frontal collision generates a yawing movement of the vehicle so that vehicle occupants are moved in the side-to-side direction in addition to the forward direction in contrast to the full-wrap frontal collision which results only in forward movement of the vehicle occupants [0004]. Fujisawa teaches that the curtain airbags that are deployed from the sides of the vehicle are therefore needed in addition to front airbags at the front of the vehicle in the event of an offset frontal collision [0004-0005].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the determination disclosed by Fujisawa with the device disclosed by Iguchi to selectively deploy occupant protection device in accordance with the type of frontal collision in which it is most likely to be necessary.
Claim(s) 6 and 12-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iguchi (US Patent Application Publication 2019/0293679) in view of Fujisawa (JP 2013-220743 A) and further in view of Saito (JP 2013-132922 A).
Regarding claims 6 and 12, Iguchi, as modified by Fujisawa, discloses the devices of claims 5 and 11 as discussed above but does not disclose wherein the activation threshold information is provided based on a relationship such that the longitudinal-direction acceleration corresponding to the activation threshold decreases as a collision angle, which is an angle between a center line of the vehicle and a direction of travel of another vehicle that has collided with the vehicle, increases.
Saito discloses a method of detecting a collision and an occupant protection control device comprising an activation threshold for determining the occurrence of a first type of collision, wherein activation threshold information is provided based on a relationship such that longitudinal-direction acceleration corresponding to the activation threshold decreases as a collision angle (ϴ), which is an angle between a center line of the vehicle and a direction of travel of another vehicle that has collided with the vehicle, increases [0020, 0022, 0024-0028, as shown in Figures 3-4].
Saito teaches that when the collision is not of a full-wrap, head-on type, it is possible that only the side airbags will be deployed or the front airbags will be deployed unnecessarily based on the output of the longitudinal and lateral acceleration sensors because the magnitude of the longitudinal-direction acceleration may not rise to the standard threshold value [0005]. Saito teaches that by lowering the threshold value as the collision angle increases from 0°, to a value under 45° for example, the appropriate combination of airbags are deployed thereby ensuring adequate vehicle occupant protection [0021, 0028].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the activation threshold disclosed by Iguchi, as modified by Fujisawa, to decrease when the collision angle increases to appropriately trigger the longitudinal-direction activation threshold and deploy the necessary combination of vehicle occupant protection devices because the longitudinal acceleration sensor produces a lower output when the collision angle is increased.
Regarding claim 13, Iguchi discloses an activation control device for controlling activation of an occupant protection device to be mounted to a vehicle, comprising:
side sensors provided on left and right sides of a vehicle body, which detect the longitudinal-direction acceleration and the lateral-direction acceleration [0030-0032, as shown in Figure 1]; and
an electronic control device configured to acquire the longitudinal-direction acceleration and the lateral-direction acceleration output from the side sensors to control activation of the occupant protection device [0030-0032, as shown in Figure 1], wherein
the electronic control device comprises:
an acceleration acquisition unit configured to acquire a longitudinal-direction acceleration and a lateral-direction acceleration output from side sensors [0030-0032, as shown in Figure 1]; and
a determination unit configured to determine whether to activate the occupant protection device for frontal collisions based on relational information indicating a relationship of the longitudinal-direction acceleration and the lateral-direction acceleration detected by the acceleration acquisition unit to the longitudinal-direction acceleration and the lateral-direction acceleration according to a type of collision, wherein the collision determination device is configured to activate the occupant protection device in response to determining that the type of collision is the first type of collision and requires activation of the occupant protection device [0005-0006, 0059, 0068-0069].
Iguchi does not disclose the determination unit is configured to determine the type of collision based on the relational information provided to distinguish between a first type of collision and a second type of collision in a two-dimensional coordinate space with a first axis indicating the longitudinal-direction acceleration and a second axis indicating the lateral-direction acceleration, and the first type of collision has a higher need for activation of an occupant protection device for frontal collisions than the second type of collision, wherein the relational information is provided based on a relationship that the lateral-direction acceleration is higher than the longitudinal-direction acceleration in the second type of collision, wherein the relational information includes activation threshold information that defines an activation threshold for determining occurrence of the first type of collision, and the activation threshold information is provided based on a relationship such that the longitudinal-direction acceleration corresponding to the activation threshold decreases as the lateral-direction acceleration increases from a low acceleration region to a high acceleration region.
Fujisawa discloses a determination unit (22) configured to determine a type of collision based on relational information provided to distinguish between a first type of collision and a second type of collision in a two-dimensional coordinate space with a first axis indicating longitudinal-direction acceleration and a second axis indicating lateral-direction acceleration [0009-0011], and
the first type of collision has a higher need for activation of an occupant protection device for frontal collisions than the second type of collision [0003-0005],
wherein the determination unit is configured to determine the type of collision based on relational information that is provided based on a relationship that the lateral-direction acceleration is higher than the longitudinal-direction acceleration in the second type of collision [0029, as shown in Figure 3],
wherein the relational information includes activation threshold information that defines an activation threshold (X1) for determining occurrence of the fist type of collision [0031], and
the activation threshold information is provided based on a relationship such that the longitudinal-direction acceleration corresponding to the activation threshold decreases as the lateral-direction acceleration increases from a low acceleration region to a high acceleration region [0049, as shown in Figure 6].
Fujisawa teaches that in the full-wrap frontal collision, the entire width of the front of the vehicle body collides with an object, whereas in the offset frontal collision, only a portion of the width of the front of the vehicle body collides with an object [0003]. The offset frontal collision generates a yawing movement of the vehicle so that vehicle occupants are moved in the side-to-side direction in addition to the forward direction in contrast to the full-wrap frontal collision which results only in forward movement of the vehicle occupants [0004]. Fujisawa teaches that the curtain airbags that are deployed from the sides of the vehicle are therefore needed in addition to front airbags at the front of the vehicle in the event of an offset frontal collision [0004-0005].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the determination disclosed by Fujisawa with the device disclosed by Iguchi to selectively deploy occupant protection device in accordance with the type of frontal collision in which it is most likely to be necessary.
does not disclose wherein the activation threshold information is provided based on a relationship such that the longitudinal-direction acceleration corresponding to the activation threshold decreases as a collision angle, which is an angle between a center line of the vehicle and a direction of travel of another vehicle that has collided with the vehicle, increases.
Saito discloses a method of detecting a collision and an occupant protection control device comprising an activation threshold for determining the occurrence of a first type of collision, wherein activation threshold information is provided based on a relationship such that longitudinal-direction acceleration corresponding to the activation threshold decreases as a collision angle (ϴ), which is an angle between a center line of the vehicle and a direction of travel of another vehicle that has collided with the vehicle, increases [0020, 0022, 0024-0028, as shown in Figures 3-4].
Saito teaches that when the collision is not of a full-wrap, head-on type, it is possible that only the side airbags will be deployed or the front airbags will be deployed unnecessarily based on the output of the longitudinal and lateral acceleration sensors because the magnitude of the longitudinal-direction acceleration may not rise to the standard threshold value [0005]. Saito teaches that by lowering the threshold value as the collision angle increases from 0°, to a value under 45° for example, the appropriate combination of airbags are deployed thereby ensuring adequate vehicle occupant protection [0021, 0028].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the activation threshold disclosed by Iguchi, as modified by Fujisawa, to decrease when the collision angle increases to appropriately trigger the longitudinal-direction activation threshold and deploy the necessary combination of vehicle occupant protection devices because the longitudinal acceleration sensor produces a lower output when the collision angle is increased.
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 JOSHUA CAMPBELL whose telephone number is (571) 272-8215. The examiner
can normally be reached on Monday - Friday 9:00 AM – 5:00 PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor,
Lindsay M. Low can be reached on (571) 272-1196. 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. 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). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer
Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR
CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JOSHUA CAMPBELL/
Examiner, Art Unit 3747
/LOGAN M KRAFT/
Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3747