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 1-2, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1, 3 and 18 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a) and 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejections have been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of the current amendments to the claims.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 3 recites the limitation "the sensor" in line4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim because it cannot be determined if “the sensor” refers to the sensor in line 2 of claim 3 or the sensor in line 4 of claim 1 or if these are all referring to the same sensor. For the purposes of examination, claim 3 is being interpreted such that it recites: “The motor vehicle of claim 2, including a trailer having the sensor…the vehicle is configured to utilize trailer data captured by the sensor of the trailer.”
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) 1-2, 4-9, 11-15 and 17-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pursifull (US Patent Application Publication 2020/0298643) in view of Smith (US Patent Application Publication 2016/0291601).
Regarding claim 1, Pursifull discloses a motor vehicle for towing a trailer having a deployable structure that extends and retracts from a side of the trailer between deployed and retracted positions, the motor vehicle comprising:
a sensor (12);
a user interface (25, 31, 32) that is configured to permit a user to input information corresponding to the retracted and deployed positions of the deployable structure based, at least in part, on an image of a trailer (11) that is generated using trailer data from the sensor [0025, 0032-0033, claims 3, 5 and/or 6]; and wherein:
the vehicle (10) is configured to: 1) utilize the trailer data to determine if the deployable structure of the trailer is at least partially deployed from the retracted position, and 2) if the deployable structure of the trailer is at least partially deployed, generate an operator alert and/or modify vehicle operation and/or restrict movement of the vehicle [0027-0028].
Pursifull does not disclose wherein a width of the trailer is greater than a width of the motor vehicle when the deployable structure is in the deployed position.
Smith discloses a motor vehicle (12) adapted for towing a trailer (14) having a deployable structure (18, 20, 22, 24, 26) that extends and retracts from a side of the trailer between deployed and retracted positions, wherein a width of the trailer is greater than a width of the motor vehicle when the deployable structure is in the deployed position [0023, as shown in Figure 1].
Smith teaches that it is known in the art to provide awnings and slide-out rooms as deployable structures for a trailer towed by a motor vehicle to provide cover from the sun and rain in the case of an awning or to provide more internal space in the case of a slide-out room [0007-0008]. The structures are deployable because, for example, they must conform to a street-legal width specification or they would cause excessive aerodynamic drag if they were to remain in an extended position [0008]. Smith teaches that it is desirable to prevent a situation in which the deployable structures are deployed while the vehicle is moving also because the structures are vulnerable in the deployed position [0011, 0015-0016]. The situation may be prevented by generating an operator alert if the deployable structure is at least partially deployed [0025].
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 substitute the deployable structure disclosed by Pursifull for at least one of the deployable structures disclosed by Smith which have a width greater than the width of the motor vehicle when deployed so that trailer data is used to determine if any extendable member disclosed by Smith is not fully retracted because, as taught by Smith, it is desirable to have the deployable structures in their retracted positions to prevent damage, so that the vehicle operates within a street-legal width and to reduce aerodynamic drag.
Regarding claim 2, Pursifull further discloses wherein the sensor is configured to capture data corresponding to at least a portion of a trailer hitched to the vehicle, and wherein the vehicle is configured to utilize the trailer data captured by the sensor of the vehicle to determine if the deployable structure of the trailer is at least partially deployed from the retracted position [0012, 0027-0028].
Regarding claim 4, Pursifull further discloses wherein the sensor comprises a rearview camera mounted to the motor vehicle [0012].
Regarding claim 5, Pursifull further discloses wherein the motor vehicle is configured to store a first form factor corresponding to at least one set of trailer data, wherein the first form factor corresponds to a trailer configuration in which the deployable structure is not deployed [0025, 0032-0033].
Regarding claim 6, Pursifull further discloses wherein the motor vehicle is configured to detect a trailer hitched to the vehicle [0028], and
utilize the user interface to prompt a user to identify a second form factor corresponding to a trailer configuration in which the deployable structure of the trailer is in a deployed position [0025, 0032-0033, claims 3, 5 and/or 6].
Regarding claim 7, Pursifull further discloses wherein the sensor comprises a camera [as shown in Figure 8];
the motor vehicle is configured to use image recognition to detect deviations from the first form factor [0026, 0034].
Regarding claim 8, Pursifull further discloses wherein the motor vehicle is configured to detect deviations from the first form factor while the motor vehicle is stationary and/or while the motor vehicle is moving [0026-0028].
Regarding claim 9, Pursifull further discloses wherein the motor vehicle is configured to, at least initially, restrict and/or prevent movement of the motor vehicle if the vehicle detects deviations from the first form factor [0027-0028].
Regarding claim 11, Pursifull discloses the vehicle having the user interface of claim 1. Pursifull does not explicitly disclose that the user interface is configured to display an image of at least a portion of a trailer hitched to the vehicle. In Pursifull, the sensor captures an image of at least a portion of a trailer hitched to the vehicle at the direction of the user [0018-0020, Figures 12-14 for images 50, 52, 60 captured by the sensor]. The user then associates a stored signature pattern with the deployed state of the deployable structure, where the signature pattern is an image that shows image areas 55, 56 in the captured image [0033, claims 3, 5-6], and thus the user inherently sees a display of a portion of the captured image through a user interface and can identify 1) an image of the trailer in which a deployable structure of the trailer is at least partially deployed, and/or 2) an image of the trailer in which a deployable structure of the trailer is in a retracted position.
Regarding claim 12, Pursifull further discloses wherein the vehicle is configured to store a profile of a trailer based, at least in part, on information input by a user concerning 1) an image in which a deployable structure is at least partially deployed, and 2) an image in which a deployable structure is in a retracted position [0033, claims 3, 5-6].
Regarding claim 13, Pursifull further discloses wherein the vehicle is configured to 1) determine if a trailer is hitched to the vehicle, and 2) determine if a profile of the trailer has been stored [0025-0026].
Regarding claim 14, Pursifull further discloses wherein the vehicle is configured to prompt a user to input information concerning retracted and/or deployed configurations of a deployable structure if a profile of the trailer has not been stored [0025-0026].
Regarding claim 15, Pursifull further discloses wherein the vehicle is configured to retrieve a profile of the trailer if a profile of the trailer has been stored [0025-0026].
Regarding claim 17, Pursifull further discloses wherein the vehicle is configured to prevent movement of the vehicle if a deployable structure is not in the retracted position [0027-0028].
Regarding claim 18, Pursifull discloses a motor vehicle that is capable of towing a trailer having a deployable structure, the motor vehicle comprising:
at least one sensor (12) that is configured to capture trailer data for a trailer (11) that is hitched to the vehicle (10), the trailer data including a first set of trailer data in which a deployable structure of the trailer is in a stowed position, and a second set of trailer data in which the deployable structure is in a deployed position [0027];
a user interface (25, 31, 32);
wherein the motor vehicle is configured to utilize the user interface to communicate the trailer data to a user [0027];
and wherein the user interface is configured to permit the user to identify the second set of trailer data as corresponding to a non-towable trailer form factor [0025, 0032-0033, claims 3, 5 and/or 6];
and wherein the vehicle is configured to utilize a data recognition feature to recognize trailer data for a trailer configuration in which a deployable structure of the trailer is not in a stowed position based, at least in part, on at least one of the first and second sets of trailer data [0025, 0032-0033, claims 3, 5 and/or 6].
Pursifull does not disclose wherein a width of the trailer is greater than a width of the motor vehicle.
Smith discloses a motor vehicle (12) adapted for towing a trailer (14) having a deployable structure (18, 20, 22, 24, 26) that extends and retracts from a side of the trailer between deployed and retracted positions, wherein a width of the trailer is greater than a width of the motor vehicle when the deployable structure is in the deployed position [0023, as shown in Figure 1].
Smith teaches that it is known in the art to provide awnings and slide-out rooms as deployable structures for a trailer towed by a motor vehicle to provide cover from the sun and rain in the case of an awning or to provide more internal space in the case of a slide-out room [0007-0008]. The structures are deployable because, for example, they must conform to a street-legal width specification or they would cause excessive aerodynamic drag if they were to remain in an extended position [0008]. Smith teaches that it is desirable to prevent a situation in which the deployable structures are deployed while the vehicle is moving also because the structures are vulnerable in the deployed position [0011, 0015-0016]. The situation may be prevented by generating an operator alert if the deployable structure is at least partially deployed [0025].
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 substitute the deployable structure disclosed by Pursifull for at least one of the deployable structures disclosed by Smith which have a width greater than the width of the motor vehicle when deployed so that trailer data is used to determine if any extendable member disclosed by Smith is not fully retracted because, as taught by Smith, it is desirable to have the deployable structures in their retracted positions to prevent damage, so that the vehicle operates within a street-legal width and to reduce aerodynamic drag.
Regarding claim 19, Pursifull further discloses wherein the motor vehicle is configured to restrict a speed of the motor vehicle if a deviation from the first set of trailer data is detected by the motor vehicle [0027-0028].
Regarding claim 20, Pursifull further discloses the vehicle including a camera [0012] and wherein at least one of the first and second sets of trailer data comprises an image of a trailer that can be displayed on the user interface. Pursifull does not explicitly disclose that the user interface is configured to display an image corresponding to at least one of the first and second sets of trailer data. In Pursifull, the sensor captures an image of at least a portion of a trailer hitched to the vehicle at the direction of the user [0018-0020, Figures 12-14 for images 50, 52, 60 captured by the sensor]. The user then associates a stored signature pattern with the deployed state of the deployable structure, where the signature pattern is an image that shows image areas 55, 56 in the captured image [0033, claims 3, 5-6], and thus the user inherently sees a display of the captured image through a user interface.
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pursifull (US Patent Application Publication 2020/0298643) in view of Smith (US Patent Application Publication 2016/0291601) and further in view of Lascau (WO 2014/186828 A1).
Regarding claim 3, Pursifull discloses the vehicle of claim 2 including a trailer and a sensor that is operably connected to the motor vehicle whereby the sensor communicates trailer data to the motor vehicle and wherein the vehicle is configured to utilize trailer data captured by the sensor to determine if the deployable structure of the trailer is at least partially deployed from the retracted position as discussed with respect to claim 1 above.
Pursifull does not disclose the deployable structure is selected from the group consisting of an awning, steps, or a slide out unit and does not disclose the sensor positioned on the trailer.
As discussed in reference to claim 1 above, Smith discloses a deployable structure comprising an awning or a slide out unit and teaches that it is known in the art to provide awnings and slide-out rooms as deployable structures for a trailer towed by a motor vehicle to provide cover from the sun and rain in the case of an awning or to provide more internal space in the case of a slide-out room [0007-0008, 0023]. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute at least one of the deployable structures disclosed by Smith for the deployable structure disclosed by Pursifull for the reasons specified in reference to claim 1 above.
Lascau discloses a second sensor in the form of a camera positioned on a trailer used to determine if a hitching structure of the trailer is deployed and engaged with a motor vehicle [page 3, lines 12-21; page 9, lines 3-13].
Lascau teaches that the sensor functions to allow the vehicle driver to correctly align the trailer hitching mechanism with the vehicle whether it is mounted on the vehicle or on the body of the trailer and teaches that providing the image generated by the sensor to the driver makes the connection process faster, more efficient and substantially safer [page 9, lines 3-13].
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 second sensor disclosed by Lascau with the body of the trailer disclosed by Pursifull so that the sensor output is received by the controller in the same manner as the camera disclosed by Pursifull because the sensor mounted to the body of the trailer can also be used to provide an image that allows the driver to determine alignment of a hitching mechanism and improves the safety of the connection process.
Claim(s) 10 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pursifull (US Patent Application Publication 2020/0298643) in view of Smith (US Patent Application Publication 2016/0291601) and further in view of Jembari (US Patent Application Publication 2017/0174275).
Regarding claim 10, Pursifull discloses the vehicle of claim 9 as discussed above but does not disclose wherein the motor vehicle is configured to permit movement of the motor vehicle if a user override is activated after deviations from the first form factor are detected.
Jembari discloses a trailer hitch arrangement for a motor vehicle that has a user override input which, once activated, allows movement of the vehicle by allowing disengagement of a brake assembly after deviations from a proper coupling status are detected [0003, 0019].
Jembari teaches that an override signal may be required to overcome a faulty sensor that would prevent movement of the vehicle [0019].
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 restrict movement of the vehicle using a brake assembly that can be overridden, as disclosed by Jembari, in the vehicle disclosed by Pursifull so that the vehicle can be moved if the sensor is faulty.
Regarding claim 16, Pursifull discloses the vehicle of claim 1 wherein the vehicle is configured to restrict vehicle movement by limiting a speed of the vehicle if a deployable structure is not in the retracted position [0027-0028].
Pursifull does not disclose the vehicle includes a user override feature that permits a user to at least partially modify the restriction of vehicle movement.
Jembari discloses a trailer hitch arrangement for a motor vehicle that has a user override input which, once activated, allows movement of the vehicle by allowing disengagement of a brake assembly after deviations from a proper coupling status are detected [0003, 0019].
Jembari teaches that an override signal may be required to overcome a faulty sensor that would prevent movement of the vehicle [0019].
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 restrict movement of the vehicle using a brake assembly that can be overridden, as disclosed by Jembari, in the vehicle disclosed by Pursifull so that the vehicle can be moved if the sensor is faulty.
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
Prosecution Insights