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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Priority is being given to 04/11/2023.
Status of Claims
This action is in reply to the amendments filed on 06/04/2026.
Claims 1 and 3-5 are currently pending and have been examined.
Claims 1 and 5 are amended.
Claim 2 is cancelled.
Claims 1 and 3-5 are currently rejected.
This action is made FINAL.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed 06/04/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant’s arguments appear to be directed to the amended claims which are addressed in the updated rejections below.
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.
Claim(s) 1 and 3-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aradhyula et. al. (US 11,648,976), herein Aradhyula in view of Seydoux et. al. (US 2011/0221692), herein Seydoux and Teranisi et. al. (US 2009/0171472), herein Teranisi.
Regarding claim 1:
Aradhyula teaches:
A mobile terminal operated by an operator to remotely support a moving body (The movement of the vehicle 10 and trailer 30 may be remotely controlled by a user 40 using a mobile device 50 [col 4, lines 14-15]), the mobile terminal comprising:
a communication device configured to perform wireless communication with the moving body (The vehicle system controller 110 may control the subsystems based, at least in part, on signals generated by the vehicle sensors 120 and the mobile device 50 (e.g., a control signal 130). The mobile device 50 may also provide data transfer functions of the system 100. [col 5, lines 5-9]);
a touch panel (the user interface 60 (e.g., a touch-sensitive display screen) [col 4, lines 62-63]) configured to detect a presence or absence of a touch by the operator (The mobile device 50 may generate and display two engagement areas 220, 222 on the user interface 60. The engagement areas 220, 222 are engaged by the user 40. For example, the user 40 holds the mobile device 50 with both hands and contacts the two engagement areas 220, 222 with the user's thumbs [col 6, lines 1-6]); and
a processor (fig. 11, mobile device processor 54), wherein a motion of the moving body is controlled in accordance with an operation of the operator tilting the mobile terminal (The mobile device 50 uses measurements of tilt and rotation of the mobile device 50 as propulsion command and steering curvature control inputs that are used to generate control signals 130 [col 7, lines 1-4]) while touching the touch panel (When the user 40 contacts both of the engagement areas 220, 222, the mobile device 50 is able to perform methods described in further detail below [col 6, lines 6-8]), and
the processor is configured to:
determine, as a reference angle in a specific rotation direction of the mobile terminal, a tilt angle of the mobile terminal in the specific rotation direction (the mobile device 50 prompts the user 40 to establish an initialization tilt angle 332. The initialization tilt angle 332 is a tilt angle that is a neutral control position where neither a forward or reverse control command is generated [col 8, lines 34-38]) [at a time point of detection of a touch by the operator on the touch panel];
generate a control signal for the motion of the moving body based on the reference angle and the tilt angle in the specific rotation direction (When the tilt angle 260 is located in the reverse tilt angle control sector 346, the control signal 130 is configured to instruct the vehicle 10 to place the vehicle 10 in reverse and apply the accelerator and/or brake to maintain a speed. When the tilt angle 260 is located in the forward tilt angle control sector 348, the control signal 130 is configured to instruct the vehicle 10 to place the vehicle 10 in drive or a forward gear (e.g., first gear, second gear) and apply the accelerator or brake to maintain a speed. [col 9, lines 58-67]) during a control validity period in which the touch is continued from the time point of the detection (If the user 40 releases contact from one or both of the engagement areas 220, 222, the mobile device 50 ends the control method and places the vehicle 10 in park. [col 10, lines 1-3]);
transmit the generated control signal to the moving body via the communication device (The mobile device 50 generates a control signal 130 based on the curvature control sector 442, 444, 445, 446, 447 in which the heading 270 is located [col 11, lines 63-65]).
and reset the reference angle in response to release of the touch by the operator (a new initialization tilt angle 332 may be established for each session [col 9, lines 10-11]).
Seydoux also teaches:
and reset the reference angle in response to release of the touch by the operator (This state lasts so long as the finger remains pressed on the zone 68, whether stationary or moving. As soon as finger contact is released, the actions opposite to the above actions are executed, with the autopilot being reactivated and with the icon 70 disappearing. [0080];).
Aradhyula does not explicitly teach, however Seydoux teaches:
determine, as a reference angle in a specific rotation direction of the mobile terminal, a tilt angle of the mobile terminal in the specific rotation direction at a time point of detection of a touch by the operator on the touch panel (in order to determine its angle of tilt (the positions of the pitching and roll axes 32 and 34 relative to the absolute vertical in a terrestrial frame of reference) at the moment the finger makes contact, with this position then being defined as the new neutral position for subsequent application of commands by tilting [0076]);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Aradhyula to include the teachings as taught by Seydoux with a reasonable expectation of success. Both references are in the same field of endeavor of remote controlling a vehicle using tilt control of a mobile device. Seydoux also teaches the benefit of “activating piloting commands by means of symbols in reactive mode that leaves the user free to hold the appliance at a slope throughout the stage of piloting in reactive mode that requires only one finger of one hand for piloting in reactive mode, combining all of the piloting commands that are activated via the touch screen (up/down, turn right/left), the other hand then being free, and in particular free to activate special functions such as firing a virtual shot that enables the user to activate special commands, in particular firing, in a manner that is more intuitive and spontaneous, without any incidence on piloting proper [Seydoux, 0024]”.
Aradhyula in view of Seydoux do not explicitly teach, however Teranisi teaches:
stop the moving body when a communication disruption occurs between the moving body and the mobile terminal (As shown in the figure, the period from time 0 to time t1 is when the safety slave Cn is in the "not participating in communication" state (e.g., "absent" or "communication failure"), and thus the status signal of the equipment Dn is turned OFF ("0"), which indicates an "unsafe state", the operation instruction signal of each equipment becomes "0", which indicates "stop instruction", by the execution of the interlock program, and all pieces of equipment will be in the stopped state. [0089]), and maintain a stopped state of the moving body until the operator releases the touch once (When the interlock invalidation request is generated at a time point of time t1, the status signal of the equipment Dn of "0" is invalidated and becomes "1", and the operation instruction signal of each equipment becomes "1" indicating "operation instruction" by the execution of the interlock program, and all pieces of the equipment will be in the operation state [0090]) even when the operator continues the touch before the stop after the mobile terminal returns from the communication disruption after the stop (the interlock is made to an invalid state with a simple operation without altering the user program itself and without forcibly setting or resetting a specific input signal [0042]; provide a safety controller of having the interlock in an invalid state with a simple operation without altering the user program itself, or forcibly setting or resetting the specific input signal or output signal when one of the equipment configuring the manufacturing system is "absent" or communication failure or power disconnection has occurred. [0034]);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Aradhyula and Seydoux to include the teachings as taught by Teranisi with a reasonable expectation of success. Teranisi teaches “it is an object of the present invention to provide a safety controller of having the interlock in an invalid state with a simple operation without altering the user program itself, or forcibly setting or resetting the specific input signal or output signal when one of the equipment configuring the manufacturing system is "absent" or communication failure or power disconnection has occurred. [Teranisi, 0034]” which provides the benefit of locking out a user input after a disconnection until the disconnection is acknowledge by the user by actively resetting/invalidating the lockout signal. Although Teranisi does not teach that the invalidation request is performed by lifting and retouching a touchscreen, both Aradhyula and Seydoux teaches using this lifting operation as a resetting mechanic and one would be motivated by the benefits of Teranisi to apply the lifting function of Aradhyula and Seydoux as the trigger for the interlock invalidation request to arrive at the claimed invention. Additionally, choosing exactly what defines the interlocking invalidation request would be an obvious design choice as long as it results in an active decision by the user and stops the control from automatically resuming control after the signal is reconnected without any form of acknowledgement/resetting.
Regarding Claim 3:
Aradhyula in view of Seydoux and Teranisi teaches all the limitations of claim 1, upon which this claim is dependent.
Seydoux further teaches:
wherein where a new touch on the touch panel is detected after the touch by the operator is released, the processor updates the reference angle with a tilt angle in the specific rotation direction at a time point of the detection of the new touch (in order to determine its angle of tilt (the positions of the pitching and roll axes 32 and 34 relative to the absolute vertical in a terrestrial frame of reference) at the moment the finger makes contact, with this position then being defined as the new neutral position for subsequent application of commands by tilting [0076]).
Regarding Claim 4:
Aradhyula in view of Seydoux and Teranisi teaches all the limitations of claim 1, upon which this claim is dependent.
Seydoux further teaches:
wherein where a difference between a tilt angle in the specific rotation direction and the reference angle is less than a threshold value during the control validity period (For example, a neutral tilt angle control sector 342 may be defined by a range of tilt angles including the initialization tilt angle 332 (e.g., the initialization angle +/−10 degrees) [col 9, lines 16-19]), the processor generates the control signal such that a control amount of the motion of the moving body does not change (when the tilt angle 260 is located in the neutral tilt angle control sector 342, the control signal 130 is configured to instruct the vehicle 10 to place the vehicle 10 in park or place the vehicle 10 in neutral and apply the brake [col 9, lines 54-58]).
Regarding claim 5:
Aradhyula teaches:
A remote support system including a moving body and a mobile terminal operated by an operator to remotely support the moving body (The movement of the vehicle 10 and trailer 30 may be remotely controlled by a user 40 using a mobile device 50 [col 4, lines 14-15]), the remote support system comprising one or more processors (fig. 11, mobile device processor 54), wherein the mobile terminal includes:
a communication device configured to perform wireless communication with the moving body (The vehicle system controller 110 may control the subsystems based, at least in part, on signals generated by the vehicle sensors 120 and the mobile device 50 (e.g., a control signal 130). The mobile device 50 may also provide data transfer functions of the system 100. [col 5, lines 5-9]); and
a touch panel (the user interface 60 (e.g., a touch-sensitive display screen) [col 4, lines 62-63]) configured to detect a presence or absence of a touch by the operator (The mobile device 50 may generate and display two engagement areas 220, 222 on the user interface 60. The engagement areas 220, 222 are engaged by the user 40. For example, the user 40 holds the mobile device 50 with both hands and contacts the two engagement areas 220, 222 with the user's thumbs [col 6, lines 1-6]),
a motion of the moving body is controlled in accordance with an operation of the operator tilting the mobile terminal (The mobile device 50 uses measurements of tilt and rotation of the mobile device 50 as propulsion command and steering curvature control inputs that are used to generate control signals 130 [col 7, lines 1-4]) while touching the touch panel (When the user 40 contacts both of the engagement areas 220, 222, the mobile device 50 is able to perform methods described in further detail below [col 6, lines 6-8]), and
the one or more processors are configured to:
determine, as a reference angle in a specific rotation direction of the mobile terminal, a tilt angle of the mobile terminal in the specific rotation direction (the mobile device 50 prompts the user 40 to establish an initialization tilt angle 332. The initialization tilt angle 332 is a tilt angle that is a neutral control position where neither a forward or reverse control command is generated [col 8, lines 34-38]) [at a time point of detection of a touch by the operator on the touch panel]; and
generate a control signal for the motion of the moving body based on the reference angle and the tilt angle in the specific rotation direction (When the tilt angle 260 is located in the reverse tilt angle control sector 346, the control signal 130 is configured to instruct the vehicle 10 to place the vehicle 10 in reverse and apply the accelerator and/or brake to maintain a speed. When the tilt angle 260 is located in the forward tilt angle control sector 348, the control signal 130 is configured to instruct the vehicle 10 to place the vehicle 10 in drive or a forward gear (e.g., first gear, second gear) and apply the accelerator or brake to maintain a speed. [col 9, lines 58-67]) during a control validity period in which the touch is continued from the time point of the detection (If the user 40 releases contact from one or both of the engagement areas 220, 222, the mobile device 50 ends the control method and places the vehicle 10 in park. [col 10, lines 1-3]).
and reset the reference angle in response to release of the touch by the operator (a new initialization tilt angle 332 may be established for each session [col 9, lines 10-11]).
Seydoux also teaches:
and reset the reference angle in response to release of the touch by the operator (This state lasts so long as the finger remains pressed on the zone 68, whether stationary or moving. As soon as finger contact is released, the actions opposite to the above actions are executed, with the autopilot being reactivated and with the icon 70 disappearing. [0080];).
Aradhyula does not explicitly teach, however Seydoux teaches:
determine, as a reference angle in a specific rotation direction of the mobile terminal, a tilt angle of the mobile terminal in the specific rotation direction at a time point of detection of a touch by the operator on the touch panel (in order to determine its angle of tilt (the positions of the pitching and roll axes 32 and 34 relative to the absolute vertical in a terrestrial frame of reference) at the moment the finger makes contact, with this position then being defined as the new neutral position for subsequent application of commands by tilting [0076]); and
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Aradhyula to include the teachings as taught by Seydoux with a reasonable expectation of success. Both references are in the same field of endeavor of remote controlling a vehicle using tilt control of a mobile device. Seydoux also teaches the benefit of “activating piloting commands by means of symbols in reactive mode that leaves the user free to hold the appliance at a slope throughout the stage of piloting in reactive mode that requires only one finger of one hand for piloting in reactive mode, combining all of the piloting commands that are activated via the touch screen (up/down, turn right/left), the other hand then being free, and in particular free to activate special functions such as firing a virtual shot that enables the user to activate special commands, in particular firing, in a manner that is more intuitive and spontaneous, without any incidence on piloting proper [Seydoux, 0024]”.
Aradhyula in view of Seydoux do not explicitly teach, however Teranisi teaches:
stop the moving body when a communication disruption occurs between the moving body and the mobile terminal (As shown in the figure, the period from time 0 to time t1 is when the safety slave Cn is in the "not participating in communication" state (e.g., "absent" or "communication failure"), and thus the status signal of the equipment Dn is turned OFF ("0"), which indicates an "unsafe state", the operation instruction signal of each equipment becomes "0", which indicates "stop instruction", by the execution of the interlock program, and all pieces of equipment will be in the stopped state. [0089]), and maintain a stopped state of the moving body until the operator releases the touch once (When the interlock invalidation request is generated at a time point of time t1, the status signal of the equipment Dn of "0" is invalidated and becomes "1", and the operation instruction signal of each equipment becomes "1" indicating "operation instruction" by the execution of the interlock program, and all pieces of the equipment will be in the operation state [0090]) even when the operator continues the touch before the stop after the mobile terminal returns from the communication disruption after the stop (the interlock is made to an invalid state with a simple operation without altering the user program itself and without forcibly setting or resetting a specific input signal [0042]; provide a safety controller of having the interlock in an invalid state with a simple operation without altering the user program itself, or forcibly setting or resetting the specific input signal or output signal when one of the equipment configuring the manufacturing system is "absent" or communication failure or power disconnection has occurred. [0034]);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Aradhyula and Seydoux to include the teachings as taught by Teranisi with a reasonable expectation of success. Teranisi teaches “it is an object of the present invention to provide a safety controller of having the interlock in an invalid state with a simple operation without altering the user program itself, or forcibly setting or resetting the specific input signal or output signal when one of the equipment configuring the manufacturing system is "absent" or communication failure or power disconnection has occurred. [Teranisi, 0034]” which provides the benefit of locking out a user input after a disconnection until the disconnection is acknowledge by the user by actively resetting/invalidating the lockout signal. Although Teranisi does not teach that the invalidation request is performed by lifting and retouching a touchscreen, both Aradhyula and Seydoux teaches using this lifting operation as a resetting mechanic and one would be motivated by the benefits of Teranisi to apply the lifting function of Aradhyula and Seydoux as the trigger for the interlock invalidation request to arrive at the claimed invention. Additionally, choosing exactly what defines the interlocking invalidation request would be an obvious design choice as long as it results in an active decision by the user and stops the control from automatically resuming control after the signal is reconnected without any form of acknowledgement/resetting.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Wataya (US 2019/0375294) discloses when the permission signal/non-permission signal cannot be acquired due to a failure such as a disconnection or a communication failure, the plurality of display devices 50 stop the reception of the input, so it can be prevented from being carelessly operated at the time of failure.
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 Scott R Jagolinzer whose telephone number is (571)272-4180. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 8AM - 4PM Eastern.
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, Christian Chace can be reached at (571)272-4190. 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.
Scott R. Jagolinzer
Examiner
Art Unit 3665
/S.R.J./Examiner, Art Unit 3665 /CHRISTIAN CHACE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3665
Prosecution Insights