DETAILED ACTION
This is the first action in response to US Patent Application No. 18/629,908, filed 08 April, 2024, with foreign priority claimed to Chinese Application CN 2024 10232743.5, filed 01 March, 2024.
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 .
Claim Interpretation
The examiner’s understanding of certain language present throughout the claims is indicated below.
When a living biological detection device is in a “closed state”, the specification indicates that this means that the device is not in a working state (see instant specification at [0016]). This meaning of “closed state” is presumed to apply to the claimed disinfection device as well. Accordingly, the term “closed state” is generally understood to be synonymous with a “deactivated”, “inactivated”, “deenergized”, or “off” state, and does not imply the presence of a physical closing mechanism, e.g., a shutter.
Conversely, when a device is in an “enabled” state, it is understood that the device is in a working state (based on the contextual use of the term throughout the claims and specification, such as at [0020]-[0021]). Accordingly, the terms “enabling” is generally understood to be synonymous with “activating”, “turning on”, “powering”, “triggering”, or the like.
Additionally, it is noted that an exemplary embodiment of a “living biological detection device” comprises cameras and infrared detectors (specification at [0015]). However, the broadest reasonable interpretation of a “living biological detection device” as recited in the claims comprises substantially any type of sensor, detector, or camera capable of detecting a living organism in a vehicle.
Also, the structure of the claimed “safety monitoring device” as set forth in claims 7-8 is interpreted as broadly encompassing any device or portion of a device which is configured or programmed for checking the operating status of components of the control system, such that the safety monitoring device may be a portion of a control device. It is acknowledged that claim 13 requires the safety monitoring device include a force switch, which is understood to be a switch that a user may operate to force deactivation of the disinfection device.
Claim Objections
Claims 4, 13, and 15 are objected to for the informalities indicated below.
Claim 4 recites “the replacement device information illustrates whether the replacement device information can be replaced” (claim 4, lines 6-7 / page 2, lines 16-17); information illustrating whether the same information can be replaced does not appear sensible, and the recited limitation is otherwise not consistent with the instant specification at [0025]-[0026] or claims 10 and17. The limitation should be adjusted to read “the replacement device information illustrates that the ultraviolet disinfection lamps need to be replaced”, or similarly adjusted to correspond with the instant disclosure.
Claim 13 recites “the control device controls the disinfection device is in the closed state by the force switch” (claim 13, lines 2-3), and should be adjusted for grammatical clarity with respect to the phrase “is in the closed state”, such as by adjusting the claim limitation to read “the control device controls the disinfection device to turn off
Claim 15 is objected to because lines 8-9 of the claim (corresponding to page 7, lines 17-18 of the claims document) should be adjusted to state “control the disinfection device in the closed state, when the second living detection information illustrates that the (i.e., replace “no” with “the” at line 9 of the claim) to remain consistent with the instant disclosure and corresponding limitations of claims 2 and 8.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-4, 7-10, and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1&2) as being anticipated by Chen et al. (US 2021/0393822 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Chen teaches a UV lamp sanitizer for a vehicle cabin (title), the UV lamp device (20) ([0025]) including passive infrared sensors (PRI sensor 132) for detecting people or animals within the interior (12) of a motor vehicle to be sanitized ([0027]; [0045]), short-wavelength UV lamps (40) for disinfecting the vehicle interior ([0037]), and a control processor (126) and circuitry (120) for controlling the activation of the UV lamps (Fig. 10, [0044]). The device further incorporates means for detecting a fault of various system components, including the PIR sensors ([0054]). Fig. 11 of Chen, shown below, depicts the control algorithm (200) implemented by the control processor (126) ([0056]).
PNG
media_image1.png
744
280
media_image1.png
Greyscale
From Fig. 11, it is evident that Chen teaches a vehicle disinfection control method (200) ([0056]) comprising:
enabling a living biological detection device (130/132) in response to disinfection instructions (at step 206, control processor 126 initiates a germicidal irradiation cycle, provides a warning delay at step 208, and at step 210 the sensing circuit 130 [with PIR sensors 132] and control processor 126 determines whether the space around the device 20 is vacant or occupied—[0058]; also, [0054] discusses how the control processor 126 queries the sensor circuit 130; it is thus evident that control processor 126 essentially sends a disinfection instruction which triggers the occupancy detecting device 130/132 to activate);
obtaining a first operating state (fault status) of the living biological detection device and first living detection information (occupancy status) detected by the living biological detection device (130/132), wherein the first living detection information illustrates whether a living organism is in a vehicle (sensing circuit 130 and control processor 126 determines whether the space around the device 20 is vacant or occupied at step 210—[0058]; at step 212, the control processor 126 and sensing circuit 130 determine whether a fault is detected, for example, absence of a response to a query sent from control processor 126 to the sensor 130—[0059]);
enabling (powering) a disinfection device (40) arranged in the vehicle when the first operating state is normal (no fault), and the first living detection information illustrates that no living organism is in the vehicle (yes vacancy) (at step 216, the control processor provides a control signal to the lamp drivers 128 instruction powering of the UV lamps—[0061]; from Fig. 11 and [0058]-[0059], it is clear that the powering of the UV lamps at step 216 can only be achieved when vacancy is detected at step 210 and no fault is detected at step 212); and
maintaining the disinfection device in a closed state when the first operating state is abnormal (yes fault), or the first living detection information illustrates that the living organism is in the vehicle (no vacancy) (see Fig. 11 and [0058]-[0059]: when either no vacancy [i.e., occupancy] or a fault is detected at steps 210 and 212, respectively, the step 216 of activating the UV lamps is skipped and the control method proceeds to step 220 which ensures the lamps are deenergized if previously powered on. It is evident that if either condition for skipping step 216 is met upon the first pass of the cycle, the UV lamps will not have been powered on and will be “maintained” in an off state).
Regarding claim 2, Chen discloses the vehicle disinfection control method of claim 1. As best understood, claim 2 is essentially directed toward the control method operating to continue checking for occupancy in the vehicle or faults in the system while the disinfecting device is active, and deactivating the disinfecting device if occupancy or a fault is detected while the disinfecting device is active. Viewing Fig. 11 of Chen at step 218, it is evident that after the UV lamps are powered (at step 216), the control algorithm continues to check for vacancy (step 210) and faults (step 212) unless an irradiation duration is reached (cycle timer expired).
Thus, Chen teaches wherein after enabling the disinfection device arranged in the vehicle (after step 216, Fig. 11), the vehicle disinfection control method further comprises:
obtaining a second operating state (fault status) of the living biological detection device (method loops back to step 212 after step 218), second living detection information (vacancy status) detected by the living biological detection device (method loops back to step 210 after step 218), and a third operating state (fault status) of the disinfection device (40) (method loops back to step 212 after step 218; step 212 includes detection of a fault, which can include detecting a failures of the UV lamps 40—see [0054] and [0059]) in a process of disinfection of the vehicle by the disinfection device (said looping steps occur after the UV lamps are powered at step 216 for disinfection of the vehicle interior), wherein the second living detection information illustrates whether the living organism is in the vehicle during the process of disinfection of the vehicle (vacancy/occupancy status of Chen is consistent with the claim); and
controlling the disinfection device in the closed state when the second living detection information illustrates that the living organism is in the vehicle (no vacancy), the second operating state is abnormal (yes detector fault), or the third operating state is abnormal (yes UV lamp fault) (see Fig. 11, if occupancy is detected at step 210 or a fault or failure in the detector or lamp is detected at step 212, the control method proceeds to step 220 and the lamps are deenergized).
Regarding claim 3, Chen discloses the vehicle disinfection control method of claim 1. Chen further teaches the disinfection device comprises ultraviolet disinfection lamps (device 20 includes germicidal UV lamps 40a-c—[0026], Figs. 4-7); enabling the disinfection device in the vehicle comprises: enabling and configuring the ultraviolet disinfection lamps in response to light intensity adjustment instructions of the ultraviolet disinfection lamps (control processor 126 provides a control signal to the lamp drivers 128 instructing powering of the UV lamps 40—[0061]; thus, the controller 126 effectively sends an instruction to increase the light intensity emitted by the UV lamps 40).
Regarding claim 4, Chen discloses the vehicle disinfection control method of claim 3. Chen discusses lifespan monitoring of the UV lamps ([0007]), wherein the control device (control processor 126) tracks expended or remaining lifespan of the UV lamps, and provides a notification through a blinking LED (133) or other means when a UV lamp needs to be replaced ([0037]). Such functions fairly constitute obtaining a cumulative disinfection duration time of the ultraviolet disinfection lamps (control processor 126 tracks expended lifespan of UV lamps—[0037]); and generating replacement device information (providing a notification) of the ultraviolet disinfection lamps when the cumulative disinfection duration (expended lifespan of UV lamps) time is larger than a maximum service life (useful lifespan) of the ultraviolet disinfection lamps, wherein the replacement device information illustrates whether the ultraviolet lamps need to be replaced (LED indicator 133 provides a blinking light or other notification that the UV lamps 40 need replaced—[0037]; processor 126 captures elapsed UV lamp time and reports the data for use in warning when a useful lifespan for UV lamps 40 is approaching and/or is exceeded—[0050]; thus evident that the processor tracks a cumulative usage of the UV lamps, and the system provides a notification when the cumulative usage time exceeds an expected useful lifespan for the UV lamps ).
Regarding claim 7, the claim is recognized as essentially a system configured to perform the method of claim 1. As discussed with respect to claim 1 above, Chen teaches a vehicle disinfection control system (see Fig. 10), comprising: a control device (control processor 126), a living biological detection device (vacancy/occupancy sensing circuit 130 with passive infrared sensors 132), a disinfection device (UV lamps 40), and a safety monitoring device ([0054] indicates that control processor 126 and/or sensor circuit 130 includes features for detecting a failure of the UV lamps, lamp drivers 128, occupancy sensing circuit 130, and PRI sensors 134 according to known means, which may be implemented as an algorithm which compares expected data performance parameters to detected parameters; thus, it is evident that the control processor 126 and/or circuitry 120 comprises a safety monitoring device),
wherein the control device (126) is communicated with the living biological detection device (130/132), the disinfection device (40), and the safety monitoring device (e.g., portions of control processor 126), the living biological detection device (13/132) is communicated with the safety monitoring device (portion of control processor 126) (Fig. 10 shows communication between all of the system components; see, e.g., [0047] describing interaction of occupancy sensing circuit 130, control processor 126 with safety monitoring means, and UV lamps 40),
the control device (126) enables the living biological detection device (130/132) in response to receiving disinfection instructions (see step 210 of Fig. 11 and [0058] as discussed with respect to claim 1 above; control processor queries sensor circuit 130 at a regular interval—see [0054]; control processor 126 initiates germicidal irradiation cycle—[0058]);
the living biological detection device (130/132) detects whether a living organism is in a vehicle and generates first living detection information (see step 210 of Fig. 11 and [0058] as discussed with respect to claim 1 above);
the safety monitoring device (portion of control processor 126) obtains a first operating state of the living biological detection device (see step 212 of Fig. 11 and [0059] as discussed with respect to claim 1 above);
the disinfection device disinfects the vehicle (see [0061], step 216) when the first operating state is normal (no fault), and the first living detection information illustrates that no living organism is in the vehicle (vacancy) (see Fig. 11, [0058]-[0059] and [0061] as discussed with respect to claim 1 above).
See Fig. 10 of Chen below.
PNG
media_image2.png
432
644
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 8, Chen discloses the vehicle disinfection control system of claim 7. The further limitations of claim 8 generally correspond to the limitations of claim 2 above. Also, as discussed with respect to claim 7 above, at least portions of the control processor and/or circuitry (120) of Chen fairly define a safety monitoring device which is capable of checking for faults in various system components, including the UV lamps (40) and vacancy/occupancy detectors (130/132) (see [0054] and [0059]).
Accordingly, see the rejection of claim 2 above and Fig. 11 regarding how the system of Chen is configured such that:
the safety monitoring device (portions of processor 126 or circuitry 120) obtains a second operating state (fault status) of the living biological detection device (130/132) (step 212 is repeated after UV lamps powered at step 216, step 212 including checking for a fault in the occupancy sensor—see Fig. 11; as indicated above, such function is attributable to a safety monitoring device portion of the control processor 126 or circuitry 120—see [0054], [0059]),
the control device (126) obtains a third operating state (fault status) of the disinfection device (40) (step 212 is repeated after UV lamps powered at step 216—Fig. 11—step 212 including checking for faults in system components—see Fig. 11[0059]—said system components which are checked for faults or failures fairly indicated to include the UV lamps 40—see [0054]),
the living biological detection device (130/132) generates second living detection information (vacancy/occupancy status) in a process of disinfection of the vehicle by the disinfection device (while UV lamps powered), the second living detection information illustrates whether the living organism is in the vehicle during the process of disinfection of the vehicle (step 210 is repeated after UV lamps are activated at step 216, step 210 including checking a vacancy status by sensor circuitry 130/132—see Fig. 11, [0058]); and
the control device (126) controls the disinfection device (40) in the closed state (deenergizes lamps) when the second living detection information illustrates that the living organism is in the vehicle (no vacancy), the second operating state is abnormal (sensor fault), or the third operating state is abnormal (UV lamp fault) (see Fig. 11, if occupancy is detected at step 210 or a fault in either the sensor or lamps is detected at step 212, the method continues to step 220 of deenergizing the lamps).
Regarding claim 9, Chen discloses the vehicle disinfection control system of claim 7. Chen further teaches wherein the disinfection device comprises ultraviolet disinfection lamps (40) (device 20 includes germicidal UV lamps 40a-c—[0026], Figs. 4-7); the control device enables and configures the ultraviolet disinfection lamps in response to light intensity adjustment instructions of the ultraviolet disinfection lamps (control processor 126 provides a control signal to the lamp drivers 128 instructing powering of the UV lamps 40—[0061]; thus, the controller 126 effectively sends an instruction to increase the light intensity emitted by the UV lamps 40).
Regarding claim 10, Chen discloses the vehicle disinfection control system of claim 9. As discussed with respect to claim 4 above, Chen further teaches the control device (126) obtains a cumulative disinfection duration time (expended lifespan) of the ultraviolet disinfection lamps ([0037]) and generates replacement device information (provides a notification) of the ultraviolet disinfection lamps when the cumulative disinfection duration time is larger than a maximum service life of the ultraviolet disinfection lamps ([0037], [0050]), the replacement device information illustrates that the ultraviolet disinfection lamps need to be replaced (see rejection of claim 4 above, [0037] and [0050]).
Regarding claim 13, Chen teaches the vehicle disinfection control system of claim 7. Chen further teaches a force switch (power off switch 152), the control device controls the disinfection device in the closed state by the force switch (remote control 150 includes a power off switch 152—[0031]; in response to actuation of the power off switch 152 of the remote 150, the control processor 126 will instruct lamp drivers 128 to terminate the power supplied to the UV lamps—[0049]). The structure of the claimed safety monitoring device can encompass substantially any combination of components, such that the force switch (152) of Chen fairly defines a portion of the safety monitoring device.
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.
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.
Claims 5-6 and 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen et al. (US 2021/0393822 A1), as applied to claims 1 and 7 above, in view of Kanniaraj et al. (US 2022/0401600 A1).
Regarding claim 5, Chen teaches the vehicle disinfection control method of claim 1. Chen does not indicate that before enabling the living biological detection device, the vehicle disinfection control method further comprises: obtaining a driving state of the vehicle, wherein the driving state of the vehicle comprises a driving state or a parking state; enabling the living biological detection device when the driving state of the vehicle is in the parking state; and keeping the living biological detection device in the closed state when the driving state of the vehicle is in the driving state.
However, in the analogous art of disinfection systems for motorized vehicles (title), Kanniaraj teaches a disinfection system (100) for a truck (1) cabin (2) ([0036]) comprising disinfectant light sources (106, 108) ([0037]) such as UV-C ([0039]) LEDs ([0040]), a plurality of sensors (102) for sensing operation parameters of the truck ([0041]), and a controller (1040) for controlling the light sources based on sensor readings ([0043], [0046]). The sensors (102) include a sensor (102c) adapted to sense if the park brake is applied or not ([0041]), and a sensor (camera 102e) adapted to detect motion in the cabin (2) indicative of a human or animal occupant ([0043]). The controller only activates the disinfectant light sources when it is determined that a human or animal is not present within the cabin ([0046]-[0047]), with the parking brake being applied being an indication of the cabin being more likely to be unoccupied ([0043]). Also, a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the absence of the parking brake being applied can be an indication that an occupant is present in the cabin and operating the vehicle in a driving mode. Therefore, it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the control method of Chen to include a step of checking whether the vehicle is in a parking state (parking brake applied) or a driving state (parking brake not applied) and only allowing activation of the disinfecting light sources when the vehicle is parked, as seen in Kanniaraj, for the benefit of ensuring that an operator driving the vehicle is not irradiated with UV light.
Furthermore, a person having ordinary skill in the art would configure the control method to check the parking status of the vehicle first before activating the motion sensors (biological detection devices) for the benefit of reducing the energy expended operating the motion sensor at a time when the parking sensor already indicates that the vehicle is likely occupied (i.e., for a conventional, non-self-driving vehicle, if the parking brake is not engaged it can reasonably be assumed that the vehicle is being driven by an occupant and thus there is no need to expend energy activating the motion sensor/camera because it is already known that the vehicle is occupied).
Regarding claim 6, Chen in view of Kanniaraj in view of teaches the vehicle disinfection control method of claim 5. Claim 6 indicates that after enabling the living biological detection device in response to the disinfection instructions, the vehicle disinfection control method further comprises: obtaining a single disinfection duration time, a disinfection opening time, and a living detection duration time; obtaining the first living detection information detected by the living biological detection device comprising: obtaining the first living detection information detected by the living biological detection device within the living detection duration time; enabling the disinfection device arranged in the vehicle comprises: enabling the disinfection device at the disinfection opening time; and controlling the disinfection device to disinfect the vehicle within the single disinfection duration time.
As best understood, these limitations essentially amount to the control method operating according to received, programmed, or determined time settings with respect to when the disinfection device is first activated, how long the disinfection device is kept activated, and when the occupant detector (living biological detection device) is activated. Chen clearly teaches selecting a cycle time duration ([0057]), and the control method of Chen keeps the UV lamps (40) activated for the duration of the cycle ([0061]); Chen thus teaches obtaining a single disinfection duration time, and controlling the disinfection device to disinfect the vehicle within the single disinfection duration time. Also, Chen indicates that after initiation of the cycle, the UV lamps cannot be powered until a warning delay of, for example, 15 seconds expires (step 208, Fig. 1, [0058]), such that an opening time of the distinction device is determined to be at least 15 seconds after initiation of the disinfection cycle, and at the opening time the disinfection device is enabled (activated). Additionally, it is evident that the biological disinfection duration device of Chen should be operational during substantially any point in the cycle when the UV lamp is on or about to be powered on (i.e., during warning delay 208); therefore, it would be obvious for the control method to include determining a living detection duration time corresponding to a time when a user could be exposed to UV radiation and operate the living detection duration device during that time to ensure that any person or animal near the UV light sources during or leading up to their activation is detected.
Regarding claim 11, Chen teaches the vehicle disinfection control system of claim 7. Chen further teaches wherein a driving state of the vehicle comprises a driving state or a parking state (inherent to any vehicle). Chen does not teach the control device further obtains the driving state of the vehicle, the control device enables the living biological detection device when the driving state of the vehicle is in the parking state, or keep the living biological detection device in the closed state when the driving state of the vehicle is in the driving state.
However, for substantially the same reasons as discussed with respect to claim 5 above, it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of Chen in view of Kanniaraj and arrive at the claimed system for the benefit of preventing undesirable activation of the disinfection device and biological detection device at times when the vehicle is in a driving state and thus already known to be occupied (see rejection of claim 5 above).
Regarding claim 12, Chen in view of Kanniaraj teaches the vehicle disinfection control system of claim 11. See the rejection of claim 6 above regarding how Chen is understood to teach the control device obtains a single disinfection duration time, and a disinfection opening time, wherein the control device enables the disinfection device at the disinfection opening time, and controls the disinfection device to disinfect the vehicle within the single disinfection duration time (see rejection of claim 6 above). Further see the rejection of claim 6 above regarding the obviousness of configuring the device of Chen to obtain a living detection duration time, and obtain the first living detection information detected by the living biological detection device within the living detection duration time (see rejection of claim 6 above).
Claims 14-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen et al. (US 2021/0393822 A1) in view of Takahashi (US 12,194,172 B2, filed 04 February, 2022).
Regarding claim 14, the claim is essentially directed to the control device element of claim 7 configured to perform the control method of claim 1, with claim 14 defining the control device as an electronic device comprising at least one processor and a data storage storing one or more programs executable by the at least one processor. As substantially discussed with respect to claims 1 and 7 above, the control device (control processor 126) of Chen is configured to:
enable a living biological detection device (130/132) in response to disinfection instructions (control processor 126 initiates germicidal irradiation cycle at step 206—see Fig. 11, [0058]—and queries the occupancy/vacancy sensing circuit 130 at step 210—see Fig. 11, [0058], and [0054]);
obtain a first operating state (fault status) of the living biological detection device (130/132) and first living detection information (occupancy/vacancy status) detected by the living biological detection device (130/132), wherein the first living detection information illustrates whether a living organism is in a vehicle (control processor 126 determines whether space around device 20 is vacant or occupied at step 210—see Fig. 11, [0058]; at step 212 control processor 126 determines whether a fault is detected, such as a fault of sensing circuit 130—see Fig. 11, [0059]);
enable a disinfection device (40) arranged in the vehicle ([0061]; disinfection device intended for use in vehicle interior—see, e.g., Fig. 3, [0028], title), when the first operating state is normal (no fault), and the first living detection information illustrates that no living organism is in the vehicle (yes vacancy) (see Fig. 11 and [0058]-[0059] and [0061]); and
keep the disinfection device (40) in a closed state (off) when the first operating state is abnormal (yes fault), or the first living detection information illustrates that the living organism is in the vehicle (no vacancy) (see Fig. 11, control method will not reach step 216 to power UV lamps if occupancy is sensed at step 210 or a fault is detected at step 212 after initializing the cycle at step 206, and thus the UV lamps will instead remain powered off/deenergized).
Chen does not explicitly state that the control processor performs the above indicated functions by executing one or more programs stored on a data storage of the control device. However, it is first noted that Chen indicates that the processor (control processor 126) follows algorithms ([0054, [0056]), which strongly implies to a person having ordinary skill in the art that the processor includes or is associated with a memory storing said algorithms as a program (i.e., instructions, or a software package).
Furthermore, the claimed controller configuration (an electronic device comprising a processor and a memory storing processor executable programs) is conventional in the art. For example, Takahashi (US 12,194,172 B2), in the analogous art of control devices for in-vehicle sterilization systems (title), teaches a control device (4) which cooperates with a detection device (3) to determine if a person is present inside of a vehicle (6) (column 5, lines 41-45), and which activates an ultraviolet emission device (2) when no person is detected inside of the vehicle (6) (column 5, lines 49-53). The control device (4) of Takahashi is configured as a processor (401) and memory (402), the processor reading and executing a program stored in the memory (402) to implement the disclosed control algorithm (column 7, line 59, through column 8, line 3). Therefore, it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to configure the control device (control processor 126) of Chen as a processor and a data storage storing programs executable by the processor for performing the control method of Chen, as substantially seen in Takahashi (processor 401 and memory 402—column 7, line 59, through column 8, line 3). Such modification adopts a conventional controller configuration into the control device of Chen to achieve known and expected benefits, such as the benefit of enabling adjustment of the control algorithm by updating the software programs stored on the memory.
Regarding claim 15, Chen in view of Takahashi teaches the electronic device of claim 14. The limitations of claim 15 correspond to the limitations of claims 2 and 8. Accordingly, see the rejections of claims 2 and 8 above regarding how the processor (126) of Chen is further configured, after enabling the disinfection device arranged in the vehicle (i.e., after step 216 of Fig. 11), to:
obtain a second operating state (fault status) of the living biological detection device (130/132), second living detection information (vacancy/occupancy status) detected by the living biological detection device (130/132), and a third operating state (fault status) of the disinfection device in a process of disinfection of the vehicle by the disinfection device (while UV lamps are powered), wherein the second living detection information illustrates whether the living organism is in the vehicle during the process of disinfection of the vehicle (see Fig. 11, [0054], and [0058]-[0059] as discussed with respect to claims 2 and 11 above; Fig. 11 shows that the steps 210 and 212, which include determining an occupancy status of the vehicle and determining a fault status of the sensor 130/132 and UV lamps 40 are repeated after the UV lamps have been turned on in steps 216); and control the disinfection device in the closed state, when the second living detection information illustrates that [the] living organism is in the vehicle (no vacancy), the second operating state is abnormal (yes sensor fault), or the third operating state is abnormal (yes UV lamp fault) (see Fig. 11, if claimed conditions detected at steps 210 and 212, control method proceeds to deactivate UV lamps at step 220).
For substantially the same reasons discussed with respect to claim 14 above, it would be obvious to configure the processor of Chen to perform the disclosed steps of the control method by executing instructions stored on a memory, as seen in Takahashi (see rejection of claim 14 above), for the benefit of enabling adjustment of the control algorithm by updating the software program(s) stored on the memory.
Regarding claim 16, Chen in view of Takahashi teaches the electronic device of claim 14. Chen further teaches the disinfection device comprises ultraviolet disinfection lamps (device 20 includes germicidal UV lamps 40a-c—[0026], Figs. 4-7); when the at least one processor (126) enables the disinfection device in the vehicle, the at least one processor is further caused to: enable and configure the ultraviolet disinfection lamps in response to light intensity adjustment instructions of the ultraviolet disinfection lamps (control processor 126 provides a control signal to the lamp drivers 128 instructing powering of the UV lamps 40—[0061]; thus, the controller 126 effectively sends an instruction to increase the light intensity emitted by the UV lamps 40). Configuring the processor to accomplish such functions by executing programs stored on a memory is obvious in view of Takahashi for the same reasons discussed with respect to claims 14-15 above.
Regarding claim 17, Chen in view of Takahashi teaches the electronic device of claim 16. As discussed with respect to claims 4 and 10 above, Chen further teaches the processor (126) is configured to obtain a cumulative disinfection duration time (expended lifespan) of the ultraviolet disinfection lamps (40); and generate replacement device information (generate notification) of the ultraviolet disinfection lamps (40) when the cumulative disinfection duration time is larger than a maximum service life (useful lifespan) of the ultraviolet disinfection lamps, wherein the replacement device information illustrates that the ultraviolet disinfection lamps need to be replaced (see [0037], [0050], and rejections of claims 4 and 10 above). Configuring the processor to accomplish such functions by executing programs stored on a memory is obvious in view of Takahashi for the same reasons discussed with respect to claims 14-15 above.
Claims 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen et al. (US 2021/0393822 A1) in view of Takahashi (US 12,194,172 B2, filed 04 February, 2022), as applied to claim 14 above, in further view of Kanniaraj et al. (US 2022/0401600 A1).
Regarding claim 18, Chen in view of Takahashi teaches the electronic device of claim 14. Chen does not teach: before the at least one processor enables a living biological detection device, the at least one processor is further caused to: obtain a driving state of the vehicle, wherein the driving state of the vehicle comprises a driving state or a parking state; enable the living biological detection device when the driving state of the vehicle is in the parking state; and keep the living biological detection device in the closed state when the driving state of the vehicle is in the driving state.
However, the limitations of claim 18 correspond to the limitations of claims 5 and 11. Therefore, see the rejection of claims 5 and 11 above regarding the obviousness of further modifying the processor of Chen in view of Kanniaraj such that the processor obtains a driving state of the vehicle and activates the biological detection device when the vehicle is parked (see rejections of claims 5 and 11 above). Also, configuring the processor to accomplish such functions by executing programs stored on a memory is obvious in view of Takahashi for the same reasons discussed with respect to claims 14-15 above.
Regarding claim 19, Chen in view of Takahashi and Kanniaraj teaches the electronic device of claim 18. As discussed with respect to claims 6 and 12 above, the processor of Chen is understood to obtain a single disinfection duration time, and a disinfection opening time, wherein the control device enables the disinfection device at the disinfection opening time, and controls the disinfection device to disinfect the vehicle within the single disinfection duration time (see rejection of claims 6 and 12 above). Further see the rejection of claims 6 and 12 above regarding the obviousness of configuring the processor of Chen to obtain a living detection duration time, and obtain the first living detection information detected by the living biological detection device within the living detection duration time (see rejection of claim 6 above). Also, configuring the processor to accomplish such functions by executing programs stored on a memory is obvious in view of Takahashi for the same reasons discussed with respect to claims 14-15 above.
Conclusion
Chen (US 2019/0091738 A1) teaches a cleaning system for a vehicle (title) and a related method which includes steps of determining an ultraviolet dosage to deliver to an interior surface of vehicle cabin and controlling a UV light source to deliver the determined dosage (abstract).
Hallack (US 2020/0061223 A1) teaches a disinfection system comprising a light source, sensor, and a controller, the light source configured to emit germicidal light in a vehicle interior dependent on a current occupancy of the vehicle sensed by a second sensor (abstract).
Kim et al. (US 2023/0302182 A1, with PCT filed 09 August, 2021) teaches a system for disinfection surfaces in a space such as a vehicle, the system including a UVC light source (102) (abstract), occupancy sensor(s) (106), and controller (104) (Fig. 1), wherein the occupancy sensors may comprise a sensor which detects if the vehicle is in the park condition ([0043]).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRADY C PILSBURY whose telephone number is (571)272-8054. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 7:30a-5:00p.
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, MICHAEL MARCHESCHI can be reached at (571) 272-1374. 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.
/BRADY C PILSBURY/Examiner, Art Unit 1799
/JENNIFER WECKER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1797
Prosecution Insights