Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/632,508

STORAGE MANAGEMENT DEVICE FOR VEHICLE

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Apr 11, 2024
Examiner
GIROUARD, JANICE MARIE
Art Unit
2138
Tech Center
2100 — Computer Architecture & Software
Assignee
Toyota Jidosha Kabushiki Kaisha
OA Round
2 (Final)
73%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 10m
To Grant
87%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 73% — above average
73%
Career Allow Rate
128 granted / 175 resolved
+18.1% vs TC avg
Moderate +14% lift
Without
With
+13.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 10m
Avg Prosecution
20 currently pending
Career history
195
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.3%
-37.7% vs TC avg
§103
56.2%
+16.2% vs TC avg
§102
22.7%
-17.3% vs TC avg
§112
12.4%
-27.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 175 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
DETAILED ACTION This office action is in response to an Amendment/Request for Reconsideration-After Non-Final Rejection filed 7/25/2025 for application 18/632. Claims 1 and 3 have been amended. No claims have been cancelled. Claims 4-6 are new. Thus claims 1-6 have been examined. The IDS sent 4/11/2024 has been considered. Acknowledgement is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in Japan on 5/9/2023. Examiner notes the priority documents to JP2023-077114 have been received by the USPTO. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . 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. 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. Claims 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as unpatentable over Wegner (Wegner et al., US 2015/0212952 A1) in view of Geng (Geng et al., US 2021/0334018 A1). Regarding claim 1, Wegner teaches A storage management device for a vehicle, (Wegner Fig. 1 and supporting paras [0028]-[0033] discloses a first embodiment that is a multicore processor 1 in a motor vehicle with memory range 4 associated with processor core 2 and memory range 5 associated with processor core 3, where each memory range stores data.) comprising a processor and a memory, (Wegner Fig. 1 and supporting paras [0028]-[0033] that discloses ) wherein the processor is configured to store, in the memory, data corresponding to an operation of each vehicle on-board system in which one of multiple functional safety levels is set in advance, (Wegner [0010] discloses that during the start process of the multicore processors, the configuration for the range associated with the processor is read and programmed for the processor and its associated memory range.) the memory includes partitions including a first partition and a second partition allocated in advance, (Wegner [0028] discloses memory ranges 4 and 5 that are permanently associated with processor cores 2 and 3 respectively, thus allocated in advance.) the first partition is configured to store data corresponding to an operation of a vehicle on-board system for which a functional safety level lower than a predetermined specific level is set, (Wegner Fig. 1 and supporting paras [0028]-[0033] discloses that the embodiment may run software program SW2 that controls the gasoline injection system with safety level B (the third safety level of the ASIL levels QM, A, B, C, and D will execute on the first processor core 3 and memory range 5 where memory range 5 is an example of a first partition. Wegner [0010] discloses that the safety level associated with each memory region is based on configuration data read and programmed during the start process of the multicore processor.) and the second partition is configured to store data corresponding to an operation of a vehicle on-board system for which a functional safety level higher than or equal to the specific level is set, (Wegner Fig. 1 and supporting paras [0028]-[0033] discloses that the embodiment may run software program SW1 that controls antilock braking system with safety level D (the highest safety level of the ASIL levels QM, A, B, C, and D will execute on the second processor core 2 and memory range 4 where memory range 4 is an example of a second partition. Wegner [0010] discloses that the safety level associated with each memory region is based on configuration data read and programmed during the start process of the multicore processor.) However, Wegner does not explicitly disclose the processor is configured to specify, based on a specific identifier included in a write request for the data corresponding to the operation of the vehicle on-board system into the memory, a partition of the partitions in which the data is to be stored, and the specific identifier includes first information indicating the vehicle on-board system, second information indicating the functional safety level set in the vehicle on-board system, and third information indicating the partition in which the data is to be stored. Geng, of a similar field of endeavor, further teaches the processor is configured to specify, based on a specific identifier included in a write request for the data corresponding to the operation of the vehicle on-board system into the memory, (Examiner notes that as claimed the “specific identifier” may be a plurality of values that identify the vehicle on-board system, the safety level, and the partition in which data is to be stored. Geng [0010] discloses the memory access request contains both a target address and safety level information of the initiator that combined is an example of a specific identifier that is directed to a write request for data corresponding to (relating to) on-board vehicle systems for data that is to be written into the memory of the on-board vehicle system. See also Geng [0145], [0147]-[0161] as detailed immediately below.). a partition of the partitions in which the data is to be stored, (Gang [0010] discloses the write request contains an address to write the data. Geng [0145] discloses that a first subsystem function is to identify an object and the second subsystem is to perform braking. Geng [0158] discloses the memory of the system is divided based on the safety level to achieve isolation between the subsystems. Thus the target address of the solution of fig.2 of Geng paras [0147]-[0161] is divided into address segments that are directed to the safety level of the first subsystem, or the second subsystem (to one of two partitions) and the write address will be directed to the address space of the first subsystem or the second subsystem based on the target address.) and the specific identifier includes first information indicating the vehicle on-board system, (consistent with paragraph [0026] of the instant application an on-board system may be a functional safety level. Geng [0010], [0145], an d [0147]-[0161] discloses that the address in the write requests identifies the data as belonging to either the address segment for the first or second subsystem, thus identifies it to a first or second functional safety level.) second information indicating the functional safety level set in the vehicle on-board system, (Geng [0010]], [0145], and [0147]-[0161] (most notably [0151]-[0153]) discloses that the target address included in the write request is used to identify the safety level of the target partition (i.e. the functional safety level set in the vehicle on-board system) using the safety level division information where it is used to verify if the write source safety level matches the target safety level. Thus when the data is written the safety level in the write request indicates the safety level in the on-board system that receives the write data.) and third information indicating the partition in which the data is to be stored. (Gang [0010], [0145], and [0158] discloses the target address of the solution of fig.2 of Geng paras [0147]-[0161] is divided into address segments that are directed to the safety level of the first subsystem, or the second subsystem (to one of two partitions) and the address will be directed to the address space of the first subsystem or the second subsystem based on the target address, thus indicating which partition (which address space) in which the data is to be stored (the first or second subsystem address space).) Wegner and Geng are in a similar field of endeavor as both relate to managing data in vehicles protected by Automotive Safety Integrity Level standard. Thus it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effectively filed date of the claimed invention to incorporate the configuration and verification of write requests to partitions using the safety level division information and safety level configure file of Geng. Thus combining prior art elements according to known methods (the) to yield predictable results (to provide strict isolation of safety domain systems that are executed by different devices/partitions so as to achieve different safety levels in the computer system of autonomous vehicles. See Geng [0002]-[0008]. The motivation for combining Geng into the solution of Wegner for claims 2-5 are the same as set forth in claim 1 above. Regarding claim 2, the combination of Wegner and Geng teaches all of the limitations of claim 1 above. Wegner further teaches wherein the multiple functional safety levels include three or more functional safety levels, (Wegner Fig. 1 and supporting paras [0028]-[0033] discloses there may be three safety levels, such as B, C, D.) and the first partition is an area configured to store only data corresponding to an operation of a vehicle on-board system for which a lowest functional safety level is set, (Wegner Fig. 1 and supporting paras [0028]-[0033] discloses that the embodiment may run software program SW2 that controls the gasoline injection system with safety level B (the lowest function level of the set of safety levels B, C, and D)will execute on the first processor core 3 and memory range 5 where memory range 5 is an example of a first partition. Wegner [0005] and [0006] discloses that only the gasoline injection system has access to processor core 3 and memory range 5.) and the second partition is an area configured to store only data corresponding to an operation of any vehicle on-board system except the vehicle on-board system for which the lowest functional safety level is set. (Wegner Fig. 1 and supporting paras [0028]-[0033] discloses that the embodiment may run software program SW1 that controls antilock braking system with safety level D (the highest safety level of the set of safety levels B, C, and D and will execute on the second processor core 2 and memory range 4 where memory range 4 is an example of a second partition. Wegner [0005] and [0006] discloses that only the breaking system has access to processor core 2 and memory range 4. Which constitutes the processors and memory ranges associated with the embodiment that are dedicated to processor core 3 and memory range 5 thus is an area configured to store only data corresponding to an operation of any vehicle on-board system except the one other vehicle on-board breaking system which is the lowest functional safety level in the embodiment of Fig 1 that discloses only two safety levels.) Regarding claim 3, the combination of Wegner and Geng teaches all of the limitations of claim 1 above. Wegner further teaches wherein the multiple functional safety levels include three or more functional safety levels, (Wegner Fig. 1 and supporting paras [0028]-[0033] discloses there may be three safety levels, such as B, C, D.) and the partitions further include a third partition allocated in advance, and the third partition is an area configured to store only data corresponding to an operation of a vehicle on-board system for which a highest functional safety level is set. (Wegner [0036]-[0037] discloses that the system may have an additional memory range 10 that only processor cores 2 and 3 have access to and only one processor core has access at a given time. Thus during the period of time when the breaking code SW1 has access to memory range 10, the system includes a third partition allocated in advance and is configured to store only data corresponding to the breaking code SW1 for which a highest functional safety level is set where an operation of a vehicle on-board system may be an operation at a given safety level.) Regarding claim 4, the combination of Wegner and Geng teaches all of the limitations of claim 1 above. Geng further teaches wherein the third information included in the specific identifier includes a number assigned to each of the partitions, and the processor is configured to specify a range of an actual storage area of the memory in which the data is to be stored, based on memory information indicating a correspondence relationship between the number assigned to each of the partitions and the range of the actual storage area of the memory. (Gang [0010], [0145], and [0158] discloses the target address of the solution of fig.2 of Geng paras [0147]-[0161] is divided into address segments that are directed to the safety level of the first subsystem, or the second subsystem (to one of two ranges of an actual storage area of the memory that includes the number 1 (for the first subsystem) or 2 (for the second subsystem)) and the address will be directed to the address space of the first subsystem or the second subsystem based on the target address, thus indicating which address space in which the data is to be stored (the first or second subsystem address space), based on the memory address segments for each subsystem (based on the memory information indicating a corresponding relationship between the number assigned to each of the partitions (the address space assigned to each partition) and the range of the actual storage areas of the memory (the total memory address space)).) The motivation to combine Gang into the existing combination is the same as set forth in clam 1 above. Regarding claim 5, the combination of Wegner and Geng teaches all of the limitations of claim 1 above. Gang further teaches wherein the vehicle on-board system for which the functional safety level lower than the specific level is set and the vehicle on-board system for which the functional safety level higher than or equal to the specific level is set are configured to be operated by the same base ECU. (The instant application does not contain an explicit definition of a base ECU. Consistent with para [0023] of the instant application a base ECU may be a system component that controls one or more devices. Geng [0191]-[0194] discloses that a partition manager writes the safety level information to the first partition and the second partition using a safety level configuration file. Thus the partition manager of Geng is an example of a base ECU and the same base ECU configures both the first and second partition containing separate safety levels.) The motivation to combine Gang into the existing combination is the same as set forth in clam 1 above. Regarding claim 6, Wegner teaches A storage management device for a vehicle, comprising a processor and a memory, (Wegner Fig. 1 and para [0028] discloses embodiment 1 consisting of processors 2 and 3 and memory 4 and 5 (i.e. storage 4 and 5) that may be embedded in motor vehicles. Wegner [0008] discloses the solution may be a memory protection device, thus is an example of a storage management device.) The remainder of claim 6 recites limitations described in claim 1 above and thus is rejected based on the teaching and rationale of claim 1 above. Response to Remarks Examiner thanks applicant for their claim amendments and remarks of 7/25/2025. They have been fully considered. Applicant argues on page 6 of their remarks ‘Wegner does not suggest or disclose "the processor is configured to specify, based on a specific identifier included in a write request for the data corresponding to the operation of the vehicle on-board system into the memory, a partition of the partitions in which the data is to be stored, and the specific identifier includes first information indicating the vehicle on-board system, second information indicating the functional safety level set in the vehicle on-board system, and third information indicating the partition in which the data is to be stored." That is, the rigid correspondence of software program, processor core, and memory of Wegner clearly differs. Examiner agrees that Wegner does not suggest or disclose the cited limitation. Wegner in view of Geng is cited in the above rejection. Geng [0009], [0015] and [0084] teaches a single processor running an access checker within a first subsystem with a high safety level (see Geng [0145] and [0147] verifies the write request is for a given service level that is appropriate to the target and enables the write (thus directs the write) to the appropriate address space (partition) for the write request based on the target address contained within the write request. Thus Wegner in view of Geng dynamically directs a write request to an appropriate partition based on the write request. Applicants arguments with respect to independent claim 6 all rely upon an argument similar to those presented for claim 1 and thus have been addressed in the rejection and remarks relating to claim 1 above. Applicants arguments with respect to dependent claims 2-5 all rely upon perceived errors in base claim 1 and thus have been addressed in the rejection and remarks relating to claim 1 above. 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 JANICE M. GIROUARD whose telephone number is (469)295-9131. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30 - 7:30. 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, Tim Vo can be reached at 571-272-3642. 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. /JANICE M. GIROUARD/Examiner, Art Unit 2138
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 11, 2024
Application Filed
Apr 23, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Jul 25, 2025
Response Filed
Oct 01, 2025
Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12602186
MANAGING DISTRIBUTION OF PAGE ADDRESSES AND PARTITION NUMBERS IN A MEMORY SUB-SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12493413
FREQUENCY REGULATION FOR MEMORY MANAGEMENT COMMANDS
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 09, 2025
Patent 12481451
DATA READ/WRITE METHOD AND HYBRID MEMORY
2y 5m to grant Granted Nov 25, 2025
Patent 12461862
ADDRESS TRANSLATION AT A TARGET NETWORK INTERFACE DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Nov 04, 2025
Patent 12449981
NON-VOLATILE MEMORY THAT DYNAMICALLY REDUCES THE NUMBER OF BITS OF DATA STORED PER MEMORY CELL
2y 5m to grant Granted Oct 21, 2025
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
73%
Grant Probability
87%
With Interview (+13.8%)
2y 10m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 175 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month