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 .
Double Patenting
The terminal disclaimer filed 10/14/25 has been approved and thus the double patenting rejection has been withdrawn.
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.
Claims 2-22 are 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 2 recites the limitation "the other space of the predetermined area" in the last line of the first paragraph of page 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The claim does previously introduce a term “another space” but it is not clear that the “other space” is the same as the “another space”.
Claims 3-15 inherit the same issue due to dependency.
Claim 16 has the same issue as claim 1 with the “other space”. Claims 17-22 inherit the same issue due to dependency.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claim(s) 2, 7-8, 11-17 and 20-26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gila et al. [US 2005/0038574; Gila] in view of Futami et al. [US 4,898,010] and further in view of Schaffzin et al. [US 2006/0164208] and further in view of Ghabra [8284020].
Regarding claim 2. Gila discloses a system that authorizes an operation of an object (vehicle),
the object including an object system capable of controlling the operation, the object including a
door separating a predetermined area of the object between an outside area the predetermined
arca and an inside arca in the predetermined arca relative to the object, [see Fig. 2], such as
exterior area (e.g. user approach vehicle) and interior area (e.g. cabin) the system comprising:
a master transmitter (e.g. transmitter 3) configured to communicate to the object system
authorization to initiate the operation [para. 23], wherein the master transmitter includes an
object interface capable of communicating the authorization to the object system via a bus (e.g.
base station 1) [Figs. 1-2 and para. 43];
a plurality of remote communication devices (e.g. antennas 5) disposed on the object,
each of the plurality of communication devices capable of receiving wireless communications
from a portable device (2), the plurality of remote communication devices disposed in an interior
space of the door [para. 41]
the plurality of remote communication devices (5) including a second communication
device disposed on the object outside the interior space of the door and outside the
predetermined area of the object (e.g. exterior antennas) [para. 52]; the portable device (2)
configured to wirelessly communicate an authorization code to the master transmitter to
authorize the operation, the portable device including a transceiver (12 and 13) capable of
receiving wireless communications from the master transmitter [Fig. 1 and para. 44];
wherein at least one of the master transmitter and the portable device is configured to
determine if a location of the portable device is in proximity to the specific space of the
predetermined area of the object but not in proximity to another space of the predetermined area
of the object [para. 45-46],
wherein the determination of the location is based on a difference between 1) a signal
strength of wireless communications relative to the communication device carried by the door
and disposed in the interior space of the door and 2) a signal strength of wireless
communications relative to the second communication device disposed outside the interior space
of the door and outside the predetermined area, wherein the signal strength of wireless
communications relative to the communication device with the antenna aimed substantially
toward the specific space of the predetermined arca of the object facilitates locating the portable
device in proximity to the specific space but not in proximity to the other space of the
predetermined area [para. 52]; and
wherein the portable device communicates the authorization code to the master
transmitter (3) [Fig. 1 and para. 41].
Gila does not explicitly mention a directional communication device carried by the door an disposed in an interior space of the door, the directional communication device including a
directional antenna aimed substantially toward a specific space of the predetermined area of the
object.
Futami teaches a keyless entry system for automotive vehicles includes a plurality of
directional antennas (21a and 21b) the antennas carried by the door [Fig. 1 and col. 4, lines 37-
43]. With that, the directional antenna can be mounted by the door of the vehicle.
Furthermore, Schaffzin teaches that the two directional antennas can be disposed at the door, so that one antenna can be receiving signal on one side of the door and the other antenna can receives signal on an opposite side of the door [see para. 99]. That, the directional antennas can be arranged on
both sides of the door.
Therefore, the teaching of Futami (directional antennas carried by the vehicle
door and Schaffzin teaches the directional antennas can be detected from both sides of the door,
which means the directional antennas can be disposed on both sides of the vehicle's door, so that
the antennas can receive signals from exterior of vehicle and interior of vehicle.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the directional antennas carried by the door and disposed in an
interior space of the door as taught by Futami and Schaffzin to the system of Gila, for the benefit
of more accuracy detection, because the directional antenna can be aimed at a specific angle or
arca of monitoring direction, that the only signals receive from that direction can be considered.
In an analogous art, Ghabra ‘020 teaches using multiple antennas at dispersed locations and using RSSI signals to determine the location of a fob. The location of the antennas can then discern the sublocation of the interior of the vehicle the fob currently resides. See Col. 6 line 50+ and figure 6.
By configuring the antennas 16, 18, 20 as shown in FIG. 6, a greater number of inclusion/exclusion areas 92, 94, 96, 98, 100, 102, 104, 106, 108, 110, and 112 may be formed. FIG. 6 also illustrates that three elliptical authorization zones 86, 88, and 90 may be established. Each elliptical authorization zone 86, 88, and 90 may allow the controller to more accurately determine the location of the fob 22 relative to the interior or exterior of the vehicle 10. Furthermore, the use of three separate elliptical authorization zones 86, 88, and 90 may allow the vehicle controller 14 the ability to determine the location of the fob 22 without having to proceed with the triangulation verification procedure.
Using antennas in such a formation allows location determining without needing triangulation verification process.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have used the multiple antenna location system to have determined which interior location the fob is located, because it would reduce processing expenses.
Regarding claim 13. The limitations are similar to those in claim 2 above, that the rejection
would be in the same manner.
Regarding claim 14. Gila further teaches all the transceivers (5) are connected and detected both exterior and interior of the vehicle [see Fig. 2 and para. 41 and 53] such that both directional antennas on both sides of the door are communicatively coupled to each other.
Regarding claim 15. Gila and the combination made obvious above. Gila further teaches the
position of the code transmitter 2 is identified as being in a certain position in the vicinity of the
motor vehicle or inside the motor vehicle. [para. 45]. That constitutes of in response to the
determination of the location of the portable device being in proximity to the specific space in
the predetermined area of the object but not in proximity to the other space of the predetermined
area, the at least one of the master transmitter and the portable device authorizes the object for a
command relative to the object; and wherein in response to the determination of the location of
the portable device being in proximity to the other space but not in proximity to the specific
space, the at least one of the master transmitter and the portable device abstains from instructing
the object to authorize the command.
Regarding claim 7. Gila and the combination made obvious above, Gila further teaches portable
device proximity to an exterior to the vehicle and communicates the authorization code to the
master transmitter to unlock a vehicle door [para. 45-46].
Regarding claim 8. Gila and the combination made obvious above, Gila further teaches in
response to said portable device determining said portable device is in proximity to a driver seat
(e.g. inside the motor vehicle) the portable device communicates said authorization code to said
master transmitter to authorize the vehicle system to at least one of start and mobilize the vehicle
[cited at para. 33 and 44].
Regarding claims 11-12. Gila and the combination made obvious above, Gila teaches the
portable device can be detected at a certain distance from the transceiver of the vehicle (e.g. at a
predetermined area) [para. 5], except for not specifically mention that the second communication
device is disposed outside the interior space of the door.
As addressed in the rejection of claim 2 above, the combination of Futami and Schaffzin show that the directional antennas can be arranged on a door and directly aimed at outside of the door, which
can be arranged to aimed toward the specific space of the predetermined area of the object (e.g.
near exterior door or within the interior of the door).
Regarding claim 16. The claimed method steps are similarly to the system claimed in claim 2
above, and the rejection would be in the same manner.
Regarding claim 17. The claimed method steps are similarly to the system claimed in claim 2
above, and the rejection would be in the same manner.
Regarding claim 20-22. The claimed method steps are similarly to the system claimed in claims
7-8 above, and the rejection would be in the same manner.
Regarding claim 23. The claimed limitations are similarly to the system claimed in claim 2
above, and the rejection would be in the same manner.
Regarding claims 24-25. The claimed limitations are similarly to the system claimed in claims
7-8 above, and the rejection would be in the same manner.
Regarding claim 26. Gila and the combination made obvious above, Gila further discloses a
controller (e.g. evaluation unit 9) is operably coupled to the vehicle transmitter communication
interface (c.g. transmitter 3) and wherein the controller of said master device (1) directs
operation of the first and second communication devices (5) via said vehicle transmitter
communication interface (3) [see Figs. 1-2].
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gila et al. in view of
Futami et al. and Schaffzin et al. and Ghabra ‘020 as applied to claim 2, and further in view of Ghabra et al. [US 6,906,612; Ghabra ‘612].
Regarding claim 3. Gila and the combination made obvious above, Gila further discloses the
location information of the portable device is being determined by the master transmitter (e.g.
evaluation unit 9), except for not specifically mention that the portable device is configured to
determine said location information based on relative strength between wireless communications
received from the plurality of remote communication devices. In an analogous art, Ghabra ‘612 teaches a remote transceiver (14) is configured to determine whether the remote transceiver 14 is located inside or outside the vehicle, based on the determined signals strengths of the first and second signals (24,
28) [cited col. 5, lines 9-15].
It would be obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed, to have a portable device location being determined by the portable device as taught by Ghabra ‘612, as an alternative concept of determine location information by portable device itself.
Claims 4-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gila et al. in
view of Futami et al., Schaffzin et al. Ghabra ‘020 and Ghabra ‘612 et al. in claim 3 above, and further in view of Ghabra et al. [US 7,046,119; Ghabra ‘119].
Regarding claim 4. Gila and combination made obvious above, Gila further teaches the master
transmitter configured to transmit interrogation signal to portable device via plurality of remote
communication devices (5), except for not explicitly mention that master transmitter is calibrated
and adjusted a power level for plurality of remote communication devices. Ghabra ‘119 teaches a
method of calibrating the signal strength indication (SSD for a particular vehicle model, wherein
the signal strength indication is adjusted to a predetermined range corresponds to a target signal
strength for the desired reception conditions for the particular model (vehicle) being calibrated
[cited at Fig. 5, and col. 5, lines 4-30].
It would be obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed, to implement a concept of calibrating the signal strength indication for the plurality of remote communication devices as taught by Ghabra 119' for the purpose of accuracy detection.
Regarding claim 5. Gila and combination made obvious above, Grhabra ‘612 further teaches a
remote transceiver (14) is configured to determine whether the remote transceiver 14 is located
inside or outside the vehicle, based on the determined signals strengths of the first and second
signals, except for not explicitly mention the signal strength of remote communication devices
being at least one of above and below a threshold. Ghabra ‘119 teaches a portable device (25)
which "A user request is generated in step 55 when a user activates a door handle or presses an
engine start switch, for example. In step 56, the gain values are transferred to the interior and
exterior amplifiers according to their calibration values and according to the specific passive
entry function being requested as appropriate. If the interior and exterior gain values each have
only one respective value for the particular vehicle model for all passive entry functions" [col. 5,
lines 33-42]. Thus, the respective value is considered as a threshold value for signal strength
signals, for determining the location.
It would be obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to recognize that, the detected signal strength indication for location information is the calibrated value or a respective value for a particular vehicle model, which used as a threshold signal strength.
Regarding claim 6. Gila and Ghabra ‘612 made obvious above, except for not explicitly mention that
the portable device determines said threshold in a calibration mode, wherein said threshold is
affected by one or more physical characteristics of the vehicle, Ghabra ‘119 teaches a method of
calibrating the interior gain value and the exterior gain value [see Fig. 5] which to determine a
desired reception conditions (e.g. threshold) for the particular vehicle model, that the desired
reception conditions may be affected by the physical characteristics of the vehicle (e.g. border
location, such as doors, window glass and etc.) associated with the vehicle [as cited at col. 5, lincs
1-30].
It would be obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was
filed, to have a calibration mode as taught by Ghabra ‘119, so that the determination for portable
device location is more accuracy, since each vehicle model type is different in term of body
characteristics, that would affect the signal strength of wireless communications.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gila et al. in view of
Futami et al., Schaffzin et al. Ghabra ‘020 as applied to claim 2, and further in view of Benco et al. [US 2008/0136611; Benco].
Regarding claim 9. Gila and the combination made obvious above, except for not explicitly
mention an authentication server remote from the vehicle and said portable device, said
authentication server capable of communicating wirelessly with the vehicle and said portable
device, wherein both said master transmitter and said portable device receive information from
said authentication server including at least of one or more one shared keys, one or more server
provided authorization codes, and protocol information. Benco teaches a server (e.g. 160) which transmits a security key (e.g. shared keys) to vehicle (150) and a security key to a portable device (140) [cited at Fig. 1, I 24 and 26].
It would be obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed, to implement the concept of receiving an authorization code from the remote server as taught by Benco to the combination above, for the benefit of at least increasing an authentication communication and security.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gila in view of Futami et al. and Schaffzin et al. Ghabra ‘020 as applied to claim 2, and further in view of Peeters et al. [US 014/0025950;
Peeters].
Regarding claim 10. Gila and the combination made obvious above, except for not explicitly
mention an asymmetric key pair device, wherein said portable device is configured to
communicate with said master transmitter using a public key, and wherein said master
transmitter is configured to validate communication from said portable device based on a secret
key accessible to said master transmitter, wherein said public key and said secret key form said
asymmetric key pair.
Peeters teaches an unit-key fob (204) which comprises a key fob pairing device (202),
which configured to encrypt new authorization code into the portable device [cited at Figs. 8-9].
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was
filed, to modify the asymmetric key pair device as taught by Peeters, into the system of the
combination above, in order to provide new authorization code to portable device or updated
authorization code.
Claims 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gila in view in
view of Futami et al. and Schaffzin et al. Ghabra ‘020 as applied to claims 16 and 17 above, and further in view of Matsubara [US 2007/0109093].
Regarding claims 18-19. Gila and the combination made obvious above, Gila disclosed the first
and second remote communication devices configured to transmit wireless communication
signals to the portable device, except for not explicitly mention a transmission rate of the
communications of the first and second communication devices is reduced and discontinued to
conserve power, based on receiving a valid authorization code.
Matsubara teaches "in order to reduce the load on the vehicle battery in a case where the
smart key 11 is located in the vehicle-inside area 8, the main microcomputer 13 determines
whether or not the smart key 11 is located in the vehicle-inside area 8" [cited Fig. 28, 4 and para.
233-236] and further teaches at step 10 of Fig. 28, the transmission is reduced to certain
transmitter(s) and that transmitter is transmitted key search signal for a last cycle, which last for
an extended period of time, then transmission process is terminated (e.g. discontinued) [cited at
end of para. 236]. Thus, the communication devices are discontinued when the valid
authorization code is received by vehicle.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed, to implement the method of conserving power by discontinue the communications from the first and second communication devices and discontinued transmission rate concept when portable device already located within the vehicle and authorization code is validated, the discontinue transmission would reserve power to the vehicle battery as taught by Matsubara.
Response to Arguments
Arguments presented 10/15/25 are moot in view of new grounds of rejection.
Relevant References
WO 2015084235 Arfwedson also teaches directional antenna mounted on the door (of a car) to determine the location of the portable transceiver.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRIAN A ZIMMERMAN whose telephone number is (571)272-3059. The examiner can normally be reached m,t,tr 6-4; w,f 6-noon.
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.
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.
/BRIAN A ZIMMERMAN/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2686