DETAILED ACTION
The non-final action is in response to the application filed 1 May 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 .
Priority
Claims 1-28 are pending having a filing date of 1 May 2024, and claiming domestic benefit/national stage for PCT/JP2022-169376, filed 27 October 2022, and claiming foreign priority to Japanese Patent Application Numbers JP2022-169376, filed 21 October 2022, and JP2021-179890, filed 3 November 2021.
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted 1 May 2024, complies with 35 C.F.R 1.97. Accordingly, the IDS has been considered by the examiner. An initialed copy of the 1449 form is enclosed herewith.
Drawings
The drawings, filed 1 May 2024, are accepted by the examiner.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f). The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
“a driver seat angle adjustment unit adjusting “ (claim 1, 16, 17, 18, 23, 24, 28) <see specification at [0025] disclosing that the driver seat angle adjustment unit 11 includes a gear, which rotates to change the angle of driver seat back, and a motor, which rotates the gear. In addition to the gear and the motor, the driver seat angle adjustment unit 11 includes an angle sensor that detects the angle of driver seat back, a motor control circuit that controls the motor to a desired angle based on the angle detected by the angle sensor >;
“a driving condition determination unit determining” (claims 1, 6, 16, 18, 23, 24 ) < see Fig. 2, showing item 21, and [0028] disclosing that the occupant condition determination unit 20 includes a driver condition determination unit 21 and a passenger condition determination unit 22. The driver condition determination unit 21 successively determines a condition of the driver. The driver condition determination unit 21 may include a near-infrared light source, a near-infrared camera, and a control unit that controls the near-infrared light source and the near-infrared camera>;
“an autonomous driving level acquisition unit acquiring” (claims 1,6, 18) < see Fig. 2, showing 42 ECU includes autonomous driving control execution unit ... autonomous driving level acquisition unit 422, [0035] disclosing that autonomous driving ECU 42 is implemented by a computer including a processor 43, a RAM 44, a storage 45, an input output interface (I/O) 46, a bus connecting these component, and [0045] disclosing that FIG. 2 shows functions executed by the autonomous driving ECU 42. The autonomous driving ECU 42 includes, as functional blocks, an autonomous driving control execution unit 421, an autonomous driving level acquisition unit 422, a driver condition acquisition unit 423, and a reclining control unit 424, by executing the program using the processor 43. The autonomous driving ECU 42 implements the vehicle control device for driver by including the autonomous driving level acquisition unit 422, the driver condition acquisition unit 423, and the reclining control unit 424, as functional blocks>;
“a driver condition acquisition unit acquiring” (claims 1, 6, 24)
<see specification at [0028] disclosing that the occupant condition determination unit 20 includes a driver condition determination unit 21 and a passenger condition determination unit 22. The driver condition determination unit 21 successively determines a condition of the driver. The driver condition determination unit 21 may include a near-infrared light source, a near-infrared camera, and a control unit that controls the near-infrared light source and the near-infrared camera; >;
“a reclining control unit ... terminating” (claims 1, 6, 24) < see Fig. 2, 424, and specification at [0045]; [0051] disclosing the reclining control unit 424 successively acquires the condition of passenger from the passenger condition determination unit 22. The condition of passenger includes a state of consciousness of passenger and whether or not the passenger is an infant. The reclining control unit 424 also acquires the angles of the driver seat back and the passenger seat back, from the seat angle adjustment unit 10. The reclining control unit 424 controls the angles (reclined state) of driver seat back and passenger seat back, based on the acquired information >;
“a passenger condition determination unit that determines” (claim 5, 12, 17, 21) < see Fig. 2, 22, and specification at [0028]; [0129] disclosing that the driver condition determination unit 21 and the passenger condition determination unit 22 may detect the conditions of the driver and passenger using biological information detection device other than the camera instead of or in addition to the camera. Examples of biological information detection device other than camera may include biological information detection device that detects body temperature, heartbeat, or pulse>;
“a wiper control unit restricting” (claim 14, ) <see specification at [0035] disclosing that autonomous driving ECU 42 is implemented by a computer including a processor 43, a RAM 44, a storage 45, an input output interface (I/O) 46, a bus connecting these component, and at [0119] disclosing that autonomous driving ECU 42 of the fifth embodiment includes a wiper control unit 425 shown in FIG. 9 in addition to the functional units 421 to 424 of the first embodiment shown in FIG. 1. The wiper control unit 425 is implemented by the processor 43 by executing a program stored in a memory>; and
“an autonomous driving control execution unit controlling” (claim 25) <see Fig. 8 showing item 421, and specification at [0035] and [0119] >.
Because these claim limitations are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) they are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
The driver seat angle adjustment unit is interpreted as including a gear, which rotates to change the angle of driver seat back, and a motor, which rotates the gear, per spec at [0025] . The driving condition determination unit is interpreted as including a near-infrared light source, a near-infrared camera, and a control unit that controls the near-infrared light source and the near-infrared camera, per spec at [0028]. The autonomous driving level acquisition unit is interpreted as a processor, per spec at [0035]. The driver condition acquisition unit is interpreted as including a near-infrared light source, a near-infrared camera, and a control unit that controls the near-infrared light source and the near-infrared camera, per spec at [0028]. The reclining control unit is interpreted as a processor, per spec at [0035] . The passenger condition determination unit is interpreted as biological information detection devices that include biological information detection device that detects body temperature, heartbeat, or pulse, per spec at [0129]. The wiper control unit is interpreted as a processor, per spec at [0119]. The autonomous driving control execution unit is interpreted as a processor, per spec at [0119].
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f).
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 pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter 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 pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) 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 non-obviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a), the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned at the time any inventions covered therein were made absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and invention dates of each claim that was not commonly owned at the time a later invention was made in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(c) and potential pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(e), (f) or (g) prior art under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a).
Claims 1, 4-6, 8, 11-13, 16-21 and 23-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Publication Number 2023/0166638 to Kotani et al. (hereafter Kotani) in view of U.S. Patent Publication Number 2021/0188324 to Kim et al. (hereafter Kim).
As per claim 1, Kotani discloses [a] vehicle control device for driver used in a vehicle (see at least Kotani, Abstract), the vehicle being equipped with:
... (1) ... ;
a driver seat angle adjustment unit adjusting an angle of a driver seat back (see at least Kotani, [0026] disclosing the seat reclining position control device 100 is mounted in a vehicle, for controlling an angle of a backrest 111, 121 of a front seat 110 or a rear seat 120, as a seat angle control, for example, for an occupant 200 in a sleeping state); and
a driver condition determination unit determining whether a consciousness state of the driver is an awake state or a sleep state (see at least Kotani, Abstract, disclosing a sleep state detection unit configured to detect a sleep state of the occupant; [0035] disclosing that the camera 140 is a sleep state detection unit that detects the sleep state of the occupant 200. The camera 140 is, for example, a CCD camera, a CMOS camera, an infrared camera, or the like, and is provided at a front side on the ceiling of the vehicle. The camera 140 acquires face images of all of the occupants 200 on the front seat 110 and the rear seat 120. The camera 140 outputs the acquired face image data to the control unit 150),
the vehicle control device for driver comprising: an autonomous driving level acquisition unit acquiring a currently executing autonomous driving level that is currently being executed by the autonomous driving system and a scheduled autonomous driving level that is scheduled to be executed (see at least Kotani, [0028] disclosing autonomous driving device 10 can implement automatic driving levels 1 to 5 based on the driving state of the vehicle, the driving environment (the road on which the vehicle is traveling, the surrounding environment); [0039] disclosing that when the vehicle is provided with the autonomous driving device 10, the control unit 150 grasps the level (1 to 5) of automatic driving currently being executed based on the information from the autonomous driving device 10);
a driver condition acquisition unit acquiring the consciousness state of the driver from the driver condition determination unit (see at least Kotani, [0035] disclosing that the camera 140 acquires face images of all of the occupants 200 on the front seat 110 and the rear seat 120. The camera 140 outputs the acquired face image data to the control unit 150 ; [0042] disclosing that the control unit 150 detects an occupant 200 in a sleep state in the front seat 110 or the rear seat 120 from the face images of the occupants 200 obtained from the camera 140); and
a reclining control unit, in response to the autonomous driving level acquisition unit acquiring that the autonomous driving level is to be switched from the nap enabled autonomous driving level to the autonomous driving level lower than the nap enabled autonomous driving level in a reclined state of the driver seat back, terminating the reclined state of the driver seat back and outputting a notification related to termination of the reclined state via a notification unit equipped to the vehicle (see at least Kotani, abstract , disclosing that the control unit implements a seat angle control to adjust the angle of the backrest for the occupant in the sleep state based on the vehicle interior state to a suitable sleeping angle suitable for sleeping when the sleep state detection unit detects the sleep state of the occupant; [0034] disclosing that the adjustment unit 130 is provided on each of the front seat 110 and the rear seat 120. The adjustment unit 130 adjusts the angle of the backrest 111, 121 (reclining function). That is, the adjustment unit 130 reclines the angle of the backrest 111, 121 for the sleeping occupant suitably for sleeping, and restores the backrest 111, 121 when the occupant wakes from sleep; [0058] disclosing that a seat angle control is implemented while the vehicle is automatically driven at the automatic driving level 4 or 5 by the autonomous driving device 10 and when the destination guidance is performed by the car navigation device 20. The configuration of the seat reclining position control device 100 is the same as that of the first embodiment; [0059]; [0062] disclosing that the control unit 150 prohibits the seat angle control for the driver 211, and permits the seat angle control for the other passengers (the passenger seat occupant 212, the rear seat occupant 220) other than the driver 211, when the vehicle is automatically traveling on a road with a predetermined driving difficulty level <interpreted as terminating the reclining state of the driver>; [0064] disclosing that seat reclining position control device 100A includes a notification unit 160 for notifying the rear seat occupant 220. The notification unit 160 can be, for example, a directional speaker that has directivity to each rear seat occupant 220 on the rear seat 120. The notification unit 160 is provided in, for example, the headrest 123),
wherein the autonomous driving level acquisition unit acquires a type of a destination when the vehicle can reach the destination with the nap enabled autonomous driving level being maintained, the type of the destination includes at least one of (i) a boarding and alighting area or (ii) a parking lot (see at least Kotani, [0058] disclosing that a seat angle control is implemented while the vehicle is automatically driven at the automatic driving level 4 or 5 by the autonomous driving device 10 and when the destination guidance is performed by the car navigation device 20. The configuration of the seat reclining position control device 100; [0034]; [0047] disclosing that when the sleeping occupant 200 is the driver 211 and the vehicle is automatically traveling, or when the driver 211 is taking a nap while the vehicle is parked, the control unit 150 controls the seat angle for the driver 211. Therefore, the driver 211 can have a comfortable sleep),
in the termination of the reclined state, the reclining control unit determines, according to the consciousness state of the driver, an execution order of an angle control, which controls the angle of the driver seat back to terminate the reclined state, and an output control, which outputs the notification related to the termination of the reclined state (see at least Kotani, [0059] disclosing that when the time required to reach the destination i)s shorter than a predetermined time, the control unit 150 prohibits the seat angle control for the driver 211, and permits the seat angle control for the other passengers (the passenger seat occupant 212, the rear seat occupant 220) other than the driver 21; [0064] disclosing that seat reclining position control device 100A includes a notification unit 160 for notifying the rear seat occupant 220. The notification unit 160 can be, for example, a directional speaker that has directivity to each rear seat occupant 220 on the rear seat 120. The notification unit 160 is provided in, for example, the headrest 123), and
the reclining control unit changes details of the angle control, which controls the angle of the driver seat back to terminate the reclined state, when the destination is set to the boarding and alighting area from when the destination is set to the parking lot (see at least Kotani, Abstract, disclosing that a seat reclining position control device includes: a seat on which an occupant of a vehicle sits; an adjustment part configured to adjust an angle of a backrest of the seat; [0034] disclosing that the adjustment unit 130 adjusts the angle of the backrest 111, 121 (reclining function). That is, the adjustment unit 130 reclines the angle of the backrest 111, 121 for the sleeping occupant suitably for sleeping, and restores the backrest 111, 121 when the occupant wakes from sleep <interpreted as when the destination is set to the boarding and alighting area from when the destination is set to the parking lot>; [0047]; [0062]; [0132] disclosing that the route planning unit 161 sets a route from a current position to a designated destination on the basis of the global map. Furthermore, the route planning unit 161 sets an autonomous driving level for each section on the traveling route on the basis of the local dynamic map (LDM)). But, the difference between Kotani and the claimed invention is that Kotani does not explicitly teach the following limitation taught in Kim, a comparable device where it was known to have:
an autonomous driving system capable of switching autonomous driving between a nap enabled autonomous driving level, which enables a driver to take a nap, and an autonomous driving level, which requires the driver to immediately get prepared for takeover of driving operation, or lower (see at least Kim, [0002] disclosing that but also there may be a situation where switching from an autonomous driving mode as described above to a manual driving mode in which a driver performs steering needs to be performed);
Kotani and Kim are analogous art to claim 1 because they are in the same field related to the consciousness state of a driver of a vehicle. Kotani relates to a seat reclining position control device (see Kotani, [0002]). Kim relates to an information processing apparatus with an eyeball behavior analysis unit that analyzes an eyeball behavior of a driver, and based on the eyeball behavior dynamically switches an analysis mode according to a driving mode (see Kim, Abstract).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device, as disclosed in Kotani, to provide the benefit of (1) having an autonomous driving system capable of switching autonomous driving between a nap enabled autonomous driving level, which enables a driver to take a nap, and an autonomous driving level, which requires the driver to immediately get prepared for takeover of driving operation, or lower, as disclosed in Kim, with a reasonable expectation of success. The results would have been predictable to one of ordinary skill.
As per claim 4, the combination of Kotani and Kim discloses all of the limitations of claim 1, as shown above. Kotani further discloses:
wherein, in the termination of the reclined state, the reclining control unit simultaneously executes the angle control of the driver seat back and the output control via the notification unit (see at least Kotani, [0065] disclosing that when the control unit 150 performs the seat angle control, if a rear seat occupant 220 (another passenger) is in the rear seat 120 at the rear side of the sleeping occupant 200 (the driver 211 or the front passenger 212) and is awake, the notification unit 160 notifies the rear seat occupant 220 in advance that the seat angle control will be performed ) when ... (1) ... and (ii) a simultaneous control condition is satisfied in response that the consciousness state of the driver is the sleep state (see at least Kotani, [0042]; [0064]).
Kim further discloses:
(1) the reclining control unit simultaneously executes... when (i) the autonomous driving level acquisition unit acquires that the autonomous driving level is required to be immediately switched to the autonomous driving level lower than the nap enabled autonomous driving level (see at least Kim, claim 1) ... .
As per claim 5, the combination of Kotani and Kim discloses all of the limitations of claim 4, as shown above. Kotani further discloses the following:
wherein the vehicle is equipped with a passenger condition determination unit that determines whether a consciousness state of a passenger other than the driver is an awake state or a sleep state (see at least Kotani, [0044] disclosing that the control unit 150 detects the posture of the sleeping occupant 200 from the state image of the occupant 200 obtained from the camera 140. As shown in FIGS. 2 and 3, for example, when the sleeping occupant 200 is not out of the backrest 111 and/or the headrest 113, the control unit 150 reclines the backrest 111 to adjust the angle of the backrest 111 to a sleeping angle suitable for sleeping (as seat angle control). The sleeping angle of the backrest 111 is set in advance for sleeping. In case where the sleeping occupant 200 is a rear seat occupant 220, the seat angle control is performed to the backrest 12), and
in the termination of the reclined state, the reclining control unit executes the output control via the notification unit first and then executes the angle control of the driver seat back (see at least Kotani, [0065] disclosing that when the control unit 150 performs the seat angle control, if a rear seat occupant 220 (another passenger) is in the rear seat 120 at the rear side of the sleeping occupant 200 (the driver 211 or the front passenger 212) and is awake, the notification unit 160 notifies the rear seat occupant 220 in advance that the seat angle control will be performed ) when ... (1) ... and (ii) a sequential control condition is satisfied in response that the consciousness state of the driver is the sleep state and the consciousness state of the passenger is the awake state (see at least Kotani, [0040] disclosing that the control unit 150 controls the angle adjustment of the backrest 111 (or the backrest 121) with respect to the sleeping occupant 200, taking into account the state of the vehicle interior, the automatic driving level, the navigation information; [0064]; [0065] disclosing that when the control unit 150 performs the seat angle control, if a rear seat occupant 220 (another passenger) is in the rear seat 120 at the rear side of the sleeping occupant 200 (the driver 211 or the front passenger 212) and is awake, the notification unit 160 notifies the rear seat occupant 220 in advance that the seat angle control will be performed. Specifically, the notification unit 160 notifies that, for example, “be careful as the front seat will be reclined.” If the rear seat occupant 220 is in a sleep state, the control unit 150 prohibits the notification to the rear seat occupant 220).
Kim further discloses the following:
(1) the reclining control unit executes the output control ... when (i) the autonomous driving level acquisition unit acquires that the autonomous driving level is required to be immediately switched to the autonomous driving level lower than the nap enabled autonomous driving level (see at least Kim, claim 1) ... .
As per claim 6, similar to claim 1, Kotani discloses [a] vehicle control device for driver used in a vehicle (see at least Kotani, Abstract), the vehicle being equipped with: ... (1) ... ;
a driver seat angle adjustment unit adjusting an angle of a driver seat back (see at least Kotani, [0026]);
a driver condition determination unit determining whether a consciousness state of the driver is an awake state or a sleep state (see at least Kotani, Abstract; [0035]); and
a passenger condition determination unit determining whether a consciousness state of a passenger other than the driver is an awake state or a sleep state (see at least Kotani, [0042] disclosing that the control unit 150 detects an occupant 200 in a sleep state in the front seat 110 or the rear seat 120 from the face images of the occupants 200 obtained from the camera 140),
the vehicle control device for driver comprising: an autonomous driving level acquisition unit acquiring a currently executing autonomous driving level that is currently being executed by the autonomous driving system and a scheduled autonomous driving level that is scheduled to be executed (see at least Kotani, [0028]);
a driver condition acquisition unit acquiring the consciousness state of the driver from the driver condition determination unit (see at least Kotani, [0035]; [0042]); and
a reclining control unit, in response to the autonomous driving level acquisition unit acquiring that the autonomous driving level is to be switched from the nap enabled autonomous driving level to the autonomous driving level lower than the nap enabled autonomous driving level in a reclined state of the driver seat back, terminating the reclined state of the driver seat back and outputting a notification related to termination of the reclined state via a notification unit equipped to the vehicle (see at least Kotani, Abstract; [0034]; [0058]; [0062]; [0064]),
wherein, in the termination of the reclined state, the reclining control unit determines, according to the consciousness state of the driver, an execution order of an angle control, which controls the angle of the driver seat back to terminate the reclined state, and an output control, which outputs the notification related to the termination of the reclined state via the notification unit (see at least Kotani, [0059]; [0064]),
the reclining control unit simultaneously executes the angle control of the driver seat back and the output control via the notification unit when ... (2) ... and (ii) a simultaneous control condition is satisfied in response that the consciousness state of the driver is the sleep state (see at least Kotani, [0042]; [0064]) , and
the reclining control unit executes the output control via the notification unit first and then executes the angle control of the driver seat back when ... (3) ... and (ii) a sequential control condition is satisfied in response that the consciousness state of the driver is the sleep state and the consciousness state of the passenger is the awake state (see at least Kotani, [0064]; [0065]). But, the difference between Kotani and the claimed invention is that Kotani does not explicitly teach the following limitation taught in Kim, a comparable device where it was known to have:
(1) an autonomous driving system capable of switching autonomous driving between a nap enabled autonomous driving level, which enables a driver to take a nap, and an autonomous driving level, which requires the driver to immediately get prepared for takeover of driving operation, or lower (see at least Kim, [0002]) ... ;
(2), (3) the reclining control unit executes ... when (i) the autonomous driving level acquisition unit acquires that the autonomous driving level is required to be immediately switched to the autonomous driving level lower than the nap enabled autonomous driving level (see at least Kim, claim 1) ... .
Kotani and Kim are analogous art to claim 6 because they are in the same field related to the consciousness state of a driver of a vehicle. Kotani relates to a seat reclining position control device (see Kotani, [0002]). Kim relates to an information processing apparatus with an eyeball behavior analysis unit that analyzes an eyeball behavior of a driver, and based on the eyeball behavior dynamically switches an analysis mode according to a driving mode (see Kim, Abstract).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device, as disclosed in Kotani, to provide the benefit of (1) having an autonomous driving system capable of switching autonomous driving between a nap enabled autonomous driving level, which enables a driver to take a nap, and an autonomous driving level, which requires the driver to immediately get prepared for takeover of driving operation, or lower, and (2), (3) having the reclining control unit execute ... when (i) the autonomous driving level acquisition unit acquires that the autonomous driving level is required to be immediately switched to the autonomous driving level lower than the nap enabled autonomous driving level, as disclosed in Kim, with a reasonable expectation of success. The results would have been predictable to one of ordinary skill.
As per claim 8, similar to claim 5, the combination of Kotani and Kim discloses all of the limitations of claim 1, as shown above. Kotani further disclose the following limitation:
wherein, in the termination of the reclined state, the reclining control unit executes the output control via the notification unit first and then executes the angle control of the driver seat back (see at least Kotani, [0065]) when ... (1) ... and (ii) the consciousness state of the driver is the sleep state and the consciousness state of the passenger is the awake state (see at least Kotani, [0040]; [0064]; [0065]).
Kim further discloses the following:
(1) the reclining control unit executes the output control ... when (i) the autonomous driving level acquisition unit acquires that the autonomous driving level is required to be immediately switched to the autonomous driving level lower than the nap enabled autonomous driving level (see at least Kim, claim 1) ... .
As per claim 11, the combination of Kotani and Kim discloses all of the limitations of claim 1, as show above. Kotani further discloses the following:
wherein, in the termination of the reclined state, the reclining control unit: determines, according to the consciousness state of the driver (see at least Kotani, [0042]; [0064]), the execution order of the angle control, which controls the angle of the driver seat back (see at least Kotani, [0052]), and the output control, which outputs the notification via the notification unit (see at least Kotani, [0064]; [0065]); and changes a maximum standing angle of the driver seat back according to the consciousness state of the driver (see at least Kotani, [0052] seat angle control in the third embodiment will be described with reference to FIGS. 9 and 10. The configuration of the seat reclining position control device 100 is the same as that of the first embodiment. In the third embodiment, when there is a rear seat occupant 220 (another passenger) in the rear seat 120 at the rear side of the sleeping occupant 200 (front seat occupant 210) as a vehicle interior state, the control unit 150 reduces the reclining angle shown in FIG. 10 <interpreted as changes a maximum standard angle of the driver seat back>, to be smaller than the normal sleeping angle shown in FIG. 9 when performing the seat angle control for the sleeping occupant 210 (front seat occupant 210).
As per claim 12, the combination of Kotani and Kim discloses all of the limitations of claim 1, as shown above. Kotani further discloses the following limitations:
further comprising a passenger seat angle adjustment unit adjusting an angle of a passenger seat back (see at least Konti, [0055] disclosing that FIG. 11 shows the seat angle control in the fourth embodiment. The configuration of the seat reclining position control device 100 is the same as that of the first embodiment. In the fourth embodiment, when there is a rear seat occupant 220 (another passenger) in the rear seat 120 on the rear side of the sleeping occupant 200 (front seat occupant 210) as a vehicle interior state, the control unit 150 performs the seat angle control for the sleeping occupant 210, and, as shown in FIG. 11, reclines the backrest 121 (rear seat backrest) of the rear seat 120 ),
wherein the reclining control unit performs the angle control of the driver seat back with a higher priority than an angle control of the passenger seat back when terminating the reclined state (see at least Kotani, [0040]; [0057] disclosing that the seat angle control for the front seat occupant 210 can be performed without impairing the comfort of the rear seat occupant 220 (so as not to make the rear seat occupant 220 uncomfortable). When the sleeping occupant 200 is the driver 211, the seat angle control (such as full reclining) is possible to prioritize the driver 211 more than in case of the third embodiment ).
As per claim 13, the combination of Kotani and Kim discloses all of the limitations of claim 12, as shown above. Kotani further discloses the following limitation:
wherein the reclining control unit starts the angle control of the passenger seat back to terminate the reclined state of the passenger seat back based on a termination operation input by the driver (see at least Kotani, [0057] < the seat angle control of the driver is prioritized is interpreted as operation input by the driver>).
As per claim 16, similar to claims 1, 2, Kotani discloses [a] vehicle control method for driver used in a vehicle (see at least Kotani, Abstract), the vehicle being equipped with: ... (1) ... ;
a driver seat angle adjustment unit adjusting an angle of a driver seat back (see at least Kotani, [0026]); and
a driver condition determination unit determining whether a consciousness state of the driver is an awake state or a sleep state (see at least Kotani, [0035]),
the vehicle control method for driver comprising: acquiring a currently executing autonomous driving level at which the autonomous driving system is executing the autonomous driving and the autonomous driving level scheduled to be executed (see at least Kotani, [0028]; [0039]);
acquiring the consciousness state of the driver from the driver condition determination unit (see at least Kotani, [0035]; [0042];
in response to acquiring that the autonomous driving level is required to be switched from the nap enabled autonomous driving level to the autonomous driving level lower than the nap enabled autonomous driving level in a reclined state of the driver seat back, terminating the reclined state of the driver seat back and outputting a notification related to termination of the reclined state via a notification unit equipped to the vehicle (see at least Kotani, Abstract; [0034]; [0058]; [0059]; [0062]);
acquiring a type of a destination when the vehicle can reach the destination with the nap enabled autonomous driving level being maintained, the type of the destination including at least one of (i) a boarding and alighting area or (ii) a parking lot (Kotani, [0058]; [0034]; [0047]);
determining, according to the consciousness state of the driver, an execution order of an angle control, which controls the angle of the driver seat back to terminate the reclined state (see at least Kotani, Abstract; [0034]; [0058]; [0062]; [0064]), and
an output control, which outputs the notification related to the termination of the reclined state (see at least Kotani, [0064]); and
changing details of the angle control, which controls the angle of the driver seat back to terminate the reclined state, when the destination is set to the boarding and alighting area from when the destination is set to the parking lot (see at least Kotani, Abstract, [0034]; [0047]; [0062]; [0132]. But, the difference between Kotani and the claimed invention is that Kotani does not explicitly teach the following limitation taught in Kim, a comparable device where it was known to have:
(1) an autonomous driving system capable of switching autonomous driving between a nap enabled autonomous driving level, which enables a driver to take a nap, and an autonomous driving level, which requires the driver to immediately get prepared for takeover of driving operation, or lower (see at least Kim, [0002]);
Kotani and Kim are analogous art to claim 16 because they are in the same field related to the consciousness state of a driver of a vehicle. Kotani relates to a seat reclining position control device (see Kotani, [0002]). Kim relates to an information processing apparatus with an eyeball behavior analysis unit that analyzes an eyeball behavior of a driver, and based on the eyeball behavior dynamically switches an analysis mode according to a driving mode (see Kim, Abstract).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method, as disclosed in Kotani, to provide the benefit of (1) an autonomous driving system capable of switching autonomous driving between a nap enabled autonomous driving level, which enables a driver to take a nap, and an autonomous driving level, which requires the driver to immediately get prepared for takeover of driving operation, or lower, as disclosed in Kim, with a reasonable expectation of success. The results would have been predictable to one of ordinary skill.
As per claim 17, similar to claims 1 and 6, Kotani discloses [a] vehicle control method for driver used in a vehicle (see at least Kotani, Abstract), the vehicle being equipped with: ... (1) ... ;
a driver seat angle adjustment unit adjusting an angle of a driver seat back (see at least Kotani, [0026]);
a driver condition determination unit determining whether a consciousness state of the driver is an awake state or a sleep state (see at least Kotani, [0035]); and
a passenger condition determination unit determining whether a consciousness state of a passenger other than the driver is an awake state or a sleep state (see at least Kotani, [0042]),
the vehicle control method for driver comprising: acquiring a currently executing autonomous driving level at which the autonomous driving system is executing the autonomous driving and the autonomous driving level scheduled to be executed (see at least Kotani, [0028]);
acquiring the consciousness state of the driver from the driver condition determination unit (see at least Kotani, [0035]; [0042]);
in response to acquiring that the autonomous driving level is required to be switched from the nap enabled autonomous driving level to the autonomous driving level lower than the nap enabled autonomous driving level in a reclined state of the driver seat back, terminating the reclined state of the driver seat back and outputting a notification related to termination of the reclined state via a notification unit equipped to the vehicle (see at least Kotani, Abstract; [0034]; [0058]; [0062]; [0064]);
in the termination of the reclined state, determining, according to the consciousness state of the driver, an execution order of an angle control, which controls the angle of the driver seat back to terminate the reclined state (see at least Kotani, [0059]; [0064]), and
an output control, which outputs the notification related to the termination of the reclined state (see at least Kotani, [0064]; [0065]);
simultaneously executing the angle control of the driver seat back and the output control via the notification unit (see at least Kotani, [0065]) when ... (2) ... and (ii) a simultaneous control condition is satisfied in response that the consciousness state of the driver is the sleep state (see at least Kotani, [0042]; [0064]); and
executing the output control via the notification unit first and then executing the angle control of the driver seat back (see at least Kotani, [0065])... (3) ... and (ii) a sequential control condition is satisfied in response that the consciousness state of the driver is the sleep state and the consciousness state of the passenger is the awake state (see at least Kotani, [0040]; [0064]; [0065]). But, the difference between Kotani and the claimed invention is that Kotani does not explicitly teach the following limitation taught in Kim, a comparable device where it was known to have:
(1) an autonomous driving system capable of switching autonomous driving between a nap enabled autonomous driving level, which enables a driver to take a nap, and an autonomous driving level, which requires the driver to immediately get prepared for takeover of driving operation, or lower (see at least Kim, [0002]) ... ;
(2) simultaneously executing ... when (i) acquiring that the autonomous driving level is required to be immediately switched to the autonomous driving level lower than the nap enabled autonomous driving level (see at least Kim, claim 1) ... ; and
(3) executes ... when (i) acquiring that the autonomous driving level is required to be immediately switched to the autonomous driving level lower than the nap enabled autonomous driving level (see at least Kim, claim 1) ... .
Kotani and Kim are analogous art to claim 17 because they are in the same field related to the consciousness state of a driver of a vehicle. Kotani relates to a seat reclining position control device (see Kotani, [0002]). Kim relates to an information processing apparatus with an eyeball behavior analysis unit that analyzes an eyeball behavior of a driver, and based on the eyeball behavior dynamically switches an analysis mode according to a driving mode (see Kim, Abstract).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method, as disclosed in Kotani, to provide the benefit of (1) having an autonomous driving system capable of switching autonomous driving between a nap enabled autonomous driving level, which enables a driver to take a nap, and an autonomous driving level, which requires the driver to immediately get prepared for takeover of driving operation, or lower, and (2) simultaneously executing when (i) acquiring that the autonomous driving level is required to be immediately switched to the autonomous driving level lower than the nap enabled autonomous driving level, (3) and executing when (i) acquiring that the autonomous driving level is required to be immediately switched to the autonomous driving level lower than the nap enabled autonomous driving level, as disclosed in Kim, with a reasonable expectation of success. The results would have been predictable to one of ordinary skill.
As per claim 18, similar to claim 1, Kotani discloses [a] vehicle control device for driver used in a vehicle (see at least Kotani, Abstract),
the vehicle being equipped with: ..., (1) ... ,
a driver seat angle adjustment unit adjusting an angle of a driver seat back (see at least Kotani, [0026]); and
a driver condition determination unit determining whether a consciousness state of the driver is an awake state or a sleep state (see Abstract; [0035]),
the vehicle control device for driver comprising: an autonomous driving level acquisition unit acquiring a currently executing autonomous driving level that is currently being executed by the autonomous driving system and a scheduled autonomous driving level that is scheduled to be executed (see at least Kotani, [0028]; [0039]);
a driver condition acquisition unit acquiring the consciousness state of the driver from the driver condition determination unit (see at least Kotani, [0035]; [0042]); and
a reclining control unit terminating a reclined state of the driver seat back in response to the autonomous driving level acquisition unit acquiring that the autonomous driving level is to be switched from the nap enabled autonomous driving level to the autonomous driving level lower than the nap enabled autonomous driving level in the reclined state of the driver seat back (see at least Kotani, Abstract, [0034]; [0058]; [0062]; [0064]),
wherein, in termination of the reclined state of the driver seat back, the reclining control unit determines different maximum control angles of the driver seat back according to different consciousness states of the driver, and sets the angle of the driver seat back to a forward inclined angle when the consciousness state of the driver is the sleep state (see at least Kotani, [0059]; [0064]). But, the difference between Kotani and the claimed invention is that Kotani does not explicitly teach the following limitation taught in Kim, a comparable device where it was known to have:
(1) an autonomous driving system capable of switching autonomous driving between a nap enabled autonomous driving level, which enables a driver to take a nap, and an autonomous driving level, which requires the driver to immediately get prepared for takeover of driving operation, or lower (see at least Kim, [0002]) ... .
Kotani and Kim are analogous art to claim 18 because they are in the same field related to the consciousness state of a driver of a vehicle. Kotani relates to a seat reclining position control device (see Kotani, [0002]). Kim relates to an information processing apparatus with an eyeball behavior analysis unit that analyzes an eyeball behavior of a driver, and based on the eyeball behavior dynamically switches an analysis mode according to a driving mode (see Kim, Abstract).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device, as disclosed in Kotani, to provide the benefit of (1) having an autonomous driving system capable of switching autonomous driving between a nap enabled autonomous driving level, which enables a driver to take a nap, and an autonomous driving level, which requires the driver to immediately get prepared for takeover of driving operation, or lower, as disclosed in Kim, with a reasonable expectation of success. The results would have been predictable to one of ordinary skill.
As per claim 19, similar to claim 4, the combination of Kotani and Kim discloses all of the limitations of claim 18, as shown above. Kotani further discloses:
wherein, in the termination of the reclined state, the reclining control unit sets the angle of the driver seat back to the forward included angel when (see at least Kotani, [0034] disclosing that the adjustment unit 130 is provided on each of the front seat 110 and the rear seat 120. The adjustment unit 130 adjusts the angle of the backrest 111, 121 (reclining function). That is, the adjustment unit 130 reclines the angle of the backrest 111, 121 for the sleeping occupant suitably for sleeping, and restores the backrest 111, 121 when the occupant wakes from sleep; [0043]; [0044]; [0047]; [0065] disclosing that when the control unit 150 performs the seat angle control, if a rear seat occupant 220 (another passenger) is in the rear seat 120 at the rear side of the sleeping occupant 200 (the driver 211 or the front passenger 212) and is awake, the notification unit 160 notifies the rear seat occupant 220 in advance that the seat angle control will be performed ) when ... (1) ... and (ii) a simultaneous control condition is satisfied in response that the consciousness state of the driver is the sleep state (see at least Kotani, [0042]; [0064]).
Kim further discloses:
(1) the reclining control unit simultaneously executes... when (i) the autonomous driving level acquisition unit acquires that the autonomous driving level is scheduled to be switched to the autonomous driving level lower than the nap enabled autonomous driving level (see at least Kim, claim 1) ... .
As per claim 20, the combination of Kotani and Kim discloses all of the limitations of claim 18, as shown above. Kim further discloses:
wherein, in the termination of the reclined state, the reclining control unit sets, regardless of the consciousness state of the driver, the angle of the driver seat back to a driving state angle when the autonomous driving level acquisition unit acquires that the autonomous driving level is required to be immediately switched to the level lower than the nap enabled autonomous driving level (see at least Kim [0048] The autonomous controller 100 may control autonomous driving, and may determine whether to enable an autonomous driving mode or may determine to convert the autonomous driving mode into a manual driving mode, based on a current position of the driver's seat. In other words, the autonomous controller 100 may control at least one of whether to enable the autonomous driving function, whether to restrict position adjustment of the driver's seat, whether to hand over control authority, or the like based on a movement position in a forward or backward direction of the driver's seat or an angle of the backrest of the driver's seat. For example, when the movement position in the forward or backward direction of the driver's seat or the angle of the backrest of the driver's seat is greater than a predetermined threshold, the autonomous controller 100 may prohibit the autonomous driving mode from being enabled, may convert the autonomous driving mode into the manual driving mode while the autonomous driving mode is performed, and may restrict position adjustment of the driver's seat; [0058]; [0062] disclosing that while the autonomous driving function is performed, when the position in the forward or backward direction of the driver's seat is greater than the first threshold or when the angle of the backrest of the driver's seat is greater than the second threshold, the autonomous controller 100 may request the driver to take over control authority and may change to a manual driving mode ) .
As per claim 21, similar to claims 11 and 12, the combination of Kotani and Kim discloses all of the limitations of claim 18, as shown above. Kotani further discloses the following limitations:
further comprising a passenger seat angle adjustment unit adjusting an angle of a passenger seat back other than the driver seat back (as cited in claim 12, see at least Kotani, [0055]),
wherein, in the termination of the reclined state, the reclining control unit sets the angle of the driver seat back to the driving state angle and sets the angle of the passenger seat back to a standard angle (see at last Kotani, [0051] disclosing that when there is a rear seat occupant 220 (another passenger) in the rear seat 120 at the rear side of the sleeping occupant 200 (front seat occupant 210) as a vehicle interior state, the control unit 150 reduces the reclining angle shown in FIG. 10, to be smaller than the normal sleeping angle shown in FIG. 9 when performing the seat angle control for the sleeping occupant 210 (front seat occupant 210; [0053] disclosing that when the control unit 150 determines that the front seat occupant 210 in a sleeping state has sufficient foot space (there is a predetermined space or more) from the control position of the seat portion 112, the control unit 150 may perform the seat angle control and move the position of the seat portion 112 forward) ... . Kim further disclose the following limitation:
when the autonomous driving level acquisition unit acquires that the autonomous driving level is required to be immediately switched to the level lower than the nap enabled autonomous driving level (see at least Kim, claim 1).
As per claim 23, similar to claim 18, Kotani discloses [a] vehicle control method for driver used in a vehicle (see at least Kotani, Abstract),
the vehicle being equipped with: ... (1) ... ;
a driver seat angle adjustment unit adjusting an angle of a driver seat back (see at least Kotani, [0026]); and
a driver condition determination unit determining whether a consciousness state of the driver is an awake state or a sleep state (see Abstract; [0035]),
the vehicle control method for driver comprising: acquiring a currently executing autonomous driving level at which the autonomous driving system is executing the autonomous driving and the autonomous driving level scheduled to be executed (see at least Kotani, [0028]; [0039]);
acquiring the consciousness state of the driver from the driver condition determination unit (see at least Kotani, [0035]; [0042]);
terminating a reclined state of the driver seat back in response to acquiring that the autonomous driving level is to be switched from the nap enabled autonomous driving level to the autonomous driving level lower than the nap enabled autonomous driving level in the reclined state of the driver seat back (see at least Kotani, Abstract, [0034]; [0058]; [0062]; [0064]); and
determining different maximum control angles of the driver seat back according to different consciousness states of the driver and setting the angle of the driver seat back to a forward inclined angle when the consciousness state of the driver is the sleep state in terminating of the reclined state of the driver seat back (see at least Kotani, [0059]; [0064]). But, the difference between Kotani and the claimed invention is that Kotani does not explicitly teach the following limitation taught in Kim, a comparable device where it was known to have:
(1) an autonomous driving system capable of switching autonomous driving between a nap enabled autonomous driving level, which enables a driver to take a nap, and an autonomous driving level, which requires the driver to immediately get prepared for takeover of driving operation, or lower (see at least Kim, [0002]) ... .
Kotani and Kim are analogous art to claim 23 because they are in the same field related to the consciousness state of a driver of a vehicle. Kotani relates to a seat reclining position control device (see Kotani, [0002]). Kim relates to an information processing apparatus with an eyeball behavior analysis unit that analyzes an eyeball behavior of a driver, and based on the eyeball behavior dynamically switches an analysis mode according to a driving mode (see Kim, Abstract).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device, as disclosed in Kotani, to provide the benefit of (1) having an autonomous driving system capable of switching autonomous driving between a nap enabled autonomous driving level, which enables a driver to take a nap, and an autonomous driving level, which requires the driver to immediately get prepared for takeover of driving operation, or lower, as disclosed in Kim, with a reasonable expectation of success. The results would have been predictable to one of ordinary skill.
As per claim 24, similar to claims 1 and 6, Kotani discloses [a] vehicle control device for driver used in a vehicle (see at least Kotani, Abstract), the vehicle being equipped with: ... (1) ... ;
a driver seat angle adjustment unit adjusting an angle of a driver seat back (see at least Kotani, [0026]); and
a driver condition determination unit determining whether a consciousness state of the driver is an awake state or a sleep state (see at least Kotani, Abstract; [0035]),
the vehicle control device for driver comprising: a driver condition acquisition unit acquiring the consciousness state of the driver from the driver condition determination unit (see at least Kotani, [0035]; [0042]); and
a reclining control unit controlling a reclined state of the driver seat back, wherein, when the vehicle approaches a destination with the nap enabled autonomous driving level being maintained, the reclining control unit executes an angle control of the driver seat back, which terminates the reclined state, in response that the consciousness state of the driver is the awake state (see at least Kotani, Abstract; [0034]; [0058]; [0062]; [0064]) , and
when the vehicle approaches the destination with the nap enabled autonomous driving level being maintained, the reclining control unit suspends the angle control of the driver seat back, which terminates the reclined state, in response that the consciousness state of the driver is the sleep state (see at least Kotani, [0059]; [0068] disclosing that if the sleeping occupant 200 is the driver 211 and the vehicle is automatically traveling, the control unit 150 controls the seat angle for the driver 211 and helps for awakening the driver 211 when the time until the end of the automatic driving becomes shorter than a predetermined time ). But, the difference between Kotani and the claimed invention is that Kotani does not explicitly teach the following limitation taught in Kim, a comparable device where it was known to have:
(1) an autonomous driving system capable of performing autonomous driving at a nap enabled autonomous driving level that enables a driver to take a nap (see at least Kim, [0002]);
Kotani and Kim are analogous art to claim 24 because they are in the same field related to the consciousness state of a driver of a vehicle. Kotani relates to a seat reclining position control device (see Kotani, [0002]). Kim relates to an information processing apparatus with an eyeball behavior analysis unit that analyzes an eyeball behavior of a driver, and based on the eyeball behavior dynamically switches an analysis mode according to a driving mode (see Kim, Abstract).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device, as disclosed in Kotani, to provide the benefit of (1) an autonomous driving system capable of performing autonomous driving at a nap enabled autonomous driving level that enables a driver to take a nap, as disclosed in Kim, with a reasonable expectation of success. The results would have been predictable to one of ordinary skill.
As per claim 25, the combination of Kotani and Kim discloses all of the limitations of claim 24, as shown above. Kotani further discloses:
further comprising an autonomous driving control execution unit controlling the vehicle to travel around the destination by performing the autonomous driving at the nap enabled autonomous driving level when the consciousness state of the driver is the sleep state (see at least Kotani, [0058]; [0059]).
As per claim 26, the combination of Kotani and Kim discloses all of the limitations of claim 25, as shown above. Kotani further discloses the following:
wherein the autonomous driving control execution unit controls the vehicle to travel around the destination by performing the autonomous driving when a current time is earlier than an estimated arrival time notified to the driver in advance (see at least Kotani, [0058]; [0059]; [0064]; [0065]).
As per claim 27, the combination of Kotani and Kim discloses all of the limitations of claim 24, as shown above. Kotani further discloses the following limitations:
wherein the driver condition acquisition unit acquires sleep related information related to the sleep state of the driver when the driver is in the sleep state (see at least Kotani, [0035]), and
when the driver is in the sleep state after the vehicle is parked at the destination, the reclining control unit determines whether to execute the angle control of the driver seat back to terminate the reclined state based on the sleep related information (see at least Kotani, [0058]; [0059]).
As per claim 28, similar to claims 1, 6 and 24, Kotani discloses [a] vehicle control method for driver used in a vehicle (see at least Kotani, Abstract), the vehicle being equipped with: ... (1) ... ;
a driver seat angle adjustment unit adjusting an angle of a driver seat back (see at least Kotani, [0026]); and
a driver condition determination unit determining whether a consciousness state of the driver is an awake state or a sleep state (see at least Kotani, Abstract; [0035]),
the vehicle control method for driver comprising: acquiring the consciousness state of the driver from the driver condition determination unit (see at least Kotani, [0035]; [0042]);
when the vehicle approaches a destination with the nap enabled autonomous driving level being maintained, executing an angle control of the driver seat back, which terminates a reclined state of the driver seat back, in response that the consciousness state of the driver is the awake state (see at least Kotani, Abstract; [0034]; [0058]; [0062]; [0064]); and
when the vehicle approaches the destination with the nap enabled autonomous driving level being maintained, suspending the angle control of the driver seat back, which terminates the reclined state of the driver seat back, in response that the consciousness state of the driver is the sleep state (see at least Kotani, [0059]; [0068]). But, the difference between Kotani and the claimed invention is that Kotani does not explicitly teach the following limitation taught in Kim, a comparable device where it was known to have:
(1) an autonomous driving system capable of performing autonomous driving at a nap enabled autonomous driving level that enables a driver to take a nap (see at least Kim, [0002]);
Kotani and Kim are analogous art to claim 28 because they are in the same field related to the consciousness state of a driver of a vehicle. Kotani relates to a seat reclining position control device (see Kotani, [0002]). Kim relates to an information processing apparatus with an eyeball behavior analysis unit that analyzes an eyeball behavior of a driver, and based on the eyeball behavior dynamically switches an analysis mode according to a driving mode (see Kim, Abstract).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method, as disclosed in Kotani, to provide the benefit of (1) an autonomous driving system capable of performing autonomous driving at a nap enabled autonomous driving level that enables a driver to take a nap, as disclosed in Kim, with a reasonable expectation of success. The results would have been predictable to one of ordinary skill.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kotani and Kim as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of U.S. Patent Publication Number 2020/0016997 to Sato et al. (hereafter Sato).
As per claim 2, the combination of Kotani and Kim discloses all of the limitations of claim 1, as shown above. Kotani further discloses the following limitations:
wherein, when the vehicle travels toward the boarding and alighting area with the nap enabled autonomous driving level being maintained (see at least Kotani, [0043] disclosing that when the driver 211 is in a sleep state, for example, the vehicle is controlled by the autonomous driving device 10 at the automatic driving level 4 or 5, or the vehicle is parked or stopped in a parking lot while the driver is taking a nap. It is desired that the driver 211 be preferentially relaxed during an automatic driving or during a nap, for safe driving. The occupant 200 in a sleep state includes a passenger 212 such as rear seat occupant 220, other than the driver 211), ... (1) ... , and
when the vehicle travels toward the parking lot with the nap enabled autonomous driving level being maintained, the reclining control unit starts the angle control of the driver seat back after the vehicle arrives at the parking lot (see at least Kotani, [0043]). But, the difference between the combination of Kotani and Kim and the claimed invention is that neither Kotani nor Kim explicitly teaches the following limitation taught in Sato, a comparable device where it was known to have:
(1) the reclining control unit starts the angle control of the driver seat back before the vehicle arrives at the boarding and alighting area (see at least Sato, disclosing that when the controller 45 determines that the vehicle 40 has been parked in the parking lot 60 for staying, the safety verification unit 70 performs control of releasing the regulation of the reclining angle of each seat, to the seat mechanism unit 42; Claims 2 and 3) ... .
Kotani, Kim and Sato are analogous art to claim 2 because they are in the same field related to the consciousness state of a driver of a vehicle. Kotani relates to a seat reclining position control device (see Kotani, [0002]). Kim relates to an information processing apparatus with an eyeball behavior analysis unit that analyzes an eyeball behavior of a driver, and based on the eyeball behavior dynamically switches an analysis mode according to a driving mode (see Kim, Abstract). Sato relates to an accommodation vehicle management apparatus and an accommodation vehicle management system that are capable of managing an accommodation vehicle enabling an in-vehicle stay, and the accommodation vehicle (see at least Sato, [0002]).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device, as disclosed in Kotani, as modified by Kim, to provide the benefit of (1) having the reclining control unit start the angle control of the driver seat back before the vehicle arrives at the boarding and alighting area, as disclosed in Sato, with a reasonable expectation of success. The results would have been predictable to one of ordinary skill.
Claims 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kotani and Kim as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of U.S. Patent Publication Number 2020/0298732 to Gandhi et al. (hereafter Gandhi).
As per claim 3, the combination of Kotani and Kim discloses all of the limitations of claim 1, as shown above. Kotani further discloses the following:
wherein, when the vehicle departures from (i) the boarding and alighting area or (ii) the parking lot at the nap enabled autonomous driving level, the reclining control unit controls the driver seat back to the reclined state (as cited in claim 2, see at least Kotani, [0043]) ... (1) ... . But, the difference between the combination of Kotani and Kim and the claimed invention is that neither Kotani nor Kim explicitly teaches the following limitation taught in Gandhi, a comparable device where it was known to have:
(1) controls the driver seat back to a reclined stated after the vehicle travels to a predetermined location or the vehicle reaches a predetermined speed or higher (see at least Gandhi, [0046] disclosing that the seat actuator control module(s) 190 can be configured to cause the seat actuator(s) 180 to be selectively activated or deactivated based on both a vehicle speed threshold and a steering angle threshold. Thus, if a detected vehicle speed is above the vehicle speed threshold and if a detected steering angle is above the steering angle threshold, the seat actuator control module(s) 190 can be configured to cause the seat actuator(s) 180 to be activated or maintained in an activated state. If a detected vehicle speed is below the vehicle speed threshold and/or if a detected steering angle is below the steering angle threshold, the seat actuator control module(s) 190 can be configured to cause the seat actuator(s) 180 to be deactivated or maintained in a deactivated state).
Kotani, Kim and Gandhi are analogous art to claim 3 because they are in the same field related to the consciousness state of a driver of a vehicle and controlling seats. Kotani relates to a seat reclining position control device (see Kotani, [0002]). Kim relates to an information processing apparatus with an eyeball behavior analysis unit that analyzes an eyeball behavior of a driver, and based on the eyeball behavior dynamically switches an analysis mode according to a driving mode (see Kim, Abstract). Gandhi relates to control of vehicle seats (see at least abstract, [0001]).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device, as disclosed in Kotani, as modified by Kim, to provide the benefit of (1) controlling the driver seat back to a reclined stated after the vehicle travels to a predetermined location or the vehicle reaches a predetermined speed or higher, as disclosed in Gandhi, with a reasonable expectation of success. The results would have been predictable to one of ordinary skill.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kotani and Kim as applied to claim 5 above, and further in view of U.S. Patent Publication Number 2020/0086886 to Kaneko et al. (hereafter Kaneko).
As per claim 7, the combination of Kotani and Kim discloses all of the limitations of claim 5, as shown above. Kotani further discloses the following limitation:
wherein the sequential control condition is satisfied when (i) the consciousness state of the driver is the sleep state (see at least Konti, [0035]; [0042]; [0062]) and ... (1) ... . relates to and vehicle network control apparatus that acquires the state of a vehicle, a control profile, according to the acquired vehicle state, from one or more control profiles including settings for controlling equipment connected to an in-vehicle network and controls equipment within the in-vehicle network on the basis of the acquired control profile (see Matsumoto, Abstract)in Kaneko, a comparable device where it was known to include:
a sequential control conditions is satisfied when .... (ii) the passenger, who is in the awake state, is not an infant (see at least Kaneko, [0060] disclosing that the in-vehicle sensor 43 is a sensor that detects the state and attribute of a passenger in the vehicle 11, and supplies the detection result to the integrated ECU 31. The in-vehicle sensor 43 detects, for example, information regarding the state of the driver, which seat in the vehicle 11 a passenger is sitting, whether the passenger is an adult or a child, and the like.).
Kotani, Kim and Kaneko are analogous art to claim 7 because they are in the same field related to the consciousness state of a driver of a vehicle. Kotani relates to a seat reclining position control device (see Kotani, [0002]). Kim relates to an information processing apparatus with an eyeball behavior analysis unit that analyzes an eyeball behavior of a driver, and based on the eyeball behavior dynamically switches an analysis mode according to a driving mode (see Kim, Abstract). Kaneko relates to a vehicle control apparatus, a vehicle control method, and a movable object that make it possible to realize appropriate switching of an operation mode (see at least Kaneko, [0001]).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device, as disclosed in Kotani, as modified by Kim, to provide the benefit of (1) having the sequential control condition be satisfied when the passenger, who is in the awake state, is not an infant, as disclosed in Kaneko, with a reasonable expectation of success. The results would have been predicable to one of ordinary skill.
Claims 9 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kotani and Kim as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of U.S. Patent Publication Number 2023/0013883 to Ozawa et al. (hereafter Ozawa).
As per claim 9, the combination of Kotani and Kim discloses all of the limitations of claim 1, as shown above. Kotani further discloses the following limitations:
wherein, in the termination of the reclined state, the reclining control unit terminates the reclined state first (see at least Kotani, [0042]; [0064] ) and ... (1) ... when ... (2) ... and (ii) the consciousness state of the driver is the sleep state (see at least Kotani, [0042]; [0064]).
Kim further discloses the following limitation:
(2) outputs the notification .... when (i) the autonomous driving level acquisition unit acquires that the autonomous driving level is scheduled to be switched from the nap enabled autonomous driving level to a level lower than the nap enabled autonomous driving level within the predetermined period (see at least Kim, claim 1) ... . But, the difference between the combination of Kotani and Kim and the claimed invention is that neither Kotani nor Kim explicitly teach the following limitation taught in Ozawa, a comparable device where it was known to have:
(1) then outputs, via the notification unit, the notification indicating a scheduled termination of the nap enabled autonomous driving level within a predetermined period (see at least Ozawa, [0080] disclosing that the timing when the driving controller 1 switches autonomous driving to manual driving, the seat controller 2 controls the seat form changer 20 so that a change to a seat arrangement for manual driving (a form suitable for manual driving) is made. On the other hand, at the timing when the driving controller 1 switches manual driving to autonomous driving, the seat controller 2 controls the seat form changer 20 so that a change to a seat arrangement for an autonomous driving (a form not suitable for manual driving) is made. The form not suitable for manual driving is a form of the seat 10 changed by the seat form changer 20 which operates according to the control by the seat controller 2, when the driving controller 1 switches manual driving of the vehicle V to autonomous driving there; [0102] disclosing that examples of cases where the switching is voluntarily performed include ... a case where a timing for switching manual driving to autonomous driving has been scheduled in advance <note that it would be obvious to one of skill in the art to know that it would also be the case where the switching is voluntarily performed in a case where a timing for switching autonomous driving to manual driving has been scheduled in advance>; [0132] disclosing, with regard to Fig. 2, that if it cannot be confirmed in step S2 that the occupant is seated, the driving controller 1 notifies the occupant in the vehicle in step S3 and prompt the occupant to sit in the seat 10).
Kotani, Kim and Ozawa are analogous art to claim 9 because they are in the same field related to the consciousness state of a driver of a vehicle and seat control. Kotani relates to a seat reclining position control device (see Kotani, [0002]). Kim relates to an information processing apparatus with an eyeball behavior analysis unit that analyzes an eyeball behavior of a driver, and based on the eyeball behavior dynamically switches an analysis mode according to a driving mode (see Kim, Abstract). Ozawa relates to A vehicle control system includes a driving controller that switches between autonomous driving an manual driving of a vehicle, a seat whose form is changed between a form during autonomous driving and a form during manual driving that are different from each other (see at least Ozaki, Abstract).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device, as disclosed in Kotani, as modified by Kim, to provide the benefit of (1) outputting the notification indicating a scheduled termination of the nap enabled autonomous driving level within a predetermined period as disclosed in Ozawa, with a reasonable expectation of success. The results would have been predictable to one of ordinary skill.
As per claim 10, the combination of Kotani and Kim discloses all of the limitations of claim 1, as shown above. Kotani further discloses the following:
wherein, in the termination of the reclined state, the reclining control unit ... (1) ... and then terminates the reclined state (see at least Kotani, [0040]; [0064]; [0065]) when ... (2) ... and (ii) the consciousness state of the driver is the awake state (see at least Kotani, [0040]; [0064]; [0065]).
Kim further discloses the following:
(1) the reclining control unit ... terminates the reclining state ... when (i) the autonomous driving level acquisition unit acquires that the autonomous driving level is to be switched from the nap enabled autonomous driving level to a level lower than the nap enabled autonomous driving level within a predetermined period (see at least Kim, claim 1) ... . But, the difference between the combination of Kotani and Kim and the claimed invention is that neither Kotani nor Kim explicitly teach the following limitation taught in Ozawa, a comparable device where it was known to have:
(1) outputs, via the notification unit, the notification indicating a scheduled termination of the nap enabled autonomous driving level within a predetermined period first (similar citation to claim 9, see at least Ozawa, [0080]; [0102] disclosing that examples of cases where the switching is voluntarily performed include ... a case where a timing for switching manual driving to autonomous driving has been scheduled in advance <note that it would be obvious to one of skill in the art to know that it would also be the case where the switching is voluntarily performed in a case where a timing for switching autonomous driving to manual driving has been scheduled in advance>; [0132]).
Kotani, Kim and Ozawa are analogous art to claim 10 because they are in the same field related to the consciousness state of a driver of a vehicle and seat control. Kotani relates to a seat reclining position control device (see Kotani, [0002]). Kim relates to an information processing apparatus with an eyeball behavior analysis unit that analyzes an eyeball behavior of a driver, and based on the eyeball behavior dynamically switches an analysis mode according to a driving mode (see Kim, Abstract). Ozawa relates to A vehicle control system includes a driving controller that switches between autonomous driving an manual driving of a vehicle, a seat whose form is changed between a form during autonomous driving and a form during manual driving that are different from each other (see at least Ozaki, Abstract).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device, as disclosed in Kotani, as modified by Kim, to provide the benefit of (1) outputting the notification indicating a scheduled termination of the nap enabled autonomous driving level within a predetermined period first, as disclosed in Ozawa, with a reasonable expectation of success. The results would have been predictable to one of ordinary skill.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kotani and Kim as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of U.S. Patent Publication Number 2023/0163983 to Matsumoto et al. (hereafter Matsumoto).
As per claim 14, the combination of Kotani and Kim discloses all of the limitations of claim 1, as shown above. But, the difference between the combination of Kotani and Kim and the claimed invention is that neither Kotani nor Kim explicitly teach the following limitation taught in Matsumoto, a comparable device where it was known to have:
a wiper control unit restricting an operation of a wiper mounted on the vehicle when both of the driver seat back and a passenger seat back are in the reclined states (see at least Matsumoto, [0045] A “vehicle state” denotes a state that can be grasped from information that can be acquired from driving-related equipment (engines, tires, steering, brakes, transmissions, etc.) and additional equipment (doors, tailgates, windscreen wipers, seats, air conditioners, power windows, audio equipment, meter panels, information terminals, etc.) in the vehicle, information that can be acquired from a control system for controlling these pieces of equipment, information that can be acquired from sensors attached thereto, and information (routers, switches, etc.) related to an in-vehicle network to which these pieces of equipment are connected. State parameters include engine revolutions per minute, speed, steering angle, whether or not the brakes are used, gear stage, whether a door/tailgate is open or closed, whether or not the wipers are operating, the angle of a seat back, air conditioning air volume, whether a window is open or closed, the source of audio, the type of information displayed on the meter panel or an information terminal, and the power consumption or operating mode (low power consumption mode, standby mode, etc.) of equipment ).
Kotani, Kim and Matsumoto are analogous art to claim 14 because they are in the same field related to the controlling components in the vehicle. Kotani relates to a seat reclining position control device (see Kotani, [0002]). Kim relates to an information processing apparatus with an eyeball behavior analysis unit that analyzes an eyeball behavior of a driver, and based on the eyeball behavior dynamically switches an analysis mode according to a driving mode (see Kim, Abstract). Matsumoto relates to and vehicle network control apparatus that acquires the state of a vehicle, a control profile, according to the acquired vehicle state, from one or more control profiles including settings for controlling equipment connected to an in-vehicle network and controls equipment within the in-vehicle network on the basis of the acquired control profile (see Matsumoto, Abstract)
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device, as disclosed in Kotani, as modified by Kim, to provide the benefit of having a wiper control unit restricting an operation of a wiper mounted on the vehicle when both of the driver seat back and a passenger seat back are in the reclined states, as disclosed in Matsumoto, with a reasonable expectation of success. The results would have been predictable to one of ordinary skill.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kotani, Kim and Matsumoto as applied to claim 14 above, and further in view of Japanese Patent Publication Number JP 2017/210019 to Asakura.
As per claim 15, the combination of Kotani, Kim and Matsumoto discloses all of the limitations of claim 14, as show above. But, neither Kotani, Kim nor Matsumoto explicitly teach the following limitation taught in Asakura:
wherein the wiper control unit eases restriction applied to the operation of the wiper when the autonomous driving level is scheduled to be switched to a level lower than the nap enabled autonomous driving level (see at least Asakura, Pg. 11, para. 6, disclosing that, when automatic driving is performed, the operation of the wiper is stopped to improve the comfort of the vehicle occupant, and when manual driving is performed, the wiper is operated to improve the visibility of the vehicle occupant. As a result, it is possible to control the vehicle in a favorable state for the vehicle occupant; Pg. 12, para. 1, disclosing that when the automatic operation is performed, the wiper control unit operates the first wiper blade in a range narrower than the range in which the first wiper blade W1 is operated when the automatic operation is not performed. The narrow range (region A4) is, for example, a region A4 that is narrower than the left region A1. This area A4 includes an area A3 corresponding to the imaging range of the camera 40. Thereby, while the visibility of the imaging range of the camera 40 is ensured, comfort is given priority over the visibility of the vehicle occupant ).
Kotani, Kim, Matsumoto and Asakura are analogous art to claim 15 because they are in the same field related to the controlling components in the vehicle. Kotani relates to a seat reclining position control device (see Kotani, [0002]). Kim relates to an information processing apparatus with an eyeball behavior analysis unit that analyzes an eyeball behavior of a driver, and based on the eyeball behavior dynamically switches an analysis mode according to a driving mode (see Kim, Abstract). Matsumoto relates to and vehicle network control apparatus that acquires the state of a vehicle, a control profile, according to the acquired vehicle state, from one or more control profiles including settings for controlling equipment connected to an in-vehicle network and controls equipment within the in-vehicle network on the basis of the acquired control profile (see Matsumoto, Abstract). Asakura relates to a vehicle to be controlled to a preferable state for a vehicular occupant (see at least Asakura, Abstract).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device, as disclosed in Kotani, as modified by Kim, and further modified by Matsumoto, to provide the benefit of having the wiper control unit eases restriction applied to the operation of the wiper when the autonomous driving level is scheduled to be switched to a level lower than the nap enabled autonomous driving level, as disclosed in Asakura, with a reasonable expectation of success. Doing so would provide the benefit of enhancing the comfort of the vehicle occupant.
Claim 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kotani and Kim as applied to claim 20 above, and further in view of U.S. Patent Publication Number 2017/0313314 to Sen et al. (hereafter Sen).
As per claim 22, the combination of Kotani and Kim discloses all of the limitations of claim 20, as shown above. But, the difference between the combination of Kotani and Kim and the claimed invention is that neither Kotani nor Kim explicitly teaches the following limitation taught in Sen, a comparable device where it was known to have:
wherein the reclining control unit changes the angle of the driver seat back at a first change speed to terminate the reclined state when the autonomous driving level acquisition unit acquires that the autonomous driving level is required to be immediately switched to the level lower than the nap enabled autonomous driving level (see at least Sen, [0119]; [0129] disclosing that FIG. 15 is a diagram showing a first example of wakefulness control based on a state detection result. In the example of FIG. 15, assume that the vehicle occupant P in the driver's seat is “awake,” and the reclining angle θ of the seat 87 is θ1 (θ1>threshold angle θth). In this case, upon acquisition of the above contents as a state detection result, the state detector 172 acquires a wakefulness control content by referring to the wakefulness control information 188. According to the wakefulness control information 188, the wakefulness controller 174 drives the seat by the seat driving device 88 at a normal speed V0, until the reclining angle θ to the reclining angle θ0 position where manual driving is performed. Note that a normal speed is a drive speed of the seat driving device 88 when the vehicle occupant. P in the driver's seat, operates the seat driving switch 86B; [0130] disclosing that in the first example described above, if the vehicle occupant. P in the driver's seat, had been sleeping for only a short, time, the state detector 172 refers to the wakefulness control information 188, and drives the seat by the seat driving device 88 via the wakefulness controller 174 at a faster speed V1 of changing the reclining angle θ than the normal speed V0, until the reclining angle θ comes to the reclining angle θ0 position where manual driving is performed. Since the reclining of the seat 87 can thus raise the upper body of the vehicle occupant P in the driver's seat faster than at normal speed, it is possible to wake the vehicle occupant P and prompt wakefulness),
the reclining control unit changes the angle of the driver seat back at a second change speed to terminate the reclined state when the autonomous driving level acquisition unit acquires that the autonomous driving level is scheduled to be switched to the level lower than the nap enabled autonomous driving level within a predetermined period, and the first change speed is set to be higher than the second change speed (see at least Sen, [0138] disclosing that the reclining angle θ of the seat 87 is not smaller than the threshold angle θth, and the vehicle occupant P in the driver's seat has been asleep for only a short time. Hence, the wakefulness controller 174 drives the seat by the seat driving device 88 at the speed V1 faster than the normal speed V0, until the reclining angle θ comes to the reclining angle θ0 position where manual driving is performed).
Kotani, Kim an Sen are analogous art to claim 14 because they are in the same field related to the controlling components in the vehicle. Kotani relates to a seat reclining position control device (see Kotani, [0002]). Kim relates to an information processing apparatus with an eyeball behavior analysis unit that analyzes an eyeball behavior of a driver, and based on the eyeball behavior dynamically switches an analysis mode according to a driving mode (see Kim, Abstract). Sen relates to a vehicle control system including a driving controller that executes any one of automated driving and manual driving, an electrically drivable driver's seat of the vehicle, a state detector that detects a state of an occupant seated in the driver's seat, and a seat controller that drives the driver's seat if the state detector detects that the occupant seated in the driver's seat is not in a wakeful state (see at least Sen, Abstract).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device, as disclosed in Kotani, as modified by Kim, to provide the benefit of having the reclining control unit change the angle of the driver seat back at a first change speed to terminate the reclined state when the autonomous driving level acquisition unit acquires that the autonomous driving level is required to be immediately switched to the level lower than the nap enabled autonomous driving level, and having the reclining control unit change the angle of the driver seat back at a second change speed to terminate the reclined state when the autonomous driving level acquisition unit acquires that the autonomous driving level is scheduled to be switched to the level lower than the nap enabled autonomous driving level within a predetermined period, and the first change speed is set to be higher than the second change speed, as disclosed in Sen, with a reasonable expectation of success. The results would have been predictable to one of ordinary skill.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
U.S. Patent Publication Number 2024/0262340 to Numajiri et al. (hereafter Numajiri) disclosing at [0231] identifying the seated occupant is a child or an adult with a seating sensor, and when the seated occupant is a child, control may be performed such that the operation lever 110 does not operate; and
U.S. Patent Publication Number 2022/0073092 to Yuasa et al. (hereafter Yuasa) disclosing at [0031] the vehicle control device 6 notifies the autonomous driving assistance device 1 of schedule information indicating that it is scheduled to switch from autonomous driving to manual driving a certain period of time before the vehicle actually reaches the scheduled switching point.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PATRICK M. BRADY III whose telephone number is (571)272-7458. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7:00 am - 4;30 pm.
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, Erin Bishop can be reached at 571-270-3713. 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.
PATRICK M. BRADY III
Examiner
Art Unit 3665
/PATRICK M BRADY/Examiner, Art Unit 3665
/Erin D Bishop/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3665
Prosecution Insights