DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
The following is a Final Office Action in response to communications received on 2/2/2026. Claims 1, 2, 4-6, 8-11, 13-15, and 17 are currently pending and have been examined. Claims 1, 2, 4-6, 8-11, 14, 15 and 17 have been amended. Claims 3, 7, 12, and 16 have been cancelled.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Step 1: The claims 1, 2, 4-6, 8-11, 13-15 are a system and claim 17 is a method claim. Thus, each independent claim, on its face, is directed to one of the statutory categories of 35 U.S.C. §101. However, the claims 1, 2, 4-6, 8-11, 13-15, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Step 2A Prong 1: The independent claims (1 and 17, taking claim 1 as a representative claim) recite:
A gas station information-provision system comprising:
a display device provided in a vehicle at least one processor and at least one memory having stored thereon computer-readable instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to:
receive at least one of a payment history of a payment system associated with the vehicle to provide a fueling payment service or a detection result of a knocking sensor provided on an engine of the vehicle to detect knocking occurring during operation of the engine,
determine a fueling history of the vehicle using a first fuel type, among a plurality of fuel types, based on at least one of the payment history of the payment history associated with the vehicle or the detection result of the knocking sensor provided on the engine of the vehicle, analyze a fueling pattern with the first fuel type based on the determined fueling history of the vehicle using the first fuel type,
determine an optimal fueling time for the first fuel type based on the fueling pattern with the first fuel type,
And based on determining that a preset fueling condition according to the fueling history with the first fuel type is satisfied based on the optimal fueling time, control the display device to output gas station information associated with a gas station available for fueling with the first fuel type on a map screen of the display device within a certain range based on a current location of the vehicle displayed on the map screen of the display device.
These limitations, except for the italicized portions, under their broadest reasonable interpretations, recite certain methods of organizing human activity for managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people (including social activities, teaching, and following rules or instructions) as well as commercial or legal interactions (including agreements in the form of contracts; legal obligations; advertising, marketing or sales activities or behaviors; business relations). The claimed invention recites steps for determining a fueling history of a vehicle in order to output additional information such as gas station information, location, brand, pricing, and discount information (and see [0002] of the specification). The steps under its broadest reasonable interpretation specifically fall under marketing and sales activities. The Examiner notes that although the claim limitations are summarized, the analysis regarding subject matter eligibility considers the entirety of the claim and all of the claim elements individually, as a whole, and in ordered combination.
Prong 2: This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claims recite the additional elements of
A gas station information-provision system comprising:
a display device provided in a vehicle at least one processor and at least one memory having stored thereon computer-readable instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to: (claim 1)
at least one processor (claim 17)
a knocking sensor provided on an engine of the vehicle to detect knocking occurring during operation of the engine,
control the display device of the vehicle
screen of the display device
The additional elements of emphasized above are recited at a high-level of generality (i.e., as a generic processor performing a generic computer function of processing data) such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. The limitations do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea, and therefore do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application – MPEP 2106.05(f).
Accordingly, these additional elements when considered individually or as a whole do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The independent claims are directed to an abstract idea.
Step 2B: The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed with respect to Step 2A Prong two, the additional elements in the claims amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the judicial exception using a generic computer component.
Even when considered as an ordered combination, the additional elements of claims 1 and 17 do not add anything that is not already present when they are considered individually. Therefore, under Step 2B, there are no meaningful limitations in claims 1 and 17 that transform the judicial exception into a patent eligible application such that the claims amount to significantly more than the judicial exception itself (see MPEP 2106.05).
As such, independent claims 1 and 17 are ineligible.
Dependent claims 2, 4-6, 8-11, 13-15 when analyzed as a whole, are held to be patent ineligible under 35 U.S.C. §101 because the additional recited limitations fail to establish that the claims are not directed to the same abstract idea of Independent Claims 1 and 17 without significantly more.
Claim 2 recites wherein the first fuel type has a higher octane number than a second fuel type among the plurality of fuel types. The limitation merely further limits the abstract idea and does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Claim 4 recites wherein the payment system is configured such that at least some components of the payment system are mounted in the vehicle. The payment system is merely an additional element collecting payment information and recited at a high level of generality and does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Claim 5 recites wherein the computer-readable instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to determine
Claim 6 recites wherein the computer-readable instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to, based on determining that the fueling history using the first fuel type is not obtained from the payment history of the payment system, determines the fueling history using the first fuel type based on the detection result of the knocking sensor. The limitation merely further limits the abstract idea and does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Claim 8 recites wherein the fueling pattern of the first fuel type includes at least one of a fueling cycle with the first fuel type, a fueling location with the first fuel type, a fueling history using a second fuel type among the plurality fuel types, a fueling frequency with the first fuel type relative to the second fuel type, or any combination thereof. The limitation merely further limits the abstract idea and does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Claim 9 recites wherein the computer-readable instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to determines the fueling frequency with the first fuel type relative to the second fuel type depending on a change in a number of knocking detections
Claim 10 recites wherein the computer-readable instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to analyze the fueling pattern with the first fuel type further based on a detection result of a fuel sensor provided in the vehicle. The fuel sensor is merely an additional element collecting information and recited at a high level of generality and does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Claim 11 recites wherein the computer-readable instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to determines at least one of a fueling location, a fueling time, or a combination thereof of the vehicle depending on a change in fuel volume according to the detection result of the fuel sensor to analyze the fueling pattern with the first fuel type. The limitation merely further limits the abstract idea and does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Claim 13 recites wherein the gas station information includes at least one of brand information, location information, price information, discount information, or any combination thereof of the gas station. The limitation merely further limits the abstract idea and does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Claim 14 recites wherein the computer-readable instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to control the display device to output, among gas station information associated with gas stations available for fueling with the first fuel type, gas station information associated with gas stations located around the current location of the vehicle. The limitation merely further limits the abstract idea and does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Claim 15 recites wherein the execution part outputs the gas station information such that the gas station information is recognized within the vehicle via at least one of visual sense, auditory sense, or a combination thereof. The limitation merely further limits the abstract idea and does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
For these reasons, claims 1-17 are rejected under 35 USC 101.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1, 2, 8, 10, 13-15 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zarakas (US 20220138785) in view of Reyhani (US 12174029).
Regarding claims 1 and 17, Zarakas discloses:
A gas station information-provision system comprising (claim 1)
A gas station information-provision method comprises: (claim 17)
a display device provided in a vehicle at least one processor and at least one memory having stored thereon computer-readable instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to: [0016] Additionally, or alternatively, the client device may include an in-vehicle device that may perform functions associated with the vehicle or the user, such as monitoring information and status of the vehicle, providing navigation for the vehicle, facilitating payments by the user, and/or the like.
receive at least one of a payment history of a payment system associated with the vehicle to provide a fueling payment service or a detection result of a knocking sensor provided on an engine of the vehicle to detect knocking occurring during operation of the engine, [0067] Specifically, the user history data may include purchase history and/or purchase habit information associated with fuel grade purchased, precise location of the client device during the purchase, date of purchase, time of purchase, day of the week of purchase, whether items other than fuel were purchased, portions of transaction amounts specifically for fuel, and/or the like.
determine a fueling history of the vehicle using a first fuel type, among a plurality[0067] Specifically, the user history data may include purchase history and/or purchase habit information associated with fuel grade purchased, precise location of the client device during the purchase, date of purchase, time of purchase, day of the week of purchase, whether items other than fuel were purchased, portions of transaction amounts specifically for fuel, and/or the like. [0050] As further shown in FIG. 1C, and by reference number 130, the fuel price determination system may determine a ranked list of the particular fuel stations in the geographical area based on the fuel prices (e.g., the designated fuel prices, as described above) at the particular fuel stations. In some implementations, the ranked list may rank the particular fuel stations (e.g., all of the particular fuel stations in the geographical area) in an order based on the fuel prices at the particular fuel stations. For example, where the particular fuel stations include a first fuel station with a less expensive fuel price and a second fuel station with a more expensive fuel price, the first fuel station may be ranked higher in the ranked list than the second fuel station.[0052] In implementations where the machine learning model determines different fuel prices for different grades of fuel, the fuel price determination system may determine a different, grade-specific ranked list for each of the different grades of fuel. And see [0053] of the output of a map. [0068] As shown by reference number 215, the set of observations may be associated with a target variable.
While Zarakas discloses the output of a map based on a set of criteria, the reference does not expressly disclose:
determine an optimal fueling time for the first fuel type based on the fueling pattern with the first fuel type,
and based on determining that a preset fueling condition according to the fueling history with the first fuel type is satisfied based on the optimal fueling time, control the display device to output gas station information associated with a gas station available for fueling with the first fuel type on a map screen of the display device within a certain range based on a current location of the vehicle displayed on the map screen of the display device.
However Reyhani teaches:
determine an optimal fueling time for the first fuel type based on the fueling pattern with the first fuel type, [Col. 12 lines 60-67] Shown throughout the figures, the present invention is directed toward an artificial intelligence fuel management system and method that facilitates optimizing fuel management and vehicle service times for a variety of vehicle types through determining the remaining trip range for a vehicle and providing optimal routing and vehicle fueling options for a trip route. Importantly, the artificial intelligence fuel management system and method of the disclosed embodiments provides an advantageous improvement of practical applications such as autonomous vehicles, vehicle platoon management, vehicular fuel management systems and vehicular computer controls and hardware. Fuel management problems are solved, through an efficient fuel management system and method, that are associated with autonomous vehicles and/or any other type of vehicle that is fueled by at least one of a liquid fuel and an alternative fuel, and wherein the liquid fuel is one of gasoline and diesel, and the alternative fuel is one of electricity, bio-fuel, bio-alcohol, synthetic and paraffinic, steam, heat, vegetable and waste-derived oils, compressed air, liquid nitrogen, liquid petroleum gas, propane, hydrogen, ethanol, methanol, butanol, and natural gas.
and [See Figure 9 and Col. 27 lines 57-Col. 28 lines 27] Turning our attention to FIG. 9, an illustrative user device interface 900 is shown for optimizing fuel management for a vehicle(s) and providing optimal routing and vehicle fueling options for a trip route 944 in accordance with an embodiment. More particularly, the trip route 944 comprises, illustratively, a route(s) starting at present position 902 (i.e., a present geographical position of a vehicle) and having a pick-up location 904 (with a trip route segment 912) and comprises individual trip segments (e.g., trip route segment 912, trip route segment 914, trip route segment 916 and trip route segment 918). The illustrative trip route 944 may be either a single destination route or a multi-destination route between any of the plurality of destination shown (i.e., destination D1 906, destination D2 908, and destination D3, 910). As detailed herein above, a determination is made, by the artificial intelligence fuel management device associated with the vehicle undertaking the trip route 944, if the trip route 944 is either the single destination route (e.g., between pick-up location 904 and destination D1 906 (the final destination) along a trip route comprising the trip route segment 912 and trip route segment 914) or the multi-destination route (e.g., between pick-up location 904, destination D1 906, destination D2 and destination D3 (the final destination) along trip route segment 912, trip route segment 914 and trip route segment 916). A refueling determination will be made, as detailed herein above, in accordance with the applicable present position fuel management condition, single destination route fuel management condition, multi-destination route fuel management condition, and/or top-off fuel management condition and if refueling is necessary the most proximate of the refueling stations will be identified (i.e., refueling station C1 920, refueling station C2 922, refueling station C3 924, refueling station C4 926, refueling station C5 928, refueling station C6 930, refueling station C7 932, refueling station C8 934, refueling station C9 936, refueling station C10 938, refueling station C11 940, and refueling station C12 942) for routing the vehicle thereto.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the output map of Zarakas to include determine an optimal fueling time for the first fuel type based on the fueling pattern with the first fuel type, and based on determining that a preset fueling condition according to the fueling history with the first fuel type is satisfied based on the optimal fueling time, control the display device to output gas station information associated with a gas station available for fueling with the first fuel type on a map screen of the display device within a certain range based on a current location of the vehicle displayed on the map screen of the display device, as taught in Reyhani, in order to improve the management of fuel over the course of a trip (see [Col. 12 lines 60-67]).
Regarding claim 2, Zarakas in view of Reyhani teaches the limitations set forth above and Zarakas further discloses:
wherein the first fuel type has a higher octane number than a second fuel type among the plurality of fuel types. [0020] In some cases, the transaction data may include a fuel price of the fuel dispensed in association with the transaction, an amount of fuel dispensed, a grade of fuel dispensed (e.g., octane level), a type of fuel dispensed (e.g., unleaded, diesel, ethanol, and/or the like), and/or the like. [0045] In many cases, a fuel station may provide different grades (e.g., octane levels) of fuel, and each different grade of fuel may have a different fuel price. And see [0067]
Regarding claim 8, Zarakas in view of Reyhani teaches the limitations set forth above and Zarakas further discloses:
wherein the fueling pattern of the first fuel type includes at least one of a fueling cycle with the first fuel type, a fueling location with the first fuel type, [0067] Specifically, the user history data may include purchase history and/or purchase habit information associated with fuel grade purchased, precise location of the client device during the purchase, date of purchase, time of purchase, day of the week of purchase, whether items other than fuel were purchased, portions of transaction amounts specifically for fuel, and/or the like. a fueling history using a second fuel type among the plurality of fuel types, a fueling frequency with the first fuel type relative to the second fuel type, or any combination thereof.
Regarding claim 10, Zarakas in view of Reyhani teaches the limitations set forth above and Zarakas further discloses:
wherein the computer-readable instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to analyze the fueling pattern with the first fuel type [0067] Specifically, the user history data may include purchase history and/or purchase habit information associated with fuel grade purchased, precise location of the client device during the purchase, date of purchase, time of purchase, day of the week of purchase, whether items other than fuel were purchased, portions of transaction amounts specifically for fuel, and/or the like. further based on a detection result of a fuel sensor provided in the vehicl [0027] In some implementations, the fuel price determination system may receive the vehicle data from the vehicle, such as via the client device (e.g., from the fuel price determination application on the client device). In this case, the client device may receive the vehicle data from an engine control module, from one or more sensors on the vehicle (e.g., a fuel sensor), from an in-vehicle device,
Regarding claim 13, Zarakas in view of Reyhani teaches the limitations set forth above and Zarakas further discloses:
wherein the gas station information includes at least one of brand information, location information, price information, discount information, or any combination thereof of the gas station. (see price information shown in Figure 1D)
Regarding claim 14, Zarakas in view of Reyhani teaches the limitations set forth above and Zarakas further discloses:
wherein the computer-readable instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to control the display device to output, among gas station information associated with gas stations available for fueling with the first fuel type, gas station information [0051] In some implementations, the ranked list may rank the particular fuel stations in an order based on additional factors. For example, the fuel price determination system may determine geographical distances between locations of the particular fuel stations and a location of a client device of a user, and may associate data identifying the geographical distances with the ranked list of the particular fuel stations to generate a modified ranked list of the particular fuel stations. And see Figure 1D
Regarding claim 15, Zarakas in view of Reyhani teaches the limitations set forth above and Zarakas further discloses:
wherein the computer-readable instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to control the display device to outputs the gas station information such that the gas station information is recognized within the vehicle via at least one of visual sense, auditory sense, or a combination thereof. [0053] For example, the fuel price determination system may determine a set of the particular fuel stations with the lowest fuel prices based on the ranked list, may provide indicators to highlight the set of particular fuel stations in the map, and may overlay the indicators on the map (e.g., at locations of the map that correspond to locations of the particular fuel stations as indicated by the location data).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zarakas in view of Reyhani in further view of Li (US 20250315815).
Regarding claim 4, Zarakas in view of Reyhani teaches the limitations set forth above. While Zarakas discloses using payment information to make determinations about fueling information, Zarakas in view of Reyhani does not expressly teach:
wherein the payment system is configured such that at least some components of the payment system are mounted in the vehicle
However Li teaches:
wherein the payment system is configured such that at least some components of the payment system are mounted in the vehicle (shown in Figure 1 “Vehicle mounted payment control system”)
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the payment collection information of Zarakas in view of Reyhani to include wherein the payment system is configured such that at least some components of the payment system are mounted in the vehicle, as taught in Li, in order to make the payment more convenient and practical, and improves user experience (see paragraph 0023).
Claims 5, 6, 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zarakas in view of Reyhani in view of Haraguchi (US20210293773).
Regarding claim 5, Zarakas in view of Reyhani teaches the limitations set forth above. While Zarakas discloses using payment information to make determinations about fueling information, Zarakas in view of Reyhani does not expressly teach:
wherein the computer-readable instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to determine
However Haraguchi teaches:
wherein the computer-readable instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to determine [0068] In the present embodiment, the concentration of fuel is estimated, based on control information that is controlled, according to the change in output of the knock sensor [0074] In step S705, the concentration estimation unit 202 estimates the alcohol concentration of the supplied fuel, based on the remaining capacity of fuel before supply, the supply amount of fuel, the alcohol concentration before supply, and the change in the control amount of the ignition timing that depends on the detection result of the knock sensor. The relative relationship between the alcohol concentration of fuel and the change in the control amount of ignition timing referred to here is defined in advance, and the concentration estimation unit 202 may estimate the alcohol concentration with reference to information on the change in the acquired control amount and information on this relative relationship.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the fuel analysis in Zarakas in view of Reyhani to include wherein the computer-readable instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to determine
Regarding claim 6, Zarakas in view of Reyhani teaches the limitations set forth above. While Zarakas discloses using payment information to make determinations about fueling information, Zarakas in view of Reyhani does not expressly teach:
wherein the computer-readable instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to, based on determining that the fueling history using the first fuel type is not obtained from the payment history of the payment system, determines the fueling history using the first fuel type based on the detection result of the knocking sensor.
However Haraguchi teaches:
wherein the computer-readable instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to, based on determining that the fueling history using the first fuel type is not obtained from the payment history of the payment system, determines the fueling history using the first fuel type based on the detection result of the knocking sensor [0068] In the present embodiment, the concentration of fuel is estimated, based on control information that is controlled, according to the change in output of the knock sensor [0074] In step S705, the concentration estimation unit 202 estimates the alcohol concentration of the supplied fuel, based on the remaining capacity of fuel before supply, the supply amount of fuel, the alcohol concentration before supply, and the change in the control amount of the ignition timing that depends on the detection result of the knock sensor. The relative relationship between the alcohol concentration of fuel and the change in the control amount of ignition timing referred to here is defined in advance, and the concentration estimation unit 202 may estimate the alcohol concentration with reference to information on the change in the acquired control amount and information on this relative relationship.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the fuel analysis in Zarakas in view of Reyhani to include wherein the computer-readable instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to, based on determining that the fueling history using the first fuel type is not obtained from the payment history of the payment system, determines the fueling history using the first fuel type based on the detection result of the knocking sensor, as taught in Haraguchi, in order to take information from the knock sensor and provide incentives to the user and improve customer experience (paragraph 0065).
Regarding claim 9, Zarakas in view of Reyhani teaches the limitations set forth above. While Zarakas discloses using payment information to make determinations about fueling information, Zarakas in view of Reyhani does not expressly teach:
wherein the computer-readable instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to determines the fueling frequency with the first fuel type relative to the second fuel type depending on a change in a number of knocking detections
However Haraguchi teaches:
wherein the computer-readable instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to determines the fueling frequency with the first fuel type relative to the second fuel type depending on a change in a number of knocking detections[0074] In step S705, the concentration estimation unit 202 estimates the alcohol concentration of the supplied fuel, based on the remaining capacity of fuel before supply, the supply amount of fuel, the alcohol concentration before supply, and the change in the control amount of the ignition timing that depends on the detection result of the knock sensor. The relative relationship between the alcohol concentration of fuel and the change in the control amount of ignition timing referred to here is defined in advance, and the concentration estimation unit 202 may estimate the alcohol concentration with reference to information on the change in the acquired control amount and information on this relative relationship. [0075] As for the eco-related evaluation referred to here, similarly to the first embodiment, a statistic, such as fuel with a high alcohol concentration being continuously supplied or the supply frequency of fuel with a high alcohol concentration increasing, for example, may calculated, as fuel that is supplied to the vehicle 200. This information may be provided to the user of the vehicle 200 or to the sales support server 100 periodically. This information may be used as information for reflecting on incentives or improving the eco-awareness of users, for example.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the fuel analysis in Zarakas in view or Reyhani to include wherein the computer-readable instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to determines the fueling frequency with the first fuel type relative to the second fuel type depending on a change in a number of knocking detections.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zarakas in view of Reyhani in further view of Hauser (US 20230044784).
Regarding claim 11, Zarakas in view of Reyhani teaches the limitations set forth above. While Zarakas discloses using payment information to make determinations about fueling information, Zarakas in view of Reyhani does not expressly teach:
wherein the computer-readable instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to determines at least one of a fueling location, a fueling time, or a combination thereof of the vehicle depending on a change in fuel volume according to the detection result of the fuel sensor to analyze the fueling pattern with the first fuel type.
However Hauser teaches:
wherein the computer-readable instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to determines at least one of a fueling location, a fueling time, or a combination thereof of the vehicle depending on a change in fuel volume according to the detection result of the fuel sensor to analyze the fueling pattern with the first fuel type. [0011] the system control circuit is further configured to generate a recommendation can include a recommended refueling location and a recommended refueling time. [0083] In an eightieth aspect, a system for a vehicle is included having a fuel filter sensor device configured to generate data reflecting a filter restriction value of a fuel filter, a geolocation circuit configured to generate or receive geolocation data, wherein the system is configured to evaluate the fuel filter sensor data to determine changes in the filter restriction value, receive fuel level data, cross-reference geolocation data and fuel level data to identify refueling locations utilized, correlate refueling locations with subsequent changes in the filter restriction value to identify an effect of specific refueling locations utilized on fuel filter loading, and provide at least one of route and refueling site recommendations to a user output device based on the fuel filter loading rate data. And see [0150]
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the fuel analysis in Zarakas in view of Reyhani to include wherein the computer-readable instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to determines at least one of a fueling location, a fueling time, or a combination thereof of the vehicle depending on a change in fuel volume according to the detection result of the fuel sensor to analyze the fueling pattern with the first fuel type, as taught in Hauser, in order to optimize the refueling procedure for the given vehicle (paragraph 0105).
Relevant Art Not Cited
US 20170363432 discloses determining the optimal fueling schedule and location for a vehicle
Response to Arguments
With respect to the claim interpretation under 35 USC 112(f), the interpretation has been withdrawn in light of the claim amendments.
Applicant's arguments filed 2/2/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
With respect to the remarks directed to prong 2 of Step 2A, the examiner asserts the claims do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. At most, the improvement lies within the abstract idea. The claimed invention determining the optimal refueling time and providing this information to an end user on a display device is merely improving the commerce data provided to an end user (i.e. when and where to make the purchase of refueling). The technical or mechanical aspects of refueling the vehicle nor the display technology is improved in the claimed invention. For the same reasons above, the remarks directed to Step 2B are not found to be persuasive.
With respect to the remarks directed to 35 USC 102, the examiner first asserts, the claim rejection has been updated above in view of the claim amendments and the rejection under 35 USC 102 withdrawn. The claims are now rejected under 35 USC 103 over Zarakas in view of newly cited Reyhani. Reyhani is now relied upon for teaching the determination of the optimal fueling time and then subsequently outputting the refueling information to an end user on a display device including a map. Thereby, the remarks directed to Zarakas not teaching these amended claim limitations of “determine an optimal fueling time for the first fuel type based on the fueling pattern with the first fuel type, and in response to determining that a preset fueling condition according to the fueling history with the first fuel type is satisfied based on the optimal fueling time, control the display device to output gas station information associated with a gas station available for fueling with the first fuel type on a map screen of the display device within a certain range based on a current location of the vehicle displayed on the map screen of the display device.” are determined to be moot. That is the combination or Zarakas in view of Reyhani teaches the independent claims as amended.
It is noted with respect to Hauser, while Hauser is still relied upon for the teachings of a fuel sensor in clam 11, the reference is not relied upon for teaching the independent claims.
For at least these reasons, the claims remain rejected under 35 USC 103.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VICTORIA E. FRUNZI whose telephone number is (571)270-1031. The examiner can normally be reached Monday- Friday 7-4 (EST).
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, Marissa Thein can be reached at (571) 272-6764. 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.
VICTORIA E. FRUNZI
Primary Examiner
Art Unit TC 3689
/VICTORIA E. FRUNZI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3689 4/9/2026
Prosecution Insights