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 .
Response to Amendment and Arguments
The amendment filed 12/22/2025 has been entered. Claims 1-8 remain pending in the application.
Applicant's arguments regarding the teachings of Agnew compared to the amended limitations have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Agnew at least FIG. 18B, [0106], [0252], [0276-0277], [0289], [0312], [0325], and [0373] teach two threshold levels for driver involvement degree.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 12/19/2025 is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claim(s) 1, 6, 7, 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US20200098265A1 Agnew et al ("Agnew").
As per claims 1, 6, 7 Agnew discloses the limitations of the device(s) and method:
A driver evaluation information providing device comprising: a plurality of sensors configured to detect driver information within a vehicle; and processor programmed to: monitor a condition of a driver of the vehicle based on a detection by at least one of the sensors; evaluate a driving involvement degree of the driver based on a result of monitoring of the monitored condition of the driver; perform a comparison of the evaluated driving involvement degree to a first threshold value and a second threshold value; (Agnew at least the abstract, [0017], FIG. 22, FIG. 21, FIG. 18B, [0106], [0252], [0276-0277], [0289], [0312], [0325], and [0373])
Agnew does not explicitly disclose: cause a change in a driving level of the vehicle based on a result of the comparison, wherein the driving level includes an autonomous driving level, a driving assist level, and a manual driving level. However Agnew does teach switching from manual to autonomous driving including a varying level of autonomous assistance depending on traffic and driver situation (Agnew at least [0090]: “The driver input filtering unit 150 may filter a vehicle control input by the driver, for example, a steering wheel maneuver, acceleration pedal maneuver, brake pedal maneuver or the like. That is, the driver input filtering unit 150 may block a vehicle control input by the driver from being transmitted to devices in the vehicle”, [0117], [0175]). The control of at least a single driving control such as steering, or brake/acceleration (such as with an ACC system) would be interpreted according to one of ordinary skill in the art as being an equivalent of “a driving assist level”.
As per claim 8, Agnew teaches the invention as described above. Agnew additionally teaches:
the plurality of sensors include a steering sensor, an accelerator pedal sensor, a brake pedal sensor and a camera. (Agnew at least [0017])
Claim(s) 2-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US20200098265A1 Agnew et al ("Agnew") in view of US20160207537A1 Urano et al ("Urano").
Regarding claim 2, Agnew teaches the invention as described above. Agnew does not disclose:
the processor is programmed to, when the vehicle is performing traveling control as autonomous driving or driving assist, provide information indicating that the driving involvement degree is approaching the second threshold value to the driver; and when the driving involvement degree is lower than the second threshold value, the traveling control is terminated.
Urano teaches the aforementioned limitation (Urano at least FIGs. 7A-7C, FIG. 11, FIGs 4A-4D).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Agnew with the aforementioned limitations taught by Urano with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to combine these references in order to improve safety (Urano [0066]).
Regarding claim 3, Agnew in combination with the other reference teaches the invention as described above. Agnew additionally teaches:
the processor is programmed to, when the vehicle is performing the traveling control, provide information indicating that the driving involvement degree is changing away from the second threshold value to the driver. (Agnew at least FIG. 36)
Regarding claim 4, Agnew in combination with the other reference teaches the invention as described above. Agnew additionally teaches:
the processor is programmed to continuously provide, by changing a length of a bar-shaped lit portion of a display unit provided in front of a seat of the driver of the vehicle, information about the driving involvement degree to the driver while the traveling control is being performed. (Agnew at least FIG. 21)
Regarding claim 5, Agnew in combination with the other reference teaches the invention as described above. Agnew additionally teaches:
the processor is programmed to highlight an end of the bar-shaped lit portion of the display unit; the end is configured to change, based on a change in the driving involvement degree, in length; the processor is programmed to vary a first highlight and a second highlight; the first highlight is a highlight of the end when the bar-shaped lit portion is configured to decrease in length due to a decrease in the driving involvement degree; and the second highlight is a highlight of the end when the bar-shaped lit portion is configured to increase in length due to an increase in the driving involvement degree. (Agnew at least [0291-0296])
*Examiner’s note: Urano at least FIGs 4A-4D similarly display a bar shaped graph indicating driver involvement levels.
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 OLIVER TAN whose telephone number is (703)756-4728. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10-7.
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, Navid Mehdizadeh can be reached at (571) 272-7691. 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.
/O.T./Examiner, Art Unit 3669
/TODD MELTON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3669
Prosecution Insights