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 .
Response to Arguments
Examiner’s Response re: Claim Objection
Applicant’s arguments, see Page 7, filed 29 Sep 2025, with respect to Claims 12-13 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The Claim Objections of Claims 12-13 has been withdrawn.
Examiner’s Response re: Rejection under 35 USC 103
Applicant’s arguments, see Pages 7-8, filed 29 Sep 2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1 and 14 under 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Ali, Kleijnen, and Farr.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 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 nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1, 4-10, 12-13, 15, 18, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ali et al., US 20190008050 A1 (herein Ali) in view of Kleijnen et al., US 20220183581 A1 (herein, Kleijnen and EP 3713088 A1 for priority), and in further view of Farr et al., US 20150168469 A1 (herein, Farr).
Regarding Claims 1 and 14, Ali discloses, an in-vehicle inductive sensing system comprising:
an inductive sensing apparatus (FIGS. 3-4, #2 - functional vehicle component) comprising a plurality of inductive sensing coils mounted in an array (FIGS. 3-4, #38 and illustrates an array) having a defined spatial arrangement relative to a body-facing surface (FIG. 4 illustrates the spatial arrangement of the functional layered assembly 4) of a seat unit of the vehicle (FIG. 3, #48 – vehicle seat), the seat unit for receiving a user (FIG. 3, ¶[0056] – “…a vehicle occupant who is sitting on the seat…”), and the inductive sensing coils arranged to transmit/receive electromagnetic signals via the body-facing surface to the user's body when the user is received in the seat unit (FIG. 3, ¶[0057] – “…sensors 38 can collectively sense the presence of a user's hand no matter where the user's hand contacts…”), and the seat unit supporting the array in the defined spatial arrangement (FIG. 3); and
a controller comprising one or more processors, operatively coupled with the inductive sensing apparatus (FIG. 1, #26 – electronic control unit, ¶[0076]), adapted to:
obtain, for each inductor coil, a baseline resonance parameter measurement when the seat unit is unoccupied (¶[0064] – “…component 2 can be utilized as a pressure sensor on the seat, and measure pressure points. This can help to identify driver seat pressure and automatically adjust seat position for driver comfort. This also reduces the need for a separate component of a pressure sensor installed separately on a seat…”);
obtain respective inductive sensing signals from each of the plurality of inductor coils (¶[0039] – “…with a vehicle electronic control unit (ECU) 26, which may control operation of the functional vehicle component 2,…”) after the user is received in the seat unit;
estimate a spatial arrangement of the inductor coil array relative to at least one anatomical landmark of the user's body based on a spatial pattern of the coil-body proximity measures (FIG. 3 illustrates estimated spatial arrangement based on the user on the seat so this pertains to the user’s lower back regarding the proximity of the coil-body); and
derive a biological measurement of the user based on a processing operation applied to inductive sensing signals from only a subset of the coils (FIGS. 3-4, ¶[0056] – “…sensors 38 may be configured to sense biometrics, such as heart rate, body temperature, blood pressure, etc…”).
Ali discloses a plurality of inductive sensing coils but does not disclose, each coil forming an LC resonator circuit with a tuning capacitor.
However, Farr teaches, each coil forming an LC resonator circuit with a tuning capacitor (¶[0043] – “[0043] For a common alteration up to a defined degree (i.e., about the same strength) and/or an identically-oriented rise or drop of both resulting voltages U.sub.RES and U*.sub.RES, a decision is made that there has been a drift of reference capacitance C.sub.REF or of the reference voltage U.sub.REF without alteration of the occupancy status of the seat, and it is checked whether the stored limit values are to be altered to new limit values.”).
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 in-vehicle inductive sensing system as disclosed by Ali by adding a LC resonator circuit along with a tuning capacitor as taught by Farr. Doing so, provides the capability to adjust the resonant frequency of the coils that pertain to the sensing of the vehicle’s seat regarding the occupancy of the same.
Modified Ali discloses the coil and baseline measurement but does not teach, determine, for each coil, a deviation in the resonance parameter relative to the baseline measurement, the deviation being indicative of coil-body proximity.
However, Farr teaches, determine, for each coil, a deviation in the resonance parameter relative to the baseline measurement, the deviation being indicative of coil-body proximity (¶[0031] – “… all sampling steps so that the sum of both voltages URES+U′RES result in a value clearly deviating from UREF. On the other hand, however, the differential URES−U′RES always remains relatively unaffected by a rising current leakage…”).
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 in-vehicle inductive sensing system as disclosed by modified Ali by determining a deviation in the resonance of the coil as taught by Farr. Doing so, enhances the capability to adjust the resonant frequency of the coils that pertain to the sensing of the vehicle’s seat regarding the occupancy of the same.
Modified Ali discloses a subset of coils but does not disclose,
wherein the subset is selected in dependence on the determined spatial arrangement of the inductor coil array relative to the body.
However, Kleijnen teaches,
wherein the subset is selected in dependence on the determined spatial arrangement of the inductor coil array relative to the body (¶[0153] – “…using multiple antennas is to enable a choice as to the utilized antenna for generating or sensing signals. Certain antennas in an array or arrangement…”).
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 in-vehicle inductive sensing system as disclosed by Ali by adding the subset that arranges the inductor coil according to the user’s body as taught by Kleijnen. Doing so, provides the required accurate biometric information per the subset that corresponds to the body and thus eases maintenance since the sensor associated with the user’s body part can be replaced when necessary.
Regarding Claim 4, modified Ali further teaches, wherein the method comprises obtaining a coil-body proximity measure for each coil based on processing of the sensing signal from each coil (¶[0008] – “…a leather sheet fixed over a surface of the vehicle component, a flexible electronic circuit contacting an A-surface of the leather sheet including a printed and cured conductive ink…”).
Regarding Claim 5, modified Ali further teaches, wherein the spatial arrangement of the array of inductor coils relative to the user's body is determined based on a spatial pattern of tissue proximity measures from the array of inductive coils (FIG. 3 and ¶[0064] – “…to monitor a driver's condition to maintain safe driving using sensors 38 to monitor heart rate, peripheral capillary oxygen saturation, or a driver's health condition, and the data from such monitoring…”).
Regarding Claim 6, modified Ali further teaches, wherein the method comprises:
estimating which of the plurality of coils is aligned with an area of the body-facing surface which is directly in contact with the user's body based on the proximity measures for the array of inductive coils, and which coils are outside of this area (FIG. 3 and ¶[0056] – “…vehicle seat 48 includes a functional layered assembly 4 over the front surface 56 of the back 52 of the seat 48….”).
Regarding Claim 7, modified Ali further teaches, wherein the method comprises performing driving of the coils by supplying each coil with an alternating drive signal (FIG. 3 and ¶[0037] – “…the functional vehicle component 2 may include a sensor 38 and signals from the sensor 38 may be communicated to the vehicle electronic systems…”), and wherein the obtaining of the sensing signal from each coil comprises, simultaneous to driving the coils, measuring variation of one or more electrical properties of the coil current as a function of time ([0038] – “…vehicle electronic systems from which this data or these signals are derived or to which this data or these signals are communicated, are not particularly limited and may include one or more vehicle electronic control units (ECU's)…”).
Regarding Claim 8, modified Ali further teaches, wherein the method further comprises configuring one or more characteristics of the drive signals based on the determined spatial arrangement of the coils relative to the user's body (FIG. 4 and ¶[0057] – “…one or more sensors 38 may be pressure sensors for sensing the presence of a user's hand on the wheel 62…”), and preferably wherein the one or more characteristics include signal power (FIG. 4 and ¶[0058] – “…a light source 30…”) and/or signal frequency.
Regarding Claim 9, modified Ali further teaches, wherein the biological measurement is a vital sign of the user, for example heart rate (¶[0064] – “…monitor heart rate…”) or respiration rate.
Regarding Claim 10, modified Ali further teaches, wherein the method comprises:
receiving spatial sensing data of the user seated in the seat unit (FIG. 3 and ¶[0056] – “…of a vehicle occupant who is sitting on the seat 48…”), from an optical or electromagnetic sensing device (¶[0056] – “…different electrical elements 24…”), and wherein the determining the spatial arrangement of the coils relative to the user is further based on use of the spatial sensing data (FIG. 3 illustrates when a user sits on the seat, the coils provide spatial sensing data per ¶[0056]); and/or
receiving pressure sensing data from a pressure sensor arranged for sensing a weight of a user when seated in the seating unit, and wherein the detecting of the spatial arrangement of the coils relative to the user is further based on use of the pressure sensing data (FIG. 3, #40 and ¶[0052] – “…similar to the pressure sensor…”); and/or
receiving data from a control unit of the vehicle, wherein the data includes at least one of: a steering wheel position (FIG. 4 illustrates a steering wheel position), a seat position setting, a seatbelt extension length and/or position, and wherein the estimating of the spatial arrangement of the array of coils relative to the user is further based on use of the received data from the control unit of the vehicle (FIG. 4, ¶[0060] – “….steering wheel 58 may each include a capacitive switch 40…”).
Regarding Claim 12, modified Ali further teaches, a controller (FIG. 1, #26 – ECU) comprising one or more processors (FIG. 1 illustrates the processors) adapted to perform the method according to claim 1 when the controller is operatively coupled to an inductive sensing apparatus which comprises the plurality of inductor coils mounted in an array having a defined spatial arrangement relative to the user-engaging surface of a seat unit of the vehicle, the seat unit for receiving a user, and the inductor coils arranged to transmit/receive electromagnetic signals to the user's body when the user is received in the seat unit.
Regarding Claim 13, modified Ali further teaches, a non-transitory computer program product comprising code configured to cause a processor (FIG. 1 and ¶[0050] – “… based on programming of the microcontroller 46 to control functioning…”) to execute the steps of the method of claim 1 when the processor is operatively coupled to the inductive sensing apparatus which comprises the plurality of inductor coils mounted in an array having the defined spatial arrangement relative to the user-engaging surface of a seat unit of the vehicle, the seat unit for receiving a user, and the inductor coils arranged to transmit/receive electromagnetic signals to the user's body when the user is received in the seat unit.
Regarding Claim 15, modified Ali further teaches, wherein the system comprises the seat unit and the array is fixedly mounted to the seat unit (FIG. 3 illustrates array fixed to the seat).
Regarding Claim 18, modified Ali further teaches, wherein the array of coils is mounted beneath the body-facing surface (FIGS. 1 and 3-4, ¶[0001] – “…leather is pliable, and thus conforms to the contours of the underlying structure…”).
Regarding Claim 20, modified Ali further teaches, wherein the controller is further adapted to obtain a coil-body proximity measure for each coil based on processing of the sensing signal from each coil (¶0051] – “… can include a sensor having any configuration including those that can sense pressure, temperature, proximity, location, speed, velocity, acceleration, tilt, motion, humidity, light, biometrics of a vehicle occupant, etc…”).
Claim(s) 2-3, 16, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ali et al., US 20190008050 A1 (herein Ali) and in view of Kleijnen et al., US 20220183581 A1 (herein, Kleijnen and EP 3713088 A1 for priority), Farr, and in further view of Kaku et al., US 20220194264 A1 (herein, Kaku).
Regarding Claim 2, modified Ali further teaches, a spatial positioning (¶[0056] – “…a vehicle occupant who is sitting on the seat…”) but does not disclose , wherein the subset is selected based on a spatial positioning of the subset relative to an anatomical area of interest.
However, Kaku teaches, wherein the subset is selected based on a spatial positioning of the subset relative to an anatomical area of interest ([0094] – “…the biometric information of the user seated in the seat can be acquired by another user….”).
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 in-vehicle inductive sensing system as disclosed by modified Ali by adding an anatomical area of interest as taught by Kaku. Doing so, provides the required accurate biometric information per the subset that corresponds to the body and thus eases maintenance since the sensor associated with the user’s body part can be replaced when necessary.
Regarding Claims 3 and 19, modified Ali teaches, wherein the subset is selected based on:
identifying a subset of the coils (FIG. 3 illustrates a subset of coils as the coils 38 are interspersed on the seat front surface 56) but does not disclose, which is closest in its spatial positioning and geometric configuration to a pre-determined preferred spatial positioning and geometric configuration relative to the anatomical area of interest of the user.
However, modified Ali discloses the claimed invention except for which is closest in its spatial positioning and geometric configuration to a pre-determined preferred spatial positioning and geometric configuration relative to the anatomical area of interest of the user.
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 subset as disclosed by modified Ali to a pre-determined preferred spatial positioning and geometric configuration relative to the anatomical area, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70. Please note that in the Patent Application Publication, ¶[0077], applicant has not disclosed any criticality for the claimed limitations.
Regarding Claim 16, modified further Ali teaches, wherein the subset is selected which is closest in alignment to the anatomical area of interest (FIG. 3 illustrates the subset in alignment to the anatomical area per ¶[0056]).
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ali et al., US 20190008050 A1 (herein Ali) in view of Kleijnen et al., US 20220183581 A1 (herein, Kleijnen and EP 3713088 A1 for priority), Farr, and in further view of Yukinori et al., US 20070095963 A1 (herein, Yuki).
Regarding Claim 11, modified Ali teaches inductive sensing signal, vehicle, spatial arrangement, and anatomical landmark but does not disclose, wherein the method further comprises obtaining inductive sensing signals from an inductor coil mounted to a belt portion of a seatbelt of the vehicle, and wherein the estimating of the spatial arrangement of the inductor coil array relative to the anatomical landmark is further based on use of the inductive sensing signals from the seatbelt inductor coil.
However, Yuki, teaches, wherein the method further comprises obtaining inductive sensing signals from an inductor coil mounted to a belt portion of a seatbelt of the vehicle, and wherein the estimating of the spatial arrangement of the inductor coil array relative to the anatomical landmark is further based on use of the inductive sensing signals from the seatbelt inductor coil (FIG. 1 and ¶[0081] – “…a signal generated by the electromagnetic induction is transmitted to the control system 14. The buckle switch 307 is integrated into the buckle 304 and detects whether or not the seat belt is fastened by a passenger and supplies a signal of fastening the seat belt…”).
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 in-vehicle inductive sensing system as disclosed by modified Ali to include the seat belt and its corresponding inductor coil as taught by Yuki. Doing so, provides the required additional information that is generated by the seatbelt and with this additional information, the safety of the vehicle can be improved.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ali et al., US 20190008050 A1 (herein Ali) in view of Kleijnen et al., US 20220183581 A1 (herein, Kleijnen and EP 3713088 A1 for priority), Farr, and in further view of Kuehne et al., US 20160347271 A1 (herein, Kuehne).
Regarding Claim 17, modified Ali teaches user’s body, coils and further teaches contact with the seat unit surface (¶[0052] – “…vehicle occupant in contact with the functional vehicle component…”) but does not disclose, : estimating a dimension of the user's body based on a spatial extension of the identified set of coils aligned with the area of the user's body in contact with the seat unit surface.
However, Kuehne teaches, : estimating a dimension of the user's body based on a spatial extension of the identified set of coils aligned with the area of the user's body in contact with the seat unit surface (FIG.2 and ¶[0010] – “…determine or estimate the spatial position of all body parts of a vehicle occupant…” and Claim 15 – “…including at least one of a seat belt height adjustment device and a head support height adjustment device, said system comprising: a sensing device configured to determine a spatial position with respect to the motor vehicle of at least one first body part of a vehicle occupant, including a first shoulder, arranged within a sensing range of the sensing device; a storage device configured to provide an anthropometric data model with data relating to dimensions of predetermined body parts of a human being and positioning of the body parts with respect to one another;…”).
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 in-vehicle inductive sensing system as disclosed by modified Ali to include estimating the user’s dimension based on spatial extension as taught by Kuehne. Doing so, provides the required additional information that is generated by the seatbelt and with this additional information, the safety of the vehicle can be improved due to accounting for the user’s dimensions.
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 LUIS G DEL VALLE whose telephone number is (303)297-4313. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 0730 - 1630 MST.
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, Anne Antonucci can be reached at (313) 446-6519. 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.
/LUIS G DEL VALLE/Examiner, Art Unit 3666
/ANNE MARIE ANTONUCCI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3666