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
1. Applicant's arguments filed 27 May 2026 have been fully considered but are not persuasive. The new limitations are disclosed by at least Kawai as detailed in the rejection below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
2. 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 of this title, 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
3. Claims 1-11 and 13-20 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kawai (WIPO Patent Application Publication # WO 2018/109925) in view of Kemper et al. (German Patent Application Publication # DE 10 2019 211 776)
Regarding claims 1, 11, and 20, Kawai discloses a method for operating a door arrangement of a motor vehicle with a door which can be adjusted via a door kinematic system, the door arrangement comprising a control arrangement (110) for actuating a drive arrangement (109) with at least one electric drive and a sensor arrangement (111, 205) for detecting operator actions, a plurality of predefined operating actions being provided to trigger an actuating function of the door arrangement (P52, 23, 26, etc),
the occurrence of at least one of the predefined operator actions being monitored by means of the control arrangement on the basis of the detection via the sensor arrangement, and the drive arrangement being actuated, in a manner which is dependent on the occurrence, to provide the actuating function of the door arrangement (P23, 26, etc) by motor (P23, 26, etc: implicit), the output of an operator information item which contains an indication to the operator of at least one of the predefined operator actions being carried out being caused by the control arrangement (P25-26, etc),
wherein the predefined operator actions are assigned respective boundary conditions to be met, wherein at least one of the predefined operator actions is selected as recommended operator action by means of the control arrangement based on the assignment and the given boundary conditions, and wherein the indication of the operator information item is directed at the at least one recommended operator action being carried out (P77-78, etc),
wherein the plurality of predefined operator actions are provided to trigger an opening of a door of the door arrangement (P24: “When the situation determination unit 107 determines that there is a possibility of an occupant disembarking and that control of opening and closing the door is necessary, it outputs the amount of door opening and closing control to the door control unit 109 based on the image processing results of the captured image [including of the predefined operator actions] and the distance from the vehicle to the obstacle”, P26, 39, 44, P49: “Furthermore, according to this embodiment 1, the control unit 108 is configured to include a door control unit 109 that controls the opening and closing of the vehicle doors based on the determination result of the situation determination unit 107”, P51: “This second embodiment shows a configuration that detects the movement of the occupant and controls the opening and closing of the door before the occupant performs the door opening or closing operation”, P59: “the vehicle door is equipped with an action detection unit 111 that detects the possibility of opening or closing a vehicle door based on at least one of the vehicle occupant's gaze direction, face direction, or body direction from an image captured inside the vehicle, and a situation determination unit 107a that determines the situation in which a vehicle occupant is alighting from a door that is likely to be opened or closed. As a result, the system can determine the situation of the vehicle door that an occupant is trying to open and perform opening and closing control. This allows for efficient control of the opening and closing of vehicle doors. Furthermore, the system can control the opening and closing of the doors based on the occupant's gaze, posture, and movements when attempting to open the vehicle doors, enabling quick and reliable door control”, claim 2, etc).
Kawai does not explicitly disclose that the actuating function of the door arrangement is by motor.
In the same field of endeavor, Kemper discloses that the actuating function of the door arrangement is by motor (P2-3, etc). Kemper also discloses that the plurality of predefined operator actions are provided to trigger an opening of a door of the door arrangement (gesture 44 or procedure 2 triggers an opening of the door).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kawai to use a motor, as taught by Kemper, in order to mechanically actuate the door, with predictable results.
Regarding claim 2, Kawai further discloses that at least one operator gesture, a contact of a component of the door arrangement by the operator, the actuation of an actuating element of the door arrangement, a manual door movement
Regarding claim 3, Kawai further discloses that the change in a locked state of a motor vehicle loc
Regarding claim 4, Kawai further discloses that the boundary conditions relate to the vehicle situation of the motor vehicle
Regarding claim 5, Kawai further discloses that the boundary conditions relate to the surroundings situation of the motor vehicle (P84, etc).
Regarding claim 6, Kawai further discloses that the output of the operator information item on a visual display apparatus
Regarding claim 7, Kawai further discloses that the visual display apparatus comprises at least a first display field for identifying an execution area of an operator gesture and at least a second display field for identifying an actuating area for the operator (P25-26, 78, 85, 108, etc)
Regarding claim 8, Kawai further discloses that an operator default, in which at least one of the predefined operator actions is stored as preferred operator action, is provided for the predefined operator actions, and wherein, if the preferred operator action is categorized as one of the recommended operator actions, the operator information item contains an indication to carry out the preferred operator action (P84, etc).
Regarding claim 9, Kawai further discloses that the operator default is determined by an operator input, in a manner which is dependent on an operator authorization which is assigned to the operator and/or which is dependent on the position of the door on the motor vehicle (P84, etc).
Regarding claim 10, Kawai further discloses that the operator default contains, furthermore, an output default for outputting the operator information item (P84, etc)
Regarding claim 13, Kawai further discloses that the motorized adjustment of the door comprises motorized raising, motorized opening or motorized closing of the door (Kemper P2-3, etc).
Regarding claim 14, Kawai further discloses that the vehicle situation comprises the presence of a crash state, the charging state of an energy store of the motor vehicle, an inclination of the motor vehicle or the state of components of the door arrangement (P77-78, etc).
Regarding claim 15, Kawai further discloses that the surroundings situation of the motor vehicle comprise the space which is available in the region of the door arrangement and/or the presence of obstacles in the region of the door arrangement, (P84, etc)
Regarding claim 16, Kawai further discloses that the surroundings situation is detected at least partially by the sensor arrangement (P84, etc).
Regarding claim 17, Kawai further discloses that the visual display apparatus is arranged on an actuating element (P25-26, 78, 85, 108, etc).
Regarding claim 18, Kawai further discloses that a combined actuation of the first display field and the second display field is used to identify a contact area for the operator (P25-26, 78, 85, 108, etc).
Regarding claim 19, Kawai further discloses that the output default relates to a light sequence and/or color to be output for the visual display apparatus (P25-26, 78, 85, 108, etc: color implicit from display, even if it is a single color).
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHELLEY CHEN whose telephone number is (571)270-1330. The examiner can normally be reached Mondays through Fridays.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone. 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.
/Shelley Chen/
Patent Examiner
Art Unit 3665
July 29, 2026
Prosecution Insights