The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
DETAILED ACTION
Status of the Claims
This is in response to the amendment filed on 2/23/26. Claims 16-19 have been newly added. Therefore, Claims 1-19 are pending in the application.
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
Claims 1-8 and 16-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dixon et al. (Dixon; US 20080211668 A1) and Evarts et al. (Evarts; US 20110133919 A1), further in view of Tanmachi (JP 2012236569 A).
Regarding Claim 1, Dixon discloses a method for determining occupancy inside a motor vehicle ([0016] detection system and methods for detecting the presence of a person or animal within a confined space, [0018] confined spaces include…automobiles) using a presence sensor (300 of Fig 3 motion detector), the method comprising:
periodically determining the occupancy (step 801 of Fig 1 [0043] periodic measurement of respiratory gases within the confined space);
determining a value representative of a quantity of acceleration of the vehicle ([0046] Once a concentration greater than the threshold value has been detected, the motion detector's accelerometer may be activated (step 805) to determine (at step 806) whether the confined space is experiencing acceleration that exceeds a predetermined acceleration threshold or is steady (e.g., the acceleration measured by the accelerometer is below the predetermined acceleration threshold, which indicates that the container is either stationary or traveling at a substantially constant rate of speed));
wherein the method further comprises suspending the periodic determination of the acceleration, wherein the suspension is triggered on the basis of the value representative of a quantity of acceleration ([0048] Referring again to the steps 805 and 806, if the accelerometer detects an acceleration that exceeds the predetermined acceleration threshold, it may wait until the next chemical detection event (e.g., about 1 minute)). Dixon teaches an accelerometer, but doesn’t specify using it for vibration measurements, and suspends an acceleration determination instead of an occupancy determination. However, accelerometers measure vibration.
In the same field of endeavor, Evarts discloses a vehicle system for detecting a user hand position on a steering wheel, using a sensor array disposed on the circumference of the wheel to detect contact; and processing user hand location and movement data. The system uses a vehicle movement indicator communicating vehicle direction, speed, and acceleration.
Evarts discloses using an accelerometer for vibration measurements ([0076] FIG. 8, device waits for its accelerometer…to detect vibrations indicative of the engine running).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Dixon with Evarts using an accelerometer to measure vibrations and suspend measurements to conserve energy when polling for a more appropriate time to detect for occupancy in order to efficiently determine movement of the vehicle using readily available components.
Regarding the new limitation:
In the same field of endeavor, Tanmachi (JP 2012236569 A) discloses a seat state passenger detecting means which determines the state of a seat on the basis of load signals from load sensors with a vibration threshold setting section which sets a vibration threshold on the basis of the load detecting signal, a vibration determining section which determines the generation of the vehicle vibration on the basis of the load detecting signal and the vibration threshold, and a seat determining section which executes the seat determination when the vehicle vibration is not generated and suspends the execution of seat determination when the vehicle vibration is generated. The vibration threshold setting section sets the vibration threshold higher when the variation of the load detecting signal is small when the variation of the load detecting signal is large.
Tanmachi discloses suspending the periodic determination of the occupancy, during the vibration, wherein the suspension is triggered on the basis of the value representative of a quantity of vibration (PAGE 9 para 5 In the passenger detection process of the comparative example, if the vehicle vibration is relatively large, the seat determination is suspended and the previous determination result is maintained, and if the vehicle vibration is relatively small, the seat determination is executed).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Smith with Tanmachi using suspending seat detection during vibration in order to increase the opportunity of executing or suspending seat determination according to the scale of the vibration of a vehicle, as suggested by Tanmachi (Abstract).
Regarding Claim 2, Dixon discloses during the acceleration suspension, the occupancy is considered to be equal to a last occupancy determined before the suspension (805, 806 of Fig 1 YES still waiting to make accurate determination on the occupancy state; [0048] may wait until the next chemical detection event (e.g., about 1 minute)).
Evarts discloses using an accelerometer for vibration measurements ([0076] FIG. 8, device waits for its accelerometer…to detect vibrations indicative of the engine running).
Regarding Claim 3, Dixon discloses the acceleration suspension of the determination is triggered when the value representative of a quantity of vibration becomes greater than a first predetermined threshold value ([0048] predetermined acceleration threshold) or when a variation of the value representative of a quantity of vibration becomes greater than a second predetermined threshold value.
Evarts discloses using an accelerometer for vibration measurements ([0076] FIG. 8, device waits for its accelerometer…to detect vibrations indicative of the engine running).
Tanmachi discloses suspension of the determination is triggered when the value representative of a quantity of vibration becomes greater than a first predetermined threshold value (PAGE 9 para 5 if the vehicle vibration is relatively large, the seat determination is suspended and the previous determination result is maintained, and if the vehicle vibration is relatively small, the seat determination is executed…a vibration threshold value set in advance is provided for the vibration change amount that is the sum of the absolute values of the variation amounts of the load detection signal. If the vibration change amount is equal to or greater than the vibration threshold, it is determined that the vehicle vibration is large).
2>Regarding Claim 4, Dixon discloses restarting the periodic determination of the acceleration, wherein the restart is triggered on the basis of the value representative of a quantity of vibration ([0048] if the accelerometer detects an acceleration that exceeds the predetermined acceleration threshold, it may wait until the next chemical detection event (e.g., about 1 minute)).
Evarts discloses using an accelerometer for vibration measurements ([0076] FIG. 8, device waits for its accelerometer…to detect vibrations indicative of the engine running).
4>Regarding Claim 5, Evarts discloses the restart comprises reinitializing the presence sensor (Fig 8, [0081] during any time the accelerometer 14 stops reading the vibrations of the motor 50 (indicative of the engine turning off) then the polling loop 52 is put on hold until the motor starts back).
4>Regarding Claim 6, Dixon discloses when the restart is triggered, the occupancy is initially determined as the last occupancy determined before the suspension (805, 806 of Fig 1 YES still waiting to make accurate determination on the occupancy state; [0048] may wait until the next chemical detection event (e.g., about 1 minute))
Evarts discloses suspending an occupancy determination on the basis of the value representative of a quantity of vibration (Fig 8, [0081]).
4>Regarding Claim 7, Dixon discloses the restart of the periodic determination is triggered when the value representative of a quantity of vibration becomes lower than a third predetermined threshold value or when a variation of the value representative of a quantity of vibration becomes lower than a fourth predetermined threshold value (805, 806, 808 Fig 1 NO).
Evarts discloses restarting the periodic determination of occupancy, triggered on the basis of the value representative of a quantity of vibration ([0081]).
Regarding Claim 8, Dixon discloses the periodic determination of the occupancy consists in repeating the determination at a regular time interval ([0044] an acceptable sampling rate).
Regarding Claim 16, Tanmachi discloses the suspension of the determination is triggered when a variation of the value representative of a quantity of vibration becomes greater than a second predetermined threshold value (PAGE 9 para 5 a vibration threshold value set in advance is provided for the vibration change amount that is the sum of the absolute values of the variation amounts of the load detection signal. If the vibration change amount is equal to or greater than the vibration threshold, it is determined that the vehicle vibration is large, and if the vibration change amount is less than the vibration threshold, it is determined that the vehicle vibration is small, [note: no first predetermined threshold value has been claimed in Claim 1]).
4>Regarding Claim 17, Dixon discloses the restart of the periodic determination is triggered when a variation of the value representative of a quantity of vibration becomes lower than a fourth predetermined threshold value (PAGE 9 para 5 if the vehicle vibration is relatively small, the seat determination is executed, [note: no first, second or third predetermined threshold values have been claimed in Claims 1, 2 or 4]).
1>Regarding Claim 18, Dixon discloses the occupancy is periodically determined at a regular time interval periodic measurements performed at step 801 may be one sample about every several minutes, but longer and shorter sampling rates are possible and envisioned).
Dixon discloses the claimed invention except for an interval between 3 and 5 seconds. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to shorten the interval, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Allert 105 USPQ 233.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dixon, Evarts and Tanmachi, further in view of CECH (Cech; US 20170236395 A1).
Regarding Claim 9, Dixon discloses transmitting a signal on the basis of the occupancy, wherein the signal indicates that an occupant is present in the stationary, step 811 of activating an alarm, which indicates to the appropriate personnel that a person or animal has been detected within a particular monitored confined space), or that an occupant needs to put on his safety belt, or that an airbag needs to be inactivated, but doesn’t specify the vehicle is locked, though Dixon would issue an alert when the vehicle is locked.
In the same field of endeavor, Cech discloses a system for detecting the presence of an occupant in a child seat with two sensor modules positioned to detect acceleration of the child seat. The sensor modules provide signals representative of the acceleration detected at the first and send sensor modules to a controller. The controller processes the signals received from the sensor modules to isolate acceleration of the child seat from the motion of the vehicle.
Cech discloses issuing an alert when the vehicle is locked ([0029] warning signal could be produced if the child seat is occupied and the vehicle is locked).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Dixon with Cech in order to efficiently determine level of danger for a trapped occupant and provide appropriate alerts.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dixon, Evarts and Tanmachi, further in view of Welk et al. (Welk US 20210206343 A1).
Regarding Claim 10, Dixon doesn’t specify the occupancy is determined for at least one of the seats of the vehicle, and wherein the occupancy comprises an occupied state in which an occupant is sitting on the seat and a vacant state in which the seat is unoccupied.
In the same field of endeavor, Welk discloses a vehicle occupancy-monitoring system with a controller circuit that receives occupant data from an occupancy-monitoring sensor. The controller circuit determines an occupancy status of respective seats in a cabin of the vehicle based on the occupancy-monitoring sensor.
Welk discloses occupancy is determined for at least one of the seats of the vehicle, and wherein the occupancy comprises an occupied state in which an occupant is sitting on the seat and a vacant state in which the seat is unoccupied ([0067] determining the seat occupancy by determining one or more of an occupied seat, a vacant seat, a presence of an adult, the presence of a child, and the presence of an inanimate object).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Dixon with Welk in order to efficiently determine level of danger for a trapped occupant and provide appropriate alerts.
Claims 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dixon, Evarts and Tanmachi, further in view of Breed et al. (Breed; US 20070182528 A1).
Regarding Claim 11, Dixon discloses the value representative of a quantity of vibration is calculated acceleration of the confined space due to external sources can be accounted for), but doesn’t specify weighted sums.
In the same field of endeavor, Breed discloses a radar system for use in connection with an airbag deployment apparatus to prevent injury to passengers when impact with an approaching object is imminent.
Breed teaches using weighted sums ([0117] turning rates and acceleration/deceleration, are all generated by appropriate detectors, weighted according to their importance to a normal vehicle operators sensed safe or danger levels and then the weighted input voltages are summed to provide an "instantaneous voltage level")
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Dixon with Breed using weighted sums in order to create accurate determinations of scenarios to efficiently determine levels of danger for a trapped occupant and provide appropriate alerts.
11>Regarding Claim 12, Dixon discloses accounting for external sources ([0063] acceleration of the confined space due to external sources can be accounted for) are chosen on the basis of at least one of the following causes of the vibration of the vehicle: a flow of air; a movement of the vehicle in the course of maintenance or repair; an external person pushing the vehicle; passage of the vehicle through a washing system; an imperfection in the road surface on which the vehicle is running; an occupant moving inside the vehicle (808 of Fig 1).
Breed teaches using weighted sums ([0117]).
Claims 13, 15 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dixon, Evarts and Tanmachi.
Regarding Claim 13, Dixon discloses a system for determining occupancy inside a motor vehicle ([0016] detection system and methods for detecting the presence of a person or animal within a confined space, [0018] confined spaces include…automobiles), the system comprising:
a presence sensor adapted for periodically determining the occupancy (200, 801 of Fig 1; [0043] periodic measurement of respiratory gases within the confined space);
a acceleration of the vehicle ([0046] Once a concentration greater than the threshold value has been detected, the motion detector's accelerometer may be activated (step 805) to determine (at step 806) whether the confined space is experiencing acceleration that exceeds a predetermined acceleration threshold or is steady (e.g., the acceleration measured by the accelerometer is below the predetermined acceleration threshold, which indicates that the container is either stationary or traveling at a substantially constant rate of speed)); a computer connected to the presence sensor and to the vibration sensor (809 of Fig 1, Fig 2);
wherein the computer is programmed to suspend the periodic determination of the occupancy on the basis of the value representative of a quantity of acceleration ([0048] Referring again to the steps 805 and 806, if the accelerometer detects an acceleration that exceeds the predetermined acceleration threshold, it may wait until the next chemical detection event (e.g., about 1 minute)). Dixon teaches an accelerometer, but doesn’t specify using it for vibration measurements, and suspends an acceleration determination instead of an occupancy determination. However, accelerometers measure vibration.
Evarts discloses using an accelerometer for vibration measurements ([0076] FIG. 8, device waits for its accelerometer…to detect vibrations indicative of the engine running).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Dixon with Evarts using an accelerometer to measure vibrations and suspend measurements to conserve energy when polling for a more appropriate time to detect for occupancy in order to efficiently determine movement of the vehicle using readily available components.
Regarding the new limitation: Tanmachi discloses suspending the periodic determination of the occupancy, during the vibration, wherein the suspension is triggered on the basis of the value representative of a quantity of vibration (PAGE 9 para 5 In the passenger detection process of the comparative example, if the vehicle vibration is relatively large, the seat determination is suspended and the previous determination result is maintained, and if the vehicle vibration is relatively small, the seat determination is executed).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Smith with Tanmachi using suspending seat detection during vibration in order to increase the opportunity of executing or suspending seat determination according to the scale of the vibration of a vehicle, as suggested by Tanmachi (Abstract).
Regarding Claim 15, Dixon discloses the vibration sensor is included in, and used by, another system of the vehicle (Fig 1 used by the chemical detector system (200) and by the radar system (808) and by the system controller (400) to help make accurate determinations).
13>Regarding Claim 19, Dixon disclose the computer is programmed to periodically determine the occupancy at a regular time intervalperiodic measurements performed at step 801 may be one sample about every several minutes, but longer and shorter sampling rates are possible and envisioned).
Dixon discloses the claimed invention except for an interval between 3 and 5 seconds. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to shorten the interval, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Allert 105 USPQ 233.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dixon, Evarts, Tanmachi further in view of Breed.
Regarding Claim 14, Dixon disclose a vibration sensor (300, 805 of Fig 1) and presence sensor (200 of Fig 1) integrated into detection system 100, but doesn’t specify a circuit card
Breed discloses an electronic circuit card ([0498] printed circuit board that contains other related components).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments with respect to Claims 1-19 have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection.
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 MARK S RUSHING whose telephone number is (571)270-5876. The examiner can normally be reached on 10-6pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Davetta Goins can be reached at 571-272-2957. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/MARK S RUSHING/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2689
Prosecution Insights