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 .
This is a Final Office Action in response to application 18/695,357 entitled "SERVER AND PROGRAM" on April 26, 2026, with claims 1-9 pending.
Status of Claims
Claims 1-6 have been amended and are hereby entered.
Claims 7-9 are added and have been examined.
Claims 1-9 are pending and have been examined.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on March 26, 2024, is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the Examiner.
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed April 26, 2026, has been entered. Claims 1-9 remain pending in the application. Applicant’s amendments to the Specification, Drawings, and/or Claims have been noted in response to the Non-Final Office Action mailed February 5, 2026.
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 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.
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.
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 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.
Claims 1-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable overEstes (“SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR AUTOMATIC DETECTION OF GIG-ECONOMY ACTIVITY”, U.S. Patent Number: US 11663675 B1), in view of Simon (“METHOD OF ENABLING AND DISABLING A MOTOR VEHICLE IN RESPONSE TO PAYMENTS BEING TIMELY MADE AND A SYSTEM FOR CARRYING OUT THE METHOD”, Czech Republic Patent Publication Number: CZ 2002482 A3).
Regarding Claim 1,
Estes teaches,
A server, comprising: a processor configured to: acquire operating information and location information on a vehicle of a user;
(Estes [Abstract] Telematics data indicative of movement of a vehicle
Estes [Col 7, Lines 17-21] such as monitoring vehicle usage or recording data regarding vehicle operation. The on-board computer 11A may interface with the one or more sensors within the vehicle 10 to collect data regarding vehicle movement or operation.
Estes [Col 12, Lines 63-65] determines a current location using data from the GPS unit)
manage data associating the user, a prescribed time corresponding to information indicating a time during which the user works, and a prescribed area corresponding to information indicating an area in which the user works
(Estes [Col 5, Lines 30-33] data regarding gig-economy work performance (e.g., hours, locations, profitability) may be collected and evaluated to provide records and recommendations
Estes [Col 5, Lines 35-38] increase the quality of gig-economy work at particular locations and times for particular gig-economy workers. Thus, customized recommendations may be generated and presented to gig-economy workers)
calculate, based on the operating information and the location information on the vehicle, an integrated value of a time of working of the user in the prescribed area within the prescribed time ;
(Estes [Col 16, Lines 37-39] data may be used to score gig-economy workers based upon their driving behaviors and/or develop commercial driving profiles/ratings/scores
Estes [Col 18, Lines 37-42] set of data may include time and/or time of day information. The data may include a percentage of time that the vehicle spends on highways ...and/or a percentage of time that the vehicle spends in parking lots; )
use the integrated value as a score for the user ;
(Estes [Col 16, Lines 37-39] data may be used to score gig-economy workers based upon their driving behaviors and/or develop commercial driving profiles/ratings/scores
Estes [Col 2, Lines 9-11] determining a risk score for each gig-related behavior indicated in the set of data;)
modify, based on the score that is the integrated value, at least one of a period of repayment, an amount of repayment, or interest rate;
(Estes [Col 52, Lines 7-11] enables the third party to determine one or more aspects, terms, or characteristics of gig and non-gig activities, such as a new or updated insurance policy, loan approval, savings rate, admission, gig work, etc
Estes [Col 52, Lines 48-51] data regarding a prediction relating to the gig worker 1110 in a new activity, such as ...timely repaying a new loan.)
Estes does not teach transmit, in accordance with a situation of the repayment and the score for the user, a control command to the vehicle to control an activation state of the vehicle.;
Simon teaches,
transmit, in accordance with a situation of the repayment and the score for the user, a control command to the vehicle to control an activation state of the vehicle.;
(Simon [Abstract] A disabling module (3) in communication with a control module (4) operates to disable or partially disable equipment in response to the failure of a user to complete a specific task, such as make a loan or lease payment.
Simon [Clam 21] wherein said device is a vehicle.
Simon [page 3] The connection between the control module 6 and the computer or portable device can be realized by cable, telephone, radio transmission or any other known transmission medium.)
It is prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the driver monitoring of Estes to incorporate the vehicle immobilization teachings of Simon for “enabling and disabling a motor vehicle” (Simon [Title]). The modification would have been obvious, because it is merely applying a known technique (i.e. vehicle immobilization) to a known concept (i.e. driver monitoring) ready for improvement to yield predictable result (i.e. “enabling and disabling a motor vehicle in response to payments.” (Simon [Title])
Regarding Claim 2,
Estes and Simon teach the vehicle repayment monitoring of Claim 1 as described earlier.
Estes teaches,
wherein the processor is configured to calculate the integrated value further based on credit information on the user.
(Estes [Col 48, Lines 17-22] traditional credit information—credit score...number of financial accounts... mortgages, debt, bills, etc.;
Estes [Col 16, Lines 37-39] data may be used to score gig-economy workers based upon their driving behaviors and/or develop commercial driving profiles/ratings/scores
Estes [Col 2, Lines 9-11] determining a risk score for each gig-related behavior indicated in the set of data;)
Regarding Claim 3,
Estes and Simon teach the vehicle repayment monitoring of Claim 1 as described earlier.
Estes teaches,
wherein the processor is configured to calculate the integrated value further based on history of road manners of the user.
(Estes [Col 2, Lines 7-11] collecting a set of data indicative of one or more gig-related behaviors (e.g., driving behaviors) of the gig-economy worker; (iii) determining a risk score for each gig-related behavior indicated in the set of data;
Estes [Col 21, Lines 36-39] may indicate that the gig-economy worker typically drives below the speed limit and/or in a low risk manner.
Estes [Col 16, Lines 37-39] data may be used to score gig-economy workers based upon their driving behaviors and/or develop commercial driving profiles/ratings/scores)
Regarding Claim 4,
Estes and Simon teach the vehicle repayment monitoring of Claim 1 as described earlier.
Estes teaches,
wherein the processor is configured to determine, based on the score, a service providable to the user.
(Estes [Col 52, Lines 7-11] enables the third party to determine one or more aspects, terms, or characteristics of gig and non-gig activities, such as a new or updated insurance policy, loan approval)
Regarding Claim 5,
Estes and Simon teach the vehicle repayment monitoring of Claim 1 as described earlier.
Estes teaches,
wherein the processor is configured to revise, in response to fulfillment of a prescribed condition, at least the integrated value.
(Estes [Col 21, Lines 36-39] may indicate that the gig-economy worker typically drives below the speed limit and/or in a low risk manner.
Estes [Col 27, Lines 35-49] may continue by adjusting, updating, and/or generating a commercial driving profile associated with the gig-economy worker, based upon the one or more risk scores...may additionally determine a change to an insurance policy based upon the one or more risk scores. For example, a discount may be generated for an insurance policy when a determined risk score indicates that the gig-economy worker operates a vehicle in a risk averse manner or in a manner that results in lower risk than the average risk associated with other drivers....a gig-economy worker ... may be notified or warned regarding the risk scores, adjustment, and/or update.)
Claim 6 is rejected on the same basis as Claim 1.
Regarding Claim 7,
Estes and Simon teach the vehicle repayment monitoring of Claim 1 as described earlier.
Estes teaches,
wherein the integrated value is an integrated value of a time of travelling of the vehicle in the prescribed area within the prescribed time, the time of travelling indicating a time during which power of the vehicle is in operation.
(Estes [Col 7, Lines 17-21] such as monitoring vehicle usage or recording data regarding vehicle operation. The on-board computer 11A may interface with the one or more sensors within the vehicle 10 to collect data regarding vehicle movement or operation.
Estes [Abstract] Telematics data indicative of movement of a vehicle
Estes [Col 18, Lines 37-42] set of data may include time and/or time of day information. The data may include a percentage of time that the vehicle spends on highways ...and/or a percentage of time that the vehicle spends in parking lots.)
Regarding Claim 8,
Estes and Simon teach the vehicle repayment monitoring of Claim 1 as described earlier.
Estes teaches,
wherein the processor is further configured to modify the at least one of the period of repayment, the amount of repayment, or the interest rate to the user who satisfies a criterion indicating that the score is larger than a prescribed value
(Estes [Col 52, Lines 7-11] enables the third party to determine one or more aspects, terms, or characteristics of gig and non-gig activities, such as a new or updated insurance policy, loan approval, savings rate, admission, gig work, etc
Estes [Col 27, Lines 35-49] may continue by adjusting, updating, and/or generating a commercial driving profile associated with the gig-economy worker, based upon the one or more risk scores... when a determined risk score indicates that the gig-economy worker operates a vehicle in a risk averse manner or in a manner that results in lower risk than the average risk associated with other drivers
Estes [Col 21, Lines 36-39] may indicate that the gig-economy worker typically drives below the speed limit and/or in a low risk manner.)
Regarding Claim 9,
Estes and Simon teach the vehicle repayment monitoring of Claim 1 as described earlier.
Estes does not teach wherein the processor is configured to control the activation state of the vehicle by switching between an activation allowable state and an activation unallowable state, and wherein the activation state is controlled via activation control of an engine of the vehicle.
Simon teaches,
wherein the processor is configured to control the activation state of the vehicle by switching between an activation allowable state and an activation unallowable state, and wherein the activation state is controlled via activation control of an engine of the vehicle
(Simon [Abstract] operates to disable or partially disable equipment in response to the failure of a user to complete a specific task, such as make a loan or lease payment. When a user makes a payment on an outstanding loan, usually a loan related to specific equipment (320), such as a motorized vehicle a control module is notified of the payment. The control module causes the equipment to be enabled (315) or disabled (319) in accordance with payment receipt.)
It is prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the driver monitoring of Estes to incorporate the vehicle immobilization teachings of Simon for “enabling and disabling a motor vehicle” (Simon [Title]). The modification would have been obvious, because it is merely applying a known technique (i.e. vehicle immobilization) to a known concept (i.e. driver monitoring) ready for improvement to yield predictable result (i.e. “enabling and disabling a motor vehicle in response to payments.” (Simon [Title])
Response to Remarks
Applicant's arguments filed on April 26, 2026, have been fully considered and Examiner’s remarks to Applicant’s amendments follow.
Response Remarks on Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
Claim 1 states, “transmit… a control command to the vehicle to control an activation state of the vehicle” wherein the Specification elaborates [0026] “control function to perform activation control of the engine based on the control signal” and [0044] “during which the power of the vehicle 1 (e.g., the engine) is in operation (active)” and [0105] “a control command for switching the vehicle 1 between the activation unallowable state and the activation allowable state” and [0106] “a control command for controlling the vehicle 1 to switch to the activation unallowable state”
Therefore, the rejection under 35 USC § 101 is lifted.
Response Remarks on Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Applicant's amendments required the application of new/additional prior art.
New prior art includes:
Estes (“SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR AUTOMATIC DETECTION OF GIG-ECONOMY ACTIVITY”, U.S. Patent Number: US 11663675 B1),
Simon (“METHOD OF ENABLING AND DISABLING A MOTOR VEHICLE IN RESPONSE TO PAYMENTS BEING TIMELY MADE AND A SYSTEM FOR CARRYING OUT THE METHOD”, Czech Republic Patent Publication Number: CZ 2002482 A3).
Excised prior art includes:
Rippel (“COMPUTERIZED SYSEM AND METHOD FOR DATA ACQUISTION AND APPLICATION OF DISPARATE DATA TO TWO STAGE BAYESIAN NETWORKS TO GENERATE CENTRALLY MAINTAINED PORTABLE DRIVING SCORE DATA”, U.S. Patent Number: 10210479 B2).
Applicant’s remarks regarding the rejection made under 35 USC § 103 are rendered moot by the introduction of new prior art.
Therefore, the rejection under 35 USC § 103 remains.
Prior Art Cited But Not Applied
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Salah (“Payment enforcement system”, U.S. Publication Number: US 20160090923 A1) to encourage on time payments includes electronic apparatus coupled to a critical system of certain equipment. For example, the starter system of an automobile. Apparatus includes a mechanism whereby a user-operator is able to enter a command. Entry of a command serves as an indication that a payment has been made and enables further use of the equipment. On failure to timely make payments, a user is prevented from using the equipment as the apparatus is arranged to disable the equipment by way of the critical system to which it is coupled.
Toyooka (“Vehicle remote control system”, U.S. Publication Number: US 20230406261 A1) [0008] for auto loan and auto lease, in which a relay switch device is controlled such that the starting of the engine of a target vehicle is disabled when the loan payment or the lease fee is not settled.
Schwarz (“Enforcing payment schedules”, U.S. Publication Number: US 20070194881 A1) payment schedule enforcement system and method cause various actions to be taken in response to nonpayment by the debtor. Such actions include remotely activating an alert message, disabling a vehicle or other product, or the like. Upon occurrence of a specified event, a message is sent to a remotely located device, such as one installed in a vehicle or other product. The remotely located device is configured so that it can disable the vehicle (for example by disabling the starter circuitry) upon receipt of the message from the operations center.
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 CHINEDU EKECHUKWU whose telephone number is (571)272-4493. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Fri 9 AM ET to 3:30 PM ET.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone 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, Christine Tran, can be reached on (571) 272-8103. 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.
/C.E./Examiner, Art Unit 3695
/CHRISTINE M Tran/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3695
Prosecution Insights