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 4/2/2026 has been entered. Claims 1, 3-9, 11-16, 18-21 remain pending in the application.
Applicant's arguments with respect to 35 USC 101 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Although performing a system (program) repair or update process could integrate the abstract idea into practical application, the embodiment of performing a simple diagnostic process would be considered determining and generating which is a mental process aided by a tool such as a computer.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to 35 USC 102 and 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The previous rejection(s) have been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of US20220158854A1 (“Simplicio”) and US20130103749A1 (“Werth”).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1, 3-9, 11-16, 18-21 are rejected under 35 USC § 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Claims 1-8, 9-15 are directed to a product, claims 16-21 are directed to a method, which is one of the statutory categories of invention. (Step 1: YES). The examiner has identified product claim 1 as the claim that represents the claimed invention for analysis and is similar to claims 9 and 16.
Regarding claim 1 (and 9 and 16), the claim recites, in part, “managing vehicle data…identifiers …perform…configuration …identifying a pseudonymous identifier… transmitting…receiver… data…collecting the vehicle data…transmitting the vehicle data…request vehicle directives…transmitting …receiving…initiating…diagnostic, repair, or update process.”. The limitations of determining and generating (even diagnostics, which is aided by a tool such as a computer), when read in light of the specification, are mental processes capable of being performed in the human mind, which have been identified as being abstract ideas (MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)). The limitations of: computing devices, memory, processor is considered an insignificant extra-solution activity for data gathering and outputting (MPEP 2106.05(g)). The additional element of a “computer” is just a generic computing device. Invocation of generic computing devices to perform or aid the abstract idea does not amount to significantly more than the judicial exception (MPEP 2106.05(f)). Transmitting data over a network is considered routine, well understood, and conventional activity. MPEP 2106.05(d). Initiating the directive is considered extra solution activity such as transmitting/displaying data.
This judicial exception is not integrated into practical application because the claim does not
include limitations that purport the improvement to the function of a computer or another technology,
apply the abstract idea by way of a particular machine, or effect a tangible transformation in state of a
particular article (MPEP 2106.05). Rather, the abstract ideas are instead merely generally linked to a
particular technical field (MPEP 2106.04(3)).
Regarding claim 3 (and 11 and 18), the claim recites, in part, “identifier is corresponding to…identifier associated with the individual vehicle”. The claim recites no additional elements that are indicative of an integration into a practical application or that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Regarding claim 4, the claim recites, in part, “sensors, components,…data stores”. These limitations, when read in light of the specification, are considered an insignificant extra-solution activity for data gathering and outputting (MPEP 2106.05(g)). The claim recites no additional elements that are indicative of an integration into a practical application or that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Regarding claim 5 (and 12 and 19), the claim recites, in part, “synchronize…data…wirelessly”. The limitations of determining and generating when read in light of the specification, are mental processes capable of being performed in the human mind, which have been identified as being abstract ideas (MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)). Transmitting data over a network is considered routine, well understood, and conventional activity. MPEP 2106.05(d) The claim recites no additional elements that are indicative of an integration into a practical application or that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Regarding claim 6 (and 13 and 20), the claim recites, in part, “transmit…network”. The limitations of determining and generating when read in light of the specification, are mental processes capable of being performed in the human mind, which have been identified as being abstract ideas (MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)). Transmitting data over a network is considered routine, well understood, and conventional activity. MPEP 2106.05(d) The claim recites no additional elements that are indicative of an integration into a practical application or that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Regarding claim 7 (and 14), the claim recites, in part, “publishing the vehicle directives…”. The limitations of determining and generating when read in light of the specification, are mental processes capable of being performed in the human mind, which have been identified as being abstract ideas (MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)). Transmitting data over a network is considered routine, well understood, and conventional activity. MPEP 2106.05(d) The claim recites no additional elements that are indicative of an integration into a practical application or that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Regarding claim 8 (and 15 and 21), the claim recites, in part, “receive a request…process the request…identifying…identifiers…provide the…directives to the management component”. The limitations of determining and generating when read in light of the specification, are mental processes capable of being performed in the human mind, which have been identified as being abstract ideas (MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)). Transmitting data over a network is considered routine, well understood, and conventional activity. MPEP 2106.05(d). Providing the directives to the management component is considered extra solution activity such as transmitting/displaying data. The claim recites no additional elements that are indicative of an integration into a practical application or that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
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(s) 1, 3-9, 11-16, 18-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US20210232704A1 ("Lim", previously cited) in view of US20220158854A1 Simplicio and US20130103749A1 Werth.
As per claims 1, 9 and 16 Lim teaches the limitations of the systems and method:
A system for managing vehicle data by using pseudonymous identifiers associated with vehicles, the system comprising one or more external computing devices associated with a processor and a memory for executing computer-executable instructions to implement a management component, wherein the management component is configured to: perform a pseudonymous identifiers configuration, wherein each of the pseudonymous identifiers is associated with an individual vehicle, and wherein to perform the pseudonymous identifiers configuration, the management component is configured to: identify a pseudonymous identifier; store the identified pseudonymous identifier; and transmit the identified pseudonymous identifier to a network service; transmit vehicle data transmission to the network service, wherein to transmit the vehicle data the management component is configured to: collect the vehicle data; associate the vehicle data with the identified pseudonymous identifier; and transmit the vehicle data with the identified pseudonymous identifier to the network service; identify vehicle directives from the network service, wherein to identify vehicle directives the management component is configured to: transmit a request to the network service to post the vehicle directives with the pseudonymous identifiers; receive the posted vehicle directives from the network service; (Lim at least the abstract, [0006-0011], FIGs. 2A, 2B, 3, 4, 5A, 5B, 6, [0041], [0052])
Lim does not disclose, which Simplicio teaches:
wherein individual vehicles independently contact the network service for a published list of pseudonymous identifiers and vehicle directives without actively transmitting the vehicle directive requests to each vehicle; (Simplicio at least the abstract, [0048], [0068], [0094], [0102], [0181])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Lim with the aforementioned limitations taught by Simplicio with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to combine these references in order to preserve user privacy (Simplicio abstract).
Lim does not disclose, which Werth teaches:
identify the vehicle directives generated from the network service and perform one or more corrective actions based on the vehicle directives; and identifying at least one directive related to the vehicle; and in response to identifying the vehicle directives associated with the vehicle, initiate the identified directive directives, wherein to initiate the identified directives the management component is configured to cause execution of one or more commands by the vehicle to perform a diagnostic, repair, or update process. (Werth at least the abstract, [0066], [0048])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Lim with the aforementioned limitations taught by Werth with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to combine these references in order to improve the quality of resource delivery (Werth [0089]).
As per claims 3, 11, 18 Lim in combination with the other references teaches the limitations of the systems and method, Lim additionally teaches:
wherein the pseudonymous identifier is corresponding to one of variety of unique or semi-unique identifier associated with the individual vehicle. (Lim at least [0007])
As per claim 4 Lim in combination with the other references teaches the limitations of the systems and method, Lim additionally teaches:
wherein the individual vehicle includes a plurality of sensors, components, and data stores for obtaining, generating, and maintaining the vehicle data. (Lim at least [0033])
As per claims 5, 12, 19 Lim in combination with the other references teaches the limitations of the systems and method, Lim additionally teaches:
wherein the management component is further configured to synchronize the vehicle data with a computing device, and wherein the computing device is configured to communicate the vehicle data wirelessly. (Lim at least [0038], [0052], [0054])
As per claims 6, 13, 20 Lim in combination with the other references teaches the limitations of the systems and method, Lim additionally teaches:
the computing device is configured to transmit the vehicle data to the network service. (Lim at least FIG. 6)
As per claims 7, 14 Lim in combination with the other references teaches the limitations of the systems and method, Lim additionally teaches:
wherein the posted vehicle directives is publishing the vehicle directives and associated set of pseudonymous identifiers. (Lim at least [0039-0041], FIGs. 3, 4, 5B)
As per claims 8, 15, 21 Lim in combination with the other references teaches the limitations of the systems and method, Lim additionally teaches:
wherein the network service is configured to: receive a request for an issuance of the vehicle directives by the pseudonym identifiers; process the request for the vehicle directives by identifying appropriate pseudonymous identifiers correlated to selection criteria, wherein the selection criteria is associated with a threshold of vehicle attributes, and wherein the vehicle directives associated with the appropriate pseudonymous identifiers are posted vehicle directives and provide the posted vehicle directives to the management component. (Lim at least [0011], [0032-0036], [0052-0054])
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
/NAVID Z. MEHDIZADEH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3669
Prosecution Insights