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 .
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.
Claims status
In the amendment filed on February 19, 2026, claims 1-3 and 10 have been amended. Therefore, claims 1-10 are currently pending for examination.
CLAIM INTERPRETATION
Examiner interprets Claims 4 limitation “one or more of a 5G communication device, a controller area network (CAN) bus communication device, a transmission control protocol/Internet protocol (TCP/IP) communication device, a Bluetooth communication device, and another wireless communication device” as “one or more of a 5G communication device, one or more of a controller area network (CAN) bus communication device, one or more of a transmission control protocol/Internet protocol (TCP/IP) communication device, one or more of a Bluetooth communication device, and one or more of another wireless communication device”. The plain English meaning of the phrase “one or more of X and Y;” is “one or more of X and one or more of Y”.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
Use of the word “means” (or “step for”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim element is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) (pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph). The presumption that 35 U.S.C. 112(f) (pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph) is invoked is rebutted when the function is recited with sufficient structure, material, or acts within the claim itself to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step for”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim element is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) (pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph). The presumption that 35 U.S.C. 112(f) (pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph) is not invoked is rebutted when the claim element recites function but fails to recite sufficiently definite structure, material or acts to perform that function.
Claim elements in this application that use the word “means” (or “step for”) are presumed to invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Similarly, claim elements that do not use the word “means” (or “step for”) are presumed not to invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier.
Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
Claim 1 limitation “a driver identity verification unit”, “a vehicle control unit”, “a vehicle gateway unit”, “an alarm prompt unit”, and “a remote management unit”.
Claim 2 limitations “an identity document reading sub-unit, a biometric information acquisition sub-unit, and a biometric information comparison sub-unit”.
Claim 4 limitation “a network communication module, and/or a data storage module, and/or an edge computing module”.
Claim 5 limitation “a vehicle local alarm prompt sub-unit” and “a remote monitoring client software alarm prompt sub-unit”.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant wishes to provide further explanation or dispute the examiner’s interpretation of the corresponding structure, applicant must identify the corresponding structure with reference to the specification by page and line number, and to the drawing, if any, by reference characters in response to this Office action.
If applicant does not intend to have the claim limitation(s) treated under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112 , sixth paragraph, applicant may amend the claim(s) so that it/they will clearly not invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, or present a sufficient showing that the claim recites/recite sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function to preclude application of 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
For more information, see MPEP § 2173 et seq. and Supplementary Examination Guidelines for Determining Compliance With 35 U.S.C. 112 and for Treatment of Related Issues in Patent Applications, 76 FR 7162, 7167 (Feb. 9, 2011).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 1 limitation “a driver identity verification unit”, “a vehicle control unit”, “a vehicle gateway unit”, “an alarm prompt unit”, and “a remote management unit”,
Claim 2 limitations “an identity document reading sub-unit, a biometric information acquisition sub-unit, and a biometric information comparison sub-unit”,
Claim 4 limitation “a network communication module, and/or a data storage module, and/or an edge computing module”, and
Claim 5 limitation “a vehicle local alarm prompt sub-unit” and “a remote monitoring client software alarm prompt sub-unit” invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function.
Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
Applicant may:
(a) Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph;
(b) Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what structure, material, or acts perform the entire claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(c) Amend the written description of the specification such that it clearly links the structure, material, or acts disclosed therein to the function recited in the claim, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)).
If applicant is of the opinion that the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts and clearly links them to the function so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either:
(a) Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(b) Stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181.
Claim 1 recites “the cab” in the amended limitation without proper antecedent basis in the claims. Claims 2-10 are also rejected since they depend from the rejected claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claims 1-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brewer et al. (Brewer: US 2017/0039356) in view of Bauchot et al. (Bauchot: US 2010/0066513).
Regarding Claim 1, Brewer teaches a specified driver management system based on biometric identification technology, comprising:
a driver identity verification unit, the driver identity verification unit being configured to acquire document information and biometric information of a current driver, on a basis of performing an on-site person-document consistency verification by performing a consistency comparison between the biometric information of the current driver acquired on site and biometric information comprised in a chip or read on a surface of a document on site, perform secondary comparison verification on the document information and the biometric information of the current driver that has passed the on-site person-document consistency verification with driver identity information and biometric information stored in an authorized driver database, and control a working state of a vehicle start system according to a verification result (Fig. 3, steps 308 and 310 and Par 19, authorization program 110 matches the driver's license photo with a snapshot of a driver's face while the driver is sitting behind the wheel of vehicle 106. Only after a positive match of the driver's license photo to the snapshot of the driver's face, via facial recognition techniques, would the driver to be able to operate vehicle 106. And Par 22, multiple authorized drivers may be programmed into vehicle computing device 108 so multiple drivers may operate vehicle 106. And Par 33, In additional embodiments, authorization program 110 uses forms of biometric identification, for example, fingerprint, hand geometry, retina and iris scan, facial recognition, voice analysis, and additional forms of biometric identification to determine driver are approved to operate vehicle 106 and Par 25, detection program 113 sends received credential information to authorization program 110, and as described in FIG. 3, authorization program 110 compares the credentials to various databases to determine whether the received credentials are valid. );
a vehicle control unit, the vehicle control unit being linked to the vehicle start system, and being associated with the driver identity verification unit and a vehicle gateway unit, and the vehicle control unit being configured to control whether a vehicle is permitted to start according to a driver identity verification result sent by the driver identity verification unit or the vehicle gateway unit (Par [0020] Authorization program 110 controls the authorizing of the necessary information to permit the driver to operate vehicle 106. Authorization program 110 also controls the signaling to vehicle 106 to start, or to not start because, by analyzing the information supplied to determine if the information is either incomplete or inaccurate and Fig. 1, vehicle 106 communicates with network 102);
the vehicle gateway unit (Par [0016] Vehicle computing device 108 may be any programmable electronic device located within vehicle 106 and capable of communicating with server 104 via network 102.), the vehicle gateway unit being associated with the driver identity verification unit, the vehicle control unit, an alarm prompt unit, and a remote management unit respectively, and the vehicle gateway unit being configured to perform driver identity verification in cooperation with the driver identity verification unit (Fig. 1 and Par [0025] detection program 113 sends received credential information to authorization program 110, and as described in FIG. 3, authorization program 110 compares the credentials to various databases to determine whether the received credentials are valid.);
the alarm prompt unit, the alarm prompt unit being connected and cooperated with the driver identity verification unit and the vehicle gateway unit respectively (Par 27, detection program 113 reports the information relating to denying vehicle 106 the ability to start to a third party, a computer, a computing device, or stored in a repository, for example, database 114 or database 116…, detection program 113 alerts the authorities if vehicle 106 is disallowed to start. In additional embodiments, detection program 113 contacts the authorities to communicate with the driver.); and
further, the alarm prompt unit configured to issue an alarm according to the driver identity verification result sent by the driver identity verification unit or the vehicle gateway unit (Par 27, detection program 113 reports the information relating to denying vehicle 106 the ability to start to a third party, a computer, a computing device, or stored in a repository, for example, database 114 or database 116. The information may be, for example, global positioning coordinates of vehicle 106, the credentials which are no longer valid, a visual image or video from an onboard camera, audio from an onboard microphone, or additional information which may be pertinent to why vehicle 106 is denied access to start. And Par 27, alerts the authorities);
the remote management unit (Fig. 1, server 104), the remote management unit being configured to perform the driver identity verification in cooperation with the driver identity verification unit through the vehicle control unit, and output a control command for vehicle management and driver management to the vehicle gateway unit (Par [0025] In decision 204, detection program 113 determines if the credentials are valid. In some embodiments, detection program 113 sends received credential information to authorization program 110, and as described in FIG. 3, authorization program 110 compares the credentials to various databases to determine whether the received credentials are valid. This step is explained in greater detail in FIG. 3 with regard to authorization program 110. And Par 26, authorization program 110 sends a signal to detection program 113 informing detection program 113 which of the credentials are verified and they detection program 113 should permit the driver to engage vehicle's 106 engine or power source, and allow vehicle 106 to be operational. ).
Brewer does not explicitly disclose the alarm prompt unit being disposed in the cab of the vehicle or outside the vehicle, configured to issue a voice prompt or an audible and visual alarm.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Bauchot teaches a vehicle authorization method and system (abstract) and further teaches the alarm prompt unit being disposed in the cab of the vehicle or outside the vehicle, configured to issue a voice prompt or an audible and visual alarm according to the driver identity verification result sent by the driver identity verification unit (Par 59-60: Computing system 10 is configurable via user interface 9 so that if a mismatch in correspondences as described, supra, is detected the following actions could be executed: 1. Vehicle 8 will not start. 2. The mismatch is displayed via user interface 9. 3. The mismatch is displayed via user interface 9 and must be acknowledged by driver 17. And Par 65; computing system activates an alarm on the vehicle. 6. The computing disables the vehicle. And Par 35, computing system 10 within a vehicle 8).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Bauchot in order to
Regarding Claim 2, the combination of Brewer and Bauchot teaches the specified driver management system according to claim 1, wherein
the driver identity verification unit comprises an identity document reading sub-unit, a biometric information acquisition sub-unit, and a biometric information comparison sub-unit;
the identity document reading sub-unit comprises a second-generation resident identity card reading device, an integrated circuit (IC) card qualification certificate reading device, a motor vehicle driving license reading device, and/or a pass reading device (Brewer: Par [0017] Detection program 113 receives information from near field communication devices (NFC) such as, for example, insurance documents, license plates, inspection documents, driver's licenses or driver's documents, and additional forms of identification which are equipped with a radio frequency identification (RFID), or other NFC device. ); and
the identity document reading sub-unit is configured to obtain identity information of the document held by the current driver, and send the obtained identity information of the held document to the biometric information comparison sub-unit in the driver identity verification unit, or a biometric information comparison sub-unit in the vehicle gateway unit, or a biometric information comparison sub-unit in the remote management unit through the vehicle gateway unit (Brewer: Par 19, authorization program 110 matches the driver's license photo with a snapshot of a driver's face while the driver is sitting behind the wheel of vehicle 106. Only after a positive match of the driver's license photo to the snapshot of the driver's face, via facial recognition techniques, would the driver to be able to operate vehicle 106);
the biometric information acquisition sub-unit comprises a face information acquisition device, and/or a fingerprint information acquisition device, and/or an iris information acquisition device, and/or a finger vein information acquisition device, and/or a palm vein information acquisition device, and/or a palm print information acquisition device, and/or a retina information acquisition device, and/or a sound information acquisition device, or another biometric information acquisition device (Brewer: Par 33, In additional embodiments, authorization program 110 uses forms of biometric identification, for example, fingerprint, hand geometry, retina and iris scan, facial recognition, voice analysis, and additional forms of biometric identification to determine driver are approved to operate vehicle 106); and
the biometric information acquisition sub-unit is configured to obtain the biometric information of the current driver, and send the obtained information to the biometric information comparison sub-unit in the driver identity verification unit, or the biometric information comparison sub-unit in the vehicle gateway unit, or the biometric information comparison sub-unit in the remote management unit through the vehicle gateway unit; the biometric information comparison sub-unit comprises a face information comparison device, and/or a fingerprint information comparison device, and/or an iris information comparison device, and/or a finger vein information comparison device, and/or a palm vein information comparison device, and/or a palm print information comparison device, and/or a retina information comparison device, and/or a sound information comparison device, or another biometric information comparison device (Brewer: Par 19, authorization program 110 matches the driver's license photo with a snapshot of a driver's face while the driver is sitting behind the wheel of vehicle 106. Only after a positive match of the driver's license photo to the snapshot of the driver's face, via facial recognition techniques, would the driver to be able to operate vehicle 106); and
the biometric information comparison sub-unit is configured to perform the on-site person-document consistency verification on the biometric information in the chip or on the surface of the document held by the driver and the biometric information of the current driver, to determine whether the information belongs to the same person (Brewer: Par 19, authorization program 110 matches the driver's license photo with a snapshot of a driver's face while the driver is sitting behind the wheel of vehicle 106. Only after a positive match of the driver's license photo to the snapshot of the driver's face, via facial recognition techniques, would the driver to be able to operate vehicle 106), and perform the secondary specified driver comparison verification on the identity information and the biometric information of the document held by the current driver that has passed the on-site person-document consistency verification with the driver identity information and the biometric information stored in the authorized driver database in itself or the vehicle gateway unit or the remote management unit.
Regarding Claim 3, the combination of Brewer and Bauchot teaches the specified driver management system according to claim 1, wherein the vehicle control unit comprises a vehicle start control module; the vehicle start control module is configured to determine whether the vehicle is permitted to start according to a received driver identity verification result; the vehicle is permitted to start in a case that the specified driver identity verification result is passed, and the vehicle is not permitted to start in a case that the specified driver identity verification result is failed (Brewer: Fig. 2, steps 206 and 208 and Par 19, authorization program 110 matches the driver's license photo with a snapshot of a driver's face while the driver is sitting behind the wheel of vehicle 106. Only after a positive match of the driver's license photo to the snapshot of the driver's face, via facial recognition techniques, would the driver to be able to operate vehicle 106 ); and the vehicle start control module supports emergency start through the remote management unit (Brewer: Fig. 3, step 314 and Par 36, authorization program 110 determines if vehicle 106 is involved in an emergency situation. … an external source determines if the situation vehicle 106 is in is an emergency situation, and permits the driver to operate vehicle 106. If authorization program 110 determines vehicle 106 is in an emergency situation (YES branch, proceed to step 206), authorization program 110 communicates with detection program 113, informing detection program 113 to signal vehicle to start. ).
Regarding Claim 4, the combination of Brewer and Bauchot teaches the specified driver management system according to claim 1, wherein the vehicle gateway unit comprises a network communication module, and/or a data storage module (Brewer: Fig. 1, databases 116 and 114), and/or an edge computing module;
the network communication module comprises one or more of a 5G communication device, a controller area network (CAN) bus communication device, a transmission control protocol/Internet protocol (TCP/IP) communication device, a Bluetooth communication device, and another wireless communication device; and the network communication module is configured for data exchange between the driver identity verification unit and the alarm warning unit, the vehicle control unit, and the remote management unit (The network communication module is not required due to alternative term “and/or” recited above);
the data storage module comprises a built-in data storage device and an external data storage device (Brewer: Fig. 1, databases 116 and 114 and Fig. 4, 416); and the data storage module is configured to store data interacted between the driver identity verification unit and the alarm prompt unit, the vehicle control unit, and the remote management unit (Brewer: Par 21-22), and/or store authorized driver database information; and
the edge computing module comprises an artificial intelligence (AI) smart chip with an edge computing function and a terminal software development kit (SDK) with edge computing; and the edge computing module is configured to perform the on-site person-document consistency verification on the document information and the biometric information acquired by the driver identity verification unit, and perform comparison verification on the document information and the biometric information with relevant identity information and biometric identification information stored in an authorized driver database in the vehicle gateway unit (The edge computing module is not required due to alternative term “and/or” recited above).
Regarding Claim 5, the combination of Brewer and Bauchot teaches the specified driver management system according to claim 1, wherein the alarm prompt unit comprises a vehicle local alarm prompt sub-unit (Brewer: Par 27, detection program 113 reports the information relating to denying vehicle 106 the ability to start to a third party, a computer, a computing device, or stored in a repository, for example, database 114 or database 116. The information may be, for example, global positioning coordinates of vehicle 106, the credentials which are no longer valid, a visual image or video from an onboard camera, audio from an onboard microphone, or additional information which may be pertinent to why vehicle 106 is denied access to start ….) and a remote monitoring client software alarm prompt sub-unit (Brewer: Par 27, detection program 113 alerts the authorities if vehicle 106 is disallowed to start. In additional embodiments, detection program 113 contacts the authorities to communicate with the driver. ).
Regarding Claim 6, the combination of Brewer and Bauchot teaches the specified driver management system according to claim 1, wherein the remote management unit comprises a government industry management client (Brewer: par 30, The license plate is valid if the license plate is registered with the appropriate governing bodies, is verified to match and see also Par 31-32, To verify the driver's license is valid, some factors may be, for example, if the driver's license is processed by the correct governing body, has not expired, is the proper class or rank for vehicle 106, or has not been modified or altered), an enterprise operation management client (Brewer: Par 29, authorization program 110 records each determination of the insurance in a repository such as database 114. In one embodiment, authorization program 110 communicates with detection program 113 via network 102 to gather the information relating to the insurance.), a driver and passenger service client (Par 37, once authorization program 110 determines vehicle 106 is involved in an emergency situation, authorization program 110 activates vehicle 106's global positioning system (hereinafter GPS), on-board camera, and audio system to record the driver and passengers and broadcasts the information to the proper authorities. ), and a communication center (Brewer: Fig. 4, 410 and Par 44);
the remote management unit
receives an on-site person-document consistency verification result of the driver and a specified driver identity verification result sent by the vehicle gateway unit (Brewer: par [0025] In decision 204, detection program 113 determines if the credentials are valid ), and generates the control command for vehicle management and driver management (Par 26, authorization program 110 sends a signal to detection program 113 informing detection program 113 which of the credentials are verified and they detection program 113 should permit the driver to engage vehicle's 106 engine or power source, and allow vehicle 106 to be operational.), or
receives the identity information acquisition result of the driver sent by the vehicle gateway unit, performs consistency comparison between the identity information and the biometric information of the driver on site, and performs comparison identification on the identity information and the biometric information of the driver on site and identity information and biometric information of a specified driver stored in an authorized driver database, and generates the control command for vehicle management and driver management; and sends the control command to the vehicle gateway unit, so that the vehicle gateway unit sends the control command to the alarm prompt unit or the vehicle control unit, to issue an audible and visual alarm and a voice prompt, or control the vehicle.
Regarding Claim 7, the combination of Brewer and Bauchot teaches the specified driver management system according to claim 6, wherein the government industry management client in the remote management unit comprises public security industry management client software, traffic industry management client software, emergency industry management client software, and another industry management client software, depending on different industry departments; the public security industry management client software is configured for driver identity verification management and driver identity management; the traffic industry management client software is configured for the driver identity verification management, driver authority supervision, and driver and passenger file management; the emergency industry management client software is configured for the driver identity verification management; and the another industry management client software is configured for the driver identity verification management (Brewer: Par [0032] In decision 308, authorization program 110 determines if the driver's license is valid. A driver's license may have NFC technology incorporated to allow a NFC receiver to gather information from the driver's license, the information is gathered by detection program 113 when the driver is in vehicle 106, or within reach of the NFC receiver located on or within vehicle 106 and sent to authorization program 110 to make the determination if the driver's license is valid or not. To verify the driver's license is valid, some factors may be, for example, if the driver's license is processed by the correct governing body, has not expired, is the proper class or rank for vehicle 106, or has not been modified or altered. The proper class of vehicle 106 relates to the different driving licenses related to the type of vehicle, vehicle 106 is. For example, a car requires a different driver's license than a bus, motorcycle, boat, tractor trailer, or motorhome. In some embodiments, additional attributes may be associated with the driver's license regarding times when the driver may operate the vehicle, or which vehicles the driver may operate. For example keeping night-vision impaired drivers from driving at night, keeping children from unauthorized use of an expressly prohibited car, allow an insurance company to govern the compliance of specific drivers for specific vehicles, and preventing thieves from stealing and using license plates on additional vehicles.);
Regarding Claim 8, the combination of Brewer and Bauchot teaches the specified driver management system according to claim 6, wherein the enterprise operation management client in the remote management unit comprises consignor unit management client software, carrier unit management client software, and consignee unit management client software, depending on different users; the consignor unit management client software is configured for driver identity information query (Brewer: Par 33, authorization program 110 uses forms of biometric identification, for example, fingerprint, hand geometry, retina and iris scan, facial recognition, voice analysis, and additional forms of biometric identification to determine driver are approved to operate vehicle 106. In an additional embodiment, authorization program 110 records each determination of the inspection in a repository such as database 114);
the carrier unit management client software is configured for driver identity verification management, driver authority supervision, and driver and passenger file management (Par 32, verify the driver's license is valid, some factors may be, for example, if the driver's license is processed by the correct governing body, has not expired, is the proper class or rank for vehicle 106, or has not been modified or altered. The proper class of vehicle 106 relates to the different driving licenses related to the type of vehicle, vehicle 106 is. For example, a car requires a different driver's license than a bus, motorcycle, boat, tractor trailer, or motorhome.); and the consignee unit management client software is configured for the driver identity information query (Brewer: Par 33, authorization program 110 uses forms of biometric identification, for example, fingerprint, hand geometry, retina and iris scan, facial recognition, voice analysis, and additional forms of biometric identification to determine driver are approved to operate vehicle 106. In an additional embodiment, authorization program 110 records each determination of the inspection in a repository such as database 114.).
Regarding Claim 9, the combination of Brewer and Bauchot teaches the specified driver management system according to claim 6, wherein the driver and passenger service client in the remote management unit comprises driver service client software and escort service client software, depending on difference users; the driver service client software is configured for driver identity verification and verification abnormality prompt (Brewer: Par 27, detection program 113 reports the information relating to denying vehicle 106 the ability to start to a third party, a computer, a computing device, or stored in a repository, for example, database 114 or database 116. The information may be, for example, global positioning coordinates of vehicle 106, the credentials which are no longer valid, a visual image or video from an onboard camera, audio from an onboard microphone, or additional information which may be pertinent to why vehicle 106 is denied access to start. In additional embodiments, the driver may have additional opportunity to present the correct credentials after a predetermined time period. In one embodiment, detection program 113 grants the driver a set amount of attempts to input an override code to start vehicle 106, before locking out the driver. ); and the escort service client software is configured for driver identity verification abnormality alarm (Brewer: Par 37, once authorization program 110 determines vehicle 106 is involved in an emergency situation, authorization program 110 activates vehicle 106's global positioning system (hereinafter GPS), on-board camera, and audio system to record the driver and passengers and broadcasts the information to the proper authorities.).
Regarding Claim 10, the combination of Brewer and Bauchot teaches the specified driver management system according to claim 6,
wherein the communication center in the remote management unit comprises a cloud platform, a local server, and a personal mobile intelligent terminal;
the cloud platform (Brewer: Par 14, server 104 may represent a server computing system utilizing multiple computers as a server system, such as in a cloud computing environment.) is configured to store data information uploaded by the driver identity verification unit ; store authorized driver database information; perform intelligent analysis, identification, and determination on the data information uploaded by the driver identity verification unit (Par 27, detection program 113 reports the information relating to denying vehicle 106 the ability to start to a third party, a computer, a computing device, or stored in a repository, for example, database 114 );
provide a shared data resource pool for data reception and calling by government industry management client software, enterprise operation management client software, or driver and passenger service client software; support a computer hardware platform environment for applying the government industry management client software, the enterprise operation management client software, or the driver and passenger service client software; and support communication interaction between the government industry management client software, the enterprise operation management client software, or the driver and passenger service client software and the vehicle gateway unit (Par 21, database 114 is a database management system (DBMS) used to allow the definition, creation, querying, update, and administration of a database(s). In the depicted embodiment, database 114 is stored on server 104. In additional embodiments, database 114 may reside on another server or computing device, provided database 114 is accessible to authorization program 110. );
the local server (Fig. 1, database 116 and Par 22) is configured to store the data information uploaded by the driver identity verification unit separately; store the authorized driver database information; perform intelligent analysis, identification, and determination on the data information uploaded by the driver identity verification unit (Par 19, multiple authorized drivers may be programmed into vehicle computing device 108 so multiple drivers may operate vehicle 106. In some embodiments, the information is stored within vehicle computing device 108 in database 116 and Par 27, detection program 113 reports the information relating to denying vehicle 106 the ability to start to a third party, a computer, a computing device, or stored in a repository, for example, database 114 or database 116.);
provide data resource for data reception and calling by the government industry management client software, the enterprise operation management client software, or the driver and passenger service client software; support the computer hardware platform environment for applying the government industry management client software, the enterprise operation management client software, or the driver and passenger service client software; and support communication interaction between the government industry management client software, the enterprise operation management client software, or the driver and passenger service client software and the vehicle gateway unit (Brewer: par [0022] Database 116 may be a repository which may be written to and/or read by vehicle computing device 108 and detection program 113. In one embodiment, information gathered by detection program 113 or authorization program 110 may be stored to database 114. This information gathered by authorization program 110 is regarding the credentials for vehicle 106 and the driver. Such as driver's license information, insurance information, inspection information, registration information, list of drivers authorized to operate vehicle 106, or pre-check authorization information. In one embodiment, database 114 is a database management system (DBMS) used to allow the definition, creation, querying, update, and administration of a database(s). In the depicted embodiment, database 114 is stored on vehicle computing device 108. In additional embodiments, database 114 may reside on an additional server, or an additional computing device, provided database 114 is accessible to detection program 113.); and
the personal hand-held intelligent terminal is configured to communicate with the vehicle gateway unit through the cloud platform or the local server, to receive a driver identity document acquisition result forwarded by the driver identity verification unit through the vehicle gateway unit, and forward a management command or a response command of the government industry management client software, the enterprise operation management client software, or the driver and passenger service client software to the vehicle gateway unit (Brewer: Par 17, detection program 113 may receive and send information to/from a computing device such as a smart phone or a tablet which includes information indicating, for example, insurance, license plate, inspection, driver's license or driver's documents, and/or additional forms of identification and Par [0018] Authorization program 110 controls the authorization process to allow a driver to operate vehicle 106. The authorization process has several checks to determine if vehicle 106 is insured, registered, inspected, and otherwise safe to drive. This may encourage owners to keep up with appropriate renewals for license, registration, inspection, and insurance, as well as allow police officers to quickly check a motorist during a traffic stop. Authorization program 110 may be used in conjunction with a key-less start of a car's ignition system (with, for example, a Smart Fob or Smart Phone Application)).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on February 19, 2025 have been fully considered.
Applicants arguments regarding the prior art rejections are moot in view of new grounds of rejections.
Applicants arguments regarding claim interpretations and 112 rejections are not persuasive.
On page 9 Applicants argued that “Applicant submits that the claim recitations and the description of such in the specification provide sufficient basis to avoid MPF construction of the claims.”.
Examiner respectfully disagrees because Applicants do not provide any reason how it avoids the 112 (f) interpretation. If applicant wishes to provide further explanation or dispute the examiner’s interpretation of the corresponding structure, applicant must identify the corresponding structure with reference to the specification by page and line number, and to the drawing, if any, by reference characters in response to this Office action.
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.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Nay Tun whose telephone number is (571)270-7939. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Thurs from 9:00-5:00.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's Supervisor, Steven Lim can be reached on (571) 270-1210. 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).
/Nay Tun/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2688