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 .
Status of Claims
This Office Action is in response to the application filed on 05/23/2024. Claims 1-12 and 14-16 are presently pending and are presented for examination. Claims 1-12 and 14 were amended. Claim 13 was cancelled. Claims 15 and 16 were added.
Claim Interpretation
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.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, 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: "first module configurable to", and “second module configurable to” in claim 1, and “the apparatus configurable” to in claims 4 and 7.
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 does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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 10-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
As per claim 10
Step 1: The claim is directed to a process as it recites (a processing method).
Step 2A Prong 1: The claim is directed to an abstract idea of a mental process. The claim
recites the limitations:
A processing method for adjustment of at least one seat in a vehicle, the processing method comprising:
a preliminary adjustment step comprising:
obtaining at least one preliminary sensory signal from at least one sensor positioned relative to the seat, and
generating at least one general control signal by determining a suitable seat adjustment model based on the at least one preliminary sensory signal,
the at least one general control signal being communicable for use for preliminary adjustment of the seat; and
a secondary adjustment step comprising:
obtaining at least one fine-tuning sensory signal from the sensor,
determining delta data based on the at least one fine-tuning sensory signal and the suitable seat adjustment, and
generating at least one fine-tuning control signal based on the delta data,
the at least one fine-tuning control signal being communicable for use for secondary adjustment of the seat.
These limitations as drafted are simple processes that under their broadest reasonable interpretations cover the performance of these limitations in the mind or by hand or with pen and paper as these steps fall within the mental process groupings of abstract ideas because they cover concepts performed in the human mind, including observation, evaluation, judgment, and opinion. See MPEP 2106.04(a)(2), subsection III. The nominal recitation of the processor does not take the limitation out of the mental process grouping. Thus, the claim recites a mental process which is an abstract idea.
Step 2A Prong 2: Judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. The claim recites the additional elements of:
A processing method for adjustment of at least one seat in a vehicle, the processing method comprising:
a preliminary adjustment step comprising:
obtaining at least one preliminary sensory signal from at least one sensor positioned relative to the seat, and
generating at least one general control signal by determining a suitable seat adjustment model based on the at least one preliminary sensory signal,
the at least one general control signal being communicable for use for preliminary adjustment of the seat; and
a secondary adjustment step comprising:
obtaining at least one fine-tuning sensory signal from the sensor,
determining delta data based on the at least one fine-tuning sensory signal and the suitable seat adjustment, and
generating at least one fine-tuning control signal based on the delta data,
the at least one fine-tuning control signal being communicable for use for secondary adjustment of the seat.
The instructions for obtaining sensory signal are recited at a high level of generality (i.e., obtaining at least one fine-tuning sensory signal), and amounts to mere data gathering, which is a form of insignificant extra-solution activity. Further, the additional elements are applying the abstract ideas in a vehicle environment. Claiming that the control signal is for the use of seat adjustment indicates intended use and not vehicular control.
Step 2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to
significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to Step 2A Prong
2, the additional elements amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception in a
vehicle environment using gathered visual observation data which do not provide an inventive concept. See MPEP 2106.05(g). For these reasons, claim 10 is not patent eligible under 35 U.S.C. § 101.
As per claims 11-16
These process claims further define the abstract ideas of the mental processes illustrated in claim 10, they do not recite any additional elements or other limitations that transform the determinations of whether to and by how much to move the vehicle seat and these elements are not sufficient to overcome the mental process rejection.
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.
Claim 5 is 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
The terms “optimal and non-optimal” in claim 5 are relative terms which render the claim indefinite. The terms “optimal and non-optimal” are not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Therefore Examiner interprets the relevant limitations to mean that the optimal real time user data refers to user data that is optimally gathered, such as by a sensor with optimal sensitivity, and non-optimal real time user data refers to data indicating that a driver or passenger is in danger such as when their head is too far from the headrest. Examiner interprets the relevant limitations to mean that the delta data, or divergence, is determined between the target position, where the headrest is close to the occupant, and the current position when the user head was previously too far away from the headrest.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. The limitations of the final paragraph of claim 1 are repeated in claim 3 as concepts for the second or fine-tuning adjustment control being based on sensor signals associated with this stage, such as a fine-tuning sensory signal, after the completion of the preliminary adjustment stage is claimed in both claims. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(2) as being unpatentable over Herrmann et al., US-20250074258-A1, hereinafter referred to as Herrmann 258.
As per claim 1
Herrmann 258 discloses [a]n for adjustment of at least one seat based on a two-step adjustment strategy comprising a preliminary adjustment stage and a secondary adjustment stage, the apparatus comprising (a rough adjustment in a first adjustment phase, controls the adjustment movements of the vehicle seat 1…In the subsequent precise adjustment…comparatively small adjustment path and thus a comparatively short distance between the intermediate position and the desired target position is bridged in the following precise adjustment, controls the adjustment movements of the vehicle seat 1 - Herrmann 258 ¶5 & ¶22):
a first module configurable to (adjustment device 101 is coupled to a control electronics 100 which controls the adjustment movements of the vehicle seat 1 - Herrmann 258 ¶22):
receive at least one input signal, the at least one input signal comprising (If a user triggers an adjustment process by a specific operating event, the control electronics 100 controls the adjustment of the vehicle seat 1 proceeding from a starting position…target position - Herrmann 258 ¶22):
at least one sensor signal communicable from at least one sensor positioned relative to the apparatus (An operating event for triggering a corresponding adjustment process can include for example…the actuation of a switch or button, and/or a user entering the vehicle interior, which is detected by means of sensors - Herrmann 258 ¶22);
at least one general adjustment signal communicable from at least one host device coupled to the apparatus (control electronics 100 is configured to actuate the adjustment device 101 for a triggered adjustment process initially, in a first adjustment range and thus during a first adjustment phase of the adjustment process, for a rough adjustment of the vehicle seat 1 - Herrmann 258 ¶23),
a second coupled to the first module, the second module configurable to process the at least one input signal in a manner so as to produce at least one output signal, the at least one output signal comprising (adjustment device 101 is coupled to a control electronics 100 which controls the adjustment movements of the vehicle seat 1. If a user triggers an adjustment process by a specific operating event, the control electronics 100 controls the adjustment of the vehicle seat 1 - Herrmann 258 ¶22):
at least one preliminary derivation signal based on processing of the at least one sensor signal (If a user triggers an adjustment process by a specific operating event, the control electronics 100 controls the adjustment of the vehicle seat 1 proceeding from a starting position…target position. An operating event for triggering a corresponding adjustment process can include for example…the actuation of a switch or button, and/or a user entering the vehicle interior, which is detected by means of sensors - Herrmann 258 ¶22 - Examiner reasons that the preliminary derivation signal means a processor that analyses the sensor data to begin the adjustment process and is created in the control electronics 100 that contains the first and second modules, which is proven to be true as the adjustment process is executed),
at least one general control signal based on the at least one general adjustment signal (control electronics can be configured to actuate the adjustment device in the first adjustment range, during a first adjustment phase of the adjustment process, for the rough adjustment of the interior object - Herrmann 258 ¶9),
at least one fine-tuning control signal (control electronics can be configured to actuate the adjustment device…in the following second adjustment range, during a temporally following second adjustment phase of the adjustment process, for the precise adjustment- Herrmann 258 ¶9),
the at least one general control signal being usable for the preliminary adjustment stage of the seat (control electronics can be configured to actuate the adjustment device in the first adjustment range, during a first adjustment phase of the adjustment process, for the rough adjustment of the interior object - Herrmann 258 ¶9),
the at least one fine-tuning control signal being usable for the secondary adjustment stage of the seat, and being based on receiving at least one sensor signal communicable from the sensor subsequent to the preliminary adjustment stage (a rough adjustment of the interior object can be user-independent, after completion of the first adjustment phase, to start the second adjustment phase only in response to an operating event triggered by a user…for example by a gesture and/or a voice command, target position to be reached by the precise adjustment can be user-specific, second adjustment phase begins…requires a further operating event by the user, such that the adjustment process is interrupted at least briefly, until the user signals that the second adjustment phase can begin, data relating to the precise adjustment can also originate from an external memory, such as a memory of a mobile device of a user getting into the vehicle - Herrmann 258 ¶4 & ¶9 & ¶10 & ¶23 & ¶25).
As per claim 9
Herrmann 258 further discloses suitable for use for adjustment of at least one seat of an automobile, the seat being a driver seat (the interior object is for example a vehicle seat, the type of the precise adjustment is dependent on which identified user is sitting on the vehicle seat - Herrmann 258 ¶10).
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, 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.
Claims 2, 3, and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Herrmann 258, as per claims 1, and 2, respectively, and further in view of Herrmann et al., US-20240208372-A1, hereinafter referred to as Herrmann 372.
As per claim 2
Herrmann 258 further discloses the sensor signals including at least one preliminary sensory signal and at least one fine-tuning sensory signal, the preliminary sensory signals being associable with the preliminary adjustment stage and the fine-tuning sensory signals being associable with the secondary adjustment stage (control electronics can be configured to actuate the adjustment device…in the following second adjustment range, during a temporally following second adjustment phase of the adjustment process, for the precise adjustment…to start the second adjustment phase only in response to an operating event triggered by a user, An operating event for triggering a corresponding adjustment process…by means of sensors, to actuate the adjustment device 101 for a triggered adjustment process initially, in a first adjustment range and thus during a first adjustment phase- Herrmann 258 ¶9 & ¶22 & ¶23).
Herrmann 258 does not specifically disclose wherein the second module is configurable to process the preliminary sensory signals to generate the preliminary derivation signals, and
wherein the preliminary derivation signals are processable so as to obtain a suitable seat adjustment model, the general adjustment signals being based on the suitable seat adjustment model.
Herrmann 372 teaches wherein the second module is configurable to process the preliminary sensory signals to generate the preliminary derivation signals (a predetermined user gesture may be required to initiate an adjustment process... evaluate a detection signal from a sensor device or an interior monitoring device for detecting a predetermined gesture, in order to conclude an adjustment request when the predetermined gesture is detected, control device is configured to…by means of a sensor system on the interior assembly, via a control module 36 of the control device 3 - Herrmann 372 ¶37 & ¶52 & ¶113),
wherein the preliminary derivation signals are processable so as to obtain a suitable seat adjustment model, the general adjustment signals being based on the suitable seat adjustment model (interior assembly is configured by a vehicle seat, a user's wish for adjustment may be distinguished from situations in which no adjustment is to take place. For example, a certain movement of a user may indicate a request for adjustment, while in other situations, for example when vehicle occupants are in the vehicle interior while the vehicle is in motion, no adjustment of the interior assembly is to take place, to initiate an adjustment process of the interior assembly, it may be provided that a user acts on the interior assembly with his hand with a certain pattern - Herrmann 372 ¶20 & ¶36 & ¶38).
Herrmann 258 discloses an adjustment system for adjusting an interior object in a vehicle interior. Herrmann 372 teaches a drive device for adjusting an interior assembly of a vehicle.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Herrmann 258, an adjustment system for adjusting an interior object in a vehicle interior, with a drive device for adjusting an interior assembly of a vehicle, as taught by Herrmann 372, with a reasonable expectation of success so that a vehicle seat may be held safely and reliably in position in the event of a crash, in order to prevent unacceptable uncontrolled movement of the vehicle seat in the event of a crash and thus reduce the risk of injury to a user, see Herrmann 372 ¶16 for details.
As per claim 3
Herrmann 258 further discloses wherein the sensor signals communicable from the sensor subsequent to the preliminary adjustment stage correspond to the fine-tuning sensory signals (a rough adjustment of the interior object can be user-independent, after completion of the first adjustment phase, to start the second adjustment phase only in response to an operating event triggered by a user…for example by a gesture and/or a voice command, target position to be reached by the precise adjustment can be user-specific, second adjustment phase begins…requires a further operating event by the user, such that the adjustment process is interrupted at least briefly, until the user signals that the second adjustment phase can begin, data relating to the precise adjustment can also originate from an external memory, such as a memory of a mobile device of a user getting into the vehicle - Herrmann 258 ¶4 & ¶9 & ¶10 & ¶23 & ¶25).
As per claim 6
Herrmann 258 further discloses further comprising: a third module coupled to the second module, the output signals being communicable to the third module from the second module for further transmission from the apparatus for further processing so as to determine a suitable seat adjustment model usable for the preliminary adjustment stage of the seat (adjustment device 101 is coupled to a control electronics 100 which controls the adjustment movements of the vehicle seat 1, An operating event for triggering a corresponding adjustment process…by means of sensors, to actuate the adjustment device 101 for a triggered adjustment process initially, in a first adjustment range and thus during a first adjustment phase - Herrmann 258 ¶22 & ¶23).
Herrmann 258 does not specifically disclose wherein the suitable seat adjustment model is determinable based on the preliminary derivation signals, and
the general adjustment signals being determinable based on the suitable seat adjustment model.
Herrmann 372 teaches wherein the suitable seat adjustment model is determinable based on the preliminary derivation signals (a predetermined user gesture may be required to initiate an adjustment process...evaluate a detection signal from a sensor device or an interior monitoring device for detecting a predetermined gesture, in order to conclude an adjustment request when the predetermined gesture is detected, control device is configured to…by means of a sensor system on the interior assembly, via a control module 36 of the control device 3 - Herrmann 372 ¶37 & ¶52 & ¶113),
the general adjustment signals being determinable based on the suitable seat adjustment model (interior assembly is configured by a vehicle seat, a user's wish for adjustment may be distinguished from situations in which no adjustment is to take place. For example, a certain movement of a user may indicate a request for adjustment, while in other situations, for example when vehicle occupants are in the vehicle interior while the vehicle is in motion, no adjustment of the interior assembly is to take place, to initiate an adjustment process of the interior assembly, it may be provided that a user acts on the interior assembly with his hand with a certain pattern - Herrmann 372 ¶20 & ¶36 & ¶38).
Herrmann 258 discloses an adjustment system for adjusting an interior object in a vehicle interior. Herrmann 372 teaches a drive device for adjusting an interior assembly of a vehicle.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Herrmann 258, an adjustment system for adjusting an interior object in a vehicle interior, with a drive device for adjusting an interior assembly of a vehicle, as taught by Herrmann 372, with a reasonable expectation of success so that a vehicle seat may be held safely and reliably in position in the event of a crash, in order to prevent unacceptable uncontrolled movement of the vehicle seat in the event of a crash and thus reduce the risk of injury to a user, see Herrmann 372 ¶16 for details.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Herrmann 258, in view of Herrmann 372, as per claim 2, and further in view of Yuan, CN-107789002-A, hereinafter referred to as Yuan (Translation by PE2E Search).
As per claim 4
Herrmann 258 further discloses wherein the suitable seat adjustment model is associable with at least one threshold value (If a user triggers an adjustment process by a specific operating event, the control electronics 100 controls the adjustment of the vehicle seat 1 proceeding from a starting position…target position. An operating event for triggering a corresponding adjustment process can include for example…the actuation of a switch or button, and/or a user entering the vehicle interior, which is detected by means of sensors - Herrmann 258 ¶22),
wherein the fine-tuning sensory signals are associable with real-time user data (to start the second adjustment phase only in response to an operating event triggered by a user…for example by a gesture and/or a voice command - Herrmann 258 ¶9).
Herrmann 258 does not specifically disclose wherein the apparatus is configurable to process the real-time user data and the threshold value to derive delta data for use for secondary adjustment of the seat.
Herrmann 258 discloses secondary adjustment of the seat. However, Yuan teaches wherein the apparatus is configurable to process the real-time user data and the threshold value to derive delta data for use for secondary adjustment of the seat (real-time detection of the vertical position and the set position threshold deviation range…the vertical displacement threshold A1 adjusts the position of the seat mechanism - Yuan Claim 7).
Herrmann 258 discloses an adjustment system for adjusting an interior object in a vehicle interior. Yuan teaches a seat adjustment system with recorded horizontal and vertical position thresholds and position sensors.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Herrmann 258, an adjustment system for adjusting an interior object in a vehicle interior, with a seat adjustment system with recorded horizontal and vertical position thresholds and position sensors, as taught by Yuan, with a reasonable expectation of success to gather real-time position information to adjust the sitting posture of the seat mechanism, see Yuan Page 2 Lines 35-36 and Page 3 Lines 4-5 for details.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Herrmann 258, in view of Herrmann 372, and Yuan, as per claim 4, and further in view of Smith et al., US 8184856 B2, and Wuerstlein et al., US-20120043975-A1, hereinafter referred to as Smith, and Wuerstlein.
As per claim 5
Herrmann 258 further discloses wherein based on processing of the real-time user data and the threshold value by the apparatus (If a user triggers an adjustment process by a specific operating event, the control electronics 100 controls the adjustment of the vehicle seat 1 proceeding from a starting position… user-specific target position, An operating event for triggering a corresponding adjustment process can include for example…the actuation of a switch or button, and/or a user entering the vehicle interior, which is detected by means of sensors - Herrmann 258 ¶22).
Herrmann 258 does not specifically disclose wherein the real-time user data include a plurality of portions, a portion of the real-time user data is determinable to be one of optimal.
However, Smith teaches wherein the real-time user data include a plurality of portions, a portion of the real-time user data is determinable to be one of optimal (processing the signal produced by the relative motion sensor for controlling adjustment of the headrest to provide both optimal driver safety and optimal sensitivity of the relative motion sensor…driver's head pose as forward when the motion of the posterior portion is less than a first threshold, a steady head pose condition exists for a period of time that exceeds a second threshold, and a non-forward head pose condition exists for a period of time that exceeds a third threshold - Smith Claim 1).
Herrmann 258 discloses an adjustment system for adjusting an interior object in a vehicle interior. Smith teaches a method and apparatus for adjusting the headrest position to optimize both the safety of the driver and the sensitivity of the relative motion sensor.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Herrmann 258, an adjustment system for adjusting an interior object in a vehicle interior, with a seat adjustment system with a method and apparatus for adjusting the headrest position to optimize both the safety of the driver and the sensitivity of the relative motion sensor, as taught by Smith, with a reasonable expectation of success to adjusting the headrest position to optimize both the safety of the driver and the sensitivity of the relative motion sensor, see Smith Page 1 Lines 53-55 for details.
Herrmann 258 does not specifically disclose [portion of real time user data is] non-optimal, delta data being based only on non-optimal portions of the real-time user data.
However, Wuerstlein teaches [portion of real time user data is] non-optimal,
delta data being based only on non-optimal portions of the real-time user data (minimize the risk of head injury…the head support should also be situated as close as possible to the vehicle occupant's head in the horizontal direction, a capacitive proximity sensor which is integrated into the head support…determine a dimension for the vertical and horizontal deviations of a head support position from a target position provided with regard to the position of the head of a vehicle occupant, determine the dimension for the vertical deviation of the head support position on the basis of a difference between the receive signals…and to determine the dimension for the horizontal deviation of the head support position - Wuerstlein ¶5 & ¶10 & ¶11).
Herrmann 258 discloses an adjustment system for adjusting an interior object in a vehicle interior. Wuerstlein teaches a sensor device system for determining the deviation of the position of a head support of a motor vehicle seat from a target position.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Herrmann 258, an adjustment system for adjusting an interior object in a vehicle interior, with a sensor device system for determining the deviation of the position of a head support of a motor vehicle seat from a target position, as taught by Wuerstlein, with a reasonable expectation of success to provide a sensor device for a head support which is improved over the prior art, see Wuerstlein ¶9 for details.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Herrmann 258, in view of Herrmann 372, as per claim 6, and further in view of Yuan, Smith, and Wuerstlein.
As per claim 7
Herrmann 258 further discloses wherein the suitable seat adjustment model is associable with at least one threshold value (If a user triggers an adjustment process by a specific operating event, the control electronics 100 controls the adjustment of the vehicle seat 1 proceeding from a starting position…target position. An operating event for triggering a corresponding adjustment process can include for example…the actuation of a switch or button, and/or a user entering the vehicle interior, which is detected by means of sensors - Herrmann 258 ¶22),
the fine-tuning sensory signals being associable with real-time user data (to start the second adjustment phase only in response to an operating event triggered by a user…for example by a gesture and/or a voice command - Herrmann 258 ¶9),
wherein the sensor is configurable to communicate at least one fine-tuning sensory signal obtained subsequent to the preliminary adjustment stage (a rough adjustment of the interior object can be user-independent, after completion of the first adjustment phase, to start the second adjustment phase only in response to an operating event triggered by a user…for example by a gesture and/or a voice command, target position to be reached by the precise adjustment can be user-specific, second adjustment phase begins…requires a further operating event by the user, such that the adjustment process is interrupted at least briefly, until the user signals that the second adjustment phase can begin, data relating to the precise adjustment can also originate from an external memory, such as a memory of a mobile device of a user getting into the vehicle - Herrmann 258 ¶4 & ¶9 & ¶10 & ¶23 & ¶25),
wherein based on processing of the real-time user data and the threshold value by the apparatus (If a user triggers an adjustment process by a specific operating event, the control electronics 100 controls the adjustment of the vehicle seat 1 proceeding from a starting position… user-specific target position, An operating event for triggering a corresponding adjustment process can include for example…the actuation of a switch or button, and/or a user entering the vehicle interior, which is detected by means of sensors - Herrmann 258 ¶22).
Herrmann 258 does not specifically disclose wherein the apparatus is configurable to process the real-time user data and the threshold value to derive delta data for use for secondary adjustment of the seat.
Herrmann 258 discloses secondary adjustment of the seat. However, Yuan teaches wherein the apparatus is configurable to process the real-time user data and the threshold value to derive delta data for use for secondary adjustment of the seat (real-time detection of the vertical position and the set position threshold deviation range…the vertical displacement threshold A1 adjusts the position of the seat mechanism - Yuan Claim 7).
Herrmann 258 discloses an adjustment system for adjusting an interior object in a vehicle interior. Yuan teaches a seat adjustment system with recorded horizontal and vertical position thresholds and position sensors.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Herrmann 258, an adjustment system for adjusting an interior object in a vehicle interior, with a seat adjustment system with recorded horizontal and vertical position thresholds and position sensors, as taught by Yuan, with a reasonable expectation of success to gather real-time position information to adjust the sitting posture of the seat mechanism, see Yuan Page 2 Lines 35-36 and Page 3 Lines 4-5 for details.
Herrmann 258 does not specifically disclose a portion of the real-time user data is determinable to be one of optimal.
However, Smith teaches a portion of the real-time user data is determinable to be one of optimal (processing the signal produced by the relative motion sensor for controlling adjustment of the headrest to provide both optimal driver safety and optimal sensitivity of the relative motion sensor…driver's head pose as forward when the motion of the posterior portion is less than a first threshold, a steady head pose condition exists for a period of time that exceeds a second threshold, and a non-forward head pose condition exists for a period of time that exceeds a third threshold - Smith Claim 1).
Herrmann 258 discloses an adjustment system for adjusting an interior object in a vehicle interior. Smith teaches a method and apparatus for adjusting the headrest position to optimize both the safety of the driver and the sensitivity of the relative motion sensor.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Herrmann 258, an adjustment system for adjusting an interior object in a vehicle interior, with a seat adjustment system with a method and apparatus for adjusting the headrest position to optimize both the safety of the driver and the sensitivity of the relative motion sensor, as taught by Smith, with a reasonable expectation of success to adjusting the headrest position to optimize both the safety of the driver and the sensitivity of the relative motion sensor, see Smith Page 1 Lines 53-55 for details.
Herrmann 258 does not specifically disclose [portion of real time user data is] non-optimal, delta data being based only on non-optimal portions of the real-time user data.
However, Wuerstlein teaches [portion of real time user data is] non-optimal,
delta data being based only on non-optimal portions of the real-time user data (minimize the risk of head injury…the head support should also be situated as close as possible to the vehicle occupant's head in the horizontal direction, a capacitive proximity sensor which is integrated into the head support…determine a dimension for the vertical and horizontal deviations of a head support position from a target position provided with regard to the position of the head of a vehicle occupant, determine the dimension for the vertical deviation of the head support position on the basis of a difference between the receive signals…and to determine the dimension for the horizontal deviation of the head support position - Wuerstlein ¶5 & ¶10 & ¶11).
Herrmann 258 discloses an adjustment system for adjusting an interior object in a vehicle interior. Wuerstlein teaches a sensor device system for determining the deviation of the position of a head support of a motor vehicle seat from a target position.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Herrmann 258, an adjustment system for adjusting an interior object in a vehicle interior, with a sensor device system for determining the deviation of the position of a head support of a motor vehicle seat from a target position, as taught by Wuerstlein, with a reasonable expectation of success to provide a sensor device for a head support which is improved over the prior art, see Wuerstlein ¶9 for details.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Herrmann 258, in view of Herrmann 372, Yuan, Smith, and Wuerstlein, as per claim 7, and further in view of Breed et al., US-20020125050-A1, hereinafter referred to as Breed.
As per claim 8
Herrmann 258 does not specifically disclose wherein the output signals are receivable by the host device for machine-learning based processing.
However, Breed teaches wherein the output signals are receivable by the host device for machine-learning based processing (determines that the seat is occupied by an adult or child for which adjustment of the seat is beneficial or desired, then the processor means may direct the control means to affect the power means accordingly…for evaluating the occupancy of the seat and another for adjusting the component…correlation function or state between the output of the various sensors and the desired result (i.e., seat occupancy identification and categorization) is determined, e.g., by a neural network - Breed Fig 3 (31, 32, 33, 25) + ¶237).
Herrmann 258 discloses an adjustment system for adjusting an interior object in a vehicle interior. Breed teaches an arrangement and method for controlling a component in a vehicle in which at least one morphological characteristic of an occupant is measured and a current position of at least a part of a seat on which the occupant is situated is obtained.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Herrmann 258, an adjustment system for adjusting an interior object in a vehicle interior, with an arrangement and method for controlling a component in a vehicle in which at least one morphological characteristic of an occupant is measured and a current position of at least a part of a seat on which the occupant is situated is obtained, as taught by Breed, with a reasonable expectation of success so that the reliability of the seated-state detecting unit can be improved and more people saved from death or serious injury, see Breed ¶12 for details.
Claims 10 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Herrmann 258, in view of Yuan.
As per claim 10
Herrmann 258 discloses [a] processing method for adjustment of at least one seat in a vehicle, the processing method comprising (controls the adjustment movements of the vehicle seat 1 - Herrmann 258 ¶5):
a preliminary adjustment step comprising (a rough adjustment in a first adjustment phase, controls the adjustment movements of the vehicle seat 1 - Herrmann 258 ¶5):
obtaining at least one preliminary sensory signal from at least one sensor positioned relative to the seat (An operating event for triggering a corresponding adjustment process can include for example…the actuation of a switch or button, and/or a user entering the vehicle interior, which is detected by means of sensors - Herrmann 258 ¶22),
generating at least one general control signal by determining a suitable seat adjustment model based on the at least one preliminary sensory signal (interior object-specific information for a vehicle seat can also include information, and thus data, relating to seat kinematics and to the vehicle with which the data relating to the desired target position and the associated precise adjustment were acquire, If a user triggers an adjustment process by a specific operating event, the control electronics 100 controls the adjustment of the vehicle seat 1 proceeding from a starting position…target position…An operating event for triggering a corresponding adjustment process can include for example…the actuation of a switch or button, and/or a user entering the vehicle interior, which is detected by means of sensors - Herrmann 258 ¶14 & ¶22),
the at least one general control signal being communicable for use for preliminary adjustment of the seat (a rough adjustment in a first adjustment phase, controls the adjustment movements of the vehicle seat 1, If a user triggers an adjustment process by a specific operating event, the control electronics 100 controls the adjustment of the vehicle seat 1 proceeding from a starting position…target position…An operating event for triggering a corresponding adjustment process can include for example…the actuation of a switch or button, and/or a user entering the vehicle interior, which is detected by means of sensors - Herrmann 258 ¶5 & ¶22);
a secondary adjustment step comprising (In the subsequent precise adjustment…comparatively small adjustment path and thus a comparatively short distance between the intermediate position and the desired target position is bridged in the following precise adjustment, controls the adjustment movements of the vehicle seat 1 - Herrmann 258 ¶5 & ¶22):
obtaining at least one fine-tuning sensory signal from the sensor (a rough adjustment of the interior object can be user-independent, after completion of the first adjustment phase, to start the second adjustment phase only in response to an operating event triggered by a user…for example by a gesture and/or a voice command, target position to be reached by the precise adjustment can be user-specific, second adjustment phase begins…requires a further operating event by the user, such that the adjustment process is interrupted at least briefly, until the user signals that the second adjustment phase can begin, data relating to the precise adjustment can also originate from an external memory, such as a memory of a mobile device of a user getting into the vehicle - Herrmann 258 ¶4 & ¶9 & ¶10 & ¶23 & ¶25),
generating at least one fine-tuning control signal based on [need to reach target position] (a precise adjustment takes place in a following second adjustment range, from an intermediate position until the target position is reached - Herrmann 258 ¶15),
the at least one fine-tuning control signal being communicable for use for secondary adjustment of the seat (a rough adjustment of the interior object can be user-independent, after completion of the first adjustment phase, to start the second adjustment phase only in response to an operating event triggered by a user…for example by a gesture and/or a voice command, target position to be reached by the precise adjustment can be user-specific, second adjustment phase begins…requires a further operating event by the user, such that the adjustment process is interrupted at least briefly, until the user signals that the second adjustment phase can begin, data relating to the precise adjustment can also originate from an external memory, such as a memory of a mobile device of a user getting into the vehicle - Herrmann 258 ¶4 & ¶9 & ¶10 & ¶23 & ¶25).
Herrmann 258 does not specifically disclose determining delta data based on the at least one [fine-tuning sensory signal and the suitable seat adjustment model], the delta data.
Herrmann 258 discloses the fine-tuning control for secondary adjustment phase and the suitable seat adjustment model. However, Yuan teaches determining d