Detailed Action
Claims 1-3, 5-12, and 14-20 are pending.
Claims 1-3, 5-12, and 14-20 are rejected.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-3, 5-12, and 14-20 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-8 of Patent No. 12,103,479. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claim 1 of the instant application states “automation description” instead of “task description” stated on claim 1 of the co-pending application. Since an “automation description” can be one possible type of a “task description”, the claims are not patentably distinct from each other.
Instant claim
Patent 12,103,479 claim
1. An apparatus, comprising: - a controller, comprising: - an automation definition circuit structured to interpret an automation description from an external device; - an automation management circuit structured to provide an automated action plan in response to the automation description; and - an automation execution circuit structured to provide an automation command in response to the automated action plan; wherein the automation command is structured to implement an automated vehicle response via an end point of a plurality of end points of a network of a vehicle.
1. A system, comprising: - a vehicle having a network comprising a plurality of end points; - a controller, comprising: - an automation definition circuit structured to interpret a task description; - an automation management circuit structured to provide a task action plan in response to the task description; and - an automation execution circuit structured to provide a task execution command in response to the task action plan; wherein an end point of the plurality of end points is responsive to the task execution command to implement a task for the vehicle.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
Claims 1-3, 5-12, and 14-20 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-11 of Patent No. (not assigned yet) (reference application#: 18093964). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other. Each of the limitation of the Patent claims in the above rejection is narrower than claim in the instant application. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to omit elements wherein the remaining elements perform as before. A person of ordinary skill could have arrived at the present claims by omitting the details of the patented claims. See In re Karlson (CCPA) 136 USPQ 184, decided January 16, 1963 ("Omission of element and its function in combination is obvious expedient if remaining elements perform same functions as before").
Instant claim
18093964 claim
1. An apparatus, comprising: - a controller, comprising: - an automation definition circuit structured to interpret an automation description from an external device; - an automation management circuit structured to provide an automated action plan in response to the automation description; and - an automation execution circuit structured to provide an automation command in response to the automated action plan; wherein the automation command is structured to implement an automated vehicle response via an end point of a plurality of end points of a network of a vehicle.
1. A system, comprising:
- a vehicle having a network comprising a plurality of end points; and - a controller, comprising: - an automation definition circuit structured to interpret an automation description generated by a device external to the vehicle, wherein the automation description is for at least one of: a speaker system of the vehicle; a seat heating system of the vehicle; a seat positioning system of the vehicle; an environmental management system of the vehicle; a lighting system of the vehicle; or an off-vehicle messaging system of the vehicle, and wherein the automation description includes an operation impact that specifies limits on utilization of resources of the vehicle
- an automation management circuit structured to provide an automated action plan in response to the automation description, and to store the automated action plan as a data file on a data storage communicatively coupled to the controller; and - an automation execution circuit structured to provide an automation command in response to the automated action plan; - monitor the operation impact of the automation command for the limits on the utilization of resources; and generate a notification when the limits on the utilization have been exceeded, and wherein an end point of the plurality of end points is responsive to the automation command to implement an automated vehicle response.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
Claims 1-3, 5-12, and 14-20 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-11 of copending Application No. 17833614 (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other. Each of the limitation of the copending claims in the above rejection is narrower than claim in the instant application. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to omit elements wherein the remaining elements perform as before. A person of ordinary skill could have arrived at the present claims by omitting the details of the patented claims. See In re Karlson (CCPA) 136 USPQ 184, decided January 16, 1963 ("Omission of element and its function in combination is obvious expedient if remaining elements perform same functions as before").
Instant claim
17833614 claim
1. An apparatus, comprising: - a controller, comprising: - an automation definition circuit structured to interpret an automation description from an external device; - an automation management circuit structured to provide an automated action plan in response to the automation description; and - an automation execution circuit structured to provide an automation command in response to the automated action plan; wherein the automation command is structured to implement an automated vehicle response via an end point of a plurality of end points of a network of a vehicle.
1. A system, comprising: - a vehicle having a network comprising a plurality of end points; - a controller, comprising: - an automation definition circuit structured to interpret an automation description; - an automation management circuit structured to provide an automated action plan in response to the automation description; and - an automation execution circuit structured to provide an automation command in response to the automated action plan; and wherein an end point of the plurality of end points comprises a sensor of the vehicle and wherein the sensor is responsive to the automation command to implement an automated vehicle response.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
Claims 1-3, 5-12, and 14-20 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of copending Application No. 18743848 (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other. Each of the limitation of the copending claims in the above rejection is narrower than claim in the instant application. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to omit elements wherein the remaining elements perform as before. A person of ordinary skill could have arrived at the present claims by omitting the details of the patented claims. See In re Karlson (CCPA) 136 USPQ 184, decided January 16, 1963 ("Omission of element and its function in combination is obvious expedient if remaining elements perform same functions as before").
Instant claim
18743848 claim
1. An apparatus, comprising: - a controller, comprising: - an automation definition circuit structured to interpret an automation description from an external device; - an automation management circuit structured to provide an automated action plan in response to the automation description; and - an automation execution circuit structured to provide an automation command in response to the automated action plan; wherein the automation command is structured to implement an automated vehicle response via an end point of a plurality of end points of a network of a vehicle.
1. A system, comprising: - a vehicle having a network comprising a plurality of end points; and - a controller, comprising: - an automation definition circuit structured to interpret an automation description; - an automation management circuit structured to provide an automated action plan in response to the automation description, and to store the automated action plan as a data file on a data storage communicatively coupled to the controller; and - an automation execution circuit structured to provide an automation command in response to the automated action plan; wherein an end point of the plurality of end points is responsive to the automation command to implement an automated vehicle response.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 3, 5-8, 10, 12, 14-17 and 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Muta et al. (Publication No. US 20190258252 A1; hereafter Muta) in view of TSUJI et al. (Pub. No.: US 2020/0247415 A1).
Regarding to claim 1, Muta teaches an apparatus, comprising:- a controller on a vehicle (fig. 2, “control unit”), comprising: - an automation definition circuit structured to interpret an automation description from a device external to the vehicle; ([Par. 0044], “The operation plan generating unit 1031 acquires the operation command from the management server 400, and the operation plan generating unit 1031 generates the operation plan of itself. The information, which relates to the departure place and the destination given to the moving body 100, is included in the operation command.”)- an automation management circuit structured to provide an automated action plan in response to the automation description, ([Par. 0044], “The operation plan generating unit 1031 acquires the operation command from the management server 400, and the operation plan generating unit 1031 generates the operation plan of itself. The information, which relates to the departure place and the destination given to the moving body 100, is included in the operation command. Therefore, the operation plan generating unit 1031 calculates the moving route of the moving body 100, and the operation plan generating unit 1031 generates the operation plan for moving along the moving route, on the basis of the destination given from the management server 400 and the position of the moving body 100 itself obtained from the position information acquiring unit 102.”)- an automation execution circuit structured to provide an automation command in response to the automated action plan; ([Par. 0048], “The traveling control unit 1033 generates the control command in order to control the autonomous traveling of the moving body 100 on the basis of the operation plan generated by the operation plan generating unit 1031, the environment data generated by the environment detecting unit 1032, and the position information of the moving body 100 acquired by the position information acquiring unit 102. For example, the traveling control unit 1033 generates the control command in order to allow the moving body 100 to travel so that the moving body 100 travels along a predetermined route and any obstacle does not enter a predetermined safe area around the center of the moving body 100.”) and - wherein the automation command is structured to implement an automated vehicle response via an end point of a plurality of end points of a network of the vehicle. ([Par. 0048], “The generated control command is transmitted to the driving unit 104 described later on. As for the method for generating the control command for allowing the moving body to perform the autonomous traveling, it is possible to adopt any known method”). Muta does not explicitly disclose to adjust a stored policy in response to the automation description and that the automation command is provided in response to the adjusted stored policy. However, TSUJI discloses to adjust a stored policy in response to the automation description and that the automation command is provided in response to the adjusted stored policy (TSUJI, paragraph 0051, wherein “in a case in which travel control is to be performed based on a travel plan with a set destination, the ECU 20 can prioritize and select a change mode with less participation by the driver of the vehicle 1 compared to that of a case in which travel control is to be performed based on a travel plan without a set destination. For example, the ECU 20 may select one of the second change mode and the third change mode described above in a case in which travel control is to be performed based on a travel plan with a set destination, and select the first change mode in a case in which travel control is to be performed based on a travel plan without a set destination”; wherein the setting responsible to select the change modes can be the stored policy which is to be selected in response to the existence/absence of set destination (automation description) and the travel control (automation command) is provided based on the selected change mode (adjusted stored policy)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claim invention to modify Muta to incorporate the teaching of TSUJI to achieve the claimed limitation because this would have provided a way to improve the deriving experience by adjusting lane change operation policy in light of travel plan.
Examiner Note: The components labeled as the ‘automation definition circuit,’ ‘automation management circuit,’ and ‘automation execution circuit’ are asserted to form integral parts of a unified controller. Muta 's system, as depicted in paragraph 0105 as an example, accomplishes the described functions through an ‘n electronic control unit (ECU) ' Consequently, it is to be inferred that the ECU inherently encompasses all essential circuits required to execute the aforementioned functions.
As pre claim 3, claim 1 is incorporated and Muta further discloses wherein the automation management circuit is further structured to store a policy responsive to the automated action plan (Fig 3, [Par. 0053-0055], “The environment management DB 106 stores various pieces of information in relation to the working environment in the moving body 100. The information of the traveling condition corresponding to the noise level of the user stored in the environment management DB 106, the information of the traveling condition corresponding to the vibration level, the traveling condition corresponding to the state of the working environment, and the configuration of the work information.”), and wherein the automation execution circuit provides the automation command in response to the policy (Fig 3, [Par. 0093-0094], “the adjusting unit 1035 of the moving body 100 adjusts the working environment. The adjusting unit 1035 can change, for example, the setting temperature of the air conditioner in the moving body 100 depending on the change of the body temperature or the heart rate of the user. Further, if the increase in the blood pressure of the user is detected, the adjusting unit 1035 may decelerate or stop the moving body 100. Further, the adjusting unit 1035 can also adjust the working environment depending on the work information in the same manner as in S102 to S106 shown in FIG. 7, in addition to the adjustment of the working environment based on the biometric information”).
As pre claim 5, claim 1 is incorporated and Muta discloses wherein the automation command comprises an actuator command ([Par. 0038], “The moving body 100 is an autonomous traveling vehicle which performs the autonomous traveling on the basis of a given command. However, the moving body 100 may be a ship or an aircraft (for example, an airplane or a helicopter), provided that the user can perform the working concerning the work in the moving body 100. In this embodiment, the moving body 100 is the vehicle which performs the autonomous traveling on the road. For example, the moving body 100 can accept the utilization request from the user via the user terminal 50, and the moving body 100 can move to a getting-on position designated by the user. When the user gets on the moving body 100, the moving body 100 moves to the destination designated by the user. The route to arrive at the getting-on position or the destination designated by the user is appropriately determined, for example, by the moving body 100 or the management server 400”. Wherein since the command causes the moving of the vehicle the command is considered to be an actuator command as claimed);
As pre claim 6, claim 1 is incorporated and Muta discloses wherein the automation command comprises a data collection command ([Par. 0080, 0083], “the acquiring unit 1034 of the moving body 100 acquires the work information. The work information is the work content relevant to the work to be executed by the user in the moving body 100, and the work information includes the information of the permittable noise level and the permittable vibration level. For example, in the case of the example of the work information table shown in FIG. 5, the permittable noise level is “2” and the permittable vibration level is “3” for the user having the user ID of U001.”);
As pre claim 7, claim 6 is incorporated and Muta further discloses an automation reporting circuit structured to provide, to the external device, at least portion of data collected in response to the data collection command ([Par. 0070, 0072], “the management server 400 has, in its auxiliary storage device, the moving body management DB 403 which stores various pieces of information in relation to the plurality of moving bodies 100 that perform the autonomous traveling. The present position field stores the information for specifying the place at which each of the moving bodies 100 is positioned at the present point in time. Specifically, the present position is the information which relates to the latitude and the longitude for specifying the present position of the moving body 100. Every time when the information about the present position, which is acquired by the position information acquiring unit 102 of the moving body 100, is transmitted from the moving body 100 to the management server 400, the present position field, which corresponds to the moving body 100 in the moving body management DB 403, is updated. The destination field stores the destination of the user who goes by the moving body 100. The management server 400 receives the information of the destination together with the utilization request from the user, and the management server 400 stores the information in the destination field”);
As pre claim 8, claim 1 is incorporated and Muta discloses wherein the automation command comprises a calibration adjustment for at least one of a flow, an application, or a service of a vehicle having the controller ([Par. 0011], “The speed (velocity) or the acceleration/deceleration can be adjusted and the noise and the vibration can be suppressed by changing the traveling route depending on the work content of the user. The traveling route is changed, for example, by avoiding the traffic jam or detouring the road on which any construction site is present or curves are continued. The moving body adjusts the working environment by changing the setting of the equipment of the moving body, the traveling condition, and the traveling route on the basis of the work information including, for example, the levels of the permittable noise and the permittable the vibration”);
Claims 10, 12, 14-17 and 19-20 are rejected under the same rationale as claims 1 and 3, 5-8.
Claim(s) 2 and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Muta et al. (Publication No. US 20190258252 A1; hereafter Muta) in view of TSUJI et al. (Pub. No.: US 2020/0247415 A1) and IWAI et al (Pub. No.: US 2019/0195646 A1).
As pre claim 2, claim 1 is incorporated and Muta does not explicitly disclose an automation reporting circuit structured to provide a confirmation communication to the external device in response to the implementation of the automated vehicle response. However, IWAI discloses an automation reporting circuit structured to provide a confirmation communication to the external device in response to the implementation of the automated vehicle response (IWAI, paragraph 0076, wherein the processing unit 210 confirms whether or not the declaration signal, which is a declaration for performing the recommended action plan (a confirmation), has been received from the vehicle 300 within a predetermined period of time. Wherein the component providing the declaration for performing the recommended action plan can be the automation reporting circuit as claimed).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claim invention to modify Muta to incorporate the teaching of IWAI to achive the claimed limitation because this would have provided a way to track when the vehicle stated to move/drive in according to the given plan which helps to diagnose and resolve problems that can occur after executing the plan and thus user satisfaction is improved.
Claim 11 is rejected under the same rationale as claim 2.
Claim(s) 9 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Muta et al. (Publication No. US 20190258252 A1; hereafter Muta) in view of TSUJI et al. (Pub. No.: US 2020/0247415 A1) and SHIN (Pub. No.: US 2018/0131524 A1).
As pre claim 9, claim 1 is incorporated and Muta does not explicitly disclose wherein the automation management circuit is further structured to determine an authorization of the external device to provide the automation description. However, SHIN discloses wherein the automation management circuit is further structured to determine an authorization of the external device to provide the automation description (SHIN, abstract, wherein a communication protocol is presented that provides secure communications between the vehicle's internal components and external entities. The protocol enables authorization of external servers for in-vehicle ECUs as well as authentication and proof of messages between internal and external components to combat a compromised gateway).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective fling date of the invention to incorporate SHIN into Muta so that an authorization is determined as claimed because this would improve the security of the system by providing secure communications between the vehicle's internal components and external entities (see SHIN abstract);
Claim 18 is rejected under the same rationale as claim 9.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments field on 10/28/2025 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HAMZA N ALGIBHAH whose telephone number is (571)270-7212. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30 am - 3:30 pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Wing Chan can be reached at (571) 272-7493. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/HAMZA N ALGIBHAH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2441