DETAILED ACTION
This Office Action is in response to Applicant’s Amendment and Remarks filed on 10/27/2025.
Claims 1 and 4-6 received on 10/27/2025 are considered in this Office Action.
Claims 1 and 4-6 are pending for examination.
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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 02/04/2026 is being considered by the examiner.
Response to Arguments
In response to the Applicant’s amendment, claim interpretation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) is not invoked.
In response to the Applicant’s amendment, claim rejection under 35 U.S.C. 101 is withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1 and 4 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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
The factual inquiries 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, 4 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KANG (US 20230234551 A1), in view of GUNZEL (DE102013209242A1).
The Espacenet English translation of GUNZEL referenced by the Examiner is attached.
Regarding claim 1, KANG teaches a vehicle (FIG. 1; para. [0053]: “exterior of a vehicle according to an exemplary embodiment of the present disclosure”) comprising:
a computer (FIG. 5 Control Device 170; para. [0210]: “The processor 171, the memory 172, and the communicator 173 may be components of a control device for convenient equipment 170”; para. [0037]: “FIG. 5 is a control schematic diagram of a vehicle according to an exemplary embodiment of the present disclosure”; para. [0239]: “In various exemplary embodiments of the present disclosure, each operation described above may be performed by a control device, and the control device may be configured by a plurality of control devices, or an integrated single control device”) configured to:
acquire a captured image of a vehicle-mounted camera or position information of a vehicle (para. [0074]: “A camera 121 for obtaining an image of a surrounding environment may be provided on the exterior of the vehicle 1”; para. [0116]: “The location receiver 127 receives location information for recognizing a current location of the vehicle”) and acquire a speed of the vehicle (para. [0111]: “The speed detector 125 detects a driving speed of the vehicle and outputs driving speed information corresponding to the detected driving speed”);
specify that a vehicle wash machine is present based on the captured image or the position information of the vehicle before the vehicle has entered the vehicle wash machine (FIG. 7; para. [0174]: “As shown in FIG. 7, the processor 171 may recognize an object based on the image information of the camera 121, determine whether the recognized object corresponds to an entrance to a vehicle wash, determine that the current location is the entrance to the vehicle wash upon determining that the recognized object is an object corresponding to the entrance to the vehicle wash, determine whether a distance to the entrance to the vehicle wash is a reference distance based on the detection information of the distance sensor 122”, wherein FIG. 7 shows the vehicle before the vehicle has entered the vehicle wash machine); and
automatically stop a vehicle-mounted function in a vehicle washing mode of the vehicle before the vehicle has entered the vehicle wash machine when (FIG. 7; FIG. 8; para. [0174]-[0175]: “generate the change control signal of the operating state of the at least one electronic device upon determining that the distance to the entrance to the vehicle wash is the reference distance, and transmit the generated change control signal of the operating state to the at least one electronic device […] generate the change control signal of the operating state of the at least one electronic device based on pre-stored vehicle wash preparation information corresponding to the vehicle wash preparation mode”; para. [0178]: “As shown in FIG. 8, the change control signal of the operating state of the at least one electronic device, which is a signal output when the vehicle washing mode is turned on, may include a folding control signal of the side mirror, a closing control signal of the window glass (also referred to as door glass), a closing control signal of the sunroof, a retracting control signal of the door handle, a deactivating control signal of the first sensor (a handle touch sensor), a deactivating control signal of the second sensor (a rain sensor), an indoor air circulation control signal of the air conditioner, a locking control signal of the tailgate, a locking control signal of the door (or sliding door), and a locking control signal of the charging door”),
wherein stopping the vehicle-mounted function includes at least one of turning off power to a raindrop sensor associated with a wiper device of the vehicle or turning off power to a clearance sonar associated with a braking device of the vehicle (FIG. 8; para. [0178]: “a deactivating control signal of the second sensor (a rain sensor),”; para. [0073]: “In other words, the vehicle may further include the second sensor 124 provided on the wiper 119 or the front windshield glass, and the second sensor 124 outputs detection information (i.e., raindrop information and detected precipitation information) corresponding to whether rain falls or not and the amount of precipitation (amount of raindrop), respectively.”), but fails to specifically teach the vehicle is traveling at a predetermined vehicle speed or lower.
However, in the same field of endeavor GUNZEL teaches automatically stop a vehicle-mounted function in a vehicle washing mode of the vehicle before the vehicle has entered the vehicle wash machine (para. [0030]: “The control unit 103 may be configured to detect that the vehicle 100 is approaching a washer and/or wash line and/or that the vehicle 100 is driving a washer and/or wash line. Furthermore, the control unit 103 may be configured to deactivate one or more active driver assistance functions (e.g. the parking aid) before the start of a washing process.”) when the vehicle is traveling at a predetermined vehicle speed or lower (para. [0031]: “The control unit 103 may be configured to determine, on the basis of the environmental sensors 101, 102 and/or on the basis of vehicle sensors, that the vehicle 100 is located in a wash line or approaches a wash line. One or more of the following parameters or criteria or indicators can be used in this case […] Determine (e.g., based on chassis sensors) that the speed of the vehicle is less than or equal to a predefined speed threshold value”) and the vehicle wash machine is present (para. [0033]-[0034]: “Further criteria are listed below […] Detecting the approach or passage of a "gate opening" (e.g. by means of a front camera) […] Determine (e.g., based on a digital map and a GPS receiver, i.e., e.g., using a navigation system of the vehicle) that the vehicle is in proximity to a car wash/gas station”).
KANG and GUNZEL are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of deactivating vehicle functions when approaching a car wash. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified KANG to incorporate the teachings of GUNZEL and add the speed being below a threshold as a criteria to determine whether the vehicle is approaching car wash. Doing so would aid recognizing that the vehicle is approaching the car wash, thus faulty deactivations are avoided (GUNZEL, para. [0017]).
Regarding claim 4, it recites a vehicle control method with claim limitations similar to those performed by vehicle comprising a computer according to claim 1, and therefore is rejected on the same basis.
Regarding claim 6, KANG in view of GUNZEL teaches the vehicle according to claim 1. KANG further teaches wherein the computer is further configured to: determine whether the vehicle is moving away from the vehicle wash machine based on the captured image of the vehicle-mounted camera or the position information of the vehicle (para. [0223]: “determine whether the vehicle washing is completed based on the obtained image information (304)”; para. [0171]: “conclude that the vehicle washing is completed upon determining that the rear obstacle exists within a predetermined distance in a state where the front obstacle does not exist within a predetermined distance”; para. [0165]: “completed upon determining that the recognized object is an object corresponding to the exit of the vehicle wash. Herein, the object corresponding to the exit of the vehicle wash may include information on the object obtained through learning”, wherein vehicle washing is completed indicates whether the vehicle is moving away from the vehicle wash machine); and
shift the vehicle from the vehicle washing mode to a normal running mode wherein the vehicle-mounted function is turned back on when the vehicle is away from the vehicle wash machine (FIG. 3 305; para. [0226]-[0227]: “Upon determining that the vehicle washing is complete, the vehicle controls to be restored the operating state of the at least one electronic device (305). […] ] The vehicle may restore the operating state of the at least one electronic device whose operating state is changed before the vehicle washing mode is performed”).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 5 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Cunningham (US 20240411312 A1) identifies the presence of a carwash in front of the vehicle 10, assists with preparations of the vehicle prior to entering the carwash, assists with maneuvering tasks of the vehicle 10 to enter the carwash at the optimal approach angle, and may assist with operation of the vehicle within, and exit from, the carwash.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREW S KIM whose telephone number is (571)272-7356. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 8AM - 5PM.
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, James J Lee can be reached at (571) 270-5965. 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.
/A.S.K./Examiner, Art Unit 3668
/JAMES J LEE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3668