DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-20 are considered in this office action. Claims 1-20 are pending 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 .
Response to Arguments
The arguments filed on 03/10/2026 have been fully considered by the office. The office respectfully disagrees with the applicant’s assertion. The applicant mainly argues that – “Plante teaches that "a trigger is arranged, whereby the occurrence of some incident of interest, such as an automobile accident, causes data stored in the memory buffer to be transferred to a more permanent memory facility." Plante, Column 5, Lines 1-7. When a trigger event occurs in Plante, data in memory is transferred from the memory buffer to a memory of more permanent nature and an expanded timeline is reconstructed as a timeline having at least two frame rates. Plante, Column 5, Lines 58-67. Plante transfers the entire video data set from the buffer memory upon a trigger event, rather than selectively migrating only higher priority data while lower priority data remains in the volatile memory.” The office respectfully disagrees with the applicant. The prior art Plante goes in further detail to clarify the applicant’s argument that the entire video is being sent to the permanent storage (nonvolatile memory) whereas only selected video from accident is being transferred to the permanent storage in Column 7 Line 26-41: “When the buffer contains a data set associated with an important event, that data is transferred from the buffer memory to a more permanent memory before becoming Subject to being lost by overwrite actions. A video series becomes important when a detectable event occurs which implicitly indicates video is valuable; for example, if a vehicle is involved in a traffic accident, accelerometers can detect the accident and trigger a transfer of data from the buffer memory to a permanent memory. In those vehicle event recorder systems, a trigger is sometimes arranged to indicate that such an event has occurred, that is, an event for which the video images associated there with may be of extreme importance. In this case, the short term buffer memory of 120 video frames should be transferred to a more permanent long-term memory for example, a durable flash type memory.” Again, the accident data is being interpreted as the first data with a first priority level which is being transferred to the permanent storage and where as the data before the accident are being interpreted as second data with second priority level and which is not transferred to the permanent storage.
The examiner believes he has responded to all the arguments presented by the applicant at this time. However, if the applicant believes that the examiner has missed any arguments to respond, the applicant is invited to call the examiner directly to expedite the process and support the office for compact prosecution.
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 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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-5, 7-12, 14-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 a1 as being anticipated by Plante (US9226004) and herein after will be referred as Plante.
Regarding Claim 1, Plante teaches an apparatus (Col.4 L15-17: “The present invention relates to apparatus and methods are provided for overwriting memory in vehicle event recorder systems.”) comprising:
a processing system comprising one or more memories and one or more processors coupled to the one or more memories (Col.4 Line 55-58: “Memories of Such video event recording systems are preferably handled in the following manner. A memory system is divided into two portions: a fast, managed loop memory buffer, and a temporary mass storage memory.”), the processing system configured to:
obtain first data associated with a vehicle, the first data associated with a first priority level; obtain second data associated with the vehicle, the second data associated with a second priority level (Col.4 Line 59-66: “Video continuously received from a video camera may be put into the fast memory buffer. However, the amount of data generated by a video system is quite extensive and most of the time totally uninteresting, but certain portions of the video may become of great interest. For example, when a vehicle is involved in a traffic accident, the captured video may yield important clues as to fault, cause, identity, and response, among others. In this event, it is important to preserve video data associated with these select video capture periods.” Also See Fig.6 Here first data is certain portions of the video when a vehicle is involved in the accident and second data is video before the accident have occurred)
and store the first data and second data to a volatile memory of the vehicle (Col.5 Line 4-8: Old data in the memory buffer is continuously overwritten by new data received from the video camera in real-time. In common and simplistic versions, this step is performed in a “first-in, first-overwritten manner.” Here both data is being stored in the memory buffer initially which is interpreted as volatile memory)
upon detection of a data migration trigger event, selectively migrate the first data from the volatile memory to nonvolatile memory of the vehicle in accordance with a prioritization scheme that prioritizes the first data over the second , wherein the second data remains in the volatile memory (Col. 4 Line 63- Col.5 Line 4: “For example, when a vehicle is involved in a traffic accident, the captured video may yield important clues as to fault, cause, identity, and response, among others. In this event, it is important to preserve video data associated with these select video capture periods. To this end, a trigger is arranged, whereby the occurrence of some incident of interest, such as an automobile accident, causes data stored in the memory buffer to be transferred to a more permanent memory facility.” Here when the vehicle is in accident the, accident data is transferred to the permanent memory facility i.e. nonvolatile memory and the data before the accident occurred remain in the memory buffer. See also Col. 7 Line 26-41: “When the buffer contains a data set associated with an important event, that data is transferred from the buffer memory to a more permanent memory before becoming Subject to being lost by overwrite actions. A video series becomes important when a detectable event occurs which implicitly indicates video is valuable; for example, if a vehicle is involved in a traffic accident, accelerometers can detect the accident and trigger a transfer of data from the buffer memory to a permanent memory. In those vehicle event recorder systems, a trigger is sometimes arranged to indicate that such an event has occurred, that is, an event for which the video images associated there with may be of extreme importance. In this case, the short term buffer memory of 120 video frames should be transferred to a more permanent long-term memory for example, a durable flash type memory.”)
Similarly Claims 8 and 15 are rejected on the similar rational.
Regarding Claim 2, Plante teaches the apparatus of claim 1. Plante also teaches wherein the first data indicates one or more of a critical vehicle state associated with the vehicle or a critical driver state associated with a driver of the vehicle, and wherein the second data indicates one or more of a noncritical vehicle state associated with the vehicle or a noncritical driver state associated with the driver (Col.12 L38-47 : “In one embodiment, a trigger mechanism is the device arranged to provide an electrical signal that indo indicates that a particular video series should be transferred to permanent memory for long-term storage. A trigger may be an accelerometer operable for detecting abrupt changes in speed, for example, speed changes related to a traffic accident. Triggers may be activated by other events such as heavy braking or Swerving maneuvers, and may be activated by means other than accelerometers. For example, a user panic button can be used to activate a trigger event.”).
Similarly Claims 9 and 16 are rejected on the similar rational.
Regarding Claim 3, Plante teaches the apparatus of claim 1. Plante also teaches wherein the processing system is further configured to retrieve, the first data from the volatile memory in accordance with a data migration scheme (Col.12 Line 59-66: “When a trigger event occurs, overwrite manager 93 continues to overwrite data to buffer memory 94 in accordance with the timeline definition, by way of an overwrite pointer which is associated with a cell Subject to an impending over write action. Overwrite manager 93 sends a signal.96 to flush module 95 that cause flush module 95 to copy buffer memory 94 and to transfer the video data set with the prescribed expanded timeline to high-capacity long-term storage 97.”).
Similarly Claims 10 and 17 are rejected on the similar rational.
Regarding Claim 4, Plante teaches the apparatus of claim 3. Plante also teaches wherein the data migration scheme indicates that the first data is prioritized for migration from the volatile memory to the nonvolatile memory over other data stored at the volatile memory in accordance with the first data being associated with a more recent timestamp as compared to the other data (Col.5 Line 1-8: “To this end, a trigger is arranged, whereby the occurrence of some incident of interest, Such as an automobile accident, causes data stored in the memory buffer to be transferred to a more permanent memory facility. Old data in the memory buffer is continuously overwritten by new data received from the video camera in real-time. In common and simplistic versions, this step is performed in a “first-in, first-overwritten manner.”).
Similarly Claims 11 and 18 are rejected on the similar rational.
Regarding Claim 5, Plante teaches the apparatus of claim 3. Plante also teaches wherein the data migration scheme indicates that the first data is prioritized for migration from the volatile memory to the nonvolatile memory over other data stored at the volatile memory in accordance with the first data being associated with a more critical event type as compared to the other data (Col.12 Line 59-66 : “When a trigger event occurs, overwrite manager 93 continues to overwrite data to buffer memory 94 in accordance with the timeline definition, by way of an overwrite pointer which is associated with a cell Subject to an impending overwrite action. Overwrite manager 93 sends a signal.96 to flush module 95 that cause flush module 95 to copy buffer memory 94 and to transfer the video data set with the prescribed expanded timeline to high-capacity long-term storage 97.”).
Similarly Claims 12 and 19 are rejected on the similar rational.
Regarding Claim 7, Plante teaches the apparatus of claim 1. Plante also teaches wherein the processing system is further configured to: initiate at least one other operation at the nonvolatile memory; and provide a dedicated command to the nonvolatile memory with the first data, wherein the dedicated command indicates that storing of the first data to the nonvolatile memory is prioritized over the at least one other operation (Col. 12 Line 48-58 : “When the user believes that a video series should be saved, he can hit a panic button to activate one type of trigger. It is not relevant what precisely causes a trigger to be activated, but rather how memory performs once a trigger event has occurred. Overwrite manager 93 is a control module that interfaces with the trigger and a video camera, and also with a buffer memory 94. An overwrite manager includes means where a timeline definition may be set and further means for executing overwrite operations in agreement with the stored timeline definitions. Further, an overwrite manager may additionally integrate with flush-module 95.”).
Similarly Claim 14 is rejected on the similar rational.
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 of this title, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim 6, 13 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Plante in view of Li et al. (DE102020207009A1) and herein after will be referred as Li.
Regarding Claim 6, Plante teaches the apparatus of claim 1. Plante may not expressly teaches wherein the processing system is further configured to store the first data to a secure region of the nonvolatile memory in accordance with a data security protocol
Li teaches wherein the processing system is further configured to store the first data to a secure region of the nonvolatile memory in accordance with a data security protocol (Para [009]: “During the saving step, the encrypted event data can be additionally or alternatively stored in a separate non-volatile storage device as the encrypted permanent event data. Another type of non-volatile storage device is a permanent storage device in which the permanently encrypted event data can be securely stored for a longer period of time, for example, permanently. The non-volatile storage device may be the same as, or different from, the other non-volatile storage device. For example, event data can be stored in encrypted or unencrypted form.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Plante to incorporate the teachings of Li to include securely storing the data in the vehicle. Doing so would optimize the storing of the event data of the vehicle.
Similarly Claim 13 is rejected on the similar rational.
Regarding Claim 20, Plante teaches the non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 15.
Plante teaches using a dedicated command indicating that storing of the first data to the nonvolatile memory is prioritized over at least one other operation associated with the nonvolatile memory (Col.12 L 48-58).
Plante may not expressly teaches wherein the instructions are further executable by the one or more processors to store the first data is stored to a secure region of the nonvolatile memory.
Li teaches wherein the processing system is further configured to store the first data to a secure region of the nonvolatile memory in accordance with a data security protocol (Para [009]: “During the saving step, the encrypted event data can be additionally or alternatively stored in a separate non-volatile storage device as the encrypted permanent event data. Another type of non-volatile storage device is a permanent storage device in which the permanently encrypted event data can be securely stored for a longer period of time, for example, permanently. The non-volatile storage device may be the same as, or different from, the other non-volatile storage device. For example, event data can be stored in encrypted or unencrypted form.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Plante to incorporate the teachings of Li to include securely storing the data in the vehicle. Doing so would optimize the storing of the event data of the vehicle.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ABDHESH K JHA whose telephone number is (571)272-6218. The examiner can normally be reached M-F:0800-1700.
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.
/ABDHESH K JHA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3668
Prosecution Insights