DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
Y 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 made in response to Applicant’s remarks filed on 4/23/2026. Claims 1-5 have been amended. Claims 1-5 are pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s amendments regarding Examiner's rejections under 35 USC 112 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph have been considered, however, Applicant's amended claims are newly rejected under 35 USC 112(b) as discussed in the corresponding section below.
Applicant’s amendments regarding Examiner's rejections under 35 USC 101 have been considered and are accepted in view of the issues raised in the previous action. These rejections are accordingly withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to Examiner's rejections under 35 USC 102 and 103 have been considered but are moot in view of new grounds of 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.
Claims 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites: "An information processing device comprising:
a processor; and
a memory storing executable instructions that cause the processor to
detect that a user of a vehicle has operated a first switch from among a plurality of switches in a secondary manner, wherein
each switch of the plurality of switches being provided in the vehicle to operate a corresponding device from among a plurality of devices installed in the vehicle,
the secondary manner of operating the first switch is an operation of the first switch that does not cause a state of the corresponding device to change in response to the operation of the first switch, because the function of the corresponding device has reached a predetermined state; and
transmit a predetermined action command to a user terminal used by the user in response to detecting the operation on the first switch in the secondary manner, the predetermined action causing the user terminal to perform a predetermined action."
This language is vague and indefinite for at least the following reasons:
Intended Use: The claim contains the following language that is vague and indefinite as it is unclear whether the scope of this language is intended to affirmatively require specific performance or whether this language is deliberately articulated as an expression of intended use:
“each switch of the plurality of switches being provided in the vehicle to operate a corresponding device from among a plurality of devices installed in the vehicle”
Accordingly, this language does not serve to patentably distinguish the claimed structure over that of the reference. See In re Pearson, 181 USPQ 641; In re Yanush, 177 USPQ 705; In re Finsterwalder, 168 USPQ 530; In re Casey, 512 USPQ 235; In re Otto, 136 USPQ 458; Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ 2nd 1647.
Antecedent Basis: The following term(s) lack(s) proper antecedent basis:
“the function”
Although the following language does not necessarily cure the issues discussed above, for purposes of examination under 35 USC 102 and 103, Examiner will interpret this language as reading:
"An information processing device comprising:
a processor; and
a memory storing executable instructions that cause the processor to
detect that a user of a vehicle has operated a first switch from among a plurality of switches in a secondary manner, wherein
each switch of the plurality of switches being provided in the vehicle [intended to operate a corresponding device from among a plurality of devices installed in the vehicle],
the secondary manner of operating the first switch is an operation of the first switch that does not cause a state of the corresponding device to change in response to the operation of the first switch, because a function of the corresponding device has reached a predetermined state; and
transmit a predetermined action command to a user terminal used by the user in response to detecting the operation on the first switch in the secondary manner, the predetermined action causing the user terminal to perform a predetermined action."
Claims 2-5 are further rejected as depending on this claim.
Claim 4 recites: "The information processing device according to claim 3, wherein:
the stored association information further indicates the predetermined action is associated with the type and the secondary manner of operating the first switch; and
the executable instructions further cause the processor to transmit, to the user terminal, the command that causes the user terminal to perform the predetermined action included in the association information in the storage unit when the operation on the first switch in the secondary manner is detected.”
This language is also rejected as vague and indefinite for the same reasons discussed in the rejection of claim 1 above.
Although the following language does not necessarily cure the issues discussed above, for purposes of examination under 35 USC 102 and 103, Examiner will interpret this language as reading:
"The information processing device according to claim 3, wherein:
the stored association information further indicates the predetermined action is associated with the type and the secondary manner of operating the first switch; and
the executable instructions further cause the processor to transmit, to the user terminal, the command that causes the user terminal to perform a predetermined action included in the association information in the storage unit when the operation on the first switch in the secondary manner is detected.”
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 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Fuyuki (JP 2007-186144 A. For purposes of this examination, Examiner will refer to the English language translation of this reference provided with this Office Action).
Regarding claim 1, Fuyuki discloses an information processing device (see e.g. at least Abstract, Fig. 1, and related text) comprising:
a processor (e.g. at least control unit 13, see e.g. at least Fig. 1, and related text); and
a memory storing executable instructions (id.) that cause the processor to
detect that a user of a vehicle has operated a first switch from among a plurality of switches in a secondary manner (see e.g. at least ¶ 14, 18, Fig. 1, 3, and related text, detecting operation of the ignition), wherein
each switch of the plurality of switches being provided in the vehicle [intended to operate a corresponding device from among a plurality of devices installed in the vehicle] (id.),
the secondary manner of operating the first switch is an operation of the first switch that does not cause a state of the corresponding device to change in response to the operation of the first switch, because a function of the corresponding device has reached a predetermined state (id., wherein the engine cannot be started because the vehicle is in a drive restricted state); and
transmit a predetermined action command to a user terminal used by the user in response to detecting the operation on the first switch in the secondary manner, the predetermined action causing the user terminal to perform a predetermined action (id., see also e.g. at least ¶ 15, 18-22, 25-26, transmitting a signal to a security company 20 and cell phone 30 so that the owner of the vehicle can identify the facial image anyone who tries to drive the vehicle).
Regarding claim 2, Fuyuki discloses that the detecting of the operation on the first switch in the second manner includes:
acquiring a type and an operation manner of a target switch from among the plurality of switches (see e.g. at least ¶ 14, 18-22, 25-26, Fig. 1, 3, and related text);
checking, based on the type of the target switch, whether the target switch corresponds to the first switch (id.);
checking, based on the operation manner of the target switch, whether the operation manner of the target switch corresponds to the secondary manner (id.); and
determining that the first switch is operated in the secondary manner in response to successful check on the type and the operation manner of the target switch (id.).
Regarding claim 3, Fuyuki discloses that the memory further stores association information indicating the type of the first switch in association with the secondary manner of operating the first switch and the executable instructions further cause the processor to check the type and the operation manner of the target switch based on the association information (see e.g. at least ¶ 14, 18-22, 25-26, Fig. 1, 3, and related text).
Regarding claim 4, Fuyuki discloses that:
the stored association information further indicates the predetermined action is associated with the type and the secondary manner of operating the first switch (see e.g. at least ¶ 14, 18-22, 25-26, Fig. 1, 3, and related text); and
the executable instructions further cause the processor to transmit, to the user terminal, the command that causes the user terminal to perform a predetermined action included in the association information in the storage unit when the operation on the first switch in the secondary manner is detected (id.).
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.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fuyuki (JP 2007-186144 A) in view of Fuke (US 2019/0053021 A1).
Regarding claim 5, Fuke teaches limitations not expressly disclosed by Fuyuki including namely: that a specific switch is a power window switch (e.g. at least power window switch, see e.g. at least ¶ 42); and
a predetermined method is an operation method that includes closing the power window switch in a state in which a window of the vehicle is fully closed (id.).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the teaching of Fuyuki by configuring that the specific switch is a power window switch; and the predetermined method is an operation method that includes closing the power window switch in a state in which a window of the vehicle is fully closed as taught by Fuke in order to improve the convenience and safety of vehicle operations by automatically switching between validation and restriction of a specific function (Fuke: ¶ 9).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHARLES J HAN whose telephone number is (571) 270-3980. The examiner can normally be reached on M-Th and every other F (7:30 AM - 5 PM).
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Christian Chace can be reached on 571-272-4190. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 900-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/CHARLES J HAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3662
Prosecution Insights