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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 02/23/2026 has been entered.
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 (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 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) 1-4, 15 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhao (US 2021/0343145 A1) in view of Lehn et al. (US 2019/0027037 A1) and OH (US 2021/0201680 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Zhao discloses an apparatus (e.g. Fig. 1: 100) comprising: a memory; and a processor coupled to the memory (e.g. [0042]), wherein the processor is configured to:
receive vehicle data (e.g. Fig. 3A: 302); and
define a parking area within the parking lot for a vehicle to park based on the received vehicle data (e.g. [0027]) and the received sensor data.
Zhao fails to disclose, but Lehn teaches an apparatus configured to receive sensor data of a parking lot (e.g. Abstract & [0096]), and define a parking area within the parking lot for a vehicle to park based on the received sensor data (e.g. Fig. 4 & [0097-0098]).
Thus, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Zhao with the teachings of Lehn to accurately assign an unoccupied parking space to a vehicle to park.
Zhao and Lehn in combination fails to disclose, but OH teaches the processor is configured to transmit a command to turn on a number of light-emitting diodes (LEDs) on signs (e.g. [0063, 0064]: LED on pillars; LED itself is a sign) of the parking lot to guide the vehicle to the defined parking area and indicate the defined parking area in response to the vehicle not having augmented reality (AR) capabilities (This limitation neither require detection of vehicle capability to determine whether the vehicle has AR capabilities nor turn on the LED ONLY when vehicle has not AR capabilities. OH teaches an invention that is capable of “turn on the LED” in response to vehicle have or not having AR capabilities; thus, OH teaches the claimed invention).
Thus, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Zhao with the teachings of OH to guide vehicle to target parking spot effectively.
Regarding claim 2, Zhao discloses the vehicle data includes a year, type, manufacturer, and/or model of the vehicle (e.g. [0031-0033]).
Regarding claim 3, Zhao discloses the processor is configured to determine an area of the vehicle based on the vehicle data (e.g. [0031-0033]: size information).
Regarding claim 4, Lehn teaches the received sensor data is from light detection and ranging (LIDAR) sensors and/or image sensors (e.g. Fig. 2: 30 and [0045, 0088]).
Regarding claim 15, Zhao discloses a method comprising:
receiving a selection of a type of vehicle;
determining an area of a vehicle based on the type of vehicle (e.g. [0031-0033]);
determining free area within the parking lot (e.g .[0027]);
comparing the area of the vehicle to the free area within the parking lot (e.g .[0027]: based on vehicle information and priority to compare and select free area for parking); and
defining a parking area within the free area within the parking lot based on the comparison (e.g. Fig. 3A: 303 & [0027]).
Zhao fails to disclose, but Lehn teaches receiving sensor data from light detection and ranging (LIDAR) sensors in a parking lot (e.g. Fig. 2: 30 and Abstract and [0045, 0088, 0096]).
Thus, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Zhao with the teachings of Lehn to accurately assign an unoccupied parking space to a vehicle to park.
Zhao and Lehn in combination fails to disclose, but OH teaches the processor is configured to transmit a command to turn on a number of light-emitting diodes (LEDs) on signs (e.g. [0063, 0064]: LED on pillars; LED itself is a sign) of the parking lot to guide the vehicle to the defined parking area and indicate the defined parking area in response to the vehicle not having augmented reality (AR) capabilities (This limitation neither require detection of vehicle capability to determine whether the vehicle has AR capabilities nor turn on the LED ONLY when vehicle has not AR capabilities. OH teaches an invention that is capable of “turn on the LED” in response to vehicle have or not having AR capabilities; thus, OH teaches the claimed invention).
Thus, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Zhao with the teachings of OH to guide vehicle to target parking spot effectively.
Regarding claim 20, Zhao discloses determining whether a portion of the vehicle is outside of the defined parking area based on additional sensor data from sensors; and charging a fee based on the portion of the vehicle outside of the defined parking area (e.g. [0036]), and Lehn teaches it is known to utilize LIDAR as sensor in a parking facility.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhao (US 2021/0343145 A1) in view of Lehn et al. (US 2019/0027037 A1) and OH (US 2021/0201680 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Lai et al. (US 2014/0077973 A1) and Choi (US 2020/0180607 A1).
Regarding claim 5, Zhao, Lehn and OH in combination fails to disclose, but Lai teaches the processor is configured to transmit directions to the defined parking area to an application on the vehicle and/or a mobile device (e.g. [0024]).
Thus, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Zhao with the teachings of Lai to improve direction guiding accuracy (e.g. Lai: [0023-0024]).
In addition, Choi teaches the defined parking area is not defined as a parking space in the parking lot prior to the processor defining the parking area (e.g. [0114-0117]: temporary parking zone).
Thus, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Zhao with the teachings of Choi to dispatch vehicle to temporary parking in case of emergency and/or no vacant parking slot in a normal parking zone (Choi: [0117]).
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhao (US 2021/0343145 A1) in view of Lehn et al. (US 2019/0027037 A1) and OH (US 2021/0201680 A1) as applied to claim 1, and further in view of Lai et al. (US 2014/0077973 A1).
Regarding claim 6, Zhao, Lehn and OH in combination fails to disclose, but Lai teaches the processor is configured to transmit directions to the defined parking area to an application on the vehicle and/or a mobile device (e.g. [0024]).
Thus, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Zhao with the teachings of Lai to improve direction guiding accuracy (e.g. Lai: [0023-0024]).
Claim(s) 8 and 10-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhao (US 2021/0343145 A1) in view of Lai et al. (US 2014/0077973 A1) and OH (US 2021/0201680 A1).
Regarding claim 8, Zhao discloses a system (e.g. Abstract) comprising:
A computing device configured to transmit vehicle data (e.g. [0038]: vehicle information directly transmits from vehicle to parking management system); and
A server (e.g. Fig. 1: 101) configured to:
Receive the vehicle data (e.g. [0038]);
Receive sensor data of a parking lot
Zhao fails to disclose, but Lai teaches define a parking area within the parking lot for a vehicle to park based on the received vehicle data and the received sensor data (e.g. [0022]); and display the data corresponding to the defined parking area on the user interface (e.g. [0023]).
Thus, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Zhao with the teachings of Lai to improve direction guiding accuracy (e.g. Lai: [0023-0024]).
Zhao and Lai in combination fails to disclose, but OH teaches the processor is configured to transmit a command to turn on a number of light-emitting diodes (LEDs) on signs (e.g. [0063, 0064]: LED on pillars; LED itself is a sign) of the parking lot to guide the vehicle to the defined parking area and indicate the defined parking area in response to the vehicle not having augmented reality (AR) capabilities (This limitation neither require detection of vehicle capability to determine whether the vehicle has AR capabilities nor turn on the LED ONLY when vehicle has not AR capabilities. OH teaches an invention that is capable of “turn on the LED” in response to vehicle have or not having AR capabilities; thus, OH teaches the claimed invention).
Thus, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Zhao with the teachings of OH to guide vehicle to target parking spot effectively.
Regarding claim 10, Lai teaches the computing device is configured to: install an application (e.g. [0022]); receive the data corresponding to the defined parking area for the vehicle to park within the parking lot via the application (e.g. [0022]); and display the data corresponding to the defined parking area on the user interface via the application (e.g. [0023]).
Zhao and Lai in combination does not explicitly disclose transmit the vehicle data via the application; however, the examiner is taking Official notice that transmitting/communicating data between vehicle and parking management using application is known in the art, since Zhao discloses transmitting vehicle information from vehicle to parking management and Lai teaches receiving parking guide via application from parking management.
Regarding claim 11, Lai teaches an infotainment system including a user interface, wherein the application is installed on the infotainment system (e.g. [0014]: car navigation system).
Regarding claim 12, Lai teaches the data corresponding to the defined parking area including directions to the defined parking area (e.g. [0024]).
Regarding claim 13, Lai teaches the apparatus is the vehicle or a mobile device (e.g. [0014]).
Regarding claim 14, Zhao discloses the processor is configured to: receive a year, type, manufacturer, and/or model of the vehicle; and transmit the year, type, manufacturer, and/or model of the vehicle as the vehicle data (e.g. [0031-0033]).
Claim(s) 16-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhao (US 2021/0343145 A1) in view of Lehn et al. (US 2019/0027037 A1) and OH (US 2021/0201680 A1) as applied to claim 15 above, and further in view of Breed et al. (US 2019/0271550 A1).
Regarding claim 16, Zhao discloses charging a fee for parking, but fails to explicitly discloses the fee is based on the type of vehicle.
Breed teaches the fee is based on the type of vehicle (e.g. [0307]).
Thus, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Zhao with the teachings of Breed to charge parking fee according to type/size of an vehicle, the modification would have yielded only predictable results to one skilled in the art since bigger occupies bigger space that would cost more for parking.
Regarding claim 17, Breed teaches determining a period of time the vehicle is within the parking lot based on additional sensor data from the LIDAR sensors (e.g. [0421]); and charging a fee based on the period of time (e.g. [0307]).
Claim(s) 1, 8-9 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhao (US 2021/0343145 A1) in view of Lai et al. (US 2014/0077973 A1), OH (US 2021/0201680 A1) and Ohyama et al. (US 2023/0221569 A1).
Regarding claims 1, 8 and 15, Zhao discloses a method and a system (e.g. Abstract) comprising:
a computing device configured to transmit vehicle data (e.g. [0038]: vehicle information directly transmits from vehicle to parking management system); and
A server (e.g. Fig. 1: 101) comprising a memory and a processor coupled to the memory (e.g. [0042]), configured to:
Receive the vehicle data (e.g. [0038]);
Receive sensor data of a parking lot
Zhao fails to disclose, but Lai teaches define a parking area within the parking lot for a vehicle to park based on the received vehicle data and the received sensor data (e.g. [0022]); and display the data corresponding to the defined parking area on the user interface (e.g. [0023]).
Thus, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Zhao with the teachings of Lai to improve direction guiding accuracy (e.g. Lai: [0023-0024]).
Zhao and Lai in combination fails to disclose, but OH teaches the processor is configured to transmit a command to turn on a number of light-emitting diodes (LEDs) on signs (e.g. [0063, 0064]: LED on pillars; LED itself is a sign) of the parking lot to guide the vehicle to the defined parking area and indicate the defined parking area.
Thus, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Zhao with the teachings of OH to guide vehicle to target parking spot effectively.
Zhao, Lai and OH in combination fails to explicitly disclose the LED is turned on in response to the vehicle not having augmented reality (AR) capabilities.
However, Ohyama teaches it is known to provide driving information to driver by determining whether AR function of the vehicle has been turned on (e.g. Fig. 32: S102 & [0160]) so as to enhance convenience for driver to receiving information on the display when AR function is enabled, and if the AR function is not available, the system will provide information with alternative method (e.g. Fig. 32: S112 & [0160]).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to provide LED guide as suggested by OH instead of providing guide on AR display as suggested Ohyama when AR function is disabled, since it would be obvious to try to display information on AR display when it is available to conveniently provide information to driver, and utilizing a suitable and available function to provide information to driver is known in the art as taught by Ohyama. The modification would have yielded only predictable results to one skilled in the art.
Regarding claim 9, Ohyama teaches the computing device comprises a user interface that is a head-up-display (HUD) to display the defined parking area (e.g. [0064, 0213]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 02/23/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to applicant’s arguments with respect to amended claims 1, 8 and 15, the examiner disagrees with the following reason(s):
The newly added limitation neither require detection of vehicle capability to determine whether the vehicle has AR capabilities nor turn on the LED ONLY when vehicle has not AR capabilities. OH teaches an invention that is capable of “turn on the LED” in response to vehicle have or not having AR capabilities; thus, OH teaches the claimed invention; and
A separate and new ground of rejections has been made in view of Zhao, Lai, OH and Ohyama for claims 1, 8 and 15.
Claims 2-6, 9-14, 16-17 and 20 are unpatentable in view of forgoing reason(s) and rejections set forth in the Office action.
Conclusion
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, Steven Lim can be reached at 571-270-1210. 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.
/KAM WAN MA/Examiner, Art Unit 2688