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 .
Response to Amendment
Rejections Under 35 U.S.C. §101: Applicant’s amendments do not overcome the 101 rejections of record. The rejections under 101 have been maintained.
Rejections Under 35 U.S.C. §103: Claims 1, 8, and 16 have been amended to change the scope of the claimed invention. Specifically, limitations pertaining to “a camera configured to capture images of a vehicle charger external to the vehicle; via the camera by comparing captured images to stored charger identification data, and monitor, via the camera, a human/machine interface of the vehicle charger during execution of the procedure to determine whether the procedure is being performed properly by comparing a sequence of images captured by the camera to a stored sequence of images corresponding to a successful charging procedure, and adjust the instructions based on deviations detected via the camera monitoring” which changes the scope of the claimed invention.
Response to Arguments
Rejections Under 35 U.S.C. §101: Applicant's arguments filed 02/03/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues “Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 on the asserted basis that the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more.
Applicant respectfully traverses the above rejection. Nevertheless, Applicant has amended several of the claims herein.
Amended claim 1 recites:
A vehicle system, comprising:
a vehicle including a human/machine interface;
a camera configured to capture images of a vehicle charger external
to the vehicle; and
one or more controllers including executable instructions stored in
non-transitory memory that cause the one or more controllers to: identify a vehicle charger via the camera by comparing captured images to stored charger identification data and provide instructions via the human/machine interface to instruct a procedure for activating the vehicle charger, where the vehicle charger is external to the vehicle; and
monitor, via the camera, a human/machine interface of the vehicle
charger during execution of the procedure to determine whether the procedure is being performed properly by comparing a sequence of images captured by the camera to a stored sequence of images corresponding to a
successful charging procedure, and
adjust the instructions based on deviations detected via the camera monitoring.
Support for the amendments to claim 1 may be found at least at page 4, lines 10- 23, page 17, lines 1-23, page 18, lines 1-5, page 21, lines 5-8, and Fig. 3 of Applicant's specification.
In rejecting the claims under 35 U.S.C. 101, the Office asserts that the claim limitations constitute "mental processes" because they can be "performed in the human mind, or by a human using a pen and paper." See Office action, page 2. However, as amended, claim 1 recites a specific technological implementation that cannot be performed mentally and that integrates the alleged abstract idea into a practical application.
Amended claim 1 now explicitly recites camera based charger identification, real- time monitoring of external device interface image sequence comparison for procedure validation and dynamic instruction adjustment based on visual feedback. These limitations cannot be performed in the human mind. A human cannot simultaneously capture images via a camera, compare those images to stored charger identification data in a database, monitor a sequence of images of an external device's interface, compare that sequence to stored successful sequences, and dynamically adjust instructions based on detected deviations-all in real-time during a charging procedure. The claim requires the integration of specialized hardware (camera, controllers, non-transitory memory, human/machine interface) performing coordinated functions that are fundamentally technological in nature.
Even if the Office were to maintain that some portion of amended claim 1 recites an abstract idea, which Applicant disputes, the claim as a whole integrates any such exception into a practical application. As set forth in MPEP § 2106.04(d), a claim reciting a judicial exception is not directed to that exception if the claim as a whole integrates the exception into a practical application. Amended claim 1 integrates the identification and instruction process into a practical application by implementing a closed-loop feedback system where the vehicle (a) identifies a charger via camera-based image comparison, (b) provides instructions, (c) monitors execution via real-time camera surveillance of the charger's HMI, (d) compares the monitored sequence to known successful sequences, and (e) adjusts instructions based on detected deviations.
This closed-loop system represents a specific technological implementation that improves the reliability and efficiency of vehicle charging operations. Further, the claim requires a camera to capture images of an external vehicle charger and its human/machine interface, with controllers that process these images in real-time to validate user actions. This is not a generic use of a camera, but rather a specialized application where the camera monitors an external device's interface to provide feedback for a vehicle-based training system. The integration of these components creates a novel system where a vehicle actively monitors and guides a user through operation of an external device (the charger) by visually observing the external device's interface and providing real-time corrective feedback.
In view of the above, Applicant respectfully requests that the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 101 of claim 1, and all claims depending therefrom, be withdrawn.”
Examiner respectfully disagrees, because as currently drafted the claim(s) do not exclude the steps such as “identify a vehicle charger”, “determining whether the procedure is being performed properly by comparing a sequence of images captured by the camera to a stored sequence of images corresponding to a successful charging procedure” and “adjusting the instructions” from being performed in the human mind and/or by a human with the aid of pen and paper as these are observation, evaluation, and/or judgement processes which the human mind is capable of performing (see at least MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)) and can reasonably be interpreted as making an identification based on observing data, determining if a task is being completed correctly based on observed data, and judging whether to change (adjust) instructions based on the determination (evaluation) of whether a task is completed properly.
Claim limitations pertaining to (b) providing instructions and (c) monitoring execution via real-time camera surveillance of the charger's HMI further are evaluated as additional elements and therefore would have to be analyzed on whether they integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. The hardware elements such as the camera, controllers, non-transitory memory, and human/machine interface, as the claim(s) are currently drafted, are recited at a high level of generality. Also the limitation of providing instructions can reasonably be interpreted as displaying/outputting of data and the limitation of monitoring execution via real-time camera surveillance of the charger's HMI can reasonably be interpreted as mere data gathering which are both forms of insignificant extra-solution activity which would not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application.
Further the elements such as “real- time monitoring”, “simultaneously capture images” and “dynamically adjust instructions based on detected deviations-all in real-time during a charging procedure” that Applicant has reference in the arguments as being the features that are beyond the capability of the human mind are not clearly drafted in the claims, but the corresponding limitations instead are recited at a high generality that do not require the specific time elements such as “real-time”.
Further, the high level of generality of the hardware elements such as the camera, controllers, non-transitory memory, and human/machine interface would not amount to specific technological implementation that improves the reliability and efficiency of vehicle charging operations as in order to show an improvement to the functioning of a computer or any other technology or technical field “the claims must recite the details regarding how a computer aids the method, the extent to which the computer aids the method, or the significance of a computer to the performance of the method. Merely adding generic computer components to perform the method is not sufficient. Thus, the claim must include more than mere instructions to perform the method on a generic component or machinery to qualify as an improvement to an existing technology” (see at least MPEP §2106.05 (a) and MPEP §2106.05 (f)). Specifically the claims as drafted, merely recite instructions to perform a method for a vehicle based training system for charging a vehicle on generic components (controller) or machinery (camera, non-transitory memory, and human/machine interface. Therefore due to the hardware elements as the camera, controllers, non-transitory memory, and human/machine interface being recited at a high generality and the mere recitation of instructions to perform the method on these generic components for example providing instructions and monitoring execution via real-time camera surveillance of the charger's HMI, the claim would not qualify as an improvement in the technology of vehicle charging operations.
Applicant also argues “Turning to amended claim 8, amended claim 8 recites:
A method for a vehicle, comprising:
via a camera mounted on the vehicle, capturing images of a vehicle
charger external to the vehicle;
via one or more controllers, identifying the vehicle charger by
comparing the captured images to stored charger identification data, where
the vehicle charger is external to the vehicle; and
communicating a procedure to activate the vehicle charger via a
human/machine interface of the vehicle;
monitoring, via the camera, a human/machine interface of the
vehicle charger during execution of the procedure;
determining, via the controller whether the procedure is being
performed properly by comparing a sequence of images captured by the camera to a stored sequence of images corresponding to a successful
charging procedure; and
adjusting, via the controller, the instructions based on deviations
detected via the camera monitoring.
Support for amended claim 8 may be found at least at page 4, lines 10-23, page 17, lines 1-23, page 18, lines 1-5, page 21, lines 5-8, and Fig. 3 of Applicant's specification.
Applicant asserts that amended claim 8 recites a method that includes similar technological improvements as those discussed above with respect to amended claim 1. For the same reasons as those discussed above with respect to amended claim 1, amended claim 8 is not directed to an abstract idea, or alternatively, integrates any alleged abstract idea into a practical application by providing a specific technological solution to a technical problem. The method recites specific technological steps that improve vehicle charging technology through camera-based monitoring and real-time validation of charging procedures.
In view of the above, Applicant respectfully requests that the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 101 of claim 8, and all claims depending therefrom, be withdrawn.”
Examiner respectfully disagrees for similar reasons as stated above with respect to claim 1.
Applicant further argues “Turning to amended claim 16, amended claim 16 recites:
A vehicle system, comprising:
a vehicle including an actuator configured to generate audible
output;
a camera configured to capture images of a vehicle charger external
to the vehicle; and
one or more controllers within the vehicle including executable
instructions stored in non-transitory memory that cause the one or more
controllers to:
identify the vehicle charger via the camera, communicate instructions for proceeding through a vehicle charging procedure via the actuator, where the instructions are based on the identified vehicle charger external to the vehicle;
monitor, via the camera, a human/machine interface of the vehicle charger during execution of the vehicle charging procedure; and
determine whether the vehicle charging procedure is being performed properly by comparing a sequence of images captured by the camera to a stored seqeuence of images corresponding to a successful charging procedure; and
adjust the instructions based on deviations detected via the camera monitoring.
Support for the amendments to claim 16 may be found at least at page 4, lines 10- 23, page 17, lines 1-23, page 18, lines 1-5, page 21, lines 5-8, and Fig. 3 of Applicant's specification.
As with amended claims 1 and 8, these limitations cannot be performed mentally
and represent a specific technological implementation that improves vehicle charging systems. The combination of audible instruction output with visual monitoring of the external charger's interface creates a multimodal feedback system that guides users through unfamiliar charging procedures while validating their actions in real-time.
In rejecting claim 16 under 35 U.S.C. 101, the Office asserts that the claim limitations constitute "methods of organizing human activity" because the claim "covers managing personal behavior or interaction between people but for the recitation of generic computer components." See Office action, page 3. Applicant respectfully disagrees.
The Office's characterization of amended claim 16 as directed to "managing personal behavior or interaction between people" fundamentally mischaracterizes the claimed invention. Amended claim 16 is not directed to organizing human activity, but rather to a specific technological system that addresses the technical problem of electric vehicle charging infrastructure incompatibility through automated, real-time monitoring and adaptive instruction.
The Office's assertion that the claim "amounts to managing personal behavior or interaction between people" conflates the result of the system (a user successfully charging a vehicle) with the technological means by which that result is achieved. The claim is not directed to the abstract concept of following instructions or managing behavior. Rather, it is directed to a specific technological system that uses camera-based monitoring, image processing, and adaptive control to solve the technical problem of charger incompatibility in electric vehicle infrastructure. By the Office's reasoning, virtually any vehicle assistance system could be characterized as "managing personal behavior."
Even if some aspect of the claim could be characterized as relating to human instruction, which Applicant disputes, the claim as a whole integrates any such concept into a practical application by implementing a particular machine. The claim recites a specific configuration of hardware components including a camera, an audible actuator, controllers, and memory that work together in a coordinated manner to perform functions that are not generic computer functions. The camera is specifically configured to capture images of an external charger's HMI, the controllers process these images in real-time to validate procedure execution, and the actuator provides adaptive audible instructions based on the visual monitoring.
Further, the claim integrates any alleged abstract idea into a practical application by addressing the technical problem of electric vehicle charging infrastructure incompatibility, a problem that exists specifically in the technological domain of electric vehicle charging systems. The solution is technical: using camera-based monitoring and image sequence comparison to validate charging procedures and provide adaptive guidance. The integration of the camera specifically configured and positioned to monitor an external device's interface during a charging procedure, the controllers that perform specialized image processing, and the audible actuator creates a system where the vehicle actively monitors and guides a user through operation of an external device by visually observing the external device's interface and providing real-time corrective feedback. This is not a generic application of computer technology, but a specific technological solution to a technical problem.
For at least the reasons presented above, Applicant respectfully requests that the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 101 of claim 16, and all claims depending therefrom, be withdrawn.”
Examiner respectfully disagrees, that “As with amended claims 1 and 8, these limitations cannot be performed mentally and represent a specific technological implementation that improves vehicle charging systems. The combination of audible instruction output with visual monitoring of the external charger's interface creates a multimodal feedback system that guides users through unfamiliar charging procedures while validating their actions in real-time” for reasons as stated above with respect to claim 1.
Examiner also respectfully disagrees, that “The Office's characterization of amended claim 16 as directed to "managing personal behavior or interaction between people" fundamentally mischaracterizes the claimed invention. Amended claim 16 is not directed to organizing human activity, but rather to a specific technological system that addresses the technical problem of electric vehicle charging infrastructure incompatibility through automated, real-time monitoring and adaptive instruction” because as drafted the claim(s) can reasonably be interprets as pertaining to managing personal behavior as the claim(s) monitors, via a camera, a human/machine interface of the vehicle charger during execution of the procedure to determine whether the procedure is being performed properly by comparing a sequence of images captured by the camera to a stored sequence of images corresponding to a successful charging procedure, and based on this monitor of this execution of the procedures adjusts instructions which under the broadest reasonable interpretation pertains to teaching and/or following rules or instructions which is a form of managing personal behaviors or relationships or interactions between people (see at least MPEP §2106.04 (a)).
Further in order to qualify as a particular machine the additional elements must integrate the exception into a practical application or provide significantly more than the judicial exception and must include more than mere instructions to perform the method on a generic component(s) or machinery. The hardware components including a camera, an audible actuator, controllers, and memory are recited at a high generality and therefore similar to arguments presented above with respect claim 1 the claim as a whole amounts to mere recitation of instructions to perform a method on these generic components and therefore would not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application or provide significantly more than the judicial exception. Therefore the 101 rejections are maintained.
Rejections Under 35 U.S.C. §103: Applicant's arguments filed 02/03/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues “None of the cited references, even if considered in combination, disclose or suggest a system configured to "identify a vehicle charger via the camera by comparing captured images to stored charger identification data," as required by amended claim 1. In rejecting previously presented claim 1, the Office cites Hanshik at paragraph [0087] as teaching identification of a vehicle charger. Whether or not Hanshik teaches identifying a vehicle charger, Hanshik does not disclose identifying "a vehicle charger via the camera by comparing captured images to stored charger identification data." Hanshik's system identifies "an area corresponding to a charging station image in images surrounding a vehicle" and outputs "charging station-related information into the identified area by use of augmented reality technology." See Hanshik, paragraph [0087]. This is an augmented reality display system, not a charger identification system based on comparing captured images to stored charger identification data. Hanshik's system captures images for the purpose of overlaying augmented reality information onto a display showing the charging station location. The system does not teach nor suggest comparing captured images to stored charger identification data to identify the specific type, model, manufacturer, or operating characteristics of a charger. The remaining cited references fail to cure the deficiencies of Hanshik.”
Examiner respectfully disagrees, as Hanshik teaches "identify a vehicle charger via the camera by comparing captured images to stored charger identification data," as Hanshik teaches identifying a charger image in an image by using artificial intelligence image analysis technology and the artificial intelligence image analysis technology may be configured to extract a shape similar to the shape of a charger, included in past conventional charging station image information received from the driving information management server 201 (see at least Hanshik, [0098]).
Examiner interprets that comparing captured images is encompassed at least by extract a shape similar to the shape of a charger, included in past conventional charging station image information and stored charger identification data is encompassed at least by past conventional charging station image information received from the driving information management server 201.
Applicant’s further arguments with respect to claims 1, 8, and 16 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 Objections
Claim 16 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 16 (line 15) “seqeuence” should read “sequence”
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more.
Claims 1, 8, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. §101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Claim 1 (Currently amended) A vehicle system, comprising: a vehicle including a human/machine interface; a camera configured to capture images of a vehicle charger external to the vehicle; and one or more controllers including executable instructions stored in non-transitory memory that cause the one or more controllers to: identify a vehicle charger via the camera by comparing captured images to stored charger identification data and provide instructions via the human/machine interface to instruct a procedure for activating the vehicle charger, where the vehicle charger is external to the vehicle, and monitor, via the camera, a human/machine interface of the vehicle charger during execution of the procedure to determine whether the procedure is being performed properly by comparing a sequence of images captured by the camera to a stored sequence of images corresponding to a successful charging procedure, and adjust the instructions based on deviations detected via the camera monitoring.
Claim 8 (Currently amended) A method for a vehicle, comprising: via a camera mounted on the vehicle, capturing images of a vehicle charger external to the vehicle; via one or more controllers, identifying [[a]]the vehicle charger by comparing the captured images to stored charger identification data, where the vehicle charger is external to the vehicle; and communicating a procedure to activate the vehicle charger via a human/machine interface of the vehicle; monitoring, via the camera, a human/machine interface of the vehicle charger during execution of the procedure; determining, via the controller, whether the procedure is being performed properly by comparing a sequence of images captured by the camera to a stored sequence of images corresponding to a successful charging procedure; and adjusting, via the controller, the instructions based on deviations detected via the camera monitoring.
Claim 16 (Currently amended) A vehicle system, comprising: a vehicle including an actuator configured to generate audible output; a camera configured to capture images of a vehicle charger external to the vehicle; and one or more controllers within the vehicle including executable instructions stored in non-transitory memory that cause the one or more controllers to: identify the vehicle charger via the camera, communicate instructions for proceeding through a vehicle charging procedure via the actuator, where the instructions are based on [[a]]the identified vehicle charger external to the vehicle; monitor, via the camera, a human/machine interface of the vehicle charger during execution of the vehicle charging procedure; and determine whether the vehicle charging procedure is being performed properly by comparing a sequence of images captured by the camera to a stored seqeuence of images corresponding to a successful charging procedure; and adjust the instructions based on deviations detected via the camera monitoring.
101 Analysis - Step 1: Statutory category – Yes
The claims 1, 8, and 16 recite a vehicle system, a method for a vehicle, and a vehicle system respectively. The claim falls within one of the four statutory categories (see at least MPEP 2106.03).
101 Analysis - Step 2A Prong one evaluation: Judicial Exception – Yes – Mental processes and Certain methods of organizing human activity
In Step 2A, Prong one of the 2019 Patent Eligibility Guidance (PEG), a claim is to be analyzed to determine whether it recites subject matter that falls within one of the following groups of abstract ideas: a) mathematical concepts, b) mental processes, and/or c) certain methods of organizing human activity.
The Office submits that the foregoing bolded limitation(s) constitutes judicial exceptions in terms of “mental processes” because under its broadest reasonable interpretation, the limitations can be “performed in the human mind, or by a human using a pen and paper”. See MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III)
The claims recites the limitation of “identifying”, “comparing”, “determining” and “adjusting the instructions”. This limitation, as drafted, is a simple process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of “by the controller”. That is, other than reciting “by a controller” nothing in the claim elements precludes the step from practically being performed in the mind. For example, but for the “by the controller” language, the claim encompasses a person looking at data collected, determining whether a task is completed properly, and forming a simple judgement (adjusting the instruction) based on the determination. The mere nominal recitation of by a controller does not take the claim limitations out of the mental process grouping.
Thus, the claim recites a mental process.
The claims as drafted, is a process that, under the broadest reasonable interpretation, covers a method of organizing human activity (i.e. managing personal behavior including following rules or instructions) but for recitation of generic computer components. That is, other than reciting a system implemented by a controller, the claimed invention amounts to managing personal behavior or interaction between people. For example, but for the controller, the claim encompasses determining steps to activate (use) a charger. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers managing personal behavior or interactions between people but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the “method of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea.
101 Analysis - Step 2A Prong two evaluation: Practical Application - No
In Step 2A, Prong two of the 2019 PEG, a claim is to be evaluated whether, as a whole, it integrates the recited judicial exception into a practical application. As noted in MPEP 2106.04(d), it must be determined whether any additional elements in the claim beyond the abstract idea integrate the exception into a practical application in a manner that imposes a meaningful limit on the judicial exception, such that the claim is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the judicial exception. The courts have indicated that additional elements such as: merely using a computer to implement an abstract idea, adding insignificant extra solution activity, or generally linking use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use do not integrate a judicial exception into a “practical application.”
The Office submits that the foregoing underlined limitation(s) recite additional elements that do not integrate the recited judicial exception into a practical application.
The claim(s) recites additional elements or steps of to capture images of a vehicle charger external to the vehicle; provide instructions via the human/machine interface to instruct a procedure for activating the vehicle charger, where the vehicle charger is external to the vehicle, monitor, via the camera, a human/machine interface of the vehicle charger during execution of the procedure, and to generate audible output. The receiving (capturing and/or monitoring) steps from the cameras are recited at a high level of generality (i.e. as a general means of gathering data for use in the evaluating step), and amount to mere data gathering, which is a form of insignificant extra-solution activity. The displaying results (providing and/or generating) step on through the human/machine interface and/or actuator are also recited at a high level of generality (i.e. as a general means of displaying the instructions from the evaluating step), and amounts to mere post solution displaying, which is a form of insignificant extra-solution activity. The “vehicle system” merely describes how to generally “apply” the otherwise mental judgements using a generic or general-purpose vehicle control environment, i.e. a computer. The vehicle system is recited at a high level of generality and is merely automates the evaluating step.
Accordingly, even in combination, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea.
101 Analysis - Step 2B evaluation: Inventive concept - No
In Step 2B of the 2019 PEG, a claim is to be evaluated as to whether the claim, as a whole, amounts to significantly more than the recited exception, i.e., whether any additional element, or combination of additional elements, adds an inventive concept to the claim. See MPEP 2106.05.
As discussed with respect to Step 2A Prong Two, the additional elements in the claim amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. The same analysis applies here in 2B, i.e., mere instructions to apply an exception on a generic computer cannot integrate a judicial exception into a practical application at Step 2A or provide an inventive concept in Step 2B.
Under the 2019 PEG, a conclusion that an additional element is insignificant extra-solution activity in Step 2A should be re-evaluated in Step 2B. Here, the receiving steps and the displaying step were considered to be insignificant extra-solution activity in Step 2A, and thus they are re-evaluated in Step 2B to determine if they are more than what is well-understood, routine, conventional activity in the field. The sensors, human/machine interface, camera, and actuator are recited at a high generality and do not indicate anything other than conventional elements mounted on a vehicle, and the specification does not provide any indication that the vehicle controller is anything other than a conventional computer within a vehicle. MPEP 2106.05(d)(II), and the cases cited therein, including Intellectual Ventures I, LLC v. Symantec Corp., 838 F.3d 1307, 1321 (Fed. Cir. 2016), TLI Communications LLC v. AV Auto. LLC, 823 F.3d 607, 610 (Fed. Cir. 2016), and OIP Techs., Inc., v. Amazon.com, Inc., 788 F.3d 1359, 1363 (Fed. Cir. 2015), indicate that mere collection or receipt of data over a network is a well‐understood, routine, and conventional function when it is claimed in a merely generic manner (as it is here). Further, the Federal Circuit in Trading Techs. Int’l v. IBG LLC, 921 F.3d 1084, 1093 (Fed. Cir. 2019), and Intellectual Ventures I LLC v. Erie Indemnity Co., 850 F.3d 1315, 1331 (Fed. Cir. 2017), for example, indicated that the mere displaying of data is a well understood, routine, and conventional function. Accordingly, a conclusion that the collecting step is well-understood, routine, conventional activity is supported under Berkheimer.
Thus, the claim is ineligible.
Dependent Claims
Dependent claims 2-7, 9-15, and 17-20 do not recite any further limitations that cause the claim(s) to be patent eligible. Rather, the limitations of the dependent claims are directed toward additional aspects of the judicial exception and/or well-understood, routine and conventional additional elements that do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application such as mere post solution displaying/outputting similar to that detailed above and further limitations pertaining to receiving data which is a form of insignificant extra-solution activity. Therefore, dependent claims 2-7, 9-15, and 17-20 are not patent eligible under the same rationale as provided for in the rejection of independent claims 1, 8, and 16.
Therefore, claims 2-7, 9-15, and 17-20 are ineligible under 35 USC §101.
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.
Claims 1, 4, 7-8, 10, 14, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hanshik et al. (US2025/0191413A1) in view of Yaldo et al. (US2020/0324667A1) in further view of Zahid et al. (US2025/0296588A1), hereinafter Hanshik, Yaldo, and Zahid respectively.
Regarding claim 1, (Currently amended) Hanshik teaches a vehicle system, comprising: a vehicle including a human/machine interface (see at least [0041] “The driving information display apparatus 101 according to the exemplary embodiment of the present disclosure may be provided inside a means of transportation such as a vehicle” and [0044] “As shown in the drawing, the driving information display apparatus 101 according to the exemplary embodiment of the present disclosure may include...an output unit 140.” also see at least [0060] “The output unit 140 may be implemented as a head-up display (HUD), a cluster, an audio, video and navigation (AVN) system, a human-machine interface (HMI), and/or the like.”); a camera configured to capture images of a vehicle charger external to the vehicle (see at least [0091] “To capture the accurate state of a charger, the processor 110 may perform control to select one camera from a plurality of cameras attached to an electric vehicle based on information related to the direction in which the charging port of the electric vehicle is located and capture an image of the charger.” also see at least Fig.3 and Fig.4); and one or more controllers including executable instructions stored in non-transitory memory that cause the one or more controllers to (see at least [0047] “The processor 110 may be electrically connected to the storage unit 120 and the communication unit 130, may electrically control the individual components, may be an electric circuit which executes software commands, and may perform various types of data processing and determination to be described later. The processor 110 may be, for example, an electronic control unit (ECU), a micro-controller unit (MCU), or another lower level controller which is mounted on a means of transportation.” also see at least [0181] “In various exemplary embodiments of the present disclosure, the scope of the present disclosure includes software or machine-executable commands (e.g., an operating system, an application, firmware, a program, etc.) for enabling operations according to the methods of various embodiments to be executed on an apparatus or a computer, a non-transitory computer-readable medium including such software or commands stored thereon and executable on the apparatus or the computer.”): identify a vehicle charger via the camera by comparing captured images to stored charger identification data (see at least [0098] “To the present end, the processor 110 may use artificial intelligence image analysis technology which can identify a charger image in an image. It is not limited by a specific method. However, the artificial intelligence image analysis technology may be configured to extract a shape similar to the shape of a charger, included in past conventional charging station image information received from the driving information management server 201, from an image”) where the vehicle charger is external to the vehicle (see at least Fig.6B).
Examiner interprets that a human/machine interface is encompassed at least by an output unit 140, one or more controllers is encompassed at least by processor 110, non-transitory memory is encompassed at least by storage unit 120, vehicle charger is encompassed at least by charging station and/or charger, and stored charger identification data is encompassed at least by past conventional charging station image information.
Hanshik does not explicitly teach provide instructions via the human/machine interface to instruct a procedure for activating the vehicle charger, and monitor, via the camera, a human/machine interface of the vehicle charger during execution of the procedure to determine whether the procedure is being performed properly by comparing a sequence of images captured by the camera to a stored sequence of images corresponding to a successful charging procedure, and adjust the instructions based on deviations detected via the camera monitoring.
Yaldo more explicitly teaches provide instructions via the human/machine interface to instruct a procedure for activating the vehicle charger (see at least [0063] “In various embodiments, the processing module 220 provides information regarding the pairings and the instructions for charging of the vehicles using the charging stations to the vehicles and charging stations (and/or respective users and/or owners thereof) as outputs 225 of the processing module 220.”). Yaldo suggests monitor, via the camera, a human/machine interface of the vehicle charger during execution of the procedure to determine whether the procedure is being performed properly by comparing a sequence of images captured by the camera to a stored sequence of images corresponding to a successful charging procedure (see at least [0089] “Also in various embodiments, during the charging, monitoring is performed at 326 with respect to both the electric vehicle and the charging station, for use in updating their respective ratings. In various embodiments, video images are obtained via a camera onboard the vehicle with respect to the use of the charging station (and as to before and after conditions of the charging station), and data is collected via sensors onboard the electric vehicle as to performance of the charging station. Accordingly, in various embodiments, monitoring is performed as to whether the user of the electric vehicle has properly used the charging station in a timely manner and left the charging station in good condition,” also see at least [0070]).
Examiner interprets that provide instructions to instruct a procedure for activating the vehicle charger is encompassed at least by the instructions for charging of the vehicles using the charging stations and monitor, via the camera, a human/machine interface of the vehicle charger during execution of the procedure to determine whether the procedure is being performed properly by comparing a sequence of images captured by the camera to a stored sequence of images corresponding to a successful charging procedure is suggested at least by monitoring is performed as to whether the user of the electric vehicle has properly used the charging station.
Zahid teaches monitor during execution of the procedure to determine whether the procedure is being performed properly (see at least [0106] “monitoring a behavior of the vehicle after displaying the notification with the instruction to perform the action to determine an adherence of a driver of the vehicle to the instruction, and displaying a second notification via the display device of the vehicle based on the adherence of the driver of the vehicle to the instruction in 249D.”) and adjust the instructions based on deviations detected via the camera monitoring (see at least [0085] “In some embodiments, after more real-time data is gathered, the system may recommend a different instruction for a different vehicle based on the monitored behavior of the vehicle 120.”).
Examiner interprets that determine whether the procedure is being performed properly is encompassed at least by determine an adherence of a driver of the vehicle to the instruction and adjust the instructions based on deviations detected via the camera monitoring is encompassed at least by recommend a different instruction for a different vehicle based on the monitored behavior.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teaching of Hanshik of teaches a vehicle system, comprising: a vehicle including a human/machine interface; a camera configured to capture images of a vehicle charger external to the vehicle; and one or more controllers including executable instructions stored in non-transitory memory that cause the one or more controllers to: identify a vehicle charger via the camera by comparing captured images to stored charger identification data where the vehicle charger is external to the vehicle with the teaching of provide instructions via the human/machine interface to instruct a procedure for activating the vehicle charger found in the Yaldo, the suggested teaching of monitor, via the camera, a human/machine interface of the vehicle charger during execution of the procedure to determine whether the procedure is being performed properly by comparing a sequence of images captured by the camera to a stored sequence of images corresponding to a successful charging procedure found in Yaldo, and the teaching of monitor during execution of the procedure to determine whether the procedure is being performed properly and adjust the instructions based on deviations detected via the camera monitoring found in Zahid. One could combine the teachings in order to have a vehicle system, comprising: a vehicle including a human/machine interface; a camera configured to capture images of a vehicle charger external to the vehicle; and one or more controllers including executable instructions stored in non-transitory memory that cause the one or more controllers to: identify a vehicle charger via the camera by comparing captured images to stored charger identification data and provide instructions via the human/machine interface to instruct a procedure for activating the vehicle charger, where the vehicle charger is external to the vehicle, and monitor, via the camera, a human/machine interface of the vehicle charger during execution of the procedure to determine whether the procedure is being performed properly by comparing a sequence of images captured by the camera to a stored sequence of images corresponding to a successful charging procedure, and adjust the instructions based on deviations detected via the camera monitoring with a reasonable expectation of success. One would have been motivated to do so in order to improve methods and systems for charging electric vehicles (see at least Yaldo, [0003]-[0004]). One would have also been motivated to do so in order to improve user experience when interacting with a vehicle charger.
Regarding claim 4, (Original) the combination of Hanshik, Yaldo, and Zahid teaches the vehicle system of claim 1 as detailed above.
Hanshik teaches where the vehicle charger is identified via a wireless connection between the one or more controllers and the vehicle charger (see at least [0109]-[0110] “The connection setup unit 210 sets up connections to exchange information with the driving information display apparatuses 101 of a plurality of electric vehicles. The connection setup unit 210 sets up connections with the communication units 130 of the driving information display apparatuses 101 over a wired or wireless communication network, and is not limited to a specific type of communication. The charging station information storage unit 220 stores information for identifying charging stations and charging station images received from the driving information display apparatuses 101 of the plurality of electric vehicles over the set-up connections.”).
Examiner interprets that wireless connection is encompassed at least wireless communication network.
Regarding claim 7, (Original) the combination of Hanshik, Yaldo, and Zahid teaches the vehicle system of claim 1 as detailed above.
Hanshik does not explicitly teach further comprising additional executable instructions that cause the one or more controllers to recognize the procedure is being performed properly.
However, Yaldo more explicitly teaches further comprising additional executable instructions that cause the one or more controllers to recognize the procedure is being performed properly (see at least [0089] “In various embodiments, video images are obtained via a camera onboard the vehicle with respect to the use of the charging station...in various embodiments, monitoring is performed as to whether the user of the electric vehicle has properly used the charging station,” also see at least [0070]).
Examiner interprets that additional executable instructions that cause the one or more controllers to recognize the procedure is being performed properly is encompassed at least by monitoring is performed as to whether the user of the electric vehicle has properly used the charging station.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hanshik with the teaching of further comprising additional executable instructions that cause the one or more controllers to recognize the procedure is being performed properly found in Yaldo. One could combine the teachings in order to have a vehicle system of claim 1, further comprising additional executable instructions that cause the one or more controllers to recognize the procedure is being performed properly with a reasonable expectation of success. One would have been motivated to do so in order to improve methods and systems for charging electric vehicles (see at least Yaldo, [0003]-[0004]). One would have also been motivated to do so in order to improve user experience when interacting with a vehicle charger.
Regarding claim 8, (Currently amended) Hanshik teaches a method for a vehicle, comprising: via a camera mounted on the vehicle, capturing images of a vehicle charger external to the vehicle (see at least [0091] “To capture the accurate state of a charger, the processor 110 may perform control to select one camera from a plurality of cameras attached to an electric vehicle based on information related to the direction in which the charging port of the electric vehicle is located and capture an image of the charger.” also see at least Fig.3 and Fig.4); via one or more controllers, identifying [[a]]the vehicle charger by comparing the captured images to stored charger identification data (see at least [0098] “To the present end, the processor 110 may use artificial intelligence image analysis technology which can identify a charger image in an image. It is not limited by a specific method. However, the artificial intelligence image analysis technology may be configured to extract a shape similar to the shape of a charger, included in past conventional charging station image information received from the driving information management server 201, from an image”), where the vehicle charger is external to the vehicle (see at least Fig.6B).
Examiner interprets that one or more controllers is encompassed at least by processor 110, non-transitory memory is encompassed at least by storage unit 120, vehicle charger is encompassed at least by charging station and/or charger, and stored charger identification data is encompassed at least by past conventional charging station image information.
Hanshik does not explicitly teach communicating a procedure to activate the vehicle charger via a human/machine interface of the vehicle; monitoring, via the camera, a human/machine interface of the vehicle charger during execution of the procedure; determining, via the controller, whether the procedure is being performed properly by comparing a sequence of images captured by the camera to a stored sequence of images corresponding to a successful charging procedure; and adjusting, via the controller, the instructions based on deviations detected via the camera monitoring.
Yaldo more explicitly teaches communicating a procedure to activate the vehicle charger via a human/machine interface of the vehicle (see at least [0063] “In various embodiments, the processing module 220 provides information regarding the pairings and the instructions for charging of the vehicles using the charging stations to the vehicles and charging stations (and/or respective users and/or owners thereof) as outputs 225 of the processing module 220.”). Yaldo suggests monitoring, via the camera, a human/machine interface of the vehicle charger during execution of the procedure; determining, via the controller, whether the procedure is being performed properly by comparing a sequence of images captured by the camera to a stored sequence of images corresponding to a successful charging procedure (see at least [0089] “Also in various embodiments, during the charging, monitoring is performed at 326 with respect to both the electric vehicle and the charging station, for use in updating their respective ratings. In various embodiments, video images are obtained via a camera onboard the vehicle with respect to the use of the charging station (and as to before and after conditions of the charging station), and data is collected via sensors onboard the electric vehicle as to performance of the charging station. Accordingly, in various embodiments, monitoring is performed as to whether the user of the electric vehicle has properly used the charging station in a timely manner and left the charging station in good condition,” also see at least [0070]).
Examiner interprets that provide instructions to instruct a procedure for activating the vehicle charger is encompassed at least by the instructions for charging of the vehicles using the charging stations, and monitor, via the camera, a human/machine interface of the vehicle charger during execution of the procedure to determine whether the procedure is being performed properly by comparing a sequence of images captured by the camera to a stored sequence of images corresponding to a successful charging procedure is suggested at least by monitoring is performed as to whether the user of the electric vehicle has properly used the charging station.
Zahid teaches monitoring, during execution of the procedure; determining, via the controller, whether the procedure is being performed properly (see at least [0106] “monitoring a behavior of the vehicle after displaying the notification with the instruction to perform the action to determine an adherence of a driver of the vehicle to the instruction, and displaying a second notification via the display device of the vehicle based on the adherence of the driver of the vehicle to the instruction in 249D.”); and adjusting, via the controller, the instructions based on deviations detected via the camera monitoring (see at least [0085] “In some embodiments, after more real-time data is gathered, the system may recommend a different instruction for a different vehicle based on the monitored behavior of the vehicle 120.”).
Examiner interprets that determine whether the procedure is being performed properly is encompassed at least by determine an adherence of a driver of the vehicle to the instruction and adjust the instructions based on deviations detected via the camera monitoring is encompassed at least by recommend a different instruction for a different vehicle based on the monitored behavior.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teaching of Hanshik of a method for a vehicle, comprising: via a camera mounted on the vehicle, capturing images of a vehicle charger external to the vehicle; via one or more controllers, identifying [[a]]the vehicle charger by comparing the captured images to stored charger identification data, where the vehicle charger is external to the vehicle with the teaching of communicating a procedure to activate the vehicle charger via a human/machine interface of the vehicle found in Yaldo, the suggested teaching of monitoring, via the camera, a human/machine interface of the vehicle charger during execution of the procedure; determining, via the controller, whether the procedure is being performed properly by comparing a sequence of images captured by the camera to a stored sequence of images corresponding to a successful charging procedure found in Yaldo, and the teaching of monitoring, during execution of the procedure; determining, via the controller, whether the procedure is being performed properly; and adjusting, via the controller, the instructions based on deviations detected via the camera monitoring found in Zahid. One could combine the teachings in order to have a method for a vehicle, comprising: via a camera mounted on the vehicle, capturing images of a vehicle charger external to the vehicle; via one or more controllers, identifying [[a]]the vehicle charger by comparing the captured images to stored charger identification data, where the vehicle charger is external to the vehicle; and communicating a procedure to activate the vehicle charger via a human/machine interface of the vehicle; monitoring, via the camera, a human/machine interface of the vehicle charger during execution of the procedure; determining, via the controller, whether the procedure is being performed properly by comparing a sequence of images captured by the camera to a stored sequence of images corresponding to a successful charging procedure; and adjusting, via the controller, the instructions based on deviations detected via the camera monitoring with a reasonable expectation of success. One would have been motivated to do so in order to improve methods and systems for charging electric vehicles (see at least Yaldo, [0003]-[0004]). One would have also been motivated to do so in order to improve user experience when interacting with a vehicle charger.
Regarding claim 10, (Original) the combination of Hanshik, Yaldo, and Zahid teaches the method of claim 8 as detailed above.
Hanshik suggests where communicating the procedure includes providing audible instructions (see at least [0060] “The output unit 140 may be implemented as a head-up display (HUD), a cluster, an audio, video and navigation (AVN) system, a human-machine interface (HMI), and/or the like.”).
Examiner interprets that providing audible instructions is suggested at least by an audio, video and navigation (AVN) system.
However, Yaldo suggests communicating the procedure includes providing audible instructions (see at least [0052] “speaker 28 provides audible output to the vehicle occupants and can be either a standalone speaker specifically dedicated for use with the telematics unit 24 or can be part of a vehicle audio component 64. In either event, microphone 26 and speaker 28 enable vehicle hardware 20 and remote server 18 to communicate with the occupants through audible speech.”).
Examiner interprets that providing audible instructions is suggested at least by communicate with the occupants through audible speech.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the suggested teaching of Hanshik of communicating the procedure includes providing audible instructions with the suggested teaching of the same found in Yaldo and the teaching of communicating a procedure to activate the vehicle charger via a human/machine interface of the vehicle found in Yaldo. One could combine the teachings in order to have a method where communicating the procedure includes providing audible instructions with a reasonable expectation of success. One would have been motivated to do so in order to improve methods and systems for charging electric vehicles (see at least Yaldo, [0003]-[0004]). One would have also been motivated to do so in order to improve user experience when interacting with a vehicle charger.
Regarding claim 14, (Original) the combination of Hanshik, Yaldo, and Zahid teaches the method of claim 8 as detailed above.
Hanshik suggests where the human/machine interface provides audible instructions to communicate the procedure (see at least [0060] “The output unit 140 may be implemented as a head-up display (HUD), a cluster, an audio, video and navigation (AVN) system, a human-machine interface (HMI), and/or the like.”).
Examiner interprets that human/machine interface is encompassed at least by output unit 140 and providing audible instructions is suggested at least by an audio, video and navigation (AVN) system.
However, Yaldo suggests where the human/machine interface provides audible instructions to communicate the procedure (see at least [0052] “speaker 28 provides audible output to the vehicle occupants and can be either a standalone speaker specifically dedicated for use with the telematics unit 24 or can be part of a vehicle audio component 64. In either event, microphone 26 and speaker 28 enable vehicle hardware 20 and remote server 18 to communicate with the occupants through audible speech.”).
Examiner interprets that providing audible instructions is suggested at least by communicate with the occupants through audible speech.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the suggested teaching of Hanshik of c where the human/machine interface provides audible instructions to communicate the procedure with the suggested teaching of the same found in Yaldo and the teaching of communicating a procedure to activate the vehicle charger via a human/machine interface of the vehicle found in Yaldo. One could combine the teachings in order to have a method where the human/machine interface provides audible instructions to communicate the procedure with a reasonable expectation of success. One would have been motivated to do so in order to improve methods and systems for charging electric vehicles (see at least Yaldo, [0003]-[0004]). One would have also been motivated to do so in order to improve user experience when interacting with a vehicle charger.
Regarding claim 16, (Currently amended) Hanshik teaches a vehicle system, comprising: a camera configured to capture images of a vehicle charger external to the vehicle (see at least [0091] “To capture the accurate state of a charger, the processor 110 may perform control to select one camera from a plurality of cameras attached to an electric vehicle based on information related to the direction in which the charging port of the electric vehicle is located and capture an image of the charger.” also see at least Fig.3 and Fig.4); and one or more controllers within the vehicle including executable instructions stored in non-transitory memory that cause the one or more controllers to (see at least [0047] “The processor 110 may be electrically connected to the storage unit 120 and the communication unit 130, may electrically control the individual components, may be an electric circuit which executes software commands, and may perform various types of data processing and determination to be described later. The processor 110 may be, for example, an electronic control unit (ECU), a micro-controller unit (MCU), or another lower level controller which is mounted on a means of transportation.” also see at least [0181] “In various exemplary embodiments of the present disclosure, the scope of the present disclosure includes software or machine-executable commands (e.g., an operating system, an application, firmware, a program, etc.) for enabling operations according to the methods of various embodiments to be executed on an apparatus or a computer, a non-transitory computer-readable medium including such software or commands stored thereon and executable on the apparatus or the computer.”): identify the vehicle charger via the camera (see at least [0098] “To the present end, the processor 110 may use artificial intelligence image analysis technology which can identify a charger image in an image. It is not limited by a specific method. However, the artificial intelligence image analysis technology may be configured to extract a shape similar to the shape of a charger, included in past conventional charging station image information received from the driving information management server 201, from an image”).
Examiner interprets that one or more controllers is encompassed at least by processor 110, non-transitory memory is encompassed at least by storage unit 120, and vehicle charger is encompassed at least by charging station and/or charger
Hanshik suggests a vehicle including an actuator configured to generate audible output (see at least [0060] “The output unit 140 may be implemented as a head-up display (HUD), a cluster, an audio, video and navigation (AVN) system, a human-machine interface (HMI), and/or the like.”).
Examiner interprets that actuator configured to generate audible output is suggested at least by an audio, video and navigation (AVN) system.
Hanshik does not explicitly teach communicate instructions for proceeding through a vehicle charging procedure via the actuator, where the instructions are based on [[a]]the identified vehicle charger external to the vehicle; monitor, via the camera, a human/machine interface of the vehicle charger during execution of the vehicle charging procedure; and determine whether the vehicle charging procedure is being performed properly by comparing a sequence of images captured by the camera to a stored seqeuence of images corresponding to a successful charging procedure; and adjust the instructions based on deviations detected via the camera monitoring.
Yaldo more explicitly teaches a vehicle including an actuator configured to generate audible output (see at least [0052] “speaker 28 provides audible output to the vehicle occupants and can be either a standalone speaker specifically dedicated for use with the telematics unit 24 or can be part of a vehicle audio component 64. In either event, microphone 26 and speaker 28 enable vehicle hardware 20 and remote server 18 to communicate with the occupants through audible speech.”); communicate instructions for proceeding through a vehicle charging procedure via the actuator, where the instructions are based on [[a]]the identified vehicle charger external to the vehicle (see at least [0063] “In various embodiments, the processing module 220 provides information regarding the pairings and the instructions for charging of the vehicles using the charging stations to the vehicles and charging stations (and/or respective users and/or owners thereof) as outputs 225 of the processing module 220.”). Yaldo suggests monitor, via the camera, a human/machine interface of the vehicle charger during execution of the vehicle charging procedure; and determine whether the vehicle charging procedure is being performed properly by comparing a sequence of images captured by the camera to a stored seqeuence of images corresponding to a successful charging procedure (see at least [0089] “Also in various embodiments, during the charging, monitoring is performed at 326 with respect to both the electric vehicle and the charging station, for use in updating their respective ratings. In various embodiments, video images are obtained via a camera onboard the vehicle with respect to the use of the charging station (and as to before and after conditions of the charging station), and data is collected via sensors onboard the electric vehicle as to performance of the charging station. Accordingly, in various embodiments, monitoring is performed as to whether the user of the electric vehicle has properly used the charging station in a timely manner and left the charging station in good condition,” also see at least [0070]).
Examiner interprets that actuator configured to generate audible output is encompassed at least by speaker 28, communicate instructions for proceeding through a vehicle charging procedure via the actuator is encompassed at least by the instructions for charging of the vehicles using the charging stations, and monitor, via the camera, a human/machine interface of the vehicle charger during execution of the procedure to determine whether the procedure is being performed properly by comparing a sequence of images captured by the camera to a stored sequence of images corresponding to a successful charging procedure is suggested at least by monitoring is performed as to whether the user of the electric vehicle has properly used the charging station.
Zahid teaches monitor, during execution of the vehicle charging procedure; and determine whether the vehicle charging procedure is being performed properly (see at least [0106] “monitoring a behavior of the vehicle after displaying the notification with the instruction to perform the action to determine an adherence of a driver of the vehicle to the instruction, and displaying a second notification via the display device of the vehicle based on the adherence of the driver of the vehicle to the instruction in 249D.”); and adjust the instructions based on deviations detected via the camera monitoring (see at least [0085] “In some embodiments, after more real-time data is gathered, the system may recommend a different instruction for a different vehicle based on the monitored behavior of the vehicle 120.”).
Examiner interprets that determine whether the procedure is being performed properly is encompassed at least by determine an adherence of a driver of the vehicle to the instruction and adjust the instructions based on deviations detected via the camera monitoring is encompassed at least by recommend a different instruction for a different vehicle based on the monitored behavior.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teaching of Hanshik of a vehicle system, comprising: a camera configured to capture images of a vehicle charger external to the vehicle; and one or more controllers within the vehicle including executable instructions stored in non-transitory memory that cause the one or more controllers to: identify the vehicle charger via the camera and the suggested teaching of Hanshik of a vehicle including an actuator configured to generate audible output with the teaching of teaches a vehicle including an actuator configured to generate audible output; communicate instructions for proceeding through a vehicle charging procedure via the actuator, where the instructions are based on [[a]]the identified vehicle charger external to the vehicle found in Yaldo, the suggested teaching of monitor, via the camera, a human/machine interface of the vehicle charger during execution of the vehicle charging procedure; and determine whether the vehicle charging procedure is being performed properly by comparing a sequence of images captured by the camera to a stored seqeuence of images corresponding to a successful charging procedure found in Yaldo, and the teaching of monitor, during execution of the vehicle charging procedure; and determine whether the vehicle charging procedure is being performed properly; and adjust the instructions based on deviations detected via the camera monitoring found in Zahid. One could combine the teachings in order to have a vehicle system, comprising: a vehicle including an actuator configured to generate audible output; a camera configured to capture images of a vehicle charger external to the vehicle; and one or more controllers within the vehicle including executable instructions stored in non-transitory memory that cause the one or more controllers to: identify the vehicle charger via the camera, communicate instructions for proceeding through a vehicle charging procedure via the actuator, where the instructions are based on [[a]]the identified vehicle charger external to the vehicle; monitor, via the camera, a human/machine interface of the vehicle charger during execution of the vehicle charging procedure; and determine whether the vehicle charging procedure is being performed properly by comparing a sequence of images captured by the camera to a stored seqeuence of images corresponding to a successful charging procedure; and adjust the instructions based on deviations detected via the camera monitoring with a reasonable expectation of success. One would have been motivated to do so in order to improve methods and systems for charging electric vehicles (see at least Yaldo, [0003]-[0004]). One would have also been motivated to do so in order to improve user experience when interacting with a vehicle charger.
Claims 2 and 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hanshik et al. (US2025/0191413A1) in view of Yaldo et al. (US2020/0324667A1) in view of Zahid et al. (US2025/0296588A1) in further view of Halker et al. (US2015/0278038A1), hereinafter Hanshik, Yaldo, Zahid, and Halker respectively.
Regarding claim 2, (Original) the combination of Hanshik, Yaldo, and Zahid teaches the vehicle system of claim 1 as detailed above.
Hanshik does not explicitly teach where activating the vehicle charger includes flowing charge from the vehicle charger to the vehicle.
However, Halker more explicitly teaches where activating the vehicle charger includes flowing charge from the vehicle charger to the vehicle (see at least [0290] “First, at block 3302, a wireless charging device receives an indication to initiate wireless power transfer for charging an electric vehicle.” and [0226]-[0227] “the DLU 330 can provide or generate an instruction to the ICU 316 to start charging...the ICU 316 can manage wireless charging parameters through the VPC 314.” also see at least [0261] “the vehicle segment 320 can receive wireless charging power from the charging station segment 310. More particularly, the VPC 314 can receive wireless charging power from the PSU 304 for charging the battery 318.”).
Examiner interprets that includes flowing charge from the vehicle charger to the vehicle is encompassed at least by wireless power transfer for charging an electric vehicle, the vehicle segment 320 can receive wireless charging power from the charging station segment 310, and/or the VPC 314 can receive wireless charging power from the PSU 304.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hanshik with the teaching of where activating the vehicle charger includes flowing charge from the vehicle charger to the vehicle found in Halker. One could combine the teachings in order to have a vehicle system where activating the vehicle charger includes flowing charge from the vehicle charger to the vehicle with a reasonable expectation of success. One would have been motivated to do so in order to improve methods and systems for charging electric vehicles (see at least Yaldo, [0003]-[0004]). One would have also been motivated to do so in order to improve user experience and convenience (see at least Halker, [0135] and [0186]).
Regarding claim 17, (Original) the combination of Hanshik, Yaldo, and Zahid teaches the vehicle system of claim 16 as detailed above.
Hanshik does not explicitly teach further comprising additional executable instructions that cause the one or more controllers to: communicate instructions to adjust a position of the vehicle with respect to the vehicle charger.
However, Halker teaches further comprising additional executable instructions that cause the one or more controllers to: communicate instructions to adjust a position of the vehicle with respect to the vehicle charger (see at least [0223] “The DLU 330 can receive and/or generate a user instruction to start alignment, and can provide the instruction to the ICU 316.” and [0130] “As a result of pairing with the correct base wireless charging system 102A before alignment or guidance, the communication link can be used to communicate guidance and alignment information to allow an operator of the electric vehicle 112 to move into the correct position for charging.” also see at least [0133]).
Examiner interprets that instructions to adjust a position of the vehicle with respect to the vehicle charger is encompassed at least by instruction to start alignment and/or guidance and alignment information to allow an operator of the electric vehicle 112 to move into the correct position for charging.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hanshik with the teaching of further comprising additional executable instructions that cause the one or more controllers to: communicate instructions to adjust a position of the vehicle with respect to the vehicle charger found in Halker. One could combine the teachings in order to have a vehicle system further comprising additional executable instructions that cause the one or more controllers to: communicate instructions to adjust a position of the vehicle with respect to the vehicle charger with a reasonable expectation of success. One would have been motivated to do so in order to improve user experience and convenience (see at least Halker, [0135] and [0186]).
Regarding claim 18, (Original) the combination of Hanshik, Yaldo, Zahid, and Halker teaches the vehicle system of claim 17 as detailed above.
Hanshik does not explicitly teach where the instructions are communicated via a human/machine interface.
However, Halker more explicitly teaches where the instructions are communicated via a human/machine interface (see at least [0223] “The DLU 330 can receive and/or generate a user instruction to start alignment, and can provide the instruction to the ICU 316.” and [0161] “In FIG. 4D, the electric vehicle 402 positions itself over the base pad 405 to align a vehicle pad of the electric vehicle 402 (e.g., vehicle pad 312) with the base pad 405. During the process, a driver of the electric vehicle 402 can view the alignment process on a display unit or human machine interface, for example, the DLU 330 of FIG. 3A. The DLU 330 can allow the driver to make steering or location adjustments to better align with the charging station 404.” also see at least [0162] and [0258]).
Examiner interprets that human/machine interface is encompassed at least by DLU 330.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hanshik with the teaching of where the instructions are communicated via a human/machine interface found in Halker. One could combine the teachings in order to have a vehicle system where the instructions are communicated via a human/machine interface with a reasonable expectation of success. One would have been motivated to do so in order to improve user experience and convenience (see at least Halker, [0135] and [0186]).
Regarding claim 19, (Original) the combination of Hanshik, Yaldo, Zahid, and Halker teaches the vehicle system of claim 17 as detailed above.
Hanshik teaches further comprising additional executable instructions that cause the one or more controllers to: monitor the vehicle charger via a camera (see at least [0009] “An object of the present disclosure is to extract a charging station image from an image obtained through a camera of an electric vehicle and provide a charging station image corresponding to the success of charging to a driver so that the driver can check the accurate state of a charging station.” and [0091] “To capture the accurate state of a charger, the processor 110 may perform control to select one camera from a plurality of cameras attached to an electric vehicle based on information related to the direction in which the charging port of the electric vehicle is located and capture an image of the charger.” also see at least [0088]).
Examiner interprets that monitoring the vehicle charger is encompassed at least by capturing image of the charger and/or checking the charging station state and/or the charger state, and vehicle charger is encompassed at least by charging station and/or charger.
Claims 3, 9, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hanshik et al. (US2025/0191413A1) in view of Yaldo et al. (US2020/0324667A1) in view of Zahid et al. (US2025/0296588A1) in further view of Austin (US2022/0216529A1), hereinafter Hanshik, Yaldo, Zahid, and Austin respectively.
Regarding claim 3, (Original) the combination of Hanshik, Yaldo, and Zahid teaches the vehicle system of claim 1 as detailed above.
Hanshik does not explicitly teach where the procedure for activating the vehicle charger includes instructions to navigate through menus of the vehicle charger.
However, Austin more explicitly teaches where the procedure for activating the vehicle charger includes instructions to navigate through menus of the vehicle charger (see at least [0126] “navigation between screens 440 on the display 432 is enabled by navigation buttons on the screens. For example, the screen 440 shown in FIG. 14 includes two navigation buttons 478, 480 like those of the illustrated embodiment of FIGS. 2, 5-11 and 15 described above. By pressing one of the navigation buttons 478 (entitled "PROGRAMMED CHARGE SETUP"), the screen 440 is replaced by a charge programming screen (not shown) having any or all of the indicators and selectors 42, 54, 56, 58, 82, 84, 86, 88, 90,100,102,104,110,112, and/or 114 described above in connection with the second screen 40A in FIG. 10. These indicators and selectors can have the same or any other arrangement upon the programming screen. By pressing the other navigation button 480 (entitled "UTILITIES"), the screen 440 is replaced by a utilities screen (also not shown) having any or all of the indicators and selectors 42,54, 56, 58,116,118,120,122,124,126,128,130,132, and/or 134 described above in connection with the third screen 40B in FIG. 11. These indicators and selectors can have the same or any other arrangement upon the utilities screen.” also see at least [0083]).
Examiner interprets that navigate through menus of the vehicle charger is encompassed at least by navigation between screens.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hanshik with the teaching of where the procedure for activating the vehicle charger includes instructions to navigate through menus of the vehicle charger found in Austin. One could combine the teachings in order to have a vehicle system where the procedure for activating the vehicle charger includes instructions to navigate through menus of the vehicle charger with a reasonable expectation of success. One would have also been motivated to do so in order to improve user experience when interacting with a vehicle charger.
Regarding claim 9, (Original) the combination of Hanshik, Yaldo, and Zahid teaches the method of claim 8 as detailed above.
Hanshik does not explicitly teach where the procedure provides directions to maneuver through one or more menus of the vehicle charger.
However, Austin more explicitly teaches where the procedure provides directions to maneuver through one or more menus of the vehicle charger (see at least [0126] “navigation between screens 440 on the display 432 is enabled by navigation buttons on the screens. For example, the screen 440 shown in FIG. 14 includes two navigation buttons 478, 480 like those of the illustrated embodiment of FIGS. 2, 5-11 and 15 described above. By pressing one of the navigation buttons 478 (entitled "PROGRAMMED CHARGE SETUP"), the screen 440 is replaced by a charge programming screen (not shown) having any or all of the indicators and selectors 42, 54, 56, 58, 82, 84, 86, 88, 90,100,102,104,110,112, and/or 114 described above in connection with the second screen 40A in FIG. 10. These indicators and selectors can have the same or any other arrangement upon the programming screen. By pressing the other navigation button 480 (entitled "UTILITIES"), the screen 440 is replaced by a utilities screen (also not shown) having any or all of the indicators and selectors 42,54, 56, 58,116,118,120,122,124,126,128,130,132, and/or 134 described above in connection with the third screen 40B in FIG. 11. These indicators and selectors can have the same or any other arrangement upon the utilities screen.” also see at least [0083]).
Examiner interprets that navigate through menus of the vehicle charger is encompassed at least by navigation between screens.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hanshik with the teaching of where the procedure provides directions to maneuver through one or more menus of the vehicle charger found in Austin. One could combine the teachings in order to have a method where the procedure provides directions to maneuver through one or more menus of the vehicle charger with a reasonable expectation of success. One would have also been motivated to do so in order to improve user experience when interacting with a vehicle charger.
Regarding claim 15, (Original) the combination of Hanshik, Yaldo, and Zahid teaches the method of claim 8 as detailed above.
Hanshik does not explicitly teach further comprising storing to controller memory steps performed that resulted in activating the vehicle charger.
However, Austin teaches further comprising storing to controller memory steps performed that resulted in activating the vehicle charger (see at least [0170] “At step 43, the controller 44 can receive charge time and other settings entered by a user via the display 32 and associated navigation buttons 36, 38, and in some embodiments can store such settings in memory 106 (at 45).”).
Examiner interprets that steps performed that resulted in activating the vehicle charger is encompassed at least by storing such settings in memory 106.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hanshik with the teaching of further comprising storing to controller memory steps performed that resulted in activating the vehicle charger found in Austin. One could combine the teachings in order to have a method further comprising storing to controller memory steps performed that resulted in activating the vehicle charger with a reasonable expectation of success. One would have been motivated to do so in order to improve operational efficiency and reliability.
Claims 5, 6, 12, and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hanshik et al. (US2025/0191413A1) in view of Yaldo et al. (US2020/0324667A1) in view of Zahid et al. (US2025/0296588A1) in further view of Zhu et al. (US2025/0058660A1), hereinafter Hanshik, Yaldo, Zahid, and Zhu respectively.
Regarding claim 5, (Currently amended) the combination of Hanshik, Yaldo, and Zahid teaches the vehicle system of claim 1 as detailed above.
Hanshik does not explicitly teach wherein identifying the vehicle charger comprises identifying a type of vehicle charger
However, Zhu more explicitly teaches wherein identifying the vehicle charger comprises identifying a type of vehicle charger see at least [0074] “For example, a type, a structure, and a profile feature of the charging station are pre-stored in the processor. After analyzing the obtained image information of the environment centered on the location of the vehicle with the radius being 20 meters, the processor determines, after identifying that the vehicle environment information includes the charging station,” and [0117] “In an example, as shown in FIG. 6, an in-vehicle image device captures an image of a charging connector held by a person, and the processor determines the type of the charging connector based on the captured image of the charging connector.”).
Examiner interprets that identifying a type of vehicle charger is encompassed at least by determines the type of the charging connector.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hanshik with the teaching of wherein identifying the vehicle charger comprises identifying a type of vehicle charger found in Zhu. One could combine the teachings in order to have a vehicle system wherein identifying the vehicle charger comprises identifying a type of vehicle charger with a reasonable expectation of success. One would have also been motivated to do so in order to improve user experience (see at least Zhu, [0113]).
Regarding claim 6, (Currently amended) the combination of Hanshik, Yaldo, and Zahid teaches the vehicle system of claim 1 as detailed above.
Hanshik teaches wherein comparing the captured images to the stored charger identification data comprises comparing charger attributes from the vehicle charger to a list of known charger attributes from the stored charger identification datasee at least [0112] “The charging station information storage unit 220 analyzes the received charging station image and stores the charging station image only when the image includes a charging station and the image quality of the image is equal to or greater than a reference value. To check whether the image includes a charging station, it may be possible to check whether an area having the characteristics of a charger is present by comparing the image with a conventional charging station image stored in the charging station information storage unit 220.”).
Examiner interprets that comparing charger attributes from the vehicle charger is encompassed at least by check whether an area having the characteristics of a charger and a list of known charger attributes from the stored charger identification data is encompassed at least by a conventional charging station image stored in the charging station information storage unit 220.
However, Zhu more explicitly teaches wherein comparing the captured images to the stored charger identification data comprises comparing charger attributes from the vehicle charger to a list of known charger attributes from the stored charger identification datasee at least [0142] “For example, the in-vehicle image device captures an image of the vehicle environment information, for example, captures an image of a charging station body, the charging connector, and a charging wire. The processor compares the vehicle environment information collected by the in-vehicle image device with comparison information, to determine a type of the charging station. The comparison information is direct current charging station information and alternating current charging station information. The comparison information may be obtained in real time by the processor, or may be information pre-stored in the processor.”).
Examiner interprets that charger attributes from the vehicle charger is encompassed at least by a charging station body, the charging connector, and a charging wire and a list of known charger attributes from the stored charger identification data is encompassed at least by comparison information is direct current charging station information and alternating current charging station information.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teaching of Hanshik of wherein comparing the captured images to the stored charger identification data comprises comparing charger attributes from the vehicle charger to a list of known charger attributes from the stored charger identification data with the more explicit teaching of the same found in Zhu. One could combine the teachings in order to have a vehicle wherein comparing the captured images to the stored charger identification data comprises comparing charger attributes from the vehicle charger to a list of known charger attributes from the stored charger identification data with a reasonable expectation of success. One would have also been motivated to do so in order to improve user experience (see at least Zhu, [0113]).
Regarding claim 12, (Currently amended) the combination of Hanshik, Yaldo, and Zahid teaches the method of claim 8 as detailed above.
Hanshik does not explicitly teach wherein identifying the vehicle charger comprises identifying a type of vehicle charger
However, Zhu more explicitly teaches wherein identifying the vehicle charger comprises identifying a type of vehicle charger see at least [0074] “For example, a type, a structure, and a profile feature of the charging station are pre-stored in the processor. After analyzing the obtained image information of the environment centered on the location of the vehicle with the radius being 20 meters, the processor determines, after identifying that the vehicle environment information includes the charging station,” and [0117] “In an example, as shown in FIG. 6, an in-vehicle image device captures an image of a charging connector held by a person, and the processor determines the type of the charging connector based on the captured image of the charging connector.”).
Examiner interprets that identifying a type of vehicle charger is encompassed at least by determines the type of the charging connector.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hanshik with the teaching of wherein identifying the vehicle charger comprises identifying a type of vehicle charger found in Zhu. One could combine the teachings in order to have a method wherein identifying the vehicle charger comprises identifying a type of vehicle charger with a reasonable expectation of success. One would have also been motivated to do so in order to improve user experience (see at least Zhu, [0113]).
Regarding claim 13, (Currently amended) the combination of Hanshik, Yaldo, and Zahid teaches the method of claim 12 as detailed above.
Hanshik teaches where comparing the captured images to the stored charger identification data comprises comparing charger attributes from the vehicle charger to a list of known charger attributes from the stored charger identification data see at least [0112] “The charging station information storage unit 220 analyzes the received charging station image and stores the charging station image only when the image includes a charging station and the image quality of the image is equal to or greater than a reference value. To check whether the image includes a charging station, it may be possible to check whether an area having the characteristics of a charger is present by comparing the image with a conventional charging station image stored in the charging station information storage unit 220.”).
Examiner interprets that comparing charger attributes from the vehicle charger is encompassed at least by check whether an area having the characteristics of a charger and a list of known charger attributes from the stored charger identification data is encompassed at least by a conventional charging station image stored in the charging station information storage unit 220.
However, Zhu more explicitly teaches where comparing the captured images to the stored charger identification data comprises comparing charger attributes from the vehicle charger to a list of known charger attributes from the stored charger identification data see at least [0142] “For example, the in-vehicle image device captures an image of the vehicle environment information, for example, captures an image of a charging station body, the charging connector, and a charging wire. The processor compares the vehicle environment information collected by the in-vehicle image device with comparison information, to determine a type of the charging station. The comparison information is direct current charging station information and alternating current charging station information. The comparison information may be obtained in real time by the processor, or may be information pre-stored in the processor.”).
Examiner interprets that charger attributes from the vehicle charger is encompassed at least by a charging station body, the charging connector, and a charging wire and a list of known charger attributes from the stored charger identification data is encompassed at least by comparison information is direct current charging station information and alternating current charging station information.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teaching of Hanshik of where comparing the captured images to the stored charger identification data comprises comparing charger attributes from the vehicle charger to a list of known charger attributes from the stored charger identification data with the more explicit teaching of the same found in Zhu. One could combine the teachings in order to have a method of claim 12, where comparing the captured images to the stored charger identification data comprises comparing charger attributes from the vehicle charger to a list of known charger attributes from the stored charger identification data with a reasonable expectation of success. One would have also been motivated to do so in order to improve user experience (see at least Zhu, [0113]).
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hanshik et al. (US2025/0191413A1) in view of Yaldo et al. (US2020/0324667A1) in view of Zahid et al. (US2025/0296588A1) in further view of Bennett et al. (US2024/0083289A1), hereinafter Hanshik, Yaldo, Zahid, and Bennett respectively.
Regarding claim 11, (Original) the combination of Hanshik, Yaldo, and Zahid teaches the method of claim 8 as detailed above.
Hanshik does not explicitly teach where communicating the procedure includes providing instructions for providing payment via the vehicle charger.
However, Bennett more explicitly teaches where communicating the procedure includes providing instructions for providing payment via the vehicle charger (see at least [0043] “In an illustrative example, vehicle 310 may include an on-board charging system that includes charging manager 326 and charging interface 340. Charging manager 326 may be associated with control circuitry of a particular ECU (e.g., of control circuitry 321)...charging manager 326 and charging interface 340 may be configured to engage in analog communication (e.g., with vehicle charger 350), digital communication (e.g., with vehicle charger 350), transmit and/or receive payment information” and [0032] “After a user plugs their vehicle into the charging station (e.g., plugs one of vehicles 101, 111, or 121 into charger 150), the charging station may proceed through a process flow (e.g., based on computer instructions stored in non-transitory computer readable media) to determine which type of charging communication to engage in with the vehicle. For example, this flexibility allows support for payment over the charge cord (e.g., cord 106 or 126)...the process includes selecting a communication method after the vehicle is plugged into charger 150, and allows for vehicles that do not support charging payment integration to still communicate via a fallback method.”).
Examiner interprets that instructions for providing payment is encompassed at least by charging manager 326 and charging interface 340 may be configured to engage in analog communication (e.g., with vehicle charger 350), digital communication (e.g., with vehicle charger 350), transmit and/or receive payment information and/or a process flow (e.g., based on computer instructions stored in non-transitory computer readable media) to determine which type of charging communication to engage in with the vehicle to allow support for payment over the charge cord (e.g., cord 106 or 126) and allowing for vehicles that do not support charging payment integration to still communicate via a fallback method.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hanshik with the teaching of where communicating the procedure includes providing instructions for providing payment via the vehicle charger found in Bennett. One could combine the teachings in order to have a method where communicating the procedure includes providing instructions for providing payment via the vehicle charger with a reasonable expectation of success. One would have been motivated to do so in order to have flexibility and adaptability in charging interactions (see at least Bennett, [0032]).
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hanshik et al. (US2025/0191413A1) in view of Yaldo et al. (US2020/0324667A1) in view of Zahid et al. (US2025/0296588A1) in view of Halker et al. (US2015/0278038A1) in further view of Hau et al. (US2023/0106274A1), hereinafter Hanshik, Yaldo, Zahid, Halker, and Hau respectively.
Regarding claim 20, (Original) the combination of Hanshik, Yaldo, Zahid, and Halker teaches the vehicle system of claim 19 as detailed above.
Hanshik does not explicitly teach where the instructions to adjust the position of the vehicle are based on output of the camera.
However, Hau teaches where the instructions to adjust the position of the vehicle are based on output of the camera (see at least [0038] “The onboard controller 117 may control the localization and navigation of the EV 110 based on sensor data generated by the onboard sensor suite 119” and [0036] “The onboard sensor suite 119 detects the surrounding environment of the EV 110 and generates sensor data describing the surrounding environment. The onboard sensor suite 119 may include various types of sensors...For example, the onboard sensor suite 119 may include photodetectors, cameras,” also see at least [0042]).
Examiner interprets that instructions to adjust the position of the vehicle is encompassed at least by control the localization and navigation of the EV 110 and output of the camera is encompassed at least by sensor data generated by the onboard sensor suite 119 as onboard sensor suite 119 may include cameras.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hanshik with the teaching of where the instructions to adjust the position of the vehicle are based on output of the camera found in Hau. One could combine the teachings in order to have a vehicle system where the instructions to adjust the position of the vehicle are based on output of the camera with a reasonable expectation of success. One would have been motivated to do so in order to improve operational efficiency and reliability.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
George et al. (US2025/0267343A1) Discloses an operation including one or more of determining a vehicle is receiving content while connected to a charging point, and providing an alert when an adverse situation arises within a proximity threshold of the vehicle while an occupant is consuming the content.
Li et al. (US2022/0009368A1) Discloses a charging station monitoring system including: a sensing device, a digital camera and a communication device which are arranged at a charging apparatus of a charging station, the sensing device and the digital camera each having a sensing range covering a parking lot associated with the charging apparatus and an area around the parking lot; a controller configured to determine an occupation state of the parking lot and/or detect and record an action of a third party or foreign object based on sensed information from the sensing device and the digital camera; and a charging assistance device configured to recommend an environmentally friendly charging station if an energy storage device of the electric vehicle has not been fully charged and needs to be further charged.
Panainte (US2024/0217376A1) Discloses methods, apparatuses, and/or articles of manufacture including a vehicle assistance controller to convey content to one or more display devices. The vehicle assistance controller may operate to access a user input device to determine an assistance topic for charging and/or discharging one or more energy storage elements (e.g., one or more batteries) of the vehicle. The vehicle assistance controller may additionally operate to determine a delivery mode for the content, which is applicable to the assistance topic, based on the access of the user input device, and to deliver the content to the one or more display devices via the determined delivery mode.
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 ALYSSA N RORIE whose telephone number is (571)272-6962. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday (out of office every other Friday) 7:30 am - 5:00 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, Jelani Smith can be reached at 571-270-3969. 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.R./Examiner, Art Unit 3662
/JELANI A SMITH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3662
Prosecution Insights