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 .
Status of Claims
Claims 1-20, 25, 33, and 40 have been cancelled; therefore, Claims 21-24, 26-32, 34-39 are currently pending in application 18/805,109.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 21-24, 26-32, 34-39 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Abdessamed et al. (D. Abdessamed and M. Samira, "Target Tracking in VANETs Using V2I and V2V Communication," 2014 International Conference on Advanced Networking Distributed Systems and Applications, Bejaia, Algeria, 2014, pp. 19-24).
As per independent Claims 21, 29, and 37, Abdessamed discloses a computer system for coordinating automatic passive searching using autonomous vehicle components, the computer system comprising: one or more processors; and one or more memories coupled to the one or more processors and storing executable instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the computer system to (A tangible, non-transitory computer-readable medium storing executable instructions for coordinating automatic passive searching using autonomous vehicle components that, when executed by at least one processor of a computer system, cause the computer system to )(A computer-implemented method of automatic passive searching using autonomous vehicle components, comprising) (See at least Pgs. 21-23):
receive, from a remote server via a network, particularly via wireless communication over at least a portion of the network, an indication of a situation triggering a passive search, the indication including a search area (See at least Pgs. 21-23, Query issued);
identify a plurality of vehicles physically located within the search area; cause at least one of a plurality of computing devices associated with the plurality of vehicles to passively activate at least one sensor of one or more sensors of the corresponding vehicle, by transmitting an indication of search criteria to at least one of the plurality of computing devices, wherein the indication of the search criteria triggers the passive activating of the at least one sensor and causes the at least one computing device to passively evaluate sensor data generated by the at least one sensor to determine whether the sensor data meets the search criteria, without notifying or alerting the vehicle operators or passengers of the vehicles by running the evaluation processes in the background during vehicle operation; receive a response from at least one of the plurality of computing devices, the response including an indication of the sensor data that meets the search criteria; and implement an action based upon the response (See at least Pgs. 21-23, “For that, vehicles must be equipped with sensors able to identify neighboring vehicles (for example: application of license plate recognition) and a local memory storage to carry data. The involvement of public vehicles is dependent of the application in question. In case of an application of an authoritarian entity such as the police, it would be permissible to assume that public vehicles submit to certain rules and participate in the tracking. If, however, it is an application of traffic management, security mechanisms must be used in order to preserve drivers’ privacy”).
As per Claims 22 and 30, Abdessamed discloses wherein the executable instructions further cause the computer system to: receive global positioning system (GPS) data indicating current locations of each of the plurality of vehicles, wherein identifying the plurality of vehicles comprises comparing the GPS data associated with the plurality of vehicles to the search area (See at least Pgs. 21-23).
As per Claims 23 and 31, Abdessamed discloses wherein the executable instructions further cause the computer system to: receive GPS data indicating current locations of each of the plurality of vehicles and each of a second plurality of vehicles, wherein the GPS data associated with the second plurality of vehicles indicates the second plurality of vehicles are outside the search area; and compare the GPS data to the search area, wherein the identifying the plurality of vehicles comprises determining the GPS data associated with the plurality of vehicles indicates the plurality of vehicles are within the search area (See at least Pgs. 21-23).
As per Claims 24 and 32, Abdessamed discloses wherein the executable instructions further cause the computer system to identify the plurality of vehicles by polling the plurality of vehicles for GPS data (See at least Pgs. 21-23).
As per Claims 26 and 34, Abdessamed discloses wherein the indication of the situation includes one or more of a missing person alert, a stolen vehicle alert, or a person of interest alert (See at least Pgs. 21-23).
As per Claims 27 and 35, Abdessamed discloses wherein: the indication of the search criteria includes one or more of a license plate number, biometric data identifying a person of interest, or a make, model, or color of a vehicle of interest; and the sensor data meeting the search criteria includes image data from a camera of the corresponding vehicle (See at least Pgs. 21-23).
As per Claims 28 and 36, Abdessamed discloses wherein implementing the action based upon the response comprises sending a message containing information regarding the response to a server associated with a third party (See at least Pgs. 21-23).
As per Claim 38, Abdessamed discloses determining whether one vehicle of the plurality of vehicles is operating; when the one vehicle is operating, accessing the sensor data from one or more sensors of the one vehicle that are already active for the purpose of operating the one vehicle; and when the one vehicle is not operating, activating one or more sensors of the one vehicle to collect the sensor data (See at least Pgs. 21-23).
As per Claim 39, Abdessamed discloses wherein the indication of the situation triggering the passive search also includes one or more of a license plate number, biometric data identifying a person of interest, or a make, model, or color of a vehicle of interest, and wherein the sensor data includes image data from a camera of the one vehicle (See at least Pgs. 21-23).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed on 4/24/2026, with respect to Claims 1-20, have been considered but are moot because the arguments do not apply to any of the references being used in the current rejection.
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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure can be found in the PTO-892 Notice of References Cited. The Examiner suggests the applicant review all of these documents before submitting any amendments.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JONATHAN P OUELLETTE whose telephone number is (571)272-6807. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 8am-6pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Lynda C Jasmin, can be reached at telephone number (571) 272-6782. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated- interview-request-air-form.
June 3, 2026
/JONATHAN P OUELLETTE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3629
Prosecution Insights