DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP §§ 706.02(l)(1) - 706.02(l)(3) for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
Claims 1, 4, 8, 11 and 15 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 11039279. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because all the claimed limitations recited in the present application are transparently found in the U.S. Patent No. 11039279 with obvious wording variations.
Instant Application
U.S. Patent No. 11039279
1. A computer-implemented method for delivering electronic content to a vehicle, the computer-implemented method comprising: at least one of:
detecting whether a tracking service for the vehicle is active; or detecting whether a mobile device in the vehicle is in a do-not-disturb (“DND”) mode; and
automatically delivering the electronic content to the vehicle when at least one of the tracking service is detected to be active or the mobile device is detected to be in the DND mode.
1. A system for automatically triggering delivery of multimedia at a vehicle during driving sessions to incentivize both safe vehicle operation and tracking of the vehicle operation, the system comprising:
a vehicle monitor device disposed within a vehicle and configured to be implemented as part of a drive tracking service, wherein when the drive tracking service is active, the vehicle monitor device is configured to: (i) collect data representing vehicle operation; and (ii) transmit the data to a server configured to determine a risk level by analyzing the data; and a mobile device configured to: (i) detect the presence of a user at the vehicle by detecting either a first communication connection between the mobile device and the vehicle monitor device or a second communication link between the mobile device and an on-board computer of the vehicle; (ii) respond to detecting the presence of the user by: (a) tracking a first status of the drive tracking service, and (b) tracking a second status of the mobile device;
(iii) automatically synchronize a media service with the first status of the vehicle monitor device and the second status of the mobile device, including: (a) automatically transmit a message to a server to activate the media service to provide media content in a manner receivable by the user when a set of conditions is true, wherein the set of conditions includes: (1) a first condition that is true when the first status indicates the drive tracking service is active and that is otherwise false, and (2) a second condition that is true when the second status indicates the mobile device is in a do-not-disturb (“DND”) mode and that is otherwise false; (b) automatically deactivate the media service to stop providing the media content when any one of the set of conditions is not true.
For claims 4 and 11, the claims have features which are similar claim 4 of U.S. Patent No. 11039279.
For claims 8 and 15, the claims have features which are similar claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 11039279.
Claims 1-2, 8-9 and 15-16 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 11689889. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because all the claimed limitations recited in the present application are transparently found in the U.S. Patent No. 11689889 with obvious wording variations.
Instant Application
U.S. Patent No. 11689889
1. A computer-implemented method for delivering electronic content to a vehicle, the computer-implemented method comprising: at least one of:
detecting whether a tracking service for the vehicle is active; or detecting whether a mobile device in the vehicle is in a do-not-disturb (“DND”) mode; and
automatically delivering the electronic content to the vehicle when at least one of the tracking service is detected to be active or the mobile device is detected to be in the DND mode.
1. A system for a media service at a vehicle during driving sessions, the system comprising:
a vehicle monitor device disposed within the vehicle and configured to implement at least a part of a drive tracking service, the vehicle monitor device configured to collect data representing vehicle operation; and a mobile device configured to: track a first status of the drive tracking service; track a second status of the mobile device;
automatically synchronize a media service with the first status of the vehicle monitor device and the second status of the mobile device, including: transmit a message to a server to activate the media service to provide media content in a manner receivable by a user in the vehicle when each condition of a set of conditions is true, wherein the set of conditions includes: (1) a first condition that is true when the first status indicates the drive tracking service is active and that is otherwise false, and (2) a second condition that is true when the second status indicates the mobile device is in a do-not-disturb (“DND”) mode and that is otherwise false; and transmit a message to the server to deactivate the media service to stop providing the media content when any one condition of the set of conditions is not true.
For claims 2, 9 and 16, the claims have features which are similar claim 4 of U.S. Patent No. 11689889.
For claims 8 and 15, the claims have features which are similar claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 11689889.
Claims 1, 5, 8, 12, 15 and 18 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12356291. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because all the claimed limitations recited in the present application are transparently found in the U.S. Patent No. 12356291 with obvious wording variations.
Instant Application
U.S. Patent No. 12356291
1.A computer-implemented method for delivering electronic content to a vehicle, the computer-implemented method comprising: at least one of:
detecting whether a tracking service for the vehicle is active; or detecting whether a mobile device in the vehicle is in a do-not-disturb (“DND”) mode; and
automatically delivering the electronic content to the vehicle when at least one of the tracking service is detected to be active or the mobile device is detected to be in the DND mode.
1. A system for a media service at a vehicle during driving sessions of the vehicle, the system comprising: a mobile device configured to:
track a first status of a drive tracking service, wherein the drive tracking service is automatically activated in response to at least one trigger; track a second status of the mobile device; and automatically synchronize the media service with the first status of the drive tracking service and the second status of the mobile device comprising:
transmit a message to a server to activate the media service to provide media content in a manner receivable by a user in the vehicle when at least one condition of a set of conditions is true, wherein the set of conditions comprises: (1) a first condition that (a) is true when the first status indicates the drive tracking service is active and (b) is otherwise false, and (2) a second condition that (a) is true when the second status indicates the mobile device is in a do-not-disturb (“DND”) mode and (b) is otherwise false; and transmit another message to the server to deactivate the media service to stop providing the media content when each condition of the set of conditions is not true.
For claims 5, 12 and 18, the claims have features which are similar claim 4 of U.S. Patent No. 12356291.
For claims 8 and 15, the claims have features which are similar claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 12356291.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-4, 6-11, 13-17 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Malhotra et al. (U.S. 20160050315).
For claim 1, Malhotra et al. disclose a computer-implemented method for delivering electronic content to a vehicle, the computer-implemented method comprising: at least one of:
detecting whether a tracking service for the vehicle is active (at least Fig. 2, [0029]-[0030] and [0078]. The driver status update module 202 may monitor a vehicle speed by receiving vehicle speed data from one or more vehicle systems/sensors 210 and determine a driver status based on the vehicle speed data. The driver status update module 202 may send a driver status update to server(s) 218 responsive to determining that the vehicle speed has exceeded a threshold indicating a change in driver status. For example, a first driver status (e.g., “stationary”) may correspond to a vehicle speed equal to zero, while another driver status (e.g., “in city driving”) may correspond to a vehicle speed between 5 and 35 miles per hour (mph).); or detecting whether a mobile device in the vehicle is in a do-not-disturb (“DND”) mode; and
automatically delivering the electronic content to the vehicle when at least one of the tracking service is detected to be active or the mobile device is detected to be in the DND mode (at least Fig. 2, [0029]-[0030] and [0078]. As the last-received driver status information indicated that the driver was available when the vehicle may have stopped for a threshold period of time (e.g., the vehicle speed equaling 0 mph)., the server sends the forwarded call to the driver 1426 to the driver device(s) (e.g., the mobile device of the driver and/or the in-vehicle computing system). In this way, the call may not be blocked (e.g., may be allowed to reach the driver) based on the vehicle/driver status data.)
For claim 2, Malhotra et al. disclose the computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein detecting whether the tracking service of the vehicle is active further comprises: automatically activating the tracking service in response to a trigger event, wherein the trigger event comprises detecting at least one of: an ignition event to start the vehicle; a location of the mobile device within or near the vehicle; a communication connection between the mobile device and another device within a network system of the vehicle; an implementation event to activate the tracking service using an application on the mobile device; or a preconfigured setting indicating an automatic activation of the tracking service (at least Fig. 2, [0029]-[0030] and [0078]. During initialization of a driver status (e.g., responsive to a driver entering a vehicle and/or starting an engine of the vehicle) and/or responsive to determining that a driver status has been updated, the driver status update module may send the driver status to one or more servers 218.)
For claim 3, Malhotra et al. disclose the computer-implemented method of claim 1 further comprising: transmitting a message to the mobile device indicating that the tracking service has been activated (at least [0049]. An indication of a driver's status may be displayed at a caller's mobile device utilizing the illustrated example icons.)
For claim 4, Malhotra et al. disclose the computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein the electronic content comprises audio streaming services (at least Fig. 2, [0029]-[0030] and [0078]. As the last-received driver status information indicated that the driver was available when the vehicle may have stopped for a threshold period of time (e.g., the vehicle speed equaling 0 mph)., the server sends the forwarded call to the driver 1426 to the driver device(s) (e.g., the mobile device of the driver and/or the in-vehicle computing system). In this way, the call may not be blocked (e.g., may be allowed to reach the driver) based on the vehicle/driver status data.)
For claim 6, Malhotra et al. disclose the computer-implemented method of claim 1 further comprising: after automatically delivering the electronic content to the vehicle when at least one of the tracking service is detected to be active or the mobile device is detected to be in the DND mode, at least one of: continuing to detect whether the tracking service for the vehicle is active; or continuing to detect whether the mobile device in the vehicle is in the DND mode (at least [0057]. A status of “stationary” may indicate that the driver is available to take phone calls/messages without exceeding a cognitive load limit while driving. If the driver status does not indicate that the driver is unavailable (e.g., “NO” at 718), the method returns to continue monitoring the vehicle status.)
For claim 7, Malhotra et al. disclose the computer-implemented method of claim 6, wherein after at least one of continuing to detect whether the tracking service for the vehicle is active or continuing to detect whether the mobile device in the vehicle is in the DND mode, terminating the automatically delivering the electronic content to the vehicle when at least one of the tracking service is detected to not be active or the mobile device is detected to not be in the DND mode (at least [0057]. A status of “stationary” may indicate that the driver is available to take phone calls/messages without exceeding a cognitive load limit while driving. If the driver status does not indicate that the driver is unavailable (e.g., “NO” at 718), the method returns to continue monitoring the vehicle status.)
For claims 8-11, the claims have features which are similar claims 1-4. Therefore, the claims are also rejected for the same reason in claims 1-4.
For claims 13-14, the claims have features which are similar claims 6-7. Therefore, the claims are also rejected for the same reason in claims 6-7.
For claims 15-17, the claims have features which are similar claims 1-3. Therefore, the claims are also rejected for the same reason in claims 1-3.
For claims 19-20, the claims have features which are similar claims 6-7. Therefore, the claims are also rejected for the same reason in claims 6-7.
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 of this title, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 5, 12 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Malhotra et al. (U.S. 20160050315) in view of Faltyn et al. (U.S. 20180077260).
For claim 5, Malhotra et al. do not disclose the computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein the mobile device is configured to automatically activate its DND mode when an ignition event occurs to start the vehicle, when the vehicle begins to move, or when the vehicle is moving.
In the same field of endeavor, Faltyn et al. disclose the mobile device is configured to automatically activate its DND mode when an ignition event occurs to start the vehicle, when the vehicle begins to move, or when the vehicle is moving (at least [0049]. When the vehicle is not in motion, either with or without the engine running, all mobile devices are fully functional for all occupants of the vehicle at step 1301. According to one embodiment, at step 1302, when the vehicle's motor is running and the vehicle is placed into gear the telephony control system may signal the mobile device within a driver's side proximity field to enter at least a do not disturb state with the possibility of other functions and certain apps such as social media posting and chat app possibly also disabled by profile and persona management server of the device.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the invention of Malhotra et al. as taught by Faltyn et al. for purpose of carrying out a display switching operation to switch between a plurality of application software when they are activated and processed in parallel in a portable information apparatus, and the like.
For claims 12 and 18, the claims have features which are similar claim 5. Therefore, the claims are also rejected for the same reason in claim 5.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAI PHUONG whose telephone number is 571-272-7896. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday, 8am-5pm.
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, Kathy Wang-Hurst can be reached on 571-270-5371. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-7687.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/DAI PHUONG/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2644
Prosecution Insights