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 Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1 and 4-7 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 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 and 4-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanase et al US 2017/0015314 in view of Moriya et al US 2022/0063633.
Regarding claim 1, Moriya et al discloses a vehicle (see paragraph [0015]) comprising: a sensor configured to detect a state of a driver of the vehicle (see paragraph [0042]); and, in response to a determination that the vehicle has stopped, acquire information indicating the state of the driver from the sensor while the vehicle remains stopped, determine whether the driver is in an abnormal state based on the information, in response to a determination that the driver is not in the abnormal state, release the brake after a first threshold time has elapsed since the vehicle has stopped, and in response to a determination that the driver is in the abnormal state, release the brake after a second threshold time has elapsed since the vehicle has stopped, the second threshold time being longer than the first threshold time. See FIG. 3 and 4 and corresponding text.
Moriya et al fails to explicitly disclose, but Tanase et al discloses a processor (50, 70) configured to calculate a predicted collision time, the predicted collision time being a time until the vehicle collides with an obstacle (see paragraphs [0072]-[0075]), determine whether the predicted collision time is equal to or less than a threshold time, in response to a determination that the predicted collision time is equal to or less than the threshold time, operate a brake actuator of the vehicle to stop the vehicle, determine whether the vehicle has stopped after starting to operate the brake actuator. See FIG. 2 and 3 and paragraphs [0082]-[0088].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the teachings of Moriya et al in the system of Tanase et al for safety purposes.
Regarding claim 2, Moriya et al discloses wherein the sensor includes a camera
configured to capture an image of the driver. See paragraphs [0042] and [0043].
Regarding claim 6, Moriya et al discloses wherein the sensor includes a seating sensor
configured to detect a seating position of the driver. See paragraphs [0043], [0057], [0075], and [0120].
Regarding claim 7, Moriya et al discloses wherein the processor is configured to determine whether gaze direction of the driver is outside a predetermined range including a front of the vehicle, and
in a case where the gaze direction of the driver is outside the predetermined range, determine that the driver is in the abnormal state. See paragraphs [0041], [0068], [0073], and [0077].
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanase et al and Moriya et al, as applied above, in view of Roh US 2022/0017098.
Regarding claim 5, Moriya discloses wherein the sensor includes a physiological measurement device configured to detect a pulse rate of the driver. See paragraphs [0042] and [0043].
Tanase et al fails to explicitly disclose, but Roh discloses wherein the sensor includes a physiological measurement device configured to detect a heart rate of the driver. See Abstract and claim 1.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the teachings of Roh in the system of Tanase et al for safety purposes.
Conclusion
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 JOSEPH J DALLO whose telephone number is (313)446-4844. The examiner can normally be reached 7am-7pm ET M-Th.
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, Logan Kraft can be reached at 571-270-5065. 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.
/JOSEPH J DALLO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3747
Prosecution Insights