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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 3/18/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-15 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.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 2/12/2026 was filed. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1-10, 12, 14 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Belo et al. (11,897,480) and Yeom et al. (US 2022/0001894 A1).
For claims 1 and 14, Belo discloses a vehicle integration control device comprising:
an occupant monitoring unit which monitors a plurality of occupants (Fig. 2, col. 2, ln 2-36, 43-66, where activities and characteristics of the occupants are monitored by sensors);
a vehicle motion acquisition unit which acquires information about the current vehicle motion of a vehicle (Fig. 1, 8, col. 5, ln 24-34, where speed, acceleration of the vehicle information are monitored and controlled);
a motion sickness prediction unit which predicts individual sensibilities of the respective occupants to a motion sickness resulting from the motion of the vehicle, based on the result of occupant monitoring by the occupant monitoring unit and the information on the vehicle motion acquired by the vehicle motion acquisition unit (At least in col. 3, ln 3-25, col. 6, ln 4-16, where the system determines if the occupant may be susceptible to motion sickness based on the motion of the vehicle and occupant activities);
a control target determination unit which integrates the motion sickness sensibilities of the respective occupants predicted by the motion sickness prediction unit and determines a control target based on a result of the integration; and a vehicle motion control unit which determines the contents of vehicle motion control based on the control target determined by the control target determination unit (At least in col. 22, ln 64 – col. 23, ln 67, col. 30, ln 60 – col. 31, ln 8, where vehicle systems and components are controlled and adjusted to desired settings or operations based on the determination and monitoring of the occupants activities and vehicle motions).
Belo does not explicitly disclose determine a representative motion sickness sensitivity value from the motion sickness sensibilities of the respective occupants and that the control target is based on the representative motion sickness sensitivity value. Yeom in the same field of the art discloses determine a representative motion sickness sensitivity value from the motion sickness sensibilities of the respective occupants and that the control target is based on the representative motion sickness sensitivity value (Fig. 7, abstract, para. 0013, 0016, 0035, where at least the motion sickness index that represent respective occupants of their motion sickness conditions is determined and is for determining the control target of the vehicle). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present claimed invention to modify the invention of Belo to determine a representative motion sickness sensitivity value from the motion sickness sensibilities of the respective occupants and that the control target is based on the representative motion sickness sensitivity value, as taught by Yeom to measure the motion sickness conditions of respective occupants more accurately represented by certain values and control the vehicle accordingly.
For claims 2 and 15, Belo discloses the vehicle integration control device according to claims 1 and 14, wherein the vehicle motion control unit controls a posture angle of the vehicle so that a roll rate, a pitch rate, a yaw rate, longitudinal acceleration, horizontal acceleration, and vertical acceleration which are a 6-axis momentum of the vehicle are minimized (Fig. 2, 3, col. 5, ln 1-34, where the vehicle motions in various axis including roll, pitch yaw acceleration, longitudinal, horizontal and vertical acceleration are to be adjusted, minimized in order to provide comfort to the occupants).
For claim 3, Belo discloses the vehicle integration control device according to claim 1, wherein the occupant monitoring unit includes one or more sensors, and detects at least any of occupant activity, a line of sight, a gaze angle, a head movement, a head orientation, a posture, a seat orientation, and a vehicle interior configuration (Col. 2, ln 2-66, col. 3, ln 3-25, col. 5, ln 49-57, col. 6, ln 17-28, where the occupant monitoring unit includes sensors that detects at least some of the occupant activities and vehicle interior configurations).
For claim 4, Belo discloses the vehicle integration control device according to claim 1, wherein the control target determination unit selects the motion sickness sensibility of the occupant with the worst motion sickness sensibility predicted by the motion sickness prediction unit, and determines a control target based on the selected motion sickness sensibility (Col. 6, ln29-65, col. 36, ln 40-60, where the occupant that more prone to motion sickness is selected by the control target determination unit as the preference for controlling the vehicle operations associate with motion sickness mitigation).
For claim 5, Belo discloses the vehicle integration control device according to claim 1, wherein the control target determination unit averages the motion sickness sensibilities of the respective occupants predicted by the motion sickness prediction unit, and determines a control targe based on the averaged motion sickness sensibility (Col. 6, ln 29-54, where the point of interest associated with motion sickness for the various occupants may be averaged for determining control targets for the vehicle).
For claim 6, Belo discloses the vehicle integration control device according to claim 1, including: a human machine interface unit which inputs information about the occupants, wherein the control target determination unit determines a control target based on the information input from the human machine interface unit (Col. 6, ln 4-16, where the occupants may provide inputs through the human machine interface to request preference or control profile).
For claim 7, Belo disclose the vehicle integration control device according to claim 1, wherein the control target determination unit selects and integrates at least one of collision safety or a travel time in addition to the motion sickness sensibility of each occupant predicted by the motion sickness prediction unit, to determine the control target (Col. 8, ln 46 – col. 9, ln 4, col. 22, ln 49-63, where the control target is determined based on planning for collision safety or travel time).
For claim 8, Belo discloses the vehicle integration control device according to claim 1, wherein the control target determination unit determines the control target using a recorded occupant travel time history (Col. 8, ln 46 – col. 9, ln 4, where control target determined based on prior rides recorded/history).
For claim 9, Belo discloses the vehicle integration control device according to claim 1, wherein the vehicle motion control unit selects a driving mode including at least one of a lane change driving mode (Col. 9, ln 49-60), an autonomous lane maintenance driving mode, adaptive cruise control, a traffic congestion driving mode, or a highway driving mode, based on the control target (Col. 1, ln 52-65, col. 18, ln 8-22, where the vehicle is autonomously driven and at least these various modes of operations are selectively performed based on control targets of the vehicle).
For claim 10, Belo discloses the vehicle integration control device according to claim 1, wherein the vehicle motion control unit operates, based on the control target, an active suspension in the vicinity of the occupant who is most likely to develop a motion sickness, to reduce the possibility of developing the motion sickness in the occupant (Col. 18, ln 2-6, col. 23, ln 28-42, where the suspension is actively set for particular point of interest, associate with the particular occupant for example).
For claim 12, Belo discloses the vehicle integration control device according to claim 1, wherein when a particular occupant regularly uses the vehicle, the occupant monitoring unit learns behavior of the occupant with respect to the motion of the vehicle, the control target determination unit uses data about the learned occupant behavior to generate a correlation function for presetting a driving mode of the vehicle, and the vehicle motion control unit controls the motion of the vehicle based on the correlation function (Col. 24, ln 3-33, where occupant preferences, gestures and body language during rides may be learned for adjusting the settings of the vehicle for the particular occupant).
Claim(s) 11 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Belo et al. (11,897,480) and Yeom et al. (US 2022/0001894 A1), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Wan et al. (US 2019/0022347 A1).
For claim 11, Belo discloses the vehicle integration control device according to claim 1, but does no specifically discloses the vehicle motion control unit warns an occupant who is most likely to develop the motion sickness, before the occupant develops the motion sickness, based on the control target. Wan in the same field of the art discloses the vehicle motion control unit warns an occupant who is most likely to develop the motion sickness, before the occupant develops the motion sickness, based on the control target (Para. 0061, 0063, 0065). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present claimed invention to modify the invention of Belo to warns an occupant who is most likely to develop the motion sickness, before the occupant develops the motion sickness, based on the control target, as taught by Wan to reduce the probability of motion sickness of the occupant.
For claim 13, Belo discloses the vehicle integration control device according to claim 1, including an audio output device which outputs the vehicle driving scenario and the estimated vehicle motion with an audio signal (Col. 14, ln 40-51, where output audio may indicate actions of the vehicle including suspension adjustments), but does not specifically disclose an on- vehicle monitor which displays a vehicle driving scenario and an estimated vehicle motion. Wan in the same field of the art discloses an on- vehicle monitor which displays a vehicle driving scenario and an estimated vehicle motion (Para. 0021, 0062, 0067). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present claimed invention to modify the invention of Belo to include an on- vehicle monitor which displays a vehicle driving scenario and an estimated vehicle motion, as taught by Wan to keep the occupant inform of vehicle operations that may affect the rideability of the vehicle).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
(US 2022/0024459 A1) Park discloses a motion sickness reduction system for occupants monitoring state and positions of occupant and adjusting various vehicle systems including seats to reduce occupant motion sickness.
(US 2023/0131693 A1) Oda et al. discloses a motion sickness reduction system for monitoring and preventing motion sickness of occupants.
(US 2023/0143296 A1) Giovanardi et al. discloses a motion sickness mitigation system in a vehicle for predicting and mitigating motion sickness of one or more occupants.
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 Sze-Hon Kong whose telephone number is (571)270-1503. The examiner can normally be reached 9 AM-5 PM Mon-Fri.
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, Abby Lin can be reached at (571) 270-3976. 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.
/SZE-HON KONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3657
Prosecution Insights