Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 17, 2026
Application No. 18/834,542

EARLY WARNING ALERT FOR A DISTRACTED DRIVER

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Jul 30, 2024
Examiner
LAROSE, RENEE MARIE
Art Unit
3657
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
unknown
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
79%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 0m
To Grant
88%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 79% — above average
79%
Career Allow Rate
475 granted / 599 resolved
+27.3% vs TC avg
Moderate +9% lift
Without
With
+8.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 0m
Avg Prosecution
25 currently pending
Career history
624
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.7%
-37.3% vs TC avg
§103
59.3%
+19.3% vs TC avg
§102
12.6%
-27.4% vs TC avg
§112
20.1%
-19.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 599 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
DETAILED CORRESPONDENCE This action is in response to the filing of the Restriction Requirement on 01/26/26. The Applicant has elected to prosecute Claim 1 – 3. Claims 4 – 9 are non-elected and therefore not included in this 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 . 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. Claim(s) 1 and 3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Thompson (US 20170030731 A1). Claim 1, Thompson discloses a method for activating an alert in a vehicle when approaching a point of interest (POI) [see (fig. 4; para [0021] ; FIG. 4 is flowchart illustrating operation of the method; for activating an alert in a vehicle when approaching a point of interest (POI) (para [0019] In any of FIGS. 1-3, in place of a traffic light icon, an icon of a different POI, i.e., of a school or the barrier of a railway crossing can be displayed when the vehicle is respectively approaching a school or a railway crossing. In addition to the display of one or more Icons, a warning audible alarm can optionally be sounded] while on a hands-free voice call [active voice mode, para [0018] "The telephone icon indicates that someone in the car is using a phone, either a telephone installed in the car or a mobile phone connected by Bluetooth to the navigation system display. An active Bluetooth connection can itself be used to indicate that the user in on the phone in an active voice mode]; comprising downloading to a memory device data comprising the latitude and longitude location of one or more selected POis within a predetermined distance from the vehicle, [see (para [0020] "Latitude and Longitude coordinates for signal light-controlled intersections or schools or railway crossings, are obtained from a provider of such GPS coordinates such as deCarta, an LBS (location based services) platform company. When the navigation system device is in use, the device's current coordinates are continually read from the GPS unit that is contained in, attached to, or otherwise linked with the device. If a change in coordinates indicates that the speed of the device exceeds a certain level, say 10 mph, or that the current coordinates of the device are within a certain distance, say 250 feet (very roughly one half to one quarter of a city block) of the coordinates of the location of a POI such as a traffic light (the "warning coordinates"), that the change in coordinates indicates that the vehicle is moving towards the POI, the navigation system displays the appropriate icon on its map)]; determining the location of the vehicle from a navigation global positioning system (GPS) [see (para [0021] "At the start, a software program in the car is started and updates the current GPS location of the car."), comparing the GPS location of the vehicle to data in the memory device [see (para [0021] "Using a downloaded database of traffic light GPS vector map locations, such as maintained by deCarta, and current location information, the software determines whether the user is near e.g., 250 feet) one of the POis. If not, then the software continues to update the current location. If the software determines that the user is near one of the POis, the software displays the relevant icon for the traffic light, school zone, or railway crossing. Either before or after the foregoing display, the software detects whether a phone is in voice mode. If it is, then the icon of a phone is also displayed, at the top of the navigation map."] and, when the vehicle is within a predetermined distance from the selected POI [see (para [0021] "Using a downloaded database of traffic light GPS vector map locations, such as maintained by deCarta, and current location information, the software determines whether the user is near e.g., 250 feet) one of the POis."), activating the alert [see (para [0019] "In any of FIGS. 1-3, in place of a traffic light icon, an icon of a different POI, i.e., of a school or the barrier of a railway crossing can be displayed when the vehicle is respectively approaching a school or a railway crossing. In addition to the display of one or more icons, a warning audible alarm can optionally be sounded.")]. Claim 3, Thompson discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the POI is selected from a traffic light, school zone, or railway crossing [see (para 0022) - The software then determines whether the user has crossed the traffic light, school zone or railway crossing. If not, then the current location is updated. If yes, then the POI icon is cleared and if the phone icon was displayed, it also is cleared, as well as is any marker line]. 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. Claim(s) 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Thompson (US 20170030731 A1) in view of Liu (US 20180151065). Claim 2, Thompson discloses the method of claim 1, wherein to avoid replaying an alert multiple times for the same POI, the method includes remembering the last POI played until information is obtained that the POI is behind the device indicating that the user has passed the POI. Thompson teaches the method includes remembering the last POI played until information is obtained that the POI is behind the device indicating that the user has passed The POI (icon cleared after POI is passed, [see para [0022] "The software then determines whether the user has crossed the traffic light, school zone or railway crossing. If not, then The current location is updated. If yes, then the POI icon is cleared and if the phone icon was displayed, it also is cleared, as well as is any marker line.")]. Thompson is silent to wherein to avoid replaying an alert multiple times for the same POI, the method includes remembering the last POI. However, Liu discloses a data processing field, and in particular, to a traffic information update method and apparatus. Further discloses, wherein to avoid replaying an alert multiple times for the same POI, the method includes remembering the last POI [see (para [0070]-[0071] "Step 202. The server generates the second alert information corresponding to the traffic sign adding instruction. After receiving the traffic sign adding instruction, the server may directly generate the second alert information corresponding to the traffic sign adding instruction. To avoid repeatedly adding same alert information, the server determines whether the traffic information of the server includes alert information corresponding to the first traffic sign. Only when the traffic information of the server does not include the alert information corresponding to the first traffic sign, the server generates the second alert information corresponding to the traffic sign adding instruction.")]. It would have been obvious before the effective date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the device in Thompson to include wherein to avoid replaying an alert multiple times for the same POI, the method includes remembering the last POI, as suggested and taught by Liu, with a reasonable expectation of success, for the purpose of avoiding unwanted redundancy possibly causing confusion and error due to multiple alerts. Conclusion The examiner has pointed out particular references contained in the prior art of record in the body of this action for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. Applicant should consider the entire prior art as applicable as to the limitations of the claims. It is respectfully requested from the applicant, in preparing the response, to consider fully the entire references as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the examiner. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RENEE LAROSE whose telephone number is (313)446-4856. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday 8:30am - 5:00pm EST. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Abby Lin can be reached on (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 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). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /Renee LaRose/Examiner, Art Unit 3657
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 30, 2024
Application Filed
Feb 21, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12594948
APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR CONTROLLING VEHICLE MESSAGE OUTPUT
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12583367
Dual Release Actuator for Vehicle Seat and Method for Controlling the Same
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12582054
METHOD FOR CONTROLLING THE OPENING OF A WORK APPARATUS HAVING PAIRWISE ARRANGED PROCESSING DEVICES FOR VITICULTURE, AND WORK APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12578353
ROBOTIC SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR PRECISE ORGAN EXCISION TECHNOLOGY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12565195
Method And Apparatus For Recording A Travel Trajectory For A Parking Maneuver
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
79%
Grant Probability
88%
With Interview (+8.8%)
3y 0m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 599 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month