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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: “S18” which is only described as to be described below in paragraph [0089] and then never clearly identified within the description.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claim 12 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention does not fall within one of the four statutory categories of invention.
The determination of whether a claim recites patent ineligible subject matter is a 2 step inquiry.
STEP 1: the claim does not fall within one of the four statutory categories of invention (process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter), see MPEP 2106.03, or
STEP 2: the claim recites a judicial exception, e.g. an abstract idea, without reciting additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception, as determined using the following analysis: see MPEP 2106.04
STEP 2A (PRONG 1): Does the claim recite an abstract idea, law of nature, or natural phenomenon? see MPEP 2106.04(II)(A)(1)
STEP 2A (PRONG 2): Does the claim recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application? see MPEP 2106.04(II)(A)(2)
STEP 2B: Does the claim recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception? see MPEP 2106.05
101 Analysis – Step 1
Claim 1 is directed to a computer program, i.e. “software per se”. “Software per se”, when claimed without any structural limitations, does not have a physical or tangible form. Therefore, it does not fall within one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter and is ineligible under 35 USC 101. see MPEP 2106.03.
If support is found within the specification, Applicant is advised to amend the claim(s) to recite “A non-transitory computer readable medium comprising a computer program comprising machine readable instructions that, when executed by a processor, performs: [the claimed functions]”, or equivalent language. see MPEP 2106.03 (I). A claim directed toward a non-transitory computer readable medium would comprise an article of manufacture and thus fall within one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter.
Therefore, claim 12 is rejected under 35 USC §101 as being directed toward ineligible subject matter.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 2, 8, 11, and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a) as being anticipated by Castano et al. (US 20210097784).
In regards to claim 1, Castano teaches an in-vehicle control device to be mounted in a vehicle, comprising (Figs 1, 3, 4.)
a control unit configured to transmit at least some of vehicle data collected in the vehicle to an external device that is provided outside of the vehicle and is configured to communicate with the in-vehicle control device via a network, ([0020], [0033], [0034] ECU in vehicle performs operations, including to operate network access device to communicate with remote server or other communication operations over a network, where the server may receive sensor data communicated from the vehicle, which is transmitting at least some vehicle data collected in the vehicle.)
wherein the control unit executes: ([0020] ECU performs operations.)
calculation control for calculating a transmittable amount of the vehicle data based on a remaining battery charge of the vehicle if an ignition switch of the vehicle is switched off; ([0035], [0048] ECU selects prioritized data based on costs of transmission including data transfer costs and processing costs of the ECU and transmits selectively prioritized data without transmitting lower priority data, where processing costs are formed in part on vehicle state, including if the vehicle is turned off and state of charge, by determining desirability of processing tasks, which includes transmission. The prioritized data is the transmittable amount of data.)
extraction control for extracting first data that fits within the transmittable amount from the vehicle data; ([0035], [0065], [0070] ECU selects prioritized data based on costs of transmission including data transfer costs and processing costs of the ECU and transmits selectively prioritized data without transmitting lower priority data to the server, where data may be categorized into different priority levels from level 1, which is necessary to transfer, to level 5, which is only transferred when no costs are found, based at least on the network type and the other costs, where particular data is identified as one of the corresponding priority levels and extracted for transferring. This extracts data of the corresponding priority level that is within the transmittable amount.) and
first transmission control for transmitting the first data to the external device and not transmitting second data that is different from the first data out of the vehicle data to the external device. ([0033]-[0035] ECU selects prioritized data based on costs of transmission including data transfer costs and processing costs of the ECU and transmits selectively prioritized data without transmitting lower priority data to the server.)
In regards to claim 2, Castano teaches the in-vehicle control device according to claim 1, wherein the extraction control includes a first extraction operation of extracting data collected in a predetermined travel region out of the vehicle data, as the first data. ([0030] data of the vehicle within the current roadway is extracted for potential transmission, where the current roadway is a predetermined travel region determined before data transmission.)
In regards to claim 8, Castano teaches the in-vehicle control device according to claim 1,
wherein the control unit communicates with the external device via a communication device mounted in the vehicle, ([0020], [0033], [0034] ECU in vehicle performs operations, including to operate network access device to communicate with remote server or other communication operations over a network.)
the communication device is capable of switching between a first route for communicating with the external device using a mobile communication method, and a second route for communicating with the external device via a router and a modem using a short-distance communication method in which the range of radio waves is shorter than in the mobile communication method, ([0033], [0035] network access device may communicate using different protocols including Bluetooth, Wi-Fi, a cellular protocol, or any other wired or wireless protocol, and may switch between the different protocols. Wi-Fi necessarily uses a router and modem to direct communications and has a shorter range than cellular protocols for example.) and
the first transmission control is executed when the communication device is communicating with the external device through the second route. ([0020], [0033]-[0035] ECU in vehicle performs operations, including to operate network access device to communicate with remote server or other communication operations over a network, which includes transmitting data over, for example, Wi-Fi using a router and modem.)
In regards to claim 11, Castano teaches a control method for controlling an in-vehicle control device to be mounted in a vehicle, comprising: (Figs 5A-6B.)
a calculation step of calculating, if an ignition switch of the vehicle is switched off, a transmittable amount according to which vehicle data collected in the vehicle is capable of being transmitted to an external device that is provided outside of the vehicle and is configured to communicate with the in-vehicle control device via a network, the transmittable amount being calculated based on a remaining battery charge of the vehicle; ([0020], [0033], [0034] ECU in vehicle performs operations, including to operate network access device to communicate with remote server or other communication operations over a network, where the server may receive sensor data communicated from the vehicle, which is transmitting at least some vehicle data collected in the vehicle. [0035], [0048] ECU selects prioritized data based on costs of transmission including data transfer costs and processing costs of the ECU and transmits selectively prioritized data without transmitting lower priority data, where processing costs are formed in part on vehicle state, including if the vehicle is turned off and state of charge, by determining desirability of processing tasks, which includes transmission. The prioritized data is the transmittable amount of data.)
an extraction step of extracting first data that fits within the transmittable amount from the vehicle data; ([0035], [0065], [0070] ECU selects prioritized data based on costs of transmission including data transfer costs and processing costs of the ECU and transmits selectively prioritized data without transmitting lower priority data to the server, where data may be categorized into different priority levels from level 1, which is necessary to transfer, to level 5, which is only transferred when no costs are found, based at least on the network type and the other costs, where particular data is identified as one of the corresponding priority levels and extracted for transferring. This extracts data of the corresponding priority level that is within the transmittable amount.) and
a first transmission step of transmitting the first data to the external device and not transmitting second data that is different from the first data out of the vehicle data to the external device. ([0033]-[0035] ECU selects prioritized data based on costs of transmission including data transfer costs and processing costs of the ECU and transmits selectively prioritized data without transmitting lower priority data to the server.)
In regards to claim 12, Castano teaches a computer program for controlling an in-vehicle control device to be mounted in a vehicle, ([0022] memory stores instructions for controlling in-vehicle control device which is a computer program.)
the computer program causing a computer to execute: ([0020], [0022] ECU performs operations stored in memory.)
a calculation step of calculating, if an ignition switch of the vehicle is switched off, a transmittable amount according to which vehicle data collected in the vehicle is capable of being transmitted to an external device that is provided outside of the vehicle and is configured to communicate with the in-vehicle control device via a network, the transmittable amount being calculated based on a remaining battery charge of the vehicle; ([0020], [0033], [0034] ECU in vehicle performs operations, including to operate network access device to communicate with remote server or other communication operations over a network, where the server may receive sensor data communicated from the vehicle, which is transmitting at least some vehicle data collected in the vehicle. [0035], [0048] ECU selects prioritized data based on costs of transmission including data transfer costs and processing costs of the ECU and transmits selectively prioritized data without transmitting lower priority data, where processing costs are formed in part on vehicle state, including if the vehicle is turned off and state of charge, by determining desirability of processing tasks, which includes transmission. The prioritized data is the transmittable amount of data.)
an extraction step of extracting first data that fits within the transmittable amount from the vehicle data; ([0035], [0065], [0070] ECU selects prioritized data based on costs of transmission including data transfer costs and processing costs of the ECU and transmits selectively prioritized data without transmitting lower priority data to the server, where data may be categorized into different priority levels from level 1, which is necessary to transfer, to level 5, which is only transferred when no costs are found, based at least on the network type and the other costs, where particular data is identified as one of the corresponding priority levels and extracted for transferring. This extracts data of the corresponding priority level that is within the transmittable amount.) and
a first transmission step of transmitting the first data to the external device and not transmitting second data that is different from the first data out of the vehicle data to the external device. ([0033]-[0035] ECU selects prioritized data based on costs of transmission including data transfer costs and processing costs of the ECU and transmits selectively prioritized data without transmitting lower priority data to the server.)
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 3 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Castano in view of Obayashi (US 20230286467).
In regards to claim 3, Castano teaches the in-vehicle control device according to claim 2,
Castano does not teach:
wherein the travel region includes a first travel region and a second travel region adjacent to the first travel region, and
the first extraction control includes:
priority control for extracting data collected in the first travel region out of the vehicle data, as the first data; and
control for further extracting, from data collected in the second travel region out of the vehicle data, data sampled uniformly over time according to a remaining amount obtained by subtracting the first data extracted in the preferential control from the transmittable amount, as the first data.
However, Obayashi teaches determining multiple regions within sensor data around a vehicle and prioritizing particular regions, where by default when no issues are determined there is no change in a recognition rate of the sensor data ([0063]). This includes at least first and second travel regions, where data is prioritized selectively to be extracted from a particular travel region and data is sampled uniformly when no errors occur.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to modify the vehicle control system of Castano, by incorporating the teachings of Obayashi, such that multiple regions are analyzed with a set recognition rate, which is a sampling rate of data of those regions, and the different regions are further prioritized, such that upon extraction and identification of the prioritized information to be transmitted within Castano, data from the prioritized region is transferred and data from other lesser prioritized region may also be transferred depending on the remaining costs, which necessarily is determined from a remaining amount of data obtained by subtraction after the prioritized data costs are determined.
The motivation to do so is that, as acknowledged by Obayashi, this allows for improved selective analysis of particular regions and subsequent operation for improved vehicle control ([0064]).
In regards to claim 5, Castano teaches the in-vehicle control device according to claim 1.
Castano does not teach: wherein the extraction control includes control for extracting, from the vehicle data, data sampled uniformly over time according to the transmittable amount, as the first data.
However, Obayashi teaches by default when no issues are determined with sensors, there is no change in a recognition rate of the sensor data ([0063]). This includes at least data sampled uniformly when no errors occur.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to modify the vehicle control system of Castano, by incorporating the teachings of Obayashi, such that when no errors occur within the data, the data is recognized at a constant rate, which is a uniform sampling over time, performed selectively according to the current prioritization of the data of Castano.
The motivation to do so is the same as acknowledged by Obayashi in regards to claim 3.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Castano in view of Asao et al. (US 20210406082).
In regards to claim 4, Castano teaches the in-vehicle control device according to claim 1.
Castano does not teach: wherein the extraction control includes second extraction control for extracting, out of the vehicle data, at least one of data collected while a speed of the vehicle exceeds a predetermined speed and data collected while an absolute value of acceleration of the vehicle exceeds a predetermined value, as the first data.
However, Asao teaches selectively prioritizing particular regions of an environment and extracting data from those regions based on the speed of the vehicle being compared against a threshold, such that when the speed of the vehicle is above the threshold, a distant area ahead of the vehicle is prioritized, with a nearby region ahead of the vehicle given a second highest priority, and other regions not ahead of the vehicle given a lowest priority ([0066]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to modify the vehicle control system of Castano, by incorporating the teachings of Asao, such that additional prioritization operations are performed to selectively identify and extract data of particular regions based at least on the speed of the vehicle being above a particular speed threshold.
The motivation to do so is that, as acknowledged by Asao, this allows for improved resource control of the vehicle ([0005], [0006]).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Castano in view of Johnson et al. (US 9978018).
In regards to claim 6, Castano teaches the in-vehicle control device according to claim 1.
Castano also teaches prioritizing data transmission based on costs of transmission including data transfer costs and processing costs of the ECU, which include loss of charge costs, and transmitting selectively prioritized data without transmitting lower priority data, and then subsequently transmitting lower priority data when costs are reduced ([0035]).
Castano does not teach: wherein after executing the first transmission control, the control unit executes second transmission control for transmitting the second data to the external device if the remaining battery charge of the vehicle has increased.
However, Johnson teaches selectively initiating a data transmission session between a vehicle and a server whenever a power profile of the vehicle changes, where the power profile includes the vehicle’s ignition status, connection to utility power, and state of charge, and where each power profile has different corresponding rules governing communication of data (Figs 1-4, Col 9 lines 22-33). This change in power profile necessarily includes an increase in state of charge.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to modify the vehicle control system of Castano, by incorporating the teachings of Johnson, such that data transmission is selectively established as the vehicle’s power profile changes including changes in charging level, which thereby causes additional costs to be determined and further data to be transmitted based on the priority level as in Castano.
The motivation to do so is that, as acknowledged by Johnson, this improves data transfer between vehicles to servers ([0003], [0004]).
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Castano in view of Khati et al. (US 20230078214).
In regards to claim 7, Castano teaches the in-vehicle control device according to claim 1.
Castano does not teach: wherein the control unit acquires the remaining battery charge based on an SOC and an SOH of the battery mounted in the vehicle.
However, Khati teaches determining state of charge percentage of remaining battery charge using the health of the battery, which factors in SOC and SOH of the battery into the remaining battery charge ([0052], [0053], [0058]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to modify the vehicle control system of Castano, by incorporating the teachings of Khati, such that the remaining battery charge is determined using the health, which is SOH, and charge level, which is SOC, of the battery.
The motivation to do so is that, as acknowledged Khati, this allows for improved content sharing over networks ([0002], [0003]).
Claims 9 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Castano in view of Murad et al. (US 20190124275).
In regards to claim 9, Castano teaches the in-vehicle control device according to claim 1,
wherein the control unit executes first control for collecting the vehicle data while the vehicle is traveling, ([0048] vehicle may be identified as travelling, and [0030] sensors of the vehicle may record data while traveling.)
the control unit executes second control including the calculation control, the extraction control, and the first transmission control while the vehicle is parked, ([0054] vehicle state may be determined including that the vehicle is parked or turned off. [0033]-[0035], [0048], [0065], [0070] vehicle selectively prioritizes data, extracts the prioritized data, and transmits the data to server.) and
Castano does not teach:
the control unit does not collect the vehicle data while executing the second control.
However, Murad teaches when a vehicle is shut down and switched off, the cameras are also shut down and do not collect data ([0102]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to modify the vehicle control system of Castano, by incorporating the teachings of Murad, such that when the vehicle ignition is switched off and the vehicle is switched off, the sensors are also turned off and do not collect data, which means the vehicle of Castano does not collect data while performing the data prioritization after being parked and switched off.
The motivation to do so is that, as acknowledged by Murad, this allows for improved control of cameras ([0003]).
In regards to claim 10, Castano, as modified by Murad, teaches the in-vehicle control device according to claim 9, further including;
a storage unit that stores first software configured to execute the first control and second software configured to execute the second control, ([0022] memory stores instructions for controlling in-vehicle control device which is a computer program containing software divided or combined in any and all configurations to perform data collection and data analysis, which includes software to particularly perform data collection and software to particularly perform data prioritization, selection, and transmission.)
wherein the control unit executes the first software while the vehicle is traveling, ([0048] vehicle may be identified as travelling, and [0030] sensors of the vehicle may record data while traveling, [0022] which is executed by instructions including software.)
Castano teaches the vehicle state may be determined including that the vehicle is parked or turned off and the vehicle selectively prioritizes data, extracts the prioritized data, and transmits the data to the server. The vehicle may also be identified as turned on and travelling and collect data ([0022], [0030], [0033]-[0035], [0048], [0054], [0065], [0070]). This starts the software after the data has been collected based on the state of the vehicle and costs of transmission.
Murad teaches when a vehicle is shut down and switched off, the cameras are also shut down and do not collect data ([0102]). Likewise, operations, including operating the cameras, begins when the vehicle is turned on with the ignition switch ([0060]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to modify the vehicle control system of Castano, as already modified by Mura, by further incorporating the teachings of Murad, such that when the vehicle is turned off, the sensors are turned off, and when turned back on, the sensors are turned on, thereby also engaging software to collect sensor data, and when sensor data has been collected and the vehicle transitions to an ignition off, turned off, parked state, the vehicle engages data processing software to prioritize, select, and transmit data according to costs as in Castano.
The motivation to do so is the same as acknowledged by Murad in regards to claim 9.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Jeong et al. (US 20250330708) teaches deactivating vehicle cameras when the vehicle’s ignition is turned off.
Gotesdyner et al. (US 20220358382) teaches selectively performing communication between a vehicle and a server based on a power profile of the vehicle including state of charge and ignition status.
Inoue (WO 2007040119) teaches selectively performing vehicle communication operations when the vehicle is turned off and not charging.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATTHIAS S WEISFELD whose telephone number is (571)272-7258. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 7:00 AM - 4:00 PM.
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, Ramya Burgess can be reached at Ramya.Burgess@USPTO.GOV. 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.
/MATTHIAS S WEISFELD/Examiner, Art Unit 3661