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 .
The instant application having application No. 18/840,178 of DUPUY et al. for “STORAGE DRIVE ACTIVITY MONITOR” filed August 21, 2024 with a preliminary amendment has been examined.
Drawings
Drawings Figures 1A-9B submitted on August 21, 2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.121(d).
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted August 21, 2024 is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102/103
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.
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 12-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by the Applicant Submitted Prior Art of LOOS et al. (EUROPEAN Publication No. EP 3838681 A1) hereinafter “Loos”.
As to claim 12, Loos discloses a vehicle (a motor vehicle 108, shown in Figures 1, 2a, 2b) for transporting goods and/or people in a traffic lane (lane/s on roadway 300 [i.e. a traffic lane], shown in Figure 1 and described in Paragraph 0025) intended for right-hand driving or left-hand driving (A traffic situation with right-hand traffic is shown by way of example. The invention can also be used analogously for countries with left-hand traffic, described in Paragraph 0025), comprising, for a first given exteroceptive sensor model (sensor unit 105 [i.e. sensor model], ), a single sensor of this first model positioned on a front portion of the vehicle in order to obtain information about the environment in which the vehicle is located, referred to as single front sensor (The particularly preferred mounting area of the vehicle mount 106 is the front area 125 [i.e. a single sensor of this first model positioned on a front portion of the vehicle in order to obtain information about the environment in which the vehicle is located], shown in Figure 1 and described in Paragraph 0027, See also Paragraphs 0003, 0006 and 0024-0025), wherein, in the case of right-hand driving the single front sensor is offset to the left and in the case of left-hand driving said front sensor is offset to the right (The measurement can be made both for the traffic flowing off, here for vehicle 110 (motorcycle), and for the traffic arriving, here for vehicle 112 (passenger car). A traffic situation with right-hand traffic is shown by way of example. The invention can also be used analogously for countries with left-hand traffic. [i.e. wherein, in the case of right-hand driving the single front sensor is offset to the left and in the case of left-hand driving said front sensor is offset to the right], described in Paragraph 0025), from a mid-sagittal plane separating a left portion from a right portion of the vehicle (detection range 204… measurement can be made both for the traffic flowing off, here for vehicle 110 (motorcycle), and for the traffic arriving, here for vehicle 112 (passenger car). A traffic situation with right-hand traffic is shown by way of example. [i.e. from a mid-sagittal plane separating a left portion from a right portion of the vehicle], shown in Figure 1 and described in Paragraph 0025).
As to claim 13, Loos’s disclosure as set forth above in claim 12, further Loos discloses the vehicle further comprising a left side, a right side, a front side which connects the left side and the right side, and wherein the single front sensor is positioned on the front portion of the vehicle at the connection between the left side and the front side in the case of right-hand driving or at the connection between the right side and the front side in the case of left-hand driving (The measurement can be made both for the traffic flowing off, here for vehicle 110 (motorcycle), and for the traffic arriving, here for vehicle 112 (passenger car). A traffic situation with right-hand traffic is shown by way of example. The invention can also be used analogously for countries with left-hand traffic, described in Paragraph 0025).
As to claim 14, the vehicle according to claim 12, wherein the single front sensor is positioned in an upper part of the front portion of the vehicle (shown in Figure 2b and described in Paragraph 0027).
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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
Claims 15-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over by the Applicant Submitted Prior Art of LOOS et al. (EUROPEAN Publication No. EP 3838681 A1) hereinafter “Loos” in view of the Applicant Submitted Prior Art of HUELSEN et al. (GERMAN Publication No. DE 102019122186 A1) hereinafter “Huelsen”.
As to claim 15, Loos’s disclosure as set forth above in claim 14, but Loos does not expressly disclose comprising a roof which has a front left portion at the connection between the left side and the front side and a front right portion at the connection between the right side and the front side, and wherein the single front sensor is positioned near the front left portion in the case of right-hand driving or near the front right portion in the case of left-hand driving.
Huelsen disclose a vehicle (a motor vehicle 10, shown in Figures 1-6 and described in Paragraphs 0016-0030) comprising: sensor model (sensor module 24, 26), a roof which has a front left portion at the connection between a left side and a front side and a front right portion at a connection between a right side and a front side, and wherein a single front sensor is positioned near the front left portion in the case of right-hand driving or near the front right portion in the case of left-hand driving (shown in Figures 1-6 and described in Paragraph 0022, See also Paragraphs 0021, 0023-0025 and 0029).
Thus, given the vehicle of Loos and having the teaching of Huelsen disclosing a vehicle with a light sensing module that is also well-known and conventional in the art, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Loos by incorporating the teaching of Huelsen such that the apparatus, system and method of Loos to provide, the vehicle comprising a roof which has a front left portion at the connection between the left side and the front side and a front right portion at the connection between the right side and the front side, and wherein the single front sensor is positioned near the front left portion in the case of right-hand driving or near the front right portion in the case of left-hand driving, for the obvious advantage of providing a substitution of one conventional sensor type by another conventional sensor type to achieve a same or similar result, which is providing an information to a vehicle surrounding environment.
As to claim 16, the combination of Loos and Huelsen as set forth above in claim 15, further Huelsen disclose wherein the single front sensor is positioned on the roof (motor vehicle 10’s sensor module 24, 26, shown in Figure 1 and described in Paragraph 0019 and 0021-0023).
As to claim 17, the combination of Loos and Huelsen as set forth above in claim 12, further Loos disclose wherein an unobstructed horizontal field of view of the single front sensor covers an angle greater than or equal to 180°, preferably an angle of at least 270° (The particularly preferred mounting area of the vehicle mount 106 is the front area 125. In this front region, the motor vehicle comprises a driver region 60a on a second side 60 of the motor vehicle with a steering wheel 121 and a driver seat 122, and a passenger region 50a on a first side 50 of the motor vehicle, meets the claimed [i.e. wherein an unobstructed horizontal field of view of the single front sensor covers an angle greater than or equal to 180°, preferably an angle of at least 270°], described in Paragraph 0027, See also Paragraph 0025).
As to claim 18, the combination of Loos and Huelsen as set forth above in claim 12, further Loos disclose the vehicle further comprising, for a second given exteroceptive sensor model which is identical to or different from the first sensor model, a single sensor of this second model positioned on a rear portion of the vehicle in order to obtain information about the environment in which the vehicle is located, referred to as a single rear sensor, said single rear sensor being offset from the mid-sagittal plane separating the left portion from the right portion of the vehicle (shown in Figure 1 and described in Paragraph 0025, See also Paragraph 0027).
As to claim 19, the combination of Loos and Huelsen as set forth above in claim 18, further Loos disclose wherein, in the case of right-hand driving the single rear sensor is offset to the right and in the case of left-hand driving said rear sensor is offset to the left, from the mid-sagittal plane separating the left portion from the right portion of the vehicle (The vehicle body 102 may be comprised of one or more box-shaped elements. In the area 124 of the rear seat bank, a further element 41 is shown, which contains, for example, an air conditioning system or a computer unit. In a particularly preferred embodiment, this further element 41 can also comprise an adjustment unit 106, which can be screwed or positioned from the rear region 124 into the front region 125. The loading surface is equipped, in addition to receiving a traffic monitoring device 104 for rear operation, by means of T-slot nuts or T-slot rails 126, meets the claimed [i.e. wherein, in the case of right-hand driving the single rear sensor is offset to the right and in the case of left-hand driving said rear sensor is offset to the left, from the mid-sagittal plane separating the left portion from the right portion of the vehicle], shown in Figure 1 and described in Paragraph 0027, See also Paragraph 0025).
As to claim 20, the combination of Loos and Huelsen as set forth above in claim 18, further Loos disclose wherein the single front sensor is positioned on the front portion of the vehicle at a first height, the single rear sensor is positioned on the rear portion of the vehicle at a second height, the first height and the second height differing from each other by at most 20% of the height of the vehicle (shown in Figure 1 and described in Paragraphs 0025 and 0027).
As to claim 21, the combination of Loos and Huelsen as set forth above in claim 18, further Loos disclose wherein the single rear sensor is positioned on the roof (shown in Figure 1 and described in Paragraphs 0025).
As to claim 22, the combination of Loos and Huelsen as set forth above in claim 12, further Huelsen disclose wherein the single front sensor is a LiDAR sensor, a camera, or a radar (described in Paragraphs 0025) .
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The following cited arts are further to show the state of related art.
U.S. Publication No. 2021/0206368 A1 of TSURUOKA et al, discloses a driving assist apparatus which executes a process for collision avoidance when the possibility of collision of a vehicle with an obstacle is high. When the steering angle of the steering wheel is greater than an angle threshold, the apparatus determines that a driver is trying to avoid the collision by operating the steering wheel and does not execute the collision avoidance process. When the vehicle is making a right turn or a left turn, there arises a possibility that the collision avoidance process is not executed even in a situation where the collision avoidance process must be executed. In view of this, when the vehicle is making a right turn or a left turn, the angle threshold mentioned above is set to a larger value as compared with the case where the vehicle is not making a right turn or a left turn.
U.S. Publication No. 2018/0326979 A1 of TSURUOKA et al, discloses a driving assist apparatus comprising: an obstacle detection section which detects an obstacle present in a heading direction of a vehicle; a steering angle sensor which detects steering angle which is the rotational position of a steering wheel of said vehicle represented by the operation direction of said steering wheel and the operation amount of said steering wheel from its neutral position; a collision possibility determination section which determines whether or not a possibility of said vehicle colliding with said detected obstacle is high; an execution condition determination section which determines that a process execution condition is satisfied when said detected steering angle falls within a range between a rotational position which is a clockwise direction reference position which said steering wheel reaches when said operation direction is a clockwise direction and said operation amount is a predetermined first angle and another rotational position which is a counterclockwise direction reference position which said steering wheel reaches when said operation direction is a counterclockwise direction and said operation amount is a predetermined second angle; and a collision avoidance process execution section which executes a collision avoidance process, including at least one of a process of providing a warning to a driver of said vehicle and a process of decreasing speed of said vehicle, when said collision possibility determination section determines that the possibility of said vehicle colliding with said obstacle is high and said execution condition determination section determines that said process execution condition is satisfied, wherein said execution condition determination section executes at least one of a clockwise adjustment process of changing said clockwise direction reference position to a predetermined third angle larger than said first angle when said vehicle is determined to be making a right turn and a counterclockwise adjustment process of changing said counterclockwise direction reference position to a predetermined fourth angle larger than said second angle when said vehicle is determined to be making a left turn.
Correspondence
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SISAY YACOB whose telephone number is (571)272-8562. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 10:30-07:00 ET.
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, BRIAN A ZIMMERMAN can be reached at (571) 272-3059. 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.
/SISAY YACOB/ September 25, 2025 Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2686