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 .
Status of Claims
This action is in response to the claims filed on 02/27/2026, wherein claims 1 and 6-10 are amended and claim 2 is cancelled. Claims 1 and 3-10 are rejected.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see REMARKS, filed 02/27/2026, with respect to the rejection of claims 1-10 under 35 USC §101 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the previous rejections under 35 USC §101 have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the rejection of claims 1-10 under 35 USC §103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the previous rejections under 35 USC §103 have been withdrawn. However, a new rejection is presented below in view of Dudar.
The Applicant has amended the claims to recite “…automatically adjusts the specified seat.” This limitation overcomes the rejections under 35 USC §101 and therefore those rejections have been withdrawn.
With respect to the rejection of claims 1-10, under 35 USC §103, the Applicant argues:
However, in the instant case, the seat is automatically adjusted when the user's ID includes a permission. Thus, we recommend amending claim 1 to include claim 2 and to further state that the processing unit automatically transmits the adjustment data to a seat adjuster only when the adjustment data includes a permission to adjust a seat, wherein the seat adjuster adjusts the specified seat among a plurality of seat adjusters configured to perform adjustment of the respective plurality of seats. Thus, unlike Bayes, automatic adjustment is based on a preference stored in the mobile terminal not the actual user.
The new prior art of Dudar discloses a method and system for operating an engine in humid conditions and teaches the use of security tokens associated with a key fob. The system determines if a key fob is within its proximity and if so it receives the security token associated with the key fob. If the security token is accepted then the system automatically performs control of the vehicle, e.g., starting an engine or powering a power source. While, Dudar is not directed towards seat adjustment, substituting the security tokens of Dudar for the password and/or finger print of Bayes would allow for a security token to be used as a method of automatically controlling a vehicle seat system. Thus providing the seat adjustment prior to the user entering the vehicle. Therefore, the amended claims are rejected as being unpatentable over the combination of Naoki, Dudar, and Bayes.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) are: “communication apparatus that is configured to wirelessly communicate with…” in claims 1,3-6 and 8-9.
Because these claim limitation(s) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, they are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
In the instant application the term “communication apparatus” will be interpreted in light of the specification at ¶ [0056]-[0057] and Fig. 5: “FIG. 5 is a block diagram showing a configuration of a main part of the communication apparatus 11 and the mobile terminal 13. The communication apparatus 11 includes a wireless transmission unit 61, a wireless reception unit 62, a wired communication unit 63, an apparatus input unit 64, an apparatus storage unit 65, and an apparatus control unit 66. These are connected to an apparatus bus 67. The wireless transmission unit 61 is further connected to each of three transmission antennas Ta. The wireless reception unit 62 is further connected to a reception antenna Ra. The wired communication unit 63 is further connected to a communication bus B.
The wireless transmission unit 61 wirelessly transmits data to the mobile terminal 13 via the transmission antennas Ta in accordance with instructions from the apparatus control unit 66. The wireless reception unit 62 receives data wirelessly transmitted from the mobile terminal 13 via the reception antenna Ra. The communication apparatus 11 communicates with the mobile terminal 13 wirelessly. The wireless communication between the communication apparatus 11 and the mobile terminal 13 is performed according to a communication protocol such as Bluetooth (registered trademark), UWB (Ultra-Wide Band), Wi-Fi (registered trademark), or LTE (Long Term Evolution). The wired communication unit 63 communicates with the device communication unit 53 of the seat adjuster 12 via the communication bus B. The wired communication unit 63 transmits data to the device communication unit 53 in accordance with an instruction from the apparatus control unit 66. The wired communication unit 63 receives data from the device communication unit 53.”
If applicant does not intend to have these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
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) 1-3, 5-8, and 10 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Naoki et al. (JP2013205297A, “Naoki”, Machine Translation) in view of Dudar (US 2019/0211764 A1, “Dudar”) and in further view of Bayes (US 2023/0249588 A1, “Bayes”).
Regarding claims 1, 6, and 7, Naoki discloses boarding position speculation device and vehicle and teaches:
a communication apparatus that is configured to wirelessly communicate with a mobile terminal and is to be mounted in a vehicle (The vehicle 100 in FIG. 2 has at least an in-vehicle LAN (Local Area Network) 110, a car audio module 120, a car air conditioning module 130, a power window module 140, a power seat module 150, a driving information measurement unit 160, a communication unit 170, a position measurement unit 180, and a control unit 190 – See at least ¶ [0018] The communication unit 170 is a communication device that conforms to a communication standard for short-range wireless communication, such as Bluetooth or Wi-Fi (Wireless Fidelity (registered trademark)). The communication unit 170 mutually identifies and communicates with the user's information terminal 200 – See at least ¶ [0025]; Examiner notes that the entire vehicle system is the “communication apparatus”.) in which a plurality of seats are arranged, the plurality of seats having a seat adjuster configured to change the position of the seat the communication apparatus comprising (As shown in Fig. 1 there are a plurality of seats within vehicle 100. The power seat module 150 has operating conditions for the power seat for each occupancy position in the vehicle 100. The operating conditions for the power seat can be changed to suit the user's attributes and preferences. The power seat module 150 determines the operating conditions of the power seat in accordance with control instructions from the control unit 190. The power seat module 150 controls the operation of the power seat based on the determined operating conditions – See at least ¶ [0023])
a processing unit configured to execute processing, (The control unit 190 is an ECU (Electronic Control Unit) for in-vehicle devices. The control unit 190 controls the various operations of the above-mentioned in-vehicle devices, the position measurement unit 180, the communication unit 170, and the driving information measurement unit 160 based on a control program stored in advance – See at least ¶ [0028])
wherein the processing unit, (The control unit 190 is an ECU (Electronic Control Unit) for in-vehicle devices. The control unit 190 controls the various operations of the above-mentioned in-vehicle devices – See at least ¶ [0028])
estimates a position of the mobile terminal inside the vehicle based on information obtained through communication with the mobile terminal, (The control unit 190 infers whether or not the user is riding in the vehicle 100. The control unit 190 outputs an instruction to the position measurement unit 180 to read out the position information. The control unit 190 acquires the position information output from the position measurement unit 180. The control unit 190 outputs an instruction to the communication unit 170 requesting acquisition of the location information of the information terminal 200. The control unit 190 acquires the location information and terminal ID of the information terminal 200 output from the communication unit 170. The control unit 190 uses the position information of the position measurement unit 180 and the position information and terminal ID of the information terminal 200 to determine whether the information terminal 200 is present inside the vehicle 100 while the vehicle 100 is moving. The control unit 190 determines that the user is in the vehicle 100 when the information terminal 200 is present inside the vehicle 100. The control unit 190 estimates the user's riding position within the vehicle 100 – See at least ¶ [0030])
specifies a seat closest to the estimated position among the plurality of seats, (The control unit 190 determines that the seating position closest to the position of the information terminal 200 in the vehicle 100 is the user's riding position – See at least ¶ [0030]) acquires, from the mobile terminal, adjustment data needed to adjust the specified seat, (The control unit 190 receives the input information and terminal ID of the information terminal 200 output from the communication unit 170. The control unit 190 analyzes the content of the input information. The control unit 190 identifies the riding position of the information terminal 200 indicated by the terminal ID. The control unit 190 outputs control instructions to the in-vehicle devices based on the position information of the identified riding position and the input information. The control instruction to the in-vehicle device is, for example, a control instruction to specify the operating conditions of the in-vehicle device for the specified riding position, and a control instruction to operate the in-vehicle device based on the operating conditions – See at least ¶ [0031]; Examiner notes that the in-vehicle devices includes power seating and adjusting of said seating – See at least ¶ [0018] and [0023])
transmits the adjustment data acquired from the mobile terminal to the seat adjuster corresponding to the specified seat [], where the seat adjuster automatically adjusts the specified seat. (The power seat module 150 determines the operating conditions of the power seat in accordance with control instructions from the control unit 190. The power seat module 150 controls the operation of the power seat based on the determined operating conditions – See at least ¶ [0023])
Naoki does not explicitly teach acquires the adjustment data from the mobile terminal only if the acquired data indicates permission to adjust a seat. However, Dudar discloses a method and system for operating an engine in humid conditions teaches:
transmits the adjustment data acquired from the mobile terminal to the [vehicle] corresponding to the specified [target] only when the adjustment data includes a permission to make an adjustment, where the [controller] automatically adjusts the specified [target]. (The various components described above with reference to FIG.1 may be controlled by a vehicle control system 41, which includes a controller 12 with computer readable instructions for carrying out routines and subroutines for regulating vehicle systems, a plurality of sensors 42, and a plurality of actuators 44… A key fob 3 may transmit a security token (e.g., number sequence) to receiver 2 when key fob 3 enters a proximity (e.g., within two meters) of vehicle 1. The security token may allow activation of the vehicle 1 including energy conversion device 18 and engine 20 – See at least ¶ [0019])
In summary, Naoki teaches acquiring adjustment data from a mobile device and automatically adjusting the seat based on the received data. Naoki does not explicitly teach transmitting adjustment data only when the adjustment data includes a permission to make an adjustment. However, Dudar discloses a method and system for operating an engine in humid conditions and teaches the use of security tokens to authorize a vehicle adjustment signal to be transmitted to the vehicle.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to have modified the boarding position speculation device and vehicle of Naoki to provide for the security tokens, as taught in Dudar, to operate the vehicle in response to a key fob entering a proximity and a security token is recognized by the vehicle controller, i.e., increased security. (At Dudar ¶ [0053])
Naoki does not explicitly teach acquires the adjustment data from the mobile terminal only if the acquired data indicates permission to adjust a seat. However, Bayes discloses vehicle seat adjustment system and method and teaches:
transmits the adjustment data acquired [] to the seat adjuster corresponding to the specified seat only when the adjustment data includes a permission to make an adjustment, where the seat adjuster automatically adjusts the specified seat. (The system 100 may be configured to limit access thereto to only authorized users. As such, the users may only be able to adjust the at least one seat 5 when they are authorized, for example, via fingerprint or via password. As such, the processor 124 may be configured to receive at least one access attempt from the at least one user via the user interface 110 – See at least ¶ [0034])
In summary, Naoki discloses identifying and verifying users based on their mobile devices. This includes associating the identified user with a specified seat within the vehicle. Naoki further discloses filtering out users who are not within the vehicle and allowing users in the vehicle to modify the positions of their seats. While Dudar discloses only allowing vehicle operation when the vehicle receives a security token from a key fob of a user. However, the combination of Naoki and Dudar does not explicitly teach a seat adjustment in response to the security token. However, Bayes discloses vehicle seat adjustment system and method and teaches a system that only allows authorized users to adjust the settings of the seat. The authorization includes fingerprints and passwords. However, Bayes does no rely on a mobile terminal to perform the transmission function. But using the security token of Dudar with the seat permissive adjustment settings Bayes allows for the vehicle to predict operations prior to the user arriving at the vehicle. This allows for the seat adjustment to occur security and before the user is seated.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to have modified the boarding position speculation device and vehicle of Naoki and Dudar to provide for the vehicle seat adjustment system and method, as taught in Bayes, to provide a system and method that allows a plurality of users to save preferred position(s) of a driver seat and/or at least one passenger seat and selectively adjusts the driver seat and/or the at least one passenger seat to the preferred position(s). (At Bayes ¶ [0005])
Regarding claims 3 and 8, Naoki does not explicitly teach, but Bayes further teaches:
wherein the adjustment of the seat includes at least one of adjustment of a position in a front-rear direction of a bottom portion of the seat configured to come into contact with a gluteal region of an occupant of the vehicle, adjustment of a position in an up-down direction of the bottom portion, (The system 100 may be configured to automatically adjust at least one seat 5 in a vehicle. For example, the at least one seat 5 may include a driver seat and at least one passenger seat (such as front passenger seat). In some embodiments, the system 100 may be configured to adjust an entirety of the at least one seat 5 (via at least one drive means 10). For example, the system 100 may adjust backward/ forward position of the at least one seat 5 (lengthening or shortening leg room), may adjust a height of the at least one seat, etc. – See at least ¶ [0022]) adjustment of an angle of a backrest that protrudes upward from a rear side of the bottom portion and is configured to come into contact with a back of the occupant, and adjustment of an angle of a headrest that protrudes upward from an upper end portion of the backrest and is configured to come into contact with a head region of the occupant. (In other embodiments, the system 100 may be configured to adjust portions of the at least one seat 5. For example, the system 100 may adjust headrest angle/height/support, seat cushion angle/height, lumbar angle/height, backrest angle, etc. – See at least ¶ [0023])
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to have modified the boarding position speculation device and vehicle of Naoki and dudar to provide for the vehicle seat adjustment system and method, as taught in Bayes, to provide a system and method that allows a plurality of users to save preferred position(s) of a driver seat and/or at least one passenger seat and selectively adjusts the driver seat and/or the at least one passenger seat to the preferred position(s). (At Bayes ¶ [0005])
Regarding claims 5 and 10, Naoki further teaches:
wherein the processing unit determines whether or not an occupant of the vehicle has sat in one of the plurality of seats, and (The control unit 190 infers whether or not the user is riding in the vehicle 100 – See at least ¶ [0030])
if the processing unit determines that the occupant of the vehicle has sat in one of the plurality of seats, the processing unit estimates the position of the mobile terminal inside the vehicle based on information obtained through communication with the mobile terminal. (The control unit 190 outputs an instruction to the position measurement unit 180 to read out the position information. The control unit 190 acquires the position information output from the position measurement unit 180. The control unit 190 outputs an instruction to the communication unit 170 requesting acquisition of the location information of the information terminal 200. The control unit 190 acquires the location information and terminal ID of the information terminal 200 output from the communication unit 170. The control unit 190 uses the position information of the position measurement unit 180 and the position information and terminal ID of the information terminal 200 to determine whether the information terminal 200 is present inside the vehicle 100 while the vehicle 100 is moving. The control unit 190 determines that the user is in the vehicle 100 when the information terminal 200 is present inside the vehicle 100. The control unit 190 estimates the user's riding position within the vehicle 100 – See at least ¶ [0030])
Claim(s) 4 and 9 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Naoki in view of Dudar and Bayes, as applied to claims 1 and 2, and in further view of Wang (US 2017/0057379 A1, “Wang”).
Regarding claims 4 and 9, the combination of Naoki, Dudar, and Bayes does not explicitly teach wherein the adjustment data indicates a physique value relating to a physique of a person. However, Wang discloses driver visibility enhancing seat adjustment and teaches:
wherein the adjustment data indicates a physique value relating to a physique of a person. (Processing unit 104 may also be configured to automatically initiate adjustment of seats 30, 31, 40 based on stored profiles associated with a specific driver. Data for the driver profiles may be entered via user interface 24 and stored in storage unit 106. For example, controller 100 may be configured to receive preset configurations of seats 30, 31, 40 for a specific driver, to associate the preset configuration with the specific driver, and to store the data in storage unit 106. Controller 100 may also be configured to receive other preferences and physical characteristics from the specific occupant, such as a height or a torso length, to associate the information with the specific driver, and to store the data in storage unit 106. Controller 100 may then be configured to recognize the specific driver, based on at least one of an input into user interface 24, an image captured by camera 26. a weight being placed on weight sensor 80, or any other indicator of the specific occupant. Once a driver is recognized, processing unit 104 may be configured to access the respective driver profile in storage unit 106, to generate a command signal based on the driver profile, and to transmit the command signals to motors 62, 64, 66 in order to automatically adjust seats 30, 31, 40 – See at least ¶ [0032])
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to have modified the boarding position speculation device and vehicle of Naoki, Dudar, and Bayes to provide for the driver visibility enhancing seat adjustment, as taught in Wang, to comfortably accommodate the occupants. (At Wang ¶ [0014])
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 CHASE L COOLEY whose telephone number is (303)297-4355. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 7-5MT.
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, Aniss Chad can be reached at 571-270-3832. 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.
/C.L.C./Examiner, Art Unit 3662
/ANISS CHAD/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3662
Prosecution Insights