Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/862,844

METHOD FOR ADJUSTING AN INTERIOR ELEMENT OF A VEHICLE, AND EMERGENCY ASSISTANCE SYSTEM AND VEHICLE HAVING AN EMERGENCY ASSISTANCE SYSTEM

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
Nov 04, 2024
Examiner
NGUYEN, ROBERT T
Art Unit
3619
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Cariad SE
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
83%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 7m
To Grant
93%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 83% — above average
83%
Career Allow Rate
364 granted / 440 resolved
+30.7% vs TC avg
Moderate +10% lift
Without
With
+10.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 7m
Avg Prosecution
25 currently pending
Career history
465
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
10.3%
-29.7% vs TC avg
§103
35.5%
-4.5% vs TC avg
§102
14.7%
-25.3% vs TC avg
§112
28.9%
-11.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 440 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103 §112
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. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. Claim 10 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. As per claim 10, it is unclear whether the vehicle of claim 10 is the same or different than the vehicle in claim 9 as “A vehicle” is recited in the preamble of claim 10 and “a vehicle” is also recited in the preamble of claim 9. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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 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. Claim(s) 1 and 7-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Prinz (US 2019/0061772). As per claims 1, 9, and 10, Prinz discloses an emergency assistance system (system 10) for a vehicle (see at least para. 56 for vehicle) that includes at least one interior element (see at least para. 98 for sunroof), the emergency assistance system comprising: a processor device (control unit 12); and a memory storing program code (implied as this is a computer implemented method) that, when executed by the processor device, causes the emergency assistance system to: detect an occupant state signal which signals that a specified pathological state of an occupant of the vehicle at least restricts an ability of the occupant to drive the vehicle to a specified extent (see at least para. 82-87 for receiving physiological parameters to determine state of health, state of well-being, or illness such as fatigue); activate an emergency assistance system of the vehicle and provide an emergency signal to carry out at least one support measure for the occupant (see at least para. 98 for module 132 opens the windows or sunroof in response to state of health or well-being of the driver such as fatigue); and while the emergency signal is present, control an adjustment drive of the at least one interior element (see at least para. 98 for module 132 opens the windows or sunroof in response to state of health or well-being of the driver such as fatigue; wherein the claim limitations do not require the support measure and control of the adjustment drive to be distinct), wherein a position of the at least one interior element is adjusted to a specified target position (see at least para. 98 for module 132 opens the windows or sunroof in response to state of health or well-being of the driver such as fatigue; wherein the specified target position is open), and wherein, in the specified target position, a movement space delimited by way of the at least one interior element is increased for entry and/or exit of the occupant (see at least para. 98 for module 132 opens the windows or sunroof in response to state of health or well-being of the driver such as fatigue; wherein having a window or sunroof open increases options for egress). Re claim 7, Prinz further discloses wherein the occupant state signal is determined by capturing at least one vital sign and/or an attention parameter of the occupant (see at least para. 59 and 84 for camera to detect fatigue or nodding off). Re claim 8, Prinz further discloses wherein the occupant state signal is captured by way of an interior camera of the vehicle and/or by way of a vital sign measuring device inside or outside the vehicle, and/or by way of an actuation sensor of the vehicle (see at least para. 59 and 84 for camera to detect fatigue or nodding off). 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) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Prinz in view of Meng (US 2019/0370577). As per claim 6, Prinz is silent regarding, but Meng teaches wherein the at least one support measure comprises controlling a communication device assigned to the vehicle to send out an emergency call signal for an emergency service (see at least para. 178 for when fatigue is detected then calling a predetermined contact). It would have been obvious to modify the system of Prinz with the features of Meng for guaranteeing the driver’s personal and/or property safety when the driver state is determined to be distracted by establishing communication to a predetermined contact. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 2-5 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBERT NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-4838. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8AM - 4PM 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, ANNA MOMPER can be reached at (571) 270-5788. 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. /ROBERT T NGUYEN/PRIMARY EXAMINER, Art Unit 3619
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 04, 2024
Application Filed
Jan 07, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12594671
TELEOPERATION SYSTEM FOR ROBOTIC MANIPULATION, AND METHODS, APPARATUS, AND SYSTEMS THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12576522
DRUM COUPLING AUTOMATION ROBOT AND DRUM COUPLING AUTOMATION METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12564957
DYNAMIC COORDINATION OF MULTIPLE ROBOTIC MANIPULATOR ARMS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12544163
Roboticized Surgery System with Improved Control
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Patent 12521881
INFORMATION PROCESSING DEVICE, CONTROL METHOD, AND STORAGE MEDIUM
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 13, 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
83%
Grant Probability
93%
With Interview (+10.4%)
2y 7m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 440 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

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

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month