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
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.
Claim(s) 1, 14-16, 18-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Nania (US 2018/0015825 A1).
Re claim 1: Nania teaches an acoustic system, comprising:
an interior member for a conveyance (interior of a vehicle (figure 2) including at least one speaker (note teaching of speakers, paragraph [0020];
a state detection unit (304) that detects a state of an occupant or the interior member (monitoring the drowsiness of an occupant); and a control unit that is connected to the speaker and the state detection unit, and that controls the speaker,
wherein the control unit (302) includes a state determination unit that determines the state of the occupant or the interior member based on information received from the state detection unit,
and an acoustic control unit (108) that controls, when sound is emitted from the speaker, at least one of a volume, a tempo, or a direction of the sound emitted from the speaker, based on the determined state of the occupant or the interior member (paragraph [0019 and 0020] increase the volume),
the state detection unit is configured to acquire biometric information of the occupant (paragraph [0028] sensors (304) include biometric sensors),
the state determination unit determines a wakefulness (drowsiness) of the occupant as the state of the occupant based on the biometric information of the occupant,
the acoustic control unit controls the sound emitted from the speaker, based on the determined wakefulness of the occupant, and
the acoustic control unit controls the volume or the tempo of the sound in accordance with the wakefulness of the occupant differently depending on whether the occupant is a driver or not a driver (if the driver is drowsy the arrangement could increase the volume of a speaker directed to the driver, paragraph [0013, 0019] but if the occupant is not the driver the arrangement lowers the audio setting for the passenger seat, paragraph [0023]).
Re claim 14: see teaching in paragraph [0020] the use of a vibration generation such a haptic alert including a vibration in a steering wheel or driver’s seat.
Re claim 15: see teaching in paragraph [0018] monitoring the wakefulness (drowsiness) occurs for a threshold time period before imparting a stimulus (such as speaker volume or vibration)
Re claim 16: see teaching in paragraph [0019] for a continued monitoring of wakefulness (second occasion that occurs after a first occasion) to increasing a stimulus (such as a volume or haptic alert)
Re claim 18: the claimed light generating device is satisfied by displayed warning on the infotainment head unit as discussed in paragraph [0020]
Re claim 19: see use of a vibration generating device (haptic alert) and light generating device (by displayed warning on the infotainment head unit) as taught in paragraphs [0019-0020]
Re claims 20-21: determining the wakefulness of an occupant in a rear seat is deemed to be the monitoring the wakefulness of a passenger which can include a rear seat passenger and control an acoustic (audio system to a lower setting), paragraph [0023] to the rear seat/passenger seat
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 22 and 24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
Nania et al. in view of Sakata et al. (US 2019/0344805 A1) and Okubo (US 9,746,048 B2)
Re claim 22: The teaching of Nania. is discussed above and incorporated herein. Nania does not teach the specifics of a conveyance seat as set forth, i.e. a headrest, spaced speakers and a damper is connected to a headrest pillar between the speakers. Sakata et al. teaches in a similar environment to include speakers in a conveyance seat (see figure 3) to provide audio to a person using the seat. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate this teaching of Sakata et al. into the arrangement of Nanai to predictably provide a means to provide audio to a user of a seat. This combination of Nania et al. and Sakata et al. does not teach seats including headrests to include a damper. Okubo teaches in a similar environment, seats including headrests to include a damper, i.e. a damper case (17) that is connected to a center of a headrest via a pillar (12) to suppress any vibrations to a user's head. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing of the invention to incorporate a damper as taught in Okubo into the headrest arrangement Nania et al in view of Sakata et al. as applied to predictably provide a means of suppressing vibrations occurring in this rest to the user. Therefor the claimed subject matter would have been obvious before the filing of the invention.
Re claim 24: as seen from figure 6 of Okubo the headrest includes a pair of pillar portions (12a) that extend inward at portions (12b) approaching each other with damper (17 disposed between
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 12-13, 17 and 23 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The claimed acoustic system including in combination those features of claim 1 wherein, in a case where the occupant is the driver and it is determined that the wakefulness of the occupant is low, the acoustic control unit makes the tempo of the sounds faster, and in a case where the occupant is not the driver and it is determined that the wakefulness of the occupant is low, the acoustic control unit makes the tempo of the sounds slower as set forth in claim 12 is neither taught by nor an obvious variation of the art of record. The claimed acoustic system including in combination those features of claim 1 wherein, in a case where the occupant is the driver and it is determined that the wakefulness of the occupant is low, the acoustic control unit increases the volume of the sound and makes the tempo of the sounds faster, and in a case where the occupant is not the driver and it is determined that the wakefulness of the occupant is low, the acoustic control unit reduces the volume of the sound and makes the tempo of the sounds slower as set forth in claim 13 is neither taught by nor an obvious variation of the art of record. The claimed acoustic system including in combination those features of claim 1 wherein the state detection unit includes a brain wave detection unit that detects a brain wave of the occupant, the state determination unit determines a mood of the occupant based on the brain wave received from the brain wave detection unit, and when the state determination unit determines that the occupant is in a happy mood, the acoustic control unit increases the volume of the sound and makes the tempo of the sounds faster as set forth in claim 17 is neither taught by nor an obvious variation of the art of record. The claimed acoustic system including in combination those features of claim 22/1 wherein an upper end of the damper is positioned below upper ends of the speakers as set forth in claim 23 is neither taught by nor an obvious variation of the art of record.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 has been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 ANDREW SNIEZEK whose telephone number is (571)272-7563. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:00 AM-3:30 PM EST.
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, Ahmad Matar can be reached at 571-272-7488. 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.
/ANDREW SNIEZEK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2693
/A.S./Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2693
