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 .
Claim Objections
Claims 1 and 5 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1, line 1, should be changed to A steering system for vehicles” which should be changed to A steering system for a vehicle” because the claims refer to “said vehicle” which denotes a singular vehicle. Line 2 should also be amended to recite --said vehicle-- and not --a vehicle-- to mirror the amendment to line 1.
Claim 1, line 3, recites “the user” which should be changed to --a user-- because “a user” has not been previously claimed.
Claim 5, line 2, recites “said at least one onboard system onboard systems by means” which is grammatically incorrect and should be changed to --said at least one onboard system by means--.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 6 is 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.
Claim 6, line 4, recites “an image” which is indefinite because it is unclear what the difference is between the image from claim 6 and the image from claim 1, line 10. Are there two separate images? Should claim 6 be amended to recite --the image--? The Applicant amended claim 1 to include the limitations of claim 2 which included the limitation of “an image”.
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 1 and 3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Audio Mobil (DE 202009001077 U1; see provided machine translation) in view of Mayville et al. (WO 2022/072153 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Audio Mobil discloses a steering system for vehicles, comprising:
a steering device (see Figure 1) associated with a vehicle and provided with a steering wheel (see Figure 1) provided with a body (the rim of the steering wheel) configured to be gripped by a user and rotationally actuatable by the user, about an axis of rotation (the axial centerline of the steering wheel), in order to impart changes of direction to said vehicle,
said steering device comprising at least one button (3-9) which can be operated by the user to control or set at least one onboard system (see Page 2 / Lines 22-28 of the machine translation) installed on said vehicle,
wherein a display (2) configured to display the commands or settings imparted by means of said at least one button is mounted on the body of said steering wheel.
Audio Mobil does not disclose an electronic gyroscope which is functionally connected to said display and is configured to maintain an image displayed by said display in a predetermined fixed reading position, regardless of the angular position assumed by said steering wheel about said axis of rotation.
Mayville et al. teaches an electronic gyroscope (122, 124) which is functionally connected to a display (108) and is configured to maintain an image displayed by said display in a predetermined fixed reading position (an upright orientation), regardless of the angular position assumed by said steering wheel about an axis of rotation (the axial centerline of the steering wheel) (see Paragraphs 0053 and 0054).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the steering system of Audio Mobil to have an electronic gyroscope functionally connected to said display and configured to maintain an image displayed by said display in a predetermined fixed reading position, regardless of the angular position assumed by said steering wheel about said axis of rotation, as taught by Mayville et al., for the purpose of providing a structure that maintains a desired orientation of the display throughout the rotation of the steering wheel thus allowing the user to read the display no matter what orientation the steering wheel is in.
Regarding claim 3, Audio Mobile discloses that said at least one button is mounted on at least one respective supporting wing (the structure that 7 and 8 are formed on is viewed as being a wing since it extends outward from the center of the steering wheel) arranged at a rear (see Figure 2) of said steering wheel.
Claims 4 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Audio Mobil (DE 202009001077 U1; see provided machine translation) in view of Mayville et al. (WO 2022/072153 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Amaru et al. (US 10,247,944 B2).
Regarding claim 4, Audio Mobil in view of Mayville et al. discloses all of the claim limitations, see above, but does not disclose that said at least one button and said display are mutually connected by virtue of short-range wireless communication means.
Amaru et al. teaches at least one button (36, 37) and a display (the display of the smartphone) are mutually connected by virtue of short-range wireless communication means (Bluetooth; Column 8 / Line 65 – Column 9 / Line 8).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the at least one button and said display of Audio Mobil in view of Mayville et al. to be mutually connected by virtue of short-range wireless communication means, as taught by Amaru et al., for the purpose of providing a connection that does not require wiring thus simplifying the assembly.
Regarding claim 5, Audio Mobil in view of Mayville et al. discloses all of the claim limitations, see above, but does not disclose that said steering device is interconnected with said at least one onboard system by means of a CANBUS network.
Amaru et al. teaches a steering device (26) that is interconnected with onboard systems (a vehicle’s ECU) by means of a CANBUS network (Column 12 / Lines 43-46).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the steering device of Audio Mobil in view of Mayville et al. to be interconnected with said at least one onboard system by means of a CANBUS network, as taught by Amaru et al., for the purpose of providing a singular network that links the onboard systems together thus allowing a user to control the various systems from a singular system.
Claim 6, as best understood, is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Audio Mobil (DE 202009001077 U1; see provided machine translation) in view of Mayville et al. (WO 2022/072153 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Schramm et al. (US 9,193,375 B2).
Regarding claim 6, Audio Mobil in view of Mayville et al. discloses all of the claim limitations, see above, but does not disclose a mobile processing device which is configured to be operated by the user and is connectable, by means of a short-range wireless communication network, to said steering device, said mobile processing device being configured to allow the user to vary the image displayed by said display and/or a type of command or setting that can be given by the user by means of said button.
Schramm et al. teaches a mobile processing device (210) which is configured to be operated by the user and is connectable, by means of a short-range wireless communication network (a Bluetooth wireless connection; Column 8 / Line 17), to a steering device (100), said mobile processing device being configured to allow the user to vary an image (the image on 214 in Figure 4) displayed by a display (214) and/or a type of command or setting that can be given by the user by means of a button.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the steering system of Audio Mobil in view of Mayville et al. to have a mobile processing device which is configured to be operated by the user and is connectable, by means of a short-range wireless communication network, to said steering device, and to have said mobile processing device be configured to allow the user to vary the image displayed by said display and/or a type of command or setting that can be given by the user by means of said button, as taught by Schramm et al., for the purpose of allowing a user to use a phone to control the image on the steering wheel thus allowing a further degree of options on what is shown on the display.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed September 5, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The Applicant argued on Page 8 of the Remarks that “Mayville pertains to a steering wheel-mounted display whose orientation is maintained (1) by electronically updating an image based on the steering wheel's orientation, or (2) by mechanical or motorized rotation of the display itself, using counterweights, motors, or gears. Mayville, particularly the cited portions, does not disclose or suggest an electronic gyroscope that detects steering wheel rotation and controls the correction of visual content, as in Applicant’s amended independent claim 1. Rather, Mayville focuses on physical mechanisms or electronic corrections within the display, without specifying any type of inertial sensor or other system for detecting the angular orientation of the steering wheel”.
Paragraphs 0053 and 0054 of Mayville discuss how the display is moved when the steering wheel is rotated. Paragraph 0053 discloses that a motor (122) turns a geared output shaft (124) according to a signal sent from a PCBA (printed circuit board assembly) to maintain the display (108) in an upright orientation. This structure is viewed as meeting the limitation of an electronic gyroscope because there is an electronic component with the PCBA, and a structure (the motor, geared output shaft, exterior toothed profile, etc.) that functions in a gyroscopic manner. The Applicant’s specification does not disclose any structure of the electronic gyroscope thus it appears that the display moving structure of Mayville meets the claim limitation. Furthermore, it is viewed that updating the image based on the steering wheel’s orientation would also meet the limitation of “an electronic gyroscope” because there is a structure that electronic and that alters the image to maintain its position no matter what position the steering wheel is in. Also, in response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., any type of inertial sensor or other system for detecting the angular orientation of the steering wheel) are not recited in the rejected claims. Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 ADAM D ROGERS whose telephone number is (571)272-6561. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday from 6AM-2:00PM 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, John Olszewski can be reached at (571)272-2706. 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.
/ADAM D ROGERS/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3617