DETAILED ACTION
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-11 and 13-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
The new limitations in claims 1, 9 and 15 were not described in the specification. Contrary to applicant’s assertions, paragraphs [0036] and [0037] do not provide support for the new limitations. The specification does not even use the terms “selecting”, “selected” or “select”. Also, the specification does not describe the selection of rules including at least one of: a requirement that an adult occupant be present in the vehicle, a maximum number of persons allowed in the vehicle, a restriction on an area allowed for driving, a restriction on a time period allowed for driving, and a prohibition on alcohol consumption or smoking within the vehicle based on a determination of an age category of a driver.
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 1-6, 8-11 and 13-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kuehnle et al. (US 2019/0147262 A1) in view of Trundle et al. (US 10,836,309 B1). Kuehnle teaches a computerized method / system of vehicular safety monitoring, the method comprising: determining a driver-associated state (e.g., “the seat belt not being worn by the driver” – paragraph 0139; other aspects of a driver-associated state are discussed in paragraphs 0164, 0198-0200, 0225 and 0241) based on data from one or more sensors (e.g., 345 – see paragraph 0140; see also paragraph 0014) of a vehicle and on additional vehicle data including at least one of a state of an advanced driver assistance system (e.g., “adaptive lane departure warning system” – paragraph 0012; “Lane Departure Warning (LDW) system 322” - paragraph 0053; “the data collection and communication module portion 300 may include one or more devices or systems 314 for providing input data indicative of one or more operating parameters or one or more conditions of a commercial vehicle. For example, the devices 314 may be one or more sensors, such as but not limited to, one or more wheel speed sensors 316, one or more acceleration sensors such as multi-axis acceleration sensors 317, a steering angle sensor 318, a brake pressure sensor 319, one or more vehicle load sensors 320, a yaw rate sensor 321, a lane departure warning (LDW) sensor or system 322” – paragraph 0062; “a radar-based distance keeping aid” – paragraph 0231; see also paragraphs 0063, 0070, 0072, 0243 and 0254) or a state of an onboard infotainment system (“for instance, when the radio station is being changed and the driver is not facing forward in the normal pose, and somewhat to the right, then the map area being faced may be labeled radio (or the likelihood of it being the radio increases)” – paragraph 0225), wherein: at least one sensor (e.g., 345) of the one or more sensors captures a cabin of the vehicle (paragraph 0184), and the driver-associated state includes a state of the cabin (e.g., whether or not the driver is wearing a seat belt – see paragraph 0139) and a vehicle operating state (“such as for example a vehicle door status, a speed change, an unusual stopping location, unauthorized passenger visible, or the like” – paragraph 0016; “how many people are present in the vehicle, their identities (with the unknown John or Jane Doe state also possible), the cabin image, the vehicle location, the vehicle speed, the door status(plural possibly), the forward view, an audio recording if speech is detected from the microphone or lip motion signals” – paragraph 0126; “for example, vehicle speed data or the like” – paragraph 0132); comparing the driver-associated state to one or more predefined driver-associated rules specific to the driver (e.g., a seat belt should be worn by the driver – see paragraph 0139; see also paragraph 0126 (which discusses the identification of people in the vehicle, the driver being one of the people in the vehicle) and claims 4 and 26 (which discuss identification of a “particular first driver”); other rules are presented in paragraphs 0164, 0198-0200 and 0241); and in response to detection of a violation of a rule of the one or more predefined driver-associated rules, triggering a warning event (paragraphs 0139, 0164, 0198-0200 and 0241); wherein: a sensor of the one or more sensors is an onboard camera (e.g., 345); and determining the driver-associated state includes: obtaining image data from the onboard camera (see paragraph 0012); determining, based on the image data, at least one of: a seating pose of a driver (said seating pose including a “driver’s head pose” – see paragraph 0012) of the vehicle, an interaction of the driver with a person and/or with an object in the vehicle, and a type of an object placed within the cabin; and determining the driver-associated state based on at least one of: the seating pose of the driver of the vehicle (see paragraphs 0012 and 0198-0200), the interaction of the driver with the person and/or with the object in the vehicle, and the type of the object placed within the cabin; wherein determining the driver-associated state further includes: determining at least one of: a number of persons in the cabin (paragraph 0126), an age of one or more persons, activities (e.g., “speech” – paragraph 0126) of one or more persons, a seat belt status of one or more persons (paragraph 0139), and alcohol usage and/or intoxication of one or more persons; and determining the driver-associated state based on at least one of: the number of persons in the cabin (paragraph 0126), the age of one or more persons, the activities (e.g., “speech” – paragraph 0126) of one or more persons, the seat belt status of one or more persons (paragraph 0139), and the alcohol usage and/or intoxication of one or more persons; wherein: the additional vehicle data includes input from further vehicle sensors (paragraphs 0014, 0019, 0062, 0069, 0070 and 0201). The one or more rules concern at least one of: an existence of a co-driver (e.g., 760; see paragraphs 0013 and 0095-0097); a maximum number of persons in the vehicle; phone usage while driving; a maximum speed-limit; an area allowed for driving; and a time period allowed for driving. The warning event is at least one of: an email sent to an email address associated with the vehicle, a message sent to an application connected with the vehicle (paragraphs 0197, 0213, 0224 and 0237), a warning sound outputted from onboard speakers, a warning light at a dashboard of the vehicle, and a warning message displayed on an infotainment system of the vehicle. The response to the violation of the one or more rules may involve interacting with one or more vehicle driving control systems (paragraphs 0063 and 0072). The system comprises a vehicle monitoring compute unit (e.g., 330) and a communication unit (e.g., 300, 350; see paragraphs 0197, 0213, 0224 and 0237). The system is a part of a vehicle (e.g., 10). The system comprises a non-transitory computer-readable medium comprising instructions to perform the computerized method / system of vehicular safety monitoring (paragraph 0020). Kuehnle does not teach determining an age category of a driver. Trundle teaches determining an age category of a driver (column 14, lines 4-22); selecting, based on the determined age category, one or more predefined driver-associated rules specific to the driver from a plurality of driver-associated rule sets, wherein: a driver-associated rule set applicable to a driver of a first age category includes at least one additional rule relative to a driver-associated rule set applicable to a driver of a second age category, and the at least one additional rule includes at least one of: a requirement that an adult occupant be present in the vehicle, a maximum number of persons allowed in the vehicle (column 13, lines 14-17), a restriction on an area allowed for driving, a restriction on a time period allowed for driving (column 13, lines 14-18), and a prohibition on alcohol consumption or smoking within the vehicle. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use age-based rules as taught by Trundle for an invention as taught by Kuehnle in order to tailor the rules to the age of the driver (column 13, lines 4-22 of Trundle). All the claimed elements were known in the cited prior art, and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results. MPEP § 2143(I)(A).
Claims 1, 4-7, 9, 14 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fields et al. (US 10,242,513 B1) in view of Trundle et al. (US 10,836,309 B1). Fields teaches a computerized method / system of vehicular safety monitoring, the method comprising: determining a driver-associated state (e.g., “geographic location data” – column 3, lines 9-10; “driver behavior” – column 5, line 39; “speed, force, heading, and/or direction” – column 16, line 55) based on data from one or more sensors (e.g., “microphones, digital optical cameras, infrared cameras, or similar sensors” – column 42, lines 48-51; see also the abstract; column 5, lines 46-63; column 16, lines 51-67; column 70, lines 37-44) of a vehicle and on additional vehicle data including at least one of a state of an advanced driver assistance system (e.g., “adaptive cruise control, autonomous piloting, GPS location, or lane deviation warnings” – column 38, lines 31-36; “driver assistance functionalities” – column 31, lines 56-63; “collision avoidance systems, adaptive cruise control systems, automatic lane centering systems, etc.” – column 58, lines 15-20; see also column 46, line 8 – column 47, line 11 and column 48, lines 25-65) or a state of an onboard infotainment system (“sounds”, such as those produced by an onboard infotainment system, may be recorded – column 16, line 36; column 39, lines 21-23; column 48, lines 3-5), wherein: at least one sensor of the one or more sensors captures a cabin of the vehicle (column 42, lines 47-51), and the driver-associated state includes a state of the cabin (column 70, lines 37-44) and a vehicle operating state (e.g., “aggressive driving” - column 54, lines 54-58; “For example, information regarding speed, braking, acceleration, mobile phone usage, turn signal usage, or similar indication of driving behavior may be included in the telematics data” – column 55, lines 29-34); comparing the driver-associated state to one or more predefined driver-associated rules specific to the driver (e.g., rules related to “aggressive driving” are specific to the driver - column 54, lines 54-58; “For example, information regarding speed, braking, acceleration, mobile phone usage, turn signal usage, or similar indication of driving behavior may be included in the telematics data” – column 55, lines 29-34; see also column 55, lines 33-34 (which discuss “data indicating one or more drivers operating the vehicle”) and column 70, lines 37-62 (which discuss identification of a specific driver)); and in response to detection of a violation of a rule of the one or more predefined driver-associated rules, triggering a warning event (column 9, line 58 – column 10, line 3; column 54, lines 54-58); wherein: the additional vehicle data includes input from further vehicle sensors (abstract; column 5, lines 46-63; column 16, lines 51-67; column 70, lines 37-44). The one or more rules concern at least one of: an existence of a co-driver; a maximum number of persons in the vehicle; phone usage while driving (column 2, lines 48-49); a maximum speed-limit; an area allowed for driving (column 2, lines 53-58); and a time period allowed for driving (column 2, lines 50-51). The warning event is at least one of: an email (column 21, line 42) sent to an email address associated with the vehicle, a message (column 21, lines 41-42; column 54, lines 53-58) sent to an application connected with the vehicle, a warning sound outputted from onboard speakers (column 51, lines 20-24), a warning light at a dashboard of the vehicle, and a warning message displayed on an infotainment system of the vehicle. The method / system further comprises determining a warning level associated with the violation of a rule of the one or more rules, wherein the warning level defines the warning event to be triggered (column 2, line 67 – column 3, line 3; column 56, lines 32-49; column 63, lines 13-18). The system is a part of a vehicle (abstract). The system comprises a non-transitory computer-readable medium comprising instructions to perform the computerized method / system of vehicular safety monitoring (column 14, lines 36-45). Fields does not teach determining an age category of a driver. Trundle teaches determining an age category of a driver (column 14, lines 4-22); selecting, based on the determined age category, one or more predefined driver-associated rules specific to the driver from a plurality of driver-associated rule sets, wherein: a driver-associated rule set applicable to a driver of a first age category includes at least one additional rule relative to a driver-associated rule set applicable to a driver of a second age category, and the at least one additional rule includes at least one of: a requirement that an adult occupant be present in the vehicle, a maximum number of persons allowed in the vehicle (column 13, lines 14-17), a restriction on an area allowed for driving, a restriction on a time period allowed for driving (column 13, lines 14-18), and a prohibition on alcohol consumption or smoking within the vehicle. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use age-based rules as taught by Trundle for an invention as taught by Fields in order to tailor the rules to the age of the driver (column 13, lines 4-22 of Trundle). All the claimed elements were known in the cited prior art, and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results. MPEP § 2143(I)(A).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed on August 14, 2026 with respect to the rejections set forth in the Office action filed on April 14, 2026 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejections have been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made, as set forth above.
Furthermore, the claims filed on August 14, 2026 are not allowable at least because the new limitations are not in compliance with 35 U.S.C. 112(a), as explained above.
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 KEITH J FRISBY whose telephone number is (571)270-7802. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00AM - 5:00PM.
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, Jason Shanske can be reached at (571)270-5985. 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.
/KEITH J FRISBY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3614
Prosecution Insights