DETAILED ACTION
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claim 12 does not further limit claim 9. That is, an invention that meets the limitations of claim 9 would also meet the limitations of claim 12. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claims 1-6 and 8-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kuehnle et al. (US 2019/0147262 A1). Kuehnle discloses 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; “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 wherein 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 rules (e.g., a seat belt should be worn – see paragraph 0139; other rules are presented in paragraphs 0164, 0198-0200 and 0241), wherein the one or more predefined rules are defined per driver (“i.e., these rules may also be considered to be driver-associated rules” – see paragraph 0043 of applicant’s specification; see paragraph 0126 and claims 4 and 26 of Kuehnle); and in response to detection of a violation of a rule of the one or more predefined 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).
Claims 1, 4-7, 9, 12, 14 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Fields et al. (US 10,242,513 B1). Fields discloses 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 34-36; “driver assistance functionalities” – column 31, line 63; “collision avoidance systems, adaptive cruise control systems, automatic lane centering systems, etc.” – column 58, lines 19-20; 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 wherein 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 rules, wherein the one or more predefined rules are defined per driver (“i.e., these rules may also be considered to be driver-associated rules” – see paragraph 0043 of applicant’s specification; see column 55, lines 33-34 and column 70, lines 37-62 of Fields); and in response to detection of a violation of a rule of the one or more predefined 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).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on October 2, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
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., LDW data is used to determine user behavior, particularly behavior specific to individual users” – see the paragraph spanning pages 13 and 14 of the remarks) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
Regarding applicant’s arguments in the first full paragraph on page 14 of the remarks, “the seat belt not being worn by the driver” is just one aspect of the driver-associated state. Other aspects of the driver-associated state are determined based 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; “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).
Contrary to applicant’s assertions with respect to Fields (see the second full paragraph on page 14 of the remarks), Fields does in fact disclose or suggest using additional data such as ADAS (e.g., “adaptive cruise control, autonomous piloting, GPS location, or lane deviation warnings” – column 38, lines 34-36; “driver assistance functionalities” – column 31, line 63; “collision avoidance systems, adaptive cruise control systems, automatic lane centering systems, etc.” – column 58, lines 19-20; see also column 46, line 8 – column 47, line 11 and column 48, lines 25-65) or infotainment system status (“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) to determine the driver-associated state as well as tailoring that determination on a per-user basis (column 55, lines 33-34; column 70, lines 37-62).
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