DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
2. Claims 1-20 are pending.
Drawings
3. Applicant’s Drawings submitted October 9, 2024 are acceptable.
Priority
4. No Foreign Priority has been asserted by Applicant.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
5. 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.
6. Claims 1-20, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zahid et al., US 12,509,097.
Regarding claims 1, 3-12 and 14-19, Zahid discloses in Figs. 1-6 and related disclosure, networks, e.g. 210, 240, 250 300A, 400, 402, a service agent, e.g. 204, onboard passengers, e.g. 112, 114, inside a vehicle, e.g. 100, 202, 222, a personable electronic computing device, e.g. 130, 406C, 410C, 414C, 418C 424C, 428C, 432C, 436C, 442C, 440C, mobile phone, e.g. 220, a cloud based artificial intelligence (AI), e.g. 323, 602, 604, 606, col. 17, lines 4-50, having historical passenger specific features and individual stored preferences, e.g. Fig. 2E, comprising a database, e.g. 440C, storing data services, e.g. varied music, that may be provided by a service request in a vehicle entertainment system, e.g. cols. 7-9 where a response of human feedback, e.g. facial expression, e.g. 246E, 248F, may be used to select different content that matches the passenger specific features associated with the passengers response.
Zahid does not specifically disclose the claim language of bi-laterally matching sets/engine of AI-based information, nor client/service agents or reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF) or a terrestrial network connection. However, Zahid does disclose multiple processors which act as client/service agents associated with the computing devices for providing data preferences that serve as multiple trained models, while the facial expressions disclosed by Zahid is a form of RLHF. The multiple processors maintain data preferences and may be updated, e.g. re-train, based on the human feedback generated by the passenger(s).
Official Notice is further taken that a bilateral matching of sets of cloud AI based information, terrestrial network connections and varied language capabilities to order content (features) has been common knowledge in the cloud/AI art. To have provided this for Zahid would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, as to modify Zahid to include cloud AI-based information one would have a reasonable expectation of success, as the motivation for doing such is to provide a workable vehicle/passenger information exchange capable of being implemented in various languages.
Regarding claims 2, 13 and 20, Official Notice of such is taken that to have provided information prior to a passenger being onboard the vehicle would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date with a reasonable expectation of success, as data analytics and passenger specific preferences, e.g. what style of music/movie one prefers, associated with passenger specific likes/dislikes prior to entering a vehicle has been common knowledge in the passenger requesting art, e.g. downloading music/video/movie selection and one of ordinary skill in the art would with a reasonable expectation of success would have implemented such.
7. Further pertinent references of interest are noted on the attached PTO-892.
8. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREW JOSEPH RUDY whose telephone number is
571-272-6789. The examiner can generally be reached on Monday thru Friday from about 10am-6pm EST.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful the examiner’s supervisor, Fadey Jabr, can be reached on 571-272-1516. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/ANDREW JOSEPH RUDY/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3668
571-272-6789