RESPONSE TO AMENDMENT
This communication is responsive to the amendment filed 3-June-2026 with respect to application 18/926,464 filed 25-October-2024.
Applicant has amended claim 1, and has added new claims 8 and 9.
Claims 1-9 are currently pending.
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 §103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1, 3, 5, 6 and 7 are rejected under 35 USC §103(a) as unpatentable over Shaw (United States Patent Application Publication # US 2017/0054949 A1) in view of Hwang et al. (United States Patent Application Publication # US2021/0323576 A1), hereinafter Hwang.
Consider claim 1: A seat system Shaw discloses an in-vehicle camera system comprising a plurality of seats (16, 18) [Title; Abstract; Fig. 1-3; Para. 0002, 0008, 0013-0014], comprising:
a seat main body; wherein seats (16, 18) have a head-rest (17) and seat base (19) (main body) [Fig. 1; Para. 0015];
at least one first sensor provided inside the seat main body; the seat base includes a weight sensor (56) (first sensor) [Fig. 1; Para. 0015];
at least one second sensor that can be reached by a user seated on the seat main body and is provided external of the seat main body; a control interface (28), which may comprise one or more buttons, on a steering wheel (23), and/or a user interface (24) on the vehicle dashboard (22) and configured to receive input from the driver [Fig. 1; Para. 0015, 0021-0022]. Shaw also discloses one or more cameras (52, 54) which may be used to identify a user of a particular seat, and also determine position, orientation, age, whether the occupant is asleep or smiling [Fig. 1; Para. 0016, 0019, 0033, 0036, 0042-0043]; and
an application execution device provided with a display unit, a camera system (11), comprising a controller (100) and communicating with a display (53) and a HUD display (25) to provide vehicle and/or entertainment information to a driver [Fig. 1-2; Para. 0015, 0024-0028];
wherein the first sensor and the second sensor constitute an application controller for the application execution device; wherein operation of the camera system may be managed based in inputs from one or more of the seat sensors and selections of the control interface (first and second sensor inputs) [Para. 0021, 0026];
wherein at least one of the first sensor and the second sensor detects a motion of a body of the user, wherein a broad interpretation suggests that an act of actuating a user interface button, or detection of smile on a user face may be a detection of user movement and/or motion [Para. 0021, 0036]; and
wherein the application execution device executes the application based on the detected motion of the user; wherein detection of a facial expression, such as a smile or crying, or the detection of a button press may cause activation of a display and/or the control and display of entertainment media. [Para. 0021, 0026, 0035-0036]
Shaw discloses that occupant actions such as button actuation, or a facial expression, may be detected, and used to control system operation. These actions clearly suggest an element of motion or movement, but the detection of motion, per se, is not explicitly disclosed. This is well known in analogous prior art, however, and for example:
Hwang discloses a vehicle cabin system, comprising one or more cameras [Title; Abstract; Fig. 1-4; Para. 0056-0061], and particularly the user motion may be detected by one or more cameras and used to control the system such as by gestures [Fig. 4c; Para. 0087-0091, 0094, 00132, 0228; 0257-0260].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing for the invention to use one or more cameras, or other sensors to detect occupant motion, such as in performing a gesture, and use the detection to control system operation, as taught by Hwang, and applied to an in-vehicle camera system comprising a plurality of seats as taught by Shaw, in order to allow control of the system without requiring specific operator controls and to minimize user distraction.
Consider claim 3 and as applied to claim 1: The seat system according to claim 1, wherein at least one of the second sensors is provided on one of a roof, a floor, a pillar, and an instrument panel. Shaw discloses a user interface (24) which may accept user inputs (second sensor), mounted on the vehicle dashboard (instrument panel) [Fig. 1; Para. 0015, 0022].
Consider claim 5 and as applied to claim 1: The seat system according to claim 1, wherein the application execution device performs a selection process to select, from among the first sensor and the second sensor, at least one operation input sensor for performing operation input, and thereafter executes an execution process to execute an application based on a signal from the selected operation input sensor. Shaw discloses an embodiment in which a control interface (28) button selects a mode in which a camera video is selected for display on the one or more displays (53) (execution process) based on an occupied seat, as determined by a seat sensor (first sensor) [Fig. 1; Para. 0021, 0026].
Consider claim 6 and as applied to claim 1: The seat system according to claim 1, wherein the application execution device performs a selection process to making the user select at least one operation input sensor from among the first sensor and the second sensor, and thereafter executes an execution process to execute an application based on a signal from the selected operation input sensor. Shaw discloses an embodiment in which a control interface (28) button selects a mode in which a camera video is selected for display on the one or more displays (53) (execution process) based on manual selection of the driver using buttons on the control interface (second sensor) [Fig. 1; Para. 0021, 0026].
Consider claim 7 and as applied to claim 1: The seat system according to claim 1, wherein the application execution device executes an application based on at least two sensors of the first sensor and the second sensor.
Shaw discloses an embodiment in which a control interface (28) button selects a mode in which a camera video is selected for display on the one or more displays (53) (execution process) based on manual selection of the driver using buttons on the control interface (second sensor). Shaw also discloses that a display may be operatively connected to a seat sensor (first sensor such that a display is only enabled if its corresponding seat is occupied [Fig. 1; Para. 0021, 0026].
Shaw does not specifically disclose that these embodiments work together such that a driver must both be seated and select a particular camera for display on the control interface for a camera image to be displayed, but this would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing for the invention, in order that the driver display show images for a particular seat of interest, and that the not operate when the driver is not present to observe.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 USC §103 as unpatentable over Shaw (United States Patent Application Publication # US 2017/0054949 A1), and Hwang et al. (United States Patent Application Publication # US2021/0323576 A1), hereinafter Hwang, further in view of Lange-Mao et al. (United States Patent Application Publication # US 2014/0319895 A1), hereinafter Lange-Mao.
Consider claim 2 and as applied to claim 1: The seat system according to claim 1, wherein the seat system is installed in vehicle having a door, and at least one of the second sensors is provided on a door trim of the door.
Shaw discloses that a sensor, in particular a camera, may be mounted on a dashboard, windshield, steering wheel or pillar of the vehicle [Para. 0018] and also detection of a door opening [Para. 0041] but does not specifically disclose a sensor mounted on a door trim. This is known in analogous prior art, however, and for example:
Lange-Mao discloses a device and method for adjusting a seat position comprising a plurality of sensors (5.1-5.n), and which may include pressure sensors mounted in a seat, a camera, and particularly that sensors may be mounted on a vehicle pillar or door trim [Title; Abstract; Fig. 1; Para. 0044-0053.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing for the invention, to mount a camera, door or other sensor on a door trim of a vehicle, as taught by Lange-Mao and applied to a seat and camera system as taught by Shaw as modified by Hwang, where such door trim location may provide a good line of sight for a camera, or for a sensor to detect door opening.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 USC §103 as unpatentable over Shaw (United States Patent Application Publication # US 2017/0054949 A1), and Hwang et al. (United States Patent Application Publication # US2021/0323576 A1), hereinafter Hwang, further in view of Hiramatsu et al. (United States Patent Application Publication # US 2009/0146912 A1), hereinafter Hiramatsu.
Consider claim 4 and as applied to claim 1: The seat system according to claim 1, wherein
the seat main body includes a front-side seat main body and a rear-side seat main body disposed behind the front-side seat main body, Shaw discloses an exemplary vehicle with 4 seats (two front (16) and two rear (18)) each of which may comprise a pressure sensor (56) [Fig. 1; Para. 0014-0015, 0020];
each of the front-side seat main body and the rear-side seat main body includes a seat cushion forming a seating surface and a seat back connected to a rear portion of the seat cushion, wherein each seat has a base portion (19), a back portion, and a headrest (17) [Fig. 1; Para. 0014-0015, 0020];
the first sensor is provided in the rear-side seat main body, wherein each seat base (including rear seats) is outfitted with a pressure/weight (first) sensor [Fig. 1; Para. 0014-0015, 0020]; and
at least one of the second sensors is provided on a rear surface of the front-side seat back of the seat main body; Shaw also discloses a display (53) on a back portion of each front seat, which may be used to show images captures from cameras in the vehicle and/or media content such as movies or television shows [Fig. 1; Para. 0026];
Shaw does not, however, specifically disclose second sensors positioned on the display or rear side of the front seats. This was known in analogous prior art, and for example:
Hiramatsu discloses a display control device for controlling operation of both front seat and rear seat displays in a vehicle, and particularly that both the front seat and rear seat displays are equipped with user controls such as buttons (second sensors) [Title; Abstract; Fig. 1-4, 6; Para. 0002, 0009-0010, 0036].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing for the invention, for rear panel displays to have operation controls (second sensors) as taught by Hiramatsu, and applied to rear seat displays mounted on the rear side of front seats as taught by Shaw as modified by Hwang, in order that rear seat passengers have control over content for their respective displays.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 USC §103 as unpatentable over Shaw (United States Patent Application Publication # US 2017/0054949 A1), and Hwang et al. (United States Patent Application Publication # US2021/0323576 A1), hereinafter Hwang, further in view of Hermina Martinez et al. (United States Patent Application Publication # US 2019/0355178 A1), hereinafter Martinez.
Consider claim 8 and as applied to claim 1: The seat system according to claim 1, wherein the application execution device executes an application to move a character in the application based on the detected motion of the body of the user.
Neither Shaw nor Hwang discloses an operation in which a character moves in accordance with that of a user’s body. This is known in analogous prior art, however, and for example:
Martinez discloses a method and system for providing a shared environment for a vehicle occupant and a remote user [Title; Abstract; Fig. 1-3; Para. 0003-0005] and in which a video is generated with avatars of one or more vehicle occupants , and one or more remote users, wherein the avatars may be animated and made to mimic the motions of the occupants and remote users [Fig. 3-5].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing for the invention, to generate a video presentation for display, comprising vehicle occupants, and remote users, as avatars in a representation of the vehicle, the movements of the avatars which mimic the occupant movements as taught by Martinez, and applied to an in-vehicle camera system comprising a plurality of seats as taught by Shaw and modified by Hwang, in order to present a simulation of an actual in-person interaction in the vehicle.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 USC §103 as unpatentable over Shaw (United States Patent Application Publication # US 2017/0054949 A1), and Hwang et al. (United States Patent Application Publication # US2021/0323576 A1), hereinafter Hwang, further in view of Mizoi et al. (United States Patent Application Publication # US 2018/00154811 A1), hereinafter Mizoi.
Consider claim 9 and as applied to claim 1: The seat system according to claim 1, wherein the seat main body comprises
a seat back and a seat cushion, and
the first sensor comprises a pressure sensor configured to detect pressure on a seating surface of the seat cushion so as to detect changes in the pressure in accordance with raising and lowering of the knees of the user.
Shaw and Hwang disclose pressure sensors in the vehicle seats to detect passenger presence and weight, but do not specifically disclose that these are embedded in a cushion, or that they detect changes in lower leg or knee position. This is known in analogous prior art, however, and for example:
Mizoi discloses a vehicle seat comprising a seat back and cushion [Title; Abstract; Fig. 1-3; Para. 0097-0098], and particularly the use of pressure sensors within the seat cushions to detect occupant posture, including that of knees and lower legs [Fig, 11-14, 16-17; Para. 0168-0175, 0183-0190].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing to the invention, to place a plurality of pressure sensors in seat cushions as taught by Mizoi, and applied to an in-vehicle camera system comprising a plurality of seats as taught by Shaw, in order to monitor movement and posture changes at various points in an occupant’s body.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed on 3-June-2026 have been carefully and fully considered by the Examiner, and responses are provided as follow:
Consider Applicant’s remarks with respect to the rejection of claims 1, 3, 5 and 6 under 35 USC §102 as anticipated by Shaw (US 2017/0054949 A1) [Remarks: page 4-5]:
Regarding independent claim 1: Applicant arguments are, in summary, that Shaw fails to teach or suggest limitations introduced in the amendment of the claim, and in particular a sensor which detects motion of the user. These arguments are not persuasive because the sensors taught by Shaw, in particular a pushbutton, implicitly require motion by the user to activate, and may broadly be considered a detector of that motion. The argument is, moreover, moot; the claim is now rejected under 35 USC §103 over Shaw and Hwang US2021/0323576 A1), where Hwang teaches these features.
Regarding claims 3, 5 and 6: No separate or additional arguments are made with respect to these claims, and allowability asserted based on the alleged allowability of base claim 1. These claims are now also rejected under 35 USC §103 over Shaw and Hwang, based on the new rejection of claim 1, and the particular citations and analysis presented for each in this Office action.
Consider Applicant’s remarks with respect to the rejection of claims 2 and under 35 USC §103 over Shaw and Lange-Mao (US 2014/0319895 A1), and Shaw and Hiramatsu (US 2009/0146912 A1) respectively [Remarks: page 5]: No separate or additional arguments are made with respect to these claims, and allowability asserted based on the alleged allowability of base claim 1. These claims are now rejected under 35 USC §103 over Shaw, Hwang and Lange-Mao, and Shaw, Hwang and Hiramatsu, based on the new rejection of claim 1, and the particular citations and analysis presented for each in this Office action.
Consider Applicant’s remarks with respect to new claims 8 and 9 [Remarks: page 5]: Arguments with respect to these claims are moot. The claims have not been previously examined. The claims are now rejected under 35 USC §103 based on references, citations, and analysis presented in this Office action.
Consider Applicant’s remarks with respect to the rejection of claims 1 and 7 for non-statutory double patenting [Remarks: page 5]: A terminal disclaimer with respect to the Parent patent has been submitted and accepted. This rejection is, therefore, withdrawn.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to Applicant’s disclosure.
Yetukuri et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication # US 2015/0231991 A1) disclosing a seat cushion length extender with sensor.
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the Examiner should be directed to STEPHEN R BURGDORF whose telephone number is (571)270-7328. The Examiner can normally be reached on Monday and Friday at 11:00 AM to 8:00 PM EST/EDT.
If attempts to reach the Examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the Examiner’s supervisor, Quan-Zhen Wang can be reached at (571)272-3114. 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.
/STEPHEN R BURGDORF/ Examiner, Art Unit 2685
Prosecution Insights