DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-20 are considered in this office action. Claims 1-20 are pending examination.
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 .
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1-34 of U.S. Patent No. 11520303. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both inventions disclose test script for test driving the vehicle for the user and hence would have been obvious to an ordinary person skilled in the art.
Instant Application
US Patent 11520303
1. A method comprising: determining, by a processor, a test drive script to perform while a tool including the processor and a display monitors an electronic system in a vehicle during a test drive of the vehicle, wherein: the test drive script includes an ordered sequence of drive cycle procedures, the ordered sequence of drive cycle procedures begins with an initial drive cycle procedure and ends with a final drive cycle procedure, each drive cycle procedure is indicative of a respective vehicle state, and a particular drive cycle procedure within the ordered sequence of drive cycle procedures before the final drive cycle procedure corresponds to a state of a diagnostic trouble code settable within the vehicle; outputting, by the processor on the display during a performance of the test drive script, a representation of at least a portion of the test drive script; determining, by the processor, the electronic system in the vehicle has set the diagnostic trouble code active prior to the final drive cycle procedure being completed; and outputting, by the processor, a notification indicating the test drive can be ended before a performance of the final drive cycle procedure is complete.
1. A method comprising:
determining, by a processor, a test drive script to perform while a tool monitors an electronic system in a mobile machine during a test drive of the mobile machine, wherein:
the test drive script is associated with a first readiness monitor,
the electronic system is configured to check whether the first readiness monitor passed or failed during the test drive,
the test drive script includes an ordered sequence of drive cycle procedures,
the ordered sequence of drive cycle procedures begins with an initial drive cycle procedure and ends with a final drive cycle procedure,
each drive cycle procedure is indicative of a respective mobile machine state, and
the respective mobile machine state for one or more of the drive cycle procedures includes a speed of the mobile machine being greater than zero miles or kilometers per hour,
outputting, by the processor, a representation of at least a portion of the test drive script;
determining, by the processor, status information corresponding to whether the first readiness monitor has passed or failed during the test drive; and
outputting, by the processor, the status information corresponding to whether the first readiness monitor has passed or failed during the test drive.
11. A computing system comprising: a processor; a display; and a non-transitory computer-readable memory storing executable instructions, wherein execution of the executable instructions by the processor causes the computing system to perform functions comprising: determining a test drive script to perform while the computing system monitors an electronic system in a vehicle during a test drive of the vehicle, wherein: the test drive script includes an ordered sequence of drive cycle procedures, the ordered sequence of drive cycle procedures begins with an initial drive cycle procedure and ends with a final drive cycle procedure, each drive cycle procedure is indicative of a respective vehicle state, and a particular drive cycle procedure within the ordered sequence of drive cycle procedures before the final drive cycle procedure corresponds to a state of a diagnostic trouble code settable within the vehicle; outputting, on the display during a performance of the test drive script, a representation of at least a portion of the test drive script; determining the electronic system in the vehicle has set the diagnostic trouble code active prior to the final drive cycle procedure being completed; and outputting a notification indicating the test drive can be ended before a performance of the final drive cycle procedure is complete.
31. A computing system comprising:
one or more processors; and
computer readable data storage storing executable instructions, wherein execution of the executable instructions by the one or more processors causes computing system to perform functions comprising:
determining a test drive script to perform while a tool monitors an electronic system in a mobile machine during a test drive of the mobile machine, wherein:
the test drive script is associated with a first readiness monitor,
the electronic system is configured to check whether the first readiness monitor passed or failed during the test drive,
the test drive script includes an ordered sequence of drive cycle procedures,
the ordered sequence of drive cycle procedures begins with an initial drive cycle procedure and ends with a final drive cycle procedure,
each drive cycle procedure is indicative of a respective mobile machine state,
the respective mobile machine state for one or more of the drive cycle procedures includes a speed of the mobile machine being greater than zero miles or kilometers per hour, and
the test drive script includes a first particular drive cycle procedure associated with both a first particular mobile machine state and a first condition pertaining to the first particular mobile machine state;
outputting a representation of at least a portion of the test drive script;
determining one or more of: status information corresponding to whether the first readiness monitor has passed or failed during the test drive or the first condition pertaining to the first particular mobile machine state; and
outputting the status information corresponding to whether the first readiness monitor has passed or failed during the test drive or the first condition pertaining to the first particular mobile machine state.
20. A non-transitory computer-readable memory having stored therein instructions executable by a processor to cause a computing system with a display to perform functions comprising: determining a test drive script to perform while the computing system monitors an electronic system in a vehicle during a test drive of the vehicle, wherein: the test drive script includes an ordered sequence of drive cycle procedures, the ordered sequence of drive cycle procedures begins with an initial drive cycle procedure and ends with a final drive cycle procedure, each drive cycle procedure is indicative of a respective vehicle state, and a particular drive cycle procedure within the ordered sequence of drive cycle procedures before the final drive cycle procedure corresponds to a state of a diagnostic trouble code settable within the vehicle; outputting, on the display during a performance of the test drive script, a representation of at least a portion of the test drive script; determining the electronic system in the vehicle has set the diagnostic trouble code active prior to the final drive cycle procedure being completed; and outputting a notification indicating the test drive can be ended before a performance of the final drive cycle procedure is complete.
33. A non-transitory computer readable memory having stored therein instructions executable by one or more processors to cause a computing system to perform functions comprising:
determining a test drive script to perform while a tool monitors an electronic system in a mobile machine during a test drive of the mobile machine, wherein:
the test drive script is associated with a first readiness monitor,
the electronic system is configured to check whether the first readiness monitor passed or failed during the test drive,
the test drive script includes an ordered sequence of drive cycle procedures,
the ordered sequence of drive cycle procedures begins with an initial drive cycle procedure and ends with a final drive cycle procedure,
each drive cycle procedure is indicative of a respective mobile machine state,
the respective mobile machine state for one or more of the drive cycle procedures includes a speed of the mobile machine being greater than zero miles or kilometers per hour, and
the test drive script includes a first particular drive cycle procedure associated with both a first particular mobile machine state and a first condition pertaining to the first particular mobile machine state;
outputting a representation of at least a portion of the test drive script;
determining one or more of: status information corresponding to whether the first readiness monitor has passed or failed during the test drive or the first condition pertaining to the first particular mobile machine state; and
outputting the status information corresponding to whether the first readiness monitor has passed or failed during the test drive or the first condition pertaining to the first particular mobile machine state.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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 of this title, 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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-5 and 10-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Morimoto (EP 2990774A1) in view of Cacabelos et al. (US2016/0247331A1) and herein after referred as Morimoto and Cacabelos.
Regarding Claim 1, Morimoto teaches a method (Fig.1) comprising:
determining, by a processor, a test drive script to perform while a tool including the processor and a display monitors an electronic system in a vehicle during a test drive of the vehicle (Para [0044]: “Upon starting the diagnosis, and transmitting the data request from the communication AP server 8 to the communication terminal 4 through the M2M server 3, the server 2 selects an operation instruction screen from the WEB screens stored in the WEB screen storage portion 6e, and provides the operation instruction screen (C16). When the server 2 provides the operation instruction screen, the communication terminal 4 receives the WEB screen data configuring the operation instruction screen from the server 2, and builds the received WEB screen data to display the operation instruction screen on the display portion 4e by the functions of the WEB browser. The operator browses and confirms the operation instruction screen displayed on the communication terminal 4 (B17), grasps an instruction for advancing the diagnosis of an IG on, an engine start, an idle, a racing, and a full throttle racing as illustrated in FIG. 8, and proceeds to the subsequent process.”),
wherein: the test drive script includes an ordered sequence of drive cycle procedures, the ordered sequence of drive cycle procedures begins with an initial drive cycle procedure and ends with a final drive cycle procedure (Fig.8),
each drive cycle procedure is indicative of a respective vehicle state, and a particular drive cycle procedure within the ordered sequence of drive cycle procedures before the final drive cycle procedure corresponds to a state of a diagnostic trouble code settable within the vehicle (Para [0045] : “In this situation, when the operator changes a vehicle state according to an instruction described in the operation instruction screen (A7), data that reflects a change in the vehicle state is transmitted from the vehicle 9, and received by the server 2 through the communication terminal 4. For example, the instruction described in the operation instruction screen is an instruction for operating (depressing) the accelerator pedal 12b, and when the operator operates the accelerator pedal 12b, data that indicates the rotation speed of the engine linked with the amount of operation of the accelerator pedal 12b is transmitted from the vehicle 9, and received by the server 2 through the communication terminal 4. Upon receiving the data transmitted from the vehicle 9 (B18), the communication terminal 4 converts the received data into a command, and transmits the data subjected to the command conversion to the server 2 from the wide area wireless communication portion 4c through the M2M server 3 (B19).”);
outputting, by the processor on the display during a performance of the test drive script, a representation of at least a portion of the test drive script (Fig.4 the display showing the web screen and also see Figs. 12-17);
determining, by the processor, the electronic system in the vehicle has set the diagnostic trouble code active prior to the final drive cycle procedure being completed; and outputting, by the processor, a notification indicating the test drive can be ended before a performance of the final drive cycle procedure is complete (Fig.8 and Para [0065] : “When the operator performs a series of diagnoses according to the operation instruction screens switched constantly in time series in the manner, and creates the diagnosis result, the server 2 transmits the WEB screen data configuring a diagnosis result screen 108 to the communication terminal 4. Upon receiving the WEB screen data from the server 2, the communication terminal 4 builds the received WEB screen data, and displays the diagnosis result screen 108 as illustrated in FIG. 18. With the browse and confirmation of the diagnosis result screen 108, the operator grasps the diagnosis result obtained by performing the series of diagnoses. As illustrated in FIG. 19, the communication terminal 4 displays the diagnosis result screen 108 scrollably. As illustrated in FIG. 20, the communication terminal 4 may print and output the diagnosis result to a predetermined size of a sheet 201.”).
In the analogous art of vehicle control, Cacabelos teaches test run/ drive (gives assistance when the test driver runs 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 have modified Morimoto to incorporate the teachings of Cacabelos to include test drive. Doing so would optimize the operation of verifying repairs.
Similarly Claims 11 and 20 are rejected on the similar rational as claim 1 above is.
Regarding Claim 2, Morimoto in view Cacabelos teaches the method of claim 1. Cacabelos also teaches the method further comprises displaying, on the display, a status indicator associated with a parameter identifier (PID) that the electronic system in the vehicle is configured to output, and the PID is associated with the diagnostic trouble code (Para [0053] and [0066]).
Similarly Claim 12 rejected on the similar rational as claim 2 above is.
Regarding Claim 3, Morimoto in view Cacabelos teaches the method of claim 1. Cacabelos also teaches wherein the processor determines the PID by referring to symptom-to-PID mapping data that maps the PID to the diagnostic trouble code (Para [0066-68]).
Similarly Claim 13 rejected on the similar rational as claim 3 above is.
Regarding Claim 4, Morimoto in view Cacabelos teaches the method of claim 1. Cacabelos also teaches wherein determining the test drive script to perform includes determining a selection of a vehicle component within the vehicle and the diagnostic trouble code set (Para [0037]).
Similarly Claim 14 rejected on the similar rational as claim 4 above is.
Regarding Claim 5, Morimoto in view Cacabelos teaches the method of claim 1.
Morimoto teaches wherein the particular drive cycle procedure is the initial drive cycle procedure or an intermediate drive cycle procedure within the sequence of drive cycle procedures between the initial drive cycle procedure and the final drive cycle procedure (Fig.8).
Similarly Claim 15 rejected on the similar rational as claim 5 above is.
Regarding Claim 10, Morimoto in view Cacabelos teaches the method of claim 1. Morimoto teaches wherein the respective vehicle state for one or more of the drive cycle procedures includes a speed of the vehicle being greater than zero miles or kilometers per hour (Fig.8 #travel speed).
Claims 6-7 and 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Morimoto in view of Cacabelos and in further view of Osawa (JP20201426542A1) and herein after referred as Osawa.
Regarding Claim 6, Morimoto in view Cacabelos teaches the method of claim 1.
Osawa teaches further comprising: outputting, by the processor, to the electronic system in the vehicle before a performance of the initial drive cycle procedure, a first message requesting the electronic system in the vehicle to clear all diagnostic trouble codes set by the electronic system in the vehicle; receiving, by the processor from the electronic system in the vehicle in response to outputting the first message, a second message indicating a status of the electronic system in the vehicle clearing diagnostic trouble codes set by the electronic system in the vehicle; and outputting, by the processor, data indicating the status of the electronic system in the vehicle clearing diagnostic trouble codes set by the electronic system in the vehicle (Para [0016-0017]).
Similarly Claim 16 rejected on the similar rational as claim 6 above is.
Regarding Claim 7, Morimoto in view Cacabelos and in further view of Osawa teaches the method of claim 1.
Morimoto teaches wherein determining the test drive script to perform includes the processor determining the diagnostic trouble code is set active in the vehicle (Para [0065]).
Similarly Claim 17 rejected on the similar rational as claim 7 above is.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8-9 and 18-19 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Cacabelos et al. (US9639995B2) discloses systems and methods pertaining to generating a test drive script (TDS) based on vehicle data values (VDV) from a vehicle and driving circumstance parameters (DCP) that correspond to use of the vehicle when the VDV are captured are described herein. The TDS can include a baseline path that includes the paths taken by the vehicle while the VDV are captured. The TDS can include an alternate path that includes paths that approximate one or more paths taken by the vehicle while the VDV are captured. The VDV can include, but are not limited to, DTC and PID values from the vehicle. The DCP can include, but are not limited to, traffic condition parameters, meteorological parameters, location parameters, and motion parameters. The TDS can include notifications to alert a user to a location where certain VDV were captured to assist the user in recreating a symptom in a vehicle.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ABDHESH K JHA whose telephone number is (571)272-6218. The examiner can normally be reached M-F:0800-1700.
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, James J Lee can be reached at 571-270-5965. 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.
/ABDHESH K JHA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3668