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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
Claim limitations “control unit configured to receive”, “connection module to perform”, “control unit determines”, and “control unit receives”, have been interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because they use a generic placeholder “unit” and “module” coupled with functional language “receive”, “perform”, and “determine”, without reciting sufficient structure to achieve the function. Furthermore, the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier.
Since the claim limitations invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, claims 6-10 have been interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification that achieves the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-3, 6-8, and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Ochi (WO 2006106684).
Regarding claim 1, Ochi discloses a method of wireless communication (reception control method that receives radio waves in a predetermined frequency band at a current position of a mobile body; [0012]), comprising:
receiving, via a control unit mounted on a vehicle, at least one driving parameter of the vehicle (sensor 500 is disposed in the vehicle, detects a movement state of the vehicle, that is, a traveling state, and outputs a predetermined detection signal to the connected movement support device 600 and the reception control device 700. sensor unit 621 of the navigation main body 620 detects the movement state of the vehicle, that is, the current position, the driving situation, and the like; [0032-0034]);
determining, via the control unit, whether a condition is met according to the at least one driving parameter (the reception state determination unit 742 recognizes that the vehicle is not traveling, that is, stops or slows down; [0053]); and
controlling, via the control unit, a wireless connection module mounted on the vehicle to perform automatic channel selection (ACS), when the control unit determines that the condition is met; wherein the condition comprises that the vehicle is in an idle state (When the reception state determination unit 742 recognizes that the vehicle is not traveling, that is, stops or slows down, based on the travel state signal output from the movement state recognition unit 710, the reception state determination unit 742 performs automatic channel selection scan processing; [0053]).
Regarding claim 2, Ochi discloses wherein the at least one driving parameter comprises speed, acceleration, or engine speed of the vehicle (the reception state determination unit 742 recognizes that the vehicle is not traveling, that is, stops or slows down; [0053]).
Regarding claim 3, Ochi discloses wherein the condition further comprises that the vehicle switches to the idle state from a driving state (If the reception state judging means 742 recognizes that the vehicle is stopped or slowing down, it acquires traffic jam information from the mobility support device 600, and stops or slows down due to traffic jam based on the current position information and traffic jam information; [0053]).
Regarding claim 6, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the reasons cited in claim 1.
Regarding claim 7, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the reasons cited in claim 2.
Regarding claim 8, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the reasons cited in claim 3.
Regarding claim 10, Ochi discloses wherein the control unit receives the at least one driving parameter from an on-board diagnostic, a sensor, or a global positioning system (sensor 500 is disposed in the vehicle, detects a movement state of the vehicle, that is, a traveling state, and outputs a predetermined detection signal to the connected movement support device 600 and the reception control device 700; [0032]).
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.
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.
Claim(s) 4, 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ochi (WO 2006106684) in view of Smith et al. (US 20190376431).
Regarding claim 4, Ochi discloses wherein the control unit determines that the vehicle is in the driving state in response to a determination that the at least one driving parameter is higher than the threshold (based on the speed data, it is determined whether or not the force is lower than a preset traveling speed, which is a preset threshold value, and it is determined whether or not the vehicle is traveling, slowing down or stopping; [0048]).
Ochi does not expressly disclose wherein the control unit determines that the vehicle is in the idle state in response to a determination that the at least one driving parameter is lower than a threshold for more than a specific period of time and the vehicle is not stalled.
In an analogous art, Smith discloses wherein the control unit determines that the vehicle is in the idle state in response to a determination that the at least one driving parameter is lower than a threshold for more than a specific period of time and the vehicle is not stalled (Information retrieved from the cloud may include a preview of upcoming traffic conditions, type of roads, accidents along the route, stalled or stopped vehicles, and the like. For example, when a long stretch of downward sloping road is detected, it may indicate a coasting condition. Information relayed within the vehicle network may include one or more of vehicle speed, an average speed of vehicles within the vehicle network, duration for which the speed is maintained, and the like. For example, when the average speed of the vehicle is less than a threshold, the threshold being 5 mph, for example, a congestion in the traffic may be deduced. In other examples, when higher average speeds are maintained for longer duration, it may indicate cruising conditions. In still other examples, when the average speed of the vehicles in the network is lower for longer period of time, then it may indicate an extended idle condition; [0052]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to add the features of Smith into the system of Ochi in order to efficiently determine a current and a future driving condition based on a communication within a vehicle-to-vehicle (V2V) network (Smith; [0006]).
Regarding claim 9, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the reasons cited in claim 4.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ochi (WO 2006106684) in view of Kim et al. (US 20230053134).
Regarding claim 5, Ochi does not expressly disclose wherein the control unit determines whether the vehicle switches from the driving state to the idle state according to a previous state stored in a memory; wherein the previous state is the state that the vehicle was in before a period of time; wherein the previous state is the idle state or the driving state.
In an analogous art, Kim discloses wherein the control unit determines whether the vehicle switches from the driving state to the idle state according to a previous state stored in a memory; wherein the previous state is the state that the vehicle was in before a period of time; wherein the previous state is the idle state or the driving state (the state change histories may be recorded when the vehicles are operated differently from operation patterns for respective vehicles. For example, this may correspond to the case in which the autonomous driving system exits an idle state differently from an operation pattern, as in the situation in which the corresponding vehicle starts autonomous driving at a time at which the vehicle is usually parked and therefore in an idle state, or the situation in which the vehicle is usually traveling in a manual driving mode, but suddenly switches to an autonomous driving mode; [0122]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to add the features of Kim into the system of Ochi in order to maximize the efficiency of computing resources of an autonomous vehicle, which has strong computing power, but is in an idle state most of the time (Kim; [0009]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Kimura et al. (US 20140173679), “DIGITAL BROADCAST RECEIVER AND INFORMATION UPDATING METHOD THEREFOR.”
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OUSSAMA ROUDANI whose telephone number is (571)272-4727. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30 AM - 5:00 PM.
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, UN C CHO can be reached at (571) 272 7919. 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.
/OUSSAMA ROUDANI/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2413
Prosecution Insights