Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/953,469

INFORMATION PROCESSING DEVICE

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Nov 20, 2024
Examiner
LI, HELEN
Art Unit
3665
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Toyota Jidosha Kabushiki Kaisha
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
65%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 9m
To Grant
77%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 65% of resolved cases
65%
Career Allow Rate
31 granted / 48 resolved
+12.6% vs TC avg
Moderate +12% lift
Without
With
+12.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 9m
Avg Prosecution
39 currently pending
Career history
87
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
6.0%
-34.0% vs TC avg
§103
72.3%
+32.3% vs TC avg
§102
15.2%
-24.8% vs TC avg
§112
5.2%
-34.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 48 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . DETAILED ACTION Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 11/20/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. 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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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, 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. Claim(s) 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zaidan, et al., hereinafter Zaidan (German Patent Application Pub. No. 10 2019 119 052 A1) in view of Abou-Nasr, et al., hereinafter Abou-Nasr (U.S. Patent Application Pub. No. 2016/0101783). Regarding Claim 1, Zaidan teaches: An information processing device that a “device for releasing vehicle functions of a vehicle” such as “seat position”, “mirror position”, “radio stations”, “assistance or driving dynamics settings”, etc.), the information processing device comprising a control unit (Zaidan, Para. 0028, 0031, 0053 –“a control device” for executing a “procedure for releasing vehicle functions of the vehicle”) configured to recognize the user by one of a plurality of different kinds of recognition methods (Zaidan, Para. 0020-0023, 0030-0031, 0053-0054 – identifying a passenger of a vehicle by “an identification signal” provided by “at least one of the identification devices”, such as “an interior camera”, “biometric sensors”, “a mechanical vehicle key”, “a digital key”, etc.), and select a setting item to be assigning a “confidence level” or “trust rating” based on “identification signal[s]” provided by “at least one of the identification devices”, for example, if a passenger carries “the physical vehicle key with the corresponding digital key”, the passenger gains access to “security level L1”, wherein “vehicle functions are enabled up to a security level that corresponds to [a] confidence level” determined based on “weighting”; where functions include vehicle settings such as “seat position or mirror position, comfort settings”, etc. saved in a “driver's account”). While Zaidan teaches an information processing device that releases (or enables) a setting related to a user to an in-vehicle device, and select a setting item to be released (or enabled) to the in-vehicle device, Zaidan does not specifically teach an information processing device that applies a setting related to a user to an in-vehicle device, and select a setting item to be applied to the in-vehicle device. However, Abou-Nasr teaches an information processing device that applies a setting related to a user to an in-vehicle device (Abou-Nasr, Para. 0002, 0015, 0023, 0027-0035 – a “controller” of a system, which makes adjusts, or applies, vehicle settings based on a “confidence level” of a driver identity, where the adjustment of vehicle settings is done “automatically”; wherein “vehicle settings” may be “a station” of a vehicle “radio system”, “seat position”, etc.), and select a setting item to be applied to the in-vehicle device (Abou-Nasr, Para. 0002, 0015, 0023, 0027-0035 – adjusting, or applying, vehicle settings based on a “confidence level” of a driver identity, where the adjustment of vehicle settings is done “automatically”; wherein “vehicle settings” may be “a station” of a vehicle “radio system”, “seat position”, etc.). 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 the information processing device of Zaidan to include an information processing device that applies a setting related to a user to an in-vehicle device, and select a setting item to be applied to the in-vehicle device, as taught by Abou-Nasr, in order to improve an in-vehicle experience and comfort of the user. In regards to Claim 2, Zaidan in view of Abou-Nasr teaches the information processing device of Claim 1, and Zaidan in view of Abou-Nasr further teaches wherein a degree of reliability when the recognition method is used to recognize the user is associated with each of the different recognition methods (Zaidan, Para. 0008, 0056-0061 – a “weighting is determined depending on the respective device providing the identification signal”, wherein a “confidence level”/”trust rating” percentage, or degree of reliability, is determined based on the weighting; an exemplary embodiment lists a “physical vehicle key” enables access to “security level L1” functions, a “digital key” enables access to “security level L2”, etc. but does not necessarily proceed in the order, as the “identification signal” can be provided by any of “identification devices 12-17’”), and the control unit selects the setting item to be applied (Abou-Nasr, Para. 0002, 0015, 0023, 0027-0035 – a “controller” of a system, which makes adjusts, or applies, vehicle settings “automatically”) to the in-vehicle device from the setting items, based on the degree of reliability of the recognition method (Zaidan, Para. 0012, 0033-0034, 0046-0061 – assigning a “confidence level” or “trust rating” based on “identification signal[s]” provided by “at least one of the identification devices”, where the “confidence level” is associated with a “security level”, wherein “vehicle functions are enabled up to a security level”, where functions include vehicle settings such as “seat position or mirror position, comfort settings”, etc. saved in a “driver's account”). In regards to Claim 3, Zaidan in view of Abou-Nasr teaches the information processing device of Claim 2, and Zaidan in view of Abou-Nasr further teaches wherein the control unit determines to apply, to the in-vehicle device (Zaidan, Para. 0012, 0033-0034, 0046-0061 – “vehicle functions are enabled up to a security level”; Abou-Nasr, Para. 0002, 0015, 0023, 0027-0035 – a “controller” of a system, which makes adjusts, or applies, vehicle settings “automatically”), a setting item having a greater influence on privacy of the user out of the setting items as the degree of reliability of the recognition method increases (Zaidan, Para. 0045-0061 – where based on the “security level” vehicle functions are enabled, where the security level is “representative of how sensitive”, or private “the driver's data is that is used to perform the vehicle function”; where “security level” is determined based on a “confidence level” or reliability). In regards to Claim 4, Zaidan in view of Abou-Nasr teaches the information processing device of Claim 2, and Zaidan in view of Abou-Nasr further teaches wherein the control unit determines to apply, to the in-vehicle device (Zaidan, Para. 0012, 0033-0034, 0046-0061 – “vehicle functions are enabled up to a security level”; Abou-Nasr, Para. 0002, 0015, 0023, 0027-0035 – a “controller” of a system, which makes adjusts, or applies, vehicle settings “automatically”), a setting item having a greater influence on safety of a vehicle on which the in-vehicle device is mounted out of the setting items as the degree of reliability of the recognition method increases (Zaidan, Para. 0012, 0030 – where the “vehicle functions”, such as “driver assistance”, which can be enabled are assigned “a safety level”, such as “non-safety-critical vehicle functions” and “safety-critical vehicle functions”, which are enabled or locked based on a determined “confidence level”, or degree of reliability). In regards to Claim 5, Zaidan in view of Abou-Nasr teaches the information processing device of Claim 1, and Zaidan further teaches wherein the recognition method is any of the following recognition method: electronic key recognition (Zaidan, Para. 0022 – a “physical (radio) vehicle key”), digital key recognition (Zaidan, Para. 0032 – “digital key”), recognition by a Bluetooth (registered trademark) device, biometric recognition (Zaidan, Para. 0020 – “biometric sensors”), and recognition based on an input operation by the user (Zaidan, Para. 0032, 0036 – prompting “the driver to authenticate, for example by entering a password”). Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Protopapas (U.S. Patent Application Pub. No. 2014/0282931) teaches a system and method for authenticating a user and creating and applying a user profile, where the user profile is associated with personalized settings within a vehicle. Gleeson-May, et al. (U.S. Patent Application Pub. No. 2020/0110952) teaches a method for driver identification and determining a driver identification confidence, wherein based on the identification the method can modify vehicle-driver interfaces including automatically adjusting the seat position, mirror positions, control behaviors, etc. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HELEN LI whose telephone number is (703)756-4719. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday, from 9am to 5pm eastern. 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, Hunter Lonsberry can be reached at (571) 272-7298. 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. /H.L./Examiner, Art Unit 3665 /HUNTER B LONSBERRY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3665
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 20, 2024
Application Filed
Feb 20, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12590473
VEHICLE PLATFORM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12567337
METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR SWATH WIDTH NORMALIZATION DURING AIRBORNE COLLECTION OF TERRAIN DATA
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12528517
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR EVALUATING MOTION PREDICTION MODELS
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 20, 2026
Patent 12522189
CONTROL DEVICE STRUCTURE OF BRAKE SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 13, 2026
Patent 12524728
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR DEFINING SERVICEABLE AREAS
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 13, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
65%
Grant Probability
77%
With Interview (+12.2%)
2y 9m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 48 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month