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 .
Claim(s) Status
Claims 1-2 are currently pending.
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.
The factual inquiries 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.
Claim(s) 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sakakibara et al. (“Sakakibara”, US 20150035660 A1) in view of Fuwamoto et al. (“Fuwamoto”, JP 2009040318 A).| 1) Regarding claim 1, Sakakibara a vehicle approach notification device (Fig. 1: vehicle approach warning apparatus (APP) 2) comprising a sound pressure control unit (¶¶31-32; Fig. 1: microcomputer (MIC) 200) that controls a sound pressure (Fig. 1; low frequency sound 210a) of an approach notification sound output from a sound generator provided in an electrified vehicle toward outside of the vehicle according to a vehicle speed of electrified vehicle (¶4; Fig. 3). As per the limitation wherein the sound pressure control unit is configured to perform control such that the sound pressure of the approach notification sound gradually decreases as the vehicle speed of electrified vehicle increases when the vehicle speed of the electrified vehicle is higher than a threshold vehicle speed. Sakakibara illustrates, in Fig. 3, that the low frequency component is decreased as the speed of the vehicle increases, but fails to disclose the use of threshold analysis. In the same art, Fuwamoto discloses, on page 5-6 with reference to Fig. 4, the concept of using speed ranges (which can be interpreted as a threshold) analysis to control the outputted sound pressure to decrease based on the speed of the vehicle (take note to the 1st column corresponding to specific speed ranges, and the 2nd column corresponding to the outputted sound, notice that at velocity (V) 0 the sound output is larger than when V is 10<V≤15, hence the sound pressure is decrease as the vehicle speed is higher than V equal 10. At the time of filing, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate the concept of using speed ranges analysis to control the outputted sound pressure to decrease based on the speed of the vehicle, with the motivation to enhance sound generation features of the system.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim(s) 2 is 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. US 20120081222 A1; US 20150191117 A1; US 20140210602 A1; US 20200215969 A1; US 20230086076 A1; JP 2014113963 A, system providing vehicle approach notifications.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHICO A FOXX whose telephone number is (571)272-5530. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 - 6:00 M-F.
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, 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 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.
CHICO A. FOXX
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2684
/CHICO A FOXX/Examiner, Art Unit 2685
