DETAILED ACTION
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 .
This is a Final Office Action on the merits. Claims 1, 3-9, and 11-16 are currently pending and are addressed below.
Response to Amendment
The specification was objected to due to minor informalities. Applicant amended the specification accordingly; therefore, the objection is withdrawn.
Claims 1, 4, 9, and 15 were objected to due to minor informalities. Applicant amended the specification accordingly; therefore, the specification objection is withdrawn.
Claims 1-16 were rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as being directed to an abstract idea. Applicant amended the claims accordingly; therefore, the rejection is withdrawn.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments on pages 12-15 of the response, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-2, 4, 9-10, and 15 under 35 U.S.C. 102 and claims 3, 5-8, 11-14, and 16 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Ezaka.
Claim Objections
Claims 1 and 9 objected to because of the following informalities:
Claims 1 and 9 recite “…comparing the amount of power with the battery charge amount…”. Examiner respectfully recommends modifying the underlined portion to “amount of power required” to improve clarity and for consistency with the first instance of the term (“…comparing an amount of power required…”).
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 4, 9, and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ogawa of US 20150241234 A1, filed 01/15/2015, hereinafter “Ogawa”, in view of Ezaka of JP 2007276665 A, published 10/25/2007, hereinafter “Ezaka”.
Regarding claim 1, Ogawa teaches:
A method performed by a navigation system for energy-saving driving of a mobility device, the method comprising: (See at least Abstract: “A travel support device includes a mode planner. The mode planner selects one of a first mode, in which the state of charge of a battery is not maintained, and a second mode, in which the state of charge of the battery is maintained, based on a road load in each section on a travel route, thereby planning a travel mode…”)
receiving a guide request of a first route to a first destination; (See at least [0034]: “…when a destination is set by the driver, the navigation controller 121 identifies the latitude and longitude of the destination. Next, the navigation controller 121 searches a travel route from the current location of the vehicle 100 to the destination by referring to the map information database 122…”)
comparing an amount of power required for driving of the first route with a battery charge amount of the mobility device; (See at least Fig. 2 & [0058]: “…the driving support 111 determines whether the sum E'' of consumption energy of sections from the section 1 to the section n is greater than the remaining charge of the battery 113 (Step S31)…”)
determining a portion of the first route as an energy-saving mode driving section in response to determining that the battery charge amount of the mobility device for reaching the first destination is insufficient as a result of the comparing the amount of power with the battery charge amount, wherein a traffic congestion section included on the first route is determined as the energy-saving mode driving section; and (See at least [0052-0053]: “In contrast, if the driving support 111 determines that the sum Esum of consumption energy in all the sections on the travel route is greater than the remaining charge of the battery 113 (Step S23: YES), the following are set, that is, i=1 (where i varies from 1 to the number of total sections), the sum E' of consumption energy=0, and a switch flag=1 (Step S24). Here, the section i denotes an i.sup.th section. The consumption energy E' is the consumption energy of sections from the section 1 to the i.sup.th section. The switch flag is a flag that indicates that the vehicle is unable to travel in the EV mode in all the sections of the travel route. Next, the driving support 111 determines whether the section i is an EV priority section (Step S25). That is, as described above, when the travel route includes an ordinary road and an expressway, the mode planner 111a selects a section including an ordinary road as the EV priority section, that is, it assigns the section to the EV priority section. When the travel route includes a traffic congestion section, it selects the traffic congestion section as the EV priority section, that is, it assigns the traffic congestion section to the EV priority section” & [0059]: “…if the driving support 111 determines that the sum E'' of consumption energy of the sections from the section 1 to the section n is greater than the remaining charge of the battery 113 (Step S31: YES), it sets the sections from the first section to the n.sup.th section arranged in order as the EV mode (Step S32)…”)
Ogawa does not explicitly teach:
in response to determining that the mobility device enters the energy-saving mode driving section, transmitting, to an electronic control unit (ECU) of the mobility device, a control request to reduce an auxiliary electrical load of the mobility device,
wherein the control request includes at least one of (i) a control request for an air conditioner actuator, (ii) a control request for a terminal charging device actuator, (iii) a control request for an audio system actuator, and (iv) a request to stop receiving over-the-air (OTA) firmware information.
Ezaka teaches:
in response to determining that the mobility device enters the energy-saving mode driving section, transmitting, to an electronic control unit (ECU) of the mobility device, a control request to reduce an auxiliary electrical load of the mobility device, (See at least [0058-0059]: “In S21, the warning ECU 3 detects the vehicle speed; in S22, the car navigation ECU 2 detects a congested area; and in S23, the car navigation ECU 2 measures the vehicle's position. In S24, the system determines whether the vehicle is traveling through a congested area based on its position, the congested section, and its speed. If it is, the system proceeds to S25; otherwise, the control system terminates. In S25, the warning ECU 3 detects the remaining capacity of the battery 15, and in S26, it detects the discharge current of the battery 15. Then, in S27, the warning ECU 3 uses the method described above to predict the remaining capacity of the battery 15 while driving in a congested area. In S28, if it is determined that the remaining capacity of the battery 15 while driving in a congested area will fall below a predetermined value before the vehicle leaves the congested area, the process proceeds to S29, where the warning ECU 3 emits an alarm sound through the speaker 8 to warn the user. If it is determined in S28 that the battery capacity will not fall below the predetermined value, the control process ends. In S30, the display 7 or speaker 8 prompts the user to decide whether or not to allow the load control ECU 23 to automatically turn off or reduce the power consumption of predetermined loads of low importance. In S31, if the user selects the operation of the load control ECU 23 using the touch panel 9 in response to this notification, in S32 it is determined that the user's decision is acceptable, and in S33 the operation of the load control ECU 23 is automatically performed to turn off or reduce the power consumption of predetermined loads of low importance.”)
wherein the control request includes at least one of (i) a control request for an air conditioner actuator, (ii) a control request for a terminal charging device actuator, (iii) a control request for an audio system actuator, and (iv) a request to stop receiving over-the-air (OTA) firmware information. (See at least [0056]: “Then, when the user determines whether or not to operate the load control ECU 23, that is, whether to automatically turn off or reduce the power consumption of predetermined loads of low importance, and responds to the notification from the display 7 or speaker 8, and selects operation of the load control ECU 23 using the touch panel 9, the ECU 23 will either reduce the power consumption of predetermined loads of low importance based on a command from the load control ECU 23, or turn off predetermined loads of low importance, such as the car audio system 20, air conditioning system 21, and car navigation system 22, based on the operation of the switching elements in the load control ECU 23. Here, whether to turn off a predetermined load of low importance or reduce its power consumption is determined by the position during driving in a congested section at which the remaining capacity of the battery 15 falls below a predetermined value.”)
One having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have found it obvious to combine Ogawa’s method with Ezaka’s technique of turning off or reducing the power consumption of an air conditioning system in response to determining that the mobility device enters the energy-saving mode driving section. Doing so would be obvious so that “appropriate measures can be taken when the remaining capacity of the battery 15 is insufficient, making the vehicle more user-friendly” (See [0045] of Ezaka).
Regarding claim 4, Ogawa and Ezaka in combination teach all the limitations of claim 1 as discussed above.
Ogawa additionally teaches:
further comprising determining a section from a first point included on the first route to the first destination where the battery charge amount of the mobility device is equal to or less than a reference value when the mobility device is driven on the first route as the energy-saving mode driving section. (See at least [0065]: “…the travel mode may be replanned if it is determined that the vehicle 100 is traveling in the EV mode not only in a section other than the EV priority section, but also in the EV priory section when the remaining charge of the battery 113 is less than a necessary remaining charge of the battery. In this way, it is also possible to facilitate correct planning of the travel mode in each section of the travel route.”)
Regarding claim 9, Ogawa teaches:
A navigation system of a mobility device, comprising: (See at least Abstract: “A travel support device includes a mode planner. The mode planner selects one of a first mode, in which the state of charge of a battery is not maintained, and a second mode, in which the state of charge of the battery is maintained, based on a road load in each section on a travel route, thereby planning a travel mode…”)
at least one processor; and a memory storing a set of instructions, wherein the at least one processor, by executing the set of instructions, performs: (See at least [0017]: “…the navigation controller 121 and the engine controller 130 is a so-called electronic control unit (ECU) and includes a small computer having an arithmetic device and a storage device (memory)…”)
an operation of receiving a guide request of a first route to a first destination; (See at least [0034]: “…when a destination is set by the driver, the navigation controller 121 identifies the latitude and longitude of the destination. Next, the navigation controller 121 searches a travel route from the current location of the vehicle 100 to the destination by referring to the map information database 122…”)
an operation of comparing an amount of power required for driving of the first route with a battery charge amount of the mobility device; (See at least Fig. 2 & [0058]: “…the driving support 111 determines whether the sum E'' of consumption energy of sections from the section 1 to the section n is greater than the remaining charge of the battery 113 (Step S31)…”)
an operation of determining a portion of the first route as an energy-saving mode driving section in response to determining that the battery charge amount of the mobility device for reaching the first destination is insufficient as a result of the comparing the amount of power with the battery charge amount, wherein a traffic congestion section included on the first route is determined as the energy-saving mode driving section; and (See at least [0052-0053]: “In contrast, if the driving support 111 determines that the sum Esum of consumption energy in all the sections on the travel route is greater than the remaining charge of the battery 113 (Step S23: YES), the following are set, that is, i=1 (where i varies from 1 to the number of total sections), the sum E' of consumption energy=0, and a switch flag=1 (Step S24). Here, the section i denotes an i.sup.th section. The consumption energy E' is the consumption energy of sections from the section 1 to the i.sup.th section. The switch flag is a flag that indicates that the vehicle is unable to travel in the EV mode in all the sections of the travel route. Next, the driving support 111 determines whether the section i is an EV priority section (Step S25). That is, as described above, when the travel route includes an ordinary road and an expressway, the mode planner 111a selects a section including an ordinary road as the EV priority section, that is, it assigns the section to the EV priority section. When the travel route includes a traffic congestion section, it selects the traffic congestion section as the EV priority section, that is, it assigns the traffic congestion section to the EV priority section” & [0059]: “…if the driving support 111 determines that the sum E'' of consumption energy of the sections from the section 1 to the section n is greater than the remaining charge of the battery 113 (Step S31: YES), it sets the sections from the first section to the n.sup.th section arranged in order as the EV mode (Step S32)…”)
Ogawa does not explicitly teach:
an operation of transmitting, to an electronic control unit (ECU) of the mobility device, a control request to reduce an auxiliary electrical load of the mobility device in response to determining that the mobility device enters the energy-saving mode driving section,
wherein the control request includes at least one of (i) a control request for an air conditioner actuator, (ii) a control request for a terminal charging device actuator, (iii) a control request for an audio system actuator, and (iv) a request to stop receiving over-the-air (OTA) firmware information.
Ezaka teaches:
an operation of transmitting, to an electronic control unit (ECU) of the mobility device, a control request to reduce an auxiliary electrical load of the mobility device in response to determining that the mobility device enters the energy-saving mode driving section, (See at least [0058-0059]: “In S21, the warning ECU 3 detects the vehicle speed; in S22, the car navigation ECU 2 detects a congested area; and in S23, the car navigation ECU 2 measures the vehicle's position. In S24, the system determines whether the vehicle is traveling through a congested area based on its position, the congested section, and its speed. If it is, the system proceeds to S25; otherwise, the control system terminates. In S25, the warning ECU 3 detects the remaining capacity of the battery 15, and in S26, it detects the discharge current of the battery 15. Then, in S27, the warning ECU 3 uses the method described above to predict the remaining capacity of the battery 15 while driving in a congested area. In S28, if it is determined that the remaining capacity of the battery 15 while driving in a congested area will fall below a predetermined value before the vehicle leaves the congested area, the process proceeds to S29, where the warning ECU 3 emits an alarm sound through the speaker 8 to warn the user. If it is determined in S28 that the battery capacity will not fall below the predetermined value, the control process ends. In S30, the display 7 or speaker 8 prompts the user to decide whether or not to allow the load control ECU 23 to automatically turn off or reduce the power consumption of predetermined loads of low importance. In S31, if the user selects the operation of the load control ECU 23 using the touch panel 9 in response to this notification, in S32 it is determined that the user's decision is acceptable, and in S33 the operation of the load control ECU 23 is automatically performed to turn off or reduce the power consumption of predetermined loads of low importance.”)
wherein the control request includes at least one of (i) a control request for an air conditioner actuator, (ii) a control request for a terminal charging device actuator, (iii) a control request for an audio system actuator, and (iv) a request to stop receiving over-the-air (OTA) firmware information. (See at least [0056]: “Then, when the user determines whether or not to operate the load control ECU 23, that is, whether to automatically turn off or reduce the power consumption of predetermined loads of low importance, and responds to the notification from the display 7 or speaker 8, and selects operation of the load control ECU 23 using the touch panel 9, the ECU 23 will either reduce the power consumption of predetermined loads of low importance based on a command from the load control ECU 23, or turn off predetermined loads of low importance, such as the car audio system 20, air conditioning system 21, and car navigation system 22, based on the operation of the switching elements in the load control ECU 23. Here, whether to turn off a predetermined load of low importance or reduce its power consumption is determined by the position during driving in a congested section at which the remaining capacity of the battery 15 falls below a predetermined value.”)
One having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have found it obvious to combine Ogawa’s system with Ezaka’s technique of turning off or reducing the power consumption of an air conditioning system in response to determining that the mobility device enters the energy-saving mode driving section. Doing so would be obvious so that “appropriate measures can be taken when the remaining capacity of the battery 15 is insufficient, making the vehicle more user-friendly” (See [0045] of Ezaka).
Regarding claim 15, Ogawa and Ezaka in combination teach all the limitations of claim 9 as discussed above.
Ogawa additionally teaches:
wherein the at least one processor further performs an operation of determining a section from a first point included on the first route to the first destination where the battery charge amount of the mobility device is equal to or less than a reference value when the mobility device is driven on the first route as the energy-saving mode driving section. (See at least [0065]: “…the travel mode may be replanned if it is determined that the vehicle 100 is traveling in the EV mode not only in a section other than the EV priority section, but also in the EV priory section when the remaining charge of the battery 113 is less than a necessary remaining charge of the battery. In this way, it is also possible to facilitate correct planning of the travel mode in each section of the travel route.”)
Claim(s) 3 and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ogawa in view of Ezaka and further in view of Melatti of US 20190219412 A1, filed 01/16/2018, hereinafter “Melatti”.
Regarding claim 3, Ogawa and Ezaka in combination teach all the limitations of claim 1 as discussed above.
Ogawa and Ezaka in combination do not explicitly teach:
further comprising changing the first route to a route passing through a charging station when it is determined that the battery charge amount of the mobility device for reaching the first destination is insufficient as a result of the comparison.
Melatti teaches:
further comprising changing the first route to a route passing through a charging station when it is determined that the battery charge amount of the mobility device for reaching the first destination is insufficient as a result of the comparison. (See at least [0091]: “…the locations of charging stations along the routes could be relayed to the user. If the routes to the destination require more miles than the available range of the vehicle, the control module can plan breaks along the route that have charge port accessibility…”)
One having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have found it obvious to combine Ogawa and Ezaka’s method with Melatti’s technique of changing the first route to a route passing through a charging station when it is determined that the battery charge amount of the mobility device for reaching the first destination is insufficient as a result of the comparison. Doing so would be obvious “for longer trips where recharging would be needed along with rest stops” (See [0091] of Melatti).
Regarding claim 11, Ogawa and Ezaka in combination teach all the limitations of claim 9 as discussed above.
Ogawa and Ezaka in combination do not explicitly teach:
wherein the at least one processor further performs an operation of changing the first route to a route passing through a charging station when it is determined that the battery charge amount of the mobility device for reaching the first destination is insufficient as a result of the comparison.
Melatti teaches:
wherein the at least one processor further performs an operation of changing the first route to a route passing through a charging station when it is determined that the battery charge amount of the mobility device for reaching the first destination is insufficient as a result of the comparison. (See at least [0091]: “…the locations of charging stations along the routes could be relayed to the user. If the routes to the destination require more miles than the available range of the vehicle, the control module can plan breaks along the route that have charge port accessibility…”)
One having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have found it obvious to combine Ogawa and Ezaka’s method with Melatti’s technique of changing the first route to a route passing through a charging station when it is determined that the battery charge amount of the mobility device for reaching the first destination is insufficient as a result of the comparison. Doing so would be obvious “for longer trips where recharging would be needed along with rest stops” (See [0091] of Melatti).
Claim(s) 5 and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ogawa in view of Ezaka and further in view of Bonne of US 20100087977 A1, filed 01/23/2008, hereinafter “Bonne”.
Regarding claim 5, Ogawa and Ezaka in combination teach all the limitations of claim 1 as discussed above.
Ezaka additionally teaches:
further comprising: displaying a first map including the first route; and (See at least [0026]: “Display 7 displays the search route that the car navigation ECU 2 has found based on the entered destination, along with map information for display.”)
Ogawa and Ezaka in combination do not explicitly teach:
displaying the first map by overlaying the energy-saving mode driving section on the first route displayed on the first map.
Bonne teaches:
displaying the first map by overlaying the energy-saving mode driving section on the first route displayed on the first map. (See at least Figs. 1-2 & [0028]: “The height profile of a traveled route shown in FIG. 2, for example, from Schutzenhof to Wollhovel here, can be obtained by changing over the display mode of the navigation system. There was a high power consumption in particular during the "ascent to Kermeter", because a motor vehicle naturally consumes more power uphill. This is shown by a dark color, for example, red on a display. In contrast, during the steep hill descent to Staumauer, a particularly energy-saving mode of driving was implemented, as illustrated by the light line having dark spots, which can be shown green on a display…”)
One having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have found it obvious to combine Ogawa and Ezaka’s method with Bonne’s technique of displaying a first map including the first route by overlaying the energy-saving mode driving section on the first route displayed on the first map. Doing so would be obvious so that “the driver can establish on which route sections he drove ecologically advantageously. Of course, such a representation can also be selected for route sections still to be traveled, if a hilly travel route having increased power consumption is to be expected, for example” (See [0027] of Bonne).
Regarding claim 12, Ogawa and Ezaka in combination teach all the limitations of claim 9 as discussed above.
Ezaka additionally teaches:
wherein the at least one processor further performs an operation of displaying a first map including the first route; and (See at least [0026]: “Display 7 displays the search route that the car navigation ECU 2 has found based on the entered destination, along with map information for display.”)
Ogawa and Ezaka in combination do not explicitly teach:
displaying the first map by overlaying the energy-saving mode driving section on the first route displayed on the first map.
Bonne teaches:
displaying the first map by overlaying the energy-saving mode driving section on the first route displayed on the first map. (See at least Figs. 1-2 & [0028]: “The height profile of a traveled route shown in FIG. 2, for example, from Schutzenhof to Wollhovel here, can be obtained by changing over the display mode of the navigation system. There was a high power consumption in particular during the "ascent to Kermeter", because a motor vehicle naturally consumes more power uphill. This is shown by a dark color, for example, red on a display. In contrast, during the steep hill descent to Staumauer, a particularly energy-saving mode of driving was implemented, as illustrated by the light line having dark spots, which can be shown green on a display…”)
One having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have found it obvious to combine Ogawa and Ezaka’s method with Bonne’s technique of displaying a first map including the first route by overlaying the energy-saving mode driving section on the first route displayed on the first map. Doing so would be obvious so that “the driver can establish on which route sections he drove ecologically advantageously. Of course, such a representation can also be selected for route sections still to be traveled, if a hilly travel route having increased power consumption is to be expected, for example” (See [0027] of Bonne).
Claim(s) 6, 8, 13, and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ogawa in view of Ezaka and Bonne and further in view of Wu and Melatti.
Regarding claim 6, Ogawa, Ezaka, and Bonne in combination teach all the limitations of claim 5 as discussed above.
Bonne additionally teaches:
wherein the displaying the first map including the first route comprises displaying information on an energy-saving running time, (See at least Fig. 2 & [0028]: “…during the steep hill descent to Staumauer, a particularly energy-saving mode of driving was implemented, as illustrated by the light line having dark spots, which can be shown green on a display…”)
a reason for activating the energy-saving mode in each energy-saving mode driving section. (See at least Fig. 2 & [0028]: “The height profile of a traveled route shown in FIG. 2, for example, from Schutzenhof to Wollhovel here, can be obtained by changing over the display mode of the navigation system…during the steep hill descent to Staumauer, a particularly energy-saving mode of driving was implemented, as illustrated by the light line having dark spots, which can be shown green on a display…”)
Ogawa, Ezaka, and Bonne in combination do not explicitly teach:
an amount of power saved by an energy-saving mode,
Wu teaches:
an amount of power saved by an energy-saving mode, (See at least Fig. 10 & [0174]: “…the driving planning module may further calculate, based on the selected target driving path and the target driving configuration information, energy that can be saved by energy consumed when the vehicle arrives at the destination from the departure place through the target driving path compared with energy consumed on a driving path with maximum energy consumption in other driving paths determined by the navigation module for the vehicle from the departure place to the destination, and display calculated saved energy in the user interface shown in FIG. 10…”)
One having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have found it obvious to combine Ogawa, Ezaka, and Bonne’s method with Wu’s technique of displaying an amount of energy saved. Doing so would be obvious “to better provide user experience for the user and meet a user requirement” (See [0011] of Wu).
Ogawa, Ezaka, Bonne, and Wu in combination do not explicitly teach:
an additional available driving distance due to the energy-saving mode, and
Melatti teaches:
an additional available driving distance due to the energy-saving mode, and (See at least [0074]: “The control module 70 next identifies at least one of the potential routes as being an optimal route, and can show an energy savings associated with one or more of the routes. The routes could each be displayed with an associated message, for example. Example messages could include “ROUTE 1 SAVES 20 MILES IN RANGE,”…”)
One having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have found it obvious to combine Ogawa, Ezaka, Bonne, and Wu’s method with Melatti’s technique of displaying an additional available driving distance due to the energy-saving mode. Doing so would be obvious “to reveal alternative, energy efficient routes to the user” (See [0069] of Melatti).
Regarding claim 8, Ogawa and Ezaka in combination teach all the limitations of claim 1 as discussed above.
Ogawa and Ezaka in combination do not explicitly teach:
further comprising displaying information on a distance driven in an energy-saving mode,
Bonne teaches:
further comprising displaying information on a distance driven in the energy-saving mode, (See at least Figs. 1-2 & [0028]: “…during the steep hill descent to Staumauer, a particularly energy-saving mode of driving was implemented, as illustrated by the light line having dark spots, which can be shown green on a display…”)
One having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have found it obvious to combine Ogawa and Ezaka’s method with Bonne’s technique of displaying information on a distance driven in the energy-saving mode. Doing so would be obvious so that “the driver can establish on which route sections he drove ecologically advantageously. Of course, such a representation can also be selected for route sections still to be traveled, if a hilly travel route having increased power consumption is to be expected, for example” (See [0027] of Bonne).
Ogawa, Ezaka, and Bonne in combination do not explicitly teach:
an amount of power saved by driving in the energy-saving mode and
Wu teaches:
an amount of power saved by driving in the energy-saving mode and (See at least Fig. 10 & [0174]: “…the driving planning module may further calculate, based on the selected target driving path and the target driving configuration information, energy that can be saved by energy consumed when the vehicle arrives at the destination from the departure place through the target driving path compared with energy consumed on a driving path with maximum energy consumption in other driving paths determined by the navigation module for the vehicle from the departure place to the destination, and display calculated saved energy in the user interface shown in FIG. 10…”)
One having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have found it obvious to combine Ogawa, Ezaka, and Bonne’s method with Wu’s technique of displaying an amount of energy saved. Doing so would be obvious “to better provide user experience for the user and meet a user requirement” (See [0011] of Wu).
Ogawa, Ezaka, Bonne, and Wu in combination do not explicitly teach:
an additional available driving distance caused by driving in the energy-saving mode in accordance with a determination that the mobility device has reached the first destination.
Melatti teaches:
an additional available driving distance caused by driving in the energy-saving mode in accordance with a determination that the mobility device has reached the first destination. (See at least [0074]: “The control module 70 next identifies at least one of the potential routes as being an optimal route, and can show an energy savings associated with one or more of the routes. The routes could each be displayed with an associated message, for example. Example messages could include “ROUTE 1 SAVES 20 MILES IN RANGE,”…”)
One having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have found it obvious to combine Ogawa, Ezaka, Bonne, and Wu’s method with Melatti’s technique of displaying an additional available driving distance caused by driving in the energy-saving mode in accordance with a determination that the mobility device has reached the first destination. Doing so would be obvious so that “the operating range and the possibility of return to the destination point can be seen by the driver without the driver having to perform an elaborate route guidance in a navigation device” (See [0044] of Melatti).
Regarding claim 13, Ogawa, Ezaka, and Bonne in combination teach all the limitations of claim 12 as discussed above.
Bonne additionally teaches:
wherein the operation of displaying the first map including the first route comprises an operation of displaying information on an energy-saving running time, (See at least Fig. 2 & [0028]: “…during the steep hill descent to Staumauer, a particularly energy-saving mode of driving was implemented, as illustrated by the light line having dark spots, which can be shown green on a display…”)
a reason for activating the energy-saving mode in each energy-saving mode driving section. (See at least Fig. 2 & [0028]: “The height profile of a traveled route shown in FIG. 2, for example, from Schutzenhof to Wollhovel here, can be obtained by changing over the display mode of the navigation system…during the steep hill descent to Staumauer, a particularly energy-saving mode of driving was implemented, as illustrated by the light line having dark spots, which can be shown green on a display…”)
Ogawa, Ezaka, and Bonne in combination do not explicitly teach:
an amount of power saved by an energy-saving mode,
Wu teaches:
an amount of power saved by an energy-saving mode, (See at least Fig. 10 & [0174]: “…the driving planning module may further calculate, based on the selected target driving path and the target driving configuration information, energy that can be saved by energy consumed when the vehicle arrives at the destination from the departure place through the target driving path compared with energy consumed on a driving path with maximum energy consumption in other driving paths determined by the navigation module for the vehicle from the departure place to the destination, and display calculated saved energy in the user interface shown in FIG. 10…”)
One having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have found it obvious to combine Ogawa, Ezaka, and Bonne’s method with Wu’s technique of displaying an amount of energy saved. Doing so would be obvious “to better provide user experience for the user and meet a user requirement” (See [0011] of Wu).
Ogawa, Ezaka, Bonne, and Wu in combination do not explicitly teach:
an additional available driving distance due to the energy-saving mode, and
Melatti teaches:
an additional available driving distance due to the energy-saving mode, and (See at least [0074]: “The control module 70 next identifies at least one of the potential routes as being an optimal route, and can show an energy savings associated with one or more of the routes. The routes could each be displayed with an associated message, for example. Example messages could include “ROUTE 1 SAVES 20 MILES IN RANGE,”…”)
One having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have found it obvious to combine Ogawa, Ezaka, Bonne, and Wu’s method with Melatti’s technique of displaying an additional available driving distance due to the energy-saving mode. Doing so would be obvious “to reveal alternative, energy efficient routes to the user” (See [0069] of Melatti).
Regarding claim 16, Ogawa and Ezaka in combination teach all the limitations of claim 9 as discussed above.
Ogawa and Ezaka in combination do not explicitly teach:
wherein the at least one processor further performs an operation of displaying information on a distance driven in an energy-saving mode,
Bonne teaches:
wherein the at least one processor further performs an operation of displaying information on a distance driven in an energy-saving mode, (See at least Figs. 1-2 & [0028]: “…during the steep hill descent to Staumauer, a particularly energy-saving mode of driving was implemented, as illustrated by the light line having dark spots, which can be shown green on a display…”)
One having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have found it obvious to combine Ogawa and Ezaka’s method with Bonne’s technique of displaying information on a distance driven in the energy-saving mode. Doing so would be obvious so that “the driver can establish on which route sections he drove ecologically advantageously. Of course, such a representation can also be selected for route sections still to be traveled, if a hilly travel route having increased power consumption is to be expected, for example” (See [0027] of Bonne).
Ogawa, Ezaka, and Bonne in combination do not explicitly teach:
an amount of power saved by driving in the energy-saving mode and
Wu teaches:
an amount of power saved by driving in the energy-saving mode and (See at least Fig. 10 & [0174]: “…the driving planning module may further calculate, based on the selected target driving path and the target driving configuration information, energy that can be saved by energy consumed when the vehicle arrives at the destination from the departure place through the target driving path compared with energy consumed on a driving path with maximum energy consumption in other driving paths determined by the navigation module for the vehicle from the departure place to the destination, and display calculated saved energy in the user interface shown in FIG. 10…”)
One having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have found it obvious to combine Ogawa, Ezaka, and Bonne’s method with Wu’s technique of displaying an amount of energy saved. Doing so would be obvious “to better provide user experience for the user and meet a user requirement” (See [0011] of Wu).
Ogawa, Ezaka, Bonne, and Wu in combination do not explicitly teach:
an additional available driving distance caused by driving in the energy-saving mode in accordance with a determination that the mobility device has reached the first destination.
Melatti teaches:
an additional available driving distance caused by driving in the energy-saving mode in accordance with a determination that the mobility device has reached the first destination. (See at least [0074]: “The control module 70 next identifies at least one of the potential routes as being an optimal route, and can show an energy savings associated with one or more of the routes. The routes could each be displayed with an associated message, for example. Example messages could include “ROUTE 1 SAVES 20 MILES IN RANGE,”…”)
One having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have found it obvious to combine Ogawa, Ezaka, Bonne, and Wu’s method with Melatti’s technique of displaying an additional available driving distance caused by driving in the energy-saving mode in accordance with a determination that the mobility device has reached the first destination. Doing so would be obvious so that “the operating range and the possibility of return to the destination point can be seen by the driver without the driver having to perform an elaborate route guidance in a navigation device” (See [0044] of Melatti).
Claim(s) 7 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ogawa in view of Ezaka and Bonne and further in view of Melatti.
Regarding claim 7, Ogawa and Ezaka in combination teach all the limitations of claim 1 as discussed above.
Ezaka additionally teaches:
further comprising displaying an information on a second route to the first destination while the mobility device is driven through the first route to the first destination, (See at least [0037-0039]: “Furthermore, when the user attempts to drive through a congested area by either turning off or reducing the battery capacity, the car navigation ECU 2 will indicate a point S (or a time t4 from the current time) where the remaining capacity of the battery 15 falls below a predetermined value e (Ah). For example, if the remaining capacity of the battery 15 detected by the state detection sensor 13 immediately before or after entering a congested section is b (Ah), and the discharge current detected by the state detection sensor 13 when the user performs either the "off" or "reduction" action is f (A) (i.e., f < c), and the vehicle speed detected by the ABS 12 immediately before or after entering a congested section is v (km/h), then t4 = (b - e) / f (h), and point R can be predicted as a point V × t4 (km) away from the vehicle's position. In addition to the above, when the warning ECU 3 issues a warning to the user, the car navigation ECU 2, acting as a search means, searches for an alternative route ACJKLOPQB to avoid the congested section. The car navigation ECU 2 also functions as a display means, and the display 7 shows the alternative route ACJKLOPQB to the user, for example, as a double line.”)
wherein the information on the second route includes an information on an amount of power saved due to driving of the second route compared to driving of the first route(See at least [0043-0044]: “Furthermore, the navigation ECU 2 searches for an alternative route to avoid the congested section and displays the alternative route to the user on the display 7. In S14, the system uses the display 7 to clearly indicate that the alternative route is intended to avoid insufficient remaining battery capacity by displaying text such as "Route ACJKLOPQB is an alternative route to avoid insufficient remaining battery capacity," as shown in Figure 6. As a result, users can receive a warning about insufficient remaining capacity of the battery 15 before the remaining capacity actually becomes insufficient, allowing them to take a more flexible course of action when they receive such a warning.”)
Ogawa and Ezaka in combination do not explicitly teach:
…and an Estimated Time of Arrival (ETA) information changed by the driving of the second route.
Melatti teaches:
wherein the information on the second route includes an information on an amount of power saved due to driving of the second route compared to driving of the first route and (See at least [0069-0070]: “…At a step 220, the method 200 determines whether any of the routes to the destination provide an energy savings. That is, step 220 assesses whether there is a reduction in energy consumption associated with traveling along an alternate route. If there is an energy savings associated with an alternate route, the method 200 displays the alternate route to the user at a step 230 as a new preferred route…”)
an Estimated Time of Arrival (ETA) information changed by the driving of the second route. (See at least [0090]: “An example warning can include a message on the display 78 stating “SEVERE BLIZZARD DETECTED IN 1.5 HOURS. ALTERNATE ROUTE ADDS 2 HOURS. WOULD YOU LIKE TO STOP, CONTINUE, OR USE ALTERNATE ROUTE?” The message can thus prompt the user to transition to the alternative route and indicate how much time will be added to the journey if the user takes the alternative route.”)
One having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have found it obvious to combine Ogawa and Ezaka’s method with Melatti’s technique of displaying information on a second route to the first destination including an amount of power saved due to driving the second route compared to the first route, and an ETA changed by the driving of the second route. Doing so would be obvious “to reveal alternative, energy efficient routes to the user” (See [0069] of Melatti).
Regarding claim 14, Ogawa and Ezaka in combination teach all the limitations of claim 9 as discussed above.
Ezaka additionally teaches:
wherein the at least one processor further performs an operation of displaying an information on a second route to the first destination while the mobility device is driven through the first route to the first destination, and (See at least [0037-0039]: “Furthermore, when the user attempts to drive through a congested area by either turning off or reducing the battery capacity, the car navigation ECU 2 will indicate a point S (or a time t4 from the current time) where the remaining capacity of the battery 15 falls below a predetermined value e (Ah). For example, if the remaining capacity of the battery 15 detected by the state detection sensor 13 immediately before or after entering a congested section is b (Ah), and the discharge current detected by the state detection sensor 13 when the user performs either the "off" or "reduction" action is f (A) (i.e., f < c), and the vehicle speed detected by the ABS 12 immediately before or after entering a congested section is v (km/h), then t4 = (b - e) / f (h), and point R can be predicted as a point V × t4 (km) away from the vehicle's position. In addition to the above, when the warning ECU 3 issues a warning to the user, the car navigation ECU 2, acting as a search means, searches for an alternative route ACJKLOPQB to avoid the congested section. The car navigation ECU 2 also functions as a display means, and the display 7 shows the alternative route ACJKLOPQB to the user, for example, as a double line.”)
the information on the second route includes information on an amount of power saved due to driving of the second route compared to driving of the first route(See at least [0043-0044]: “Furthermore, the navigation ECU 2 searches for an alternative route to avoid the congested section and displays the alternative route to the user on the display 7. In S14, the system uses the display 7 to clearly indicate that the alternative route is intended to avoid insufficient remaining battery capacity by displaying text such as "Route ACJKLOPQB is an alternative route to avoid insufficient remaining battery capacity," as shown in Figure 6. As a result, users can receive a warning about insufficient remaining capacity of the battery 15 before the remaining capacity actually becomes insufficient, allowing them to take a more flexible course of action when they receive such a warning.”)
Melatti teaches:
wherein the at least one processor further performs an operation of displaying an information on a second route to the first destination while the mobility device is driven through the first route to the first destination, and (See at least [0065]: “…the preferred route is provided to the user by initiating a display of the preferred route on the display 78 within the electrified vehicle 60…” & [0069]: “…the method 200 continually calculates routes to the destination. New routes can be identified based on roads opening or closing, traffic problems clearing, etc….”)
the information on the second route includes information on an amount of power saved due to driving of the second route compared to driving of the first route and (See at least [0069-0070]: “…At a step 220, the method 200 determines whether any of the routes to the destination provide an energy savings. That is, step 220 assesses whether there is a reduction in energy consumption associated with traveling along an alternate route. If there is an energy savings associated with an alternate route, the method 200 displays the alternate route to the user at a step 230 as a new preferred route…”)
an ETA information changed by the driving of the second route. (See at least [0090]: “An example warning can include a message on the display 78 stating “SEVERE BLIZZARD DETECTED IN 1.5 HOURS. ALTERNATE ROUTE ADDS 2 HOURS. WOULD YOU LIKE TO STOP, CONTINUE, OR USE ALTERNATE ROUTE?” The message can thus prompt the user to transition to the alternative route and indicate how much time will be added to the journey if the user takes the alternative route.”)
One having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have found it obvious to combine Ogawa and Ezaka’s method with Melatti’s technique of displaying information on a second route to the first destination including an amount of power saved due to driving the second route compared to the first route, and an ETA changed by the driving of the second route. Doing so would be obvious “to reveal alternative, energy efficient routes to the user” (See [0069] of Melatti).
Conclusion
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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NIKKI MARIE M MOLINA whose telephone number is (571)272-5180. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 9am-6pm PT.
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, Aniss Chad can be reached at 571-270-3832. 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.
/NIKKI MARIE M MOLINA/Examiner, Art Unit 3662
/ANISS CHAD/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3662
Prosecution Insights