DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
2. Claims 1-5 are pending.
Drawings
3. Applicant’s Drawings submitted December, 2024 are acceptable.
Priority
4. Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
5. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite in that it fails to point out what is included or excluded by the claim language.
Regarding claim 1, lines 8-9 the phrase “a first predetermined time period or longer” is not clear as to its metes and bounds.
The phrase “the first predetermined time period” from claim 2 is not clear. As is, this limitation need be positively part of claim 1, “or longer” may be the limitation reviewed, while “the first predetermined time period” may be ignored.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
6. 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.
7. Claims 1-5, as understood, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pollny US, 11,181,901.
Regarding claims 1-5, Pollny discloses an autonomous vehicle, e.g. 1, a user, e.g. driver, a monitoring apparatus, e.g. 4, a watching notification, e.g. col. 2, lines 24-35, and a non-watching condition, e.g. col. 2, lines 36-39.
Pollny does not disclose the specific terms a watching notification and a non-watching condition along with a first predetermined time period or longer in association with a line of sight angle.
However, each of these terms watch and non-watching are deemed to be disclosed from col. 2, lines 24-39. There is inherently a line-of-sight angle that the monitoring apparatus possesses when reviewing whether a driver is being monitored. A driver or one who manipulates a device for an autonomous vehicle has been common knowledge in the autonomous vehicle art. Official Notice of such is taken. To have provided these features for Pollny would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, as to modify Pollny to include watch/non-watching, along with a line of sight angle, with a reasonable expectation of success. The motivation for doing such is to provide a workable vehicle management system to avoid collisions.
8. Further pertinent references of interest are noted on the attached PTO-892.
9. Applicant’s Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) submitted December 17, 2024 has been reviewed. Note the attached IDS.
10. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREW JOSEPH RUDY whose telephone number is
571-272-6789. The examiner can generally be reached on Monday thru Friday from about 10am-6pm EST.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful the examiner’s supervisor, Fadey Jabr, can be reached on 571-272-1516. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/ANDREW JOSEPH RUDY/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3668
571-272-6789