DETAILED ACTION
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on May 26, 2026, has been entered.
In the response filed May 26, 2026, Applicant amended claims 1, 3, 9, 11, and 12; and canceled claims 2 and 10. Claims 1, 3-9, and 11-20 are pending in the current application.
Notice of 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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments for claims 1, 3-9, and 11-20, with respect to the 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection have been considered but are moot because the arguments do not apply to the combination of references being used in the current rejection.
Claim Objections
Claim 9 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 9, lines 8-13, “modulate the user identidication code and convert the modulated user identidicatin code into a binary code, and output the optical signal by flashing the automotvie lamp based on the generated binary code, wherein the user identification code is used to identifiy a vehicle as the dispatched vehicle,” should read
--modulate the user identification code and convert the modulated user identification code into a binary code, and output the optical signal by flashing the automotive lamp based on the generated binary code, wherein the user identification code is used to identify a vehicle as the dispatched vehicle--. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claims 18 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Dependent claim 18 is dependent upon canceled claim 10 and claim 19 is dependent upon claim 18. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
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.
Claims 1, 4-9, 12, and 14-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Donnelly (US 2017/0294130 A1) in view of Liu et al. (US 2015/0146871 A1), hereinafter Liu.
Regarding claim 1, Donnelly discloses a mobile terminal for identifying a dispatched vehicle using an automotive lamp, the mobile terminal comprising:
at least one processor; and a storage medium storing a computer-readable instruction, wherein when executed by the at least one processor (Par. [0060], a processor 3400 of the mobile computing device 300 can execute a rider application 332 stored in memory 330), the computer-readable instruction causes the at least one processor to
transmit a vehicle call request (Par. [0023], A requesting user can provide an input on a user device 195 to transmit a pick-up request 197),
receive an optical signal…output through the automotive lamp of a vehicle (Par. [0028], The flash codes 127 can enable a lighting element (or other output device , such as a radio or acoustic transmitter) on the selected AV 109 to output a unique flash sequence that identifies the selected AV … When outputted , the flash sequence corresponding to the flash code 127 can be identified using a camera of the requesting user’s device 195),
identify the vehicle as the dispatched vehicle (Par. [0028], the user device 195 can execute a perception technique to detect the flash sequence outputted by the selected AV 109 as the selected AV 109 approaches the pick-up location, as described in detail below. In response to determining the flash code 127 from the selected AV 109 , the user device 195 can display an indicator on the display screen indicating the selected AV; Par. [0057], the mobile computing device 300 can generate an indication feature viewable on the display so that the requesting user can readily identify the matching AV 390).
Donnelly explicitly discloses the use of unique optical signals (Par. [0028], The flash codes 127 can enable a lighting element (or other output device, such as a radio or acoustic transmitter) on the selected AV 109 to output a unique flash sequence that identifies the selected AV). Donnelly does not explicitly disclose a user identification code, receive an optical signal, including the user identification code,…the user identification code being modulated into a binary code and output by flashing,…demodulate the received optical signal and convert the demodulated optical signal into the user identification code, determine whether the converted user identification code matches a pre-stored user identification code, and identify…based on the converted user identification code being matched with the pre-stored user identification code.
Liu teaches a user identification code (Par. [0035], the communication data includes user information, and the user information includes ID information),
receive an optical signal, including the user identification code,…the user identification code being modulated into a binary code and output by flashing (Par. [0164], the ID data set at the transmit end and the receive end is a 16-bit binary numeral 0000000000010000, the pseudocode sequence indicator is an 8-bit binary numeral 10000000, and a pseudocode sequence corresponding to the pseudocode sequence indicator is a 16-bit binary numeral 0000100000000000),
demodulate the received optical signal and convert the demodulated optical signal into the user identification code (Par. [0111], The visible light receiver 201 converts the stroboscopic visible light signal into a binary digital signal, and sends the binary digital signal to a demodulator 202 for demodulation, and the demodulator 202 sends a demodulated signal to a pseudocode sequence indicator processing unit),
determine whether the converted user identification code matches a pre-stored user identification code, and identify…based on the converted user identification code being matched with the pre-stored user identification code (Par. [0239], if the recovered user ID is consistent with the user ID stored locally at the receive end, it is considered that the visible light signal is a legal signal).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the transportation system of Donnelly to include the light signal coding abilities of Liu to teach “transmit a vehicle call request including a user identification code, receive an optical signal including the user identification code, output through the automotive lamp of a vehicle, the user identification code being modulated into a binary code and output by flashing of the automotive lamp, demodulate the received optical signal and convert the demodulated optical signal into the user identification code, determine whether the converted user identification code matches a pre-stored user identification code, and identify the vehicle as the dispatched vehicle based on the converted user identification code being matched with the pre-stored user identification code,” as a need exists to solve a problem of decryption failure in visible light encryption and decryption, and improve accuracy of decryption (Liu, Par. [0070]). Since each individual element and its function are shown in the prior art, albeit shown in separate references, the difference between the claimed subject matter and the prior art rests not on any individual element or function but in the very combination itself - that is in the substitution of the identification code of Liu for the flash sequence as disclosed in Donnelly. Thus, the simple substitution of one known element for another producing a predictable result renders the claim obvious.
Regarding claim 4, Donnelly and Liu teach the mobile terminal according to claim 1. Donnelly discloses wherein the at least one processor: determines whether a user boarding is completed; and outputs a dispatch completion indication if the user boarding is determined to be completed (Par. [0079], detects user egress and terminates designated application).
Regarding claim 5, Donnelly and Liu teach the mobile terminal according to claim 4. Donnelly discloses wherein the at least one processor determines that the user boarding is completed when detecting at least one of near field communication (NFC) tagging or quick response (QR) code tagging, or when receiving confirmation from a user (Par. [0052], NFC interface; Par. [0079], detects user egress and terminates designated application).
Regarding claim 6, Donnelly and Liu teach the mobile terminal according to claim 1. Donnelly discloses wherein the at least one processor activates a vehicle search button when the vehicle approaches within a preset distance from the mobile terminal (Par. [0075], when the AV 390 is within a proximity to the pick-up location, such as a predetermined distance or time, the mobile computing device 300 can generate a prompt (e.g., a visual and/or audio prompt) instructing the user to point the camera 350 of the mobile computing device 300 towards oncoming road traffic).
Regarding claim 7, Donnelly and Liu teach the mobile terminal according to claim 6. Donnelly discloses wherein the at least one processor highlights and displays an identified vehicle on a screen when the activated vehicle search button is clicked (Par. [0075], when the AV 390 is within a proximity to the pick-up location, such as a predetermined distance or time, the mobile computing device 300 can generate a prompt (e.g., a visual and/or audio prompt) instructing the user to point the camera 350 of the mobile computing device 300 towards oncoming road traffic; the mobile computing device 300 can detect flash code data 312 via the camera, and provide a visual indication of the AV 390 on the display screen 320 identifying the AV 390 (510). In one example, the visual indication can comprise a shaped outline, such as a colored circle or square, that identifies the AV 390 on live image data displayed on the display screen 320).
Regarding claim 8, Donnelly and Liu teach the mobile terminal according to claim 7. Donnelly discloses wherein the at least one processor highlights and outputs the identified vehicle by surrounding the vehicle with a shape (Par. [0075], when the AV 390 is within a proximity to the pick-up location, such as a predetermined distance or time, the mobile computing device 300 can generate a prompt (e.g., a visual and/or audio prompt) instructing the user to point the camera 350 of the mobile computing device 300 towards oncoming road traffic; the mobile computing device 300 can detect flash code data 312 via the camera, and provide a visual indication of the AV 390 on the display screen 320 identifying the AV 390 (510). In one example, the visual indication can comprise a shaped outline, such as a colored circle or square, that identifies the AV 390 on live image data displayed on the display screen 320).
Regarding claim 9, Donnelly discloses a vehicle terminal for identifying a dispatched vehicle using an automotive lamp, the vehicle terminal comprising: at least one processor; and a storage medium storing a computer-readable instruction (Par. [0060], a processor 3400 of the mobile computing device 300 can execute a rider application 332 stored in memory 330), wherein, when executed by the at least one processor, the computer-readable instruction causes the at least one processor to receive dispatch information (Par. [0023], A requesting user can provide an input on a user device 195 to transmit a pick-up request 197), and output the optical signal by flashing the automotvie lamp (Par. [0028], The flash codes 127 can enable a lighting element (or other output device, such as a radio or acoustic transmitter) on the selected AV 109 to output a unique flash sequence that identifies the selected AV … When outputted , the flash sequence corresponding to the flash code 127 can be identified using a camera of the requesting user’s device 195).
Donnelly explicitly discloses the use of unique optical signals (Par. [0028], The flash codes 127 can enable a lighting element (or other output device, such as a radio or acoustic transmitter) on the selected AV 109 to output a unique flash sequence that identifies the selected AV). Donnelly does not explicitly disclose a user identification code, modulate the user identidication code and convert the modulated user identidicatin code into a binary code, and output the optical signal by flashing the automotvie lamp based on the generated binary code, wherein the user identification code is used to identifiy a vehicle as the dispatched vehicle.
Liu teaches a user identification code (Par. [0035], the communication data includes user information, and the user information includes ID information),
modulate the user identidication code and convert the modulated user identidicatin code into a binary code (Par. [0164], the ID data set at the transmit end and the receive end is a 16-bit binary numeral 0000000000010000, the pseudocode sequence indicator is an 8-bit binary numeral 10000000, and a pseudocode sequence corresponding to the pseudocode sequence indicator is a 16-bit binary numeral 0000100000000000), and
output the optical signal by flashing the automotvie lamp based on the generated binary code (Par. [0227], the transmit end 110 sends a modulated signal in a flashing form by using an LED lamp),
wherein the user identification code is used to identifiy (Par. [0239], if the recovered user ID is consistent with the user ID stored locally at the receive end, it is considered that the visible light signal is a legal signal).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the transportation system of Donnelly to include the light signal coding abilities of Liu to teach “modulate the user identidication code and convert the modulated user identidicatin code into a binary code, and output the optical signal by flashing the automotvie lamp based on the generated binary code, wherein the user identification code is used to identifiy a vehicle as the dispatched vehicle,” as a need exists to solve a problem of decryption failure in visible light encryption and decryption, and improve accuracy of decryption (Liu, Par. [0070]). Since each individual element and its function are shown in the prior art, albeit shown in separate references, the difference between the claimed subject matter and the prior art rests not on any individual element or function but in the very combination itself - that is in the substitution of the identification code of Liu for the flash sequence as disclosed in Donnelly. Thus, the simple substitution of one known element for another producing a predictable result renders the claim obvious.
Regarding claim 12, Donnelly and Liu teach the mobile terminal according to claim 10. Donnelly does not explicitly disclose wherein the at least one processor flashes the automotive lamp for a binary code “0” to have a shorter turn-on time than a binary code “1,” or the binary code “1” to have a shorter turn-on time than the binary code “0.” Liu teaches wherein the at least one processor flashes the automotive lamp for a binary code “0” to have a shorter turn-on time than a binary code “1,” or the binary code “1” to have a shorter turn-on time than the binary code “0” (Par. [0164], the ID data set at the transmit end and the receive end is a 16-bit binary numeral 0000000000010000, the pseudocode sequence indicator is an 8-bit binary numeral 10000000, and a pseudocode sequence corresponding to the pseudocode sequence indicator is a 16-bit binary numeral 0000100000000000).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the transportation system of Donnelly to include the light signal coding abilities of Liu to teach “modulate the user identidication code and convert the modulated user identidicatin code into a binary code, and output the optical signal by flashing the automotvie lamp based on the generated binary code, wherein the user identification code is used to identifiy a vehicle as the dispatched vehicle,” as a need exists to solve a problem of decryption failure in visible light encryption and decryption, and improve accuracy of decryption (Liu, Par. [0070]). Since each individual element and its function are shown in the prior art, albeit shown in separate references, the difference between the claimed subject matter and the prior art rests not on any individual element or function but in the very combination itself - that is in the substitution of the identification code of Liu for the flash sequence as disclosed in Donnelly. Thus, the simple substitution of one known element for another producing a predictable result renders the claim obvious.
Regarding claim 14, Donnelly and Liu teach the mobile terminal according to claim 9. Donnelly discloses wherein the at least one processor outputs the optical signal while the vehicle travels (Par. [0013], As the service vehicle approaches the pick-up location, the service vehicle can output the flash code using the lighting element).
Regarding claim 15, Donnelly and Liu teach the mobile terminal according to claim 9. Donnelly discloses wherein the at least one processor outputs the user identification code through a display device installed on a roof of the vehicle while the vehicle is parked or stopped (Par. [0081]).
Regarding claim 16, Donnelly and Liu teach the mobile terminal according to claim 9. Donnelly discloses wherein the at least one processor: determines whether a user boarding is completed; and terminates the output of the optical signal when the user boarding is determined to be completed (Par. [0052], NFC interface; Par. [0079], detects user egress and terminates designated application).
Regarding claim 17, Donnelly and Liu teach the mobile terminal according to claim 16. Donnelly discloses wherein the at least one processor determines that the user boarding is completed when detecting a door opening of the vehicle or when receiving the user authentication code (Par. [0052], NFC interface; Par. [0079], detects user egress and terminates designated application).
Regarding claim 18, Donnelly and Liu teach the mobile terminal according to claim 10. Donnelly discloses wherein a frequency at which the automotive lamp flashes is a frequency at which people do not perceive the flashing (Par. [0059], non-visible frequency band).
Regarding claim 19, Donnelly and Liu teach the mobile terminal according to claim 18. Donnelly discloses wherein the flashing frequency is 100 Hz or more (Par. [0059], non-visible frequency band).
Regarding claim 20, Donnelly and Liu teach the mobile terminal according to claim 9. Donnelly discloses wherein the automotive lamps includes at least one of a day running light, a low beam, a tail lamp, a position lamp, or any combination thereof (Par. [0028], one or multiple light sources).
Claims 3, 11, and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Donnelly (US 2017/0294130 A1) in view of Liu (US 2015/0146871 A1) and Adams et al. (US 2024/0289856 A1), hereinafter Adams.
Regarding claim 3, Donnelly and Liu teach the mobile terminal according to claim 2. Donnelly does not explicitly disclose wherein the at least one processor converts the binary code into the user identification code based on Morse code or American standard code for information interchange (ASCII) code. Adams teaches wherein the at least one processor converts the binary code into the user identification code based on Morse code or American standard code for information interchange (ASCII) code (Par. [0058], [0059]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the transportation system of Donnelly and Liu to include the light signal coding abilities of Adams as a need exists to verify a handshake process that does not require physical proximity (Adams, Par. [0003]). Since each individual element and its function are shown in the prior art, albeit shown in separate references, the difference between the claimed subject matter and the prior art rests not on any individual element or function but in the very combination itself - that is in the substitution of the handshake code of Adams for the flash sequence as disclosed in Donnelly. Thus, the simple substitution of one known element for another producing a predictable result renders the claim obvious.
Regarding claim 11, Donnelly and Liu teach the mobile terminal according to claim 10. Donnelly does not explicitly disclose wherein the at least one processor converts the user identification code into the binary code based on Morse code or American standard code for information interchange (ASCII) code. Adams teaches wherein the at least one processor converts the user identification code into the binary code based on Morse code or American standard code for information interchange (ASCII) code (Par. [0058], [0059]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the transportation system of Donnelly and Liu to include the light signal coding abilities of Adams as a need exists to verify a handshake process that does not require physical proximity (Adams, Par. [0003]). Since each individual element and its function are shown in the prior art, albeit shown in separate references, the difference between the claimed subject matter and the prior art rests not on any individual element or function but in the very combination itself - that is in the substitution of the handshake code of Adams for the flash sequence as disclosed in Donnelly. Thus, the simple substitution of one known element for another producing a predictable result renders the claim obvious.
Regarding claim 13, Donnelly and Liu teach the mobile terminal according to claim 9. Donnelly does not explicitly disclose wherein the user identification code includes at least one of a combination of letters, symbols, and/or numbers. Adams teaches wherein the user identification code includes at least one of a combination of letters, symbols, and/or numbers (Par. [0058], [0059]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the transportation system of Donnelly and Liu to include the light signal coding abilities of Adams as a need exists to verify a handshake process that does not require physical proximity (Adams, Par. [0003]). Since each individual element and its function are shown in the prior art, albeit shown in separate references, the difference between the claimed subject matter and the prior art rests not on any individual element or function but in the very combination itself - that is in the substitution of the handshake code of Adams for the flash sequence as disclosed in Donnelly. Thus, the simple substitution of one known element for another producing a predictable result renders the claim obvious.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Patrick Kim whose telephone number is (571)272-8619. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9AM - 5PM EST.
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, Lynda Jasmin can be reached at (571)272-6782. 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.
/Patrick Kim/Examiner, Art Unit 3629
