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 .
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
a near-infrared image data obtainer (Specification Page 11 - Fig. 1, the near-infrared camera 411) in claim 1;
a visible light image data obtainer (Specification Page 11 - Fig. 1, the color image data obtainer 311 in claim 1;
and a warner (Specification Page 11 – Fig. 1, warner 511) in claims 3, 7 and 8.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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) 1-4 and 8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Porta (US 20210012126 A1) in view of Crawford (US 20210394766 A1).
Claim 1. Porta teaches a vehicle warning apparatus (Fig. 1) to be applied to a vehicle, the vehicle warning apparatus being configured to give a warning to a driver who drives the vehicle in accordance with a state of the driver and a state of use of a mobile device by the driver in traveling of the vehicle, the vehicle warning apparatus
(abstract- notification signal may be generated if the use of the electronic device is unauthorized)
comprising:
a near-infrared image data obtainer configured to acquire near-infrared image data that is
based on an image captured by a near-infrared camera disposed in a compartment of the vehicle
(Fig. 1 [0041] one or more of the lenses 112a-112n and/or the capture devices 102a-102n.
[0043] In some embodiments, the sensor 140a may implement an RGB-InfraRed (RGB-IR) sensor.
e.g. capture device has the sensor 140a within);
a visible light image data obtainer configured to acquire visible light image data that is
based on an image captured by a visible light camera disposed in the compartment of the vehicle
([0041] one or more of the lenses 112a-112n and/or the capture devices 102a-102n.
[0042] The sensor 140a (e.g., a camera imaging sensor such as a CMOS sensor) of the capture device 102a may receive light from the lens 112a (e.g., the signal IM_A). The camera sensor 140a may perform a photoelectric conversion of the light from the lens 112a.
[0041] one or more of the lenses 112a-112n and/or the capture devices 102a-102n.);
And a warner configured to determine the state of the use of the mobile device by the driver,
based on the near-infrared image data and the visible light image data, the warner being configured
to give the warning to the driver in accordance with a result of determining the state of the use of
the mobile device by the driver
( e.g. Fig. 1 shows processor 106a has sensor fusion module 152 and the decision module 158
[0048][0056] The sensor fusion module 152 may be configured to analyze information from multiple sensors 114 and/or capture devices 102a-102n for redundancy. By analyzing various data from disparate sources, the sensor fusion module 152 may be capable of making inferences about the data that may not be possible from one of the data sources alone...
The decision making module 158 may be configured to use the information from the computer vision operations and/or the sensor fusion module 152 to determine which actions may be taken.
[0134][0135] When the decision module 158 determines that there is an unauthorized use of the smartphone 408, the processors 106a-106n may perform a response to notify the driver 402a. The response by the processors 106a-106n may be to generate the signal VCTRL. The signal VCTRL may be a notification signal. The signal VCTRL may be transmitted to one or more of the actuators 116 to perform the response selected by the decision module 158.
[0135] The notification signal VCTRL may be generated to enable a response that warns the driver 402a about the unauthorized usage.).
Porta further discloses the process of using graduating levels of alarms([0136])and having logic decisions to determine whether to trigger a warning based on the vehicle operation ([0138]) but does not specifically disclose wherein the warner is configured to stop the warning or lower a level of the warning when a functionality being used in the mobile device is a permitted functionality whose use is permitted in advance.
However, Crawford teaches wherein the warner is configured to stop the warning or lower a level of the warning when a functionality being used in the mobile device is a permitted functionality whose use is permitted in advance
([0179] enable the service when the CMD moves outside of the restricted zone, enable the service when the CMD is within the restricted zone but send a warning or reminder message to the CMD, as well as other possible control scenarios
(e.g. no warning (i.e. stop) given when outside of restricted zone)
[0181] may send a warning message to the user of the CMD and/or to the subscriber.(e.g. warning provided when vehicle is in motion)
[0188]...In step 959, the information within the Safe Driving Database, including information regarding allowable emergency numbers for a specific CMD, is made available to the Mobile Device Service Provider (MDSP) through the Internet, or other wired or wireless services to indicate that the MDSP should disable the CMD associated with vehicle 15.
[0406] In the first option, (step 3722)... e.g., map applications, that is the application and data will have full functionality.
(e.g. certain contact numbers and map applications or other applications are allowed to be used when vehicle is in motion (i.e. no warning is given (i.e. lower level based on certain things performed)))).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art before the effective filing date of invention to use the warner as taught by Crawford within the system of Porta for the purpose of silencing certain actions of a driver in relation to using navigational tools for a roadway or contacting certain individuals for emergencies.
Claim 2. Porta and Crawford teach the vehicle warning apparatus according to claim 1, wherein
the near-infrared image data comprises motion data and device data, the motion data
indicating a position of a predetermined part of the driver and a motion of the predetermined part
of the driver
(Porta [0156] The dotted box 504 may represent the processors 106a-106n detecting the face direction and/or gaze direction of the driver 402a′. The CNN module 150 may be configured to detect the eyes of the driver 402′. The location 506a may represent a location of the eyes of the driver 402a′ (e.g., 3D coordinates corresponding to a horizontal axis, a vertical axis and a depth axis). )
, the device data comprising a position of the mobile device and an appearance
characteristic of the mobile device
(Porta [0158] For example, the location of the eyes 506a may be determined, and a projection may be performed from the location of the eyes 506a to the second location 506b (e.g., a target location) in the video frame 500. In the example shown, the gaze 508 of the driver 402a′ may be projected generally towards a target location below a dashboard 512 (e.g., generally towards the smartphone 408′). The processors 106a-106n may determine whether the direction of the gaze 508 (e.g., the target 506b) corresponds with the location of the smartphone 408′ in the example video frame 500. Based on the projected gaze 508 of the driver 402a′ and/or the angle of the detected face 504, the decision module 158 may determine whether the driver 402a′ is performing an unauthorized use of the smartphone 408′.
(e.g. position is below the dashboard))
, and the visible light image data comprises screen data indicating content displayed on a screen
of the mobile device.
([0129] the unauthorized use may be using the cellular phone 408 to text while driving. In yet another example, if the electronic device 408 is a cellular phone, the unauthorized use may be watching video on the cellular phone 408 while driving)
Claim 3. Porta and Crawford teach the vehicle warning apparatus according to claim 2, wherein the warner is configured to determine whether the functionality being used in the mobile device is the permitted functionality,
based on the screen data
([0129] The decision module 158 may be configured to determine whether the use of the electronic device 408 is an unauthorized use...the unauthorized use may be using the cellular phone 408 to text while driving. In yet another example, if the electronic device 408 is a cellular phone, the unauthorized use may be watching video on the cellular phone 408 while driving).
Claim 4. Porta and Crawford teach the vehicle warning apparatus according to claim 3, wherein the permitted functionality comprises a navigation functionality
(Crawford [0406] In the first option, (step 3722)... e.g., map applications, that is the application and data will have full functionality. Alternately, the customer DNS can be configured to provide only address to safe applications or whitelisted applications and no address or a custom DNS to other applications.
(e.g. certain contact numbers and map applications or other applications are allowed to be used when vehicle is in motion (i.e. no warning is given))).).
Claim 8. Porta and Crawford teach the vehicle warning apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the warner is configured to acquire speed data indicating a travel speed of the vehicle, and raise the level of the warning as the travel speed is higher
(Porta [0073] The sensor fusion module 152 may aggregate data from the sensors 114 [0079]
Crawford [0125] In an embodiment, an aspect of the invention seeks to control unsafe driving by changing the behavior of drivers to lessen the occurrence of unsafe driving events such as texting while driving, use of distracting features of a mobile device while driving, speeding,).
Claim 9. Porta and Crawford teach the vehicle warning apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the near-infrared camera and the visible light camera are disposed on a ceiling or a pillar in the compartment of the vehicle
(Prota [0076] Based on the detected objects, the processors 106a-106n may determine a position (e.g., a distance) of the objects relative to the vehicle and/or a position of the objects relative to a component of the vehicle (e.g., distance from a vehicle pillar, distance from a steering wheel, distance from a dashboard, distance from another seat, etc.).).
Claim 10. Porta teaches a vehicle warning apparatus to be applied to a vehicle, the vehicle warning apparatus being configured to give a warning to a driver who drives the vehicle in accordance with a state of the driver and a state of use of a mobile device by the driver in traveling of the vehicle
(abstract- notification signal may be generated if the use of the electronic device is unauthorized) ,
the vehicle warning apparatus comprising circuitry configured to
acquire near-infrared image data that is based on an image captured by a near-
infrared camera disposed in a compartment of the vehicle
([0041] one or more of the lenses 112a-112n and/or the capture devices 102a-102n.
[0043] In some embodiments, the sensor 140a may implement an RGB-InfraRed (RGB-IR) sensor. ),
acquire visible light image data that is based on an image captured by a visible
light camera disposed in the compartment of the vehicle
([0041] one or more of the lenses 112a-112n and/or the capture devices 102a-102n.
[0042] The sensor 140a (e.g., a camera imaging sensor such as a CMOS sensor) of the capture device 102a may receive light from the lens 112a (e.g., the signal IM_A). The camera sensor 140a may perform a photoelectric conversion of the light from the lens 112a.
[0041] one or more of the lenses 112a-112n and/or the capture devices 102a-102n.),
determine the state of the use of the mobile device by the driver, based on the near-infrared image data and the visible light image data
( e.g. Fig. 1 shows processor 106a has sensor fusion module 152 and the decision module 158
[0048][0056] The sensor fusion module 152 may be configured to analyze information from multiple sensors 114 and/or capture devices 102a-102n for redundancy. By analyzing various data from disparate sources, the sensor fusion module 152 may be capable of making inferences about the data that may not be possible from one of the data sources alone...
The decision making module 158 may be configured to use the information from the computer vision operations and/or the sensor fusion module 152 to determine which actions may be taken.
[0134][0135] When the decision module 158 determines that there is an unauthorized use of the smartphone 408, the processors 106a-106n may perform a response to notify the driver 402a. The response by the processors 106a-106n may be to generate the signal VCTRL. The signal VCTRL may be a notification signal. The signal VCTRL may be transmitted to one or more of the actuators 116 to perform the response selected by the decision module 158.
[0135] The notification signal VCTRL may be generated to enable a response that warns the driver 402a about the unauthorized usage.).
and give the warning to the driver in accordance with a result of determining the state of the use of the mobile device by the driver
[0135] The notification signal VCTRL may be generated to enable a response that warns the driver 402a about the unauthorized usage.
Porta further discloses the process of using graduating levels of alarms([0136])and having logic decisions to determine whether to trigger a warning based on the vehicle operation ([0138]) but does not specifically disclose stop the warning or lower a level of the warning when a functionality being used in the mobile device is a permitted functionality whose use is permitted in advance.
However, Crawford teaches the process of stopping the warning or lower a level of the warning when a functionality being used in the mobile device is a permitted functionality whose use is permitted in advance
([0179] enable the service when the CMD moves outside of the restricted zone, enable the service when the CMD is within the restricted zone but send a warning or reminder message to the CMD, as well as other possible control scenarios
(e.g. no warning (i.e. stop) given when outside of restricted zone)
[0181] may send a warning message to the user of the CMD and/or to the subscriber.(e.g. warning provided when vehicle is in motion)
[0188] then in step 952, the Service Decision System 125 utilizes the information associated with that vehicle 15 that is within the Safe Driving Registration System 105 and Safe Driving Database 110, ...In step 959, the information within the Safe Driving Database, including information regarding allowable emergency numbers for a specific CMD, is made available to the Mobile Device Service Provider (MDSP) through the Internet, or other wired or wireless services to indicate that the MDSP should disable the CMD associated with vehicle 15.
[0406] In the first option, (step 3722)... e.g., map applications, that is the application and data will have full functionality. Alternately, the customer DNS can be configured to provide only address to safe applications or whitelisted applications and no address or a custom DNS to other applications.
(e.g. certain contact numbers and map applications or other applications are allowed to be used when vehicle is in motion (i.e. no warning is given (i.e. low level)))).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art before the effective filing date of invention to use the process of stopping the warning as taught by Crawford within the system of Porta for the purpose of silencing certain actions of a driver in relation to using navigational tools for a roadway or contacting certain individuals for emergencies.
Claim(s) 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Porta and Crawford and further in view of Braywatts (CN 107380164 A).
Claim 7. Porta and Crawford teach the vehicle warning apparatus according to claim 1, and further discloses the use of ADAS ([0037]) but do not specifically disclose wherein the warner is configured to lower the level of the warning when the vehicle is traveling in an advanced driver assistance mode
.However, Braywatts teaches wherein the warner is configured to lower the level of the warning when the vehicle is traveling in an advanced driver assistance mode
(Page 14- For example, the ADAS can measure the time between the moment of time the driver of detected events on the road to react to the event. Furthermore, capable of creating a driver profile as the reference parameter. For example, the ADAS can aim at each driver reaction time and recording the standard so as to perform personal alertness assessment...If driver direction detected by the potential collision watch and still relatively far distance, at the same time, relatively low risk, then a warning may be postponed until or unless the higher risk in the later stage. and in the reverse situation due to his/her own phone or inside other objects and distraction of the driver, the warning threshold would be greatly reduced.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art before the effective filing date of invention to use the ADAS as taught by Braywatts within the system of Porta for the purpose of dynamically generating alerts when high risk traffic is present and requiring the full attention of the driver.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5 and 6 are 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.
For claim 5, the prior art of record fails to specifically teach wherein the screen data comprises lighting data and functionality identification data, the lighting data indicating a lighting state of the screen of the mobile device, the functionality identification data being configured to be displayed on the screen of the mobile device when the permitted functionality is in use.
The prior art of Porta and Crawford were the closest prior art to teach the detection of the cell phones possessed by the driver and ability to detect whether the user is distracted by the phone. However, the prior art of record fails to specifically teach the lighting data and functionality identification data as claimed by Applicant’s invention.
Claim 6 is objected for its dependency to claim 5.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RUFUS C POINT whose telephone number is (571)270-7510. The examiner can normally be reached 9am-5pm.
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, Davetta Goins can be reached at 571-272-2957. 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.
/RUFUS C POINT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2689