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 Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claim(s) 1-2, and 5 are ejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Step 1 of the Subject Matter Eligibility Test entails considering whether the claimed subject matter falls within the four statutory categories of patentable subject matter identified by 35 U.S.C. 101: Process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter.
Claims 1 and 5 are directed to a system (machine or manufacture) and a method (program), respectively. As such, the claims are directed to statutory categories of invention.
If the claim recites a statutory category of invention, the claim requires further analysis in Step 2A. Step 2A of the Subject Matter Eligibility Test is a two-prong inquiry. In Prong One, examiners evaluate whether the claim recites a judicial exception.
Claim(s) 1 and 5 recites abstract limitations, which are emphasized (bolded) below:
[Claim 1] A vehicle system comprising a server device communicably connected to a vehicle, the server device includes a processor for performing an operation related to the travel of the vehicle, wherein the processor is configured to perform the following processing:
calculating a traveling state including a future positional relationship between an object and the vehicle based on detection values of the object and traveling information which relates to traveling of the vehicle, wherein the object exists around the vehicle and relates to traveling of the vehicle;
based on the traveling state, determining a contact risk which occurs to the vehicle in the future with the object;
if the contact risk exceeds a predetermined criterion, executing driving assistance to the vehicle.
[Claim 5] A non-transitory storage medium storing a program installed in a computer mounted on a vehicle system including a server device communicably connected to a vehicle, wherein the non-transitory storage medium causes the computer to perform the following processing for causing the computer to support driving of the vehicle:
acquiring detection values of an object and travel information related to the travel of the vehicle, wherein the object exists around the vehicle and relates to the travel of the vehicle;
calculating a driving state including a future positional relationship between the object and the vehicle based on the detection values and the traveling information;
based on the traveling state, determining a contact risk which occurs to the vehicle in the future with the object;
if the contact risk exceeds a predetermined criterion, executing driving assistance to the vehicle.
These limitations, as drafted, are a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, cover performance of the limitations in the mind, or by a human using pen and paper, and therefore recite mental processes, nothing in the claim element precludes the aforementioned steps from practically being performed in the human mind, or by a human using pen and paper. The mere recitation of a generic computer does not take the claim out of the mental process grouping. Thus, the claim recites an abstract idea.
If the claim recites a judicial exception in step 2A Prong One, the claim requires further analysis in step 2A Prong Two. In step 2A Prong Two, examiners evaluate whether the claim recites additional elements that integrate the exception into a practical application of that exception.
The claim(s) recite additional elements of: which are emphasized (underlined) below:
[Claim 1] A vehicle system comprising a server device communicably connected to a vehicle, the server device includes a processor for performing an operation related to the travel of the vehicle, wherein the processor is configured to perform the following processing:
calculating a traveling state including a future positional relationship between an object and the vehicle based on detection values of the object and traveling information which relates to traveling of the vehicle, wherein the object exists around the vehicle and relates to traveling of the vehicle;
based on the traveling state, determining a contact risk which occurs to the vehicle in the future with the object;
if the contact risk exceeds a predetermined criterion, executing driving assistance to the vehicle.
[Claim 5] A non-transitory storage medium storing a program installed in a computer mounted on a vehicle system including a server device communicably connected to a vehicle, wherein the non-transitory storage medium causes the computer to perform the following processing for causing the computer to support driving of the vehicle:
acquiring detection values of an object and travel information related to the travel of the vehicle, wherein the object exists around the vehicle and relates to the travel of the vehicle;
calculating a driving state including a future positional relationship between the object and the vehicle based on the detection values and the traveling information;
based on the traveling state, determining a contact risk which occurs to the vehicle in the future with the object;
if the contact risk exceeds a predetermined criterion, executing driving assistance to the vehicle.
The characterization of;
… A vehicle system
… mounted on a vehicle system …communicably connected to a vehicle… to support driving of the vehicle
amounts to merely indicating a field of use or technological environment in which to apply a judicial exception and cannot integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
(see MPEP 2106.05(h)).
The additional element(s);
… comprising a server device communicably connected to a vehicle, the server device includes a processor
… A non-transitory storage medium storing a program installed in a computer
… a server device
amounts to merely indicating functions of the server device, processor, and non-transitory storage medium storing a program are recited at a high-level of generality such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component, alternatively the limitation(s) amount to merely indicating a field of use or technological environment in which to apply a judicial exception and cannot integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. The claimed components are recited at a high level of generality and are merely invoked as tool to perform the abstract idea.
(see MPEP 2106.05(h)).
The functions of the additional element(s);
… if the contact risk exceeds a predetermined criterion, executing driving assistance to the vehicle
amounts to insignificant extra-solution activity (i.e. activity incidental to the primary process that is merely a nominal or tangential addition to the claim, see MPEP 2106.05(g)). The functions of the driving assistance (e.g. interpreted as the display of information based on the disclosure in the specification (and characterization of claim 2)) are recited at a high level of generality (i.e. as a general means of gathering and transmitting data), and amounts to mere data gathering, which is a form of insignificant post-solution activity.
The characterization of;
… wherein the processor is configured to perform the following processing
… causes the computer to perform the following processing for causing the computer to support driving of the vehicle
attempt to cover any solution to an identified problem with no restriction on how the result is accomplished and no description of the mechanism for accomplishing the result, does not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application or provide significantly more because this type of recitation is equivalent to the words “apply it”.
If the additional elements do not integrate the exception into a practical application in step 2A Prong Two, then the claim is directed to the recited judicial exception, and requires further analysis under Step 2B to determine whether they provide an inventive concept (i.e., whether the additional elements amount to significantly more than the exception itself).
With respect to the functions a computer or other machinery in its ordinary capacity for economic or other tasks (e.g., to receive, store, or transmit data) or simply adding a general purpose computer or computer components after the fact to an abstract idea does not provide significantly more. (See Affinity Labs v. DirecTV, 838 F.3d 1253, 1262, 120 USPQ2d 1201, 1207 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (cellular telephone); TLI Communications LLC v. AV Auto, LLC, 823 F.3d 607, 613, 118 USPQ2d 1744, 1748 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (computer server and telephone unit).)
As discussed above, the characterization of the claim(s), as discussed above, amounts to merely indicating a field of use or technological environment in which to apply a judicial exception, which does not amount to significantly more than the exception itself. (see MPEP 2106.05(h)).
Additionally/alternatively, with respect to the functions that require receiving, storing, and transmitting data, the Symantec, TLI, OIP Techs. and buySAFE court decisions cited in MPEP 2106.05(d)(II) indicate that mere collecting, receiving or transmitting data over a network is a well‐understood, routine, conventional function when it is claimed in a merely generic manner (as it is here); prior art Kronenberg (US 2010/0082179 A1), discloses that various combinations of sensors, detectors, processors, cameras, and other monitoring means known in the art can be used to monitor driving parameters of vehicles (see [0044]).
Furthermore, The Symantec, Internet Patent Corp. court decision cited in MPEP 2106.05(d)(II) indicate that a display functionality is a well‐understood, routine, conventional function when it is claimed in a merely generic manner (as it is here).
Moreover, the specification demonstrates the well-understood, routine, conventional nature of additional elements as it describes the additional elements as well-understood or routine or conventional (or an equivalent term), as a commercially available product, or in a manner that indicates that the additional elements are sufficiently well-known that the specification does not need to describe the particulars of such additional elements to satisfy 35 U.S.C. §112(a).
Thus, even when viewed as an ordered combination, nothing in the claims add significantly more (i.e. an inventive concept) to the abstract idea.
Claim(s) 2 act to further defining previously recited abstract ideas (e.g., further characterization of driving assistance) without reciting any further additional elements beyond those identified above with respect to the independent claims. For the reasons described above with respect to the independent claims this judicial exception is not meaningfully integrated into a practical application, or significantly more than the abstract idea.
For the reasons described above, this judicial exception is not meaningfully integrated into a practical application, or significantly more than the abstract idea.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)
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.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
In re claim(s) 5; the limitation(s), “A non-transitory storage medium storing a program installed in a computer mounted on a vehicle system including a server device communicably connected to a vehicle, wherein the non-transitory storage medium causes the computer to perform the following processing for causing the computer to support driving of the vehicle” is/are unclear. The limitation is confusing as it is unclear how or if a computer (including a server) is mounted on a vehicle and/or if the limitation is part of a vehicle system, which includes a server device and a vehicle upon which the computer is mounted. The relationship between the disclosed limitations (e.g. vehicle, vehicle system, server device) is unclear and in part renders the scope of the claim indefinite. It is suggested the claim(s) be amended to provided clarity and consistency throughout.
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 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.
Claim(s) 1-2 and 4-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kawamata US-20160280266-A1 in view of Yamamuro US-20190250612-A1.
[Claim 1] Kawamata US-20160280266-A1 discloses A vehicle system comprising a ***control*** device communicably connected to a vehicle, the ***control*** device includes a ***computer*** for performing an operation related to the travel of the vehicle[0044], wherein the processor is configured to perform the following processing:
(Kawamata [claim.1] A vehicle control system, comprising: a controller configured to, when a collision of a host vehicle with …)
(Kawamata [0044] The ECU 50 is a controller that executes vehicle control over the host vehicle 1. The ECU 50 according to the present embodiment is an electronic control unit including a computer. The steering angle sensor 24, the brake operation amount sensor 22, the right side sensor 32R, the left side sensor 32L and the rear sensor 33 are connected to the ECU 50. Signals indicating the detected results of the sensors 22, 24, 32R, 32L, 33 are output to the ECU 50.)
Yamamuro US-20190250612-A1 discloses in a similar invention field of endeavor, a consideration for a vehicle system comprising “…a server device communicably connected to a vehicle, the server device includes a processor”;
(Yamauro [claim.1] 1. A server apparatus capable of communicating with a plurality of vehicles …, the server apparatus comprising: a controller comprising at least one processor, the controller configured to: acquire traveling data … for each of the vehicles ...)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time the instant application was effectively filed to adapt the modified system of Kawamata to include a server and a processor with a reasonable expectation for success, as taught by Yamamuro, for the benefit of providing computing components configured to execute control instructions.
calculating a traveling state including a future positional relationship between an object and the vehicle based on detection values of the object [0050] and traveling information which relates to traveling of the vehicle [0070], wherein the object exists around the vehicle and relates to traveling of the vehicle ([0042] e.g. other vehicle 100, pedestrians, objects, etc);
(Kawamata [0050] Because the right side sensor 32R of the host vehicle 1 is arranged at the front end of the host vehicle 1, the right side sensor 32R detects the other vehicle 100. The right side sensor 32R calculates a relative position and relative velocity of the other vehicle 100 to the host vehicle 1. The right side sensor 32R outputs the calculated information to the traveling area estimation unit 51… The traveling area AR is a future host vehicle forward traveling area of the other vehicle 100 that is a crossing target. In other words, the traveling area AR is a future passage area)
(Kawamata [0070] In step S40, the collision possibility-determination unit 52 acquires a host vehicle state. The collision possibility determination unit 52 acquires the host vehicle state, such as the vehicle speed, current position, traveling direction, speed ratio of the transmission 6, accelerator operation amount and brake operation amount of the host vehicle 1, from the host vehicle state detection unit 40. When step S40 is executed, the process proceeds to step S50.)
(Kawamata [0042] Each of the sensors 32R, 32L, 33 may further have the function of identifying a detected target. Identifiable targets include, for example, another vehicle, a pedestrian, a bicycle, a motorcycle, a baby carriage, and other mobile units. Each of the sensors 32R, 32L, 33 estimates the type of a detected target by, for example, matching the detected target with a model of an identification target that is stored in advance. These identification tasks may be executed by the ECU 50 that has acquired the detected results of the sensors 32R, 32L, 33.)
based on the traveling state, determining a contact risk which occurs to the vehicle in the future with the object;)
(Kawamata [0050] Information about the traveling area AR estimated by the traveling area estimation unit 51 is output to the collision possibility determination unit 52… determines the possibility of a collision of the host vehicle 1 with the detected other vehicle 100. The collision possibility determination unit 52 according to the present embodiment determines the collision possibility on the basis of the traveling area AR and the state of the host vehicle 1.)
if the contact risk exceeds a predetermined criterion (e.g. collision possibility/risks, possibility of collision avoidance), executing driving assistance to the vehicle.
(Kawamata [0051-52] The alarm control is control for issuing an alarm to a driver by an alarm device 41. The alarm device 41 is a device that transmits information about the collision possibility, or the like, to the driver by a stimulus, such as voice, light and video. The alarm device 41 is preferably arranged in a vehicle cabin. When there is a possibility that the host vehicle 1 collides with the other vehicle 100, the ECU 50 assists in avoiding a collision with the other vehicle 100 by executing alarm control for prompting driver's braking operation with the use of the alarm device 41.)
(Kawamata [0125] When there is an obstacle to the rear of the host vehicle 1 or when there is a higher possibility of collision avoidance when the host vehicle 1 is caused to travel forward than when the host vehicle 1 is caused to travel backward, the assist method selection unit 53 may assist in avoiding a collision by automatically causing the host vehicle 1 to travel forward.)
[Claim 2] Kawamata discloses The vehicle system of claim 1, wherein the ***system*** is configured to perform the following processing: in the driving assistance, causing the vehicle to output a notification indicating that the vehicle is approaching the object within a predetermined distance in the future.
(Kawamata [0051-52] The alarm control is control for issuing an alarm to a driver by an alarm device 41. The alarm device 41 is a device that transmits information about the collision possibility, or the like, to the driver by a stimulus, such as voice, light and video. The alarm device 41 is preferably arranged in a vehicle cabin. When there is a possibility that the host vehicle 1 collides with the other vehicle 100, the ECU 50 assists in avoiding a collision with the other vehicle 100 by executing alarm control for prompting driver's braking operation with the use of the alarm device 41.)
(Kawamata [0057] The collision possibility determination unit 52 calculates the collision possibility in the case of execution of alarm control on the basis of the positional relationship … and the traveling area AR.)
Yamamuro US-20190250612-A1 discloses in a similar invention field of endeavor, a consideration for a vehicle system comprising a “…processor”;
(Yamauro [claim.1] 1. A server apparatus capable of communicating with a plurality of vehicles …, the server apparatus comprising: a controller comprising at least one processor, the controller configured to: acquire traveling data … for each of the vehicles ...)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time the instant application was effectively filed to adapt the modified system of Kawamata to include a server and a processor with a reasonable expectation for success, as taught by Yamamuro, for the benefit of providing computing components configured to execute control instructions.
[Claim 4] Kawamata discloses The vehicle system of claim 1, wherein the ***system*** is configured to perform the following processing:
in the driving assistance, causing the vehicle to perform deceleration control and/or steering control to reduce the contact risk.
[0061] A situation that the assist method selection unit 53 executes automatic turning control is, for example, a situation that a collision with the other vehicle 100 is still unavoidable even when assisting control for collision avoidance is executed through at least one of the deceleration control, the brake control and the alarm control.
Yamamuro US-20190250612-A1 discloses in a similar invention field of endeavor, a consideration for a vehicle system comprising a “…processor”;
(Yamauro [claim.1] 1. A server apparatus capable of communicating with a plurality of vehicles …, the server apparatus comprising: a controller comprising at least one processor, the controller configured to: acquire traveling data … for each of the vehicles ...)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time the instant application was effectively filed to adapt the modified system of Kawamata to include a server and a processor with a reasonable expectation for success, as taught by Yamamuro, for the benefit of providing computing components configured to execute control instructions.
[Claim 5] Kawamata US-20160280266-A1 discloses ***a controller that executes vehicle control over a host vehicle including: a…*** computer mounted on a vehicle system ***including a controller***, wherein the ***system*** causes the computer to perform the following processing for causing the computer to support driving of the vehicle:
(Kawamata [claim.1] A vehicle control system, comprising: a controller configured to, when a collision of a host vehicle with …)
(Kawamata [0044] The ECU 50 is a controller that executes vehicle control over the host vehicle 1. The ECU 50 according to the present embodiment is an electronic control unit including a computer. The steering angle sensor 24, the brake operation amount sensor 22, the right side sensor 32R, the left side sensor 32L and the rear sensor 33 are connected to the ECU 50. Signals indicating the detected results of the sensors 22, 24, 32R, 32L, 33 are output to the ECU 50.)
Yamamuro US-20190250612-A1 discloses in a similar invention field of endeavor, a consideration for a vehicle system comprising “…A non-transitory storage medium storing a program installed … including a server device communicably connected to a vehicle, wherein the non-transitory storage medium causes …”;
(Yamauro [0036] The respective functional modules may be realized by executing programs stored in the storage means such as ROM (Read Only Memory) or the like by CPU (Central Processing Unit) (any of them is not indicated).)
(Yamauro [claim.1] 1. A server apparatus capable of communicating with a plurality of vehicles …, the server apparatus comprising: a controller comprising at least one processor, the controller configured to: acquire traveling data … for each of the vehicles ...)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time the instant application was effectively filed to adapt the modified system of Kawamata to include a non-transitory storage medium storing a program installed in a computer and a server and a processor with a reasonable expectation for success, as taught by Yamamuro, for the benefit of providing computing components configured to execute control instructions.
acquiring detection values of an object and travel information related to the travel of the vehicle, wherein the object exists around the vehicle and relates to the travel of the vehicle;
(Kawamata [0050] Because the right side sensor 32R of the host vehicle 1 is arranged at the front end of the host vehicle 1, the right side sensor 32R detects the other vehicle 100. The right side sensor 32R calculates a relative position and relative velocity of the other vehicle 100 to the host vehicle 1. The right side sensor 32R outputs the calculated information to the traveling area estimation unit 51… The traveling area AR is a future host vehicle forward traveling area of the other vehicle 100 that is a crossing target. In other words, the traveling area AR is a future passage area)
(Kawamata [0070] In step S40, the collision possibility-determination unit 52 acquires a host vehicle state. The collision possibility determination unit 52 acquires the host vehicle state, such as the vehicle speed, current position, traveling direction, speed ratio of the transmission 6, accelerator operation amount and brake operation amount of the host vehicle 1, from the host vehicle state detection unit 40. When step S40 is executed, the process proceeds to step S50.)
(Kawamata [0042] Each of the sensors 32R, 32L, 33 may further have the function of identifying a detected target. Identifiable targets include, for example, another vehicle, a pedestrian, a bicycle, a motorcycle, a baby carriage, and other mobile units. Each of the sensors 32R, 32L, 33 estimates the type of a detected target by, for example, matching the detected target with a model of an identification target that is stored in advance. These identification tasks may be executed by the ECU 50 that has acquired the detected results of the sensors 32R, 32L, 33.)
calculating a driving state including a future positional relationship between the object and the vehicle based on the detection values and the traveling information;
(Kawamata [0070] In step S40, the collision possibility-determination unit 52 acquires a host vehicle state. The collision possibility determination unit 52 acquires the host vehicle state, such as the vehicle speed, current position, traveling direction, speed ratio of the transmission 6, accelerator operation amount and brake operation amount of the host vehicle 1, from the host vehicle state detection unit 40. When step S40 is executed, the process proceeds to step S50.)
(Kawamata [0042] Each of the sensors 32R, 32L, 33 may further have the function of identifying a detected target. Identifiable targets include, for example, another vehicle, a pedestrian, a bicycle, a motorcycle, a baby carriage, and other mobile units. Each of the sensors 32R, 32L, 33 estimates the type of a detected target by, for example, matching the detected target with a model of an identification target that is stored in advance. These identification tasks may be executed by the ECU 50 that has acquired the detected results of the sensors 32R, 32L, 33.)
(Kawamata [0050] Because the right side sensor 32R of the host vehicle 1 is arranged at the front end of the host vehicle 1, the right side sensor 32R detects the other vehicle 100. The right side sensor 32R calculates a relative position and relative velocity of the other vehicle 100 to the host vehicle 1. The right side sensor 32R outputs the calculated information to the traveling area estimation unit 51… The traveling area AR is a future host vehicle forward traveling area of the other vehicle 100 that is a crossing target. In other words, the traveling area AR is a future passage area)
based on the traveling state, determining a contact risk which occurs to the vehicle in the future with the object;
(Kawamata [0050] Information about the traveling area AR estimated by the traveling area estimation unit 51 is output to the collision possibility determination unit 52… determines the possibility of a collision of the host vehicle 1 with the detected other vehicle 100. The collision possibility determination unit 52 according to the present embodiment determines the collision possibility on the basis of the traveling area AR and the state of the host vehicle 1.)
if the contact risk exceeds a predetermined criterion(e.g. collision possibility/risks, possibility of collision avoidance), executing driving assistance to the vehicle.
(Kawamata [0051-52] The alarm control is control for issuing an alarm to a driver by an alarm device 41. The alarm device 41 is a device that transmits information about the collision possibility, or the like, to the driver by a stimulus, such as voice, light and video. The alarm device 41 is preferably arranged in a vehicle cabin. When there is a possibility that the host vehicle 1 collides with the other vehicle 100, the ECU 50 assists in avoiding a collision with the other vehicle 100 by executing alarm control for prompting driver's braking operation with the use of the alarm device 41.)
(Kawamata [0125] When there is an obstacle to the rear of the host vehicle 1 or when there is a higher possibility of collision avoidance when the host vehicle 1 is caused to travel forward than when the host vehicle 1 is caused to travel backward, the assist method selection unit 53 may assist in avoiding a collision by automatically causing the host vehicle 1 to travel forward.)
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kawamata US-20160280266-A1 and Yamamuro US-20190250612-A1, as applied to claim 1 above and further in view of Park US-20240336274-A1.
[Claim 3] Kawamata discloses The vehicle system of claim 1, wherein the ***system*** is configured to perform the following processing:
if the contact risk exceeds a predetermined criterion, causing the vehicle to start an occupant protection control and the driving assistance ***during a time period*** at which the vehicle starts the occupant protection control and the driving assistance.
(Kawamata [0091-95] The assist method selection unit 53 further executes the occupant protection control. The occupant protection control is, for example, control for automatically carrying out rolling up of an occupant's seatbelt, initialization of a seat position, activation of an airbag, closing of car windows, and the like. Activation of the airbag may be started before the other vehicle 100 actually collides with the host vehicle 1. The occupant protection control is started at least before the other vehicle 100 collides with the host vehicle 1.)
Yamamuro US-20190250612-A1 discloses in a similar invention field of endeavor, a consideration for a vehicle system comprising a “…processor”;
(Yamauro [claim.1] 1. A server apparatus capable of communicating with a plurality of vehicles …, the server apparatus comprising: a controller comprising at least one processor, the controller configured to: acquire traveling data … for each of the vehicles ...)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time the instant application was effectively filed to adapt the modified system of Kawamata to include a server and a processor with a reasonable expectation for success, as taught by Yamamuro, for the benefit of providing computing components configured to execute control instructions.
Park US-20240336274-A1 discloses in a similar invention field of endeavor, a consideration for a vehicle system comprising a causing the vehicle to start an occupant protection control and the driving assistance “…at a second timing earlier than a first timing”;
(Park [claim.5] The autonomous driving control device …, via the seat belt length adjusting device, a length of a seat belt during a third time period, wherein the third time period comprises a first retraction period, for contracting the length of the seat belt, and a first idle period; or output the second notification by controlling, via the seat belt length adjusting device, the length of the seat belt during a fourth time period, wherein the fourth time period is less than the third time period, wherein the fourth time period comprises a second retraction period, for contracting the length of the seat belt, and a second idle period.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time the instant application was effectively filed to adapt the modified system of Kawamata to include a second timing earlier than a first timing with a reasonable expectation for success, as taught by Park, for the benefit of providing control instructions regarding the timing/tension/activation of safety features (e.g. seat-belts) in order to best provide passenger protection according to the operation and environment of a vehicle during hazardous operations.
Conclusion
It should be noted that there exists prior art which is pertinent to significant though unclaimed features of the defined invention or directed to the state of art. The following is a brief description of relevant prior art cited but not applied:
HARADA (US-20160264108-A1) discloses in a similar invention field of endeavor, a consideration for “… [0047] The seat belt 80 is a known occupant restraining unit configured to restrain an occupant of the vehicle 100 by rewinding a slack part of the webbing, and has the pretensioner that can hold a state of no looseness for a certain time. For example, the pretensioner includes a motor, and has a configuration in which the webbing can be rewound by an operation of the motor. In response to receiving an occupant restraining signal from the PCS-ECU 50, the seat belt 80 (or the pretensioner) rewinds a slack part of the webbing, and generates a predetermined tension or a pulling force to operate on the webbing, for restraining the occupant of the vehicle 100. Also, in response to receiving an occupant restraining release signal from the PCS-ECU 50 while restraining the occupant, the seat belt 80 (or the pretensioner) releases a state in which the predetermined tension has been generated by the motor, to release restraining the occupant of the vehicle 100.”;
See PTO-892: Notice of references cited.
Contact
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATTHEW JOHN MOSCOLA whose telephone number is (571)272-6944. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-5:30.
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, Abby Flynn can be reached on (571) 272-9855. 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.
/M.J.M./Examiner, Art Unit 3663
/ABBY J FLYNN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3663