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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 12/26/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Mukaiyama (US 2020/0388155 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Mukaiyama discloses an automated valet parking management system for managing automated valet parking in a parking lot (e.g. Figs. 1-2 & Abstract & [0027-0028]), the automated valet parking management system comprising: one or more processors (e.g. Fig. 1: 34 & [0041]), wherein the one or more processors are configured to
determine, when a vehicle that is compatible with the automated valet parking arrives at the parking lot (e.g. Fig. 3: S1 & [0069]), whether a usage reservation for the automated valet parking is made by the vehicle (e.g. Fig. 3: S2 & [0069]),
search for vacancy information for reservation of a parking slot in the parking lot when no usage reservation is made (e.g. Fig. 3: S3: vehicle arrives earlier than reservation means no reservation is made at the arrival time) and
when the parking slot is vacant with respect to reservation (e.g. Fig. 3: S5), notify a user of the vehicle regarding a usage proposal of the automated valet parking, via a terminal device operated by the user (e.g. Fig. 1 & [0036]: server 20 transmits information on result of determination of whether parking reservation is possible to user terminal 10).
Regarding claim 2, Mukaiyama discloses the usage proposal includes information indicating a vacancy in reservation for the parking slot, and information regarding confirmation of whether the user intends to use the automated valet parking (e.g. Fig. 1 & [0036]: server transmits information on result of determination of whether parking reservation is possible).
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.
Claim(s) 3-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mukaiyama (US 2020/0388155 A1) in view of Wang (US 2016/0012726 A1).
Regarding claim 3, Mukaiyama fails to disclose, but Wang teaches when a reply rejecting (e.g. [0114, 0132]: user 2 rejects a parking space offer) the usage proposal is received from the user via the terminal device, the one or more processors do not notify the user of the usage proposal, even when the vehicle, in which the user that rejected the usage proposal is riding, arrives at the same parking lot with no usage reservation for the automated valet parking again (e.g. [0114]: stop sending notification if user reject or does not respond to the notification).
Both Mukaiyama and Wang are related to parking assist, and Wang suggests user can accept or reject a suggested parking space.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Mukaiyama with the teachings of Wang to allow user to accept or deny a parking space offer since the offer might not be fully satisfied by the user and it would provide freedom to user to accept or deny offer.
Regarding claim 4, Wang teaches when a request indicating that notification of the usage proposal is unnecessary is received from the user via the terminal device in advance, the one or more processors do not notify the user of the usage proposal when the vehicle, in which the user is riding, arrives at the parking lot with no usage reservation for the automated valet parking, with respect to all parking lots that provide an automated valet parking service by the automated valet parking management system (e.g. [0105]: turn on or off alerts in the settings).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KAM WAN MA whose telephone number is (571) 270-3693. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am-6pm.
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, Steven Lim can be reached at 571-270-1210. 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.
/KAM WAN MA/Examiner, Art Unit 2688