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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-16 and 18-20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Interpretation
As a note to the applicant regarding claim interpretation, claims 1-14, as currently amended a method which is performed based on a contingent limitation being met (in a case where a target video is play in an immersive experience mode in the in-vehicle entertainment system).
Currently, for the Broadest Reasonable interpretation of method claims, contingent limitations are not required by the method when/if the method can be performed without the contingent limitations condition being met. (MPEP 2111.04)
In the current case, for the pre-condition (in a case where a target video is played in an immersive experience mode) it is readily apparent that it is not inherently needed in that a video can be played in a standard (non-immersive) mode.
As such all the limitations of the method of 1-14 are contingent and thus not needed under the BRI of the claim. The below prior art rejection thus reflects this BRI interpretation.
While claims 15-16 use similar conditional language to claim 1, as they are directed to devices (vehicle and non-transitory computer-readable medium claims), broadest reasonable interpretation for such claim categories does require the necessary components for performing the functions should the condition be met. In the context of current application the necessary components also includes the programming to cause a processor/control unit of vehicle to perform the recited functions.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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) 1-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by
US 20240196026 A1, “CONTENT PRODUCTION AND PLAYOUT FOR SURROUND SCREENS”, Zink et al.
As noted in the claim interpretation section above method claim 1 recites a condition for the various contingent limitations to be performed (“in a case where a target video is played in an immersive experience mode in the in-vehicle entertainment system”); as such if method can be performed without the condition being met then contingent limitations are not required under the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claims. In the current case it is possible to play a video in a standard/non-immersive mode (i.e. “in a case where a target video is played in an immersive experience mode” is not met). The following rejection is based on this broadest reasonable interpretation.
Amending claim 1 for the preamble to recite “A method for controlling a vehicle in a immersive experience mode” and removing the conditional language “in a case where…entertainment system” from the body of the claim would change the BRI of the claim bounds such that the recited contingent limitations are required to be taught by the prior art. And by extension overcome the prior art rejections below.
Regarding Claim 1, Zink teaches “A method for controlling a vehicle, “performed by a control unit on a vehicle, wherein the vehicle comprises an in-vehicle entertainment system “([0002] “The present disclosure relates to methods and systems for content production, configuration and playing for surround screens, particularly autonomous vehicle screens with a front screen and two or more opposing side screens, optionally a rear screen and other screens.” + [0071] “Client devices may include, for example, portal personal devices (PPDs) such as smartphones, smartwatches, notepad computers, laptop computers, and mixed reality headsets, and special purpose media players and servers, herein called vehicle media controllers (VMCs) installed as part of vehicular electronic systems. In an implementation, VMC 162 in vehicle 160 may be coupled to vehicle controller (VC) 164 as a component of a vehicular control system.”);”and a target device, and the target device comprises at least one of: an air- conditioner, a seat heating device, an air suspension system, a seat vibrating device,”([0037] … Special-purpose hardware for vehicles may include, for example, window glass equipped with one or more LCD layers for augmented reality or conventional display, projectors with projection screens incorporated into the vehicle interior; seats equipped with motion-simulating and/or motion-damping systems; vehicle audio systems; and active vehicle suspension”);” or an electronic fragrance diffuser,”( [0086] The apparatus 300 may be located in or on a vehicle (e.g., vehicle 160), in a room 150, or other suitable locations…[0087] A user interface device 324 may be coupled to the processor 302 for providing user control input to a process for controlling output of digital media content in response to travel event information. The process may include outputting video and audio for a conventional flat screen or projection display device. In some aspects, the media control process may include outputting audio-video data for an immersive mixed reality content display process operated by a mixed reality immersive display engine executing on the processor 302. For further example, the process may include outputting haptic control data for a haptic glove, vest, or other wearable; motion simulation control data, or control data for an olfactory output device such as, for example, an Olorama™ or Sensoryco™ scent generator or equivalent device”);” the method comprising: obtaining, in a case where a target video is played in an immersive experience mode in the in-vehicle entertainment system,”( [0092] To enable communication with another node of a computer network, for example the media content server 200, the client 300 may include a network interface 322, wired or wireless. Network communication may be used, for example, to enable multiplayer experiences, including immersive or non-immersive experiences of media content. The system may also be used for other multi-user applications, for example social networking, group entertainment experiences, instructional environments, video gaming, and so forth.” Here Zink teaches a system enables media content ( video) which can be played in immersive or non-immersive modes);”… switching, after the time range corresponding to any one of the target scene information ends, the target device corresponding to the target scene information back to a running state before entering the time range corresponding to any one of the target scene information.” (As noted previously “in a case where” is a conditional limitation which does not inherently needs to be met to perform the method “control a vehicle” as currently worded (as video can be played in a non-immersive/standard mode) as such the contingent limitations are not required under BRI of the method.)
Claims 2-14 depend on claim 1 and a further contingent limitations dealing with the immersive mode as such under the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim bounds their corresponding limitations are not required under BRI; Zink as cited above teaches a vehicle equipped with the components to perform such a method and includes immersive and non-immersive entertainment (video) modes, thus the overall method can be performed without the condition for the contingent limitations being met as the video can be played in a standard/non-immersive mode.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 15-16, and 18-20 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Regarding independent claims 15-16, no prior art was found to teach the immersive experience mode and its corresponding functions as recited in the claims.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KENNETH MICHAEL DUNNE whose telephone number is (571)270-7392. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs 8:30-6:30.
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, Navid Z Mehdizadeh can be reached at (571) 272-7691. 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.
/KENNETH M DUNNE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3669
Prosecution Insights