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 .
In response to amendment filed 05/26/2026, claims 1-2, 4-6, 8, and 10-12 have been amended. Claims 7, 9, and 13-20 are canceled. Claims 21-30 are new.
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.
Claims 29-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102[a][1] as being anticipated by Davis et al. (US 20220118854 A1)
In regards to claim 29, Davis teaches, A vehicle control system comprising:
a refuse vehicle comprising: a chassis; a cab coupled to the chassis; a body coupled to the chassis, the body defining a refuse compartment; and (See paragraph 23, a vehicle, shown as refuse truck 10 (e.g., garbage truck, waste collection truck, sanitation truck, etc.), includes a chassis, shown as a frame 12, and a body assembly, shown as body 14, coupled to the frame 12. The body assembly 14 defines an on-board receptacle 16 and a cab 18. The cab 18 is coupled to a front end of the frame 12...paragraph 24, The panels 22, cover 24, and tailgate 26 define a collection chamber 28 of the on-board receptacle 16.)
a working component configured to facilitate handling of refuse; (See paragraph 25, the refuse truck 10 includes a lifting system 30 that includes a pair of arms 32 … actuators … can articulate the forks 34 to tip the refuse out of the container and into the hopper volume of the collection chamber 28)
a wearable device configured to be worn by an operator associated with the refuse vehicle, the wearable device configured to generate wearable data; and (See paragraph 56, The key or tag can be worn or embedded within a vest that is to be worn by the operator of the refuse truck 10... the proximity sensors are positioned at or near the forks 34 of the lift system 30, and the lift system 30 is disabled if the sensor detects the key or tag within a predetermined distance from the forks 34.)
a control system communicatively coupled to the wearable device, the control system configured to: acquire, from the wearable device, the wearable data; generate a zone proximate the refuse vehicle that is associated with operation of the working component; and responsive to identifying that a position of the wearable device is within the zone, inhibit operation of the working component. (See paragraph 56, the proximity sensors are positioned at or near the forks 34 of the lift system 30, and the lift system 30 is disabled if the sensor detects the key or tag within a predetermined distance from the forks 34. In some examples, the sensor is a camera or other type of live imaging devices that monitors the area near the forks 34 and communicates with the controller 106 to disable operation of the lift system 30 if an operator is within a designated no occupancy zone.)
In regards to claim 30, Davis teaches the vehicle control system of claim 29, wherein: the working component is a packer assembly configured to compact refuse within the refuse compartment; and the zone is located within the refuse compartment. (See paragraph 29, A packer 62 can pull refuse within the tailgate 26 upwardly and inwardly (e.g., forwardly) toward the collection chamber 28 for compaction. Also see paragraph 33. See paragraph 56, operator detecting sensors… proximity sensors that detect the presence of a key or tag… The key or tag can be worn or embedded within a vest that is to be worn by the operator… the lift system 30 is disabled if the sensor detects the key or tag within a predetermined distance … disable operation of the lift system 30 if an operator is within a designated no occupancy zone… Similar sensors and logic can be used for the tailgate 26 operation as well. For example, if the sensors detect that a person is near the tailgate 26, the controller 106 will disable the hydraulic cylinder(s) or actuators that control the position of the tailgate 26 so that an ejection stroke is not performed.)
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-5 and 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kraimer et al. (US 20080071429 A1) in view of Frederick; Larry D. et al. (US 20190130758 A1)
In regards to claim 1, Kraimer teaches, A vehicle control system, comprising: (See abstract, supplemental control system for a materials handling vehicle)
a control system for controlling operation of a vehicle or a working component thereof; and (See abstract, paragraph 23, a supplemental remote control system for a materials handling vehicle comprises a wearable wireless remote control device that is donned by an operator interacting with the materials handling vehicle…paragraph 38, a block diagram 100 illustrates a control arrangement for integrating remote control commands with the truck 10…The receiver 102 passes the received commands to a controller 103, which implements the appropriate actions in response to the received commands, e.g., by operating relays or other actuation devices controlled by electricity, magnetics, hydraulics, pneumatics, etc., or by communicating with other truck components. Also see paragraph 41, the controller 103 may be communicably coupled to a traction control system, illustrated as a traction motor controller 106 of the truck 10. The controller is responsive to receipt of the first type signal by the receiver 102 to evaluate at least one vehicle condition, to decide whether to implement the travel request… cause the traction control system to advance the vehicle…paragraph 27, a control area 40 for driving the truck 10 and for controlling the features of the load handling assembly 12.)
a wearable device configured to be worn by an operator associated with the vehicle, the wearable device communicatively coupled to the control system and configured to generate wearable data, the control system configured to: (See paragraph 84, the remote control device 70 is a wearable wireless remote control device that is donned by the operator who is interacting with the truck…paragraph 85, an exemplary garment 250 comprises a glove-like structure donned by a hand of the operator…paragraph 7, The wearable wireless remote control device includes a wireless transmitter and a travel control communicably coupled to the wireless transmitter, wherein actuation of the travel control causes the wireless transmitter to wirelessly transmit a travel request as a first type signal requesting the vehicle to advance in a first direction…paragraph 38, The antenna 66 is coupled to a receiver 102 for receiving commands issued by the remote control device 70.)
acquire, from the wearable device, the wearable data; (See paragraph 40, The first type signal is received by the receiver 102 and is communicated to the controller 103.)
Kraimer does not specifically teach, generate a zone proximate the vehicle;
identify, based on the wearable data, that a position of the wearable device is within the zone; and responsive to identifying that the position of the wearable device is within the zone, control operation of at least one of the vehicle or the working component.
Frederick further teaches, generate a zone proximate the vehicle; (See paragraph 54, a Warning Zone 102 and a Danger Zone 104 are pulsed or otherwise generated by MFG 100. The MFG 100 is located at the left rear of the vehicle 120…paragraph 32, A magnetic marker field 92 is then produced around the magnetic marker field generator 80.)
identify, based on the wearable data, that a position of the wearable device is within the zone; and (See paragraph 34, The MFG microcontroller 82 also determines the safety zone in which the ECHO-emitting PAD is located…paragraph 63, MFG1 detects an ECHO on the VHF channel during time window W1A, it interprets that as an indication that a PAD1 is present in its marker field within a danger zone. ECHO can be interpreted as claimed wearable data. Also see paragraph 33, The PAD 60 has three orthogonal coils 62 that sense the marker field 92… The microcontroller 70 turns on the RF transmitter 72 to send… a return signal 76 (an ECHO) to the receiver antenna 94 in the generator 80. )
responsive to identifying that the position of the wearable device is within the zone, control operation of at least one of the vehicle or the working component. (See paragraph 71, Whenever a PAD enters a defined hazardous zone, the logic in the microcontroller is instructed to operate in a special way, called being in an ALARM STATE… The active ALARM STATE directly determines, for the protected machine, which (if any) alarms are sounded and/or which other actions are taken such as slowing or stopping the machine…paragraph 69, Signals are available at the operator monitor 232 to be used in the vehicle's electrical system to slow or stop a vehicle)
Therefore, it would have been obvious by one of ordinary skilled in the art before the time the invention was effectively filed to modify the system of Kraimer to further comprise system taught by Frederick because prevention of hitting the operator and other personnel can be achieved as well as further robustly govern the truck’s operation based on operator position, and further immobilizing the equipment until personnel were able to reach a safe position can be achieved, improving safety (paragraph 3, 70).
In regards to claim 2, Kraimer-Frederick teaches the vehicle system of claim 1,
wherein: the control system is configured to control operation of the vehicle responsive to identifying that the position of the wearable device is within the zone; and controlling the vehicle comprises enabling, disabling, and limiting a function of the vehicle. (See Kraimer paragraph 41, to cause the traction control system to advance the vehicle if the controller decides to implement the travel request…paragraph 42, limit the speed of the truck 10 in response to receiving a travel request from the remote control device 70…paragraph 54, the wireless remote control 70 may include a disable control that transmits a message instructing the truck 10 to brake and/or shut down. Also see Frederick paragraph 71, The active ALARM STATE directly determines, for the protected machine, which (if any) alarms are sounded and/or which other actions are taken such as slowing or stopping the machine.)
In regards to claim 3, Kraimer-Frederick teaches the vehicle system of claim 1,
wherein the wearable device comprises one or more of a wrist-mounted device, a glove, a jacket, a vest, a head-mounted device, or a pendant. (See Kraimer fig. 6-7 and associated paragraphs)
In regards to claim 4, Kraimer-Frederick teaches the vehicle system of claim 1,
wherein the control system is further configured to: determine, based on the wearable data, an identity of the operator wearing the wearable device; and selectively control operation of the vehicle or the working component based on the identity. (See Kraimer paragraph 43, an operator and/or transmitter identification (ID) code may be embedded into the travel request as will be described in greater detail below. Under such a case, the controller 103 may be operatively configured to respond to messages bearing only certain ID codes or to exclude/disregard commands from certain ID codes.)
In regards to claim 5, Kraimer-Frederick teaches the vehicle system of claim 1,
wherein: the control system is configured to control operation of the vehicle responsive to identifying that the position of the wearable device is within the zone; and controlling operation of the vehicle responsive to identifying that the position of the wearable device is within the zone comprises driving the vehicle. (See Frederick paragraph 71, Whenever a PAD enters a defined hazardous zone, the logic in the microcontroller is instructed to operate in a special way, called being in an ALARM STATE… The active ALARM STATE directly determines, for the protected machine, which (if any) alarms are sounded and/or which other actions are taken such as slowing or stopping the machine…paragraph 69, Signals are available at the operator monitor 232 to be used in the vehicle's electrical system to slow or stop a vehicle)
In regards to claim 10, Kraimer-Frederick teaches the vehicle system of claim 1,
wherein the control system controls the operation of the at least one of the vehicle or the working component based on a predetermined identity of the zone. (See Frederick paragraph 37, A Warning Zone 28, 58 is an area that should be avoided…A Danger Zone 26, 56, is an area where a worker would be in imminent danger. Also see paragraph 52)
In regards to claim 11, Kraimer-Frederick teaches the vehicle system of claim 1,
further comprising a vehicle awareness system, wherein the control system is further configured to: receive awareness data from the vehicle awareness system; determine, based on the awareness data, indicating that an object will contact with the operator wearing the wearable device; and generate an operator alert to the wearable device. (See Kraimer paragraph 35, The truck 10 may also comprise one or more object sensors 76, which are provided about the truck 10…See Frederick paragraph 59, send a signal to the operator 160 to sound an audible alarm 222…PAD alarms the worker directly when in the danger zone. Frederick’s proximity system warns the worn device that the vehicle threatens the worker.)
Claims 6, 21, and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kraimer et al. (US 20080071429 A1) in view of Frederick; Larry D. et al. (US 20190130758 A1), and further in view of Davis et al. (US 20220118854 A1)
In regards to claim 6, Kraimer-Frederick teaches the vehicle system of claim 1.
Kraimer-Frederick does not specifically teach, wherein: the vehicle is a refuse vehicle comprising: a chassis; a cab coupled to the chassis; and a body coupled to the chassis, the body defining a refuse compartment; the working component is at least one of a lift assembly or a grabber assembly configured to facilitate dumping refuse from a refuse container into the refuse compartment; the control system is configured to control operation of the at least one of the lift assembly or the grabber assembly responsive to identifying that the position of the wearable device is within the zone; and controlling the working component responsive to identifying that the position of the wearable device is within the zone based on the position of the wearable device comprises inhibiting operation of the at least one of the lift assembly or the grabber assembly.
Davis further teaches, wherein: the vehicle is a refuse vehicle comprising: a chassis; a cab coupled to the chassis; and a body coupled to the chassis, the body defining a refuse compartment; (See paragraph 23, a vehicle, shown as refuse truck 10 (e.g., garbage truck, waste collection truck, sanitation truck, etc.), includes a chassis, shown as a frame 12, and a body assembly, shown as body 14, coupled to the frame 12. The body assembly 14 defines an on-board receptacle 16 and a cab 18. The cab 18 is coupled to a front end of the frame 12...paragraph 24, The panels 22, cover 24, and tailgate 26 define a collection chamber 28 of the on-board receptacle 16.)
the working component is at least one of a lift assembly or a grabber assembly configured to facilitate dumping refuse from a refuse container into the refuse compartment; (See paragraph 25, the refuse truck 10 includes a lifting system 30 that includes a pair of arms 32 … actuators … can articulate the forks 34 to tip the refuse out of the container and into the hopper volume of the collection chamber 28)
the control system is configured to control operation of the at least one of the lift assembly or the grabber assembly responsive to identifying that the position of the wearable device is within the zone; and controlling the working component responsive to identifying that the position of the wearable device is within the zone based on the position of the wearable device comprises inhibiting operation of the at least one of the lift assembly or the grabber assembly. (See paragraph 56, the cab controls 410 further include operator detecting sensors… the cab controls 410 further include operator detecting sensors that can selectively disable the operation of the refuse truck 10, including the lift system 30. The operator detecting sensors are configured as proximity sensors that detect the presence of a key or tag within a specified target range. The key or tag can be worn or embedded within a vest that is to be worn by the operator of the refuse truck 10… the proximity sensors are positioned at or near the forks 34 of the lift system 30, and the lift system 30 is disabled if the sensor detects the key or tag within a predetermined distance from the forks 34… the sensor is a camera or other type of live imaging devices that monitors the area near the forks 34 and communicates with the controller 106 to disable operation of the lift system 30 if an operator is within a designated no occupancy zone.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious by one of ordinary skilled in the art before the time the invention was effectively filed to modify the system of Kraimer-Frederick to further comprise system taught by Davis because protecting the operator from the moving lift/grabber can be achieved through disabling the lift when the operator’s worn tag is within a non-occupancy zone near the forks, such can provide predictable improvement in safety (paragraph 56).
In regards to claim 21, Kraimer-Frederick-Davis teaches the vehicle system of claim 6, wherein the zone includes an area within which the at least one of the lift assembly or the grabber assembly moves relative to the vehicle. (See Davis paragraph 56, the proximity sensors are positioned at or near the forks 34 of the lift system 30, and the lift system 30 is disabled if the sensor detects the key or tag within a predetermined distance from the forks 34… camera or other type of live imaging devices that monitors the area near the forks 34 and communicates with the controller 106 to disable operation of the lift system 30 if an operator is within a designated no occupancy zone.)
In regards to claim 23, Kraimer-Frederick teaches the vehicle system of claim 1.
Kraimer-Frederick does not specifically teach, wherein: the vehicle is a refuse vehicle comprising: a chassis; a cab coupled to the chassis; and a body coupled to the chassis, the body defining a refuse compartment; the working component is a packer assembly configured to compact refuse within the refuse compartment; the control system is configured to control operation of the packer assembly responsive to identifying that the position of the wearable device is within the zone, the zone being located within the refuse compartment; and controlling the working component responsive to identifying that the position of the wearable device is within the zone comprises inhibiting operation of the packer assembly.
Davis further teaches, wherein: the vehicle is a refuse vehicle comprising: a chassis; a cab coupled to the chassis; and a body coupled to the chassis, the body defining a refuse compartment; (See paragraph 23, a vehicle, shown as refuse truck 10 (e.g., garbage truck, waste collection truck, sanitation truck, etc.), includes a chassis, shown as a frame 12, and a body assembly, shown as body 14, coupled to the frame 12. The body assembly 14 defines an on-board receptacle 16 and a cab 18. The cab 18 is coupled to a front end of the frame 12...paragraph 24, The panels 22, cover 24, and tailgate 26 define a collection chamber 28 of the on-board receptacle 16.)
the working component is a packer assembly configured to compact refuse within the refuse compartment; (See paragraph 29, A packer 62 can pull refuse within the tailgate 26 upwardly and inwardly (e.g., forwardly) toward the collection chamber 28 for compaction. Also see paragraph 33)
the control system is configured to control operation of the packer assembly responsive to identifying that the position of the wearable device is within the zone, the zone being located within the refuse compartment; and (See paragraph 56, operator detecting sensors… proximity sensors that detect the presence of a key or tag… The key or tag can be worn or embedded within a vest that is to be worn by the operator… the lift system 30 is disabled if the sensor detects the key or tag within a predetermined distance … disable operation of the lift system 30 if an operator is within a designated no occupancy zone… Similar sensors and logic can be used for the tailgate 26 operation as well. For example, if the sensors detect that a person is near the tailgate 26, the controller 106 will disable the hydraulic cylinder(s) or actuators that control the position of the tailgate 26 so that an ejection stroke is not performed.
controlling the working component responsive to identifying that the position of the wearable device is within the zone comprises inhibiting operation of the packer assembly. (See paragraph 56, the lift system 30 is disabled if the sensor detects the key or tag … the controller 106 will disable the hydraulic cylinder(s) or actuators that control the position of the tailgate 26 so that an ejection stroke is not performed.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious by one of ordinary skilled in the art before the time the invention was effectively filed to modify the system of Kraimer-Frederick to further comprise system taught by Davis because protecting the operator from the moving lift/grabber can be achieved through disabling the lift when the operator’s worn tag is within a non-occupancy zone near the forks, such can provide predictable improvement in safety (paragraph 56).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kraimer et al. (US 20080071429 A1) in view of Frederick; Larry D. et al. (US 20190130758 A1), and further in view of Luthman; Trisha M. et al. (US 20210336461 A1)
In regards to claim 8, Kraimer-Frederick teaches the vehicle system of claim 1.
Kraimer-Frederick does not specifically teach, further comprising; a chassis; a cab coupled to the chassis; and a wireless charging device located within the cab and configured to charge the wearable device responsive to identifying that the position of the wearable device is within the zone, wherein the zone is located within the cab.
Luthman further teaches, further comprising; a chassis; a cab coupled to the chassis; and a wireless charging device located within the cab and configured to charge the wearable device responsive to identifying that the position of the wearable device is within the zone, wherein the zone is located within the cab. (See fig. 1-2, system 8 is vehicle having chassis and cab… paragraph 90, In one specific embodiment using induction charging, such a switch can be incorporated into the vehicle's steering control, such that the operator's gripping of the steering control is detected and charging is subsequently enabled…paragraph 85, remote control device 32 can be charged by the remote control device 32 being in close proximity to, or on the surface of, a compatible induction charging station (not shown). Such an induction charging station may be located, for example, in a driving or steering control of the vehicle 10 such that the rechargeable power source 180 may be charged while the operator is manually driving the vehicle 10 from the operator's station 20.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious by one of ordinary skilled in the art before the time the invention was effectively filed to modify the system of Kraimer-Frederick to further comprise system taught by Luthman because convenient charging can be achieved by allowing device to be charged while operator/driver is performing other tasks such as driving. Such can improve the overall efficiency and experience by the operator/driver (paragraph 85).
Claims 12 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kraimer et al. (US 20080071429 A1) in view of Frederick; Larry D. et al. (US 20190130758 A1), and further in view of Lalande et al. (US 20180197353 A1)
In regards to claim 12, Kraimer-Frederick teaches the vehicle system of claim 1.
Kraimer-Frederick does not specifically teach, wherein: the wearable device is further configured to detect an operator impairment; and the control system is further configured to: acquire, from the wearable device, data corresponding to the operator impairment; and limit one or more of access to the vehicle or operation of the vehicle or the working component based on the detection of the operator impairment.
Lalande further teaches, wherein: the wearable device is further configured to detect an operator impairment; and the control system is further configured to: acquire, from the wearable device, data corresponding to the operator impairment; and limit one or more of access to the vehicle or operation of the vehicle or the working component based on the detection of the operator impairment. (See abstract, the vehicle operator is fitted with wearable device(s) collecting biometric data (e.g., heart rate). These devices are in communication with each other, as well as a hard drive on the vehicle (e.g., a black-box) and a wireless monitoring station located at a distance. In an embodiment, the device(s) are connected to the braking system of the truck to allow emergency braking in the event of a loss of control on the part of the vehicle or consciousness on the part of the driver.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious by one of ordinary skilled in the art before the time the invention was effectively filed to modify the vehicle control system of Kraimer-Frederick to further comprise system taught by Lalande because safety can be greatly improved by utilizing operator’s biometric data (abstract, paragraph 2).
In regards to claim 22, Kraimer-Frederick-Lalande teaches the vehicle system of claim 12, wherein the operator impairment is due to at least one of drugs or alcohol. (See Lalande abstract, the vehicle operator is fitted with wearable device(s) collecting biometric data (e.g., heart rate). These devices are in communication with each other, as well as a hard drive on the vehicle (e.g., a black-box) and a wireless monitoring station located at a distance. In an embodiment, the device(s) are connected to the braking system of the truck to allow emergency braking in the event of a loss of control on the part of the vehicle or consciousness on the part of the driver. It is well known that substance such as alcohol increases heart rate. Claim does not explicitly mention detection of usage of drugs or alcohol by operator)
Claims 24-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kraimer et al. (US 20080071429 A1) in view of Frederick; Larry D. et al. (US 20190130758 A1), and further in view of Sanchez (US 20230072436 A1)
In regards to claim 24, Kraimer-Frederick teaches the vehicle system of claim 1, responsive to identifying that the position of the wearable device is within the zone (See Frederick paragraph 56)
Kraimer-Frederick does not specifically teach, wherein: the wearable device is configured to convert motion of the wearable device into electrical energy to charge the wearable device; and the control system is further configured to: … cause conversion of motion of the wearable device into electrical energy to charge the wearable device.
Sanchez further teaches, wherein: the wearable device is configured to convert motion of the wearable device into electrical energy to charge the wearable device; and
(See paragraph 4, A smart ring may be configured to harvest energy from user motion using a piezoelectric effect. To that end, the smart ring may include a piezoelectric harvesting element configured to generate a voltage in response to a deformation caused by motion. Also see paragraphs 5, 88)
the control system is further configured to: … cause conversion of motion of the wearable device into electrical energy to charge the wearable device. (See paragraph 28, In a charging mode of operation of the smart ring 101, the average power supplied by the charging unit 130 to the battery 120 may exceed the average power supplied by the battery 120 to the charging unit 130… In a non-charging mode of operation, the charging unit 130 may, on average, draw energy from the battery 120…abstract, The charging circuit includes a piezoelectric harvesting element, and is configured to charge the power source when user motion causes a mechanical deformation in the piezoelectric harvesting element.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious by one of ordinary skilled in the art before the time the invention was effectively filed to modify the vehicle control system of Kraimer-Frederick to further comprise system taught by Sanchez because convenient charging can be achieved without user taking off wearable device, thereby improving user experience (paragraph 3).
In regards to claim 25, Kraimer-Frederick-Sanchez teaches the vehicle system of claim 24, wherein: the vehicle comprises: a chassis; a cab coupled to the chassis; and a body coupled to the chassis; (See Kraimer fig. 1, see Frederick paragraph 2, The equipment also includes fork lifts, cranes, and trucks used at warehouses and shipping ports.) and the zone is located outside of the cab such that the conversion of motion of the wearable device into electrical energy to charge the wearable device occurs when the wearable device is located outside of the cab. (See Kraimer paragraphs 60, 62, 68, operator walks alongside and around the truck within the wireless operating range. Also see Frederick paragraph 37, Warning/Danger zones around the vehicle exterior. Lastly see Sanchez paragraph 88, harvesting from motion while outside of the vehicle)
Claim 26 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Davis et al. (US 20220118854 A1) in view of Luthman; Trisha M. et al. (US 20210336461 A1)
In regards to claim 26, Davis teaches, A vehicle control system comprising: (See abstract)
a vehicle comprising: a chassis; a cab coupled to the chassis; and (See paragraph 23)
a wearable device configured to be worn by an operator associated with the vehicle, the wearable device configured to generate wearable data; and (See paragraph 56, The key or tag can be worn or embedded within a vest that is to be worn by the operator of the refuse truck 10... the proximity sensors are positioned at or near the forks 34 of the lift system 30, and the lift system 30 is disabled if the sensor detects the key or tag within a predetermined distance from the forks 34.)
a control system communicatively coupled to the wearable device, the control system configured to: acquire, from the wearable device, the wearable data; generate a zone proximate the vehicle; (See paragraph 56, the proximity sensors are positioned at or near the forks 34 of the lift system 30, and the lift system 30 is disabled if the sensor detects the key or tag within a predetermined distance from the forks 34. In some examples, the sensor is a camera or other type of live imaging devices that monitors the area near the forks 34 and communicates with the controller 106 to disable operation of the lift system 30 if an operator is within a designated no occupancy zone.)
Davis does not specifically teach, a wireless charging device located within the cab; and responsive to identifying that a position of the wearable device is within the zone, control operation of the wireless charging device to charge the wearable device, wherein the zone is positioned within the cab.
Luthman further teaches, a wireless charging device located within the cab; and (See paragraph 85, contactless, or induction, charging in which the rechargeable power source 180 of the remote control device 32 can be charged… Such an induction charging station may be located, for example, in a driving or steering control of the vehicle 10 such that the rechargeable power source 180 may be charged while the operator is manually driving the vehicle 10 from the operator's station 20.)
responsive to identifying that a position of the wearable device is within the zone, control operation of the wireless charging device to charge the wearable device, wherein the zone is positioned within the cab. (See paragraph 179, the transmissions may comprise location-based transmissions that inform the controller 103 of the vehicle 10 where the remote control device 32 is located relative to the vehicle 10…paragraph 90, In one specific embodiment using induction charging, such a switch can be incorporated into the vehicle's steering control, such that the operator's gripping of the steering control is detected and charging is subsequently enabled (also see par. 85).)
Therefore, it would have been obvious by one of ordinary skilled in the art before the time the invention was effectively filed to modify the system of Davis to further comprise system taught by Luthman because convenient charging can be achieved by allowing device to be charged while operator/driver is performing other tasks such as driving. Such can improve the overall efficiency and experience by the operator/driver (paragraph 85).
Claim 27 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Davis et al. (US 20220118854 A1) in view of Luthman; Trisha M. et al. (US 20210336461 A1), and further in view of DESAI; DIPTI V. et al. (US 20170136886 A1)
In regards to claim 27, Davis-Luthman teaches the vehicle control system of claim 26.
Davis-Luthman does not specifically teach, wherein the wireless charging device is a seatbelt device configured to be disposed in a seatbelt of the vehicle.
Desai further teaches, wherein the wireless charging device is a seatbelt device configured to be disposed in a seatbelt of the vehicle. (See abstract)
Therefore, it would have been obvious by one of ordinary skilled in the art before the time the invention was effectively filed to modify the system of Davis-Luthman to further comprise system taught by Desai because Desai further ensures improved approach to in-vehicle charging of battery-powered devices (paragraph 4). Also, this allows operator to wear seatbelt which can improve safety of the operator.
Claim 28 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Davis et al. (US 20220118854 A1) in view of Luthman; Trisha M. et al. (US 20210336461 A1), and further in view of Sanchez (US 20230072436 A1)
In regards to claim 28, Davis-Luthman teaches the vehicle control system of claim 26, …the control system is further configured to: generate another zone proximate the vehicle; and (See Davis paragraph 56, no occupancy zone. Also see Luthman paragraph 85, 90)
responsive to identifying that the position of the wearable device is within the other zone, … wherein the other zone is positioned outside of the cab. (See Luthman paragraph 179, the transmissions may comprise location-based transmissions that inform the controller 103 of the vehicle 10 where the remote control device 32 is located relative to the vehicle 10. Also see paragraph 103. See Davis paragraph 56)
Davis-Luthman does not specifically teach, wherein: the wearable device is configured to convert motion of the wearable device into electrical energy to charge the wearable device;… cause conversion of motion of the wearable device into electrical energy to charge the wearable device…
Sanchez further teaches, wherein: the wearable device is configured to convert motion of the wearable device into electrical energy to charge the wearable device;… (See paragraph 4, A smart ring may be configured to harvest energy from user motion using a piezoelectric effect. To that end, the smart ring may include a piezoelectric harvesting element configured to generate a voltage in response to a deformation caused by motion. Also see paragraphs 5, 88)
cause conversion of motion of the wearable device into electrical energy to charge the wearable device…(See paragraph 28, In a charging mode of operation of the smart ring 101, the average power supplied by the charging unit 130 to the battery 120 may exceed the average power supplied by the battery 120 to the charging unit 130… In a non-charging mode of operation, the charging unit 130 may, on average, draw energy from the battery 120…abstract, The charging circuit includes a piezoelectric harvesting element, and is configured to charge the power source when user motion causes a mechanical deformation in the piezoelectric harvesting element.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious by one of ordinary skilled in the art before the time the invention was effectively filed to modify the vehicle control system of Davis-Luthman to further comprise system taught by Sanchez because convenient charging can be achieved without user taking off wearable device, thereby improving user experience (paragraph 3).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments have been fully considered but are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection presented above necessitated by applicant’s amendment.
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 JUSTIN S LEE whose telephone number is (571)272-2674. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8-5.
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, JAMES J LEE can be reached at (571)270-5965. 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.
/JUSTIN S LEE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3668
Prosecution Insights