DETAILED ACTION
Status of the Application
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Status of the Claims
This action is in response to the applicant’s filing on January 06, 2025. Claims 1 – 7 are pending and examined below.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on January 06, 2025 has been considered by the Examiner.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers submitted under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a)-(d), which papers have been placed of record in the file.
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in The Republic of Japan on March 27, 2024.
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 of this title, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. § 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1 – 4 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication No. US 2023/0138932 A1 to Shizuka et al. (herein after "Shizuka") in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. US 2015/0113521 A1 to SUZUKI et al. (herein after "Suzuki").
(Note: Claim language is in bold typeface, and the Examiner’s comments and cited passages from the prior art reference(s) are in normal typeface.)
As to Claim 1,
Shizuka’s software updating system discloses a software update management device (see Fig. 1 ~ illustrates a control schematic for a software update management system, and
PNG
media_image1.png
576
730
media_image1.png
Greyscale
see ¶0026 - ¶0027 and ¶0048 - ¶0049 ~ describing the software update management system) comprising:
a function of updating software of a vehicle control unit loaded on a vehicle (see Fig. 1 and see ¶0026 - ¶0027), the function being targeted at the vehicle that comprises
a travel motor as a driving source (see ¶0019 ~ engine of vehicle 1 is the travel motor) and
a battery (see ¶0005 and ¶0027 ~ vehicle 1 comprises a battery), the vehicle being configured to
make transition between states including a first state where the travel motor is inoperable (see ¶0026 ~ "the gateway 11 executes the software update processing after the detection unit 3 detects the state where no driving force is output by the power train of the vehicle 1, and prohibits the output of the driving force by the power train during the software update processing"; thereby denoting a first state where the travel motor is prohibited from performing a driving force / motion) and
a second state where the travel motor is operable (see ¶0026 ~ "When the activation is completed, the output of the driving force by the power train is permitted"; thus denoting a second state, being distinct in that the travel motor is now permitted to perform a driving force / motion).
Modifying Shizuka’s software updating system with Suzuki’s software information processing system (see ¶0163; Suzuki ~ update server 22 performs the software update management as outlined in process flowcharts described in Figs. 8 and 11; Suzuki) achieves wherein when the vehicle is in the first state and the battery is being charged, the vehicle being prohibited to make transition to the second state and the software of the vehicle control unit being updated. (See ¶0106 ~ "The installation processing for the update files is carried out in a state in which the target vehicle is stopped"; teaching the vehicle being in a first state, see ¶0107 ~ "the installation processing for the update files is performed… after it is confirmed that charging of the battery is carried out"; teaching wherein the vehicle is in a first state (the vehicle being stopped) and the vehicle being charged while it is in the first state, afterwhich the vehicle is provided with a software download as described further in Figs. 8, 11, and ¶0108).
Consequently, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Shizuka software update management system with the active battery charging state while the vehicle is in the first state, as taught by Suzuki, where the resultant combination would successfully provide continuity in downloading software updates, thereby enabling benefits, including but not limited to: onboarding of critical software information.
As to Claim 2,
Shizuka/Suzuki discloses the software update management device according to claim 1,
wherein the vehicle control unit is a device configured to control monitoring equipment that is configured to monitor the vehicle, and
a function of the monitoring equipment is stopped during update of the software of the vehicle control unit. (See Figs. 8, 11, and ¶0106 - ¶0108; Suzuki).
As to Claim 3,
Shizuka/Suzuki discloses the software update management device according to claim 1,
wherein the vehicle is allowed to make transition to the second state, after update of the software of the vehicle control unit is completed. (See Fig. 7, ¶0026 - ¶0027, and ¶0048 - ¶0049; Shizuka).
As to Claim 4,
Shizuka/Suzuki discloses the software update management device according to claim 1,
wherein, when charging of the battery is completed during update of the software of the vehicle control unit,
the vehicle is prohibited to make transition to the second state until the update of the software of the vehicle control unit is completed. (See Figs. 8, 11, and ¶0106 - ¶0108; Suzuki).
As to Claim 7,
Shizuka discloses a software update management method executed by a computer that manages software of a vehicle (see Fig. 1 ~ gateway 11 comprises a computer, and Fig. 7 ~ outlines a process flowchart performing a software update management when there is NO driving force applied to the vehicle 1,
PNG
media_image2.png
814
404
media_image2.png
Greyscale
in particular see process method step S104 and ¶0026 - ¶0027), the vehicle comprising
a travel motor as a driving source (see ¶0019 ~ engine of vehicle 1 is the travel motor) and
a battery (see ¶0005 and ¶0027 ~ vehicle 1 comprises a battery),
the vehicle being configured to
make transition between states including a first state where the travel motor is inoperable and a second state where the travel motor is operable, (see ¶0026 ~ "the gateway 11 executes the software update processing after the detection unit 3 detects the state where no driving force is output by the power train of the vehicle 1, and prohibits the output of the driving force by the power train during the software update processing"; thereby denoting a first state where the travel motor is prohibited from performing a driving force / motion).
Modifying Shizuka’s software updating system with Suzuki’s software information processing system (see ¶0163; Suzuki ~ update server 22 performs the software update management as outlined in process flowcharts described in Figs. 8 and 11; Suzuki) accomplishes the software update management method comprising: when the vehicle is in the first state and the battery is being charged, updating software of a vehicle control unit loaded on the vehicle while prohibiting transition of the vehicle to the second state. (See ¶0106 ~ "The installation processing for the update files is carried out in a state in which the target vehicle is stopped"; teaching the vehicle being in a first state, see ¶0107 ~ "the installation processing for the update files is performed… after it is confirmed that charging of the battery is carried out"; teaching wherein the vehicle is in a first state (the vehicle being stopped) and the vehicle being charged while it is in the first state, afterwhich the vehicle is provided with a software download as described further in Figs. 8, 11, and ¶0108).
PNG
media_image3.png
716
442
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
710
452
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Consequently, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Shizuka software update management system with the active battery charging state while the vehicle is in the first state, as taught by Suzuki, where the resultant combination would successfully provide continuity in downloading software updates, thereby enabling benefits, including but not limited to: onboarding of critical software information.
Claims 5 - 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication No. US 2023/0138932 A1 to Shizuka et al. (herein after "Shizuka") in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. US 2015/0113521 A1 to SUZUKI et al. (herein after "Suzuki") as to claim 1 above, and further in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. US 2022/0004375 A1 to SATOH et al. (herein after "Satoh").
As to Claim 5,
Shizuka/Suzuki discloses the software update management device according to claim 1,
wherein the vehicle comprises a shift device configured to
switch a traveling state (see ¶0026; Shizuka),
the shift device is capable of switching among a plurality of shift positions including a parking state where the vehicle is parked (see ¶0026; Shizuka ~ multiple shift positions of the transmission are performed by vehicle 1, wherein the vehicle 1 is parked) and
the traveling state where the vehicle is allowed to travel, when the vehicle is in the first state, the battery is being charged (see Figs. 8, 11, and ¶0106 - ¶0108; Suzuki), and
the shift device is in the parking state, update of the software of the vehicle control unit is started. (See Fig. 7, and ¶0026 - ¶0027; Shizuka).
Modifying Shizuka's shift device which discusses a parking shift mode (see ¶0026 - ¶0027; Shizuka) with the parking state prohibition of Satoh, provides more clarification regarding the shift device being prohibited from moving from the parking state, until the updating of the software of the vehicle control unit being complete ~ see ¶0041 - ¶0042; Satoh; teaching wherein a shift device such as that of a vehicle’s electronic parking brake may be interlocked such that it is prohibited from moving from the parking state, until the updating of the software of the vehicle control being complete.)
To that end, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Shizuka/Suzuki software update management system with the conditional interlock of the vehicle parking brake, as taught by Satoh, where the resultant combination would successfully provide continuous software downloading, thereby enabling benefits, including but not limited to: onboarding of critical software information.
As to Claim 6,
Shizuka discloses the software update management device according to claim 1. (See Figs. 1, 7 and ¶0026 - ¶0027; Shizuka).
However, Shizuka does not explicitly disclose wherein the vehicle comprises
a parking brake device,
when the vehicle is in the first state, the battery is being charged, and
the parking brake device is in a braking state, update of the software of the vehicle control unit is started, and
release of the braking state of the parking brake device is prohibited, until the update of the software of the vehicle control unit is completed.
Satoh’s vehicle software update management system discloses wherein the vehicle comprises a parking brake device (see ¶0042; Satoh ~ vehicle comprises a parking brake), when the vehicle is in the first state, the battery is being charged, and the parking brake device is in a braking state, update of the software of the vehicle control unit is started (see ¶0041 - ¶0042; Satoh ~ vehicle software update commences), and release of the braking state of the parking brake device is prohibited, until the update of the software of the vehicle control unit is completed. (See ¶0041; Satoh ~ “the software update device 50 records the corresponding in-vehicle device… while the vehicle is in a non-traveling state” and ¶0042; Satoh ~ “when the operation of the in-vehicle device that controls a parking brake to maintain the vehicle in a stationary state is restricted… maintaining the stationary state of the vehicle… makes it possible to update the program of the in-vehicle device… while the program is being updated).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Shizuka/Suzuki software update management system with the conditional interlock of the vehicle parking brake, as taught by Satoh, where the resultant combination would successfully provide continuous software downloading, thereby enabling benefits, including but not limited to: onboarding of critical software information.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to
applicant's disclosure can be found in the PTO-892 for the application submitted herewith, and is also listed below as follows:
US 11529886 B2, NIU et al. is analogous art to the claimed invention as it relates to a vehicle software update management system while managing a power supply during an off-state of the vehicle.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the Examiner should be directed to ASHLEY L. REDHEAD, JR. whose telephone number is (571) 272 - 6952. The Examiner can normally be reached on weekdays, Monday through Thursday, between 7 a.m. and 5 p.m.
If attempts to reach the Examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the Examiner’s Supervisor, Peter Nolan can be reached Monday through Friday, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. at (571) 270 – 7016. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/ASHLEY L REDHEAD JR./Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3661