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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 9/5/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant stated a terminal disclaimer would be filed in arguments. That terminal disclaimer is not present in the file wrapper and appears to have not been filed. Examiner recommends filing the terminal disclaimer to overcome the double patent rejection. The other rejections were overcome and are withdrawn.
Also, Examiner would like to note that the phone number on filed for Albert Penilla does not connect. Please verify the phone number on file with the office and make the needed changes to receive better service.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claim 1-15 rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1-19 of U.S. Patent No. (yet to be assigned from application 18/530,125). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the patented case is the method equivalent to the apparatus claim in the instant application with only minor obvious variations.
Conforms with 35 USC § 101
The presently examined claims were evaluated for a 101 Alice type rejection. The conclusion from going through the Alice/Mayo test is that the independent claims are integrated into a practical application (or cannot be performed merely with the human mind) and are therefore patent eligible under 35 U.S.C. 101. See MPEP §2106, subsection III and MPEP §2106.04, subsection II(A).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-20 are pending and are indicated as having allowable subject matter. If applicable, any remaining non-art rejections or formalities must be overcome prior to a notice of allowance.
As allowable subject matter has been indicated, applicant's reply must either comply with all formal requirements or specifically traverse each requirement not complied with. See 37 CFR 1.111(b) and MPEP § 707.07(a).
The following is an examiner’s statement of indicating allowable subject matter:
Regarding claims 1 all of the prior art of record fails to teach or suggest the limitation of claim 1, A system of a vehicle, comprising a processor of the vehicle; a communications system of the vehicle; a microphone of the vehicle for capturing voice data from a human occupant of the vehicle during a period of time while the human occupant is associated with use of the vehicle; and the processor and the communications system used to exchange data with a processing entity of a cloud services system, the processing entity is configured to process at least part of the voice data using a machine learning algorithm to assist in prediction of the emotion of the human occupant; wherein at least part of the data exchanged with the processing entity is used by the processor of the vehicle to generate and cause control of an input for a computing system of the vehicle, the input being selected based at least in part on the emotion of the human occupant. The combination taken with the claims not listed limitations may be patentable emphasizing the underlined limitation.
The closest prior art discloses US 20140313208 A1 discloses Information about a device may be emotively conveyed to a user of the device. Input indicative of an operating state of the device may be received. The input may be transformed into data representing a simulated emotional state. Data representing an avatar that expresses the simulated emotional state may be generated and displayed. A query from the user regarding the simulated emotional state expressed by the avatar may be received. The query may be responded to.
All dependent claims are allowable for at least the reasons of claim 1.
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
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 20140309813 A1 A system to access one or more user profiles that govern one or more vehicle functions. The system cooperates with a processor and verification module which are adapted to verify, using one or more of biometric information, gesture recognition, facial recognition and device identification information, that a user has authority to access the one or more user profiles, where the one or more profiles are stored in one or more of a vehicle, a cloud and a communications device. An edit module is further provided and adapted to allow the user to make one or more edits to the one or more user profiles.
The examiner has pointed out particular references contained in the prior art of record in the body of this action for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. Applicant should consider the entire prior art as applicable as to the limitations of the claims. It is respectfully requested from the applicant, in preparing the response, to consider fully the entire references as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the examiner.
Inquiry
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FREDERICK M BRUSHABER whose telephone number is (313)446-4839. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8am-5pm.
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, Hunter Lonsberry can be reached at (571) 272-7298. 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.
/FREDERICK M BRUSHABER/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3665
/FREDERICK M BRUSHABER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3665
Prosecution Insights