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 .
Status of Claims
This Office Action is in response to the application filed on June 23, 2026. Claims 1 and 7 have been amended. Claims 1-10 are presently pending and are presented for examination.
Response to Amendments
In response to Applicant's Amendments dated June 23, 2026, Examiner withdraws the nonstatutory double patenting rejection and the previous prior art rejections.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on June 23, 2026 have been fully considered, but they are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejections.
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 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, 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:
Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
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, 3, and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Pub. No. 20160071082 (hereinafter, "Driscoll"; previously of record) in view of U.S. Pub. No. 20150100505 (hereinafter, "Binion"; newly of record).
Regarding claim 1, Driscoll discloses a vehicle sharing system, comprising:
a vehicle (Fig. 2, #204) having
a vehicle component sensor (Fig. 1, #140 and “On board applications and devices 140 may include fuel sensors and gauges, electrical meters for determining electrical usage by the vehicle, odometers and other distance recording devices, weight sensors, tire sensors configured to detect tire wear and tear, oil level and usage sensors, and other maintenance sensors. Such sensors may be utilized to determine total costs incurred during use of a vehicle” (para 0038)),
a vehicle computing system (VCS) (Fig. 1, #130) including a processor and a memory in communication with the sensor and programmed to store sensor data associated with a vehicle sharing trip (Fig. 1, #140 and #136, and “Vehicle device 130 may further include on board applications and devices 140, which may include various vehicle sensors, devices, and processors with their corresponding applications. In this regard, on board applications and devices 140 may include devices and applications configured to determine costs incurred during operation of a vehicle corresponding to vehicle device 130 (e.g., when travelling a route). On board applications and devices 140 may include …, tire sensors configured to detect tire wear and tear, oil level and usage sensors, and other maintenance sensors. Such sensors may be utilized to determine total costs incurred during use of a vehicle” (para 0038)), and
a human-machine interface (HMI) communicating with the VCS and displaying a vehicle sharing trip cost (Fig. 2, #230 and “User 202 b may perform the check-in by providing information to vehicle device 230 using an input mechanism for vehicle device 230, such as a touch screen interface for vehicle device 230. Once check-in information for user 202 a and 202 b is received, user 202 a and 202 b may be associated with vehicle 204 so that their parameters and travel costs may be tracked for determining their pro rata shares of travel costs” (para 0054)) based on at least in part on a maintenance cost attributable to wear and tear of the vehicle incurred during the vehicle sharing trip (“The vehicle's device may also track costs incurred by the vehicle and the users in the vehicle while travelling the route. The costs may include …, maintenance of the vehicle (e.g., oil change costs, tire replacement, car servicing, other wear and tear including car washes, etc.), specialty driving requirement (e.g., snow chains, high temperature fluid requirements, etc.)... The costs may also correspond to all user's costs” (para 0013)).
determine the maintenance cost attributable to the wear and tear of the vehicle incurred during the vehicle sharing trip (“Such sensors may be utilized to determine total costs incurred during use of a vehicle. The total costs may correspond to overall costs for usage of the vehicle during a specific route. The total costs determined using on board applications and devices 140 may include …, maintenance, and other wear and tear for usage of the vehicle” (para 0038)),
However, Driscoll does not explicitly teach
wherein the VCS is further programmed to:
determine, from the sensor data, driving behavior of a driver of the vehicle during the vehicle sharing trip,
determine, based on the driving behavior, the wear and tear of the vehicle incurred during the vehicle sharing trip, and
associate the maintenance cost with the driver of the vehicle for the vehicle sharing trip.
Binion, in the same field of endeavor, teaches
wherein the VCS is further programmed to:
determine, from the sensor data, driving behavior of a driver of the vehicle during the vehicle sharing trip (“an on-board computing device (not shown) or end user device disposed in the vehicle 104 may wirelessly upload data from braking, acceleration, motion, force, environment, image, etc. sensors, via one or more wireless interfaces (not shown), for assessing correlation between changes in the condition of a vehicle 104 and operation of the vehicle 102 by a specific vehicle operator” (para 0016) and “wherein the condition data includes one or more of indications of current or prior …, behaviors of the user while operating the operated vehicle”(claim 4)),
determine, based on the driving behavior, the wear and tear of the vehicle incurred during the vehicle sharing trip (“analyzing, by the one or more processors, the condition data to determine a correlation between the user operating the operated vehicle and a change in a condition of the operated vehicle, wherein the change in the condition of the operated vehicle includes: (i) at least one of a depreciation of the operated vehicle or an appreciation of the operated vehicle, and (ii) at least one of a change in maintenance condition or a change in aesthetic condition of the operated vehicle” (claim 1)), and
associate the maintenance cost with the driver of the vehicle for the vehicle sharing trip (“an on-board computing device (not shown) or end user device disposed in the vehicle 104 may wirelessly upload data from braking, acceleration, motion, force, environment, image, etc. sensors, via one or more wireless interfaces (not shown), for assessing correlation between changes in the condition of a vehicle 104 and operation of the vehicle 102 by a specific vehicle operator” (para 0016) and “The condition report server 102 may then generate a charge for a specific vehicle operator based on the grade or score of the operator, where operators with a high score may be charged more for vehicle sharing as compared with operators with a low score” (para 0038)).
One of ordinary skill in the art, before the time of filing, would have been motivated to modify the disclosure of Driscoll with the teachings of Binion in order to assess correlation between changes in the condition of a vehicle and operation of the vehicle by a specific vehicle operator; see Binion at least at [0016].
Regarding claim 3, Driscoll discloses the vehicle sharing system of claim 1. Additionally, Driscoll discloses the VCS programmed to transmit the sensor data to a cloud-based server (“in other embodiments, any of the aforementioned information may be provided to payment provider server 150 for processing by an owner/operator of the vehicle. Thus, on board applications and devices 140 may not track such costs in all embodiments” (para 0038)).
Regarding claim 6, Driscoll discloses the vehicle sharing system of claim 1. Additionally, Driscoll discloses further comprising a mobile device having a processor selectively wirelessly coupled to the VCS and programmed to calculate the vehicle sharing trip cost (Fig. 1, #110 and “User device 110 may be implemented using any appropriate hardware and software configured for wired and/or wireless communication with vehicle device 130 and/or payment provider server 150. For example, in one embodiment, user device 110 may be implemented as a personal computer (PC), a smart phone, laptop computer, wristwatch with appropriate computer hardware resources” (para 0018) and “User 102 may then utilize user device 110 to process a payment for user 102's pro rata share” (0016)).
Claims 2 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Pub. No. 20160071082 (hereinafter, "Driscoll"; previously of record), in view of U.S. Pub. No. 20150100505 (hereinafter, "Binion"; newly of record) as applied to claim 1 above, and in further view of U.S. Pub. No. 20210118249 (hereinafter, "Fields"; previously of record).
Regarding claim 2, Driscoll discloses the vehicle sharing system of claim 1. However, Driscoll does not explicitly teach the VCS programmed to receive trip-related data from a second sensor externally located relative to the vehicle.
Fields, in the same field of endeavor, teaches
the VCS programmed to receive trip-related data from a second sensor externally located relative to the vehicle (“the vehicle may transmit and/or receive communications to or from external sources, such as other vehicles (V2V), infrastructure (e.g., a bridge, traffic light, railroad crossing, toll both, marker, sign, or other equipment along the side of a road or highway), pedestrians, databases, or other information sources external to the vehicle. Such communication may allow the vehicle to obtain information regarding other vehicles, obstacles, road conditions, or environmental conditions that could not be detected by sensors disposed within the vehicle” (para 0039)).
One of ordinary skill in the art, before the time of filing, would have been motivated to modify the disclosure of Driscoll with the teachings of Fields in order to allow the vehicle to obtain information regarding other vehicles, obstacles, road conditions, or environmental conditions that could not be detected by sensors disposed within the vehicle; see Fields at least at [0039].
Regarding claim 5, Driscoll discloses the vehicle sharing system of claim 1. However, Driscoll does not explicitly teach the HMI displaying cost savings and related coupons associated with the wear and tear incurred during the trip.
Fields, in the same field of endeavor, teaches
the HMI displaying cost savings and related coupons associated with the wear and tear incurred during the trip (“information regarding the cost associated with the insurance policy may be presented to the vehicle operator or insurance customer at block 416. The information may be presented by a display, such as the display 202 of the on-board computer 114 or the mobile device 110…The insurance cost information may include an indication of one or more of a premium, rate, rating, discount, reward, special offer, points level, program, refund, and/or other costs associated with one or more insurance policies” (para 0081)).
One of ordinary skill in the art, before the time of filing, would have been motivated to modify the disclosure of Driscoll with the teachings of Fields such that the information may be presented either for informational purposes or to receive acceptance of the vehicle operator or insurance customer; see Fields at least at [0081].
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Pub. No. 20160071082 (hereinafter, "Driscoll"; previously of record), in view of U.S. Pub. No. 20150100505 (hereinafter, "Binion"; newly of record) as applied to claim 3 above, and in further view of U.S. Pub. No. 20160364699 (hereinafter, "Steketee"; previously of record).
Regarding claim 4, Driscoll discloses the vehicle sharing system of claim 3. Additionally, Driscoll discloses the cloud-based server calculating the vehicle sharing trip cost based on the sensor data (“in other embodiments, any of the aforementioned information may be provided to payment provider server 150 for processing by an owner/operator of the vehicle. Thus, on board applications and devices 140 may not track such costs in all embodiments” (para 0038)) and
However, Driscoll does not explicitly teach
a model that associates sensor data with maintenance cost of at least one component of the vehicle.
Steketee, in the same field of endeavor, teaches
a model that associates sensor data with maintenance cost of at least one component of the vehicle (“At least one of the detection assembly 12, the mobile device 14, and the network 16 can be configured to evaluate the data obtained by the detection device 18 and determine the cost for a replacement, according to at least one embodiment. Thus, a real-time quote can be provided for fixing or maintaining the motorized vehicle. Such a quote can be based upon the data obtained by the detection device 18 and processing the data with respect to stored data, such as, but not limited to, wear data and pricing data for the particular piece of equipment or component” (para 0102) and “determining a wear rate of the first component based in part on the measurement of the first component and at least one historical measurement of at least one component related to the first component” (para 0104)).
One of ordinary skill in the art, before the time of filing, would have been motivated to modify the disclosure of Driscoll with the teachings of Steketee in order to determine a wear rate of the first component based in part on the measurement of the first component and at least one historical measurement of at least one component related to the first component; see Steketee at least at [0104].
Claims 7-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Pub. No. 20160071082 (hereinafter, "Driscoll"; previously of record), in view of U.S. Pub. No. 20150100505 (hereinafter, "Binion"; newly of record), and in further view of U.S. Pub. No. 20210118249 (hereinafter, "Fields"; previously of record).
Regarding claim 7, Driscoll discloses a method for sharing a vehicle comprising:
receiving, by a processor, data from a vehicle sensor … associated with operation of a vehicle during a vehicle sharing trip (Fig. 1, #140, “Vehicle device 130 may further include on board applications and devices 140, which may include various vehicle sensors, devices, and processors with their corresponding applications. In this regard, on board applications and devices 140 may include devices and applications configured to determine costs incurred during operation of a vehicle corresponding to vehicle device 130 (e.g., when travelling a route)” (para 0038), and “Check-in application may provide the parameters to vehicle device 130, for example, a weight for user 102 and/or user 102's luggage, a start location for user 102 in a route, and/or an end location for user 102 in the route” (para 0023));
determining, by the processor, a maintenance cost attributable to the wear and tear of the vehicle incurred during the vehicle sharing trip (“Such sensors may be utilized to determine total costs incurred during use of a vehicle. The total costs may correspond to overall costs for usage of the vehicle during a specific route. The total costs determined using on board applications and devices 140 may include …, maintenance, and other wear and tear for usage of the vehicle” (para 0038));
calculating, by the processor, a vehicle sharing cost based at least in part on the maintenance cost associated with the driver for the vehicle sharing trip (“Cost sharing application 160 may include features, processes, and/or procedures to determine a pro rata share of travel costs incurred by user 102's use of a vehicle associated with vehicle device 130, for example, when travelling a route in the vehicle…Payment provider server 150 may also receive travel costs incurred during use of the vehicle corresponding to vehicle device 130, for example, fuel/electrical consumption, maintenance, wear and tear, tolls, and/or payment issued by vehicle device 130” (para 0045))...; and
communicating the vehicle sharing cost to a vehicle user interface (“Once each users' pro rata share/portion of the costs incurred during use of a vehicle is determined by cost sharing application 160, cost sharing application 160 may communicate the pro rata shares to the user. For example, user 102 may view the pro rata share using user device 110 while an owner/operator of the vehicle may view pro rata shares using vehicle device 130.” (para 0047)).
However, Driscoll does not explicitly teach
… and an external sensor associated with operation of a vehicle during a vehicle sharing trip;
determining, by the processor. driving behavior of a driver of the vehicle during the vehicle sharing trip based on the data from the vehicle sensor and the external sensor;
determining, by the processor, wear and tear of the vehicle incurred during the vehicle sharing trip based on the driving behavior of the driver;
associating, by the processor, the maintenance cost with the driver for the vehicle sharing trip;
Fields, in the same field of endeavor, teaches
…and an external sensor associated with operation of a vehicle during a vehicle sharing trip (“the vehicle may transmit and/or receive communications to or from external sources, such as other vehicles (V2V), infrastructure (e.g., a bridge, traffic light, railroad crossing, toll both, marker, sign, or other equipment along the side of a road or highway), pedestrians, databases, or other information sources external to the vehicle. Such communication may allow the vehicle to obtain information regarding other vehicles, obstacles, road conditions, or environmental conditions that could not be detected by sensors disposed within the vehicle” (para 0039)).
One of ordinary skill in the art, before the time of filing, would have been motivated to modify the disclosure of Driscoll with the teachings of Fields in order to allow the vehicle to obtain information regarding other vehicles, obstacles, road conditions, or environmental conditions that could not be detected by sensors disposed within the vehicle; see Fields at least at [0039].
Binion, in the same field of endeavor, teaches
determining, by the processor. driving behavior of a driver of the vehicle during the vehicle sharing trip based on the data from the vehicle sensor and the external sensor (“an on-board computing device (not shown) or end user device disposed in the vehicle 104 may wirelessly upload data from braking, acceleration, motion, force, environment, image, etc. sensors, via one or more wireless interfaces (not shown), for assessing correlation between changes in the condition of a vehicle 104 and operation of the vehicle 102 by a specific vehicle operator” (para 0016) and “wherein the condition data includes one or more of indications of current or prior …, behaviors of the user while operating the operated vehicle”(claim 4)),
determining, by the processor, wear and tear of the vehicle incurred during the vehicle sharing trip based on the driving behavior of the driver (“analyzing, by the one or more processors, the condition data to determine a correlation between the user operating the operated vehicle and a change in a condition of the operated vehicle, wherein the change in the condition of the operated vehicle includes: (i) at least one of a depreciation of the operated vehicle or an appreciation of the operated vehicle, and (ii) at least one of a change in maintenance condition or a change in aesthetic condition of the operated vehicle” (claim 1));
associating, by the processor, the maintenance cost with the driver for the vehicle sharing trip (“an on-board computing device (not shown) or end user device disposed in the vehicle 104 may wirelessly upload data from braking, acceleration, motion, force, environment, image, etc. sensors, via one or more wireless interfaces (not shown), for assessing correlation between changes in the condition of a vehicle 104 and operation of the vehicle 102 by a specific vehicle operator” (para 0016) and “The condition report server 102 may then generate a charge for a specific vehicle operator based on the grade or score of the operator, where operators with a high score may be charged more for vehicle sharing as compared with operators with a low score” (para 0038)).
One of ordinary skill in the art, before the time of filing, would have been motivated to modify the disclosure of Driscoll with the teachings of Binion in order to assess correlation between changes in the condition of a vehicle and operation of the vehicle by a specific vehicle operator; see Binion at least at [0016].
Regarding claim 8, Driscoll discloses the method of claim 7. Additionally, Driscoll discloses wherein receiving further comprises receiving a driver profile (“The request may be specific to user device 110 by including information that is specific to user 102, such as a name, identifier, account information, and/or user device identifier” (para 0035)) and map data associated with a route for the vehicle sharing trip (“payment provider server 150 may receive information from user device 110 and/or vehicle device 130 corresponding to parameters for user 102, such as a map, itinerary, and/or check-in information detailing a start point and an end point for user 102 while travelling in the vehicle, tolls caused by user 102's use of the vehicle (e.g., as shown in the map), deviations from an ideal route caused by user 102's use of the vehicle” (para 0045)).
Regarding claim 9, Driscoll discloses the method of claim 7. Additionally, Driscoll discloses wherein communicating the vehicle sharing cost comprises communicating the vehicle sharing cost from a cloud-based server (“Once each users' pro rata share/portion of the costs incurred during use of a vehicle is determined by cost sharing application 160, cost sharing application 160 may communicate the pro rata shares to the user” (para 0047)).
Regarding claim 10, Driscoll discloses the method of claim 8. Additionally, Driscoll discloses wherein the receiving, calculating, and communicating are performed by a mobile device selectively wirelessly coupled to the vehicle (“each of the devices utilized by users and service providers may be implemented as computer system 500” (para 0068) and “A transceiver or network interface 506 transmits and receives signals between computer system 500 and other devices, such as another user device, service device, or a service provider server via network 170…One or more processors 512, which can be a micro-controller, digital signal processor (DSP), or other processing component, processes these various signals, such as for display on computer system 500 or transmission to other devices via a communication link 518. Processor(s) 512 may also control transmission of information, such as cookies or IP addresses, to other devices” (para 0069)).
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ADAM ALHARBI whose telephone number is (313)446-6621. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10am-6:30pm.
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, Abby Flynn can be reached on (571) 272-9855. 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.
/ADAM M ALHARBI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3663
Prosecution Insights