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 .
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In line 6 applicant recites “line of sigh”. It appears that the text should read “line of sight”.
In line 10, it appears that the word “acquire” should be “acquiring”.
In line 14, it appears that the word “calculate” should be “calculating”.
In line 18, it appears that the word “estimate” should be “estimating”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-8 and 12-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
The determination of whether a claim recites patent ineligible subject matter is a 2
step inquiry.
STEP 1: the claim does not fall within one of the four statutory categories of invention (process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter), see MPEP 2106.03, or
STEP2: the claim recites a judicial exception, e.g. an abstract idea, without reciting additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception, as determined using the following analysis: see MPEP 2106.04
STEP 2A (PRONG 1): Does the claim recite an abstract idea, law of nature, or natural phenomenon? see MPEP 2106.04(I)(A)(1)
STEP 2A (PRONG 2): Does the claim recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application? see MPEP 2106.04(II)(A)(2)
STEP 2B: Does the claim recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception? see MPEP 2106.05.
In regard to claim 1,
Claim 1 is directed to a "driver state estimation apparatus that estimates a state of a driver who drives a vehicle, the driver state estimation apparatus comprising: circuitry configured", therefore claim 1 passes step 1.
However, the remainder of claim 1 is directed only to mathematical, computational analysis steps for determining the state of a driver; in other words, an abstract idea.
The claim fails to reintegrate the abstract idea into practical application and fails to recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Therefore, claim 1 fails step 2.
As for claims 2-8, the claims only recite additional mathematical, computational analysis steps that the apparatus of claim 1 is configured to perform.
As for claim 12, while claim 12, does add a practical step: "the circuitry is configured to control an operation of the vehicle"; however, due to the extremely broad nature of the limitation, it is not considered to be significantly more than the judicial exception.
As for claim 13, claim 13 simply adds the limitations of "a travel environment information acquisition device" and "a line-of-sight detection device" to the apparatus of claim 1 without more detail of these generic devices.
As for claim 14, claim 14 is drawn to a driver state estimation method that simply describes the mathematical estimation steps found in claim 1. Therefore, the rejection of claim 1 analogously applies to claim 14.
As for claim 15, claim 15 simply provides an equation to be utilized in the method of claim 14.
As for claim 16, claim 16 simply introduces a generic computer to perform the method of claim 14; due to the extremely broad nature of the limitation, it is not considered to be significantly more than the judicial exception.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. More specifically, it is unclear whether applicant intends for claim 13 to be a dependent claim or an independent claim.. If claim 13 should be an independent, applicant is advised to list each of the limitations outlined in claim 1.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. More specifically, it is unclear whether applicant intends for claim 16 to be a dependent claim or an independent claim.. If claim 16 should be an independent, applicant is advised to list each of the limitations outlined in claim 14.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 9 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Each of the cited references discloses driver/operator monitoring devices and systems that were known in the art at the time of filing the instant application.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERIC M BLOUNT whose telephone number is (571)272-2973. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00a - 5:30p.
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, Quan Wang can be reached at 571-272-3114. 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.
ERIC M. BLOUNT
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2685
/Eric Blount/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2685
Prosecution Insights