CTNF 19/062,464 CTNF 97689 DETAILED ACTION This is the first Office action on the merits. Claims 1-8 are currently pending and addressed below. Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Priority 02-26 AIA Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statements submitted on 02/25/2025 and 08/19/2025 have been received and considered. Drawings 06-22 AIA The drawings are objected to because Fig. 3 “driver assist are” should read “driver assist area.” The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference characters not mentioned in the description: 411, 412, 421, 422 . Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance. Title of the Invention 37 C.F.R. 1.72(a) states: “The title of the invention may not exceed 500 characters in length and must be as short and specific as possible ” (emphasis added). Thus, the title of the invention is not sufficiently descriptive. A new title is required that is more clearly and more specifically indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 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 – 07-12-aia AIA (a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. 07-15-03-aia AIA Claim s 1, 5, and 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Oniwa, U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2025/0108800 A1 . Regarding claim 1, Oniwa discloses a control device for a vehicle (Oniwa Fig. 1 ), wherein the control device is configured to: perform driver assist accompanied with running control of the vehicle when a specific object in surroundings of the vehicle is present in a driver assist area set in the surroundings of the vehicle (see at least Oniwa [0073]: “The contact avoidance braking controller 142B performs emergency brake control for avoiding contact between the host vehicle M and an obstacle. For example, the contact avoidance braking controller 142B performs braking control (deceleration control) for avoiding contact when determination is made that there is a likelihood of contact between the host vehicle M and an obstacle, based on the surrounding situation recognized by the recognizer 110. The braking control that is executed by the contact avoidance braking controller 142B includes, for example, collision mitigation brake system (CMBS) control that supports contact avoidance or damage reduction.” ; [0075]: “The contact avoidance steering controller 144B performs steering control of the host vehicle M for avoiding contact between the host vehicle M and an obstacle. For example, when avoidance in the traveling lane of the host vehicle M can be performed, the contact avoidance steering controller 144B performs a steering operation to move in a direction of avoiding contact with an obstacle without departing from the same lane.” ); and change an amount of steering assist included in the running control in accordance with an ease of recovery from a state unsuitable for driving to a suitable state when a driver of the vehicle is in an unsuitable state (see at least Oniwa [0136]: “The centering steering control is executed when determination is made that the driver performs distracted driving. Accordingly, since the alert control is executed only for the driver who does not perform distracted driving, it is possible to suppress unnecessary control.” ; [0124]: “In the fourth example, the host vehicle M is positioned to the lane center CL1, and as a result, the host vehicle is steered in a direction approaching another vehicle m1; however, the steering control in the alert is intended for making the driver aware of another vehicle, and is different from the steering control of avoiding contact with another vehicle m. By performing this control, the host vehicle M is positioned to the center of the lane L1 at a time at which the driver is made aware of another vehicle. Thus, in subsequent manual driving, it is possible to allow the driver to easily select any of right and left directions and to perform a steering operation as well as deceleration.” ; [0127]: “In the centering steering control described above, when a prescribed condition is satisfied by a steering operation of the driver during execution, the centering steering control may be stopped and may be switched to manual driving of the driver…In the example of FIG. 21, a determination threshold TH1 for determining distracted driving, a determination threshold TH2 (an example of a first threshold) for override to steering in a forward direction during the centering steering control, and a determination threshold TH3 (an example of a second threshold) for override to steering in a backward direction (opposite direction) during the centering steering control are illustrated.” ). Regarding claim 5, Oniwa discloses the control device of a vehicle according to claim 1, wherein the control device is configured to, when the unsuitable state is a state where the driver is driving distracted, make the amount of steering assist greater than the amount of steering assist performed when driver is in a state suitable for driving (see at least Oniwa [0136]: “The centering steering control is executed when determination is made that the driver performs distracted driving. Accordingly, since the alert control is executed only for the driver who does not perform distracted driving, it is possible to suppress unnecessary control.” ; [0124]: “In the fourth example, the host vehicle M is positioned to the lane center CL1, and as a result, the host vehicle is steered in a direction approaching another vehicle m1; however, the steering control in the alert is intended for making the driver aware of another vehicle, and is different from the steering control of avoiding contact with another vehicle m. By performing this control, the host vehicle M is positioned to the center of the lane L1 at a time at which the driver is made aware of another vehicle. Thus, in subsequent manual driving, it is possible to allow the driver to easily select any of right and left directions and to perform a steering operation as well as deceleration.” ). Regarding claim 7, this claim recites a method that is performed by the control device of claim 1. Oniwa also discloses a method performed by the control device of claim 1 as outlined in the rejection to claim 1 above. Therefore, claim 7 is rejected for the same rationale as claim 1. Regarding claim 8, this claim recites a medium embodying the control device of claim 1. Oniwa also discloses a non-transitory computer storage medium including a computer program for the control device of claim 1 (Oniwa [0059]). Therefore, claim 8 is rejected for the same rationale as claim 1 . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-23-aia AIA The factual inquiries 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 2-4 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oniwa in view of Nagasawa, U.S. Patent No. 12286130 B2 . Regarding claim 2, Oniwa discloses all elements of the control device according to claim 1 as explained above. Oniwa further discloses wherein the control device is configured to: judge whether the unsuitable state is a predetermined first state or whether it is a second state more difficult to be recovered from to a state suitable for driving than the first state (see at least Oniwa [0136]: “The centering steering control is executed when determination is made that the driver performs distracted driving. Accordingly, since the alert control is executed only for the driver who does not perform distracted driving, it is possible to suppress unnecessary control.” ; [0124]: “In the fourth example, the host vehicle M is positioned to the lane center CL1, and as a result, the host vehicle is steered in a direction approaching another vehicle m1; however, the steering control in the alert is intended for making the driver aware of another vehicle, and is different from the steering control of avoiding contact with another vehicle m. By performing this control, the host vehicle M is positioned to the center of the lane L1 at a time at which the driver is made aware of another vehicle. Thus, in subsequent manual driving, it is possible to allow the driver to easily select any of right and left directions and to perform a steering operation as well as deceleration.” ); when the unsuitable state is the first state, make the amount of steering assist larger than the amount of steering assist performed when the driver is in a state suitable for driving (see at least Oniwa [0136]: “The centering steering control is executed when determination is made that the driver performs distracted driving. Accordingly, since the alert control is executed only for the driver who does not perform distracted driving, it is possible to suppress unnecessary control.” ; [0124]: “In the fourth example, the host vehicle M is positioned to the lane center CL1, and as a result, the host vehicle is steered in a direction approaching another vehicle m1; however, the steering control in the alert is intended for making the driver aware of another vehicle, and is different from the steering control of avoiding contact with another vehicle m. By performing this control, the host vehicle M is positioned to the center of the lane L1 at a time at which the driver is made aware of another vehicle. Thus, in subsequent manual driving, it is possible to allow the driver to easily select any of right and left directions and to perform a steering operation as well as deceleration.” ); Oniwa fails to expressly disclose making the amount of steering assist smaller when the unsuitable state is the second state. However, Nagasawa teaches and, when the unsuitable state is the second state, make the amount of steering assist smaller than the amount of steering assist performed when the driver is in a state suitable for driving (see at least Nagasawa Col. 13, lines 4-21: “Furthermore, when any of the following events is detected, the occupant state determination unit 400 may assume that the occupant P is suspected of being in a driving incapable state due to an abnormal physical condition of the occupant P, and cause the driving assistance control unit 200 to execute the forced stop control described above, and also use the communication device 220 to notify a server of, for example, a predetermined institution such as the police, an ambulance, or a medical institution. The driving incapable state may indicate, for example, deterioration of the physical condition to an extent that a consciousness level decreases, or an intoxicated state resulting from drinking, drug, etc. (a) Fixing of the visual field of the occupant P (e.g., three seconds or more) (b) When it is determined that eyes of the occupant P are closed, i.e., the occupant P is recognized as being unconscious, based on the image captured by the driver monitoring camera 401” ; Nagasawa Col. 17, lines 20-23 teaches driving assistance control is performed when a driver is in a normal state suitable for driving and Nagasawa Col. 5, lines 35-40 teaches driving assistance control includes steering assist; therefore, Nagasawa teaches the amount of steering assist is smaller in the second state because forced stop control is executed when the occupant eyes are closed). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the control device disclosed by Oniwa with Nagasawa with reasonable expectation of success. Nagasawa is directed towards the related field of a driving assistance apparatus. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to modify Oniwa with Nagasawa to perform appropriate driving assistance depending on the current state of an occupant (see at least Nagasawa Col. 3, lines 30-38: “Therefore, when the emotional state of the occupant changes in a direction in which suitability for driving decreases as compared with a normal emotional state, simply performing uniform control can result in further deterioration of the emotional state, for example, when the occupant is in an impatient state or an angry state. It is desirable to provide a driving assistance apparatus that is able to perform appropriate driving assistance corresponding to a kind of an emotion of an occupant.” ). Regarding claim 3, Oniwa in view of Nagasawa teach all elements of the control device according to claim 2 as explained above. Oniwa further discloses wherein the control device is configured to make the amount of brake assist included in the running control when the driver is in the state unsuitable for driving, regardless of whether the unsuitable state is the first state or the second state, greater than the amount of brake assist performed when the driver is in a state suitable for driving (see at least Oniwa [0100]: “When there is the accelerator operation (AP operation), the slow deceleration control in the alert and the contact caution alarm is controlled to be executed when the speed VM of the host vehicle M is 30 [km/h] or higher. Since this speed falls below a steering avoidance limit speed and is within a range in which there is a margin in performance of the CMBS control, it is possible to implement more proper driving control by setting this condition. When there is no AP operation, the slow deceleration control is controlled to be executed when the speed VM of the host vehicle M is 5 [km/h] or higher. That is, when the AP operation of the driver is not detected, the speed is set to be lower than when the AP operation is detected. With this, by relaxing the start condition for the slow deceleration control in a situation in which there is no AP operation, it is possible to execute the slow deceleration control in various situations including distracted driving during congestion, and to more safely avoid contact between the host vehicle M and another vehicle m1.” ; [0065]: “The driving state detector 120 may detect the distracted driving state of the driver when a state in which an amount of change of the operation degree of each of the accelerator pedal 84 and the brake pedal 86 is less than a threshold continues for a prescribed time or more, based on the detection results of the AP sensor 84A and the BP sensor 86A.” ). Regarding claim 4, Oniwa in view of Nagasawa teach all elements of the control device according to claim 2 as explained above. Oniwa further discloses wherein the first state is a state of distracted driving where the driver is driving distracted (see at least Oniwa [0065]: “The driving state detector 120 detects a prescribed driving state of an occupant (driver) of the host vehicle M. The prescribed driving state is, for example, a distracted driving state.” ) Nagasawa further teaches and the second state is a closed eye state where the driver has closed his eyes (see at least Nagasawa Col. 13, lines 12-21: “The driving incapable state may indicate, for example, deterioration of the physical condition to an extent that a consciousness level decreases, or an intoxicated state resulting from drinking, drug, etc. (a) Fixing of the visual field of the occupant P (e.g., three seconds or more) (b) When it is determined that eyes of the occupant P are closed, i.e., the occupant P is recognized as being unconscious, based on the image captured by the driver monitoring camera 401” ). Regarding claim 6, Oniwa discloses all elements of the control device according to claim 1 as explained above. Oniwa fails to expressly disclose making the amount of steering assist smaller when the unsuitable state is a closed eye state. However, Nagasawa teaches wherein the control device is configured to, when the unsuitable state is a closed eye state where the driver has closed his eyes, make the amount of steering assist smaller than the amount of steering assist performed when driver is in a state suitable for driving (see at least Nagasawa Col. 13, lines 4-21: “Furthermore, when any of the following events is detected, the occupant state determination unit 400 may assume that the occupant P is suspected of being in a driving incapable state due to an abnormal physical condition of the occupant P, and cause the driving assistance control unit 200 to execute the forced stop control described above, and also use the communication device 220 to notify a server of, for example, a predetermined institution such as the police, an ambulance, or a medical institution. The driving incapable state may indicate, for example, deterioration of the physical condition to an extent that a consciousness level decreases, or an intoxicated state resulting from drinking, drug, etc. (a) Fixing of the visual field of the occupant P (e.g., three seconds or more) (b) When it is determined that eyes of the occupant P are closed, i.e., the occupant P is recognized as being unconscious, based on the image captured by the driver monitoring camera 401” ; Nagasawa Col. 17, lines 20-23 teaches driving assistance control is performed when a driver is in a normal state suitable for driving and Nagasawa Col. 5, lines 35-40 teaches driving assistance control includes steering assist; therefore, Nagasawa teaches the amount of steering assist is smaller in the second state because forced stop control is executed when the occupant eyes are closed). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the control device disclosed by Oniwa with Nagasawa with reasonable expectation of success. Nagasawa is directed towards the related field of a driving assistance apparatus. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to modify Oniwa with Nagasawa to perform appropriate driving assistance depending on the current state of an occupant (see at least Nagasawa Col. 3, lines 30-38: “Therefore, when the emotional state of the occupant changes in a direction in which suitability for driving decreases as compared with a normal emotional state, simply performing uniform control can result in further deterioration of the emotional state, for example, when the occupant is in an impatient state or an angry state. It is desirable to provide a driving assistance apparatus that is able to perform appropriate driving assistance corresponding to a kind of an emotion of an occupant.” ) . Conclusion 07-96 AIA The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Oba, U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2024/0317304 A1, directed towards determining a vehicle safety measure based on a user state. Karve et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2024/0010277 A1, directed towards reducing power steering or lane keep assist after determining a driver is inattentive. Yamaoka et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2021/0245769 A1, directed towards changing driver assistance levels based on driver drowsiness levels. Kodama et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2018/0257563 A1, directed towards a collision avoidance system based on driver state and distance to vehicle. Kochhar, U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2018/0244279 A1, directed towards determining whether to take vehicle action based on eye movement. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ELIZABETH J SLOWIK whose telephone number is (571)270-5608. The examiner can normally be reached MON - FRI: 0900-1700. 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, ANISS CHAD can be reached at (571)270-3832. 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. /ELIZABETH J SLOWIK/Examiner, Art Unit 3662 /ANISS CHAD/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3662 Application/Control Number: 19/062,464 Page 2 Art Unit: 3662 Application/Control Number: 19/062,464 Page 3 Art Unit: 3662 Application/Control Number: 19/062,464 Page 4 Art Unit: 3662 Application/Control Number: 19/062,464 Page 5 Art Unit: 3662 Application/Control Number: 19/062,464 Page 6 Art Unit: 3662 Application/Control Number: 19/062,464 Page 7 Art Unit: 3662 Application/Control Number: 19/062,464 Page 8 Art Unit: 3662 Application/Control Number: 19/062,464 Page 9 Art Unit: 3662 Application/Control Number: 19/062,464 Page 10 Art Unit: 3662 Application/Control Number: 19/062,464 Page 11 Art Unit: 3662 Application/Control Number: 19/062,464 Page 12 Art Unit: 3662 Application/Control Number: 19/062,464 Page 13 Art Unit: 3662
Prosecution Insights