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 .
Application status
This office action is in response to application filed on 03/11/2025. Claims 1-20 are pending. Claims 1-20 are rejected.
Drawings
The drawings were received on 03/11/2025. These drawings are unacceptable as FIG. 5-9, 11-22, 24-25, 27-31, 34-37, 44-45, and 67 are objected because they are not in compliance with § 1.84 and shows incorrect margins (left margin).
1.84 Standards for drawings.
(g) Margins. The sheets must not contain frames around the sight (i.e., the usable surface), but should have scan target points (i.e., cross-hairs) printed on two catercorner margin corners. Each sheet must include a top margin of at least 2.5 cm. (1 inch), a left side margin of at least 2.5 cm. (1 inch), a right side margin of at least 1.5 cm. (5/8 inch), and a bottom margin of at least 1.0 cm. (3/8 inch), thereby leaving a sight no greater than 17.0 cm. by 26.2 cm. on 21.0 cm. by 29.7 cm. (DIN size A4) drawing sheets, and a sight no greater than 17.6 cm. by 24.4 cm. (6 15/16 by 9 5/8 inches) on 21.6 cm. by 27.9 cm. (8 1/2 by 11 inch) drawing sheets.
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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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 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 –
(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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5, 7, 9-14, 16, and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by ROPEL (US 20240142247 A1).
Regarding claim 1, ROPEL teaches A vehicle (ROPEL, at least one para. 0079; “The term “vehicle” as used herein refers to a thing used for transporting people or goods such as an automobile car, truck, or bus.”), comprising:
a display (ROPEL, at least one para. 0053; “To provide for interaction with a user, a computer may have a display device, e.g., a Cathode Ray Tube (CRT) or Liquid Crystal Display (LCD) monitor, for displaying information to the user, and a keyboard and a pointing device, e.g., a mouse or a trackball, by which the user may provide input to the computer.”); and
one or more processors, coupled with memory, to execute an application to provide instructions for the vehicle, the one or more processors to (ROPEL, at least one para. 0235; “FIG. 14B illustrates a system for receiving and installing a software application package for dynamic routing by a vehicle computer system, according to an embodiment. The vehicle computer system 1430 receives the software application package from a computer system 1460. The computer system 1460 comprises a processor 1402 and a computer readable medium 1464. The computer readable medium 1464 further comprises a software application 1466 for dynamic routing.”, wherein the one or more processors are the vehicle computer system 1430):
present, on the display of the vehicle, a user interface comprising a prompt for feedback of performance of the application (ROPEL, at least one para. 0123; “In an embodiment, a dynamic routing system is provided that receives information of a trip from the user, determines optimal routing.”, it is inherent that the prompt for feedback is displayed to the user via the user interface so that the user can make the correct selection to provide information.) and (ROPEL, at least one para. 0053; “feedback to the user may be any appropriate form of sensory feedback, e.g., visual feedback, auditory feedback, or tactile feedback; and a computer may receive input from the user in any appropriate form, including acoustic, speech, or tactile input.”);
select, in response to the prompt, a set of options based on a state of the application, each option of the set of options corresponding to a different type of feedback regarding performance of the application (ROPEL, at least one para. 0123; “In an embodiment, a dynamic routing system is provided that receives information of a trip from the user, determines optimal routing (e.g., identifying one or more charging stations for efficient routing that maximizes battery charge) based on a) current conditions (e.g., weather, traffic, road etc.); b) user preferences for charging stations (e.g., standard stations or preferred stations); c) primary user's driving habits; and battery's state of health; d) financial impact; and e) availability of charging stations at the time of receiving trip information.”) and (ROPEL, at least one para. 0151; “In another embodiment, the route planning system receives the second information on road condition via at least one of a navigation system, the vehicle, and the driver.”, wherein the current condition having the options of weather, traffic, road. Wherein user preferences having the options of standard or preferred stations.);
present the set of options on the user interface (ROPEL, at least one para. 0126; “The user can interact with the route planning system via the infotainment system 108.”, wherein system presents the standard station or the preferred stations as options to the user);
receive a selection of one or more options of the set of options (ROPEL, at least one para. 0126; “The user can interact with the route planning system via the infotainment system 108.”, wherein the driver selects one option from the standard station or the preferred stations as the selection); and
transmit the selection of the one or more options (ROPEL, at least one para. 0126; “The communication system 110 facilitates communication with the charging stations. The processor 102 and the memory 114, when provided with power and instructed for execution of route planning, helps in execution of route planning steps to arrive at an optimum route with a charging station in case the system predicts a low state of charge.”) to a remote computer (ROPEL, at least one para. 0235; “FIG. 14B illustrates a system for receiving and installing a software application package for dynamic routing by a vehicle computer system, according to an embodiment. The vehicle computer system 1430 receives the software application package from a computer system 1460. The computer system 1460 comprises a processor 1402 and a computer readable medium 1464. The computer readable medium 1464 further comprises a software application 1466 for dynamic routing.”, wherein the computer system 1460 that execute the dynamic routing application is the remote computer).
Regarding claim 2, ROPEL teaches The vehicle of claim 1, comprising the one or more processors to:
execute the application to generate a route for the vehicle to reach a destination (ROPEL, at least one para. 0124; “receive a first information comprising a destination, a preferred driving habit, and a charging preference via the infotainment system; determine a shortest driving route from a current position to the destination based on the first information;”);
identify a predicted state of charge of the vehicle at the destination based on the route for the vehicle to reach the destination (ROPEL, at least one para. 0124; “receive a second information on road condition for the shortest driving route; estimate a rate of power consumption in the shortest driving route based on a length of the shortest driving route, the preferred driving habit, and the road condition;”); and
select second one or more options to include on the user interface based on the predicted state of charge of the vehicle at the destination (ROPEL, at least one para. 0124; “update the shortest driving route to a driving route comprising a first charging station based on the charging preference, the rate of power consumption, and an availability of the first charging station.”).
Regarding claim 3, ROPEL teaches The vehicle of claim 1, comprising the one or more processors to:
identify the state of the application in response to the prompt (ROPEL, at least one para. 0125; “In an embodiment, the system further comprises a battery management system that is operable to estimate a state of charge of a battery, a state of health of the battery, and the rate of power consumption.”).
Regarding claim 5, ROPEL teaches The vehicle of claim 1, comprising the one or more processors to:
execute the application to generate instructions to navigate the vehicle to a
destination (ROPEL, at least one para. 0124; “receive a first information comprising a destination, a preferred driving habit, and a charging preference via the infotainment system; determine a shortest driving route from a current position to the destination based on the first information;”);
receive a selection of the prompt while the application is updating the instructions to navigate the vehicle to the destination (ROPEL, at least one para. 0124; “receive a second information on road condition for the shortest driving route; estimate a rate of power consumption in the shortest driving route based on a length of the shortest driving route, the preferred driving habit, and the road condition;”); and
select, based on the state of the application of updating the instructions to navigate the vehicle to the destination (ROPEL, at least one para. 0124; “update the shortest driving route to a driving route comprising a first charging station based on the charging preference, the rate of power consumption, and an availability of the first charging station.”), the set of options as one or more of a route problem, an illegal route, a wrong vehicle position, a road closure, confusing guidance, or inaccurate traffic (ROPEL, at least one para. 0164; “At 806, the method 800 can further comprise receiving a second information on road condition, real-time traffic data, and historical traffic data analyzed by the system for the shortest driving route by the route planning system.”, wherein a having hazardous pot hole teaches as a route problem, wherein real-time traffic data teaches an illegal route, a wrong vehicle position, a road closure, confusing guidance, or inaccurate traffic).
Regarding claim 7, ROPEL teaches The vehicle of claim 1, comprising the one or more processors to:
select, responsive to the prompt, the set of options based on the state of the application, each option of the set of options corresponding to a different type of feedback regarding performance of the application while the application was in the state (ROPEL, at least one para. 0123; “In an embodiment, a dynamic routing system is provided that receives information of a trip from the user, determines optimal routing (e.g., identifying one or more charging stations for efficient routing that maximizes battery charge) based on a) current conditions (e.g., weather, traffic, road etc.); b) user preferences for charging stations (e.g., standard stations or preferred stations); c) primary user's driving habits; and battery's state of health; d) financial impact; and e) availability of charging stations at the time of receiving trip information.”) and (ROPEL, at least one para. 0151; “In another embodiment, the route planning system receives the second information on road condition via at least one of a navigation system, the vehicle, and the driver.”, wherein the current conditions comprising weather, traffic, road as options, wherein user preferences comprising standard stations and preferred stations as options).
Regarding claim 9, ROPEL teaches The vehicle of claim 1, comprising the one or more processors to:
select, responsive to the prompt, the set of options based on the state of the application indicating that the application is presenting information regarding a point of interest on the user interface (ROPEL, at least one para. 0128; “In an embodiment, the system is further operable to transmit a first charging reservation request, the current location, and a first estimated time of arrival to the first charging station based on a confirmation of a user.”, In other words, the first estimated time of arrival can be confirmed or deny by the user as the point of interest being the charging station.).
Regarding claim 10, ROPEL teaches The vehicle of claim 1, comprising the one or more processors to:
select, responsive to the prompt, the set of options based on the state of the application indicating that the application is presenting information regarding a vehicle charging station on the user interface (ROPEL, at least one para. 0128; “In an embodiment, the system is further operable to transmit a first charging reservation request, the current location, and a first estimated time of arrival to the first charging station based on a confirmation of a user.”, In other words, the first estimated time of arrival can be confirmed or deny by the user as the set of options are related to the charging station.).
Regarding claim 11, ROPEL teaches The vehicle of claim 1, comprising the one or more processors to:
identify data regarding the vehicle (ROPEL, at least one para. 0129; “In an embodiment, the system is further operable to: monitor a driving habit and a driving preference; estimate a change in the rate of power consumption of the battery based on the change in the driving habit, the driving preference, and the road condition; estimate a time interval within which a state of charge will reach a set threshold;”); and
update the one or more options to include second one or more options based on the data regarding the vehicle (ROPEL, at least one para. 0129; “update the driving route to include a second charging station where the vehicle can reach within the time interval. In another embodiment, the system is further operable to transmit a second charging reservation request and a second estimated time of arrival to a second available charging station based on confirmation of the user. In another embodiment, the system is further operable to transmit a cancellation request to the first charging station based on confirmation of the user.”).
Regarding claim 12, ROPEL teaches A method, comprising:
presenting, by one or more processors (ROPEL, at least one para. 0235; “FIG. 14B illustrates a system for receiving and installing a software application package for dynamic routing by a vehicle computer system, according to an embodiment. The vehicle computer system 1430 receives the software application package from a computer system 1460. The computer system 1460 comprises a processor 1402 and a computer readable medium 1464. The computer readable medium 1464 further comprises a software application 1466 for dynamic routing.”, wherein the one or more processors are the vehicle computer system 1430) on a display (ROPEL, at least one para. 0053; “To provide for interaction with a user, a computer may have a display device, e.g., a Cathode Ray Tube (CRT) or Liquid Crystal Display (LCD) monitor, for displaying information to the user, and a keyboard and a pointing device, e.g., a mouse or a trackball, by which the user may provide input to the computer.”) of a vehicle (ROPEL, at least one para. 0079; “The term “vehicle” as used herein refers to a thing used for transporting people or goods such as an automobile car, truck, or bus.”), a user interface comprising an element to prompt for feedback of performance of an application to provide instructions for the vehicle (ROPEL, at least one para. 0123; “In an embodiment, a dynamic routing system is provided that receives information of a trip from the user, determines optimal routing.”, it is inherent that the prompt for feedback is displayed to the user via the user interface so that the user can make the correct selection to provide information.) and (ROPEL, at least one para. 0053; “feedback to the user may be any appropriate form of sensory feedback, e.g., visual feedback, auditory feedback, or tactile feedback; and a computer may receive input from the user in any appropriate form, including acoustic, speech, or tactile input.”);
selecting, by the one or more processors responsive to selection of the element, a set of options based on a state of the application, each option of the set of options corresponding to a different type of feedback regarding performance of the application (ROPEL, at least one para. 0123; “In an embodiment, a dynamic routing system is provided that receives information of a trip from the user, determines optimal routing (e.g., identifying one or more charging stations for efficient routing that maximizes battery charge) based on a) current conditions (e.g., weather, traffic, road etc.); b) user preferences for charging stations (e.g., standard stations or preferred stations); c) primary user's driving habits; and battery's state of health; d) financial impact; and e) availability of charging stations at the time of receiving trip information.”) and (ROPEL, at least one para. 0151; “In another embodiment, the route planning system receives the second information on road condition via at least one of a navigation system, the vehicle, and the driver.”, wherein the current condition having the options of weather, traffic, road. Wherein user preferences having the options of standard or preferred stations.);
presenting, by the one or more processors, the set of options on the user interface (ROPEL, at least one para. 0126; “The user can interact with the route planning system via the infotainment system 108.”, wherein system presents the standard station or the preferred stations as options to the user);
receiving, by the one or more processors, a selection of one or more options of the set of options at the user interface (ROPEL, at least one para. 0126; “The user can interact with the route planning system via the infotainment system 108.”, wherein the driver selects one option from the standard station or the preferred stations as the selection); and
transmitting, by the one or more processors, the selection of the one or more options (ROPEL, at least one para. 0126; “The communication system 110 facilitates communication with the charging stations. The processor 102 and the memory 114, when provided with power and instructed for execution of route planning, helps in execution of route planning steps to arrive at an optimum route with a charging station in case the system predicts a low state of charge.”) to a remote computer (ROPEL, at least one para. 0235; “FIG. 14B illustrates a system for receiving and installing a software application package for dynamic routing by a vehicle computer system, according to an embodiment. The vehicle computer system 1430 receives the software application package from a computer system 1460. The computer system 1460 comprises a processor 1402 and a computer readable medium 1464. The computer readable medium 1464 further comprises a software application 1466 for dynamic routing.”, wherein the computer system 1460 that execute the dynamic routing application is the remote computer).
Regarding claim 13, ROPEL teaches The method of claim12, comprising:
executing, by the one or more processors, the application to generate a route for the vehicle to reach a destination (ROPEL, at least one para. 0124; “receive a first information comprising a destination, a preferred driving habit, and a charging preference via the infotainment system; determine a shortest driving route from a current position to the destination based on the first information;”);
identifying, by the one or more processors, a predicted state of charge of the vehicle at the destination based on the route for the vehicle to reach the destination (ROPEL, at least one para. 0124; “receive a second information on road condition for the shortest driving route; estimate a rate of power consumption in the shortest driving route based on a length of the shortest driving route, the preferred driving habit, and the road condition;”); and
selecting, by the one or more processors, second one or more options to include on the user interface based on the predicted state of charge of the vehicle at the destination based on the route for the vehicle to reach the destination (ROPEL, at least one para. 0124; “update the shortest driving route to a driving route comprising a first charging station based on the charging preference, the rate of power consumption, and an availability of the first charging station.”).
Regarding claim 14, ROPEL teaches The method of claim 12, comprising:
identifying, by the one or more processors, the state of the application responsive to
the selection of the element (ROPEL, at least one para. 0125; “In an embodiment, the system further comprises a battery management system that is operable to estimate a state of charge of a battery, a state of health of the battery, and the rate of power consumption. ”).
Regarding claim 16, ROPEL teaches The method of claim 12, comprising:
executing, by the one or more processors, the application to generate instructions to navigate the vehicle to a destination (ROPEL, at least one para. 0124; “receive a first information comprising a destination, a preferred driving habit, and a charging preference via the infotainment system; determine a shortest driving route from a current position to the destination based on the first information;”);
receiving, by the one or more processors, the selection of the element while the application is updating the instructions to navigate the vehicle to the destination (ROPEL, at least one para. 0124; “receive a second information on road condition for the shortest driving route; estimate a rate of power consumption in the shortest driving route based on a length of the shortest driving route, the preferred driving habit, and the road condition;”); and
selecting, by the one or more processors based on the state of the application of updating the instructions to navigate the vehicle to the destination (ROPEL, at least one para. 0124; “update the shortest driving route to a driving route comprising a first charging station based on the charging preference, the rate of power consumption, and an availability of the first charging station.”), the set of options as one or more of a route problem, an illegal route, a wrong vehicle position, a road closure, confusing guidance, or inaccurate traffic (ROPEL, at least one para. 0164; “At 806, the method 800 can further comprise receiving a second information on road condition, real-time traffic data, and historical traffic data analyzed by the system for the shortest driving route by the route planning system.”, wherein a having hazardous pot hole teaches as a route problem, wherein real-time traffic data teaches an illegal route, a wrong vehicle position, a road closure, confusing guidance, or inaccurate traffic).
Regarding claim 18, ROPEL teaches A vehicle (ROPEL, at least one para. 0079; “The term “vehicle” as used herein refers to a thing used for transporting people or goods such as an automobile car, truck, or bus.”), comprising:
a display (ROPEL, at least one para. 0053; “To provide for interaction with a user, a computer may have a display device, e.g., a Cathode Ray Tube (CRT) or Liquid Crystal Display (LCD) monitor, for displaying information to the user, and a keyboard and a pointing device, e.g., a mouse or a trackball, by which the user may provide input to the computer.”); and
one or more processors, coupled with memory, to execute an application to provide instructions for the vehicle, the one or more processors to (ROPEL, at least one para. 0235; “FIG. 14B illustrates a system for receiving and installing a software application package for dynamic routing by a vehicle computer system, according to an embodiment. The vehicle computer system 1430 receives the software application package from a computer system 1460. The computer system 1460 comprises a processor 1402 and a computer readable medium 1464. The computer readable medium 1464 further comprises a software application 1466 for dynamic routing.”, wherein the one or more processors are the vehicle computer system 1430):
execute the application to generate a route for the vehicle to reach a destination (ROPEL, at least one para. 0235; “FIG. 14B illustrates a system for receiving and installing a software application package for dynamic routing by a vehicle computer system, according to an embodiment. The vehicle computer system 1430 receives the software application package from a computer system 1460. The computer system 1460 comprises a processor 1402 and a computer readable medium 1464. The computer readable medium 1464 further comprises a software application 1466 for dynamic routing.”, wherein the one or more processors are the vehicle computer system 1430) and (ROPEL, at least one para. 0124; “receive a first information comprising a destination, a preferred driving habit, and a charging preference via the infotainment system; determine a shortest driving route from a current position to the destination based on the first information;”);
present, on the display of the vehicle, a user interface comprising an element to prompt for feedback of performance of the application (ROPEL, at least one para. 0123; “In an embodiment, a dynamic routing system is provided that receives information of a trip from the user, determines optimal routing.”, it is inherent that the prompt for feedback is displayed to the user via the user interface so that the user can make the correct selection to provide information.) and (ROPEL, at least one para. 0053; “feedback to the user may be any appropriate form of sensory feedback, e.g., visual feedback, auditory feedback, or tactile feedback; and a computer may receive input from the user in any appropriate form, including acoustic, speech, or tactile input.”);
select, responsive to selection of the element, a set of options based on a state of the application indicating that the application is generating the route for the vehicle to reach the destination, one or more options of the set of options corresponding to different types of feedback regarding the route (ROPEL, at least one para. 0123; “In an embodiment, a dynamic routing system is provided that receives information of a trip from the user, determines optimal routing (e.g., identifying one or more charging stations for efficient routing that maximizes battery charge) based on a) current conditions (e.g., weather, traffic, road etc.); b) user preferences for charging stations (e.g., standard stations or preferred stations); c) primary user's driving habits; and battery's state of health; d) financial impact; and e) availability of charging stations at the time of receiving trip information.”) and (ROPEL, at least one para. 0151; “In another embodiment, the route planning system receives the second information on road condition via at least one of a navigation system, the vehicle, and the driver.”, wherein the current condition having the options of weather, traffic, road. Wherein user preferences having the options of standard or preferred stations.);
present the set of options on the user interface (ROPEL, at least one para. 0126; “The user can interact with the route planning system via the infotainment system 108.”, wherein system presents the standard station or the preferred stations as options to the user);
receive a selection of one or more options of the set of options at the user interface (ROPEL, at least one para. 0126; “The user can interact with the route planning system via the infotainment system 108.”, wherein the driver selects one option from the standard station or the preferred stations as the selection); and
transmit the selection of the one or more options (ROPEL, at least one para. 0126; “The communication system 110 facilitates communication with the charging stations. The processor 102 and the memory 114, when provided with power and instructed for execution of route planning, helps in execution of route planning steps to arrive at an optimum route with a charging station in case the system predicts a low state of charge.”) to a remote computer (ROPEL, at least one para. 0235; “FIG. 14B illustrates a system for receiving and installing a software application package for dynamic routing by a vehicle computer system, according to an embodiment. The vehicle computer system 1430 receives the software application package from a computer system 1460. The computer system 1460 comprises a processor 1402 and a computer readable medium 1464. The computer readable medium 1464 further comprises a software application 1466 for dynamic routing.”, wherein the computer system 1460 that execute the dynamic routing application is the remote computer).
Regarding claim 19, ROPEL teaches The vehicle of claim 18, comprising the one or more processors to:
identify a predicted state of charge of the vehicle at the destination based on the route for the vehicle to reach the destination (ROPEL, at least one para. 0124; “receive a second information on road condition for the shortest driving route; estimate a rate of power consumption in the shortest driving route based on a length of the shortest driving route, the preferred driving habit, and the road condition;”); and
select second one or more options to include on the user interface based on the predicted state of charge of the vehicle at the destination (ROPEL, at least one para. 0124; “update the shortest driving route to a driving route comprising a first charging station based on the charging preference, the rate of power consumption, and an availability of the first charging station.”).
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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 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.
Claim(s) 4, 15, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ROPEL (US 20240142247 A1) as applied to claim 1, 12, and 18 above, respectively, and further in view of Aviv (US 20240361137 A1) and Singhal (US 20180143639 A1).
Regarding claim 4, ROPEL teaches The vehicle of claim 1, comprising the one or more processors to:
(ROPEL, at least one para. 0126; “The communication system 110 facilitates communication with the charging stations. The processor 102 and the memory 114, when provided with power and instructed for execution of route planning, helps in execution of route planning steps to arrive at an optimum route with a charging station in case the system predicts a low state of charge.”).
ROPEL does not explicitly teach that transmit an identifier of the vehicle or an account associated with the vehicle and a path identifier of a route the application was navigating at a time of selection of the prompt to the remote computer with the selection of the one or more options.
Aviv, in the same field of endeavor (Aviv, at least one para. 0002; “This disclosure relates generally to an apparatus and method for optimal navigation route planning for an electric car, and in particular using environmental, car, and driver factors when planning the optimal route according to a defined objective.”) teaches transmit an identifier of the vehicle or an account associated with the vehicle (Aviv, at least one para. 0366; “The sensor data is sent periodically, or upon detecting the anomaly, to a server over the Internet via a first wireless network, together with a vehicle identifier (Vehicle Identification Number (VIN) or the license plate number) and its GNSS or GPS geographic location.”) (Aviv, at least one para. 0366; “The sensor data is sent periodically, or upon detecting the anomaly, to a server over the Internet via a first wireless network, together with a vehicle identifier (Vehicle Identification Number (VIN) or the license plate number) and its GNSS or GPS geographic location.”, In other words, when the user selects an options via the infotainment system for an anomaly, the vehicle identifier is also transmitted to the server).
ROPEL and Aviv are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both of them are in the same field as optimal route planning for a navigation system as the claimed invention. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to have modified the selected option transferring process of the ROPEL with teaching of Aviv. One of the ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification so that information received from a plurality of vehicles can be individually assigned to the corresponding vehicle to ensure accurate data calculation. Furthermore, the claim would have been obvious because the substitution of one known element (the selected option transferring process of the ROPEL) for another (teaching of Aviv) would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art.
The combination of ROPEL and Aviv does not teach a path identifier of a route the application was navigating.
Singhal, in the same field of endeavor (Singhal, at least one para. 0018; “Systems and methods herein can determine an optimal route for an autonomous electric vehicle. The system may score viable routes between the start and end locations of a trip using a numeric or other scale that denotes how viable the route is for autonomy.”) teaches a path identifier of a route the application was navigating (Singhal, at least one para. 0111; “These static route characteristics 908-916 may be associated with a route identifier (ID) 904. The route identifier 904 can be an alphanumeric identifier, a numeric identifier, a globally unique identifier (GUID), a street name, block addresses, or other types of identifiers that can identify the route or street. This route information 904 must be unique among all other routes, allowing the navigation system 302 to understand the route chosen and to provide this information to the route engine 804.”).
The combination of ROPEL, Aviv, and Singhal are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because all of them are in the same field as optimal route planning for a navigation system as the claimed invention. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to have modified the selected option transferring process of the ROPEL and Aviv with teaching of Singhal. One of the ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification so that information received from a plurality of vehicles can be individually assigned to the corresponding route that each of the plurality of vehicle is traveling to ensure accurate data calculation. Furthermore, all the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention.
Regarding claim 15, ROPEL teaches The method of claim 12, comprising:
(ROPEL, at least one para. 0126; “The communication system 110 facilitates communication with the charging stations. The processor 102 and the memory 114, when provided with power and instructed for execution of route planning, helps in execution of route planning steps to arrive at an optimum route with a charging station in case the system predicts a low state of charge.”).
ROPEL does not explicitly teach that transmitting, by the one or more processors, an identifier of the vehicle or an account associated with the vehicle and a path identifier of a route the application was navigating when the element was selected to the remote computer with the selection of the one or more options.
Aviv, in the same field of endeavor (Aviv, at least one para. 0002; “This disclosure relates generally to an apparatus and method for optimal navigation route planning for an electric car, and in particular using environmental, car, and driver factors when planning the optimal route according to a defined objective.”) teaches transmitting, by the one or more processors, an identifier of the vehicle or an account associated with the vehicle (Aviv, at least one para. 0366; “The sensor data is sent periodically, or upon detecting the anomaly, to a server over the Internet via a first wireless network, together with a vehicle identifier (Vehicle Identification Number (VIN) or the license plate number) and its GNSS or GPS geographic location.”) (Aviv, at least one para. 0366; “The sensor data is sent periodically, or upon detecting the anomaly, to a server over the Internet via a first wireless network, together with a vehicle identifier (Vehicle Identification Number (VIN) or the license plate number) and its GNSS or GPS geographic location.”, In other words, when the user selects an options via the infotainment system for an anomaly, the vehicle identifier is also transmitted to the server).
ROPEL and Aviv are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both of them are in the same field as optimal route planning for a navigation system as the claimed invention. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to have modified the selected option transferring process of the ROPEL with teaching of Aviv. One of the ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification so that information received from a plurality of vehicles can be individually assigned to the corresponding vehicle to ensure accurate data calculation. Furthermore, the claim would have been obvious because the substitution of one known element (the selected option transferring process of the ROPEL) for another (teaching of Aviv) would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art.
The combination of ROPEL and Aviv does not teach and a path identifier of a route the application was navigating.
Singhal, in the same field of endeavor (Singhal, at least one para. 0018; “Systems and methods herein can determine an optimal route for an autonomous electric vehicle. The system may score viable routes between the start and end locations of a trip using a numeric or other scale that denotes how viable the route is for autonomy.”) teaches a path identifier of a route the application was navigating (Singhal, at least one para. 0111; “These static route characteristics 908-916 may be associated with a route identifier (ID) 904. The route identifier 904 can be an alphanumeric identifier, a numeric identifier, a globally unique identifier (GUID), a street name, block addresses, or other types of identifiers that can identify the route or street. This route information 904 must be unique among all other routes, allowing the navigation system 302 to understand the route chosen and to provide this information to the route engine 804.”).
The combination of ROPEL, Aviv, and Singhal are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because all of them are in the same field as optimal route planning for a navigation system as the claimed invention. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to have modified the selected option transferring process of the ROPEL and Aviv with teaching of Singhal. One of the ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification so that information received from a plurality of vehicles can be individually assigned to the corresponding route that each of the plurality of vehicle is traveling to ensure accurate data calculation. Furthermore, all the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention.
Regarding claim 20, ROPEL teaches The vehicle of claim 18, comprising the one or more processors to:
(ROPEL, at least one para. 0126; “The communication system 110 facilitates communication with the charging stations. The processor 102 and the memory 114, when provided with power and instructed for execution of route planning, helps in execution of route planning steps to arrive at an optimum route with a charging station in case the system predicts a low state of charge.”).
ROPEL does not explicitly teach that transmit an identifier of the vehicle or an account associated with the vehicle and a path identifier of the route the application was navigating when the element was selected to the remote computer with the selection of the one or more options.
Aviv, in the same field of endeavor (Aviv, at least one para. 0002; “This disclosure relates generally to an apparatus and method for optimal navigation route planning for an electric car, and in particular using environmental, car, and driver factors when planning the optimal route according to a defined objective.”) teaches transmit an identifier of the vehicle or an account associated with the vehicle (Aviv, at least one para. 0366; “The sensor data is sent periodically, or upon detecting the anomaly, to a server over the Internet via a first wireless network, together with a vehicle identifier (Vehicle Identification Number (VIN) or the license plate number) and its GNSS or GPS geographic location.”) (Aviv, at least one para. 0366; “The sensor data is sent periodically, or upon detecting the anomaly, to a server over the Internet via a first wireless network, together with a vehicle identifier (Vehicle Identification Number (VIN) or the license plate number) and its GNSS or GPS geographic location.”, In other words, when the user selects an options via the infotainment system for an anomaly, the vehicle identifier is also transmitted to the server).
ROPEL and Aviv are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both of them are in the same field as optimal route planning for a navigation system as the claimed invention. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to have modified the selected option transferring process of the ROPEL with teaching of Aviv. One of the ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification so that information received from a plurality of vehicles can be individually assigned to the corresponding vehicle to ensure accurate data calculation. Furthermore, the claim would have been obvious because the substitution of one known element (the selected option transferring process of the ROPEL) for another (teaching of Aviv) would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art.
The combination of ROPEL and Aviv does not teach and a path identifier of the route the application was navigating.
Singhal, in the same field of endeavor (Singhal, at least one para. 0018; “Systems and methods herein can determine an optimal route for an autonomous electric vehicle. The system may score viable routes between the start and end locations of a trip using a numeric or other scale that denotes how viable the route is for autonomy.”) teaches a path identifier of the route the application was navigating (Singhal, at least one para. 0111; “These static route characteristics 908-916 may be associated with a route identifier (ID) 904. The route identifier 904 can be an alphanumeric identifier, a numeric identifier, a globally unique identifier (GUID), a street name, block addresses, or other types of identifiers that can identify the route or street. This route information 904 must be unique among all other routes, allowing the navigation system 302 to understand the route chosen and to provide this information to the route engine 804.”).
The combination of ROPEL, Aviv, and Singhal are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because all of them are in the same field as optimal route planning for a navigation system as the claimed invention. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to have modified the selected option transferring process of the ROPEL and Aviv with teaching of Singhal. One of the ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification so that information received from a plurality of vehicles can be individually assigned to the corresponding route that each of the plurality of vehicle is traveling to ensure accurate data calculation. Furthermore, all the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention.
Claim(s) 6 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ROPEL (US 20240142247 A1) as applied to claim 1 and 12 above, respectively, and further in view of Aviv (US 20240361137 A1).
Regarding claim 6, ROPEL teaches The vehicle of claim 1, comprising the one or more processors to:
transmit data regarding the vehicle (ROPEL, at least one para. 0126; “The battery management system 112 provides a state of charge of the battery in the vehicle. The battery management system 112 also provides a rate of power consumption based on the driving habit of the user, a preferred driving mode, a road condition, and a state of health of the battery.”), (ROPEL, at least one para. 0126; “The user can interact with the route planning system via the infotainment system 108. The communication system 110 facilitates communication with the charging stations. The processor 102 and the memory 114, when provided with power and instructed for execution of route planning, helps in execution of route planning steps to arrive at an optimum route with a charging station in case the system predicts a low state of charge.”, this is a separate data transmission in comparison to the state of health of the battery);
transmit the identifier of the vehicle or the account associated with the vehicle or the path identifier of a route the application was navigating at a time of selection of the prompt to the remote computer with the selection of the one or more options; and
wherein the remote computer is to correlate the selection of the one or more options with the data regarding the vehicle based on the identifier of the vehicle or the account associated with the vehicle or the path identifier of the route the application was navigating.
ROPEL does not explicitly teach that an identifier of the vehicle or an account associated with the vehicle, or a path identifier of a route the application is navigating
transmit the identifier of the vehicle or the account associated with the vehicle or the path identifier of a route the application was navigating at a time of selection of the prompt to the remote computer with the selection of the one or more options; and
wherein the remote computer is to correlate the selection of the one or more options with the data regarding the vehicle based on the identifier of the vehicle or the account associated with the vehicle or the path identifier of the route the application was navigating.
Aviv, in the same field of endeavor (Aviv, at least one para. 0002; “This disclosure relates generally to an apparatus and method for optimal navigation route planning for an electric car, and in particular using environmental, car, and driver factors when planning the optimal route according to a defined objective.”) teaches an identifier of the vehicle or an account associated with the vehicle, or a path identifier of a route the application is navigating (Aviv, at least one para. 0366; “The sensor data is sent periodically, or upon detecting the anomaly, to a server over the Internet via a first wireless network, together with a vehicle identifier (Vehicle Identification Number (VIN) or the license plate number) and its GNSS or GPS geographic location.”).
transmit the identifier of the vehicle or the account associated with the vehicle (Aviv, at least one para. 0366; “The sensor data is sent periodically, or upon detecting the anomaly, to a server over the Internet via a first wireless network, together with a vehicle identifier (Vehicle Identification Number (VIN) or the license plate number) and its GNSS or GPS geographic location.”, In other words, when the user selects an options via the infotainment system for an anomaly, the vehicle identifier is also transmitted to the server); and
wherein the remote computer is to correlate the selection of the one or more options with the data regarding the vehicle based on the identifier of the vehicle or the account associated with the vehicle (Aviv, at least one para. 0366; “The server analyzes the sensor data, and in response sends a notification message to a client device, such as a smartphone, or to a group of vehicles in close vicinity to the first vehicle, via a wireless network over the Internet. The received message may be used by each of the vehicles in the group for controlling, limiting, activating, or otherwise affecting an actuator operation, or may be used for notifying the driver using a dashboard display.”).
ROPEL and Aviv are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both of them are in the same field as optimal route planning for a navigation system as the claimed invention. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to have modified the selected option transferring process of the ROPEL with teaching of Aviv. One of the ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification so that information received from a plurality of vehicles can be individually assigned to the corresponding vehicle to ensure accurate data calculation. Furthermore, all the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention.
Regarding claim 17, ROPEL teaches The method of claim 12, comprising:
transmitting, by the one or more processors, data regarding the vehicle (ROPEL, at least one para. 0126; “The battery management system 112 provides a state of charge of the battery in the vehicle. The battery management system 112 also provides a rate of power consumption based on the driving habit of the user, a preferred driving mode, a road condition, and a state of health of the battery.”), (ROPEL, at least one para. 0126; “The user can interact with the route planning system via the infotainment system 108. The communication system 110 facilitates communication with the charging stations. The processor 102 and the memory 114, when provided with power and instructed for execution of route planning, helps in execution of route planning steps to arrive at an optimum route with a charging station in case the system predicts a low state of charge.”, this is a separate data transmission in comparison to the state of health of the battery);
transmitting, by the one or more processors, the identifier of the vehicle or the account associated with the vehicle or the path identifier of a route the application was navigating when the element was selected to the remote computer with the selection of the one or more options; and
wherein the remote computer is to correlate the selection of the one or more options to the remote computer with the data regarding the vehicle based on the identifier of the vehicle or the account associated with the vehicle or the path identifier of a route the application was navigating.
ROPEL does not explicitly teach that an identifier of the vehicle or an account associated with the vehicle, or a path identifier of a route the application is navigating.
transmitting, by the one or more processors, the identifier of the vehicle or the account associated with the vehicle or the path identifier of a route the application was navigating when the element was selected to the remote computer with the selection of the one or more options; and
wherein the remote computer is to correlate the selection of the one or more options to the remote computer with the data regarding the vehicle based on the identifier of the vehicle or the account associated with the vehicle or the path identifier of a route the application was navigating.
Aviv, in the same field of endeavor (Aviv, at least one para. 0002; “This disclosure relates generally to an apparatus and method for optimal navigation route planning for an electric car, and in particular using environmental, car, and driver factors when planning the optimal route according to a defined objective.”) teaches an identifier of the vehicle or an account associated with the vehicle, or a path identifier of a route the application is navigating (Aviv, at least one para. 0366; “The sensor data is sent periodically, or upon detecting the anomaly, to a server over the Internet via a first wireless network, together with a vehicle identifier (Vehicle Identification Number (VIN) or the license plate number) and its GNSS or GPS geographic location.”).
transmitting, by the one or more processors, the identifier of the vehicle or the account associated with the vehicle (Aviv, at least one para. 0366; “The sensor data is sent periodically, or upon detecting the anomaly, to a server over the Internet via a first wireless network, together with a vehicle identifier (Vehicle Identification Number (VIN) or the license plate number) and its GNSS or GPS geographic location.”, In other words, when the user selects an options via the infotainment system for an anomaly, the vehicle identifier is also transmitted to the server); and
wherein the remote computer is to correlate the selection of the one or more options to the remote computer with the data regarding the vehicle based on the identifier of the vehicle or the account associated with the vehicle (Aviv, at least one para. 0366; “The server analyzes the sensor data, and in response sends a notification message to a client device, such as a smartphone, or to a group of vehicles in close vicinity to the first vehicle, via a wireless network over the Internet. The received message may be used by each of the vehicles in the group for controlling, limiting, activating, or otherwise affecting an actuator operation, or may be used for notifying the driver using a dashboard display.”).
ROPEL and Aviv are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both of them are in the same field as optimal route planning for a navigation system as the claimed invention. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to have modified the selected option transferring process of the ROPEL with teaching of Aviv. One of the ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification so that information received from a plurality of vehicles can be individually assigned to the corresponding vehicle to ensure accurate data calculation. Furthermore, all the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention.
Claim(s) 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ROPEL (US 20240142247 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Meyer (US 10876846 B1).
Regarding claim 8, ROPEL teaches The vehicle of claim 1, comprising the one or more processors to:
select, responsive to the prompt, the set of options (ROPEL, at least one para. 0126; “The user can interact with the route planning system via the infotainment system 108.”, wherein the driver selects one option from the standard station or the preferred stations as the selection).
ROPEL does not explicitly teach that select, responsive to the prompt, the set of options based on the state of the application indicating that the vehicle has arrived at a defined destination after providing navigation instructions for the vehicle to travel to the defined destination.
Meyer, in the same field of endeavor (Meyer, col. 1, lines 14-15; “This document generally relates to rerouting in navigation systems based on updates to routing-related information.”) teaches select, responsive to the prompt, the set of options based on the state of the application indicating that the vehicle has arrived at a defined destination after providing navigation instructions for the vehicle to travel to the defined destination (Meyer, col. 11, lines 14-22; “In the example displayed, the user has selected suggested location of interest 122c (“Plush Lounge”) as a new destination for the current trip. In this example, this causes the user's device 102 to display a prompt 126 requesting that the user verify the selection of location of interest 122c as the new destination for the current trip. The user selects a button 128 on the touch screen of the user's device 102 to confirm selection of the location of interest 122c as the new destination for the current trip.”).
ROPEL and Meyer are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both of them are in the same field as optimal route planning for a navigation system as the claimed invention. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to have modified the selected option transferring process of the ROPEL with teaching of Meyer. One of the ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification because all the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to UPUL P CHANDRASIRI whose telephone number is (703)756-5823. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8.30 am to 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, Christian Chace can be reached at 571-272-4190. 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.
/U.P.C./ Examiner, Art Unit 3665 /CHRISTIAN CHACE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3665
Prosecution Insights