DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
This office action is in response to claims in application 19/077,360 filed on 3/12/2025.
The instant application claims benefit to foreign application JP2024-055652 with a priority date of 3/29/2024.
The Pre-Grant publication # 20250303864 is published on 10/2/2025.
Claims 1-6 are pending.
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 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more. The claimed invention is a computer system to a process instructions. Thus fall within one of the four statutory categories (Step 1: YES).
Claims 1 and 6 are directed to driver assistance apparatus and a vehicle processor to configured generated request data regarding a request of a user for an input, and process response data to the request data. It further transmit the request data and receive response data from the user. Upon acquisition of data regarding refusal of use of an unused driver assistance system, generate data regarding a proposal for coaching in the driver assistance system upon consent to perform processing necessary for the coaching in line with the input of an intention of the user. The actions of receiving, converting, inputting, transmitting, coaching, outputting driving assistance information falls within the “Certain Method of Organizing Human Activity” groupings of abstract ideas subject to the 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance. Also observing, judging and evaluating interface information are “Mental Processes” by specifically instances of managing interactions man-machine learning activities. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind, and/or a certain method of managing interactions between people but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the “Mental Processes” and “Certain Method of Organizing Human Activity” groupings of abstract ideas, respectively. The analysis of skills and operation by user of existing any mathematical relationships, formulas could also be a mathematical concepts. Accordingly, the claims recite one or more groupings of abstract idea(s). (Step 2A; Prong 1: Yes).
The independent claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to be significantly more than the judicial exception because the limitations of “a computer system with interface display”, “a processor’, “a memory’, "network remote storage", "communicator configuration for digital content with predetermined string of driver assistance information” do not include additional elements that are sufficient to be significantly more than the judicial exception. They merely use generic computer functions and computer parts to apply or use of judicial exception for a stipulated outcome for an autonomous driving system. Hence not indicative of integration of a practical application (Step 2A: Prong 2 No).
The independent claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to be significantly more than the judicial exception. The limitations of a computer system is an electronic device that accepts input, acquisition, processes data to perform calculations, (execute instructions, and manage data flow), stores information, manage flow of data and outputs results . It works to perform these and some other related functions that are common and routine functions. The steps in the recited computational focus on claims that are highlighted are a well-understood, routine, and conventional activities known in art. Fig.3 of the instant specification depict information flow block diagram for a hardware/ software in a standard network environment with for a communicative configuration for a proposal and coaching scenario process claimed here. As an example in case of Versata Dev. Group, Inc. v. SAP Am., Inc., 793 F.3d 1306, 1334, 115 USPQ2d 1681, 1701 (Fed. Cir. 2015); OIP Techs., 788 F.3d at 1363, 115 USPQ2d at 1092-93, the activities of storing and retrieving of information in a memory of consumer electronic for a field of use purposes are recognized to be computer functions well-understood, routine, and conventional, when they are claimed in a merely generic manner. Further, there found to be no additional elements here in the claim recitation that improves the functioning of a computer itself to overcome the abstract idea rejection (Step 2B: No).
Claims 2-5 do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. Additionally, taking the claimed elements such as signal acquirer configured to acquire a vehicle travel signal and a vehicle parking signal for distribution of a video or for the coaching to a display of a vehicle or for indicating detection of an operation of an in-vehicle device necessary for the use of the driver assistance system. The elements yields no difference from taking them in combination because each element simply performs its respective function as highlighted above. In other words, these claims merely apply an abstract idea to a programmable driver assistant processor not improving the performance of the process or computer itself or provide a technical solution to a problem in a technical field. They do not effect a transformation of a particular article to a different state or thing. Therefore, for these reasons, it appears that claims 1-6 are not patent-eligible under 35 USC 101.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
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.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Patent Application Publication Number US 20170313324 A1 KUMAI et al. (Kumai) in view of Patent Application Publication Number US
Claim 1 Kumai teaches a driver assistance apparatus ( Para 0008 enabling a driver to easily set permissions for individual driving assistance apparatus) comprising:
a processor configured to generate request data regarding a request of a user for an input, and process response data to the request data (Para 0009 0009 a processor for an automated driving executing assistance operations response to input for which performance is permitted in the driving assistance package proposed by input and approved by the driver ); and
a communicator configured to transmit the request data to a user interface, and
receive the response data from the user interface (Fig.1 element 60 Para 0039 user interface receiving navigation communication such that transmitting a request and receiving response from electronic control units), the processor being configured to, upon acquisition of data regarding refusal of use of an unused driver assistance system as the response data ( Fig.11, 12 ; Para 0009 a rejection count for a refusal detecting partly by judging whether performance of driving assistance operations for which performance is permitted in a driving assistance package has been rejected by the driver; detecting the number of times performance of driving assistance operations for which performance is permitted in the driving assistance package has been rejected by the driver as the rejection count of the driving assistance package),
Kumai teaches generating data regarding a proposal for the driver assistance system as the request data ( Kumai: Fig.12 element S202 determine driving assistance data from package request ; Para 0009-0014 proposed driving assistance requested package selection depending on driver rejection count).
But the art does not explicitly identify generating data regarding a proposal for coaching in the driver assistance system as the request data. Yoo, in an analogous and reasonably pertinent to the problem faced by inventor for reasonable expectation of success, teaches the generating data regarding a proposal for coaching in the driver assistance system as the request data. (¶0057, 0107 Driver coaching determine a riding intention of a user in response to reception of a door unlocking coached instruction). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to incorporate generating of data regarding a proposal for coaching in the driver assistance system as the request, as taught by Yoo, into the system of Kumai, in order to provide quick reference for vehicle navigation control on parameters of each attributes of different routes.
and
Kumai in combination with Gambera, upon acquisition of data regarding consent to the coaching in the driver assistance system as the response data, further perform processing necessary for the coaching in line with the input of an intention of the user (Kumai: Fig.12 element S203, 205 different driving assistance in line with the driver intention; Yoo: Para 0008,0009 provides an advanced driver assistance system processing for coaching in line e.g. to determine a possibility of collision with an obstacle in response to a riding intention of a user; may also configured to control an autonomous driving and autonomous parking to a safe riding area in response to the possibility of collision with the obstacle).
Claim 2. Kumai teaches the driver assistance apparatus according to claim 1, further comprising a signal acquirer configured to acquire a vehicle travel signal (Kumai: Para 0053 GPS signal for vehicle position for electronic control to travel) and a vehicle parking signal, wherein the processor is configured to, upon sequential acquisition of the vehicle travel signal and the vehicle parking signal in this order through the signal acquirer, determine that the acquisition of the vehicle parking signal is a request for a start of the coaching as the intention of the user, and perform the processing necessary for the coaching (Para 0202 Vehicle's parking environments and the location information of other vehicles may be sequentially obtained; Par 0053 vehicle is traveled corresponding to a driver's driving intention with a coaching from a pre-stored map information, destination information of the vehicle, and an autonomous parking mode in which the vehicle autonomously parks in a state in which the vehicle arrives at a destination or temporarily is stopped).
Claim 3. Kumai teaches the driver assistance apparatus according to claim 1, wherein as the processing necessary for the coaching, the processor is configured to perform processing necessary for distribution of a video for the coaching to a display of a vehicle or a terminal device of the user (Para 0044 camera available for video coaching and display).
Claim 4. Kumai teaches the driver assistance apparatus according to claim 2, wherein as the processing necessary for the coaching, the processor is configured to perform processing necessary for distribution of a video for the coaching to a display of a vehicle or a terminal device of the user (Kumai: Para 0054 driver monitoring camera as terminal device; Yoo: Para 0077 a camera of an autonomous driving control device provided for autonomous driving, or a camera for a user authentication).
Claim 5. Kumai teaches the driver assistance apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the processor is configured to acquire an operation signal indicating detection of an operation of an in-vehicle device necessary for the use of the driver assistance system, and as the processing necessary for the coaching, the processor is configured to set a vehicle to a simulation mode, and upon acquisition of the operation signal, perform processing necessary for distribution of a video including a response to the detected operation (Kumai: Para 0006-0009 driving assistance operation acquiring signals for in-vehicle operation and coaching purposes).
Claim 6. Kumai teaches a vehicle ( Fig.2 ) comprising:
a processor configured to generate request data regarding a request of a user for an input, and process response data to the request data (Para 0009 a processor for an automated driving executing assistance operations response to input for which performance is permitted in the driving assistance package proposed by input and approved by the driver ); and
a communicator configured to transmit the request data to a user interface, and
receive the response data from the user interface (Fig.1 element 60 Para 0039 user interface receiving navigation communication such that transmitting a request and receiving response from electronic control units), the processor being configured to, upon acquisition of data regarding refusal of use of an unused driver assistance system as the response data ( Fig.11, 12 ; Para 0009 a rejection count for a refusal detecting partly by judging whether performance of driving assistance operations for which performance is permitted in a driving assistance package has been rejected by the driver; detecting the number of times performance of driving assistance operations for which performance is permitted in the driving assistance package has been rejected by the driver as the rejection count of the driving assistance package),
Kumai teaches generating data regarding a proposal for the driver assistance system as the request data ( Kumai: Fig.12 element S202 determine driving assistance data from package request ; Para 0009-0014 proposed driving assistance requested package selection depending on driver rejection count).
But the art does not explicitly identify generating data regarding a proposal for coaching in the driver assistance system as the request data. Yoo, in an analogous and reasonably pertinent to the problem faced by inventor for reasonable expectation of success, teaches the generating data regarding a proposal for coaching in the driver assistance system as the request data. (¶0057, 0107 Driver coaching determine a riding intention of a user in response to reception of a door unlocking coached instruction). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to incorporate generating of data regarding a proposal for coaching in the driver assistance system as the request, as taught by Yoo, into the system of Kumai, in order to provide quick reference for vehicle navigation control on parameters of each attributes of different routes.
and
Kumai in combination with Gambera, upon acquisition of data regarding consent to the coaching in the driver assistance system as the response data, further perform processing necessary for the coaching in line with the input of an intention of the user (Kumai: Fig.12 element S203, 205 different driving assistance in line with the driver intention; Yoo: Para 0008,0009 provides an advanced driver assistance system processing for coaching in line e.g. to determine a possibility of collision with an obstacle in response to a riding intention of a user; may also configured to control an autonomous driving and autonomous parking to a safe riding area in response to the possibility of collision with the obstacle, a).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure..
US 20170032590 A1 STEFAN; Frederic et al.
METHOD AND DEVICE FOR MODIFYING THE CONFIGURATION OF A DRIVING ASSISTANCE SYSTEM OF A MOTOR VEHICLE
US 20190102840 A1 Perl; Andri et al.
Electronic System for Dynamic, Quasi-Realtime Measuring and Identifying Driver Maneuvers Solely Based on Mobile Phone Telemetry, and a Corresponding Method Thereof.
US 20180211561 A1 Jones; Ronnie
Method and Process of Educating, Evaluating, and Certifying Commercial Drivers
US 20030167112 A1 Akiyama, Susumu
Vehicle agent system acting for driver in controlling in-vehicle devices
US 20180319402 A1 Mills; Aaron L. et al.
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR AUTOMATIC ACTIVATION OF DRIVER ASSISTANCE FEATURE1
US 20210064030 A1 Jiang; Yu-Sian et al. (driver intention effect)
DRIVER ASSISTANCE FOR A VEHICLE AND METHOD FOR OPERATING THE SAME
US 12073631 B2 Oyama; Hajime
Object estimation device, object estimation method therefor, and vehicle
US 11420639 B2 Senmyo; Katsuo
Driving assistance apparatus
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SADARUZ ZAMAN whose telephone number is (571)270-3137. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am to 5pm CST.
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, Xuan Thai can be reached at (571) 272-7147. 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.
/S.Z/Examiner, Art Unit 3715 July 29, 2026
/XUAN M THAI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3715
Prosecution Insights