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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 08/25/2026 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 4-5, 7 and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (US 2019/0129412 A1) in view of Yamazaki et al. (US 2021/0255614 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Kim discloses a parking assistance method comprising:
a method for parking an own vehicle into a parking spot and/or retrieving the own vehicle from the parking spot by remotely controlling the own vehicle (e.g. Abstract & [0008]) using a portable information terminal (e.g. Fig. 1: 10), which is in a first state where predetermined remote operation software is running in a foreground (e.g. [0040]: parking-space-exit application) and a predetermined first operation image is displayed (e.g. Fig. 3(b)),
wherein the parking assistance method includes a second image display step of displaying a second operation image (e.g. Fig. 3(a)) on the portable information terminal to transition the portable information terminal to the first state (e.g. Fig. 3(b)) when the portable information terminal is located within a specific area (e.g. [0049-0050]) and is in a state different from the first state (e.g. Fig. 3(a)).
Kim fails to explicitly disclose, but Yamazaki teaches displaying the second operation image on the portable information terminal while the predetermined remote operation software is running in a background (e.g. Fig. 5 & [0084]: when application is activated; thus, running in a background), and the state different from the first state being a state in which the predetermined remote operation software is running in the background, and wherein selection of the second operation image activates the predetermined remote operation software in the foreground so that the portable information terminal transitions to the first state in which the predetermined first operation image is displayed (e.g. Figs. 6-8: after user presses down the start button to start the parking, different images are displayed to support the parking feature; thus, the application transitioned to another display state and the application is running in the foreground).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Kim with the teachings of Yamazaki to switch display operation of a software from running in a background to a foreground so as to allow user to actively operate the software after confirming user would like to control functions of the software; therefore, user device would not need to display unnecessary software image when user does not want to use the software.
Regarding claim 4, Kim discloses the second image display step is executed on the portable information terminal when the distance between the user remotely operating the own vehicle and the own vehicle is below a threshold value (e.g. Fig. 3(a) & [0039-0040, 0049]).
Regarding claim 5, Kim discloses a parking assistance method comprising:
a method for remotely controlling an own vehicle (e.g. Abstract & [0008]) using a portable information terminal (e.g. Fig. 1: 10), which is in a first state where predetermined remote operation software is activated (e.g. [0040]: parking-space-exit application) and a predetermined first operation image is displayed (e.g. Fig. 3(b)), to park the own vehicle into a parking spot and/or to retrieve the own vehicle from the parking spot (e.g. Abstract),
wherein the parking assistance method includes a second image display step of displaying a second operation image (e.g. Fig. 3(a)) on the portable information terminal to transition the portable information terminal to the first state (e.g. Fig. 3(b)) during a specific time period when the portable information terminal is in a state different from the first state (e.g. [0045, 0049-0050]: based on time to notify driver parking-space-exiting is possible).
Kim fails to explicitly disclose, but Yamazaki teaches displaying the second operation image on the portable information terminal while the predetermined remote operation software is running in a background (e.g. Fig. 5 & [0084]: when application is activated; thus, running in a background), and the state different from the first state being a state in which the predetermined remote operation software is running in the background, and wherein selection of the second operation image activates the predetermined remote operation software in the foreground so that the portable information terminal transitions to the first state in which the predetermined first operation image is displayed (e.g. Figs. 6-8: after user presses down the start button to start the parking, different images are displayed to support the parking feature; thus, the application transitioned to another display state and the application is running in the foreground).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Kim with the teachings of Yamazaki to switch display operation of a software from running in a background to a foreground so as to allow user to actively operate the software after confirming user would like to control functions of the software; therefore, user device would not need to display unnecessary software image when user does not want to use the software.
Regarding claim 7, Kim discloses the specific area is a region registered in advance in the portable information terminal (e.g. Fig. 1: parking space of the vehicle is recorded in advance).
Regarding claim 10, Kim discloses the specific time period is a time period registered in advance in the portable information terminal (e.g. [0045, 0049-0050]: the prescribed amount of time is predetermined and stored in the device in advance).
Claim(s) 2-3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (US 2019/0129412 A1) in view of Yamazaki et al. (US 2021/0255614 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Harai et al. (US 2021/0245734 A1).
Regarding claim 2, Kim discloses the second image display step includes:
a first position information transmission step of acquiring first position information representing the current location of the portable information terminal based on GPS signals (e.g. Fig. 2: 50 & [0039]);
a second position information transmission step of acquiring second position information representing the current location of the own vehicle based on GPS signals using a processor provided in the own vehicle (e.g. [0053, 0055]);
a determination step of determining, based on the map information (i.e. the first position information and the second position information), whether the portable information terminal and the own vehicle are located within the specific area (e.g. [0039, 0049-0050, 0053, 0055]).
Kim fails to discloses a server computer is capable of receiving information from the portable information terminal and the vehicle to determine whether the portable information terminal and the own vehicle are located within the specific area, and transmit map information including the first positional information and the second positional information to the portable information terminal.
Harai teaches transmitting the first position information to a predetermined server computer; transmitting the second position information to the server computer; and a map information transmission step of transmitting map information, which includes the first position information and the second position information, from the server computer to the portable information terminal (e.g. [0071]: mobile communication device determines whether remote parking is possible based on its own position and vehicle position; [0072-0073]: a server can be used to replace the function of the mobile communication device to determine whether remote parking is possible by receiving position information from the mobile communication device and the vehicle, and transmit the determination to the mobile communication device).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modified the teachings of Kim with the teachings of Harai to include a server to determine whether parking is possible instead of processing the determination within the mobile terminal device since they are known alternative as taught by Harai. The modification would have yielded only predictable results to one skilled in the art since it is merely simple substitutions of one known method with another.
Regarding claim 3, Kim discloses the second image display step includes:
a first position information transmission step of acquiring first position information representing the current location of the portable information terminal based on GPS signals (e.g. Fig. 2: 50 & [0039]);
a second position information transmission step of acquiring second position information representing the current location of the own vehicle based on GPS signals using a processor provided in the own vehicle (e.g. [0053, 0055]);
a determination step of determining, based on the map information (i.e. the first position information and the second position information), whether the portable information terminal and the own vehicle are located within the specific area (e.g. [0039, 0049-0050, 0053, 0055]).
Kim fails to discloses a server computer is capable of receiving information from the portable information terminal and the vehicle to determine whether the portable information terminal and the own vehicle are located within the specific area, and transmit instruction to display the second operation image.
Harai teaches transmitting the first position information to a predetermined server computer; transmitting the second position information to the server computer; and an image display instruction step of transmitting an instruction from the server computer to the portable information terminal to display the second operation image, the instruction being transmitted when the server computer determines, based on the first position information and the second position information, that the portable information terminal and the own vehicle are located within the specific area (e.g. [0071]: mobile communication device determines whether remote parking is possible based on its own position and vehicle position and display a notification; [0072-0073]: a server can be used to replace the function of the mobile communication device to determine whether remote parking is possible by receiving position information from the mobile communication device and the vehicle, transmit the determination to the mobile communication device, and the mobile communication device display a notification based on the determination).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modified the teachings of Kim with the teachings of Harai to include a server to determine whether parking is possible instead of processing the determination within the mobile terminal device since they are known alternative as taught by Harai. The modification would have yielded only predictable results to one skilled in the art since it is merely simple substitutions of one known method with another.
Claim(s) 6 and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (US 2019/0129412 A1) in view of Yamazaki et al. (US 2021/0255614 A1) as applied to claims 1 and 5 above, and further in view of Bettger et al. (US 2019/0310624 A1).
Regarding claims 6 and 9, Kim fails to disclose, but Bettger teaches the predetermined first operation image includes a dial, the portable information terminal transmits a travel permission signal while the dial is operated, the travel permission signal causing the own vehicle to proceed along a route, and the portable information terminal stops transmitting the travel permission signal when operation of the dial is stopped (e.g. Figs. 5A-5B).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Kim with the teachings of Bettger to remotely maneuver a vehicle to park at a target position with a dial control. The modification would have yielded only predictable results to one skilled in the art since utilize a dial or up/down/left/right buttons are known alternative in the art and it is merely simple substitutions of one known method with another.
Claim(s) 8 and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (US 2019/0129412 A1) in view of Yamazaki et al. (US 2021/0255614 A1) as applied to claims 1 and 5 above, and further in view of Lavoie et al. (US 2019/0308615 A1).
Regarding claims 8 and 11, Kim discloses the portable information terminal displays the second operation image (e.g. Fig. 3) on a condition that the portable information terminal and the own vehicle are located within the specific area or a current time falls within the specific time period, and a distance between a user operating the portable information terminal and the own vehicle is below a threshold value (e.g. [0039, 0049-0050, 0053, 0055]: vehicle and user device within a prescribed distance/area and/or time),
Kim fails to disclose, but Lavoie teaches the distance being determined based on a strength of a signal received from a smart key carried by the user (e.g. [023, 0025]: determine position of a mobile device relative to position of a vehicle based on communication signal strength between the devices).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Kim with the teachings of Lavoie to utilize signal strength to determine position of a mobile device relative to position of a vehicle, since both GPS and signal strength measurement for determining relative position of the mobile device and the vehicle are known in the art, the modification is merely simple substitutions of one method with another, and it would have yielded only predictable results to one skilled in the art.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-11 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KAM WAN MA whose telephone number is (571) 270-3693. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am-6pm.
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, Steven Lim can be reached at 571-270-1210. 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.
/KAM WAN MA/Examiner, Art Unit 2688
