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 .
Status of Claims
Claims 1-10 are cancelled. (Amended before first action)
Claims 11-20 are new.
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 11-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Step 1: Does the Claim Fall within a Statutory Cateqory?
Yes, with respect to claims 1-20, which recite a method, system or medium that include at least one step. The system is therefore directed to the statutory class of machine or manufacture. Paragraph 0002 states that “the present disclosure relates to mitigating vehicle pose errors across an aggregated feature map used for performing autonomous vehicle operations.”
Step 2A, Prong One: Is a Judicial Exception Recited?
Regarding Prong I of the Step 2A analysis in the 2019 PEG, the claims are to be analyzed to determine whether they recite subject matter that falls within one of the follow groups of abstract ideas: a) mathematical concepts, b) certain methods of organizing human activity, and/or c) mental processes.
Independent claim 11 includes limitations that recite an abstract idea (emphasized below) and will be used as a representative claim for the remainder of the 101 rejection. Claim 11 recites:
11. A notification management method for a vehicle-based man-machine interface comprising at least one notification channel, the notification management method comprising:
forwarding or withholding forwarding a notification, by a notification management system based on a priority linked to the notification, to the at least one notification channel, wherein the notification is directed to at least one vehicle occupant or a vehicle functional module, wherein the priority linked to the notification is set by a priority number,
wherein the notification is selected and forwarded to the notification channel when the priority number linked to the notification exceeds a channel threshold assigned to the at least one notification channel and when the notification has a highest priority number for the at least one notification channel, and
wherein the channel threshold varies over time and is set, in a normal operating mode, between a minimum threshold and a maximum threshold by the notification management system in specified time intervals based on driving data, vehicle surroundings data, vehicle data, state data of the man-machine interface, at least one previous notification transmission, or vehicle occupant observation data.
Step 2A, Prong Two: Is the Abstract Idea Inteqrated into a Practical Application?
No. The claims as a whole merely use a computer as a tool to perform the abstract idea. The computing components are recited at a high level of generality and are merely invoked as a tool to implement the steps. Simply implementing the abstract idea on a generic computer is not a practical application of the abstract idea. Additionally, there is no improvement to the functioning of a computer or technology. Therefore, the abstract idea is not integrated into a practical application.
Step 2B: Does the Claim Provide an Inventive Concept?
No. As discussed with respect to Step 2A, Prong 2, the additional elements in the claim, both individually and in combination, amount to no more than tools to perform the abstract idea. Merely performing the abstract idea using a computer cannot provide an inventive concept. Therefore, the claim does not provide an inventive concept.
As such, the claims are not patent eligible.
Examiner suggests adding an active step after all the calculation – something that is making a vehicle or notification management method act on the calculations that are described.
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.
Claims 11-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Horvitz et al. [EP1287444, now Horvitz], with Mueller-Tomfilde et al. [US 20200231173, now Mueller], further with Venkatesh et al. [US 20210266284, now Venk].
Claim 1
Horvitz discloses a notification management method for a vehicle-based man-machine interface comprising at least one notification channel, the notification management method [see at least Horvitz, Abstract (overall concept discussed); 0023 (more details on the notification management method); 0067 (discusses priority factors in the management method); 0127; 0129 (both show use of the system and method within a vehicle) comprising:
forwarding or withholding forwarding a notification, by a notification management system based on a priority linked to the notification, to the at least one notification channel, wherein the notification is directed to at least one vehicle occupant or a vehicle functional module [see at least Horwitz, ¶ 0023 (Shows Fig. 1 details for the notification system)],
wherein the priority linked to the notification is set by a priority number [see at least Horvitz, ¶ 0023 (priority value discussed); 0078-0079 (both discuss priority system and how it is used); 0089 (more on priority values and how they are used); Note a priority value is the same concept as a priority number.],
wherein the notification is selected and forwarded to the notification channel when the priority number linked to the notification exceeds a channel threshold assigned to the at least one notification channel and when the notification has a highest priority number for the at least one notification channel [see at least Horvitz, ¶ 0017 (indicates the use of priority thresholds for the notification system); 0067 (“processes are described that provide a determination when to alert the user of a high-priority text, for example, a text that has a likelihood of being high priority greater than a user-set threshold, or greater than a threshold determined by decision-theoretic reasoning. That is, beyond knowing about time-critical messages, it is also important to decide when to alert a user to time-critical messages if the user is not directly viewing incoming e-mail, for example. In general, a cost of distracting the user from the current task being addressed to learn about the time-critical message is determined.”)] and
wherein the channel threshold varies over time and is set, in a normal operating mode, between a minimum threshold and a maximum threshold by the notification management system in specified time intervals based on driving data, vehicle surroundings data, vehicle data, state data of the man-machine interface, at least one previous notification transmission, or vehicle occupant observation data [see at least Horvitz, ¶ 0075 (identifies “set of user-specified thresholds and parameters defining policies on alerting…, a user can be enabled to input thresholds on alerting for inferred states of activity and non-activity, for example”)].
Horvitz is a system designed for general communications, including within vehicles, but Mueller more specifically teaches the information is connected with a driver and a vehicle [see at least Mueller, Abstract (“enhancing a user experience of an occupant in a vehicle”); 0007 (“notification that has to be provided to an occupant of the vehicle may be determined” and further discusses of what the values and information that can determine the what is in the notification); 0016 (discusses “notification based on the attributed priority”)].
Therefore, it would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify/combine, with a reasonable expectation of success, the automatic priority system and methodology of Horvitz, with the vehicle communication system and method of Mueller. Providing a more effective, efficient and safer system for management notifications within a vehicle.
Neither Horvitz or Mueller specifically disclose/teach channels, channel preauthorization, and prioritization of the channels to provide the notifications, but Venk does teach these concepts.
Venk teaches wherein the channel threshold varies over time and is set, in a normal operating mode, between a minimum threshold and a maximum threshold by the notification management system in specified time intervals based on driving data, vehicle surroundings data, vehicle data, state data of the man-machine interface, at least one previous notification transmission, or vehicle occupant observation data [see at least Venk, ¶ 0015 (discusses thresholds and “the priority based selection of a notification request for processing may thus be conditional upon performance of a delivery channel, as represented by a performance parameter for the delivery channel.”); 0016 (further expands on the same ideas and concepts as 0015); 0076 (discusses data and data sources)].
Therefore, it would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify/combine, with a reasonable expectation of success, the automatic priority system and methodology of Horvitz, with the vehicle communication system and method of Mueller, further with the use of channel prioritization and gathering data of Venk. Providing a more effective, efficient and safer system for management notifications using different channel authorization within a vehicle.
Claim 12
Horvitz, Mueller and Venk teach the method of Claim 1.
Horvitz further discloses the priority number of the notification varies over time at least until transmission to the at least one notification channel and the priority number of the notification is set, in the normal operating mode, to a value between a priority minimum above the minimum threshold and a priority maximum below the maximum threshold by the notification management system in specified time intervals based on the driving data, vehicle surroundings data, vehicle data, at least one previous notification transmission by the man-machine interface, vehicle occupant observation data, time spent in a waiting loop of the at least one notification channel, or a duration of an activation state of a notification in the at least one notification channel [see at least Horvitz, Abstract (“enable a plurality of information associated with electronic messages, for example, to be automatically prioritized by a priorities system (12, 230) for transmittal to a user or system.”); 0001 (“a system and method providing information prioritization according to such factors as a measure of importance and/or an expected loss in order to generate and manage one or more priorities associated with such information.“); 0010 (shows an article discussing the concepts of the instant claims as well as those in Horvitz); 0017 (more information of the methodology of messaging); 0067 (“processes are described that provide a determination when to alert the user of a high-priority text” and the equivalent of determining maximum and minimum processing); 0087 (discusses other functionality and priority determination); 0089-0090 (More on thresholds and priority assignments to messages)].
Mueller further teaches a notification managements system and comparing sensor data to determine priority. [see at least Mueller, ¶0041 (indicates that “FIG. 1 shows a schematic illustration of a notification management system of a vehicle according to an embodiment. The notification management system 10 may comprise a determination unit 11, a storage unit 12, a timer 13, a detection unit 14, an examination unit 15 and an output unit 16.” and more detailed information of the notification management system); 0049 (indicates comparing sensor data “reference values or by providing a notification of another system of the vehicle as well as another vehicle or a mobile phone.”)].
Therefore, it would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify/combine, with a reasonable expectation of success, the automatic priority system and methodology of Horvitz, with the vehicle communication system and method of Mueller. Providing a more effective, efficient and safer system for management notifications within a vehicle.
Venk also teaches the concepts of a notification management system with more details on channel management [see at least Venk, ¶ 0004 (discusses the notification system and framework.].
Therefore, it would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify/combine, with a reasonable expectation of success, the automatic priority system and methodology of Horvitz, with the vehicle communication system and method of Mueller, further with the use of channel prioritization and gathering data of Venk. Providing a more effective, efficient and safer system for management notifications using different channel authorization within a vehicle.
Claim 13
Horvitz, Mueller and Venk teach the method of Claim 1.
Neither Horvitz or Mueller specifically teach but Venk teaches after forwarding the notification to the at least one notification channel, the notification management system raises the assigned channel threshold in a next time interval [see at least Venk, ¶ 0005 (discusses “a Notification Server 8 of the NOTIF system receives message requests for different systems via a message bus 10 and generates appropriate notifications for sending to the relevant user… It may also support notifications including threshold notifications, issue resolution, service activation, refill notifications, promotions, credit limit, and life cycle events” and preferences); 0016 (more explicitly discusses “a threshold level for conditional priority based selection of notification requests for processing may be used to ensure that queue ordering on the basis of priority is carried out if throughput on a delivery channel for notifications is either temporarily interrupted, for example owing to a link failure, or is degraded, for example at a busy period or owing to any other external or network factor.”); 0027 (“ comprise comparing the assigned priority of a received notification request to an importance threshold, and, if the assigned priority is at or above the importance threshold, flagging the notification request for guaranteed delivery.”)].
Therefore, it would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify/combine, with a reasonable expectation of success, the automatic priority system and methodology of Horvitz, with the vehicle communication system and method of Mueller, further with the use of channel prioritization and gathering data of Venk. Providing a more effective, efficient and safer system for management notifications using different channel authorization within a vehicle.
Claim 14
Horvitz, Mueller and Ven teach the method of Claim 1.
Neither Horvitz or Mueller specifically teach but Venk teaches after forwarding the notification to the at least one notification channel, the channel threshold assigned to the at least one notification channel is set to the maximum threshold for a predetermined time duration [see at least Venk, ¶ 0005; 0017; 0027].
Therefore, it would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify/combine, with a reasonable expectation of success, the automatic priority system and methodology of Horvitz, with the vehicle communication system and method of Mueller, further with the use of channel prioritization and gathering data of Venk. Providing a more effective, efficient and safer system for management notifications using different channel authorization within a vehicle.
Claim 15
Horvitz, Mueller and Venk teach the method of Claim 1.
Neither Horvitz or Mueller specifically teach but Venk teaches after raising the assigned channel threshold for a specified time period after forwarding the notification, the assigned channel threshold is reduced [see at least Venk, ¶ 0028 (discusses “importance threshold”)].
Therefore, it would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify/combine, with a reasonable expectation of success, the automatic priority system and methodology of Horvitz, with the vehicle communication system and method of Mueller, further with the use of channel prioritization and gathering data of Venk. Providing a more effective, efficient and safer system for management notifications using different channel authorization within a vehicle.
Claim 16
Horvitz, Mueller and Ven teach the method of Claim 1.
Neither Horvitz or Mueller specifically teach but Venk teaches the notification forwarded to the at least one notification channel remains active in the at least one notification channel until the priority number of the notification is below the assigned channel threshold value [see at least Venk, ¶ 0029 (further discusses “multiple importance thresholds…notification thresholds may be determined by a notification management system at which the method may be performed, or may be obtained from the notification request, and hence set by the system sending the notification request, or may be obtained from a user profile, and so determined from information in the user's subscription conditions, notification options etc.”)].
Therefore, it would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify/combine, with a reasonable expectation of success, the automatic priority system and methodology of Horvitz, with the vehicle communication system and method of Mueller, further with the use of channel prioritization and gathering data of Venk. Providing a more effective, efficient and safer system for management notifications using different channel authorization within a vehicle.
Claim 17
Horvitz, Mueller and Venk teach the method of Claim 1.
Neither Horvitz or Mueller specifically teach but Venk teaches the at least one notification channel comprises a plurality of notification channels, and wherein the notification management system defines a separate channel threshold that can vary over time for each individual notification channel of the plurality of notification channels and a separate priority number is assigned in each case to a notification for at least two of the plurality of notification channels. [see at least Venk, ¶ 0005; 0016; 0027; 0029; 0115 (further discusses notification management system examples and processes)].
Therefore, it would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify/combine, with a reasonable expectation of success, the automatic priority system and methodology of Horvitz, with the vehicle communication system and method of Mueller, further with the use of channel prioritization and gathering data of Venk. Providing a more effective, efficient and safer system for management notifications using different channel authorization within a vehicle.
Claim 18
Horvitz, Mueller and Venk teach the method of Claim 1.
Neither Horvitz or Mueller specifically teach but Venk teaches a change to the channel threshold of a first notification channel causes the channel threshold of at least one second notification channel of the plurality of notification channels to change [see at least Venk, ¶ 0016-0020 (discusses different configurations of channel selection and use and threshold levels)].
Therefore, it would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify/combine, with a reasonable expectation of success, the automatic priority system and methodology of Horvitz, with the vehicle communication system and method of Mueller, further with the use of channel prioritization and gathering data of Venk. Providing a more effective, efficient and safer system for management notifications using different channel authorization within a vehicle.
Claim 19
Horvitz, Mueller and Venk teach the method of Claim 1.
Horvitz does not specifically disclose these concepts, but Mueller teaches some aspects of based on the driving data, vehicle surroundings data, vehicle data, vehicle occupant observation data, or vehicle-external notification, a switch is made from the normal operating mode to a rule-based mode for at least one notification channel of the plurality of notification channels, and wherein the notification management system sets the channel threshold to the minimum threshold or the maximum threshold for at least one notification channel selected for the rule-based mode [see at least Mueller, 0007 (discusses notifications based on different data from the vehicle.)].
Therefore, it would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify/combine, with a reasonable expectation of success, the automatic priority system and methodology of Horvitz, with the vehicle communication system and method of Mueller. Providing a more effective, efficient and safer system for management notifications within a vehicle.
Neither Horvitz or Mueller specifically disclose/teach the concepts of different channels. Yank specifically teaches these concepts [see at least Venk, ¶ 0029; 0115].
Therefore, it would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify/combine, with a reasonable expectation of success, the automatic priority system and methodology of Horvitz, with the vehicle communication system and method of Mueller, further with the use of channel prioritization and gathering data of Venk. Providing a more effective, efficient and safer system for management notifications using different channel authorization within a vehicle.
Claim 20
Claim 20 has similar limitations to claim 11, therefore claim 20 is rejected with the same rationale as claim 11.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Benchenaa et al. [US 9769106]
Abstract: Technologies for displaying notifications on a mobile computing device
Moon et al. [US 20190126937]
Abstract: prioritizing notifications for a vehicle operating in an autonomous driving mode. As an example, a set of notifications based on one or more messages received or transmitted by a planning system of the vehicle may be generated. Each notification of the set of notifications is assigned a priority ranking. The set of notifications may be stored in a cache and the one or more processors may determine a first notification for display based on the priority rankings of the set of notifications and the first notification may be displayed on a display of the vehicle to a passenger of the vehicle.
M. Buinevich, A. Spirkina, V. Elagin, S. Tarakanov and A. Vladyko, "V2X-based Intersection Priority Management," 2021 Systems of Signals Generating and Processing in the Field of on Board Communications, Moscow, Russia, 2021, pp. 1-7.
K. Zheng, Q. Zheng, P. Chatzimisios, W. Xiang and Y. Zhou, "Heterogeneous Vehicular Networking: A Survey on Architecture, Challenges, and Solutions," in IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials, vol. 17, no. 4, pp. 2377-2396.
G. Karagiannis et al., "Vehicular Networking: A Survey and Tutorial on Requirements, Architectures, Challenges, Standards and Solutions," in IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials, vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 584-616.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOAN T GOODBODY whose telephone number is (571) 270-7952. The examiner can normally be reached on M-TH 7-3 (US Eastern time).
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 https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated-interview-request-air-form.html.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, RACHID BENDIDI can be reached at (571) 272-4896. The Fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is (571) 273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspot.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at (866) 217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from the USPTO Customer Serie Representative or access to the automated information system, call (800) 786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or (571) 272-1000.
/JOAN T GOODBODY/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3664
(571) 270-7952
Prosecution Insights