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 .
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: line 5 after “disposed” should read “in”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-4, 8-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Agnew (9,020,730).
Agnew teaches a monitoring system comprising at least one imaging module disposed on the vehicle to acquire imaging of an area exterior of the vehicle (14a-14f); a controller 20 operatively connected to the monitoring system and to a brake control module 18 disposed in the vehicle that operates a brake system 24 on the vehicle, wherein the controller analyzes imaging received from the monitoring system to identify at least one target in the area exterior of the vehicle, and to provide a control signal to the brake control module when the at least one target is determined to be at risk (see abstract, col. 4 line 10-52); and an interlock system 10 operatively connected to the controller; the interlock system 10 comprising at least one override module 38 providing an override signal to the controller when an operator activates the at least one override module (see abstract, col. 5 line 9-32).
For claim 2 (see elements 14a-14f col. 3 line 43-56).
For claim 3 (see switches 38, 40 col. 4 line 44-52).
For claim 4 (see switches 38, 40 col. 5 line 9-32).
For claim 8 (see col. 5 line 9-32).
For claim 9 (see col. 5 line 9-32).
For claim 10 (see abstract, figure 2, col. 3 line 43-56, col. 5 line 9-32).
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.
Claim(s) 1-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Agnew (9,020,730) in view of Du et al (CN 110956110).
Agnew teaches the claimed limitations except for a computer. Du et al teaches a computer (see abstract and claim). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to employ the computer on the safety system of Agnew as taught by Du et al in order to improve the accuracy of the safety system for a vehicle.
For claims 5-7 see abstract and claim of ‘110.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Mower et al 12,338,669 teaches a bus boarding protection system.
Forthoffer et al 12,306,294 teaches a position sensor for a vehicle.
Agnew 6,601,669 teaches a safety interlock system for a vehicle.
Schenken et al 2012/0307064 teaches a computing device for detecting moving objects surrounding the vehicle.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HAI H HUYNH whose telephone number is (571)272-4844. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00 AM-4:00 PM.
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, Lindsay M Low can be reached at 571-272-1196. 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.
/HAI H HUYNH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3747
Prosecution Insights