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 .
Response to Amendment
Examiner notes the applicant’s submission of a preliminary amendment upon submission of the instant application on 8/20/2025. Examiner has examined the revised claim-set submitted at that time.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
Claim Interpretation
A number of the claims are Markush type claims. Therefore, only one of the claimed listed alternatively usable members has to be shown to reject the claim with the prior art. Sometimes the examiner has mapped more than one of the possibilities. The Markush claims recite the phrases “including at least one of”, “for at least one traveling characteristic among”, “includes at least one of”, “configured to execute the one or more instructions to”. The examiner has italicized the individual claim language that demarcates the Markush possibilities
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 4-9, 14-16, 19-20 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 4 is a contingent claim1. Therefore, what about the possibility or contingent “in a case where…”. What about the eventuality or contingent where the “case” does not occur.
Claim 5 recites “attribute information of the vehicle”. However, the parent claim 4 only has only of the Markush possibilities reciting the “attribute information”. Therefore, there is an antecedent problem between claim 4 and its dependent 5.
The term “the threshold smaller as the vehicle is larger” in claim 5 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “smaller” and “larger” are not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. It is not clear how much is “smaller” and how much is “larger”.
Claim 14 is a contingent claim2. Therefore, what about the possibility “in a case where a value…”. What about the eventuality or contingent where the “case” does not occur.
The term “the threshold smaller as the vehicle is larger” in claim 15 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “smaller” and “larger” are not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. It is not clear how much is “smaller” and how much is “larger”.
Claim 19 is also a contingent claim. What about the possibility “in a case where a value…”. What about the eventuality where the “case” does not occur.
The term “the threshold smaller as the vehicle is larger” in claim 20 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “smaller” and “larger” are not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. It is not clear how much is “smaller” and how much is “larger”.
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)(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.
(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.
Claims 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being clearly anticipated by applicant cited JP2020201108.
A processing system comprising:
at least one memory configured to store one or more instructions (0025, 0029 2nd paragraph); and
at least one processor configured to execute the one or more instructions (0025 “CPU ( Central Processing Unit ) 11”; 0032 “CPU11 executing one or more programs in a storage device such as ROM13”) to: detect a suspension event (claim 1 1st paragraph, “parking state of a vehicle”, “carbon dioxide concentration in a vehicle cabin, the sensor being provided in the vehicle cabin of the vehicle”), which involves suspension of a use of a vehicle (0033 “parking state…when an ignition switch is in an off state”; 0066 “parking state of the vehicle is detected, for example, when the ignition switch of the vehicle is turned off”), based on a sensor mounted on the vehicle (0014 “carbon dioxide sensor 80…to detect a carbon dioxide concentration in a vehicle cabin”);
register, as a reference value (0041 “the reference value related to the increase in the carbon dioxide concentration”), a C02 concentration of an inside of the vehicle (0074; 0091 1st paragraph “carbon dioxide concentration in a vehicle cabin”) at a time of detection of the suspension event (0041 “carbon dioxide concentration may be a value at the time when the parking state is detected”);
detect an alighting event, which involves alighting from the vehicle (0031 “the control device 10 shown in FIG. 2 may be realized by another control device such as a boarding and alighting opening and closing ECU85”), based on a sensor mounted on the vehicle (0022; 0055);
in a case where the alighting event is detected after the suspension event, update the registered reference value to a C02 concentration of an inside of the vehicle (0074-0075) at a time of detection of the alighting event; and
detect a living object left behind in the vehicle (0036 “first determination unit 144 determines whether or not a person is present in the vehicle cabin based on the carbon dioxide concentration information“; 0038 “ignition switch is turned off”) by comparing the reference value with a C02 concentration (0042) of an inside of the vehicle after the suspension event is detected (0036 “first determination unit 144 determines whether or not a person is present in the vehicle cabin based on the carbon dioxide concentration…acquired by the first sensor information acquisition unit 142 in the parking state detected by the parking state detection unit 140”).
Claim 2 JP2020201108 discloses the processing system according to claim 1, wherein the suspension detection means detects the at least one processor is further configured to execute the one or more instructions to detect, as the suspension event (0033), an event including at least one of an engine stop process of the vehicle (0038 “ignition switch is turned off”), a power-off process of the vehicle (0024 “user turns off the ignition switch and moves away from the vehicle”), a door lock process based on a predetermined lock operation for locking a door of the vehicle from outside the vehicle (0069 “whether or not the door lock is locked by the door lock actuators 88…Also in this case, if the door lock is locked”), an event in which a position of the vehicle does not change for a predetermined time or more, and absence of a person in a driver's seat is detected.
Claim 3 JP2020201108 discloses the processing system according to claim 1, wherein the at least one processor is further configured to execute the one or more instructions to detect the alighting event including at least one of opening/closing of a door of the vehicle, a door lock process based on a predetermined lock operation of locking a door of the vehicle from outside of the vehicle (0069 “the control device 10 may determine whether or not the door lock is locked by the door lock actuators 88”), and movement of a living object in a predetermined direction in an image generated by a camera mounted on the vehicle (0050 “an in-cabin camera is provided, a person is recognized based on an image of the in-cabin camera”).
Claim 4 (as best understood) JP2020201108 discloses the processing system according to claim 1, wherein the at least one processor is further configured to execute the one or more instructions to: determine that, in a case where a value obtained by subtracting the reference value from a C02 concentration inside the vehicle after the suspension event is detected is equal to or greater than a threshold, a living object is left behind in the vehicle (0088; 0091 “determine whether or not a person is present in the vehicle cabin based on the first sensor”), and set the threshold based on attribute information of the vehicle and occupant information related to an occupant of the vehicle.
Claims 10, 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being clearly anticipated by applicant cited JP2020201108.
A processing method for causing a computer (0025 “control device 10 includes a CPU ( Central Processing Unit ) 11, a RAM ( Random Access Memory ) 12, a ROM ( Read Only Memory ) 13”) to execute:
detecting a suspension event (claim 1 1st paragraph, “parking state of a vehicle”, “carbon dioxide concentration in a vehicle cabin, the sensor being provided in the vehicle cabin of the vehicle”), which involves suspension of a use of a vehicle (0033 “parking state…when an ignition switch is in an off state”; 0066 “parking state of the vehicle is detected, for example, when the ignition switch of the vehicle is turned off”), based on a sensor mounted on the vehicle (0014 “carbon dioxide sensor 80…to detect a carbon dioxide concentration in a vehicle cabin”);
registering, as a reference value (0041 “the reference value related to the increase in the carbon dioxide concentration”), a CO2 concentration of an inside of the vehicle (0074; 0091 1st paragraph “carbon dioxide concentration in a vehicle cabin”) at a time of detection of the suspension event (0041 “carbon dioxide concentration may be a value at the time when the parking state is detected”);
detecting an alighting event, which involves alighting from the vehicle (0031 “the control device 10 shown in FIG. 2 may be realized by another control device such as a boarding and alighting opening and closing ECU85”), based on a sensor mounted on the vehicle (0022; 0055);
updating, in a case where the alighting event is detected after the suspension event (0092), the registered reference value to a CO2 concentration of an inside of the vehicle (0074-0075) at a time of detection of the alighting event; and
detecting a living object left behind in the vehicle (0036 “first determination unit 144 determines whether or not a person is present in the vehicle cabin based on the carbon dioxide concentration information“; 0038 “ignition switch is turned off”) by comparing the reference value with a CO2 concentration of an inside of the vehicle after the suspension event is detected (0036 “first determination unit 144 determines whether or not a person is present in the vehicle cabin based on the carbon dioxide concentration…acquired by the first sensor information acquisition unit 142 in the parking state detected by the parking state detection unit 140”).
Claim 12 JP2020201108 discloses the processing method according to claim 10, wherein the computer detects, as the suspension event (0033), an event including at least one of an engine stop process of the vehicle (0038 “ignition switch is turned off”), a power-off process of the vehicle (0024 “user turns off the ignition switch and moves away from the vehicle”), a door lock process based on a predetermined lock operation for locking a door of the vehicle from outside the vehicle (0069 “whether or not the door lock is locked by the door lock actuators 88…Also in this case, if the door lock is locked”), an event in which a position of the vehicle does not change for a predetermined time or more, and absence of a person in a driver's seat is detected.
Claim 13 JP2020201108 discloses the processing method according to claim 10, wherein the computer detects the alighting event including at least one of opening/closing of a door of the vehicle, a door lock process based on a predetermined lock operation of locking a door of the vehicle from outside of the vehicle (0069 “the control device 10 may determine whether or not the door lock is locked by the door lock actuators 88”), and movement of a living object in a predetermined direction in an image generated by a camera mounted on the vehicle (0050 “an in-cabin camera is provided, a person is recognized based on an image of the in-cabin camera”).
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
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.
Claims 11, 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over applicant cited JP2020201108.
A non-transitory computer-readable medium storing a program causing a computer (0025 “CPU ( Central Processing Unit ) 11”; 0032 “CPU11 executing one or more programs in a storage device such as ROM13”) to function as:
detect a suspension event (claim 1 1st paragraph, “parking state of a vehicle”, “carbon dioxide concentration in a vehicle cabin, the sensor being provided in the vehicle cabin of the vehicle”), which involves suspension of a use of a vehicle (0033 “parking state…when an ignition switch is in an off state”; 0066 “parking state of the vehicle is detected, for example, when the ignition switch of the vehicle is turned off”), based on a sensor mounted on the vehicle (0014 “carbon dioxide sensor 80…to detect a carbon dioxide concentration in a vehicle cabin”);
register, as a reference value (0041 “the reference value related to the increase in the carbon dioxide concentration”), a CO2 concentration of an inside of the vehicle at a time of detection of the suspension event (0041 “carbon dioxide concentration may be a value at the time when the parking state is detected”);
detect an alighting event, which involves alighting from the vehicle (0031 “the control device 10 shown in FIG. 2 may be realized by another control device such as a boarding and alighting opening and closing ECU85”), based on a sensor mounted on the vehicle (0022; 0055);
in a case where the alighting event is detected after the suspension event, updating update the registered reference value to a CO2 concentration of an inside of the vehicle (0074-0075) at a time of detection of the alighting event; and
detect a living object left behind in the vehicle (0036 “first determination unit 144 determines whether or not a person is present in the vehicle cabin based on the carbon dioxide concentration information“; 0038 “ignition switch is turned off”) by comparing the reference value with a CO2 concentration (0042) of an inside of the vehicle after the suspension event is detected (0036 “first determination unit 144 determines whether or not a person is present in the vehicle cabin based on the carbon dioxide concentration…acquired by the first sensor information acquisition unit 142 in the parking state detected by the parking state detection unit 140”).
JP2020201108 does not disclose that the computer includes a non-transitory computer readable storage medium.
At the time the invention was made it would have been very well known to one of ordinary skill to have the computer system of JP2020201108 include a non-transitory computer readable storage medium. The claim would have been obvious because the technique for improving a particular class of devices (including non-transitory computer readable storage) was part of the ordinary capabilities of a person of ordinary skill in the art, in view of the teaching of the technique for improvement in other situations.
Claim 17 JP2020201108 discloses the non-transitory computer-readable medium according to claim 11, wherein the program causing the computer to detect, as the suspension event (0033), an event including at least one of an engine stop process of the vehicle (0038 “ignition switch is turned off”), a power-off process of the vehicle (0024 “user turns off the ignition switch and moves away from the vehicle”), a door lock process based on a predetermined lock operation for locking a door of the vehicle from outside the vehicle (0069 “whether or not the door lock is locked by the door lock actuators 88…Also in this case, if the door lock is locked”), an event in which a position of the vehicle does not change for a predetermined time or more, and absence of a person in a driver's seat is detected.
Claim 18 JP2020201108 discloses the non-transitory computer-readable medium according to claim 11, wherein the program causing the computer to detect the alighting event including at least one of opening/closing of a door of the vehicle, a door lock process based on a predetermined lock operation of locking a door of the vehicle from outside of the vehicle (0069 “the control device 10 may determine whether or not the door lock is locked by the door lock actuators 88”), and movement of a living object in a predetermined direction in an image generated by a camera mounted on the vehicle (0050 “an in-cabin camera is provided, a person is recognized based on an image of the in-cabin camera”).
Claim 19 (as best understood) JP2020201108 discloses the non-transitory computer-readable medium according to claim 11, wherein the program causing the computer to:
determine that, in a case where a value obtained by subtracting the reference value from a C02 concentration inside the vehicle after the suspension event is detected is equal to or greater than a threshold, a living object is left behind in the vehicle (0088; 0091 “determine whether or not a person is present in the vehicle cabin based on the first sensor”), and
set the threshold based on attribute information of the vehicle and occupant information related to an occupant of the vehicle.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5-9, 14-16, 20 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Michael C Zarroli whose telephone number is (571)272-2101. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9-5 ET IFP.
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, Ramon Mercado can be reached at 5712705744. 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.
MICHAEL C. ZARROLI
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3658B
/MICHAEL C ZARROLI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3658 /M.C.Z/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3658
1 See MPEP 2111.04 II
2 See MPEP 2111.04 II
Prosecution Insights