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 .
Election/Restrictions
Claims 1-21 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 8/25/26.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because step S272 in Figure 49 should replace the variable “DCA” with –DDI—in order to agree with the information in the specification (see Paragraph 323). Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: Paragraph 74, Line 2: The step “S13” should be replaced with –S12--.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 22, 23, and 27-31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takashi [JP 2022 018451] (supplied by applicant) in view of Yasuhiko et al [JP 2010 155072] (supplied by applicant).
For claim 22, the health information service providing device for a rider (Paragraph 6: state determination device…about the occupant of the moving body) taught by Takashi comprises the following claimed subject matter, as noted, 1) the claimed acquisition part is met by the pulse sensor (No. 22) that acquires a biological signal during riding of a rider in a mobility (Paragraph 31: an electrode-type pulse sensor arranged on an armrest portion of the seat of the moving body), 2) the claimed estimation part is met by the data acquisition unit (No. 11) that estimates a heart rate signal related to a heart rate of the rider (Paragraph 38: the data acquisition unit 11 outputs…the pulse measurement data of the pulse sensor 22 to the second determination unit 14), 3) the claimed calculation part is met by the second index value calculation unit (No. 141) that calculates drowsiness data based on the heart rate signal (Paragraph 49: The second index value calculation unit 141 calculates RRI from the measurement data of the pulse sensor 22), the second index value calculation unit also performing the 4) claimed current drowsiness sign data acquisition part, which is the drowsiness data of the rider currently riding in the mobility (Paragraph 51: The second index value calculation unit 141 continuously calculates the RRI difference at predetermined intervals while the supply of sensor information from the data acquisition unit 11 continues), 5) the claimed past drowsiness sign data acquisition part is met by the threshold value calculation unit (No. 142) that acquires past drowsiness sign data detected when the rider rode in the mobility in the past (Paragraph 52: The threshold value calculation unit 142 calculates a second threshold value (state threshold value) as a determination criterion in the second determination from the status log of the collected data received from the server 4; Paragraph 53: More specifically, the threshold value calculation unit 142 first refers to the user information 31 and extracts the state log used for calculating the second threshold value from the state logs), 6) the claimed state estimation part is met by the comparison determination unit (No. 143) that estimates whether drowsiness of the driver has increased based on whether the current drowsiness data and the past drowsiness data satisfy a predetermined condition (Paragraph 58: When the second index value is equal to or greater than the second threshold value, the comparison determination unit 143 determines that the occupant is in a specific state. On the other hand, when the second index value is equal to or less than the second threshold value, the comparison determination unit 143 determines that the occupant’s condition is normal), and 7) the claimed service providing part is met by the notification unit (No. 15) that executes control on providing equipment (No. 5) for providing a specific service to the rider (Paragraph 60: The output device 5 outputs various notifications in the form of voice, video, or the like based on the control instruction of the notification unit 15).
Also, the past drowsiness data acquisition part is taught by another embodiment (Fig. 7) of Takashi, wherein a third determination unit (No. 16) executes a third determination based on the second index value. This third determination is to compare the average value of the past second index values of the occupants of the moving body with the latest second index value obtained from the second index value calculation unit (Paragraph 97), which then notifies the notification unit (No. 15) of the result.
However, while the Takashi reference does mention whether the system can determine if an occupant is drowsy (Paragraph 23) using heart rate signals, it does not use a “drowsiness sign” of the rider and detecting a count of the drowsiness sign per unit time measured.
One common drowsiness sign of a person is yawning, and the awakening degree decision apparatus taught by Yasuhiko recognizes this. The Yasuhiko reference, like the primary reference, does detect an amplitude peak from a heartbeat signal of a subject while driving a car (Paragraph 13). Also, the reference uses a sleepiness level determination unit (No. 106) that detects the yawn of a subject by monitoring the subject’s face and monitoring their mouth (Paragraph 41). Furthermore, the same determination unit determines whether their sleepiness level has increased by observing a number of yawns in one minute (Paragraph 43).
The Yasuhiko reference plainly shows that heart rate and sleepiness level can be integrated in order to determine the drowsiness level of a user operating a motor vehicle. And the Takashi reference also uses heart rate to determine drowsiness. The Yasuhiko provides another reference value that can determine the drowsiness level more strongly using a sign of drowsiness common to all people. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include yawning frequency in the system of Takashi for the purpose of using a common drowsiness sign to determine the drowsiness state in addition to confirming the state of the user with additional information than the heart rate.
For claim 23, the Takashi reference estimates that the drowsiness of the rider has increased where the drowsiness data is equal to or greater than a determination criterion (Paragraph 58: When the second index value is equal to or greater than the second threshold value, the comparison determination unit 143 determines that the occupant is in a specific state). Also, the Yasuhiko reference presents five separate sleepiness levels (Paragraph 16) that correspond to the drowsiness of the user. For example, a transition from level 1 to level 2 indicates that the drowsiness of the rider has increased (Paragraph 39); however, it is still not enough to alert the user.
For claim 27, in one embodiment of the Takashi reference (Paragraph 48), the second index value calculation unit (No. 141) calculates the RRI differences between the value of a certain RRI and the value of the RRI immediately before the certain RRI in a time series.
For claim 28, the second embodiment (Fig. 7) of Takashi mentioned above uses past second index values of the occupants within the moving body with the latest index values obtained from the calculation unit (Paragraph 97).
For claim 29, if a user is found to be drowsy, the notification unit (No. 15) immediately causes the output device (No. 5) to output a notification (Paragraph 103).
For claim 30, in one embodiment (Fig. 9) of Takashi, the average value of the RRI difference found in the status log for a second period that is extended by a certain amount of time (3s) as compared to that acquired by the calculation unit (No. 141; Paragraph 101).
For claim 31, the output device (No. 5) of Takashi outputs various notifications such as voice or video (Paragraph 60).
Claim 32 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takashi in view of Yasuhiko et al as applied to claim 22 above, and further in view of Kawachi et al [US 2004/0243013].
For claim 32, neither the Takashi nor the Yasuhiko reference mentions executing control on mobility safety equipment related to safety of the mobility as the providing equipment.
Controlling different aspects of a vehicle is not new in drowsiness detection devices. The sleepiness level detection device taught by Kawachi detects a heartbeat signal when a time equal to or longer than a certain interval has elapsed (Abstract). A sleepiness level evaluation parameter is then computed (Step S200) and, depending on the parameter, different actions are taken including warning of sleepiness (S700) or, in one case, controlling the vehicle (S800). The ECU (No. 20) then outputs a control signal to the brake control unit (No. 60) or the engine control unit (No. 50) to make them carry out vehicle control wherein the vehicle speed is reduced or stopped (Paragraph 44).
The Kawachi reference presents another possible response to a system that detects drowsiness or sleepiness from a driver. If an audible or visual alert is not enough to get the driver’s attention, then controlling the vehicle to stop or slow would decrease the danger of an accident or damage. The Kawachi reference presents one additional level of protection to the driver or passengers of the vehicle as well as pedestrians and property in the vicinity of the vehicle. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to control mobility safety equipment of the vehicle used in Takashi for the purpose of providing extra protection in the case of severe drowsiness.
Claims 24-26 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Each objected dependent claim teaches a more specific estimation of the state of the rider in the mobility. For example, using a second drowsiness determination criterion smaller than the drowsiness determination criterion to further estimate that the drowsiness of the rider has increased seen in claim 24 is not found in any obvious combination of the prior art. The same is true for the past drowsiness sign data comprising both previous drowsiness sign data and a before-previous drowsiness sign data for a comparison condition seen in claim 25 and the previous drowsiness sign data in conjunction with the long-term drowsiness sign data to meet the comparison condition found in claim 26. This is considered unobvious subject matter.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Mochizuki et al [U.S. 10,899,356] includes a drowsiness prevention device.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN A. TWEEL JR whose telephone number is (571)272-2969. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-4.
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, Davetta W Goins can be reached at 571-272-2957. 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.
JAT
9/9/2026
/JOHN A TWEEL JR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2689
Prosecution Insights