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 .
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)(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 1-3 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipate by Illy (Pub# US 2017/0154533 A1).
Consider claim 1, Illy clearly shown and disclose a method, comprising: detecting that a first target is within an alarm range of a carrier [0021], wherein the carrier comprises a sound making apparatuses [0025]; and controlling, in response to the first target being within the alarm range, at least two sound- making apparatuses of the sound-making apparatuses to make alert tones [0029-0030], wherein a sound image shift direction of a first alert tone in the alert tones corresponds to a first motion trend, and wherein the first motion trend comprises a relative motion trend of the carrier and the first target [0033].
Consider claim 2, Illy clearly shown and disclose the method, wherein the method further comprises: comprising controlling a sound image shift speed of the first alert tone [0032-0033].
Consider claim 3, Illy clearly shown and disclose the method, wherein controlling the sound image shift speed comprises controlling the sound image shift speed based on information associated with the carrier and the first target [0033].
Consider claim 14, Illy clearly shown and disclose the method, wherein controlling the controlling at least two sound-making apparatuses comprises: controlling intensity of sounds made of at least two sound-making apparatuses, and/or controlling delays of the sounds [0029-0030].
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.
Claims 4 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Illy (Pub # US 2017/0154533 A1) as applied to claims 1 and 3 above, and further in view of Lehmann (Pub # US 2003/0156019 A1).
Consider claim 4, Illy teaches the method, wherein the information comprises at least one of the first motion trend, and alarm level [0032].
Illy does not teach a distance between the carrier and the first target, and, or a time to collision (TTC) between the carrier and the first target.
In the same field of endeavor, Lehmann teaches a distance between the carrier and the first target [0020], and, or a time to collision (TTC) between the carrier and the first target [0023 and 0004-0005] for the benefit for providing warning before collision event.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the claimed invention to include a distance between the carrier and the first target, and, or a time to collision (TTC) between the carrier and the first target as shown in Lehmann, in Illy method for the benefit for providing warning before collision event.
Consider claim 6, Illy teaches the method, further determining, based on an orientation (direction) of the first target (obstacle) relative to the carrier (vehicle) [0018 and 0033].
Illy does not teach when the first target enters the alarm range, a first sound-making apparatus that is of the at least two sound-making apparatuses and that is located at a start of the sound image shift direction.
In the same field of endeavor, Lehmann teaches when the first target enters the alarm range, a first sound-making apparatus that is of the at least two sound-making apparatuses and that is located at a start of the sound image shift direction [0020-0022] for the benefit of providing the warning relative to the object direction.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the claimed invention to include when the first target enters the alarm range, a first sound-making apparatus that is of the at least two sound-making apparatuses and that is located at a start of the sound image shift direction as shown in Lehmann, in Illy method for the benefit of providing the warning relative to the object direction.
Consider claim 11, Illy teaches the method, wherein the carrier comprises a mapping relationship (danger type and trajectory deviation) between the first motion trend and the at least two sound-making apparatuses [0027-0029].
Illy does not teach wherein the method further comprises: determining the at least two sound-making apparatuses based on the mapping relationship and the first motion trend.
In the same field of endeavor, Lehmann teaches wherein the method further comprises: determining the at least two sound-making apparatuses (plurality of speakers according to that direction) based on the mapping relationship (direction) and the first motion trend (close to the object) [0020-0022] for the benefit of providing warning relative to the object direction.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the claimed invention to include the method further comprises: determining the at least two sound-making apparatuses based on the mapping relationship and the first motion trend as shown in Lehmann, in Illy method for the benefit of providing warning relative to the object direction.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Illy (Pub # US 2017/0154533 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Park (Pub # US 2003/0156019 A1).
Consider claim 5, Illy teaches the method of claim 1, further comprises: comprising determining, a first sound-making apparatus that is of at least two sound-making apparatuses and that is located at an end of the sound image shift direction [0025. 0029-0030].
Illy does not teach the method based on a position of a prompted user.
In the same field of endeavor, Park teaches the method based on a position (driver’s position and face direction) of a prompted user [0010-0012] for the benefit of predictably preserves the intended perceived direction to determine directional sound output.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the claimed invention to include the method based on a position of a prompted user as shown in Park, in Illy method for the benefit of predictably preserves the intended perceived direction to determine directional sound output.
Claims 7-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Illy (Pub # US 2017/0154533 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Katoh (Pub # US 2003/0156019 A1).
Consider claim 7, Illy teaches the similar method.
Illy does not teach the method, further comprising: predicting the first motion trend, based on a status of the first target, the first motion trend; and further controlling, based on the predicted first motion trend, the at least two sound-making apparatuses to make the alert tones.
In the same field of endeavor, Katoh teaches teach the method, further comprising: predicting the first motion trend, based on a status of the first target, the first motion trend [0032-0033 and 0035]; and further controlling, based on the predicted first motion trend, the at least two sound-making apparatuses to make the alert tones [0059] for the benefit of predictably provide an earlier and more informative directional warning.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the claimed invention to include the method, further comprising: predicting the first motion trend, based on a status of the first target, the first motion trend; and further controlling, based on the predicted first motion trend, the at least two sound-making apparatuses to make the alert tones as shown in Katoh, in Illy method for the benefit of predictably provide an earlier and more informative directional warning.
Consider claim 8, Illy teaches at least two second sound-making apparatuses in the plurality of the sound-making apparatuses to make second alert tones, wherein the second alert tones comprise whose sound image shift directions corresponding to the actual relative motion trend. [0033].
Illy does not teach the method, further comprising: making an identification that the first motion trend is different from an actual relative motion trend of the first target and the carrier; and controlling, in response to the identification.
In the same field of endeavor, Katoh teaches the method, further comprising: making an identification that the first motion trend is different from an actual relative motion trend of the first target and the carrier; and controlling, in response to the identification [0041 and 0044] for the benefit of generating sound image follows the newly determined actual relative direction.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the claimed invention to include the method, further comprising: making an identification that the first motion trend is different from an actual relative motion trend of the first target and the carrier; and controlling, in response to the identification as shown in Katoh, in Illy method for the benefit of generating sound image follows the newly determined actual relative direction.
Consider claim 9, Illy teaches similar invention.
Illy does not teach the method, further comprising: determining the first motion trend based on first data from a sensor of the carrier; or obtaining second data from a cloud server, and determining the first motion trend based on the second data.
In the same field of endeavor, Katoh teaches the method, further comprising: determining the first motion trend based on first data from a sensor of the carrier; or obtaining second data from a cloud server, and determining the first motion trend based on the second data [0035, 0058-0059] for the benefit of providing directional sound warning by employ sensor derived relative motion information.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the claimed invention to include the method, further comprising: determining the first motion trend based on first data from a sensor of the carrier; or obtaining second data from a cloud server, and determining the first motion trend based on the second data as shown in Katoh, in Illy method for the benefit of providing directional sound warning by employ sensor derived relative motion information.
Consider claim 10, Illy teaches similar invention.
Illy does not teach the method, wherein determining the first motion trend based on the first data comprises: determining orientations of the first target at time points based on the first data; and determining the first motion trend based on the orientations.
In the same field of endeavor, Katoh teaches wherein determining the first motion trend based on the first data comprises: determining orientations of the first target at time points based on the first data; and determining the first motion trend based on the orientations [0049 and 0059] for the benefit of determining it relative movement direction.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the claimed invention to include wherein determining the first motion trend based on the first data comprises: determining orientations of the first target at time points based on the first data; and determining the first motion trend based on the orientations as shown in Katoh, in Illy method for the benefit of determining it relative movement direction.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Illy (Pub # US 2017/0154533 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Yang et al. (Pub # US 2022/0161839 A1).
Consider claim 12, Illy teaches wherein the prompt information indicates the first motion trend, and wherein the carrier comprises the display apparatus [0018 and 0033].
Illy does not teach the method, wherein the method further comprising: controlling a lighting direction of an atmosphere light, wherein the lighting direction of the atmosphere light corresponds to the first motion trend, and wherein the carrier comprises the atmosphere light; and/or controlling a vibration direction of a steering wheel, wherein the vibration direction corresponds to the first motion trend, and wherein the carrier comprises the steering wheel; and/or controlling a display apparatus to display prompt information, wherein the prompt information indicates the first motion trend, and wherein the carrier comprises the display apparatus.
In the same field of endeavor, Yang et al. teaches wherein the method further comprising: controlling a vibration direction of a steering wheel, wherein the vibration direction corresponds to the first motion trend, and wherein the carrier comprises the steering wheel; and/or controlling a display apparatus to display prompt information, wherein the prompt information indicates the first motion trend, and wherein the carrier comprises the display apparatus [0014-0016] for the benefit of distinguish direction of reminder or warnings.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the claimed invention to include wherein the method further comprising: controlling a vibration direction of a steering wheel, wherein the vibration direction corresponds to the first motion trend, and wherein the carrier comprises the steering wheel; and/or controlling a display apparatus to display prompt information, wherein the prompt information indicates the first motion trend, and wherein the carrier comprises the display apparatus as shown in Yang et al., in Illy method for the benefit of distinguish direction of reminder or warnings.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Illy (Pub # US 2017/0154533 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Filev et al. (Pub # US 2011/0193693 A1).
Consider claim 13, Illy teaches the method, wherein detecting that the detecting that a first target is within an alarm the alarm range of a carrier comprises: detecting, in response to the identification, that the first target is within the alarm range [0026-0029].
Illy does not teach making an identification that a distance between the carrier and the first target is less than or equal to a preset distance, and a time to collision (TTC) between the carrier and the first target is less than or equal to a preset duration.
In the same field of endeavor, Filev et al. teaches making an identification that a distance between the carrier and the first target is less than or equal to a preset distance [0104-0105] and a time to collision (TTC) between the carrier and the first target is less than or equal to a preset duration [0106] for the benefit of generating corresponding sound-stage waring.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the claimed invention to include making an identification that a distance between the carrier and the first target is less than or equal to a preset distance and a time to collision (TTC) between the carrier and the first target is less than or equal to a preset duration as shown in Filev et al., in Illy method for the benefit of generating corresponding sound-stage waring.
Claims 16-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Illy (Pub # US 2017/0154533 A1), and further in view of Katoh (Pub # US 2016/01011779 A1).
Consider claim 16, Illy teaches an apparatus (electronic control unit) (15, Fig. 1) , comprising: detect that a first target is within an alarm range of a carrier, wherein the carrier comprises sound-making apparatuses [0021]; and control, in response to the first target being within the alarm range, at least two sound-making apparatuses of the sound-making apparatuses to make alert tones [0026-0027], wherein a sound image shift direction of a first alert tone in the alert tones corresponds to a first motion trend, and wherein the first motion trend comprises a relative motion trend of the carrier and the first target [0029-0030].
Illy does not specifically teach a memory, configured to store instruction; and one or more processors coupled to the memory, wherein when executed by the one or more processors, the instructions cause the computer program stored in the memory, to enable the apparatus.
In the same field of endeavor, Katoh teaches a memory, configured to store instruction; and one or more processors coupled to the memory, wherein when executed by the one or more processors, the instructions cause the computer program stored in the memory, to enable the apparatus [0058] for the benefit of using known CPU, ROM, and RAM to store and execute the instruction.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the claimed invention to include a memory, configured to store instruction; and one or more processors coupled to the memory, wherein when executed by the one or more processors, the instructions cause the computer program stored in the memory, to enable the apparatus as shown in Katoh, in Illy device for the benefit of using known CPU, ROM, and RAM to store and execute the instruction.
Consider claim 17, Illy teaches the apparatus, including the instructions further cause the apparatus to control a sound image shift speed of the first alert tone [0032-0033].
Illy does not teach wherein when executed by the one or more processors.
In the same field of endeavor, Katoh teaches wherein when executed by the one or more processors [0058] for the benefit of using known CPU, ROM, and RAM to store and execute the instruction.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the claimed invention to include wherein when executed by the one or more processors as shown in Katoh, in Illy device for the benefit of using known CPU, ROM, and RAM to store and execute the instruction.
Consider claim 18, Illy teaches the apparatus configured to: the instructions further cause the apparatus to further control the sound image shift speed based on information associated with the carrier and the first target 0032-0033].
Illy does not teach wherein when executed by the one or more processors.
In the same field of endeavor, Katoh teaches wherein when executed by the one or more processors [0058] for the benefit of using known CPU, ROM, and RAM to store and execute the instruction.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the claimed invention to include wherein when executed by the one or more processors as shown in Katoh, in Illy device for the benefit of using known CPU, ROM, and RAM to store and execute the instruction.
Consider claim 19, Illy teaches the apparatus, wherein the information comprises at least one of the first motion trend, an alarm level, a distance between the carrier and the first target [0033].
Illy does not teach a time to collision (TTC) between the carrier and the first target.
In the same field of endeavor, Katoh teaches a time to collision (TTC) between the carrier and the first target [0075] for the benefit of determining operation and degree of a vehicle warning.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the claimed invention to include a time to collision (TTC) between the carrier and the first target as shown in Katoh, in Illy device for the benefit of determining operation and degree of a vehicle warning.
Consider claim 20, Illy teaches that when executed by a computer one or more processors, cause an apparatus to: detect that a first target is within an alarm range of a carrier [0021 and 0023], wherein the carrier comprises sound-making apparatuses [0025]; and control, in response to the first target being within the alarm range, at least two sound-making apparatuses of the sound-making apparatuses to make alert tones [0026-0030], wherein a sound image shift direction of a first alert tone in the alert tones corresponds to a first motion trend [0030-0032], and wherein the first motion trend comprises a relative motion trend of the carrier and the first target [0033].
Illy does not specially teach a computer program product comprising computer-executable instructions that are stored on a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium.
In the same field of endeavor, Katoh a computer program product comprising computer-executable instructions that are stored on a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium [0058] for the benefit of using known CPU, ROM, and RAM to store and execute the instruction.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the claimed invention to include a computer program product comprising computer-executable instructions that are stored on a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium as shown in Katoh, in Illy device for the benefit of using known CPU, ROM, and RAM to store and execute the instruction.
Consider claim 21, Illy clearly shown and disclose the apparatus, wherein the sound-making apparatuses are located in a cockpit of the carrier [0017 and 0025].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JACK K WANG whose telephone number is (571)272-1938. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9AM - 5PM.
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, Brian Zimmerman can be reached at 571-272-3059. 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.
/JACK K WANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2686
Prosecution Insights