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.
(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.
Claims 1-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Nandakumar et al. (US 2019/0370575).
Regarding claim 1: Nandakumar discloses a system for implementing trip check for vehicles comprising one or more server computer devices remote from a vehicle [0108], the one or more server computer devices being configured to: receive, from the vehicle, imagery of an interior arca of the vehicle; determine, based on the imagery and using machine learning, a condition of the interior area of the vehicle; and perform a selected action based on the condition of the interior area of the vehicle [0021, 0023, 0026, 0028, 0064, 0066].
Regarding claim 2: Nandakumar discloses the condition is a cleanliness condition of the interior area of the vehicle [0026, 0073].
Regarding claim 3: Nandakumar discloses the one or more server computer devices are further configured to perform the selected action to resolve the cleanliness condition, the selected action including at least one of: (i) schedule a cleaning service, or (ii) initiate remote assistance regarding the cleanliness condition [0026, 0069, 0074].
Regarding claim 4: Nandakumar discloses the one or more server computer devices are configured to (i) schedule the cleaning service or (ii) initiate remote assistance regarding the cleanliness condition prior to performance of a next pickup operation by the vehicle [0026, 0069, 0074].
Regarding claim 5: Nandakumar discloses the one or more server computer devices are further configured to determine the cleanliness condition by determination of whether any items were left behind in the interior area of the vehicle [0026, 0028, 0074].
Regarding claim 6: Nandakumar discloses the one or more server computer devices are further configured, responsive to the determination that an item was left behind, to cause scheduling of a stop at a service facility or other location for the vehicle so that the item that was left behind can be removed from the vehicle [0028, 0079].
Regarding claim 7: Nandakumar discloses the condition is whether a seatbelt is being worn by a passenger onboard the vehicle [0027].
Regarding claim 8: Nandakumar discloses the condition is whether one or more particular zones of the interior arca of the vehicle are clear [0026].
Regarding claim 9: Nandakumar discloses the determination whether the one or more particular zones of the interior area of the vehicle are clear includes a determination that one or more doors or windows of the vehicle can be closed [0078, 0080].
Regarding claim 10: Nandakumar discloses the condition is whether a hand of a passenger onboard the vehicle is on a steering wheel of the vehicle [0035].
Regarding claim 11: Nandakumar discloses the imagery has been captured using one or more image sensors disposed within the interior area of the vehicle [0026].
Regarding claim 12: Nandakumar discloses the one or more server computer devices are further configured to cause the vehicle to initiate capture of the imagery using the one or more image sensors (109) [0039, 0047].
Regarding claim 13: Nandakumar discloses the condition is that a cabin of the vehicle is in a starting state condition [0026, 0073, 0074].
Regarding claim 14: Nandakumar discloses the starting state condition includes one or more seats within the cabin being at a selected position [0024].
Regarding claim 15: Nandakumar discloses the one or more server computer devices are further configured to cause the vehicle to adjust one or more seats to a selected position upon determination that the one or more seats are not at the selected position (all passengers seated appropriately; indicates that the seats are adjusted in a proper position) [0027].
Regarding claim 16: Nandakumar discloses the one or more server computer devices are further configured to communicate with one or more passenger client computing devices while the vehicle operates in an autonomous driving mode [0046].
Regarding claim 17: Nandakumar discloses the communication with the one or more passenger client computing devices includes information regarding either buckling up or objects left in the vehicle [0026, 0027, 0028].
Regarding claim 18: Nandakumar discloses a system for implementing trip check for vehicles comprising one or more processors configured to: receive, from a perception system of a vehicle, imagery including an interior area of the vehicle, wherein the imagery is captured using one or more image sensors disposed along the vehicle; evaluate, using machine learning, the imagery to detect an object outside of the vehicle in an external area; identify, based on the evaluation, one or more characteristics of the object; and in response to the identification, cause a system of the vehicle to perform a selected action [0042, 0055-0060].
Regarding claim 19: Nandakumar discloses detection of the object outside of the vehicle in the external arca includes detection of a person (pedestrians) adjacent to the vehicle [0055].
Regarding claim 20: Nandakumar discloses the one or more processors are further configured to evaluate the imagery based on audio information obtained by one or more acoustical sensors of the vehicle [0023, 0047].
Regarding claim 21: Nandakumar discloses the selected action includes closing a trunk lid of the vehicle or a window of the vehicle (secured vehicle doors/windows) [0078, 0080].
Regarding claim 22: Nandakumar discloses the one or more processors are disposed remote from the vehicle in a server computer device [0022, 0039, 0041, 0043-0045, 0108].
Regarding claim 23: Nandakumar discloses at least one of the one or more image sensors are disposed along an interior of the vehicle [0023, 0030, 0047].
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-23 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-22 of U.S. Patent No. 12,319,206. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because they both claimed the same subject matter. The same subject matter comprises the capturing/receiving of the interior area images of the vehicle; process/determine the condition of the interior area of the vehicle based on the images and output/perform an action based upon the condition of the interior area of the vehicle.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
-Ito et al. (US 12,668,179) discloses a notification system that notifies a user of misplacement of luggage, and a vehicle equipped with the notification system.
-Ito et al. (US 12,668,178) discloses a lost article prevention device includes a sensor, a communication device, and a controller. The sensor is configured to detect a state inside a vehicle cabin.
-Gupta et al. (US 12,515,605) discloses a vehicle cabin-based target detection and tracking system operable for perceiving a location and orientation of a target within a vehicle cabin or interior and tracking the same through a series of collected images or other sensor data.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TOAN NGOC PHAM whose telephone number is (571)272-2967. The examiner can normally be reached M - F (7 AM - 3:30 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, Quan-Zhen Wang can be reached at (571) 272-3114. 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.
/TOAN N PHAM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2685 7/22/26
Prosecution Insights