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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 28 May 2025 is considered by the examiner.
Claim Interpretation
The examiner is interpreting “privilege” to be any kind of incentive, discount, reward, or points (Specification: Para. 84).
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.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
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.
Claims 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Furuta (US Publication 2023/0081887 A1) in view of Nishio et al. (US Publication 2025/0244135 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Furuta teaches a vehicle management system comprising: one or more storage devices, the storage devices being configured to store a map indicating a correspondence relationship between a position and a vertical motion parameter associated with vertical motion of a wheel of a vehicle (Furuta: Para. 105; unsprung displacement map is stored in the memory device); and ……. , and cause the target vehicle to collect information for updating the map along the second route when the target vehicle travels through the second route (Furuta: Para. 104, 108, 186, 190; processor collects a variety of information from the vehicle control system, and generates and updates the map information based on the collected information; updates the unsprung displacement map).
Furuta doesn’t explicitly teach one or more processors, the processors being configured to give a privilege to a user of a target vehicle, wherein: a route to a destination of the target vehicle includes a first route and a second route having a degree of fullness of the map that is lower than the first route; and the one or more processors are configured to set the privilege to be given when the target vehicle travels through the second route to be greater than the privilege to be given when the target vehicle travels through the first route.
However Nishio, in the same field of endeavor, teaches one or more processors, the processors being configured to give a privilege to a user of a target vehicle, wherein: a route to a destination of the target vehicle includes a first route and a second route (Nishio: Para. 8; a first route to a predetermined destination and a second route different from the first route) having a degree of fullness of the map that is lower than the first route (Nishio: Para. 39-41, Fig. 1; road information on a road R1 has expired, it is necessary to update the road information on the road R1 to the latest road information); and the one or more processors are configured to set the privilege to be given when the target vehicle travels through the second route to be greater than the privilege to be given when the target vehicle travels through the first route (Nishio: Para. 114; general route may be read as a first route, and the contribution route may be read as a second route; distance of the contribution route is longer than the distance of the general route, points can be given, and the user is motivated to select the contribution route).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the a collected map of displacement values for active suspension control (Furuta: Para. 105, 190) with the contribution route option with reward points (Nishio: Para. 39-40) with a reasonable expectation of success because a user is more likely to select a contribution route based on reward points allowing for a quicker collection of vehicle external information for updating the road information that has expired (Nishio: Para. 68, 75).
Regarding claim 2, Furuta teaches the vehicle management system according to claim 1, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to: acquire a map enhancement degree that is proportional to an amount of increase in the degree of fullness of the map between before and after the target vehicle travels through the second route (Furuta: Para. 139-140; time-series data of the detected unsprung displacement along the actual trajectory are acquired in real time; time series data of the reference unsprung displacement along each imaginary trajectory are obtained from the unsprung displacement map).
Furuta doesn’t explicitly teach set the privilege to be given when the target vehicle travels through the second route according to the map enhancement degree.
However Nishio, in the same field of endeavor, teaches set the privilege to be given when the target vehicle travels through the second route according to the map enhancement degree (Nishio: Para. 64, Fig. 4; contribution routes (E) and (F) that can reach the destination from the current location, time limits of the contribution routes, the number of participants in the contribution routes, and points given when the user has completed the contribution routes).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the a collected map of displacement values for active suspension control (Furuta: Para. 105, 190) with the contribution route option with reward points (Nishio: Para. 39-40) with a reasonable expectation of success because a user is more likely to select a contribution route based on reward points allowing for a quicker collection of vehicle external information for updating the road information that has expired (Nishio: Para. 68, 75).
Regarding claim 3, Furuta doesn’t explicitly teach wherein the one or more processors are further configured to present the first route, the second route, and the privilege to the user.
However Nishio, in the same field of endeavor, teaches wherein the one or more processors are further configured to present the first route, the second route, and the privilege to the user (Nishio: Para. 64, Fig. 4; a general route, a shortest route (A) having a shortest distance from the current location to the destination; contribution routes (E) and (F) that can reach the destination from the current location, time limits of the contribution routes, the number of participants in the contribution routes, and points given when the user has completed the contribution routes).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the a collected map of displacement values for active suspension control (Furuta: Para. 105, 190) with the contribution route option with reward points (Nishio: Para. 39-40) with a reasonable expectation of success because a user is more likely to select a contribution route based on reward points allowing for a quicker collection of vehicle external information for updating the road information that has expired (Nishio: Para. 68, 75).
Regarding claim 4, Furuta doesn’t explicitly teach wherein the one or more processors are further configured to determine the second route as a travel route of the target vehicle in priority to the first route.
However Nishio, in the same field of endeavor, teaches wherein the one or more processors are further configured to determine the second route as a travel route of the target vehicle in priority to the first route (Nishio: Para. 63-64, Fig. 4; server transmits a route search result including a general route, a contribution route, and points to the vehicle).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the a collected map of displacement values for active suspension control (Furuta: Para. 105, 190) with the contribution route option with reward points (Nishio: Para. 39-40) with a reasonable expectation of success because a user is more likely to select a contribution route based on reward points allowing for a quicker collection of vehicle external information for updating the road information that has expired (Nishio: Para. 68, 75).
Regarding claim 5, Furuta teaches the vehicle management system according to claim 1, wherein: the target vehicle is configured to execute preview control for suppressing vibration of the target vehicle based on the vertical motion parameter obtained from the map (Furuta: Para. 124; based on the unsprung displacement map, the control device executes “preview control” which is a kind of the vibration suppression control).
Furuta doesn’t explicitly teach a plurality of modes includes a first mode and a second mode in which priority is given to the privilege over the first mode; and the one or more processors are further configured to determine the first route as a travel route of the target vehicle in priority to the second route in the first mode, and determine the second route as a travel route of the target vehicle in priority to the first route in the second mode.
However Nishio, in the same field of endeavor, teaches a plurality of modes includes a first mode and a second mode in which priority is given to the privilege over the first mode (Nishio: Para. 64 Fig. 4; contribution routes (E) and (F) that can reach the destination from the current location, time limits of the contribution routes, the number of participants in the contribution routes, and points given when the user has completed the contribution routes); and the one or more processors are further configured to determine the first route as a travel route of the target vehicle in priority to the second route in the first mode (Nishio: Para. 64, Fig. 4; a general route, a shortest route (A) having a shortest distance from the current location to the destination), and determine the second route as a travel route of the target vehicle in priority to the first route in the second mode (Nishio: Para. 68, 75; user of the vehicle is more likely to select a contribution route for which an incentive is obtained as one of the routes to reach the destination; the server accepts participation of the user of the vehicle in the contribution task including the contribution route).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the a collected map of displacement values for active suspension control (Furuta: Para. 105, 190) with the contribution route option with reward points (Nishio: Para. 39-40) with a reasonable expectation of success because a user is more likely to select a contribution route based on reward points allowing for a quicker collection of vehicle external information for updating the road information that has expired (Nishio: Para. 68, 75).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Cha et al. US Publication Number 2025/0155262 A1 teaches route option with a reward offered.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LAURA E LINHARDT whose telephone number is (571) 272-8325. The examiner can normally be reached on M-TR, M-F: 8am-4pm.
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, Angela Ortiz can be reached on (571) 272-1206. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is (571) 273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at (866) 217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call (800) 786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or (571) 272-1000.
/L.E.L./Examiner, Art Unit 3663
/ANGELA Y ORTIZ/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3663
Prosecution Insights