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 statement (IDS) is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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.
i. Claims 2, 4, 8, 11, 13, 16, 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Abler et al. (2019/0228383; hereinafter Abler)1 and Thorley et al. (2019/0272362; hereinafter Thorley)2 in view of Bazakos et al. (2005/0055582; hereinafter Bazakos; this combination of references hereinafter referred to as ATB)3.
Regarding claim 2, Abler discloses a processing system [0063] comprising:
at least one memory configured to store one or more instructions ([0022]: Computer readable memory storing software); and
at least one processor configured to execute the one or more instructions (Processor capable of accessing [0022] and executing software [0063]) to:
acquire moving body identification information for identifying a moving body (Short-range wireless communication between vehicle and stationary wireless device, of access credentials [0073] as well as account information, including vehicle identifiers [0048]);
acquire inspection item identification information for identifying an inspection item ([0041]: Maintenance, including “…body repair…” and “…replacing brakes…”);
acquire information of an inspector ([0069]: Receiving a digital key from primary operator);
compare the acquired information with information records pre-registered in a memory ([0069]: Comparing key with key stored at remote facility);
execute an inspector authentication process ([0070]: Authentication of the service provider); and
store the moving body identification information, the inspection item identification information, and the inspector identification information of the inspector authenticated in the inspector authentication process, in a storage in association with each other (Delegating vehicle access to a service provider for a specified window of time [0042] to render designated services will include a vehicle’s license plate number and geographical location among information shared with the service provider [0069]).
Abler does not explicitly disclose the system wherein acquired information is biological; the acquired biological information each associated with inspector identification information; allowing authentication.
In the same field of endeavor, Thorley discloses a vehicle service ecosystem [0001] comprising computer executable instructions [0047] configured to acquire biological information of an inspector ([0006]: Receiving technician biometric data); the acquired biological information pre-registered in a memory, each associated with inspector identification information (Cloud computing device databases comprise biometric data [0027] of two or more technicians [0036]); execute an inspector authentication process by allowing authentication [0037]. This is among measures implemented to provide vehicle service in compliance with warranty requirements [0014].
It would be obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention for the system of Abler to be modified wherein acquired information is biological; the acquired biological information, each associated with inspector identification information; allowing authentication, in view of the teaching of Thorley, to provide vehicle service in compliance with warranty requirements.
Abler in view of Thorley does not make an outright statement of the system being provided wherein the acquired biological information is compared with a plurality of biological information records; allowing authentication if a match is found between the acquired biological information and one of the pre-registered biological information records4.
In the same field of endeavor, Bazakos implements personnel biometric verification [0002] wherein the acquired biological information is compared with a plurality of biological information records ([0040]: Performing a one-to-many matching comparison process); allowing authentication if a match is found between the acquired biological information and one of the pre-registered biological information records ([0028]: Authorized to enter). This is among measures implemented to furnish more efficient personnel identification [0009].
It would be obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention for the system of Abler to be modified wherein the acquired biological information is compared with a plurality of biological information records; allowing authentication if a match is found between the acquired biological information and one of the pre-registered biological information records, in view of the teaching of Bazakos, to increase the efficiency of personnel identification.
Regarding claim 4, ATB discloses the processing system according to claim 2.
Abler does not explicitly disclose the system wherein the at least one processor is further configured to acquire the biological information when the processor detects that the moving body is at a specified position by a detection process.
In the same field of endeavor, Bazakos implements personnel biometric verification [0002] wherein the at least one processor is further configured to acquire the biological information when the processor detects that the moving body is at a specified position by a detection process ([0029]: “…facial recognition…installed closer to the gate…for scanning facial images of the personnel in vehicle…”). This is among measures implemented to furnish more efficient personnel identification [0009].
It would be obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention for the system of Abler to be modified wherein the at least one processor is further configured to acquire the biological information when the processor detects that the moving body is at a specified position by a detection process, in view of the teaching of Bazakos, to increase the efficiency of personnel identification.
Regarding claim 8, ATB discloses the processing system according to claim 2. Abler discloses the system wherein the at least one processor is further configured to manage inspection histories for a plurality of inspection sites corresponding to multiple inspection items for a same moving body ([0066]: Vehicle service records and previously scheduled maintenance accessible to dealer, service facility or central facility); detect, based on the accumulated history, whether any required inspection for the moving body remains unperformed at any inspection site ([0066]: Vehicle service records and previously scheduled maintenance form basis for need for service); and, if an inspection omission is found when the moving body is to exit the inspection area, output an alert regarding the unperformed inspection (When need for servicing determined while vehicle is at servicing facility [0066] the primary operator may be notified of the need for service [0067]).
Method claims 11 and 13 are rejected as reciting limitations similar to those recited in system claims 2 and 4, respectively.
Medium claims 16 and 18 are rejected as reciting limitations similar to those recited in system claims 2 and 4, respectively.
ii. Claims 6, 15 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ATB, as respectively applied to claim 2, 11 and 16 above, and further in view of Ricci (2014/0309866).
Regarding claim 6, ATB discloses the processing system according to claim 2. Abler discloses the system wherein the at least one processor is further configured to store, for each inspection event, at least inspector identification information, moving body identification information, inspection item identification information, and inspection execution date and time information in a memory in association with each other (Vehicle access delegated to service provider by facility [0042] with access to records including vehicle’s previously schedule maintenance [0066]).
ATB does not explicitly disclose the system wherein the processor is further configured to detect whether any attempt to modify or delete the stored history is made without proper authentication; and, when such an unauthorized attempt is detected, output an alert to a supervisory terminal or record the event in a tamper log.
In the same field of endeavor, Ricci discloses a comfortable vehicle ecosystem [0006] configured to detect whether any attempt to modify or delete the stored history [0387] is made without proper authentication [0388] and, when such an unauthorized attempt is detected [0389], output an alert to a supervisory terminal or record the event in a tamper log ([0390], [0394]).
It would be obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Abler wherein the processor is further configured to detect whether any attempt to modify or delete the stored history is made without proper authentication; and, when such an unauthorized attempt is detected, output an alert to a supervisory terminal or record the event in a tamper log, in view of the teaching of Ricci, to increase the comfort of vehicle use.
Method claim 15 and medium claim 20 are rejected as reciting limitations similar to those recited in system claim 6.
iii. Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ATB, as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Lavoie (2018/0364696).
Regarding claim 7, ATB discloses the processing system according to claim 2. Abler discloses the system wherein the at least one processor is further configured to output a lockout notification [0071].
ATB does not explicitly discloses the system wherein the processor is further configured to count the number of consecutive authentication failures for a same moving body and/or inspector within a predetermined period; and, when the number exceeds a threshold, restrict further authentication attempts within a lockout period.
In the same field of endeavor, Lavoie discloses authentication assisted parking [0002] configured to count the number of consecutive authentication failures for a same moving body and/or inspector within a predetermined period and, when the number exceeds a threshold, restrict further authentication attempts within a lockout period [0063]. Restriction of system access benefits from a customizable implementation of authentication [0036].
It would be obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Abler wherein the processor is further configured to count the number of consecutive authentication failures for a same moving body and/or inspector within a predetermined period; and, when the number exceeds a threshold, restrict further authentication attempts within a lockout period, in view of the teaching of Lavoie, to furnish a customized implementation of authentication.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3, 5, 9, 10, 12, 14, 17, 19 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.
Regarding claim 3, ATB discloses the processing system according to claim 2.
The cited prior art fails to singularly or collectively disclose the system wherein the at least one processor is further configured to detect whether a window of a moving body at a specified position is open; acquire biological information of an inspector riding in the moving body in response to a user input, when the processor detects that the window is open; execute the inspector authentication process based on the biological information acquired; and output guidance for prompting the inspector to open the window when a user input is received and the window is detected as closed.
Thus, claim 3 is objected to.
Regarding claim 5, ATB discloses the processing system according to claim 2.
The cited prior art fails to singularly or collectively disclose the system wherein the at least one processor is further configured to, when a user input to initiate authentication is received, neither the window is open nor one person is present in the imaging area, provide prioritized guidance to the user indicating which operational condition to be corrected first, according to a pre-stored priority order.
Thus, claim 5 is objected to.
Regarding claim 9, ATB discloses the processing system according to claim 2.
The cited prior art fails to singularly or collectively disclose the system wherein the at least one processor is further configured to, when a user input to initiate the inspector authentication process is received and a plurality of people are detected in an image captured from the moving body, inhibit the execution of the authentication process and output guidance for prompting one person to be present in the imaging area.
Thus, claim 9 is objected to.
Regarding claim 10, ATB discloses the processing system according to claim 2.
The cited prior art fails to singularly or collectively disclose the system wherein the at least one processor is further configured to, when a user input for authentication is received, analyze an image captured from the moving body to determine whether the person is located closer to the camera than the moving body, and inhibit acquisition of biological information and authentication when the person is detected to be located closer to the camera than the moving body, and output guidance for prompting the inspector to be seated inside the moving body in such a situation.
Thus, claim 10 is objected to.
Method claims 12 and 14 recite limitations similar to those recited in system claims 3 and 5, respectively.
Thus, method claims 12 and 14 are objected to.
Medium claims 17 and 19 recite limitations similar to those recited in system claims 3 and 5, respectively.
Thus, medium claims 17 and 19 are objected to.
Inquiries
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Aaron Midkiff whose telephone number is (571)270-5875. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8:00am - 4:00pm.
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, Amr Awad can be reached at (571)272-7764. 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.
/AARON MIDKIFF/
Examiner, Art Unit 2621
/AMR A AWAD/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2621
1 Cited in Applicant’s 24 June 2025 IDS.
2 Cited in Applicant’s 24 June 2025 IDS.
3 Cited in Applicant’s 24 June 2025 IDS.
4 Considered strongly suggested by Thorley’s teaching of cloud computing device database comprising biometric data [0027] of two or more technicians [0036].