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 .
Status of Claims
This first non-final action is in response to Applicant’s original filing of 06/30/2025.
Claims 1-6 are currently pending and have been examined.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because the Examiner may require and is requiring descriptive text labels. Specifically, the unlabeled rectangular boxes shown in the drawings should be provided with descriptive text labels (see Figs. 9, 13, and 20). [MPEP 608.02(b) examiner note]. 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.
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)(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 1-2 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Sato et al. (US 20130223643 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Sato discloses a system for a vehicle (see at least abstract), comprising:
a human-machine interface (see at least ¶ [0024] disclosing a car navigation body unit for a vehicle with input switch/mixer unit that an operator may switch sources and adjust volume);
a microphone that detects sound (see at least ¶ [0022-0024] disclosing multiple microphones that detect sounds from outside a vehicle);
a sound source device that emits sound (see at least ¶ [0022-0024] disclosing speakers in the vehicle reproducing sounds from outside the vehicle collected by the microphones);
and a controller that prompts pairing of the sound source device and the microphone (see at least ¶ [0022-0024] disclosing speakers in the vehicle reproducing sounds from outside the vehicle collected by the microphones), such that the sound source device emits sound corresponding to the sound detected by the microphone (see at least ¶ [0022-0024] disclosing speakers in the vehicle reproducing sounds from outside the vehicle collected by the microphones), wherein the controller prompts pairing of the sound source device and the microphone in response to at least one of (i) the vehicle entering a reverse mode (see at least ¶ [0034] disclosing the speakers in the vehicle reproducing sounds from outside the vehicle collected by the microphones when the vehicle operates in reverse driving), and (ii) receiving a user input entered into the human-machine interface via selection of an input option by a user, wherein the input option is made accessible for selection by the user in response to the vehicle entering the reverse mode.
Regarding claim 2, Sato discloses entering the reverse mode comprises shifting into a reverse gear of the vehicle (see at least ¶ [0034] disclosing the speakers in the vehicle reproducing sounds from outside the vehicle collected by the microphones when the vehicle operates in reverse driving).
Regarding claim 6, Sato discloses at least one of the microphone and the sound source device is a portable electronic device (see at least ¶ [0035] where the speaker may be embodied in a mobile phone that reproduces the sounds collected by the microphones).
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.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sato et al. in view of Ling et al. (US 20200001790 A1).
Regarding claim 3, Sato does not explicitly disclose entering the reverse mode comprises activating a hitching assistance system of the vehicle.
However, Ling teaches the reverse mode of the vehicle comprises activating a hitching assistance system of the vehicle (see at least I [0024-0026] and [0050] and Figs. 1-2 disclosing a hitch assist system that is activated when the vehicle enters into reverse).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to incorporate the hitch assist system of Ling into the microphone-and-speaker-coupled vehicle of Sato with a reasonable expectation of success because both inventions are directed toward system components for a vehicle. One of ordinary skill in the art would be able to add the hitch assist system to the vehicle that has the microphone-and-speaker-coupled without undue or unusual experimentation and without affecting the capabilities of the microphone-and-speaker- coupled system.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sato et al. in view of Lavoie et al. (US 9233710 B2).
Regarding claim 4, Sato does not explicitly disclose entering the reverse mode comprises activating a trailer reverse assistance system of the vehicle.
However, Lavoie teaches entering the reverse mode of the vehicle comprises activating a trailer reverse assistance system of the vehicle (see at least column 5-6, lines 61-67 and 1-22 for a trailer assist system that operates as the vehicle is in reverse).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to incorporate the trailer reverse assist system of Lavoie into the microphone-and-speaker-coupled vehicle of Sato with a reasonable expectation of success because both inventions are directed toward system components for a vehicle. One of ordinary skill in the art would be able to add the trailer reverse assist system to the vehicle that has the microphone-and-speaker-coupled without undue or unusual experimentation and without affecting the capabilities of the microphone-and-speaker-coupled system.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sato et al. in view of Fujii et al. (US 20190359130 A1).
Regarding claim 5, Sato discloses a rear gate assembly of the vehicle that includes a closure panel operable between an open position and a closed position (see at least ¶ [0022] and Fig. 2 disclosing a rear hatchback door of the vehicle).
Sato does not explicitly disclose a sound exciter that is coupled to the rear glass panel and that vibrates the rear glass panel to emit sound.
However, Fujii suggests a sound exciter that is coupled to the rear glass panel and that vibrates the rear glass panel to emit sound (see at least ¶ [0013-0016] disclosing a speaker emitting a warning sound to the rear window pane to vibrate and reflect the warning sound).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to incorporate the rear glass speaker of Fujii into the microphone-and-speaker-coupled vehicle of Sato with a reasonable expectation of success because both inventions are directed toward system components for a vehicle. One of ordinary skill in the art would be able to add the rear glass speaker to the vehicle that has the microphone-and-speaker-coupled without undue or unusual experimentation and without affecting the capabilities of the microphone-and-speaker-coupled system. This would additionally help the vehicle occupant be aware when an obstacle is approaching the rear of the vehicle.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JARED C BEAN whose telephone number is (571)272-5255. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30AM - 5:00PM.
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, Navid Z Mehdizadeh can be reached at (571) 272-7691. 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.
/J.C.B./Examiner, Art Unit 3669
/NAVID Z. MEHDIZADEH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3669
Prosecution Insights