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 the Claims
This action is in response to the applicant’s filing on July 25, 2025. Claims 1-7 are pending and are examined below.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority to Japanese Patent Application No. JP 2024-166330, filed September 25, 2024.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: the claim lacks traditional punctuation, i.e., a colon, following the transitional phrase delineating the preamble from the body of the claim. Appropriate correction is required.
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, 2, 4, and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Hirata et al., US 20260001554 A1, hereinafter referred to as Hirata.
As to claim 1, Hirata discloses a parking support apparatus configured to execute a parking support control for parking a vehicle in a parking space, wherein, the parking support apparatus is configured to:
allow the parking support control to be executed, in response to a position of the vehicle satisfying a start position condition and a vehicle speed being equal to or lower than a predetermined start speed (Automatic parking – See at least ¶63; Predetermined determination area, i.e., satisfying start position condition – See at least ¶66; Speed compared against threshold in predetermined determination area – See at least ¶73); and
start a deceleration notification that notifies a user that the parking support control becomes available by decelerating the vehicle, in response to the position of the vehicle satisfying the start position condition and the vehicle speed being higher than the start speed (Deceleration notification and deceleration – See at least ¶68).
As to claim 2, Hirata discloses the parking support apparatus is configured to start an availability notification that notifies the user that the parking support control is available, in response to the position of the vehicle satisfying the start position condition and the vehicle speed being equal to or lower than the start speed (Display in response to satisfying predetermined determination area and speed – See at least ¶98).
As to claim 4, Hirata discloses the parking support apparatus is configured to execute, as the parking support control, an automatic parking control for automatically driving the vehicle to park the vehicle in the parking space such that the vehicle speed does not exceed an upper-limit control speed, and wherein the start speed is set to the upper-limit control speed (Automatic parking – See at least ¶63; Control conditioned with respect to speed threshold – See at least ¶73).
As to claim 6, Hirata discloses the parking support apparatus is configured to:
store, as a learning parking route, a route that the vehicle traveled along when the vehicle was parked in the parking space by manual driving (Store route of past travel – See at least ¶62);
execute, as the parking support control, an automatic parking control for automatically driving the vehicle along the learning parking route to park the vehicle in the parking space (Execution in response to past traveling – See at least ¶70-71); and
determine that the position of the vehicle satisfies the start position condition in response to a distance between the vehicle and the learning parking route being equal to or shorter than a threshold distance (Determination area defined with respect to distance – See at least ¶67).
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 3 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hirata et al., US 20260001554 A1, hereinafter referred to as Hirata.
As to claim 3, Hirata discloses the parking support apparatus is configured to:
determine whether or not the vehicle speed is equal to or lower than a start upper-limit speed that is greater than the start speed, in response to the position of the vehicle satisfying the start position condition and the vehicle speed being higher than the start speed (Second speed threshold greater than first speed threshold – See at least ¶73);
start the deceleration notification in response to the vehicle speed being equal to or lower than the start upper-limit speed (Control conditioned with respect to second speed threshold – See at least ¶73); and
not start the deceleration notification in response to the vehicle speed being higher than the start upper-limit speed (Control conditioned with respect to second speed threshold – See at least ¶73).
Hirata fails to explicitly disclose ending the deceleration notification in response to the vehicle speed becoming equal to or higher than a first end speed that is higher than the start upper-limit speed after the deceleration notification has been started. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Hirata and include the feature of ending the deceleration notification in response to the vehicle speed becoming equal to or higher than a first end speed that is higher than the start upper-limit speed after the deceleration notification has been started, with a reasonable expectation of success, because Hirata’s deceleration/parking control is conditioned on a vehicle traveling below a predetermined speed and the claimed ending control when the speed is exceeded is the logical inverse of this Hirata feature.
As to claim 5, Hirata discloses the parking support apparatus is configured to:
start, as the parking support control, an automatic parking control for automatically driving the vehicle to park the vehicle in the parking space such that the vehicle speed does not exceed an upper-limit control speed, in response to a predetermined start operation being performed by the user while the availability notification is being performed (Automatic parking – See at least ¶63; Control conditioned with respect to speed threshold – See at least ¶73; Approval operation – See at least Abstract).
Hirata fails to explicitly disclose ending the availability notification in response to the vehicle speed becoming equal to or higher than a second end speed that is higher than the start speed wherein the second end speed is set to the upper-limit control speed. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Hirata and include the feature of ending the availability notification in response to the vehicle speed becoming equal to or higher than a second end speed that is higher than the start speed wherein the second end speed is set to the upper-limit control speed, with a reasonable expectation of success, because Hirata’s deceleration/parking control is conditioned on a vehicle traveling below a predetermined speed, including second speed threshold greater than a first speed threshold, and the claimed ending control when the speed is exceeded is the logical inverse of this Hirata feature.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hirata et al., US 20260001554 A1, in view of Mesery et al., US 20250299579 A1, hereinafter referred to as Hirata, and Mesery.
As to claim 7, Hirata discloses the parking support apparatus is configured to execute, as the parking support control, an automatic parking control for automatically driving the vehicle to park the vehicle in the parking space (Automatic parking – See at least ¶63).
Hirata fails to explicitly disclose starting the deceleration notification in response to: the position of the vehicle satisfying the start position condition, the vehicle speed being higher than the start speed, and there being no contact object that may come into contact with the vehicle on a planned route along which the vehicle is to travel in order to park in the parking space.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Hirata and include the feature of ending the availability notification in response to the vehicle speed becoming equal to or higher than a second end speed that is higher than the start speed wherein the second end speed is set to the upper-limit control speed, with a reasonable expectation of success, to ensure Hirata’s deceleration/parking control and automatic parking is performed successfully because Mesery teaches it is well-known and routine to consider whether an object/obstacle is present and inhibiting parking for a given parking space (See at least ¶58 of Mesery).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Lail Kleinman whose telephone number is (571)272-6286. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00-5:00.
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, Fadey Jabr can be reached at (571)272-1516. 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.
/LAIL A KLEINMAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3668
Prosecution Insights