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 .
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.
Claim Status
This action is in response to applicant’s filing on 8/12/2025. Claims 1-11 are pending and considered below.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
“network communication section”, “authentication section” and “alternative authentication section” (claims 2-11) are sections of a centralized cockpit electronic system on an integrated software and hardware platform, as disclosed in applicant’s specification, paragraphs [0035], [0040], [0046] and [0049] (PGPub) and FIG. 1A, vehicle-2, domain control unit (DCU) - 4, network comm-4A, authentication-4b, and alternative authentication-4c;
“external environment acquisition section” (claim 4) is a temperature sensor, illuminance sensor, camera, electronic mirror and/or laser radar using light detection and ranging (LiDAR), as disclosed in applicant’s specification, paragraph [0041] and FIG. 1A, vehicle-2, and external environment acquisition-6; and
“authentication history information storage section” (claim 9) is a database, as disclosed in applicant’s specification, paragraph [0048] and FIG. 1A, vehicle-2, domain control unit (DCU) - 4, and contract info for billing system function: authentication history info (success/failure) - 4e.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without integrating the judicial exception into a practical application and without an additional element which amounts to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Regarding claims 1-9, step 1 analysis, the subject matter of claims 1-9 is included in the four patent-eligible subject matter categories (e.g., process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter). Claims 1-9 are directed to a device (at least one of a circuit and a processor with a memory).
Claims 1-9 are directed to a judicial exception. The claim limitations recite a revised step 2A, prong one, abstract idea (commercial or legal interactions). Claims 1-9 are directed to a device for authenticating whether a billing system function can be enabled.
Claims 1-9 include the revised step 2A, prong two, additional element of communicating via a network with a server. Communicating via a network with a server is data gathering, which is a form of insignificant extra-solution activity. Claims 1-9 do not recite revised step 2A, prong two, additional elements that integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. Claims 1-9 generally link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use (vehicle subscription services).
Claims 1-9 include the step 2B additional element of at least one of a circuit and a processor with a memory. Applicant’s specification does not provide any indication that the at least one of a circuit and a processor with a memory are anything other than conventional circuits and processors. Verifying that a billing system function can be enabled is a well-understood, routine and conventional function when claimed using generic circuits and processors. Circuits and processors are widely prevalent and in common use in systems for verifying the availability of a vehicle subscription service. Circuits and processors are not significantly more than the judicial exception since they are well-understood, routine and conventional features previously known to the vehicle subscription service industry. Therefore, claims 1-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101.
Regarding claim 10, step 1 analysis, the subject matter of claim 10 is included in the four patent-eligible subject matter categories. Claim 10 is directed to a method.
Claim 10 is directed to a judicial exception. The claim limitations recite a revised step 2A, prong one, abstract idea (commercial or legal interactions). Claim 10 is directed to a method for authenticating whether a billing system function can be enabled.
Claim 10 includes the revised step 2A, prong two, additional element of communicating via a network with a server. Communicating via a network with a server is data gathering, which is a form of insignificant extra-solution activity. Claim 10 does not recite revised step 2A, prong two, additional elements that integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. Claim 10 generally links the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use (vehicle subscription services).
Claim 10 includes the step 2B additional elements of a network communication section, an authentication section, and an alternative authentication section. Applicant’s specification defines these sections as components of a centralized cockpit electronic system on an integrated software and hardware platform. Applicant’s specification does not provide any indication that the centralized cockpit electronic system is anything other than a conventional electronic system. Verifying that a billing system function can be enabled is a well-understood, routine and conventional function when claimed using a generic electronic system. Electronic systems are widely prevalent and in common use in systems for verifying the availability of a vehicle subscription service. Electronic systems are not significantly more than the judicial exception since they are well-understood, routine and conventional features previously known to the vehicle subscription service industry. Therefore, claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101.
Regarding claim 11, step 1 analysis, the subject matter of claim 11 is included in the four patent-eligible subject matter categories. Claim 11 is directed to a device (a non-transitory computer readable storage medium).
Claim 11 is directed to a judicial exception. The claim limitations recite a revised step 2A, prong one, abstract idea (commercial or legal interactions). Claim 11 is directed to a device for authenticating whether a billing system function can be enabled.
Claim 11 includes the revised step 2A, prong two, additional element of communicating via a network with a server. Communicating via a network with a server is data gathering, which is a form of insignificant extra-solution activity. Claim 11 does not recite revised step 2A, prong two, additional elements that integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. Claim 11 generally links the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use (vehicle subscription services).
Claim 11 includes the step 2B additional element of a non-transitory computer readable storage medium (comprising a network communication section, an authentication section, and an alternative authentication section). Applicant’s specification does not provide any indication that the non-transitory computer readable storage medium is anything other than a conventional medium. Verifying that a billing system function can be enabled is a well-understood, routine and conventional function when claimed using a generic medium. Media are widely prevalent and in common use in systems for verifying the availability of a vehicle subscription service. Media are not significantly more than the judicial exception since they are well-understood, routine and conventional features previously known to the vehicle subscription service industry. Therefore, claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101.
Examiner suggests amending the independent claims to positively recite a vehicle control function in order to provide a revised step 2A, prong two, additional element that integrates the abstract idea into a practical application. For instance, the independent claims could be amended to include “streaming music or video, performing automated driving and/or activating devices which perform a comfort function in response to authenticating availability of a vehicle subscription service”.
See, the 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance, which is available on the USPTO Website.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 1-2, 5-8 and 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shibasaki (US-2010/0049540-A1, hereinafter Shibasaki).
Regarding claim 1, Shibasaki discloses:
at least one of (i) a circuit and (ii) a processor with a memory storing computer program code executable by the processor, the at least one of the circuit and the processor configured to cause the vehicle authentication system to: (paragraphs [0039-0040] and [0117-0131]; FIG. 1, content delivery system-100, content delivery apparatus-110, payment information acquiring unit-111, temporary authentication information sending unit-112, formal authentication information sending unit-113, and user-140; and FIG. 7, navigation device-410a, CPU-701, ROM-702, RAM-703, audio I/F-708, input device-711, video I/F-712, and display-713);
communicate via a network with a server storing information regarding billing system function executable by an occupant of a vehicle (paragraphs [0072-0077] and [0105-0116]; FIG. 4, music delivery system-400, subscription service server-401, content reproducing apparatus-410, navigation device-410a, PC-410b, player-410c, network-420, and user-450);
authenticate whether the billing system function can be enabled (paragraphs [0051] and [0134]; and FIG. 8, Can connect with network? - S804);
substitute for authentication when connection to the server cannot be established (paragraphs [0052] and [0136-0137]; and FIG. 8, Has request for additional temporary authentication information been received? - S806, Refer to charging information - S807, Within limit of fee already paid? - S808, Send additional temporary authentication information - S809, and Reject sending of additional temporary authentication information - S810); and
wherein alternative authentication is performed when, as a result of a disconnection from the server, the vehicle authentication system fails to determine whether the billing system function can be enabled (paragraphs [0051-0052] and [0134-0137]).
Regarding claim 2, Shibasaki further discloses:
wherein a network communication section is implemented by the at least one of (i) the circuit and (ii) the processor with the memory storing computer program code executable by the processor configured to communicate via the network with the server storing the information regarding the billing system function executable by the occupant of the vehicle (paragraphs [0039-0040] and [0072-0077]);
an authentication section is implemented by the at least one of (i) the circuit and (ii) the processor with the memory storing computer program code executable by the processor configured to authenticate, via the network communication section, whether the billing system function can be enabled (paragraphs [0039-0040] and [0051]);
an alternative authentication section is implemented by the at least one of (i) the circuit and (ii) the processor with the memory storing computer program code executable by the processor configured to substitute for the authentication by the authentication section when the connection to the server cannot be established via the network communication section (paragraphs [0039-0040] and [0052]); and
wherein the alternative authentication section performs the alternative authentication when, as the result of the disconnection from the server, the authentication section fails to determine, via the network communication section, whether the billing system function can be enabled (paragraphs [0051-0052]).
Regarding claim 5, Shibasaki further discloses:
wherein when the vehicle is traveling and, during execution of the billing system function, the authentication section fails to determine whether the billing system function can be enabled, the alternative authentication section determines that the billing system function can be enabled (paragraphs [0134] and [0136-0137]; and FIG. 8, Can connect with network? - S804, Has request for additional temporary authentication information been received? - S806, Refer to charging information - S807, Within limit of fee already paid? - S808, and Send additional temporary authentication information - S809).
Regarding claim 6, Shibasaki further discloses:
wherein the at least one of (i) the circuit and (ii) the processor with the memory storing computer program code executable by the processor is further configured to implement (paragraphs [0039-0040] and [0117-0131]);
a notification control section configured to provide notification to the occupant (paragraphs [0122] and [0125]; and FIG. 7, navigation device-410a, speaker-710, and display-713); and
wherein when the alternative authentication section determines whether the billing system function can be enabled, the notification control section controls notification to the occupant of a determination result by the alternative authentication section regarding whether the billing system function can be enabled (paragraphs [0137] and [0145-0146]; FIG. 8, Send additional temporary authentication information - S809, and Reject sending of additional temporary authentication information - S810; and FIG. 9, Notify of expiration of effective period - S907).
Regarding claim 7, Shibasaki further discloses:
wherein the alternative authentication section determines whether the billing system function can be enabled by alternative authentication (paragraphs [0134] and [0136-0137]; and FIG. 8, Can connect with network? - S804, Has request for additional temporary authentication information been received? - S806, Refer to charging information - S807, Within limit of fee already paid? - S808, and Send additional temporary authentication information - S809); and
a determination result by the alternative authentication section remains valid until authentication by the authentication section becomes possible, or until the vehicle stops and a power supply of the vehicle is turned off while authentication by the authentication section remains impossible (paragraphs [0134] and [0136-0137]).
Regarding claim 8, Shibasaki further discloses:
wherein the at least one of (i) the circuit and (ii) the processor with the memory storing computer program code executable by the processor is further configured to implement (paragraphs [0039-0040] and [0117-0131]);
a notification control section configured to provide notification to the occupant (paragraphs [0122] and [0125]; and FIG. 7, navigation device-410a, speaker-710, and display-713); and
wherein when the power supply is turned off while authentication by the authentication section has failed and authentication also fails when the power supply is next turned on, the notification control section notifies the occupant that the function for which authentication by the authentication section failed is unavailable (paragraphs [0137] and [0145-0146]; FIG. 8, Reject sending of additional temporary authentication information - S810; and FIG. 9, Notify of expiration of effective period - S907).
Regarding claim 10, Shibasaki further discloses:
communicating, by a network communication section (paragraphs [0039-0040] and [0117-0131]; FIG. 1, content delivery system-100, content delivery apparatus-110, payment information acquiring unit-111, temporary authentication information sending unit-112, formal authentication information sending unit-113, and user-140; and FIG. 7, navigation device-410a, CPU-701, ROM-702, RAM-703, audio I/F-708, input device-711, video I/F-712, and display-713);
via a network with a server that stores information regarding billing system functions executable by an occupant of a vehicle (paragraphs [0072-0077] and [0105-0116]; FIG. 4, music delivery system-400, subscription service server-401, content reproducing apparatus-410, navigation device-410a, PC-410b, player-410c, network-420, and user-450);
authenticating, by an authentication section, whether the billing system function can be enabled via the network communication section (paragraphs [0051] and [0134]; and FIG. 8, Can connect with network? - S804);
substituting, by an alternative authentication section, for authentication by the authentication section when connection to the server cannot be established via the network communication section (paragraphs [0052] and [0136-0137]; and FIG. 8, Has request for additional temporary authentication information been received? - S806, Refer to charging information - S807, Within limit of fee already paid? - S808, Send additional temporary authentication information - S809, and Reject sending of additional temporary authentication information - S810); and
wherein the alternative authentication section performs alternative authentication when, as a result of a disconnection from the server, the authentication section fails to determine, via the network communication section, whether the billing system function can be enabled (paragraphs [0051-0052] and [0134-0137]).
Regarding claim 11, Shibasaki further discloses:
A non-transitory computer readable storage medium storing a vehicle authentication program for causing a vehicle authentication system to execute: (paragraphs [0039-0040] and [0117-0131]; FIG. 1, content delivery system-100, content delivery apparatus-110, payment information acquiring unit-111, temporary authentication information sending unit-112, formal authentication information sending unit-113, and user-140; and FIG. 7, navigation device-410a, CPU-701, ROM-702, RAM-703, audio I/F-708, input device-711, video I/F-712, and display-713);
communicating, by a network communication section, via a network with a server storing information regarding billing system functions executable by an occupant of a vehicle (paragraphs [0072-0077] and [0105-0116]; FIG. 4, music delivery system-400, subscription service server-401, content reproducing apparatus-410, navigation device-410a, PC-410b, player-410c, network-420, and user-450);
authenticating, by an authentication section, whether the billing system function can be enabled via the network communication section (paragraphs [0051] and [0134]; and FIG. 8, Can connect with network? - S804);
substituting, by an alternative authentication section, for authentication by the authentication section when connection to the server cannot be established via the network communication section (paragraphs [0052] and [0136-0137]; and FIG. 8, Has request for additional temporary authentication information been received? - S806, Refer to charging information - S807, Within limit of fee already paid? - S808, Send additional temporary authentication information - S809, and Reject sending of additional temporary authentication information - S810); and
wherein the alternative authentication section performs alternative authentication when, as a result of a disconnection from the server, the authentication section fails to determine, via the network communication section, whether the billing system function can be enabled (paragraphs [0051-0052] and [0134-0137]).
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shibasaki, as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Avary et al. (US-2020/0364726-A1, hereinafter Avary).
Regarding claim 3, Shibasaki further discloses:
wherein the alternative authentication section determines that the billing system function can be enabled and performs the alternative authentication (paragraphs [0134-0135]; and FIG. 8, Can connect with network? - S804, and Send renewal authentication information - S805).
Shibasaki does not disclose that the billing system function corresponds to at least one of: a function necessary for travel of the vehicle, a function necessary for safety of the occupant, and a function for making an internal environment of a vehicle comfortable. However, Avary discloses an automated automotive enrollment system for automatically enrolling a vehicle with a subscription-based system, including the following features:
when the billing system function to be determined for availability corresponds to at least one of: a function necessary for travel of the vehicle, a function necessary for a safety of the occupant, and a function for making an internal environment of a vehicle comfortable (paragraphs [0028-0033]; and FIG. 1, customer-110, registration engine-125, message out to vehicle-130, in-vehicle message-140, confirmation engine-160, subscription services activated-170, full-180, and limited-190).
Avary teaches that a vehicle should communicate with a server to enroll in either a full activation set of services or a set of services which is limited to only safety and security protection (paragraph [0033]). It would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the safety and security protection services of Avary into the vehicle which communicates with a server to enroll in a subscription service for a music delivery system of Shibasaki. A person of ordinary skill would have been motivated to do so, with a reasonable expectation of success, for the purpose of expediting enrollment in services which make vehicle travel safer and more comfortable.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shibasaki, as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Cermak et al. (US-2019/0176752-A1, hereinafter Cermak).
Regarding claim 4, Shibasaki does not disclose that the billing system function corresponds to a function for making an internal environment of a vehicle comfortable. However, Cermak discloses a system of vehicle remote start functionality, including the following features:
wherein the at least one of (i) the circuit and (ii) the processor with the memory storing computer program code executable by the processor is further configured to implement (paragraphs [0042-0046] and [0049]; and FIG. 1, vehicle-12, vehicle electronics-20, engine control unit (ECU) - 24, body control module (BCM) - 26, processor-34, memory-36, and vehicle system module (VSM) - 42);
an external environment acquisition section configured to acquire external environment information of the vehicle (paragraphs [0010] and [0078-0080]); and
wherein when determining whether a comfort function for making an internal environment of a vehicle comfortable can be enabled, the alternative authentication section performs alternative authentication by adding the external environment information of the vehicle to a determination condition for enabling the billing system function (paragraphs [0085] and [0101-0106]; and FIG. 1, remote computer-78, and remote facility-80).
Cermak teaches that vehicle-related services should be provided based on a user’s subscription (paragraph [0103]). Cermak further teaches that vehicle starting, windshield defogger functions, seat heating and/or steering wheel heating should be remotely engaged based on environmental conditions determined by a digital thermometer and/or a precipitation sensor (paragraph [0010]). It would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the user subscription for remote engagement of passenger comfort features of Cermak into the vehicle which communicates with a server to enroll in a subscription service for a music delivery system of Shibasaki. A person of ordinary skill would have been motivated to do so, with a reasonable expectation of success, for the purpose of expediting enrollment in services which make vehicle travel more comfortable.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TAMARA L WEBER whose telephone number is (303)297-4249. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30-5:00 MTN.
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, Faris Almatrahi can be reached at 3134464821. 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.
TAMARA L. WEBER
Examiner
Art Unit 3667
/TAMARA L WEBER/Examiner, Art Unit 3667
Prosecution Insights