Ex Parte Le et alDownload PDFPatent Trial and Appeal BoardJun 16, 201713865490 (P.T.A.B. Jun. 16, 2017) Copy Citation United States Patent and Trademark Office UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE United States Patent and Trademark Office Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS P.O.Box 1450 Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450 www.uspto.gov APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE FIRST NAMED INVENTOR ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. CONFIRMATION NO. 13/865,490 04/18/2013 Jialiang Le 83351291 2970 28395 7590 06/20/2017 RROOKS KTTSHMAN P C /FfTET EXAMINER 1000 TOWN CENTER THOMAS, ANA D 22ND FLOOR SOUTHFIELD, MI 48075-1238 ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER 3661 NOTIFICATION DATE DELIVERY MODE 06/20/2017 ELECTRONIC Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding. The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication. Notice of the Office communication was sent electronically on above-indicated "Notification Date" to the following e-mail address(es): docketing @brookskushman.com PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07) UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD Ex parte JIALIANG LE, MANOHARPRASAD K. RAO, and KWAKU O. PRAKAH-ASANTE (Applicant: Ford Global Technologies, LLC) Appeal 2017-003907 Application 13/865,490 Technology Center 3600 Before ERIC S. FRAHM, MICHAEL J. STRAUSS, and JOSEPH P. LENTIVECH, Administrative Patent Judges. LENTIVECH, Administrative Patent Judge. DECISION ON APPEAL Appellants seek our review under 35 U.S.C. § 134(a) of the Examiner’s final rejection of claims 1—5, 7—17, 19, and 20. Claims 6 and 18 have been canceled. See App. Br., Claims App’x. We have jurisdiction over the pending claims under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b). We affirm. STATEMENT OF THE CASE Appellants ’ Invention Appellants’ invention generally relates to receiving a presence signal representing a presence of an occupant in a vehicle, applying a default Appeal 2017-003907 Application 13/865,490 setting to a vehicle feature in response to receiving the presence signal, receiving an occupant identification signal after customizing the vehicle feature according to the default setting, and applying a customized setting, associated with the identified occupant, to the vehicle feature. Spec. 13. By applying the default setting before identifying the occupant, some vehicle features are made available to the occupant before the vehicle is started. Spec. 1 8. Claim 1, which is illustrative, reads as follows: 1. A system comprising: a presence sensor configured to generate a presence signal due to presence of an occupant in a vehicle seat; an occupant identification device configured to generate an occupant identification signal indicative of occupant identity based on the presence signal; and a customization controller programmed to apply a default setting to a vehicle feature in response to receiving the presence signal but before receiving the occupant identification signal, and apply a customized setting associated with the identified occupant in response to receiving the occupant identification signal. References The Examiner relies on the following prior art in rejecting the claims: Wang et al. US 8,437,919 B2 May 7, 2013 (filed Mar. 7, 2008) US 2013/0218420 Al Aug. 22, 2013 (filed Sept. 1,2011) US 2014/0195477 Al July 10, 2014 (filed Dec. 29, 2011) Jendritza et al. Graumann et al. 2 Appeal 2017-003907 Application 13/865,490 Rejections Claims 1—5, 7, 9-14, 16, 17, and 19 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over the combination of Graumann and Wang. Final Act. 3—12. Claims 8, 15, and 20 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over the combination of Graumann, Wang, and Jendritza. Final Act. 12—13. Issue on Appeal Did the Examiner err by finding that the combination of Graumann and Wang teaches or suggests “a customization controller programmed to apply a default setting to a vehicle feature in response to receiving the presence signal but before receiving the occupant identification signal, and apply a customized setting associated with the identified occupant in response to receiving the occupant identification signal,” as recited in claim 1? ANALYSIS Appellants contend the combination of Graumann and Wang fails to teach or suggest the disputed limitation. App. Br. 7—8; Reply Br. 1—2. In particular, Appellants contend Wang teaches setting adjustable parameters to predetermined default values when verification information from the occupant is not a match to stored verification information but fails to teach or suggest “applying] a default setting to a vehicle feature in response to receiving the presence signal but before receiving the occupant identification signal, and apply a customized setting associated with the identified 3 Appeal 2017-003907 Application 13/865,490 occupant in response to receiving the occupant identification signal,” as recited in claim 1. App. Br. 7—8 (citing Wang 6:5—17; 8:4—16). Appellants further contend Wang discloses, based on a verification at element 132, either to apply default settings if there is no match (e.g., element 136 of Wang) or to adjust reconfigurable systems if there is a match (e.g., elements 140 and 144 of Wang). Despite element 136 being described earlier than elements 140 and 144 in the discussion of the flowchart of Figure 6, the operations of element 136 are not performed first, and then the operations of element 144 performed second. Instead, one or the other is performed based on the outcome of the verification at element 132. Reply Br. 2. We do not find Appellants’ contention persuasive. The Examiner finds, and we agree, Wang teaches determining whether verification information matches stored verification information and, if the verification does not match the stored verification information, setting adjustable parameters to predetermined default values. Ans. 3 (citing Wang, Fig. 6). The Examiner finds, and we agree, because the verification information does not match the stored verification information, the occupant has not been identified and, therefore, Wang teaches or suggests that the default settings are applied prior to receiving an occupant identification signal. Id. The Examiner further finds Wang also teaches when verification information for an occupant does match the stored verification information, customized parameter values for the identified occupant are determined and the adjustable parameters are set to the determined values. Ans. 3^4 (citing Wang, Fig. 6). Appellants essentially argue because Wang does not teach performing both actions for the same occupant, Wang does not teach or suggest the disputed limitation. However, we do not find claim 1 to be so 4 Appeal 2017-003907 Application 13/865,490 narrow. Claim 1 merely requires that a customization controller be programmed to: (1) apply a default setting to a vehicle feature in response to receiving the presence signal but before receiving the occupant identification signal; and (2) apply a customized setting associated with the identified occupant in response to receiving the occupant identification signal. Appellants have not pointed to any evidence persuasive to show that claim 1 requires the recited actions to be performed for the same occupant. As such, Appellants’ arguments are not commensurate with the scope of claim 1 and, therefore, are not persuasive of error. Accordingly, we are not persuaded the Examiner erred in rejecting claim 1. Appellants contend independent claims 9 and 16 are patentable over the combination of Graumann and Wang “at least for reasons similar to those given above for the patentability of independent claim 1.” App. Br. 9. Accordingly, we are not persuaded the Examiner erred in rejecting claims 9 and 16, and claims 2—5, 7, 8, 10-15, 17, 19, and 20, which depend from claims 1, 9, and 16 and are not separately argued with particularity (App. Br. 9) for the reasons discussed above with respect to claim 1. DECISION We affirm the Examiner’s rejection of claims 1—5, 7—17, 19, and 20. No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with this appeal may be extended under 37 C.F.R. § 1.136(a)(l)(iv). AFFIRMED 5 Copy with citationCopy as parenthetical citation