PTAB

IPR2025-00890

Toyota Motor Corp v. AutoConnect Holdings LLC

Log In
Key Events
Petition
petition

1. Case Identification

2. Patent Overview

  • Title: Vehicle User Detection and Environment Configuration
  • Brief Description: The ’034 patent discloses methods and systems for personalizing a vehicle environment. The system automatically detects a person within a defined vehicle zone, identifies the person using sensors, determines if that person has corresponding settings, and configures the zone (e.g., seat, mirrors, climate) according to those settings.

3. Grounds for Unpatentability

Ground 1: Anticipation and/or Obviousness over Yasui - Claims 1 and 7-17 are anticipated by or obvious over Yasui.

  • Prior Art Relied Upon: Yasui (Japanese Patent Pub. No. JP2008-017227).
  • Core Argument for this Ground:
    • Prior Art Mapping: Petitioner argued that Yasui discloses every limitation of the challenged claims. Yasui describes a vehicle control system that separates a vehicle into zones (e.g., "driver's seat," "passenger seat"). It uses sensors (imaging devices) and a processor (CPU) to automatically detect a person's presence in a zone and identify the user via facial recognition. The system then determines the user's corresponding "hospitality operation information" (settings) and executes "hospitality operations" to configure vehicle components like power seats, mirrors, and the car stereo. For dependent claims, Petitioner asserted Yasui discloses using image data (claim 10), matching a captured image to a stored image in a data structure (claim 11), and alternatively suggests using a "voice recognition unit" (claims 12-13).
    • Motivation to Combine (for §103 grounds): This ground is primarily for anticipation under 35 U.S.C. §102. However, for claim 7's "cloud storage" limitation, Petitioner argued Yasui’s disclosure of storing settings on a "data server outside the vehicle" anticipates. Alternatively, if not anticipatory, Petitioner argued it would be obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art (POSITA) to use known cloud storage techniques with Yasui's system. A POSITA would combine them to allow users to access their settings across multiple vehicles and to conserve limited local vehicle memory, yielding predictable results.
    • Expectation of Success (for §103 grounds): A POSITA would have an expectation of success in implementing cloud storage in Yasui's system, as it would involve a simple modification of computer code to network with a remote server, a well-understood technique.

Ground 2: Obviousness over Yasui in view of Morehouse - Claims 1 and 7-17 are obvious over Yasui in view of Morehouse.

  • Prior Art Relied Upon: Yasui (Japanese Patent Pub. No. JP2008-017227) and Morehouse (European Patent App. No. EP 1 211 141 A2).
  • Core Argument for this Ground:
    • Prior Art Mapping: This ground was presented as an alternative in case the Board finds Yasui does not explicitly disclose the step of "determining, by a processor, if said identified person has corresponding settings" (limitation 1[d]). Petitioner argued that Morehouse remedies any such alleged deficiency. Morehouse explicitly discloses a vehicle configuration process that involves a series of queries to determine if settings exist for an identified user (e.g., "Climate Information Present?", "Seat Information Present?", "Mirror Information Present?") before sending commands to the relevant control modules.
    • Motivation to Combine (for §103 grounds): A POSITA would combine Morehouse's querying method with Yasui's vehicle control system to create a more efficient system. Yasui already discloses storing user settings and configuring the vehicle; incorporating Morehouse's explicit check for the existence of settings would prevent the system from inefficiently attempting to configure components for which a given user has no stored preferences.
    • Expectation of Success (for §103 grounds): A POSITA would have a reasonable expectation of success because implementing Morehouse's settings queries would only require adjusting the control software in Yasui's processor-based system, which is a straightforward modification.

Ground 3: Anticipation of Ikeda - Claims 1, 7-10, and 12-17 are anticipated by Ikeda.

  • Prior Art Relied Upon: Ikeda (Application # 2008/0215209).

  • Core Argument for this Ground:

    • Prior Art Mapping: Petitioner argued that Ikeda, as an independent reference, teaches all elements of these claims. Ikeda discloses a "driving-environment setup system" that detects a user's presence in a zone (e.g., the driver's seat via a sitting sensor) and automatically identifies the user via facial recognition or a "voiceprint." The system's processor (CPU) then sends a request for the user's "environment setup information" (settings). Upon receiving the settings, the system configures various "control units" for seat position, mirrors, audio, and climate. For claim 7, Ikeda discloses a remote "management device 30" with a "storage unit 32" that communicates over a mobile network, which Petitioner contended constitutes cloud storage.

  • Additional Grounds: Petitioner asserted additional obviousness challenges, including claims 1, 7-10, and 12-13 as obvious over Ikeda in view of Morehouse; claim 11 as obvious over Ikeda in view of Yasui (with or without Morehouse); and claims 7 and 17 as obvious over Ikeda in view of Zellner (with or without Morehouse). These grounds primarily relied on similar theories of combining known user-identification and vehicle-configuration systems with explicit setting queries (Morehouse) or remote/cloud storage solutions (Zellner).

4. Relief Requested

  • Petitioner requests institution of an inter partes review and cancellation of claims 1 and 7-17 of Patent 8,793,034 as unpatentable.