Thus, in order to reassure senders that they will receive a response at the earliest convenient opportunity, the mobile device permits the user to send an away message upon receipt of a communication.

Upon receipt of notifi cation of the incoming communication, the mobile applica tion may capture contact information of the sender, such as phone number or email address.

Another objective of the invention is to provide a mecha nism for users to prove that the communication functions of their mobile device were disabled at a particular time.

The objects and advantages of the concepts may be realized and attained by means of the meth odologies, instrumentalities and combinations particularly pointed out in the appended claims.

The mobile device of claim 1 wherein the memory further includes instructions that when executed by the pro cessor cause it to perform the step of providing a notification of the communications upon completion of the inactive mode.

Talk to you later" MobiSys' 11, Dai, Jiangpeng, et al., Mobile Phone based drunk driving detection,

drivers' apparent desire to operate their cellular phones while 65 driving, and the difficulties attendant with enforcing laws Technologies are presented herein in support of a system

tations in relation to a car a near-field and its exemplary respective coor­ munication (NFC) device, a compass, dinate and a communications system;

phone, personal digital assistant (PDA), tablet computer, and/ such acts and operations, which are at times referred to as

commu­sensor 1451, a proximity sensor 145K, a near-field code to be loaded into a memory from a computer readable nication (NFC) device 145L, and a compass 145M.As will be

Petitioner argues that “Guba discloses automatically initiating its communication policy when a legitimate and authorized connection is detected” – in other words, “in response to the pairing of the mobile device with a vehicle,” as in limitation [e] of claim 1.

Petitioner additionally argues, without citation to any support, that “[a] [person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention] would have understood that Guba’s disclosure of enabling a safety policy in response to connection between the mobile device and the vehicles wireless OBD interface teaches or suggests the claimed automatic initiation of an inactive mode in response to pairing of a mobile device with a vehicle.” Id.

Petitioner puts forward insufficient evidence that one of ordinary skill would have found Guba to teach or suggest that one condition that would cause automatic initiation of inactive mode would be the pairing of the mobile device with a vehicle.

As detailed above, we do not see support for Petitioner’s assertions regarding Riemer and Guba’s teachings or suggestions relating to the automatic initiation of inactive mode in response to the pairing of a mobile device with a vehicle.

Claim 1 – limitation [*] – “the memory including instructions that when executed by the processor cause the processor to perform the steps of:” “[*] in response to the pairing of the mobile device and the vehicle, automatically initiating a process to place the mobile device in inactive mode” Petitioner entirely fails to address this limitation, other than to assert that it was one of three bases cited by the Examiner as a point of novelty in the Notice of Allowability and Examiner’s Amendment for the ’853 patent.