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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 11/21/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In regards to claim 1, Applicant argues the cited references do not teach each and every feature of the amended claim. In particular, Applicant argues Kojima (US 20120239255) fails to disclose, teach, or suggest, automatically generating and providing corrected driver signals to a driver dynamics control system of the vehicle in response to detected lane departure, and instead requires assessing driver intention before providing corrected command signals, which therefore does not require the recited automatically generating and providing of the claim. Applicant argues one of ordinary skill would not have modified Kojima to automatically provide correct driver signal as Kojima is directed to improvements in determining driver intention and one of ordinary skill would not have modified Kojima to ignore driver intention and automatically provide corrected driver signals. Therefore, the Applicant concludes the applied references fail to teach the recited features of the claim as amended and the rejection should be withdrawn.
However, merely reciting that operations are performed automatically does not preclude earlier operations from being performed. Kojima checks a boundary condition of lane departure and driver’s intention and when the driver does not intend to leave the lane, automatically provides corrected driver signals to control the vehicle when boundary conditions are satisfied indicating the vehicle is leaving the lane. This is automatically providing corrected driver signals based on boundary conditions being satisfied, which is precisely what is required by the claim. This does not require any further modification of Kojima and does not in any way at any point require ignoring driver intention, but instead integrates determinations of driver intention into automatically providing control signals based upon a boundary condition being satisfied.
As such, this argument is unpersuasive.
Applicant argues the dependent claims are allowable by virtue of their dependency and their rejections should be withdrawn.
This argument is unpersuasive as the independent claim has been fully rejected and for the reasons as given above.
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 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kojima et al. (US 20120239255) in view of Wiegmann et al. (DE 102014220715) and Askeland (US 10275662).
In regards to claim 1, Kojima teaches a method for assisting a driver by driver assistance system, the method comprising: (Fig 3, 4, methods operate to correct lane keeping based on driver input. [0027] performed by control unit 23 with lane departure prevention control and vehicle control unit.)
evaluating, by the driver assistance system, information items input by the driver and/or driver specifications as driver signals in a driver assistance unit, wherein the driver signals include at least one of steering wheel input or steering angle, accelerator pedal or throttle pedal position, or brake pedal position, and a separate activation of the driver assistance unit; (Fig 3, 4, methods operate to correct lane keeping based on driver input. [0027] performed by control unit 23 with lane departure prevention control and vehicle control unit. [0029], [0036] input from a driver is given to steering wheel and sensed by control system.)
evaluating by the driver assistance unit, whether a correction boundary condition is satisfied by utilizing observer signals of an observer unit for the evaluation of the correction boundary condition, the correction boundary condition being departure from a course of a driving lane, the observer signals being dependent on the present driving state situation detected by vehicle sensors and/or on at least one information item relating to the course of the driving lane; ([0040] in step S103, a prediction of where the vehicle will travel after a predetermined time is made and at step S104, a comparison is made between the predicted position and the position of the lane to determine if the vehicle departs from the lane. This is a determination of if a boundary condition is satisfied or not, which is performed by the control unit. [0027], [0039] in step S101, data is read from the camera control unit to interpret road and lane markings, vehicle state data is interpreted including wheel speed and yaw rate, and operations are performed by control unit of vehicle, where [0040] information from camera on lane markings is used to determine if vehicle departs from the lane by comparing the predicted position using vehicle state data with the lane boundary position. [0040] in step S106, vehicle steering and braking commands are determined to remain within the lane, and [0041] in step S107 and S109, when it is determined that the driver is not intentionally leaving the lane, the steering and braking commands are output and the vehicle is controlled.)
automatically generating corrected driver signals; ([0040] in step S103, a prediction of where the vehicle will travel after a predetermined time is made and at step S104, a comparison is made between the predicted position and the position of the lane to determine if the vehicle departs from the lane. In step S106, vehicle steering and braking commands are determined to remain within the lane, and [0041] in step S107 and S109, when it is determined that the driver is not intentionally leaving the lane, the steering and braking commands are output and the vehicle is controlled automatically.)
and providing the corrected driver signals to a driving dynamics control system of the vehicle in response to the correction boundary conditions being satisfied; (0040] in step S103, a prediction of where the vehicle will travel after a predetermined time is made and at step S104, a comparison is made between the predicted position and the position of the lane to determine if the vehicle departs from the lane. This is a determination of if a boundary condition is satisfied or not, which is performed by the control unit. [0041], [0042] in step S107 and S109, when it is determined that the driver is not intentionally leaving the lane and conditions are satisfied, the steering and braking commands are output and the vehicle is controlled, steering and braking commands are output to steering control unit 11 and brake control unit 11.)
performing the evaluating of the correction boundary condition in the driver assistance unit cyclically and/or continuously; ([0046] operations are performed for one control cycle and necessarily must be repeated to be useful. Were the operations not performed cyclically, there would be only one single determination at one single time, which is narrower than what is contemplated by the disclosure.)
and
if the correction boundary condition is not present, providing the driver signals to the driving dynamics control system, without generating the corrected driver signals, ([0040] in step S103, a prediction of where the vehicle will travel after a predetermined time is made and at step S104, a comparison is made between the predicted position and the position of the lane to determine if the vehicle departs from the lane. This is a determination of if a boundary condition is satisfied or not. [0043] particularly when there is determined to be no possibility of deviation, which is when the boundary condition is not present, then no correction is supplied and driver control is performed.)
wherein the driver assistance unit is activated when all of the following conditions or requirements are met: (Fig 3, 4, methods operate to correct lane keeping based on driver input. [0027] performed by control unit 23 with lane departure prevention control and vehicle control unit. [0029], [0036] input from a driver is given to steering wheel and sensed by control system, which requires first activation of control units which serve as driver assistance operation unit. [0043] when it is determined that the deviation is intended by the driver, the steering control unit and brake control unit are limited, and their control is not output, which is deactivating them by driver override input.)
availability of data regarding a position and an orientation of the vehicle, (Figs 3, 8, [0026], [0030], [0031] camera recognizes lane markings and detects positional relationship with the vehicle, yaw rate sensor determines change in orientation of vehicle, which are used to predict position of vehicle over time. This information is acquired before further driving assistance can be provided and therefore necessarily must be available in order to activate driving assistance. When this information is not received, the operations cannot progress, and the method falls into implied deactivation.)
availability of data regarding a course of a road and/or a destination, (Fig 3, [0039], [0040] initial steps of performing any driving assistance include first receiving sensor data and then using this sensor data to recognize road markings and lane, which include the shape and course of the road. This information is acquired before further driving assistance can be provided and therefore necessarily must be available in order to activate driving assistance. When this information is not received, the operations cannot progress, and the method falls into implied deactivation.)
availability of actuators and control systems of the driving dynamics control system, ([0027] driving assistance is performed by a control unit increasing or decreasing control amount of a steering actuator. When either the control unit is not available or the steering actuator is not available, the driving assistance is not able to be performed, which means that both the control unit and the steering actuator must be available and known to be available in order for driver assistance to be active and falls into implied deactivation otherwise.) and
wherein the driver assistance unit is deactivated: (Fig 3, 4, methods operate to correct lane keeping based on driver input. [0027] performed by control unit 23 with lane departure prevention control and vehicle control unit. [0029], [0036] input from a driver is given to steering wheel and sensed by control system, which requires first activation of control units which serve as driver assistance operation unit. [0043] when it is determined that the deviation is intended by the driver, the steering control unit and brake control unit are limited, and their control is not output, which is deactivating them by driver override input.)
at any time, by a defined driver override input, (Fig 3, 4, methods operate to correct lane keeping based on driver input. [0027] performed by control unit 23 with lane departure prevention control and vehicle control unit. [0029], [0036] input from a driver is given to steering wheel and sensed by control system, which requires first activation of control units which serve as driver assistance operation unit. [0043] when it is determined that the deviation is intended by the driver, the steering control unit and brake control unit are limited, and their control is not output, which is deactivating them by driver override input.) or
when any one of the following conditions or requirements is not met: (Fig 3, [0039], [0040] initial steps of performing any driving assistance include first receiving sensor data and then using this sensor data to recognize road markings and lane, which include the shape and course of the road and ambient environment. This information is acquired before further driving assistance can be provided and therefore necessarily must be available in order to activate driving assistance. When this information is not received, the operations cannot progress, and the method falls into implied deactivation.)
availability of the data regarding the position and the orientation of the vehicle, (Figs 3, 8, [0026], [0030], [0031] camera recognizes lane markings and detects positional relationship with the vehicle, yaw rate sensor determines change in orientation of vehicle, which are used to predict position of vehicle over time. This information is acquired before further driving assistance can be provided and therefore necessarily must be available in order to activate driving assistance. When this information is not received, the operations cannot progress, and the method falls into implied deactivation.)
availability of the data regarding the course of the road and/or the destination, (Fig 3, [0039], [0040] initial steps of performing any driving assistance include first receiving sensor data and then using this sensor data to recognize road markings and lane, which include the shape and course of the road. This information is acquired before further driving assistance can be provided and therefore necessarily must be available in order to activate driving assistance. When this information is not received, the operations cannot progress, and the method falls into implied deactivation.)availability of information relating to ambient conditions around the vehicle,
availability of the actuators and the control systems of the driving dynamics control system. ([0027] driving assistance is performed by a control unit increasing or decreasing control amount of a steering actuator. When either the control unit is not available or the steering actuator is not available, the driving assistance is not able to be performed, which means that both the control unit and the steering actuator must be available and known to be available in order for driver assistance to be active and falls into implied deactivation otherwise.)
Kojima also teaches initial steps of performing any driving assistance include first receiving sensor data including at least presence of road markings, which are ambient conditions around the vehicle. This information is acquired before further driving assistance can be provided and therefore necessarily must be available in order to activate driving assistance. When this information is not received, the operations cannot progress, and the method falls into implied deactivation (Fig 3, [0039], [0040]).
Kojima does not teach:
availability of information relating to ambient conditions around the vehicle, the ambient conditions including one or more of a friction coefficient of a roadway surface and a condition of the roadway surface,
availability of sensor information for Electronic Stability Control (ESC) systems, and
availability of information relating to the ambient conditions around the vehicle,
availability of the sensor information for the ESC systems, and
However, Wiegmann teaches if an errors in core functions occur, such as in stability control systems, causing them to be unavailable or unreliable, steering assistance may be deactivated completely (Page 1).
Further, Askeland teaches controlling maneuvering of a vehicle based on received friction-related data estimation where the friction related data estimation comes from camera information monitoring the area ahead of the vehicle to determine a coefficient of friction and the material data of the road surface, such as dry pavement, wet pavement, and the like (Figures 4, 7, 8, Col 3 lines 1-21, Col 14 lines 6-44). As the control operations begin by receiving friction data, if it is not received, control necessarily cannot be operated.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to modify the vehicle control method of Kojima, by incorporating the teachings of Wiegmann and Askeland, such that when stability control systems are operable and available, driving assistance is available and when the stability control system errors and is unavailable, the driving assistance system is deactivated, and similarly such that when ambient data establishing condition and friction coefficient of the road surface, the vehicle is further controlled based upon this data, and when this data is unavailable as in Kojima because of sensor unavailability, the operations are not started and deactivated.
The motivation to deactivate when stability control systems are unavailable is that, as acknowledged by Wiegmann, this provides for improved driver assistance (Page 1), which one of ordinary skill would have recognized allows for improved safety. The motivation to operate control based on friction data availability is that, this accounting for friction conditions in vehicle control (Col 1 lines 21-44), which one of ordinary skill would have recognized improves safety and comfort of the vehicle.
In regards to claim 7, Kojima, as modified by Wiegmann and Askeland, teaches a driver assistance system, for carrying out a method as claimed in claim 1, comprising a driver assistance unit which evaluates and processes information items input by a driver and/or driver specifications as driver signals and provides corrected driver signals, (Fig 1, 2, 6-8.)
if the driver assistance unit evaluates a correction boundary condition as being satisfied, ([0040] a prediction of where the vehicle will travel after a predetermined time is made and a comparison is made between the predicted position and the position of the lane to determine if the vehicle departs from the lane. This is a determination of if a boundary condition is satisfied or not.)
the driver assistance unit utilizing the observer signals of an observer unit for the evaluation of the correction boundary condition and for the generation of the corrected driver signals, the observer signals being dependent on the present driving state situation detected by vehicle sensors and on an information item relating to the course of the driving lane, ([0027], [0039] data is read from the camera control unit to interpret road and lane markings, vehicle state data is interpreted including wheel speed and yaw rate, and operations are performed by control unit of vehicle, where [0040] information from camera on lane markings is used to determine if vehicle departs from the lane by comparing the predicted position using vehicle state data with the lane boundary position. [0040] vehicle steering and braking commands are determined to remain within the lane, and [0041] when it is determined that the driver is not intentionally leaving the lane, the steering and braking commands are output and the vehicle is controlled.)
the corrected driver signals being provided to a driving dynamics control system of the vehicle. ([0042] steering and braking commands are output to steering control unit 11 and brake control unit 11.)
Claims 2-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kojima in view Wiegmann and Askeland, in further view of Shin (US 20090157263).
In regards to claim 2, Kojima, as modified by Wiegmann and Askeland, teaches the method as claimed in claim 1.
Kojima, as modified by Wiegmann and Askeland, does not teach:
wherein the observer unit has and/or is provided with map data and/or navigation data relating to the course of the driving lane, and wherein a GPS position of the vehicle is provided to the observer unit, with at least one roadway property information item being provided from an additional sensor, an evaluation unit, and/or from a network service.
However, Shin teaches dynamic characteristics of a vehicle include information about a road along which the vehicle is traveling, GPS information of the vehicle, and other characteristics ([0092]) and feeding some of this information into an observer equation ([0059]), including an assessment of the virtual vehicle weight which is based upon friction ([0066]). Friction is a roadway property information item that must first be evaluated in order to be used. The vehicle location and road curvature are calculated based on sensed information ([0058]) and act as navigation data relating to the course of the driving lane.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to modify the vehicle control method of Kojima, as already modified by Wiegmann and Askeland, by incorporating the teachings of Shin, such that road information, GPS information, vehicle location, friction, virtual vehicle weight, road curvature, and other dynamic characteristics of the vehicle are received or evaluated, and fed into an observer equation to control the vehicle.
The motivation to do so is that, as acknowledged by Shin, this allows for improved lane keeping, which increases safety and comfort ([0098]).
In regards to claim 3, Kojima, as modified by Wiegmann, Askeland, and Shin, teaches the method as claimed in claim 2, wherein, from the data and information items of the observer unit, the driver assistance unit calculates a driving lane boundary model and/or a course of a driving lane edge, and, in the course of the assessment of the correction boundary condition, checks whether the driver demand trajectory of the vehicle presently determined by the driver signals would lead to a departure from the driving lane and/or a crossing of the driving lane boundary, if this is the case, the correction boundary condition is present and the driver assistance unit calculates/generates corrected driver signals, and if the correction boundary condition is not present, no corrected driver signals are calculated/generated, but the original driver signals are provided to the driving dynamics control system. ([0027], [0039] data is read from the camera control unit to interpret road and lane markings, vehicle state data is interpreted including wheel speed and yaw rate, and operations are performed by control unit of vehicle. This includes a course of a driving lane edge. [0040] information from camera on lane markings is used to determine if vehicle departs from the lane by comparing the predicted position using vehicle state data with the lane boundary position. [0040] vehicle steering and braking commands are determined to adjust the vehicle and remain within the lane, and [0041] when it is determined that the driver is not intentionally leaving the lane, the steering and braking commands are output and the vehicle is controlled.)
In regards to claim 4, Kojima, as modified by Wiegmann, Askeland, and Shin, teaches the method as claimed in claim 3.
Shin teaches adjusting the degree in which a vehicle returns to the center of a lane by adjusting a constant that governs how quickly the vehicle returns, where when the constant increases, the vehicle rapidly returns to the lane center and when the constant decreases the vehicle slowly returns to the lane center ([0083]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to modify the vehicle control method of Kojima, as already modified by Wiegmann, Askeland, and Shin, by further incorporating the teachings of Shin, such that lane keeping is performed by returning the vehicle to the center of the lane using driving control signals.
The motivation to do so is the same as acknowledged by Shin in regards to claim 2 above.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kojima in view Wiegmann and Askeland, in further view of Non-patent Literature “The new BMW 5 Series” (“BMW”).
In regards to claim 9, Kojima, as modified by Wiegmann and Askeland, teaches the method as claimed in claim 1.
Kojima, as modified by Wiegmann and Askeland, does not teach:
wherein the driver assistance unit is first activated above a defined minimum speed of the vehicle of 15 km/h.
However, BMW teaches a driving assistant and traffic jam assistant feature can be activated at speeds of at least 15 kilometers per hour (Page 20).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to modify the vehicle control method of Kojima, as already modified by Wiegmann and Askeland, by incorporating the teachings of BMW, such that driving assistance functions are activated at speeds of at least 15 kilometers per hour.
The motivation to do so is that, as acknowledged by BMW, this allows for providing improved assistance to the vehicle while improving braking ability and thereby safety (Page 20).
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kojima in view Wiegmann and Askeland, in further view of Ross (US 20130289808).
In regards to claim 10, Kojima, as modified by Wiegmann and Askeland, teaches the method as claimed in claim 1.
Kojima, as modified by Wiegmann and Askeland, does not teach:
further comprising deactivating the driver assistance unit when the driver signals, including the separate activation of the driver assistance unit, have a defined number of a plurality of cycles.
However, Ross teaches overriding base cruise control when a driver inputs a particular depression sequence of the cruise controller request button, such as a pulse or repeated actuation in a discernable manner ([0057]). These are repeated driver signals in a particular depression sequence. Pulsing, by definition, is an input followed by subsequent inputs within the same period and therefore a cycle. By pulsing, the driver is providing a defined number of cycles of at least one pulse, or however many pulses are required to discern a particular pattern or depression sequence.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to modify the vehicle control method of Kojima, as already modified by Wiegmann and Askeland, by incorporating the teachings of Ross, such that pulsed operation of a button when deviation is detected within a predetermined time to discern the pulsed operation is used to interpret a driver’s override command of driver assistance.
The motivation to do so is that, as acknowledged by Ross, this allows for driver override and preferred control by the driver ([0002], [0057]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Kim (US 20170029025) teaches determining a steering torque for lane keeping of a vehicle.
Vanterpool (US 20200079308) teaches a collision avoidance system for a vehicle that can be manually deactivated or overridden by a driver.
Ono et al. (US 20190248287) teaches an autonomous driving system that may be at least temporarily deactivated by when driver manipulation has been performed.
Mills et al. (US 20180319402) teaches deactivating driver assistance for a vehicle based on driver operation.
Ichikawa et al. (US 20180292822) teaches an automatic driving system for a vehicle that may experience an override operation performed by the driver to deactivate automatic driving control.
Bellem et al. (US 20160313733) teaches a driver may intervene and deactivate autonomous driving operations by steering or using acceleration functions.
Ross (US 20130289808) teaches an override event may be determined when a driver presses a corresponding button for a predefined period of time or the button is operated in a manner to prompt selection of a performance strategy.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATTHIAS S WEISFELD whose telephone number is (571)272-7258. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 7:00 AM - 4:00 PM.
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, Ramya Burgess can be reached on Ramya.Burgess@USPTO.GOV. 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.
/MATTHIAS S WEISFELD/Examiner, Art Unit 3661