DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
The amendment filed on 7/07/2025 has been entered and fully considered.
Claims 1, 4 and 5 are allowed. Claims 6-21 are pending in Instant Application.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) filed 09/16/2022 and 07/07/2025 and 03/20/2026 has been received and considered by the examiner. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97.
Examiner’s Note
Examiner has cited particular paragraphs/columns and line numbers or figures in the references as applied to the claims below for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested from the applicant, in preparing the responses, to fully consider the references in their entirety as potentially teaching all of part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the examiner. Applicant is reminded that the Examiner is entitled to give the broadest reasonable interpretation to the language of the claims. Furthermore, the Examiner is not limited to Applicant’s definition which is not specifically set forth in the claims.
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 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.
Response to Arguments
6. Regarding 103(a) rejection: Applicant's arguments filed 07/07/2025 have been fully considered. Regarding Claims 1, 4-5, Examiner agrees and these claims are indicated as allowable. Regarding the drawing objection and claim objections, Examiner agrees with applicant’s remarks and withdraws the objections. Regarding Claim 6, Examiner agrees with Applicant’s arguments in which Zhang in view of Ostafew does not teach the capability of the amended claim. However, Examiner brings forth a new reference Weng, in which discloses a lateral deviation and in which the lateral deviation is calculated from preview points. Regarding Claim 15, Examiner agrees that Zhang in view of Ostafew does not teach the capability of the amended claim. However, Examiner brings in a new reference, Weng, in which discloses a response time in which may comprise planning delays for calculating path planning and actuation delays. A new rejection can be found down below.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or non-obviousness.
Claims 6-7, 10-14, and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang (US 20190220012) in view of Ostafew (US 20210237769) in further view of Weng (US 20210341936).
Regarding Claim 6, Zhang discloses A method comprising: determining, based at least in part in a current location of a vehicle operating in an environment at a first time, an estimated location of the vehicle at a future time after the first time, (Zhang, [0054-0056 & Fig. 5] which discloses point 502, examiner interprets point 502 to be the current location of the vehicle and is along the vehicle trajectory. Fig. 5 also discloses point 504, examiner interprets point 504 to be the estimated location of the vehicle at a future time)
the estimated location comprising: a lateral coordinate that is based at least in part on a planned vehicle trajectory associated with the vehicle operating in the environment at the first time and a projected location of the current location onto the planned vehicle trajectory; and a longitudinal coordinate (Zhang, see at least [0040-0044 & Fig. 5] “Planning and control data is generated by planning module 305 including information describing how vehicle 300 would move in a next moving cycle (e.g., next route/path segment). For example, the planning and control data may instruct vehicle 300 to move 10 meters at a speed of 30 mile per hour (mph), then change to a right lane at the speed of 25 mph.” **The planning module 305 includes information on how the vehicle will move at planning point 504 and what action is needed to operate the vehicle. Fig. 5 also discloses point 503 which is a projected location of point 502. **The planning module 305 includes information on how the vehicle will move at planning point 504 and what action is needed to operate the vehicle. ** Fig. 5 illustrates a process of trajectory planning, in which the first trajectory is a planned trajectory.) Fig. 5 also discloses point 503 which is a projected location of point 502. Regarding a longitudinal coordinate Zhang discloses the speed at every location and exact longitudinal coordinate given vehicle is equipped with GPS system, just for clarification Examiner is using secondary reference of Ostafew)
determining, based at least in part on the estimated location at the future time and the speed associated with the planned vehicle trajectory at the first time, a new vehicle trajectory associated with the vehicle operating at the future time; (Zhang, see at least Fig. 5 in which showcases point 504 and another trajectory 520. Also see at least [0016 & 053] “A second trajectory is generated from a second location on the first trajectory corresponding to the second point in time as a starting location of the second trajectory”)
and controlling one or more of a velocity or an orientation of the vehicle based at least in part on the second vehicle trajectory at the future time. (Zhang, see at least [0048 & 053] “A segment of the first trajectory between the first point in time and the second point in time is combined with the second trajectory by trajectory combine module 404 to generate a third trajectory as the final trajectory for the second planning cycle. The ADV is driven and controlled according to the third trajectory corresponding to the second planning cycle.” **vehicle is controlled to following the third trajectory is interpreted as controlling the orientation of the vehicle.)
Zhang does not explicitly disclose and a longitudinal coordinate determined based at least in part on a speed associated with the planned vehicle trajectory;
However, Ostafew is directed to vehicle trajectory planning. Ostafew discloses a longitudinal coordinate determined based at least in part on a speed associated with the planned vehicle trajectory; (Ostafew, see at least [0040] “implementations of a trajectory planner according to this disclosure can generate a smooth trajectory for an autonomous vehicle (AV), from a source location to a destination location, by, for example, receiving HD map data, teleoperation data, and other input data; stitching (e.g., fusing, connecting, etc.) the input data longitudinally to determine a speed profile for a path from the source location to the destination location (e.g., the speed profile specifying how fast the AV can be driven along different segments of the path from the source location to the destination location);” and also see at least [0100] wherein the HD map data can use 3D cartesian coordinates)
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Zhang to include the technique of generating coordinates for which a speed profile is determined along different segments of a path as taught by Ostafew with reasonable expectation that this would allow for a vehicle to navigate road curvatures seamlessly and satisfy constraints on speed at any given location and therefore improve safety.
Zhang does not explicitly disclose the lateral coordinate being deviated from the planned vehicle trajectory by an amount less than a threshold lateral distance;
the lateral coordinate being deviated from the planned vehicle trajectory by an amount less than a threshold lateral distance; (Zhang, see at least [0051] “it is assumed the ADV is at time t1 and its actual location is at location 502, which is off the first trajectory 510 due to control error represented by Δs.” And [0052] “control error determination module 401 examines the control error Δs to determine whether the control error is less than a predetermined threshold” Also see [0042] wherein the planning module plans a next route segment/path segment and includes a target position and time required for the ADV to reach the target position. Also see at least [0045] wherein if the control error is less than the predetermined threshold, the planning module is configured to stitch a second trajectory. Therefore, when the next route segment or path segment is being planned due to the control error being less than the predetermined threshold, a target position is also determined.)
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Zhang to include the technique of controlling movement of an autonomous vehicle in which includes a target path and a current state of the autonomous machine and a lateral deviation is calculated between a preview point to the current position by Weng with reasonable expectation that this would allow for lateral control under different vehicle speeds and different lateral deviations as the vehicle is moving along a roadway. This would improve the accuracy and stability of vehicle platoons, therefore improving safety.
Regarding Claim 7, Zhang in view of Ostafew in further view of Weng in combination disclose The method of claim 6, further comprising: (set forth by the rejection above)
determining that a distance from the current location to the planned vehicle trajectory is less than or equal to a threshold distance, (Zhang, see at least [0051] “it is assumed the ADV is at time t1 and its actual location is at location 502, which is off the first trajectory 510 due to control error represented by Δs.” And [0052] “control error determination module 401 examines the control error Δs to determine whether the control error is less than a predetermined threshold”)
wherein determining the estimated location of the vehicle is based at least in part on determining that the distance is less than or equal to the threshold distance. (Zhang, see at least [0042] wherein planning module 305 plans a next route segment or path segment and includes a target position and time required for the ADV to reach the target position. Also see at least [0045] wherein if the control error is less than the predetermined threshold, the planning module is configured to stitch a second trajectory. Therefore, when the next route segment or path segment is being planned due to the control error being less than the predetermined threshold, a target position is also determined. **Examiner interprets the target position as the estimated location of the vehicle)
Regarding Claim 10, Zhang in view of Ostafew in further view of Weng in combination disclose The method of claim 6, wherein the future time is based at least in part on at least one of: (set forth by the rejection above)
a first time interval associated with calculating vehicle trajectories; or a second time interval associated with an actuation delay corresponding to a vehicle component associated with controlling the vehicle. (Zhang, see at least [0042 & 0045] wherein the planning phase is performed in time intervals and the planning phase is configured to stitch output trajectories)
Regarding Claim 11, Zhang in view of Ostafew in further view of Weng in combination disclose The method of claim 6, further comprising: (set forth by the rejection above)
determining a vehicle component associated with controlling the vehicle according to the new vehicle trajectory; (Zhang, see at least [0040-0041] “Planning and control data is generated by planning module 305 including information describing how vehicle 300 would move in a next moving cycle (e.g., next route/path segment). For example, the planning and control data may instruct vehicle 300 to move 10 meters at a speed of 30 mile per hour (mph), then change to a right lane at the speed of 25 mph.” Also see at least [0016 & 053] “A second trajectory is generated from a second location on the first trajectory corresponding to the second point in time as a starting location of the second trajectory” ** the second trajectory is interpreted as the new trajectory.)
and determining an actuation delay associated with the vehicle component, (Zhang, see at least [0042] wherein the planning phase is performed in a number of planning cycles, for example, in time intervals of 100 milliseconds. For each planning cycle, control commands will be issued based on the planning data, therefore, there is a delay associated when the vehicle component is receiving information. Control module 306 then generates one or more control commands (e.g., throttle, brake, steering control commands) based on the planning and control data of the current cycle.)
wherein determining the new vehicle trajectory is further based at least in part on the actuation delay. (Zhang, see at least [0042] “That is, for every 100 ms, planning module 305 plans a next route segment or path segment, for example, including a target position and the time required for the ADV to reach the target position. Alternatively, planning module 305 may further specify the specific speed, direction, and/or steering angle, etc.”)
Regarding Claim 12, Zhang in view of Ostafew in further view of Weng in combination disclose The method of claim 6, further comprising: (set forth by the rejection above)
determining an action associated with the vehicle operating in the environment; (Zhang, see at least [0040] “Planning and control data is generated by planning module 305 including information describing how vehicle 300 would move in a next moving cycle (e.g., next route/path segment). For example, the planning and control data may instruct vehicle 300 to move 10 meters at a speed of 30 mile per hour (mph), then change to a right lane at the speed of 25 mph.”)
and determining a speed associated with the action, (Zhang, see at least [0040] “the planning and control data may instruct vehicle 300 to move 10 meters at a speed of 30 mile per hour”)
wherein the new vehicle trajectory is determined based at least in part on the speed. (Zhang, see at least [0040-0041] “Planning and control data is generated by planning module 305 including information describing how vehicle 300 would move in a next moving cycle (e.g., next route/path segment). For example, the planning and control data may instruct vehicle 300 to move 10 meters at a speed of 30 mile per hour (mph), then change to a right lane at the speed of 25 mph.” Also see at least [0016 & 053] “A second trajectory is generated from a second location on the first trajectory corresponding to the second point in time as a starting location of the second trajectory”)
Regarding Claim 13, Zhang in view of Ostafew in further view of Weng in combination disclose The method of claim 6, further comprising: (set forth by the rejection above)
determining an object operating in the environment; (Zhang, see at least [0023] “Radar unit 214 may represent a system that utilizes radio signals to sense objects within the local environment of the autonomous vehicle.”)
and determining an action for the vehicle to perform based at least in part on the object, (Zhang, see at least [0040] “That is, for a given object, decision module 304 decides what to do with the object, while planning module 305 determines how to do it… decision module 304 may decide to pass the object, while planning module 305 may determine whether to pass on the left side or right side of the object. Planning and control data is generated by planning module 305 including information describing how vehicle 300 would move in a next moving cycle (e.g., next route/path segment). For example, the planning and control data may instruct vehicle 300 to move 10 meters at a speed of 30 mile per hour (mph), then change to a right lane at the speed of 25 mph.”)
wherein determining the new vehicle trajectory is further based at least in part on the action. (Zhang, see at least [0040] “Planning and control data is generated by planning module 305 including information describing how vehicle 300 would move in a next moving cycle (e.g., next route/path segment). For example, the planning and control data may instruct vehicle 300 to move 10 meters at a speed of 30 mile per hour (mph), then change to a right lane at the speed of 25 mph.” Also see at least [0016 & 053] “A second trajectory is generated from a second location on the first trajectory corresponding to the second point in time as a starting location of the second trajectory”)
Regarding Claim 14, Zhang in view of Ostafew in further view of Weng discloses The method of claim 6, further comprising (set forth by the rejection above)
controlling the vehicle, at the future time, based at least in part on the new vehicle trajectory. (Zhang, see at least [0048 & 053] “A segment of the first trajectory between the first point in time and the second point in time is combined with the second trajectory by trajectory combine module 404 to generate a third trajectory as the final trajectory for the second planning cycle. The ADV is driven and controlled according to the third trajectory corresponding to the second planning cycle.” Also see at least [0016 & 053] “A second trajectory is generated from a second location on the first trajectory corresponding to the second point in time as a starting location of the second trajectory”)
Regarding Claim 21, Zhang in view of Ostafew in further view of Weng discloses The method of claim 6, (see rejection above)
wherein the future time is dynamically determined during a vehicle operation based at least in part on an action associated with the vehicle operating in the environment. ( Zhang, see at least [0040] wherein an object is near a vehicle and the planning module determines how/if the vehicle should pass the object. The planning and control data is generated by the planning module for how the vehicle would move in a next moving cycle (next route/path segment).)
Claims 15-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang (US 20190220012) in view of Ostafew (US 20210237769) in further view of Merwaday (US 20210264794).
Regarding Claim 15, Zhang discloses One or more non-transitory computer-readable media storing instructions that, when executed, cause one or more processors to perform operations comprising: (Zhang, see at least [0068-0070] wherein disclosed is processing module/unit/logic 1528 and computer-readable storage medium 1509 which is capable of storing or encoding instructions that cause the machine to perform instructions)
determining, based at least in part in a current location of a vehicle operating in an environment at a first time, an estimated location of the vehicle at a future time after the first time, (Zhang, [0054-0056 & Fig. 5] which discloses point 502, examiner interprets point 502 to be the current location of the vehicle. Fig. 5 showcases point 504, examiner interprets point 504 to be an estimated location of the vehicle)
and the estimated location comprises: a lateral coordinate that is based at least in part on a planned vehicle trajectory associated with the vehicle operating in the environment at the first time and a projected location of the current location onto the planned vehicle trajectory; a longitudinal coordinate (Zhang, see at least [0040-0044 & Fig. 5] “Planning and control data is generated by planning module 305 including information describing how vehicle 300 would move in a next moving cycle (e.g., next route/path segment). For example, the planning and control data may instruct vehicle 300 to move 10 meters at a speed of 30 mile per hour (mph), then change to a right lane at the speed of 25 mph.” **The planning module 305 includes information on how the vehicle will move at planning point 504 and what action is needed to operate the vehicle. Fig. 5 also discloses point 503 which is a projected location of point 502. Regarding a longitudinal coordinate Zhang discloses the speed at every location and exact longitudinal coordinate given vehicle is equipped with GPS system, just for clarification Examiner is using secondary reference of Ostafew)
and determining, based at least in part on the estimated location at the future time and the speed associated with the planned vehicle trajectory at the first time, a new vehicle trajectory associated with the vehicle operating at the future time; (Zhang, see at least Fig. 5 in which showcases point 504 and another trajectory 520. Also see at least [0016 & 053] “A second trajectory is generated from a second location on the first trajectory corresponding to the second point in time as a starting location of the second trajectory”)
and controlling one or more of a velocity or an orientation of the vehicle based at least in part on the new vehicle trajectory at the future time. (Zhang, see at least [0048 & 053] “A segment of the first trajectory between the first point in time and the second point in time is combined with the second trajectory by trajectory combine module 404 to generate a third trajectory as the final trajectory for the second planning cycle. The ADV is driven and controlled according to the third trajectory corresponding to the second planning cycle.”)
Zhang does not explicitly disclose and a longitudinal coordinate determined based at least in part on a speed associated with the planned vehicle trajectory;
However, Ostafew is directed to vehicle trajectory planning. Ostafew discloses and a longitudinal coordinate determined based at least in part on a speed associated with the planned vehicle trajectory; (Ostafew, see at least [0040] “implementations of a trajectory planner according to this disclosure can generate a smooth trajectory for an autonomous vehicle (AV), from a source location to a destination location, by, for example, receiving HD map data, teleoperation data, and other input data; stitching (e.g., fusing, connecting, etc.) the input data longitudinally to determine a speed profile for a path from the source location to the destination location (e.g., the speed profile specifying how fast the AV can be driven along different segments of the path from the source location to the destination location);” and also see at least [0100] wherein the HD map data can use 3D cartesian coordinates)
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Zhang to include the technique of generating coordinates for which a speed profile is determined along different segments of a path as taught by Ostafew with reasonable expectation that this would allow for a vehicle to navigate road curvatures seamlessly and satisfy constraints on speed at any given location and therefore improve safety.
Modified Zhang does not explicitly disclose wherein a time interval between the first time and the future time is determined based at least in part on a delay associated with vehicle trajectory calculation and a delay associated with a drive system component actuation, (Examiner notes that Zhang [0040-0041] and [0042] does discloses a time interval delay (time interval for planning cycles) between a first time and future time and it can be associated based at least in part of a delay associated with a drive system component. However, falls silent on determining this time interval based at least in pat with vehicle trajectory calculation.)
However, Merwaday discloses wherein a time interval between the first time and the future time is determined based at least in part on a delay associated with vehicle trajectory calculation and a delay associated with a drive system component actuation, (Merwaday, see at least [0084-0085] wherein a response time includes a delay for calculating path planning for the following vehicle and actuation delays. Also see [0079] wherein the response time parameter of a vehicle may represent the time period between a change such as a time for path planning. ** path planning would have a start point (first point) and a future point in time.)
Accordingly, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings as in modified Zhang with the teachings of Merwaday to include the capability of a determining a response time for path planning wherein a response time includes a delay for calculating path planning for a vehicle and actuation delays. This would further improve the managing or controlling of a vehicle platoon.
Regarding Claim 16, Zhang in view of Ostafew in view of Merwaday in combination disclose The one or more non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 15, the operations further comprising: (set forth by the rejection above)
determining that a distance from the current location to the new vehicle trajectory is less than or equal to a threshold distance, (Zhang, see at least [0051] “it is assumed the ADV is at time t1 and its actual location is at location 502, which is off the first trajectory 510 due to control error represented by Δs.” And [0052] “control error determination module 401 examines the control error Δs to determine whether the control error is less than a predetermined threshold” Also see at least [0016 & 053] “A second trajectory is generated from a second location on the first trajectory corresponding to the second point in time as a starting location of the second trajectory”)
wherein determining the estimated location of the vehicle is based at least in part on determining that the distance is less than or equal to the threshold distance. (Zhang, see at least [0042] wherein planning module 305 plans a next route segment or path segment and includes a target position and time required for the ADV to reach the target position. Also see at least [0045] wherein if the control error is less than the predetermined threshold, the planning module is configured to stitch a second trajectory. Therefore, when the next route segment or path segment is being planned due to the control error being less than the predetermined threshold, a target position is also determined. **Examiner interprets the target position as the estimated location of the vehicle)
Regarding Claim 17, Zhang in view of Ostafew in view of Merwaday in combination disclose The one or more non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 15, wherein the future time is based at least in part on at least one of: (set forth by the rejection above)
a first time interval associated with calculating vehicle trajectories; or a second time interval associated with an actuation delay corresponding to a vehicle component associated with controlling the vehicle. (Zhang, see at least [0042 & 0045] wherein the planning phase is performed in time intervals and the planning phase is configured to stitch output trajectories)
Regarding Claim 18, Zhang in view of Ostafew in view of Merwaday discloses The one or more non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 15, the operations further comprising: (set forth by the rejection above)
determining a vehicle component associated with controlling the vehicle according to the new vehicle trajectory; (Zhang, see at least [0025] which discloses vehicle control system components and [0040-0041] “Planning and control data is generated by planning module 305 including information describing how vehicle 300 would move in a next moving cycle (e.g., next route/path segment). For example, the planning and control data may instruct vehicle 300 to move 10 meters at a speed of 30 mile per hour (mph), then change to a right lane at the speed of 25 mph.” Also see at least [0016 & 053] “A second trajectory is generated from a second location on the first trajectory corresponding to the second point in time as a starting location of the second trajectory”)
determining an actuation delay associated with the vehicle component; (Zhang, see at least [0042] wherein the planning phase is performed in a number of planning cycles, for example, in time intervals of 100 milliseconds. For each planning cycle, control commands will be issued based on the planning data, therefore, there is a delay associated when the vehicle component is receiving information. Control module 306 then generates one or more control commands (e.g., throttle, brake, steering control commands) based on the planning and control data of the current cycle.)
and sending a signal to actuate the vehicle component based at least in part on the actuation delay. (Zhang, see at least [0041-0044] wherein the control module 306 controls and drives the autonomous vehicle by sending signals to the vehicle control system 11 and wherein the planning phase is performed in planning cycles in time intervals, wherein the control commands are issued based on the planning and control data.)
Regarding Claim 19, Zhang in view of Ostafew in view of Merwaday in combination disclose The one or more non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 15, the operations further comprising: (set forth by the rejection above)
determining an action associated with the vehicle operating in the environment at the future time; (Zhang, see at least [0040-0041] “Planning and control data is generated by planning module 305 including information describing how vehicle 300 would move in a next moving cycle (e.g., next route/path segment). For example, the planning and control data may instruct vehicle 300 to move 10 meters at a speed of 30 mile per hour (mph), then change to a right lane at the speed of 25 mph.”)
and determining one or more speeds associated with the action, wherein the new vehicle trajectory is determined based at least in part on the one or more speeds. (Zhang, see at least [0040-0041] “Planning and control data is generated by planning module 305 including information describing how vehicle 300 would move in a next moving cycle (e.g., next route/path segment). For example, the planning and control data may instruct vehicle 300 to move 10 meters at a speed of 30 mile per hour (mph), then change to a right lane at the speed of 25 mph.” Also see at least [0016 & 053] “A second trajectory is generated from a second location on the first trajectory corresponding to the second point in time as a starting location of the second trajectory”)
Regarding Claim 20, Zhang in view of Ostafew in view of Merwaday discloses The one or more non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 15, (set forth by the rejection above)
the operations further comprising controlling the vehicle, at the future time, based at least in part on the new vehicle trajectory. (Zhang, see at least [0048 & 053] “A segment of the first trajectory between the first point in time and the second point in time is combined with the second trajectory by trajectory combine module 404 to generate a third trajectory as the final trajectory for the second planning cycle. The ADV is driven and controlled according to the third trajectory corresponding to the second planning cycle.” Also see at least [0016 & 053] “A second trajectory is generated from a second location on the first trajectory corresponding to the second point in time as a starting location of the second trajectory”)
9. Claims 8 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang (US 20190220012) in view of Ostafew (US 20210237769) in further view of Weng (US 20210341936) in furthest view of NISHIKAWA (JP 26712947).
Regarding Claim 8, Zhang in view of Ostafew in further view of Weng discloses The method of claim 6, further comprising: (set forth by the rejection above)
Zhang in view of Ostafew does not explicitly disclose determining a measured location of the vehicle at the future time;
determining that a distance between the measured location and the planned vehicle trajectory exceeds a threshold distance;
and determining, based at least in part on the distance exceeding the threshold distance, to cause the vehicle to move to a parking location.
However, NISHIKAWA is directed to route controlling method for unmanned vehicles. NISHIKAWA discloses determining a measured location of the vehicle at the future time; (NISHIKAWA, see at least Fig. 7, which discloses position P, in which examiner interprets to be a measured location of the vehicle)
determining that a distance between the measured location and the planned vehicle trajectory exceeds a threshold distance; (NISHIKAWA, see at least [Page 2, paragraph 4] “As shown in FIG. 7A, the unmanned vehicle 1 is temporarily stopped when the deviation amount D becomes larger than a predetermined value.”)
and determining, based at least in part on the distance exceeding the threshold distance, to cause the vehicle to move to a parking location. (NISHIKAWA, see at least [Page 2, paragraph 4], “As shown in FIG. 7A, the unmanned vehicle 1 is temporarily stopped when the deviation amount D becomes larger than a predetermined value.”, where the examiner interprets stopping location as parking location)
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Zhang in view of Ostafew to include the technique of stopping the vehicle based a route and a threshold being exceeded as taught by NISHIKAWA with reasonable expectation that this would allow for vehicle computing systems to determine a location off-route such as a stopping/parking location to satisfy pre-determined conditions and safety allow for the vehicle to exit off the route.
Regarding Claim 9, Zhang in view of Ostafew in further view of Weng in furthest view of NISHIKAWA discloses The method of claim 8, wherein causing the vehicle to move to the parking location comprises at least one of: (set forth by the rejection above)
Zhang in view of Ostafew does not explicitly disclose controlling the vehicle based at least in part on a third trajectory associated with the vehicle operating to the parking location; or controlling the vehicle based at least in part on a control input received from a remote operator.
However, NISHIKAWA is directed to route controlling method for unmanned vehicles. NISHIKAWA discloses controlling the vehicle based at least in part on a third trajectory associated with the vehicle operating to the parking location; or controlling the vehicle based at least in part on a control input received from a remote operator. (NISHIKAWA, see at least Fig. 7 and [Page 2, paragraph 4] wherein the vehicle is following a route and when there is a node N in which the vehicle cannot pass, the vehicle can stop at a position away from the node N.)
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Zhang in view of Ostafew to include the technique of stopping the vehicle based a route and due to a constraint of an item being within a as taught by NISHIKAWA with reasonable expectation that this would allow for vehicle computing systems to determine a location off-route such as a stopping/parking location to satisfy pre-determined conditions and safety allow for the vehicle to exit off the route.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1 and 4-5 are allowed.
Relevant Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 11390300– The computing system can obtain sensor data describing objects within an environment of the autonomous vehicle. The computing system can generate a plurality of trajectories for the autonomous vehicle based on the sensor data and the initial travel path. The computing system can determine whether the initial travel path, an offset profile, and a velocity profile meet flatness criteria. In response to determining that the initial travel path, the offset profile, and the velocity profile meet the flatness criteria, the computing system can combine the initial travel path, the offset profile, and the velocity profile into the respective trajectory. The computing system can determine a trajectory from the plurality of trajectories.
US 20200398894 – Techniques for generating trajectories and drivable areas for navigating a vehicle in an environment are discussed herein. The techniques can include receiving a reference trajectory representing an initial trajectory for a vehicle, such as an autonomous vehicle, to traverse the environment in a first drivable area. An object within a distance threshold can be detected in the environment and a second drivable area can be determined. Further, the techniques can include determining a target trajectory based at least in part on the reference trajectory and/or the second drivable area which can provide a region for the object to traverse the environment, and controlling the autonomous vehicle to traverse the environment based at least in part on the target trajectory.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NADA MAHYOOB ALQADERI whose telephone number is (571) 272-2052. The examiner can normally be reached Monday – Friday, 8AM-5PM.
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, Rachid Bendidi can be reached on (571) 272-4896. 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.
/NADA MAHYOOB ALQADERI/Examiner, Art Unit 3664
/REDHWAN K MAWARI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3664
Prosecution Insights