DETAILED ACTION
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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
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.
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Loberti in view of Miu (US 20190250269).
Regarding claim 7, the claimed wherein said pattern is comprised of a material that reflects light at one or more wavelengths in the near-infrared spectrum; wherein said pattern is undetectable by unaided human vision under ambient light conditions; and; wherein said pattern has a predefined shape associated with a category of object that are recognizable by a LIDAR-based detection system (“The portable article 10 includes a portable body 20 and a number of patterns 50 disposed at a number of productive locations on the portable body 20. Generally, the number of patterns 50 includes patterns 50 selected from the group including, consisting of, or consisting essentially of, public patterns 52 (shown as a warning triangle), detectable patterns 54 (shown as visible patterns 57 detectable by a camera), radar enhancing patterns 56 (shown as a pattern made from radar reflective beads 83), visible patterns 57 (shown as a decal of a sun pattern), embedded patterns 58 (in an exemplary embodiment, the radar reflective beads 83 are embedded in the fabric 22), camouflage patterns 60 (the reflective beads 83 embedded in the fabric 22 are not generally visible to the human eye), invisible patterns 62 (the reflective beads 83 are structured to reflect radar, a light that cannot be detected by the human eye)” Loberti: paragraph 68 & “In this embodiment, the pattern 50 is a radar detectable pattern 50 made from a material selected from the group including, consisting of, or consisting essentially of, a retroreflective material 80 and a metallic thread 82” Loberti: paragraph 71 & “orienting patterns 64 (the “sun on the horizon” shown as an asymmetrical pattern about a generally horizontal axis and, as such, a detection system 1 can use the orienting patterns 64 to, for example, determine the orientation of the shirt 12), collective patterns 66, external patterns 68, and internal patterns 70.” Loberti: paragraph 68 & “As used herein, an “identifier” is a pattern that is structured to be, and is, associated with a specific set of characteristics that are generally unique and which are associated with the nature of the object having the “identifier.” For example, a white cane (which is typically associated with a visual impairment) includes an “identifier” which the imaging system associates with a person having a visual impairment. As used herein, “generally unique” means that a pattern or identifier is created specifically for the disclosed specific set of characteristics and that any other instances of the pattern or identifier is not associated with the specific set of characteristics.” Loberti: paragraph 63)
An apparatus as claimed in claim 7, wherein said apparatus is road paint comprising: aluminum microstructures having a textured surface geometry creating a pattern embedded within said road paint and using a predefined association within said detection system that has been trained to recognize that said pattern is associated with categories of traffic control signs based on semantic labeling of said pattern in relation to proximate visible objects is not specifically disclosed by Loberti. Miu teaches embedding radar reflective particles in the road marking paint (“Although it is possible to read existing road markings 21 using MW/RF radiation naturally occurring in the environment, it requires highly sensitive devices forming a passive detection system which are generally cost and size prohibitive to use on road going vehicles. By increasing the contrast between the road markings 21 and background (such as the asphalt forming the road surface, or from the prior art non-radar reflective road paint) via the paint with the radar reflective particles as described hereinabove, smaller and less expensive transmitter/receivers can be used as part of an active system.” Miu: paragraph 38) with the paint including aluminum multifaceted structures (“In one embodiment, the road markings 21 (e.g., lane demarcations, pedestrian crossing, one way arrows, etc.) are displayed on the road surface using paint enhanced with radar reflective properties for increasing reflectivity relative to the surrounding environment (e.g., pavement) and for increasing the intensity of the reflections detected by receiver 1202. Such paint may preferably include distributed therein iron or iron based alloy particles, while aluminum, magnesium, zinc or their alloys may be less preferable. In order to maximize radar wave scattering back to the vehicle and back to the receiver 1202, the particles are preferably multifaceted, sharp cornered particles (e.g., a metal grit)” Miu: paragraph 35) that allow for recognition and classification of detected symbols and signs (“In another embodiment, road signs 23 (i.e., a road side sign such as speed information, street name, one way street, etc.) may include markings, such as text, symbols, arrows, or the like, which are composed of MW and/or RF reflective material strategically deposited onto the road sign 23 to further assist vehicle guidance. Such a road sign 23 may be formed using typical paint to form the text, symbols, arrows, or the like where the visible signage (i.e., visible to a human driver) that is radar non-reflective or transparent is printed over an encoded layer. The encode layer may be formed from a sequence of radar reflective material and non-radar reflective material to form an encoded sequence, for example a two-dimensional or Quick Response (QR) code 102. [0040] The QR code 102 represents the same information as the optically visible marking, but may be read by the vehicle sensors 27 through inclement weather even when visually it is not apparent what the road sign 23 displays (i.e., the sign may be covered by snow rendering the marking unreadable to a driver), but which is discernable either directly or through decoding by the advanced driver-assistance and autonomous vehicle control radar system 20. For example, the information representative of the markings of the road sign 23 may be encoded in a binary format embedded in a layer below the layer of normal non-radar reflective paint deposited to form the text, symbols, arrows, or the like.” Miu: paragraphs 39 and 40 & “Although an abundance of information about the environment can be gathered by the vehicle 22 using the advanced driver-assistance and autonomous (ADAS) vehicle control radar system 20, the system 20 may be preferably configured to detect lane demarcations typically formed as a series of left and right discontinuous lines, and roadside signs in a manner as will be described herein” Miu: paragraph 27). Modifying Loberti to include aluminum radar reflective particles in the road paint for recognition by the system to provide information to the driver of the vehicle would increase the overall utility of the system by providing the capability of detecting road markings even in situations where visibility was poor. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Loberti according to Miu.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 9/23/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant agues that Miu fails to disclose aluminum microstructures having a textured surface pattern and that there is no predefined association within a detection system that is trained to recognize the invisible pattern and that Miu uses a rule-based system that does not function in a low visibility environment.
Examiner’s Response: as shown in the rejection to claim 7 above, Miu clearly teaches the use of aluminum microstructures in road paint that are detectable. Additionally, as noted in the rejection to claim 7 above, Miu clearly teaches the classification of particular patterns (as required by the claim language) with specific road signage. Furthermore Miu specifically calls out the use of their system in low/no-visibility environments (“The advanced driver-assistance and autonomous vehicle control radar and marking system and an associated method allows for improving road visibility using radar technology assisting a driver or autonomous vehicle system to more clearly differentiate the surrounding environment either during normal driving conditions (e.g., during day light or night operation) or during difficult driving conditions that cause loss of visibility for a driver or a vehicle system.” Miu: paragraph 7).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1, 5, 6 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior art does not disclose nor suggest an apparatus detectable by LIDAR that includes invisibly woven pattern of microprismatic material selected from the group of polycarbonate, acrylic, or thermoplastic polyurethane for determining that the detected pattern is associated with a human. The closest prior art to Loberti (US 20190183190) teaches using invisibly woven material for detection and determination but fails to disclose the specific use of microprismatic material selected from the group of polycarbonate, acrylic, or thermoplastic polyurethane.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TRAVIS R HUNNINGS whose telephone number is (571)272-3118. The examiner can normally be reached M, W, H, F: 9:30-4:30; T: 9:30-3:00.
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, Davetta Goins can be reached at 571-272-2957. 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.
/TRAVIS R HUNNINGS/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2689