DETAILED ACTION
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 11/21/2025 has been entered.
Claims 1-8, 10-17 and 19-22 are currently pending and examined below. Claims 1, 10 and 19 have been amended.
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 Amendment
Applicant's arguments filed 11/21/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant indicated on page 9 of the response “Examiner expressly agreed that Autran does not teach or suggest two key features that were highlighted in the prior response: (1) the existence of a superset of predefined routines stored/maintained in the vehicle from which the mission control unit selects a set depending on the received mission information”.
The Examiner didn’t exactly mean that by the Examiner’s remark on the Advisory Action. The Examiner meant was “each routine being selectable for execution independent of a particular mission directive” sounds like function, or set of actions (routine) can be chosen and carried out on its own merits without a mission. Autran executes functions/routines based on the mission, so Autran does not disclose “each routine being selectable for execution independent of a particular mission directive”.
Both Autran (US 20210370960 A1) and Bosworth (US 20190079509 A1)
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 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.
Claims 1-6, 10-15 and 19-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Autran et al. (US 20210370960 A1; hereinafter Autran) in view of Bosworth (US 20190079509 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Autran discloses:
A method for operating a self-driving vehicle (Fig. 1: vehicle 110), comprising:
receiving, by a mission control unit (Fig. 2: vehicle processor 212) of the self-driving vehicle from a server computer system (Fig. 1: fleet management system 120), mission information relating to a mission to be executed by the self-driving vehicle ([0133] the fleet management system 120 can transmit only the destination locations to the self-driving vehicles);
controlling, by a driving control unit (Fig. 2: drive system 230) separate from the mission control unit, driving tasks for driving the self-driving vehicle according to a route ([0133] the self-driving vehicles 110 can then navigate themselves to the destination locations);
selecting, by the mission control unit depending on the mission information, a set of two or more routines from a superset of predefined routines stored in the self-driving vehicle, wherein each routine of the set of routines defines at least one vehicle function ([0133] the self-driving vehicles 110 can identify the location of the object or landmark on an electronic map, and navigate to the object or landmark); and
executing, by the at least one function control unit, each triggered vehicle function ([0133] the self-driving vehicles 110 can identify the location of the object or landmark on an electronic map, and navigate to the object or landmark).
Autran does not specifically disclose:
for at least a subset of the set of routines, triggering, by the mission control unit via an application programming interface (API) coupling the mission control unit to at least one function control unit of the self-driving vehicle, the at least one vehicle function defined by the respective routine.
However, Bosworth discloses:
for at least a subset of the set of routines, triggering, by the mission control unit via an application programming interface (API) ([0146] The operating system abstraction 916 may implement the operating system application programming interface (API) for a particular underlying operating system and hardware platform) coupling the mission control unit (Fig. 9: universal services) to at least one function control unit of the self-driving vehicle, the at least one vehicle function defined by the respective routine ([0082] During autonomous normal flight mode, the aircraft 102 may be commanded by the main operating base 112 to launch and follow a predefined launch route in accordance with, for example, the mission data previously received by the aircraft 102).
Autran and Bosworth are considered to be analogous because they are in the same field of autonomous vehicle control. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Autran’s autonomous vehicle control to further incorporate Bosworth’s autonomous vehicle control for the advantage of including API which results in direct implementation for functionality that an underlying operating system may not support (Bosworth’s [0146]).
Regarding claim 2, Autran discloses:
further comprising determining at least one condition by the mission control unit for each routine of the set of routines, based on the mission information (the vehicle processor 212 detects that a trigger condition is satisfied; [0173]-[0195]).
Regarding claim 3, Autran discloses:
further comprising triggering the at least one vehicle function of the respective routine by the mission control unit, depending on an actual occurrence of the at least one condition of the respective routine (the vehicle processor 212 detects that a trigger condition is satisfied; [0173]-[0195]).
Regarding claim 4, Autran discloses:
wherein the set of routines comprises (i) a routine for an interaction of the self-driving vehicle with a passenger of the self-driving vehicle (based on user-triggered condition; [0173]-[0195]), and/or (ii) a routine for an interaction of the mission control unit with the driving control unit (based on vehicle state triggered condition; [0173]-[0195]).
Regarding claim 5, Autran discloses:
wherein the set of routines comprises a routine for controlling a state of the self-driving vehicle (controlling the drive system 230 to immediately stop the vehicle, cutting power to the vehicle motor, or avoidance steering to prevent collision; [0155]).
Regarding claim 6, Autran discloses:
wherein set of routines comprises a routine for causing the self-driving vehicle to move to a parking position (examples of collision avoidance operations can include, but not limited to, controlling the drive system 230 to immediately stop the vehicle, cutting power to the vehicle motor, or avoidance steering; [0155]).
Regarding claim 10, Autran discloses:
A control system for operating a self-driving vehicle (vehicle 110; Fig. 1), comprising:
a mission control unit (vehicle processor 212; Fig. 2) configured to receive, from a server computer system (Fig. 1: fleet management system 120), mission information relating to a mission to be executed by the self-driving vehicle ([0133] the fleet management system 120 can transmit only the destination locations to the self-driving vehicles);
a driving control unit (drive system 230; Fig. 2) separate from the mission control unit and configured to control driving tasks for driving the self-driving vehicle according to a route ([0133] the self-driving vehicles 110 can then navigate themselves to the destination locations);
wherein the mission control unit is further configured to
select, depending on the mission information, a set of two or more routines from a superset of predefined routines stored in the self-driving vehicle, wherein each routine of the set of routines defines at least one vehicle function ([0133] the self-driving vehicles 110 can identify the location of the object or landmark on an electronic map, and navigate to the object or landmark), and,
the at least one function control unit being configured to execute each triggered vehicle function ([0133] the self-driving vehicles 110 can identify the location of the object or landmark on an electronic map, and navigate to the object or landmark).
Autran does not specifically disclose:
an application programming interface (API) coupling the mission control unit to at least one function control unit of the self-driving vehicle;
for at least a subset of the set of routines, trigger, via the API, the at least one vehicle function defined by the respective routine.
However, Bosworth discloses:
an application programming interface (API) ([0146] The operating system abstraction 916 may implement the operating system application programming interface (API) for a particular underlying operating system and hardware platform) coupling the mission control unit (Fig. 9: universal services) to at least one function control unit of the self-driving vehicle;
for at least a subset of the set of routines, trigger, via the API, the at least one vehicle function defined by the respective routine ([0082] During autonomous normal flight mode, the aircraft 102 may be commanded by the main operating base 112 to launch and follow a predefined launch route in accordance with, for example, the mission data previously received by the aircraft 102).
Autran and Bosworth are considered to be analogous because they are in the same field of autonomous vehicle control. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Autran’s autonomous vehicle control to further incorporate Bosworth’s autonomous vehicle control for the advantage of including API which results in direct implementation for functionality that an underlying operating system may not support (Bosworth’s [0146]).
Regarding claim 11, Autran discloses:
wherein the mission control unit is further configured to determine at least one condition for each routine of the set of routines, based on the mission information (the vehicle processor 212 detects that a trigger condition is satisfied; [0173]-[0195]).
Regarding claim 12, Autran discloses:
wherein the mission control unit is further configured to trigger the at least one vehicle function of the respective routine, depending on an actual occurrence of the at least one condition of the respective routine (the vehicle processor 212 detects that a trigger condition is satisfied; [0173]-[0195]).
Regarding claim 13, Autran discloses:
wherein the set of routines comprises (i) a routine for an interaction of the self-driving vehicle with a passenger of the self-driving vehicle (based on user-triggered condition; [0173]-[0195]), and/or (ii) a routine for an interaction of the mission control unit with the driving control unit (based on vehicle state triggered condition; [0173]-[0195]).
Regarding claim 14, Autran discloses:
wherein the set of routines comprises a routine for controlling a state of the self-driving vehicle (controlling the drive system 230 to immediately stop the vehicle, cutting power to the vehicle motor, or avoidance steering to prevent collision; [0155]).
Regarding claim 15, Autran discloses:
wherein set of routines comprises a routine for causing the self-driving vehicle to move to a parking position (examples of collision avoidance operations can include, but not limited to, controlling the drive system 230 to immediately stop the vehicle, cutting power to the vehicle motor, or avoidance steering; [0155]).
Regarding claim 19, Autran discloses:
A non-transitory computer-readable medium (vehicle data storage 214; Fig. 2) comprising a computer program (software program; [0144]) comprising instructions that, when executed by a control system (Fig. 2: vehicle control system 210) of a self-driving vehicle (vehicle 110; Fig. 1), cause the control system ([0144] can store computer programs consisting of computer-executable instructions, which can be loaded into the volatile memory for execution by the vehicle processor 212) to:
receive, by a mission control unit (Fig. 2: vehicle processor 212) of the self-driving vehicle from a server computer system (Fig. 1: fleet management system 120), mission information relating to a mission to be executed by the self-driving vehicle ([0133] the fleet management system 120 can transmit only the destination locations to the self-driving vehicles);
control, by a driving control unit (Fig. 2: drive system 230) separate from the mission control unit, driving tasks for driving the self-driving vehicle according to a route ([0133] the self-driving vehicles 110 can then navigate themselves to the destination locations);
select, by the mission control unit depending on the mission information, a set of two or more routines from a superset of predefined routines stored in the self-driving vehicle, wherein each routine of the set of routines defines at least one vehicle function ([0133] the self-driving vehicles 110 can identify the location of the object or landmark on an electronic map, and navigate to the object or landmark); and
execute, by the at least one function control unit, each triggered vehicle function ([0133] the self-driving vehicles 110 can identify the location of the object or landmark on an electronic map, and navigate to the object or landmark).
Autran does not specifically disclose:
for at least a subset of the set of routines, trigger, by the mission control unit via an application programming interface (API) coupling the mission control unit to at least one function control unit of the self-driving vehicle, the at least one vehicle function defined by the respective routine.
However, Bosworth discloses:
for at least a subset of the set of routines, trigger, by the mission control unit via an application programming interface (API) ([0146] The operating system abstraction 916 may implement the operating system application programming interface (API) for a particular underlying operating system and hardware platform) coupling the mission control unit (Fig. 9: universal services) to at least one function control unit of the self-driving vehicle, the at least one vehicle function defined by the respective routine ([0082] During autonomous normal flight mode, the aircraft 102 may be commanded by the main operating base 112 to launch and follow a predefined launch route in accordance with, for example, the mission data previously received by the aircraft 102).
Autran and Bosworth are considered to be analogous because they are in the same field of autonomous vehicle control. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Autran’s autonomous vehicle control to further incorporate Bosworth’s autonomous vehicle control for the advantage of including API which results in direct implementation for functionality that an underlying operating system may not support (Bosworth’s [0146]).
Regarding claim 20, Autran discloses:
further comprising
determining at least one condition by the mission control unit for each routine of the set of routines, based on the mission information (the vehicle processor 212 detects that a trigger condition is satisfied; [0173]-[0195]); and
triggering the at least one vehicle function of the respective routine by the mission control unit, depending on an actual occurrence of the at least one condition of the respective routine (the vehicle processor 212 detects that a trigger condition is satisfied; [0173]-[0195]).
Regarding claim 21, Autran discloses:
wherein executing each of the at least one triggered vehicle function comprises coordinating operations across multiple function control units to manage the vehicle functions (controlling the drive system 230 to immediately stop the vehicle, cutting power to the vehicle motor, or avoidance steering; [0155]).
Regarding claim 22, Autran discloses:
wherein the mission control unit is configured to execute each of the at least one triggered vehicle function by coordinating operations across multiple function control units to manage the vehicle functions (controlling the drive system 230 to immediately stop the vehicle, cutting power to the vehicle motor, or avoidance steering; [0155]).
Claims 7-8 and 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Autran, in view of Bosworth and in view of Matthiesen et al. (US 20200225663 A1; hereinafter Matthiesen).
Regarding claim 7, Autran as modified does not specifically disclose:
wherein set of routines comprises a routine for causing the self-driving vehicle to move to a charging station for charging a battery of the self-driving vehicle.
However, Matthiesen discloses:
wherein set of routines comprises a routine for causing the self-driving vehicle to move to a charging station for charging a battery of the self-driving vehicle (vehicle returns to a vehicle dispatch for maintenance, e.g. low power; [0032], [0039]).
Matthiesen is analogous to the claimed invention because it pertains to the same field of autonomous vehicle control. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Autran’s autonomous vehicle control as currently modified to further incorporate Matthiesen’s autonomous vehicle control for the advantage of dispatching the vehicle which results in keeping the vehicle up to date on preventative maintenances (Matthiesen’s [0032]).
Regarding claim 8, Autran as modified does not specifically disclose:
further comprising
receiving further mission information by the mission control unit; and
controlling driving tasks required for driving the self-driving vehicle according to an adapted route by the driving control unit, depending on the further mission information.
However, Matthiesen discloses:
further comprising
receiving further mission information (add additional drop-off location 514 or change drop-off location 516; Figs. 5A-5B, [0029]) by the mission control unit; and
controlling driving tasks required for driving the self-driving vehicle according to an adapted route by the driving control unit, depending on the further mission information (end ride process; [0029]).
Matthiesen is analogous to the claimed invention because it pertains to the same field of autonomous vehicle control. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Autran’s autonomous vehicle control as currently modified to further incorporate Matthiesen’s autonomous vehicle control for the advantage of modifying the mission which results in dropping off the requestor at their intended location (Matthiesen’s [0029]).
Regarding claim 16, Autran as modified does not specifically disclose:
wherein set of routines comprises a routine for causing the self-driving vehicle to move to a charging station for charging a battery of the self-driving vehicle.
However, Matthiesen discloses:
wherein set of routines comprises a routine for causing the self-driving vehicle to move to a charging station for charging a battery of the self-driving vehicle (vehicle returns to a vehicle dispatch for maintenance, e.g. low power; [0032], [0039]).
Matthiesen is analogous to the claimed invention because it pertains to the same field of autonomous vehicle control. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Autran’s autonomous vehicle control as currently modified to further incorporate Matthiesen’s autonomous vehicle control for the advantage of dispatching the vehicle which results in keeping the vehicle up to date on preventative maintenances (Matthiesen’s [0032]).
Regarding claim 17, Autran as modified does not specifically disclose:
wherein the mission control unit is further configured to receive further mission information by the mission control unit, and wherein the driving unit is further configured to control driving tasks required for driving the self-driving vehicle according to an adapted route, depending on the further mission information.
However, Matthiesen discloses:
wherein the mission control unit is further configured to receive further mission information (add additional drop-off location 514 or change drop-off location 516; Figs. 5A-5B, [0029]) by the mission control unit, and wherein the driving unit is further configured to control driving tasks required for driving the self-driving vehicle according to an adapted route, depending on the further mission information (end ride process; [0029]).
Matthiesen is analogous to the claimed invention because it pertains to the same field of autonomous vehicle control. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Autran’s autonomous vehicle control as currently modified to further incorporate Matthiesen’s autonomous vehicle control for the advantage of modifying the mission which results in dropping off the requestor at their intended location (Matthiesen’s [0029]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PAYSUN WU whose telephone number is (571)272-1528. 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, Hunter Lonsberry can be reached on (571)272-7298. 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.
/PAYSUN WU/Examiner, Art Unit 3665
/DONALD J WALLACE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3665