DETAILED ACTION
This office action is in response to the RCE filed on 10/20/2025.
Claims 16 – 27, 30 remain pending for examination.
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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 10/20/2025 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
In the Arguments/Remarks, Applicant contends that Lepp does not disclose the limitation “wherein a further request to acknowledge the acknowledge signal is received via a user interface of the vehicle or a user-operated mobile device located in the vehicle.” Applicant argues that although Lepp ¶[0077] describes a driver or passenger confirming event-related actions via a user interface, such disclosure does not amount to a “request to acknowledge the acknowledge signal.” Applicant asserts that Lepp fails to show a request to acknowledge the purported acknowledge signal and therefore does not teach the limitation. (Remarks, page 5)
The Examiner respectfully disagrees.
The specification of the instant application explains that a “request to acknowledge” is presented to the user via a user interface or via a mobile device (Spec. par. [0040]). Specifically, the specification states that the request may be displayed on a graphical user interface as visual, audible, or audiovisual information (e.g., “object X detected!”). Thus, the specification characterizes a UI prompt requiring user confirmation as a “request to acknowledge.” In a similar manner, Lepp, par. [0077], discloses the same type of UI interaction described in Applicant’s specification. Lepp teaches that the system presents the driver or passenger with interface prompts requiring them to confirm the retention, transmission, or deletion of event data, and also prompts the user to grant permission regarding privacy-related data sharing. Each of these prompts functions as a system-generated request for the user to acknowledge an action, consistent with how the specification of the application defines such a request in par. [0040].
Accordingly, Lepp’s UI confirmation prompts meet the claimed “request to acknowledge,” and Applicant’s argument is not persuasive.
For the reason described above, the amendment does not overcome the teaching of prior arts.
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 nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 16 – 22, 24 – 27, 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wittevrongel et al. (Publication No. US 20240038059 A1; hereafter Witt) in view of Kurane, Haruhisa (Publication No. US 20090148152 A1; hereafter Kurane) in further view of Lepp et al. (Publication of US 20210304592 A1; hereafter Lepp).
Regarding to claim 16, Witt teaches A computer-implemented method for collecting sensor data of a vehicle, comprising the following steps:
receiving, in the vehicle, request data that describe at least one data record missing in an existing field data record; ([Par. 0030], “a dynamic event comprises an accident that has recently occurred and is blocking traffic, an animal loose on city streets, a crime in progress, or any other appropriate event. In the event a first vehicle event recorder on a first vehicle captures data indicating a dynamic event and provides the data to the vehicle data center, the vehicle data center creates a request for dynamic event data and provides the request for dynamic event data to a set of vehicle event recorders on vehicles in the vicinity of the dynamic event.”; [Par. 0036], “Vehicle event recorder 102 comprises an interface and a processor. The interface is configured to receive a request for dynamic event data at a vehicle event recorder. The processor is configured to extract a location and a configuration setting from the request, modify a setting associated with collection of the dynamic event data according to the configuration setting, wherein the dynamic event data is collected using one or more sensors, determine whether the vehicle event recorder is located appropriately to record the dynamic event data using the one or more sensors, in response to determining that the vehicle event recorder is located appropriately to record the dynamic event data using the one or more sensors, record the dynamic event data, and provide the dynamic event data.”; [Par. 0041], “receiving a location-based data description, determining a location, determining a target, creating a location-based data identification job, etc.”
Wherein the requested 'location-based data' captured for the dynamic event reads on the 'data record missing in the existing field data record.' This mapping is interpreted as the vehicle data center sending a request to capture data at a dynamic event occurring at a specific location. The request is sent to vehicle recorders in the vicinity of the location to capture the dynamic event. The location included in the request reads on the 'sensor data that can be used to detect the missing data record.')
continuously recording sensor data for the vehicle during operation of the vehicle and storing recorded sensor data; ([Par. 0028], “the system for capturing location-based data improves the computer by transforming a set of independent vehicle event recorders on vehicles into a sensor network system capable of accomplishing monitoring tasks that would otherwise not be possible or would be disproportionately expensive. Monitoring can be accomplished as a background process on the vehicle event recorder and without requiring the vehicle driver to modify the route or perform any special tasks”; [Par. 0041], “set of vehicle event recorder systems is determined (e.g., a set of vehicle event recorder systems for executing the location-based data identification job). For example, the set of vehicle event recorder systems is determined based at least in part on vehicle routes, vehicle speeds, vehicle event recorder hardware, vehicle event recorder jobs, tenant or client permissions, location permissions, business rules, legal location permissions, federal laws, state laws, or local laws… wherein the location-based data identification job is executed by a vehicle event recorder system of the set of vehicle event recorder systems to acquire data in response to the vehicle being able to acquire the sensor data related to the location of the location-based data identification job.” [Par. 0047], “sensor data comprising the location-based data is received. For example, data is received from one or more sensors. In 1102, the location-based data is stored. For example, the data is stored in a memory local to the vehicle event recorder.”;
receiving an acknowledge signal indicating that certain of the recorded sensor data corresponds to the missing data record; ([Par. 0041], “wherein the location-based data identification job is executed by a vehicle event recorder system of the set of vehicle event recorder systems to acquire data in response to the vehicle being able to acquire the sensor data related to the location of the location-based data identification job. In some embodiments, causing execution of the location-based data identification job to the set of vehicle event recorder systems comprises causing sending of the sensor data from the vehicle event recorder system. In 606, the sensor data is received from the vehicle event recorder system. In 608, the location-based data is determined based at least in part on the sensor data. For example, it is determined whether the data satisfies all or part of the job criteria or none of the job criteria.” Where the determining on “whether the data satisfies all or part of the job criteria” reads on the “acknowledge signal”. The mapping is understood as the vehicle event recorder system acquiring the requested data, then transmitting it if the data meets the job criteria. This should be obvious that the recorder exchanges a signal with the control system indicating that the acquired data meets the criteria and is ready to be transmitted.) and
storing the certain recorded sensor data in a second memory after receiving the acknowledge signal. ([Par. 0041], “In 606, the sensor data is received from the vehicle event recorder system. In 608,the location-based data is determined based at least in part on the sensor data. For example, it is determined whether the data satisfies all or part of the job criteria or none of the job criteria.”; [Par. 0047], “sensor data comprising the location-based data is received. For example, data is received from one or more sensors. In 1102, the location-based data is stored. For example, the data is stored in a memory local to the vehicle event recorder. In 1104, the location-based data is provided to a vehicle data server. For example, the data is copied from the stored location in memory local to the vehicle event recorder and transmitted to the vehicle data server (e.g., transmitted via acellular data network or a WiFi connection, etc.).” where the “memory at the vehicle data server” reads on the “second memory”. The mapping is interpreted as after the data is collected and stored at the vehicle event recorder, the data that satisfies the job criteria (such as missing data record) will be transmitted to the vehicle data server.)
Witt teaches to collect and store acquired data in a storage as described above, but does not explicitly disclose storing recorded sensor data in a short-term memory; transmitting the recorded sensor data in a second memory before the recorded sensor data are deleted from the short-term memory.
However, Kurane teaches storing recorded sensor data in a short-term memory; transmitting the recorded sensor data in a second memory before the recorded sensor data are deleted from the short-term memory. ([Par. 0037], “in a case where the image recording device is used for photographing an image in an area and time that are desired to be managed by the administrator of the information processing device and are unnecessary for the user of the movable body, the local image data is(automatically) deleted from the recording medium of the image recording device after the data is transmitted to the information processing device.”; [Par. 0023], “The information processing device receives the local image data, which is transmitted from the image recording device, by the image data receiving means through the predetermined communication line. Further, the local image data that is received is stored in the image data storing means.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claim invention to modify Witt to incorporate the teaching of Kurane. The modification is evident as storing collected data in temporary storage allows the drive recorder to clear space after transmission, enabling continuous data collection.
The combination of Witt and Kurane teaches store and transmit the data that met job criteria (e.g. missing data record) as described above but does not explicitly disclose wherein a further request to acknowledge the acknowledge signal is received via a user interface of the vehicle or a user-operated mobile device located in the vehicle.
However, Lepp teaches wherein a further request to acknowledge the acknowledge signal is received via a user interface of the vehicle or a user-operated mobile device located in the vehicle. ([Par. 0077], “The observing vehicle 102S may trigger or transmit the event log or some identifier or marker to the AIS 120, including the stored data in the AIDR relating to the event. Subsequently, a driver or passenger of the observing vehicle 102S may confirm via a user interface (UI) or associated system the retention of the event data, the transmission of the event data, or the deletion of the event data. Privacy aspects regarding access to the data may be taken into account (e.g., ask permission of the driver or witness, as they may have to acknowledge that their location at that time will be made known to others, such as police or government authorities, insurance agents, etc.). The event data may be transmitted to investigating personnel as well as other private and or secure local or cloud storage systems or facilities.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claim invention to modify the combination of Wit and Kurane to incorporate the teaching of Lepp. The modification would have been obvious because receiving a confirmation signal from the user enables verification of the data's relevance before storage and transmission.
Regarding to claim 17, the combination of Witt, Kurane and Lepp teaches the method of claim 16.
Witt further teaches wherein each missing data record belongs to a certain operating scenario, the certain operating scenario including a certain driving maneuver and/or a certain operating situation and/or a certain driving route and/or encountering certain other road users or objects in an environment of the vehicle. ([Par. 0042], “the location is extracted from the location-based data description. In 704, a target is determined based at least in part on the location-based data description. For example, the target comprises a road sign, a billboard, a building, a road feature, or a construction zone. In 706, a location-based data identification job is created based at least in part on the location. The location-based job comprises location-based data collection instructions for collecting location-based data.”)
Regarding to claim 18, the combination of Witt, Kurane and Lepp teaches the method of claim 16.
Witt further teaches checking whether the certain recorded sensor data correspond to the missing data record based on the received request data, ([Par. 0041], “execution of the location-based data identification job is caused to the set of vehicle event recorder systems, wherein the location-based data identification job is executed by a vehicle event recorder system of the set of vehicle event recorder systems to acquire data in response to the vehicle being able to acquire the sensor data related to the location of the location-based data identification job… In 606, the sensor data is received from the vehicle event recorder system. In 608, the location-based data is determined based at least in part on the sensor data. For example, it is determined whether the data satisfies all or part of the job criteria or none of the job criteria.”)
generating the acknowledge signal when the check reveals that the certain recorded sensor data correspond to the missing data record; ([Par. 0041], “In 606, the sensor data is received from the vehicle event recorder system. In 608, the location-based data is determined based at least in part on the sensor data. For example, it is determined whether the data satisfies all or part of the job criteria or none of the job criteria. In 610, itis determined to pause or stop the location-based data identification job, if necessary. For example, in response to the data satisfying all or part of the criteria, it is determined whether the job should be halted or paused in some or all of the set of vehicle event recorders.”)
wherein the checking includes an automatic comparison of the request data with the recorded sensor data. ([Par. 0042], “the location-based data description comprises one or more locations, one or more viewing directions (e.g., directions along which the location-based data are to be viewed), one or more object types, one or more capture frequencies (e.g., frequencies indicating how often object data is to be collected), one or more data collection time windows (e.g., a time of data for data collection, a deadline by which data must be collected, etc.), one or more geofence regions (e.g., regions within which it is determined whether target data is able to be acquired), etc. In 702, a location is determined based at least in part on the location-based data description”; [Par. 0044], “it is determined whether received location-based data satisfies a frequency constraint. For example, determining that the location-based data satisfies a frequency constraint comprises determining that the location-based data has been located and does not need to be located again for a predetermined period of time (e.g., receiving location-based data at least a threshold number of times within a predetermined period of time). In the event it is determined that received location-based data does not satisfy a frequency constraint, the process ends. In the event it is determined that received location-based data satisfies a frequency constraint, control passes to 806.” This is interpreted as the recorded data is compared with the location-based data description to determine whether the collected data satisfies the request data as in the data description.)
Regarding to claim 19, the combination of Witt, Kurane and Lepp teaches the method of claim 16.
Witt further teaches transmitting the sensor data stored in the second memory, the sensor data stored in the second memory being transmitted via a communications interface permanently installed in the vehicle or via a mobile device situated in the vehicle. ([Par. 0047], “For example, data is received from one or more sensors. In 1102, the location-based data is stored. For example, the data is stored in a memory local to the vehicle event recorder. In 1104, the location-based data is provided to a vehicle data server. For example, the data is copied from the stored location in memory local to the vehicle event recorder and transmitted to the vehicle data server (e.g., transmitted via acellular data network or a WiFi connection, etc.).”
Regarding to claim 20, the combination of Witt, Kurane and Lepp teaches the method of claim 16.
Witt further teaches wherein the request data are received via a communications interface permanently installed in the vehicle or a mobile device situated in the vehicle. ([Par. 0038], “vehicle event recorder 300 comprises interface 302. For example, interface 302 comprises an interface for receiving a data system software and/or model, receiving sensor data, receiving a request for dynamic event data, receiving network communications, providing sensor data configuration information, providing an indication of an anomalous event, receiving a job for a vehicle event recorder, providing sensor data, providing communications, providing coaching information, etc.”)
Regarding to claim 21, the combination of Witt, Kurane and Lepp teaches the method of claim 16.
Lepp further teaches wherein the acknowledge signal is generated by a device in the vehicle. ([Par. 0077], “The observing vehicle 102S may trigger or transmit the event log or some identifier or marker to the AIS 120, including the stored data in the AIDR relating to the event. Subsequently, a driver or passenger of the observing vehicle 102S may confirm via a user interface (UI) or associated system the retention of the event data, the transmission of the event data, or the deletion of the event data. Privacy aspects regarding access to the data may be taken into account (e.g., ask permission of the driver or witness, as they may have to acknowledge that their location at that time will be made known to others, such as police or government authorities, insurance agents, etc.). The event data may be transmitted to investigating personnel as well as other private and or secure local or cloud storage systems or facilities.” This is understood as the acknowledge signal is generated and presented to user for confirmation via a user interface or associated system.)
Regarding to claim 22, the combination of Witt, Kurane and Lepp teaches the method of claim 16.
Witt further teaches wherein the storing in the second memory includes automatic storing or a user-initiated storing. ([Par. 0041], “In 606, the sensor data is received from the vehicle event recorder system. In 608,the location-based data is determined based at least in part on the sensor data. For example, it is determined whether the data satisfies all or part of the job criteria or none of the job criteria.”; [Par. 0047], “sensor data comprising the location-based data is received. For example, data is received from one or more sensors. In 1102, the location-based data is stored. For example, the data is stored in a memory local to the vehicle event recorder. In 1104, the location-based data is provided to a vehicle data server. For example, the data is copied from the stored location in memory local to the vehicle event recorder and transmitted to the vehicle data server (e.g., transmitted via acellular data network or a WiFi connection, etc.).” wherein the “memory at the vehicle data server” reads on the “second memory”. The mapping is interpreted as after the data is collected and stored at the vehicle event recorder, the data that satisfies the job criteria (such as missing data record) will be transmitted to the vehicle data server.)
Regarding to claim 24, the combination of Witt, Kurane and Lepp teaches the method of claim 16.
Witt further teaches analyzing the existing field data record in order to identify the at least one missing data record; ([Par. 0043], “it is determined whether previously captured data satisfies a location-based data description. For example, previously captured data comprises previously captured data stored by the vehicle data center.”) and
preparing the request data that describe the at least one data record missing in the existing field data record. ([Par. 0043], “In the event it is determined that previously captured data satisfies the location-based data description, control passes to 710. In 710, the location-based data is determined based at least in part on the previously captured data.”)
Regarding to claim 25, the combination of Witt, Kurane and Lepp teaches the method of claim 24.
Witt further teaches wherein the steps of analyzing and preparing are carried out in a computer system at a distance from the vehicle. (see fig. 2, [Par. 0029], “The vehicle event recorder system receives a request for dynamic event data (e.g., from a vehicle data center), wherein the request for dynamic event data comprises a location and/or a configuration setting. The request for dynamic event data comprises a request to capture a dynamic event—for example, an event already underway, an event with a limited duration, etc.” where the request data is created and transmitted by the vehicle data center which is remotely from the vehicle.)
Regarding to claim 26, the combination of Witt, Kurane and Lepp teaches the method of claim 16.
Witt further teaches wherein request data are transmitted to multiple vehicles, and/or sensor data from multiple vehicles are stored in corresponding second memories. ([Par. 0050], “In 1404, a plurality of vehicle event recorders to receive the request for dynamic event data is determined. For example, the plurality of vehicle event recorders comprises a plurality of vehicle event recorders near the dynamic event location or whose planned route takes them near the dynamic event location. In various embodiments, the plurality of vehicle event recorders comprises a plurality of vehicle event recorders selected based in part on an associated vehicle route, on vehicle event recorder processor capabilities, on vehicle event recorder associated sensors, on a current location, on a known future location, or based on any other appropriate data.”; [Par. 0047], “sensor data comprising the location-based data is received. For example, data is received from one or more sensors. In 1102, the location-based data is stored. For example, the data is stored in a memory local to the vehicle event recorder. In 1104, the location-based data is provided to a vehicle data server. For example, the data is copied from the stored location in memory local to the vehicle event recorder and transmitted to the vehicle data server (e.g., transmitted via acellular data network or a WiFi connection, etc.).” wherein the “memory at the vehicle data server” reads on the “second memory”. The mapping is interpreted as after the data is collected and stored at the vehicle event recorder, the data that satisfies the job criteria (such as missing data record) will be transmitted to the vehicle data server.)
Regarding to claim 27, the combination of Witt, Kurane and Lepp teaches the method of claim 16.
Witt further teaches preparing a training data record for a machine learning system for a vehicle utilizing transmitted data records. ([Par. 0042], “In some embodiments, the processor is further configured to determine a model-based system comprising a portion of the location-based data identification job. For example, a model-based system comprises a machine learning system, a neural network system, an artificial intelligence system, a machine vision system, etc. Determining a model based system comprises determining a set of parameters describing a model of a model-based system (e.g. a set of neural network weights or a set of machine learning feature weights).”
Claim 30 recites the vehicle with substantially same scope as claim 1, thus being rejected under 35 USC § 103 on the same basis as claim 1 above.
Claim(s) 23 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Witt, Kurane and Lepp in further view of Dulori, Shriniwas (Publication No. US 20200234380 A1; hereafter Dulori).
Regarding to claim 23, the combination of Witt, Kurane and Lepp teaches the method of claim 16.
The combination of Witt, Kurane and Lepp teaches a vehicle event recorder to receive request data including description of the required data as described in claim 1 above, but does not explicitly disclose supplying information about the received request data to a user of the vehicle.
However, Dulori teaches supplying information about the received request data to a user of the vehicle. ([Par. 0074], “Data processing module 525 of server 500 may send a data request to vehicle occupant user computing device 251, displayed through the vehicle occupant user interface 301, for identifying a geographic location of vehicle occupant user computing device 251 or a network location of vehicle occupant user computing device 251, as well as a timestamp identifying when the request was transmitted to vehicle occupant user computing device 251. The geographic location may be any physical location, which may be expressed in longitudinal and latitudinal coordinates, and may include other dimensions and factors such as altitude or height for determining an exact position of the geographic location.”
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claim invention to modify the combination of Witt, Kurane and Lepp to incorporate the teaching of Dulori. The modification would have been deemed obvious since providing information about requested data to the vehicle's user facilitates acknowledgment of the data received from the server.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEVEN V NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-7320. The examiner can normally be reached Monday -Friday 11am - 7pm EST.
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, James J Lee can be reached on (571) 270-5965. 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.
/STEVEN VU NGUYEN/Examiner, Art Unit 3668