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 .
Status of Claims
This action is in reply to the Application Number 17/758,434 filed on 07/06/2022.
Claims 1, 4-9, and 12-24 are currently pending and have been examined.
This action is made FINAL in response to the “Amendment” and “Remarks” filed on 09/04/2026.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on July 9th, 2026 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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.
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.
Claims 1, 4-9, 12-18, and 21-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jung (U.S. Pub. No. 2019/0184981 A1) in view of Beedham (How to have Google Maps remember where you parked your car, July 19, 2019, (Year: 2019)) in further view of Automotive World (Daimler and Bosch automate parking: Mercedes with built in valet, June 9, 2015, (Year: 2015)).
Regarding Claim 1:
Jung teaches:
A method of parking a vehicle comprising: receiving, at an input of a processor circuit located in or on a vehicle, data from at least one sensor mounted to the vehicle and having an output communicatively coupled to the input of the processor circuit; creating, by the processor circuit, a map of a parking environment utilizing the data from the at least one sensor;, (See (Jung: Summary – 8th paragraph and Detailed Description – 71st and 136th-142nd paragraphs))
storing, by the processor circuit, the map in a data storage device; communicatively coupled to the processor circuit; receiving, by the processor circuit via a user interface of the vehicle,, (See (Jung: Summary – 12th and 21st paragraphs))
and responsive to receiving the park signal, generating and issuing commands by the processor circuit based on the first set of spatial data and the map in the data storage device, the commands issued to a vehicle control system of the vehicle so that when the commands are executed by the vehicle control system, the vehicle control system causes the vehicle to autonomously move to the first parking position., (See (Jung: Summary – 12th and 21st paragraphs and Detailed Description – 473rd paragraph, FIG. 7-8))
Jung does not teach but Beedham teaches:
a user-initiated first learn signal indicating that the vehicle is currently located in a first parking position, the first parking position being for use in subsequent parking operations, wherein in response to receiving the first learn signal, the vehicle remains in the first parking location and is not caused to move from the first parking position by the processor circuit;, (“As of March 2019, there were over 38 million cars on the roads of Great Britain, according to transport and policy organization the RAC Foundation. […] Taking a quick snap of your car park’s floor number, or your vehicle‘s exact location can help locate it even quicker.” (Beedham))
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Jung with these above aforementioned teachings from Beedham in order to create a smart system and method for automated parking of a vehicle. At the time the invention was filed, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to incorporate Jung’s vehicle mounted control device and method for controlling the vehicle with Beedham’s report on how to have Google Maps remember where a car is parked in order to receive user-initiated learn signals indicating that a vehicle is currently located in a first parking position, the first parking position being for use in subsequent parking operations. Combining Jung and Beedham would thus provide a smart system and method for automated parking of a vehicle as “it can get increasingly tough to find a parking spot, let alone remember where you parked your car.” (Beedham)
Jung in view of Beedham does not teach but Automotive World teaches:
responsive to receiving the first learn signal, determining, by the processor circuit, a first set of spatial data indicative of the current location of the vehicle relative to the map, the first set of spatial data corresponding to the first parking position; storing, by the processor circuit, the first set of spatial data in the data storage device, wherein the first set of spatial data comprises data reflecting the position of the vehicle relative to structures and/or obstacles sensed by the at least one sensor and recorded on the map; receiving, by the processor circuit via the user interface, a user-initiated park signal from a user of the vehicle indicating that the user of the vehicle would like the vehicle, which is not located in the first parking position, to autonomously move to the first parking position in at least one of the subsequent parking operations;, (“What if in the near future cars could look for their spaces in a parking garage and return all by themselves by using a smartphone app? […] Daimler will adjust the sensor systems and the software in the car2go vehicles and enables future innovation leaps for the car-sharing model of car2go.” (Automotive World))
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Jung in view of Beedham with these above aforementioned teachings from Automotive World in order to create a user-friendly system and method for automated parking of a vehicle. At the time the invention was filed, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to incorporate Jung’s vehicle mounted control device and method for controlling the vehicle with Automotive World’s report on Daimler and Bosch’s automated valet parking system in order to determine a first set of spatial data corresponding to a first parking position and indicative of a current location of a vehicle relative to a map, store the first set of spatial data in a data storage device without storing any route or path data associated with the first set of spatial data, and receive a user-initiated park signal from a user of the vehicle indicating that the user of the vehicle would like the vehicle to autonomously move to the first parking position in a subsequent parking operation. Combining Jung and Automotive World would thus provide a user-friendly system and method for automated parking of a vehicle where “the vehicle drives to a free space independently and drives up comfortably by itself again.” (Automotive World)
Regarding Claim 4:
Jung in view of Beedham in further view of Automotive World, as shown in the rejection above, discloses the limitations of claim 1. Jung further teaches:
The method as set forth in claim 1 further comprising: receiving, by the processor circuit via the user interface,, (See (Jung: Summary – 21st paragraph))
[…] determining, by the processor circuit, a second set of spatial data indicative of the location of the vehicle relative to the map in response to receiving the second learn signal; and storing, by the processor circuit, the second set of spatial data in the data storage device., (See (Jung: Detailed Description – 473rd-474th paragraphs, FIG. 7-8))
Jung does not teach but Beedham teaches:
[…] a second learn signal indicating that the vehicle is located in a second parking position; […], (“As of March 2019, there were over 38 million cars on the roads of Great Britain, according to transport and policy organization the RAC Foundation. […] Taking a quick snap of your car park’s floor number, or your vehicle‘s exact location can help locate it even quicker.” (Beedham))
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Jung with these above aforementioned teachings from Beedham in order to create a smart system and method for automated parking of a vehicle. At the time the invention was filed, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to incorporate Jung’s vehicle mounted control device and method for controlling the vehicle with Beedham’s report on how to have Google Maps remember where a car is parked in order to receive user-initiated learn signals indicating that a vehicle is currently located in a first parking position, the first parking position being for use in subsequent parking operations. Combining Jung and Beedham would thus provide a smart system and method for automated parking of a vehicle as “it can get increasingly tough to find a parking spot, let alone remember where you parked your car.” (Beedham)
Regarding Claim 5:
Jung in view of Beedham in further view of Automotive World, as shown in the rejection above, discloses the limitations of claim 4. Jung further teaches:
The method as set forth in claim 4 further comprising receiving, by the processor circuit via the user interface,, (See (Jung: Summary – 21st paragraph))
Jung does not teach but Automotive World teaches:
[…] a retrieve signal from the operator indicating that the operator of the vehicle would like to retrieve the vehicle., (“What if in the near future cars could look for their spaces in a parking garage and return all by themselves by using a smartphone app? […] Daimler will adjust the sensor systems and the software in the car2go vehicles and enables future innovation leaps for the car-sharing model of car2go.” (Automotive World))
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Jung with these above aforementioned teachings from Automotive World in order to create a user-friendly system and method for automated parking of a vehicle. At the time the invention was filed, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to incorporate Jung’s vehicle mounted control device and method for controlling the vehicle with Automotive World’s report on Daimler and Bosch’s automated valet parking system in order to determine a first set of spatial data corresponding to a first parking position and indicative of a current location of a vehicle relative to a map, store the first set of spatial data in a data storage device without storing any route or path data associated with the first set of spatial data, and receive a user-initiated park signal from a user of the vehicle indicating that the user of the vehicle would like the vehicle to autonomously move to the first parking position in a subsequent parking operation. Combining Jung and Automotive World would thus provide a user-friendly system and method for automated parking of a vehicle where “the vehicle drives to a free space independently and drives up comfortably by itself again.” (Automotive World)
Regarding Claim 6:
Jung in view of Beedham in further view of Automotive World, as shown in the rejection above, discloses the limitations of claim 5. Jung further teaches:
[…] generating and issuing, by the processor circuit, second commands, the second commands issued to the vehicle control system which when executed by the vehicle control system, causes the vehicle control system to […], (See (Jung: Summary – 12th and 21st paragraphs and Detailed Description – 473rd paragraph, FIG. 7-8))
Jung does not teach but Automotive World teaches:
The method as set forth in claim 5 further responsive to receiving the retrieve signal,, (“What if in the near future cars could look for their spaces in a parking garage and return all by themselves by using a smartphone app? […] Daimler will adjust the sensor systems and the software in the car2go vehicles and enables future innovation leaps for the car-sharing model of car2go.” (Automotive World))
[…] autonomously move the vehicle to the second parking position., (“What if in the near future cars could look for their spaces in a parking garage and return all by themselves by using a smartphone app? […] Daimler will adjust the sensor systems and the software in the car2go vehicles and enables future innovation leaps for the car-sharing model of car2go.” (Automotive World))
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Jung with these above aforementioned teachings from Automotive World in order to create a user-friendly system and method for automated parking of a vehicle. At the time the invention was filed, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to incorporate Jung’s vehicle mounted control device and method for controlling the vehicle with Automotive World’s report on Daimler and Bosch’s automated valet parking system in order to determine a first set of spatial data corresponding to a first parking position and indicative of a current location of a vehicle relative to a map, store the first set of spatial data in a data storage device without storing any route or path data associated with the first set of spatial data, and receive a user-initiated park signal from a user of the vehicle indicating that the user of the vehicle would like the vehicle to autonomously move to the first parking position in a subsequent parking operation. Combining Jung and Automotive World would thus provide a user-friendly system and method for automated parking of a vehicle where “the vehicle drives to a free space independently and drives up comfortably by itself again.” (Automotive World)
Regarding Claim 7:
Jung in view of Beedham in further view of Automotive World, as shown in the rejection above, discloses the limitations of claim 1. Jung further teaches:
The method as set forth in claim 1 further comprising: receiving, by the processor circuit via the user interface, a second set of spatial data indicative of, (See (Jung: Summary – 21st paragraph and Detailed Description – 473rd paragraph, FIG. 7-8))
[…] and storing, by the processor circuit, the second set of spatial data in the data storage device., (See (Jung: Detailed Description – 473rd-474th paragraphs, FIG. 7-8))
Jung does not teach but Beedham teaches:
[…] a desired location of the vehicle with respect to the map; […], (“As of March 2019, there were over 38 million cars on the roads of Great Britain, according to transport and policy organization the RAC Foundation. […] Taking a quick snap of your car park’s floor number, or your vehicle‘s exact location can help locate it even quicker.” (Beedham))
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Jung with these above aforementioned teachings from Beedham in order to create a smart system and method for automated parking of a vehicle. At the time the invention was filed, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to incorporate Jung’s vehicle mounted control device and method for controlling the vehicle with Beedham’s report on how to have Google Maps remember where a car is parked in order to receive user-initiated learn signals indicating that a vehicle is currently located in a first parking position, the first parking position being for use in subsequent parking operations. Combining Jung and Beedham would thus provide a smart system and method for automated parking of a vehicle as “it can get increasingly tough to find a parking spot, let alone remember where you parked your car.” (Beedham)
Regarding Claim 8:
Jung in view of Beedham in further view of Automotive World, as shown in the rejection above, discloses the limitations of claim 7. Jung further teaches:
The method as set forth in claim 7 further comprising: receiving, by the processor circuit via the user interface,, (See (Jung: Summary – 21st paragraph))
Jung does not teach but Automotive World teaches:
[…] a retrieve signal indicating that an operator of the vehicle would like to retrieve the vehicle; and responsive to receiving the retrieve signal, generating and issuing commands to autonomously move the vehicle to a second parking position in response to receiving the retrieve signal., (“What if in the near future cars could look for their spaces in a parking garage and return all by themselves by using a smartphone app? […] Daimler will adjust the sensor systems and the software in the car2go vehicles and enables future innovation leaps for the car-sharing model of car2go.” (Automotive World))
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Jung with these above aforementioned teachings from Automotive World in order to create a user-friendly system and method for automated parking of a vehicle. At the time the invention was filed, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to incorporate Jung’s vehicle mounted control device and method for controlling the vehicle with Automotive World’s report on Daimler and Bosch’s automated valet parking system in order to determine a first set of spatial data corresponding to a first parking position and indicative of a current location of a vehicle relative to a map, store the first set of spatial data in a data storage device without storing any route or path data associated with the first set of spatial data, and receive a user-initiated park signal from a user of the vehicle indicating that the user of the vehicle would like the vehicle to autonomously move to the first parking position in a subsequent parking operation. Combining Jung and Automotive World would thus provide a user-friendly system and method for automated parking of a vehicle where “the vehicle drives to a free space independently and drives up comfortably by itself again.” (Automotive World)
Regarding Claim 9:
Jung teaches:
A parking system for parking a vehicle, the parking system comprising: a processor circuit and a data storage device communicatively coupled thereto, the processor circuit and the data storage device located in or on the vehicle, the processor circuit configured to:, (See (Jung: Summary – 8th and 21st paragraphs))
receive data from at least one sensor mounted to the vehicle; create a map of a parking environment utilizing the data from the at least one sensor; store the map in the data storage device; receive, via a user interface of the vehicle,, (See (Jung: Detailed Description – 71st paragraph and Detailed Description – 136th-142nd paragraphs))
and responsive to the reception of the park signal, generate and issue commands to a vehicle control system of the vehicle which when the commands are executed by the vehicle control signal, the vehicle control system causes the vehicle to autonomously move to the first parking position,, (See (Jung: Summary – 12th and 21st paragraphs and Detailed Description – 473rd paragraph, FIG. 7-8))
Jung does not teach but Beedham teaches:
a user-initiated first learn signal indicating that the vehicle is currently located in a first parking position, the first parking position being available for use in subsequent parking operations, wherein the vehicle is not caused to move from the first parking position by the processor circuit in response to receiving the first learn signal;, (“As of March 2019, there were over 38 million cars on the roads of Great Britain, according to transport and policy organization the RAC Foundation. […] Taking a quick snap of your car park’s floor number, or your vehicle‘s exact location can help locate it even quicker.” (Beedham))
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Jung with these above aforementioned teachings from Beedham in order to create a smart system and method for automated parking of a vehicle. At the time the invention was filed, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to incorporate Jung’s vehicle mounted control device and method for controlling the vehicle with Beedham’s report on how to have Google Maps remember where a car is parked in order to receive user-initiated learn signals indicating that a vehicle is currently located in a first parking position, the first parking position being for use in subsequent parking operations. Combining Jung and Beedham would thus provide a smart system and method for automated parking of a vehicle as “it can get increasingly tough to find a parking spot, let alone remember where you parked your car.” (Beedham)
Jung in view of Beedham does not teach but Automotive World teaches:
responsive to receiving the first learn signal, determine a first set of spatial data indicative of the current location of the vehicle relative to the map, the first set of spatial data corresponding to the first parking position; store the first set of spatial data in the data storage device, wherein the first set of spatial data comprises data reflecting the position of the vehicle relative to structures and/or obstacles sensed by the at least one sensor and recorded on the map; receive a user-initiated park signal from the user of the vehicle via the user interface indicating that the user of the vehicle would like the vehicle, which is not located in the first parking position, to autonomously move to the first parking position as part of one of the subsequent parking operations;, (“What if in the near future cars could look for their spaces in a parking garage and return all by themselves by using a smartphone app? […] Daimler will adjust the sensor systems and the software in the car2go vehicles and enables future innovation leaps for the car-sharing model of car2go.” (Automotive World))
wherein during the autonomous movement of the vehicle as part of the one of the subsequent parking operations, the first parking position is adjusted based on the data from the at least one sensor received during the autonomous movement., (“What if in the near future cars could look for their spaces in a parking garage and return all by themselves by using a smartphone app? […] Daimler will adjust the sensor systems and the software in the car2go vehicles and enables future innovation leaps for the car-sharing model of car2go.” (Automotive World))
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Jung in view of Beedham with these above aforementioned teachings from Automotive World in order to create a user-friendly system and method for automated parking of a vehicle. At the time the invention was filed, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to incorporate Jung’s vehicle mounted control device and method for controlling the vehicle with Automotive World’s report on Daimler and Bosch’s automated valet parking system in order to determine a first set of spatial data corresponding to a first parking position and indicative of a current location of a vehicle relative to a map, store the first set of spatial data in a data storage device without storing any route or path data associated with the first set of spatial data, and receive a user-initiated park signal from a user of the vehicle indicating that the user of the vehicle would like the vehicle to autonomously move to the first parking position in a subsequent parking operation. Combining Jung and Automotive World would thus provide a user-friendly system and method for automated parking of a vehicle where “the vehicle drives to a free space independently and drives up comfortably by itself again.” (Automotive World)
Regarding Claim 12:
Jung in view of Beedham in further view of Automotive World, as shown in the rejection above, discloses the limitations of claim 9. Jung further teaches:
The parking system as set forth in claim 9, wherein the processor circuit is further configured to:, (See (Jung: Summary – 21st paragraph))
[…] determine a second set of spatial data indicative of the location of the vehicle relative to the map in response to receiving the second learn signal; and store the second set of spatial data in the data storage device., (See (Jung: Detailed Description – 473rd-474th paragraphs, FIG. 7-8))
Jung does not teach but Beedham teaches:
[…] receive a second learn signal indicating that the vehicle is located in a second parking position; […], (“As of March 2019, there were over 38 million cars on the roads of Great Britain, according to transport and policy organization the RAC Foundation. […] Taking a quick snap of your car park’s floor number, or your vehicle‘s exact location can help locate it even quicker.” (Beedham))
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Jung with these above aforementioned teachings from Beedham in order to create a smart system and method for automated parking of a vehicle. At the time the invention was filed, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to incorporate Jung’s vehicle mounted control device and method for controlling the vehicle with Beedham’s report on how to have Google Maps remember where a car is parked in order to receive user-initiated learn signals indicating that a vehicle is currently located in a first parking position, the first parking position being for use in subsequent parking operations. Combining Jung and Beedham would thus provide a smart system and method for automated parking of a vehicle as “it can get increasingly tough to find a parking spot, let alone remember where you parked your car.” (Beedham)
Regarding Claim 13:
Jung in view of Beedham in further view of Automotive World, as shown in the rejection above, discloses the limitations of claim 12. Jung further teaches:
The parking system as set forth in claim 12, wherein the processor circuit is further configured to, (See (Jung: Summary – 21st paragraph))
Jung does not teach but Automotive World teaches:
[…] receive a retrieve signal indicating that an operator of the vehicle would like to retrieve the vehicle., (“What if in the near future cars could look for their spaces in a parking garage and return all by themselves by using a smartphone app? […] Daimler will adjust the sensor systems and the software in the car2go vehicles and enables future innovation leaps for the car-sharing model of car2go.” (Automotive World))
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Jung with these above aforementioned teachings from Automotive World in order to create a user-friendly system and method for automated parking of a vehicle. At the time the invention was filed, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to incorporate Jung’s vehicle mounted control device and method for controlling the vehicle with Automotive World’s report on Daimler and Bosch’s automated valet parking system in order to determine a first set of spatial data corresponding to a first parking position and indicative of a current location of a vehicle relative to a map, store the first set of spatial data in a data storage device without storing any route or path data associated with the first set of spatial data, and receive a user-initiated park signal from a user of the vehicle indicating that the user of the vehicle would like the vehicle to autonomously move to the first parking position in a subsequent parking operation. Combining Jung and Automotive World would thus provide a user-friendly system and method for automated parking of a vehicle where “the vehicle drives to a free space independently and drives up comfortably by itself again.” (Automotive World)
Regarding Claim 14:
Jung in view of Beedham in further view of Automotive World, as shown in the rejection above, discloses the limitations of claim 13. Jung further teaches:
The parking system as set forth in claim 13, wherein the processor circuit is further configured to, (See (Jung: Summary – 21st paragraph))
Jung does not teach but Automotive World teaches:
[…] issue commands to autonomously move the vehicle to the second parking position in response to receiving the retrieve signal., (“What if in the near future cars could look for their spaces in a parking garage and return all by themselves by using a smartphone app? […] Daimler will adjust the sensor systems and the software in the car2go vehicles and enables future innovation leaps for the car-sharing model of car2go.” (Automotive World))
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Jung with these above aforementioned teachings from Automotive World in order to create a user-friendly system and method for automated parking of a vehicle. At the time the invention was filed, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to incorporate Jung’s vehicle mounted control device and method for controlling the vehicle with Automotive World’s report on Daimler and Bosch’s automated valet parking system in order to determine a first set of spatial data corresponding to a first parking position and indicative of a current location of a vehicle relative to a map, store the first set of spatial data in a data storage device without storing any route or path data associated with the first set of spatial data, and receive a user-initiated park signal from a user of the vehicle indicating that the user of the vehicle would like the vehicle to autonomously move to the first parking position in a subsequent parking operation. Combining Jung and Automotive World would thus provide a user-friendly system and method for automated parking of a vehicle where “the vehicle drives to a free space independently and drives up comfortably by itself again.” (Automotive World)
Regarding Claim 15:
Jung in view of Beedham in further view of Automotive World, as shown in the rejection above, discloses the limitations of claim 9. Jung further teaches:
The parking system as set forth in claim 9, wherein the processor circuit is further configured to: receive a second set of spatial data indicative of, (See (Jung: Detailed Description – 473rd paragraph, FIG. 7-8))
[…] and store the second set of spatial data in the data storage device., (See (Jung: Detailed Description – 473rd-474th paragraphs, FIG. 7-8))
Jung does not teach but Beedham teaches:
[…] a desired location of the vehicle with respect to the map; […], (“As of March 2019, there were over 38 million cars on the roads of Great Britain, according to transport and policy organization the RAC Foundation. […] Taking a quick snap of your car park’s floor number, or your vehicle‘s exact location can help locate it even quicker.” (Beedham))
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Jung with these above aforementioned teachings from Beedham in order to create a smart system and method for automated parking of a vehicle. At the time the invention was filed, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to incorporate Jung’s vehicle mounted control device and method for controlling the vehicle with Beedham’s report on how to have Google Maps remember where a car is parked in order to receive user-initiated learn signals indicating that a vehicle is currently located in a first parking position, the first parking position being for use in subsequent parking operations. Combining Jung and Beedham would thus provide a smart system and method for automated parking of a vehicle as “it can get increasingly tough to find a parking spot, let alone remember where you parked your car.” (Beedham)
Regarding Claim 16:
Jung in view of Beedham in further view of Automotive World, as shown in the rejection above, discloses the limitations of claim 15. Jung further teaches:
The parking system as set forth in claim 15, wherein the processor circuit is further configured to:, (See (Jung: Summary – 21st paragraph))
Jung does not teach but Automotive World teaches:
[…] receive a retrieve signal indicating that an operator of the vehicle would like to retrieve the vehicle; and issue commands to autonomously move the vehicle to a second parking position in response to receiving the retrieve signal., (“What if in the near future cars could look for their spaces in a parking garage and return all by themselves by using a smartphone app? […] Daimler will adjust the sensor systems and the software in the car2go vehicles and enables future innovation leaps for the car-sharing model of car2go.” (Automotive World))
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Jung with these above aforementioned teachings from Automotive World in order to create a user-friendly system and method for automated parking of a vehicle. At the time the invention was filed, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to incorporate Jung’s vehicle mounted control device and method for controlling the vehicle with Automotive World’s report on Daimler and Bosch’s automated valet parking system in order to determine a first set of spatial data corresponding to a first parking position and indicative of a current location of a vehicle relative to a map, store the first set of spatial data in a data storage device without storing any route or path data associated with the first set of spatial data, and receive a user-initiated park signal from a user of the vehicle indicating that the user of the vehicle would like the vehicle to autonomously move to the first parking position in a subsequent parking operation. Combining Jung and Automotive World would thus provide a user-friendly system and method for automated parking of a vehicle where “the vehicle drives to a free space independently and drives up comfortably by itself again.” (Automotive World)
Regarding Claim 17:
Jung in view of Beedham in further view of Automotive World, as shown in the rejection above, discloses the limitations of claim 1. Jung further teaches:
The method as set forth in claim 1, wherein the at least one sensor comprises at least one radar sensor or lidar sensor, and at least one camera, and the data from the at least one sensor comprises at least one of radar data or lidar data and image data., (See (Jung: Detailed Description – 117th-130th paragraphs))
Regarding Claim 18:
Jung in view of Beedham in further view of Automotive World, as shown in the rejection above, discloses the limitations of claim 1. Jung further teaches:
The method as set forth in claim 1, further comprising controlling, by the vehicle control system of the vehicle to autonomously move the vehicle to the first parking position., (See (Jung: Summary – 21st paragraph))
Regarding Claim 21:
Jung in view of Beedham in further view of Automotive World, as shown in the rejection above, discloses the limitations of claim 9. Jung further teaches:
The parking system as set forth in claim 9, further comprising the vehicle control system of the vehicle, wherein the vehicle control system is configured by the issued commands to autonomously move the vehicle to the first parking position., (See (Jung: Summary – 21st paragraph))
Regarding Claim 22:
Jung in view of Beedham in further view of Automotive World, as shown in the rejection above, discloses the limitations of claim 9. Jung further teaches:
The parking system as set forth in claim 9, wherein the at least one sensor at least one radar sensor or lidar sensor, and at least one camera, and the data from the at least one sensor comprises at least one of radar or lidar data and image data., (See (Jung: Detailed Description – 117th-130th paragraphs))
Claims 19-20 and 23-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jung (U.S. Pub. No. 2019/0184981 A1) in view of Beedham (How to have Google Maps remember where you parked your car, July 19, 2019, (Year: 2019)) in further view of Automotive World (Daimler and Bosch automate parking: Mercedes with built in valet, June 9, 2015, (Year: 2015)) in even further view of Latotzki (U.S. Pub. No. 2017/0329346 A1).
Regarding Claim 19:
Jung in view of Beedham in further view of Automotive World, as shown in the rejection above, discloses the limitations of claim 1. Jung in view of Beedham in further view of Automotive World does not teach but Latotzki teaches:
The method as set forth in claim 1, wherein during the autonomous movement of the vehicle, the first parking position is adjusted based on the data from the at least one sensor received during the autonomous movement, and wherein the first parking position is adjusted so that the vehicle is centered in the first parking position., (See (Latotzki: Description of the Preferred Embodiments – 55th and 65th-67th paragraphs))
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Jung in view of Beedham in further view of Automotive World with these above aforementioned teachings from Latotzki in order to create a precise system and method for automated parking of a vehicle. At the time the invention was filed, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to incorporate Jung’s vehicle mounted control device and method for controlling the vehicle with Latotzki’s vehicle autonomous parking system in order to adjust a first parking position of an autonomous vehicle so that the vehicle is centered in a first parking position and receive a user-requested orientation of the vehicle in the first parking position. Combining Jung and Latotzki would thus provide “an autonomous vehicle parking system that is operable to autonomously drive and park and move a vehicle after the driver has left the vehicle.” (Latotzki: Summary of the Invention – 4th paragraph)
Regarding Claim 20:
Jung in view of Beedham in further view of Automotive World, as shown in the rejection above, discloses the limitations of claim 1. Jung further teaches:
The method as set forth in claim 1, further comprising receiving, by the processor circuit,, (See (Jung: Summary – 21st paragraph))
Jung in view of Beedham in further view of Automotive World does not teach but Latotzki teaches:
[…] a user-requested orientation of the vehicle in the first parking position, wherein when the commands are executed by the vehicle control system, the vehicle control system causes the vehicle to autonomously move to the first parking position in the user-requested orientation., (See (Latotzki: Description of the Preferred Embodiments – 39th and 65th-67th paragraphs))
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Jung in view of Beedham in further view of Automotive World with these above aforementioned teachings from Latotzki in order to create a precise system and method for automated parking of a vehicle. At the time the invention was filed, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to incorporate Jung’s vehicle mounted control device and method for controlling the vehicle with Latotzki’s vehicle autonomous parking system in order to adjust a first parking position of an autonomous vehicle so that the vehicle is centered in a first parking position and receive a user-requested orientation of the vehicle in the first parking position. Combining Jung and Latotzki would thus provide “an autonomous vehicle parking system that is operable to autonomously drive and park and move a vehicle after the driver has left the vehicle.” (Latotzki: Summary of the Invention – 4th paragraph)
Regarding Claim 23:
Jung in view of Beedham in further view of Automotive World, as shown in the rejection above, discloses the limitations of claim 9. Jung in view of Beedham in further view of Automotive World does not teach but Latotzki teaches:
The parking system as set forth in claim 9, wherein during the autonomous movement of the vehicle, the first parking position is adjusted based on the data from the at least one sensor received during the autonomous movement, and wherein the first parking position is adjusted so that the vehicle is centered in the first parking position., (See (Latotzki: Description of the Preferred Embodiments – 55th and 65th-67th paragraphs))
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Jung in view of Beedham in further view of Automotive World with these above aforementioned teachings from Latotzki in order to create a precise system and method for automated parking of a vehicle. At the time the invention was filed, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to incorporate Jung’s vehicle mounted control device and method for controlling the vehicle with Latotzki’s vehicle autonomous parking system in order to adjust a first parking position of an autonomous vehicle so that the vehicle is centered in a first parking position and receive a user-requested orientation of the vehicle in the first parking position. Combining Jung and Latotzki would thus provide “an autonomous vehicle parking system that is operable to autonomously drive and park and move a vehicle after the driver has left the vehicle.” (Latotzki: Summary of the Invention – 4th paragraph)
Regarding Claim 24:
Jung in view of Beedham in further view of Automotive World, as shown in the rejection above, discloses the limitations of claim 9. Jung further teaches:
The parking system as set forth in claim 9, wherein the processor circuit is further configured to receive, (See (Jung: Summary – 21st paragraph))
Jung in view of Beedham in further view of Automotive World does not teach but Latotzki teaches:
[…] a user-requested orientation of the vehicle in the first parking position, wherein when the commands are executed by the vehicle control system, the vehicle control system causes the vehicle to autonomously move to the first parking position in the user-requested orientation., (See (Latotzki: Description of the Preferred Embodiments – 39th and 65th-67th paragraphs))
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Jung in view of Beedham in further view of Automotive World with these above aforementioned teachings from Latotzki in order to create a precise system and method for automated parking of a vehicle. At the time the invention was filed, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to incorporate Jung’s vehicle mounted control device and method for controlling the vehicle with Latotzki’s vehicle autonomous parking system in order to adjust a first parking position of an autonomous vehicle so that the vehicle is centered in a first parking position and receive a user-requested orientation of the vehicle in the first parking position. Combining Jung and Latotzki would thus provide “an autonomous vehicle parking system that is operable to autonomously drive and park and move a vehicle after the driver has left the vehicle.” (Latotzki: Summary of the Invention – 4th paragraph)
Response to Arguments
The 35 U.S.C. 112 rejections set forth in the Non-Final Rejection mailed on June 4th, 2026 have been withdrawn as the “Amendments” and “Remarks” filed by the Applicant on September 4th, 2026 satisfactorily overcome these rejections.
Applicant’s arguments filed on September 4th, 2026 with regard to the 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection have been fully considered but are not persuasive.
With regard to the 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection, the limitations are taught in the combination of Jung, Beedham, Automotive World, and Latotzki as has been set forth above, contrary to the Applicant’s assertions. Therefore, the Applicant’s amendments and arguments are insufficient to overcome these prior art rejections.
More specifically, See (Jung: Summary – 8th-21st paragraphs and Detailed Description – 71st, 114th-144th, 331st, 358th-369th, 450th, 464th-473rd, and 481st-485th, paragraphs, FIG. 7-8) Furthermore, Beedham mentions “As of March 2019, there were over 38 million cars on the roads of Great Britain, according to transport and policy organization the RAC Foundation. […] Taking a quick snap of your car park’s floor number, or your vehicle‘s exact location can help locate it even quicker.” (Beedham) Moreover, Automotive World mentions “What if in the near future cars could look for their spaces in a parking garage and return all by themselves by using a smartphone app? […] Daimler will adjust the sensor systems and the software in the car2go vehicles and enables future innovation leaps for the car-sharing model of car2go.” (Automotive World) Finally, See (Latotzki: Description of the Preferred Embodiments – 41st and 55th paragraphs)
As a result, the combination of Jung, Beedham, Automotive World, and Latotzki addresses "wherein the first set of spatial data comprises data reflecting the position of the vehicle relative to structures and/or obstacles sensed by the at least one sensor and recorded on the map" as set forth by the Applicant in claim 1 and similarly in claim 9.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jeffrey Chalhoub whose telephone number is (571) 272-9754. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:30-5:30. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Angela Ortiz can be reached on (571) 272-1206. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/J.R.C./Examiner, Art Unit 3663
/ANGELA Y ORTIZ/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3663
Prosecution Insights