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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. JP 2021171008, filed on 10/19/2021.
Response to Amendment
This office action is responded to the amendment filed on 07/28/2025.
Claims 1,6, and 7 have been amended;
Claims 2, 4-5 and 8 are as previously presented.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s argument with respect to claims 1, 6 and 7 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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.
Claims 1 - 2, 5 - 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Endo (U.S 20190042857) in view of Wu et al. (US 20090177389), Kusanagi et al. (JP 2019120670) and Lee et al. (JP 2020094959).
Regarding claim 1, Endo discloses a navigation device (apparatus with terminal 200 and terminal 300 may be a navigation apparatus – see paragraph 0137) comprising a processor (apparatus with terminal 200 and terminal 300 may be a navigation apparatus comprises a computer or information processing unit (CPU) – see figure 2, paragraphs 0083, 0087, 0137), wherein the processor:
collects captured images that have been captured by an imaging device mounted at a vehicle (paragraph 0137 describes the terminal 200 and terminal 300 may be the same apparatus. Paragraphs 0055, 0090, 0091 describes the image acquiring unit acquires image of the outside. Thus, the computer/CPU of the apparatus collects captured image from image acquiring unit).
sets a destination, (the computer/CPU comprising control unit 302 set a destination based on acquired information related to a destination from the user via the input/output unit 302 – see paragraph 0110);
analyzes, based on the captured images that have been collected, impediments that arise during the driving of the vehicle at the position of the vehicle, which corresponds to the captured images (analyzes images captured from the vehicle-mounted camera, events occur during the driving of the vehicle and positional information corresponding to the captured images – see Fig. 1, paragraphs 0007, 0009, 0071),
causes all the impediments that may arise on all routes to the destination to be displayed on an on-board unit mounted at the vehicle (an illustration may be display as to what kind of event is occurring at what location. These events can include state of another vehicle, occurrence of deceleration or stopping not attribute to a traffic jam or traffic light, detection of parked or stopped vehicle, detection of rough driving, etc. – see include, but are not limited to paragraphs 0057-0065, 0119),
receives a selection of the impediment that the occupant would most like to avoid among the displayed impediments, the selection being made by an occupant of the vehicle from the on-board unit (receives a selectable illustration may be provided as to what kind of event is occurring at what location. The route search is based on user’s input request executed by the vehicle-mounted terminal – see Fig. 5, paragraphs 0109-0110, 0118-0119), and
after the selection of the at least one impediment is received, determines a route to the destination that avoids locations corresponding to the selected at least one impediment, wherein the vehicle is then caused to follow the determined route ( after receive user’s request the computer/CPU with control unit 303 searches for a route that has low total cost value, wherein the total cost value is calculated based on captured image provided in acquired event information that is used to determine weighted map data – see paragraphs 0081, 0091, 0096, 0109-0110, 0112, 0118-0121).
However, Endo does not explicitly disclose display the impediment before any of the routes are displayed, wherein the impediments are not concurrently displayed with any of the routes. Display with a message prompting an occupant of the vehicle to chose an impediment that the occupant would most like to avoid, and determines locations to avoids corresponding to selected impediment, in accordance with a type of the vehicle.
Wu disclose display the impediment before any of the routes are displayed, wherein the impediments are not concurrently displayed with any of the routes (displaying one or more obstacles for the operator to select and planning out the route according to the selected obstacle – see include, but are not limited to Fig. 1 paragraphs 0011, 0024).
Endo, Wu, Lee and Kusanagi are analogue art because they are from the same filed of endeavor and are reasonably pertinent to the problem addressed by the claimed invention- namely, selecting different routes to a destination. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Endo with the teaching of display the impediment before any of the routes are displayed, wherein the impediments are not concurrently displayed with any of the routes as taught by Wu in order to yield predictable result of making the navigation device be more practical as the trends in road conditions can be known in advance.
Kusanagi disclose displaying with a message prompting an occupant of the vehicle to choose (multiple selected destinations are presented for the occupant to choose before start the route guidance – see include but are not limited to Fig 4 and Fig. 8, Paragraphs 0044, 0075-0076, 0086-0087).
Endo, Wu, Lee and Kusanagi are analogue art because they are from the same filed of endeavor and are reasonably pertinent to the problem addressed by the claimed invention- namely, selecting different routes to a destination. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Endo with the teaching of displaying with a message prompting an occupant of the vehicle to choose as taught by Kusanagi in order to yield predictable result of better recommending the best routes that match the occupant needs [0005].
Lee disclose determines locations to avoids corresponding to selected impediment, in accordance with a type of the vehicle (the risk factor of the road including vehicle size, light vehicle, standard-size, large size, etc. -see include but are not limited to paragraphs 0017-0018, 0045-0046, 0050-0052).
Endo, Wu, Lee and Kusanagi are analogue art because they are from the same filed of endeavor and are reasonably pertinent to the problem addressed by the claimed invention- namely, selecting different routes to a destination. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Endo with the teaching of determines locations to avoids corresponding to selected impediment, in accordance with a type of the vehicle as taught by Lee in order to yield predictable result of better recommending the best routes that based on the road’s features [0001].
Regarding claim 2, Endo in view of Wu, Lee and Kusanagi discloses the navigation device of claim 1, as discussed supra with respect to same.
Endo teaches, where in the processor (CPU of the apparatus – see paragraphs 0087):
collects operation information pertaining to the vehicle, which corresponds to the captured images that have been captured (the computer/CPU collects operation information such as drivability, acceleration, etc. related to the vehicle, which corresponding to the captured image of event occurring around the vehicle based on images acquired by the image acquisition unit 202, such as rough driving, relates to drivability of the vehicle on a relevant road – see paragraphs 0056, 0070), and
analyzes the impediments based in the captured images and the operation information which have been collected (analyzes the acquired images and operation information in event information used to determine weighted map data. See for example, Fig.5 paragraphs 0057-0065, 0081, 0091, 0096, 0112, 0118-0121.)
Regarding claim 5, Endo in view of Wu, Lee and Kusanagi discloses a navigation system (Fig.1) comprising the navigation device of claim 1 (apparatus comprises at least terminal 200 and terminal 300; Fig. 2, paragraphs 0137, 0083) as discussed supra with respect to same.
Endo teaches, and a plurality of vehicles (see Fig. 1) that are connected by communication to the navigation device (There may be a plurality of the first vehicles. Which includes display apparatus, such as a navigation device. Each of the navigation device includes the communication unit 101 is a unit that communicates with the vehicle-mounted terminal 200 by accessing a network via a communication line in a similar manner to the communication unit 201. For example, Fig 2, paragraphs 0047, 0051, 0078, 0079 and see similar discussion in the rejection of claim 1).
Regarding claim 6, Endo discloses a navigation method, comprising, by a computer (computer/CPU of apparatus with terminal 200 and 300 Fig. 2, paragraphs 0083, 0087, 0137 and discussion in the rejection of claim 1):
collects captured images that have been captured by an imaging device mounted at a vehicle (paragraph 0137 describes the terminal 200 and terminal 300 may be the same apparatus. Paragraphs 0055, 0090, 0091 describes the image acquiring unit acquires image of the outside. Thus, the computer/CPU of the apparatus collects captured image from image acquiring unit).
sets a destination, (the computer/CPU comprising control unit 302 set a destination based on acquired information related to a destination from the user via the input/output unit 302 – see paragraph 0110);
analyzes, based on the captured images that have been collected, impediments that arise during the driving of the vehicle at the position of the vehicle, which corresponds to the captured images (analyzes images captured from the vehicle-mounted camera, events occur during the driving of the vehicle and positional information corresponding to the captured images – see Fig. 1, paragraphs 0007, 0009, 0071),
causes all the impediments that may arise on all routes to the destination to be displayed on an on-board unit mounted at the vehicle (an illustration may be display as to what kind of event is occurring at what location. These events can include state of another vehicle, occurrence of deceleration or stopping not attribute to a traffic jam or traffic light, detection of parked or stopped vehicle, detection of rough driving, etc. – see include, but are not limited to paragraphs 0057-0065, 0119),
receives a selection of the impediment that the occupant would most like to avoid among the displayed impediments, the selection being made by an occupant of the vehicle from the on-board unit (receives a selectable illustration may be provided as to what kind of event is occurring at what location. The route search is based on user’s input request executed by the vehicle-mounted terminal – see Fig. 5, paragraphs 0109-0110, 0118-0119), and
after the selection of the at least one impediment is received, determines a route to the destination that avoids locations corresponding to the selected at least one impediment, wherein the vehicle is then caused to follow the determined route ( after receive user’s request the computer/CPU with control unit 303 searches for a route that has low total cost value, wherein the total cost value is calculated based on captured image provided in acquired event information that is used to determine weighted map data – see paragraphs 0081, 0091, 0096, 0109-0110, 0112, 0118-0121).
However, Endo does not explicitly disclose display the impediment before any of the routes are displayed, wherein the impediments are not concurrently displayed with any of the routes. Display with a message prompting an occupant of the vehicle to chose an impediment that the occupant would most like to avoid, and determines locations to avoids corresponding to selected impediment, in accordance with a type of the vehicle.
Wu disclose display the impediment before any of the routes are displayed, wherein the impediments are not concurrently displayed with any of the routes (displaying one or more obstacles for the operator to select and planning out the route according to the selected obstacle – see include, but are not limited to Fig. 1 paragraphs 0011, 0024).
Endo, Wu, Lee and Kusanagi are analogue art because they are from the same filed of endeavor and are reasonably pertinent to the problem addressed by the claimed invention- namely, selecting different routes to a destination. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Endo with the teaching of display the impediment before any of the routes are displayed, wherein the impediments are not concurrently displayed with any of the routes as taught by Wu in order to yield predictable result of making the navigation device be more practical as the trends in road conditions can be known in advance.
Kusanagi disclose displaying with a message prompting an occupant of the vehicle to choose (multiple selected destinations are presented for the occupant to choose before start the route guidance – see include but are not limited to Fig 4 and Fig. 8, Paragraphs 0044, 0075-0076, 0086-0087).
Endo, Wu, Lee and Kusanagi are analogue art because they are from the same filed of endeavor and are reasonably pertinent to the problem addressed by the claimed invention- namely, selecting different routes to a destination. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Endo with the teaching of displaying with a message prompting an occupant of the vehicle to choose as taught by Kusanagi in order to yield predictable result of better recommending the best routes that match the occupant needs [0005].
Lee disclose determines locations to avoids corresponding to selected impediment, in accordance with a type of the vehicle (the risk factor of the road including vehicle size, light vehicle, standard-size, large size, etc. -see include but are not limited to paragraphs 0017-0018, 0045-0046, 0050-0052).
Endo, Wu, Lee and Kusanagi are analogue art because they are from the same filed of endeavor and are reasonably pertinent to the problem addressed by the claimed invention- namely, selecting different routes to a destination. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Endo with the teaching of determines locations to avoids corresponding to selected impediment, in accordance with a type of the vehicle as taught by Lee in order to yield predictable result of better recommending the best routes that based on the road’s features [0001].
Regarding claim 7, Endo discloses a non-transitory storage medium storing a navigation program that is executable by a computer (main/auxiliary storage apparatus storing program that executed by a computer/CPU of the apparatus with terminal 200 and terminal 300 – see paragraphs 0083, 0087 to perform processing) to:
collects captured images that have been captured by an imaging device mounted at a vehicle (paragraph 0137 describes the terminal 200 and terminal 300 may be the same apparatus. Paragraphs 0055, 0090, 0091 describes the image acquiring unit acquires image of the outside. Thus, the computer/CPU of the apparatus collects captured image from image acquiring unit).
sets a destination, (the computer/CPU comprising control unit 302 set a destination based on acquired information related to a destination from the user via the input/output unit 302 – see paragraph 0110);
analyzes, based on the captured images that have been collected, impediments that arise during the driving of the vehicle at the position of the vehicle, which corresponds to the captured images (analyzes images captured from the vehicle-mounted camera, events occur during the driving of the vehicle and positional information corresponding to the captured images – see Fig. 1, paragraphs 0007, 0009, 0071),
causes all the impediments that may arise on all routes to the destination to be displayed on an on-board unit mounted at the vehicle (an illustration may be display as to what kind of event is occurring at what location. These events can include state of another vehicle, occurrence of deceleration or stopping not attribute to a traffic jam or traffic light, detection of parked or stopped vehicle, detection of rough driving, etc. – see include, but are not limited to paragraphs 0057-0065, 0119),
receives a selection of the impediment that the occupant would most like to avoid among the displayed impediments, the selection being made by an occupant of the vehicle from the on-board unit (receives a selectable illustration may be provided as to what kind of event is occurring at what location. The route search is based on user’s input request executed by the vehicle-mounted terminal – see Fig. 5, paragraphs 0109-0110, 0118-0119), and
after the selection of the at least one impediment is received, determines a route to the destination that avoids locations corresponding to the selected at least one impediment, wherein the vehicle is then caused to follow the determined route ( after receive user’s request the computer/CPU with control unit 303 searches for a route that has low total cost value, wherein the total cost value is calculated based on captured image provided in acquired event information that is used to determine weighted map data – see paragraphs 0081, 0091, 0096, 0109-0110, 0112, 0118-0121).
However, Endo does not explicitly disclose display the impediment before any of the routes are displayed, wherein the impediments are not concurrently displayed with any of the routes. Display with a message prompting an occupant of the vehicle to chose an impediment that the occupant would most like to avoid, and determines locations to avoids corresponding to selected impediment, in accordance with a type of the vehicle.
Wu disclose display the impediment before any of the routes are displayed, wherein the impediments are not concurrently displayed with any of the routes (displaying one or more obstacles for the operator to select and planning out the route according to the selected obstacle – see include, but are not limited to Fig. 1 paragraphs 0011, 0024).
Endo, Wu, Lee and Kusanagi are analogue art because they are from the same filed of endeavor and are reasonably pertinent to the problem addressed by the claimed invention- namely, selecting different routes to a destination. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Endo with the teaching of display the impediment before any of the routes are displayed, wherein the impediments are not concurrently displayed with any of the routes as taught by Wu in order to yield predictable result of making the navigation device be more practical as the trends in road conditions can be known in advance.
Kusanagi disclose displaying with a message prompting an occupant of the vehicle to choose (multiple selected destinations are presented for the occupant to choose before start the route guidance – see include but are not limited to Fig 4 and Fig. 8, Paragraphs 0044, 0075-0076, 0086-0087).
Endo, Wu, Lee and Kusanagi are analogue art because they are from the same filed of endeavor and are reasonably pertinent to the problem addressed by the claimed invention- namely, selecting different routes to a destination. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Endo with the teaching of displaying with a message prompting an occupant of the vehicle to choose as taught by Kusanagi in order to yield predictable result of better recommending the best routes that match the occupant needs [0005].
Lee disclose determines locations to avoids corresponding to selected impediment, in accordance with a type of the vehicle (the risk factor of the road including vehicle size, light vehicle, standard-size, large size, etc. -see include but are not limited to paragraphs 0017-0018, 0045-0046, 0050-0052).
Endo, Wu, Lee and Kusanagi are analogue art because they are from the same filed of endeavor and are reasonably pertinent to the problem addressed by the claimed invention- namely, selecting different routes to a destination. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Endo with the teaching of determines locations to avoids corresponding to selected impediment, in accordance with a type of the vehicle as taught by Lee in order to yield predictable result of better recommending the best routes that based on the road’s features [0001].
Regarding claim 8 Endo in view of Wu, Lee and Kusanagi discloses the navigation device of claim 1, as discussed supra with respect to same.
Endo teaches, wherein the navigation device is a server that is remotely from the vehicle and is communicably connect to the vehicle (the apparatus is a server apparatus that remotely communicate with the communication unit inside the vehicle – see Fig 1, paragraphs 0053-0054)
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Endo at al. (US 20190042857) in view of Wu et al. (US 20090177389), Kusanagi et al. (JP 2019120670) and Lee et al. (JP 2020094959) and in further view of Patricia at al (US 11402223).
Regarding claim 4, Endo, Wu, Lee and Kusanagi discloses the navigation device of claim 1, wherein the processor selects a list of routes displayed in order based on total cost, to which it is recommended of the vehicle to drive the vehicle, and determines a route via the list
of recommended routes (see paragraphs 0117-0120).
However, Endo does not explicitly disclose the list of routes comprises recommended locations.
Patricia discloses processor selects a recommended location, to which it is recommended to drive a vehicle and determines a route via the recommended location (processor selects a recommended location such as point of interest, safe parking location associated with scenic points of the selected scenic route based on user preferences, to which is recommended to drive a vehicle and determines a route via the recommended location/point of interest – see for example, col. 8, lines 7-25, figures 2A-2B).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Endo with the teaching of recommended location as taught by Patricia in order to yield predictable result of providing more scenic or more interesting routes to user (see for example, col. 1, lines 25-28) or reducing the risk of damage to a vehicle (col. 1, lines 62-66).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 AI KIM TRAN whose telephone number is (703)756-5911. The examiner can normally be reached Thursday 8:00 am - 5:00 pm.
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 Christian Chace can be reached on (571) 272-4190. 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.
/A.K.T./Examiner, Art Unit 3665 /CHRISTIAN CHACE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3665