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 .
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
Status of Claims
This Office Action is in response to the Applicant’s Response dated 10/16/2025. Claims 1-2, 4-6, 8-9, 11-14, and 18-20 are presently pending and are presented for examination.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. All pending claims therefore have an effective filing date of 5/24/2022.
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s amendments, see page 9 of 14, filed 10/16/2025, with respect to drawing objections have been fully considered and are persuasive. The drawing objections have been withdrawn.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments, see pages 9-10 of 14, filed 10/16/2025, have been fully considered. The Applicant has argued against the 112(a) and 112(b) rejections of record. Regarding the rejection under 112(a), the arguments are persuasive and the rejection has been withdrawn. Regarding the rejection under 112(b), the arguments are not persuasive. Applicant argues that the nonce terms have been amended to state “second processor”. The specification does not clearly establish the scope of processing structure associated with the “terminal,” the “device” and the ”units”. Thus the rejection is again presented below.
Applicant's arguments, see pages 10-13 of 14, filed 10/16/2025, have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The Applicant has argued that none of the cited references explicitly disclose or teach the amended limitation, specifically, “…using route information of the vehicle obtained by searching a route from an origin to a destination…” however the Examiner respectfully disagrees. Secondary reference Ren teaches the utilization of route information (tunnel location) from an origin to a destination, which the Examiner is interpreting as the start of the tunnel and the end of the tunnel, respectively (see Ren at least [0053] and [0060]).
A detailed rejection follows below.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-2, 4, 8-9, 14, and 18-19 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1 as currently presented states “…wherein the second processor is configured to…wherein the second processor is further configured to…” which is unnecessarily redundant. If limitations pertaining to other components were listed between these two limitations, the current format would be appropriate, but as currently presented the Examiner recommends updating so as to only include necessary verbiage.
Claim 1 as currently presented states “…based on that…” which is grammatically incorrect.
Claims 2, 4, 8-9, 14, and 18-19 are objected for similar reasons.
Claim 1 as currently presented states “…from a satellite; and transmit…” which should be formatted consistently with the rest of the claims so that “…transmit…” is in the next line below.
Claim 1 as currently presented states “…the third GPS information to the second controller…” which the Examiner notes should be corrected to instead state either “…the third GPS information to a second controller…” or “…the third GPS information to the second processor…” depending upon the Applicant’s intentions.
Claims 18-19 are objected for similar reasons.
Claim 2 as currently presented states “…the processor…” which the Examiner recommends updating to specify which of the two processors are being referred to, such as “…the first processor…” or similarly “…the second processor…”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claims 1-2, 4-6, 8-9, 11-14, and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b), as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention. Claims 1 and 14 detail the implementation of a first processor and a second processor, however, the specification does not clearly establish the scope of processing structure(s) associated with the “terminal,” the “device” and the ”units.” Per Applicant’s arguments, the interpretation of the integrated terminal and the contained units as processors renders the processing locations/relationships unclear. For the sake of compact prosecution, the Examiner will interpret the vehicle ECU 101 as executing all the software related details and associated tasks for the first processor and the entirety of the integrated terminal 20 as executing all the software related details and associated tasks for the second processor.
Claims 2, 4-6, 8-9, 11-13, and 18-20 are also rejected since the claim is dependent on a previously rejected claim.
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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-2, 4-6, 8-9, 11-12, 14, and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Meyer et al. (US-11,487,025; hereinafter Meyer; already of record) in view of Ren (US-2016/0146616; already of record).
Regarding claim 1, Meyer discloses a location information obtaining apparatus of a vehicle (see Meyer at least Abs and col 9 lines 37-40), the location information obtaining apparatus comprising:
a navigation device including a processor and configured to obtain first global positioning system (GPS) information (see Meyer at least col 3 lines 33-45 and col 4 lines 42-53) using at least one of:
a GPS navigation using a GPS signal (see Meyer at least col 3 lines 33-45 and col 4 lines 42-53); and
a dead reckoning (DR) navigation using speed information and direction information of the vehicle (see Meyer at least col 6 lines 5-17 and col 7 line 59 to col 8 line 3);
…
…
a second processor (see Meyer at least col 4 lines 42-53);
wherein the second processor is configured to:
receive the first GPS information from the navigation device (see Meyer at least Fig 11 and col 8 lines 4-8);
perform map matching to match the first GPS information to a specific node and a specific link of the map data (see Meyer at least Fig 11 and col 7 line 59 to col 8 line 25; specific node = known location 1102; specific link = vector 1110) …
generate second GPS information generated by the map matching (see Meyer at least col 8 lines 4-25); and
determine a current location of the vehicle based on the first GPS information received from the navigation device (see Meyer at least col 3 lines 33-45); and
display the current location on a map image (see Meyer at least Fig 11 and col 7 lines 49-58) …
wherein the second processor is further configured to:
determine whether the vehicle enters a GPS shaded section based on the map data and the current location of the vehicle (see Meyer at least col 7 line 59 to col 8 line 3), wherein …
deactivate the map matching if the vehicle is outside the GPS shaded section (see Meyer at least col 8 lines 4-25);
determine a driving distance driven by the vehicle within the GPS shaded section based on that the vehicle enters the GPS shaded section (see Meyer at least col 8 lines 4-25);
…
…
wherein the navigation device is further configured to:
generate the first GPS information using the GPS signal based on that the GPS signal is received from a satellite (see Meyer at least col 3 lines 33-45); and
transmit the first GPS information to the second processor (see Meyer at least Fig 7 and col 6 lines 5-17);
generate the first GPS information using the speed information and the direction information received from a sensor device of the vehicle based on that the GPS signal is not received … from the satellite (see Meyer at least col 7 line 59 to col 8 line 3);
generate third GPS information using the first GPS information and the second GPS information after the generating of the first GPS information based on that the map matching is activated (see Meyer at least Fig 11 and col 8 lines 4-25; 1st GPS information = known location 1102; 2nd GPS information = estimated location 1104; 3rd GPS information = estimated location 1106); and
transmit the first GPS information or the third GPS information to the second controller according to whether the map matching is activated (see Meyer at least Fig 11, col 3 lines 33-45, and col 8 lines 4-25; 1st GPS information = known location 1102; 3rd GPS information = estimated location 1106).
Meyer suggests the use of processors within the vehicle (see Meyer at least col 4 lines 42-53), such as smartphone devices, tablet devices, or other computing systems, for the sake of determining a GPS location. This suggestion of the potential for duplicate parts would not provide any unexpected results, nor detrimental effects upon the vehicle, according to guidance provided in MPEP 2144.04-VI.B, Duplication of Parts, and thus can be reasonably assumed by one of ordinary skill in the art.
However, Meyer does not explicitly disclose the following:
…a memory storing map data…
…a display…
…using route information of the vehicle obtained by searching a route from an origin to a destination…
…display … if the map image is displayed on the display…
…the GPS shaded section is a section in which the GPS signal is not received by the navigation device for more than a predetermined time…
…maintain the map matching in a deactivated state based on that the driving distance within the GPS shaded section is less than a predetermined distance…
…activate the map matching based on that the driving distance within the GPS shaded section is greater than or equal to the predetermined distance…
…the GPS signal is not received for the predetermined time…
Ren, in the same field of endeavor, teaches the following:
…a memory storing map data (see Ren at least [0050] “The example of FIG. 3A further includes a map matching module 40 which matches the estimated current position with a road link which is a road segment on the estimated route derived from a map database. As known in the art, in a map database, a road is defined by a plurality of road links connected with one another where each road link includes information on absolute position, such as longitude and latitude of each end or node and an attribute of the road. Upon receiving the position estimate from the dead reckoning module 35, the map matching module 40 matches the estimated position with the position indicated by the corresponding road links. The map matching result is provided as feedback to an input of the integration Kalman filter 36 via a closed loop in order to correct errors in the low precision vehicle sensors caused by errors, such as gyroscope bias errors.”)…
…a display (see Ren at least [0047] “In the configuration of FIG. 3A, the vehicle includes a head unit 31 which is typically a vehicle entertainment system with a display, CD player, DVD player, stereo system, etc…”)…
…using route information of the vehicle obtained by searching a route from an origin to a destination (see Ren at least [0053] "In the present disclosure, the map matching module 40 is provided in order to assist solving this problem by matching the estimated position with the position defined by the map data as well as by providing feedback regarding the matched position to an input of the integration Kalman filter 36. In the embodiments of FIGS. 3A and 3B, the method of vehicle positioning is triggered as soon as the vehicle detects that the vehicle enters the tunnel when a current vehicle position is map-matched with a position information indicating that the current vehicle position is on a road link with a “tunnel” attribute, regardless of whether the actual GPS signal loss is detected or not. On the other hand, the moment it is determined that the vehicle enters the tunnel, the map matching module 40 starts the operation of providing the last matched in-tunnel position to the vehicle positioning module. This operation is switched back to a normal vehicle positioning mode of the integrated INS/GPS navigation system as soon as it is detected that the vehicle exits the tunnel link." and [0060] "As described above, the algorithm of FIGS. 4 and 5 starts immediately at the entrance of the tunnel and ends immediately at the exit of the tunnel by detecting the position data of the road link and its attribute...")…
…display … if the map image is displayed on the display (see Ren at least [0047] “In the configuration of FIG. 3A, the vehicle includes a head unit 31 which is typically a vehicle entertainment system with a display, CD player, DVD player, stereo system, etc…”)…
…the GPS shaded section is a section in which the GPS signal is not received by the navigation device for more than a predetermined time (see Ren at least [0052] "As noted above, the position estimation by the dead reckoning module 35 is periodically corrected by the absolute position estimated by the smartphone. However, appropriate GPS signals may not always be available, for example, in a downtown area with many tall buildings where the minimum number of visible GPS satellites may not be available. Especially, when the vehicle travels through a relatively long tunnel, no GPS signal is obtainable for a long period of time, thus, the position errors is likely be accumulated because the navigation system has to rely solely on the dead reckoning operation.")…
…maintain the map matching in a deactivate state based on that the driving distance within the GPS shaded section is less than a predetermined distance (see Ren at least Fig 4 and [0056] “Specifically, the INS/GPS navigation system will determine whether the current vehicle position is map-matched with a road link of a tunnel. As noted above, each road may include a plurality of small road links or road segments where each road and its links are assigned with a corresponding attribute, such as a highway, freeway, one-way street, bridge, tunnel, etc. Each road link is also defined by its absolute position with respect to each end which is a node. Thus, in step 104, the INS/GPS navigation system checks the attribute of the road link or road segment that is currently map-matched so as to determine if the current vehicle position reaches the tunnel or arrives at a point on a link whose only successor link is a tunnel or arrives at a point that is within a predetermined threshold distance before the tunnel entrance. If the result in step 104 is negative, indicating that the vehicle is not on a tunnel link or close enough to the tunnel entrance, the INS/GPS navigation system will proceed to step 106 and use GPS(ti) to conduct measurement update in an iterated extended Kalman filter (IEKF). If the result in step 104 is affirmative, indicating that the vehicle is on a tunnel link or on a position close enough to the tunnel entrance, the INS/GPS navigation system will determine whether the tunnel status “IsTunnel” is true (step 105). Here, the tunnel status “IsTunnel=true” indicates that the vehicle has reached to the tunnel or within a threshold distance before the tunnel.” – satellite is used as default until vehicle enters tunnel, therefore a predetermined distance in interpreted as the threshold of the tunnel)…
…activate the map matching based on that the driving distance within the GPS shaded section is greater than or equal to the predetermined distance (see Ren at least Fig 4 and [0056]-[0057] “Specifically, the INS/GPS navigation system will determine whether the current vehicle position is map-matched with a road link of a tunnel. As noted above, each road may include a plurality of small road links or road segments where each road and its links are assigned with a corresponding attribute, such as a highway, freeway, one-way street, bridge, tunnel, etc. Each road link is also defined by its absolute position with respect to each end which is a node. Thus, in step 104, the INS/GPS navigation system checks the attribute of the road link or road segment that is currently map-matched so as to determine if the current vehicle position reaches the tunnel or arrives at a point on a link whose only successor link is a tunnel or arrives at a point that is within a predetermined threshold distance before the tunnel entrance. If the result in step 104 is negative, indicating that the vehicle is not on a tunnel link or close enough to the tunnel entrance, the INS/GPS navigation system will proceed to step 106 and use GPS(ti) to conduct measurement update in an iterated extended Kalman filter (IEKF). If the result in step 104 is affirmative, indicating that the vehicle is on a tunnel link or on a position close enough to the tunnel entrance, the INS/GPS navigation system will determine whether the tunnel status “IsTunnel” is true (step 105). Here, the tunnel status “IsTunnel=true” indicates that the vehicle has reached to the tunnel or within a threshold distance before the tunnel. If the result in step 105 is negative where “IsTunnel” is not true, the INS/GPS navigation system will change the “IsTunnel” flag value to True in step 107. Then, the INS/GPS navigation system will use MM(ti−1), which is the previous map matching information, in executing the measurement update for the integration Kalman filter (IEKF) in step 108. Hereafter the measurement update using the map matching result may also be referred to as “IEKF calibration”. If the result in step 105 is affirmative where “IsTunnel” is true, the system will go to step 108 and execute the IEKF calibration. In this manner, the position estimate by the map-matching is provided as feedback for correcting the errors such as drifts in dead reckoning propagation when a previous map matching indicated that the vehicle was moving along the tunnel.”)…
…the GPS signal is not received for the predetermined time (see Ren at least [0052] “As noted above, the position estimation by the dead reckoning module 35 is periodically corrected by the absolute position estimated by the smartphone. However, appropriate GPS signals may not always be available, for example, in a downtown area with many tall buildings where the minimum number of visible GPS satellites may not be available. Especially, when the vehicle travels through a relatively long tunnel, no GPS signal is obtainable for a long period of time, thus, the position errors is likely be accumulated because the navigation system has to rely solely on the dead reckoning operation.”)…
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the location information obtaining apparatus as disclosed by Meyer with map matching which is activated/deactivated according to a vehicle’s position as taught by Ren with a reasonable expectation of success to provide feedback for compensating potential positional errors (see Ren at least [0001]).
Regarding claim 2, Meyer in view of Ren teach the location information obtaining apparatus of claim 1, wherein the processor is further configured to deactivate the map matching based on that the vehicle is out of the GPS shaded section (see Ren at least [0056] “…If the result in step 104 is negative, indicating that the vehicle is not on a tunnel link or close enough to the tunnel entrance, the INS/GPS navigation system will proceed to step 106 and use GPS(ti) to conduct measurement update in an iterated extended Kalman filter (IEKF). …”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the location information obtaining apparatus as disclosed by Meyer with a threshold distance until a location with compromised satellite reception such as taught by Ren with a reasonable expectation of success so as to determine when to transition from using satellite data to using dead reckoning and map matching techniques (see Ren at least [0056]).
Regarding claim 4, Meyer in view of Ren teach the location information obtaining apparatus of claim 2, wherein based on that the map matching is activated, the navigation device is further configured to:
obtain the third GPS information by correcting the first GPS information using the second GPS information (see Meyer at least col 7 line 59 to col 8 line 3); and
transmit the third GPS information to the second processor (see Meyer at least col 7 line 59 to col 8 line 3).
Regarding claim 5, Meyer in view of Ren teach the location information obtaining apparatus of claim 2, wherein the navigation device is further configured to transmit the first GPS information to the second processor when the map matching feedback module is deactivated (see Meyer at least col 3 lines 33-45).
Regarding claim 6, Meyer in view of Ren teach the location information obtaining apparatus of claim 1, wherein the second processor is further configured to determine the current location of the vehicle on the map data by map matching between the GPS information received from the navigation device and the map data (see Meyer at least col 7 line 59 to col 8 line 3).
Regarding claim 8, Meyer in view of Ren teach the location information obtaining apparatus of claim 6, wherein the second processor is further configured to:
based on that the vehicle enters the GPS shaded section and a junction exists within the GPS shaded section, determine a distance between the vehicle and the junction using the map data (see Ren at least [0019] “The road link on the map data includes information on an attribute of the road and an absolute position of a node of each road link...” [0053] “…In the embodiments of FIGS. 3A and 3B, the method of vehicle positioning is triggered as soon as the vehicle detects that the vehicle enters the tunnel when a current vehicle position is map-matched with a position information indicating that the current vehicle position is on a road link with a “tunnel” attribute, regardless of whether the actual GPS signal loss is detected or not. On the other hand, the moment it is determined that the vehicle enters the tunnel, the map matching module 40 starts the operation of providing the last matched in-tunnel position to the vehicle positioning module...” and [0056] “Specifically, the INS/GPS navigation system will determine whether the current vehicle position is map-matched with a road link of a tunnel. As noted above, each road may include a plurality of small road links or road segments where each road and its links are assigned with a corresponding attribute, such as a highway, freeway, one-way street, bridge, tunnel, etc. Each road link is also defined by its absolute position with respect to each end which is a node. Thus, in step 104, the INS/GPS navigation system checks the attribute of the road link or road segment that is currently map-matched so as to determine if the current vehicle position reaches the tunnel or arrives at a point on a link whose only successor link is a tunnel or arrives at a point that is within a predetermined threshold distance before the tunnel entrance. If the result in step 104 is negative, indicating that the vehicle is not on a tunnel link or close enough to the tunnel entrance, the INS/GPS navigation system will proceed to step 106 and use GPS(ti) to conduct measurement update in an iterated extended Kalman filter (IEKF). If the result in step 104 is affirmative, indicating that the vehicle is on a tunnel link or on a position close enough to the tunnel entrance, the INS/GPS navigation system will determine whether the tunnel status “IsTunnel” is true (step 105). Here, the tunnel status “IsTunnel=true” indicates that the vehicle has reached to the tunnel or within a threshold distance before the tunnel.”); and
control an activation of the map matching feedback module according the distance between the vehicle and the junction (see Ren at least [0019] “The road link on the map data includes information on an attribute of the road and an absolute position of a node of each road link...” [0053] “…In the embodiments of FIGS. 3A and 3B, the method of vehicle positioning is triggered as soon as the vehicle detects that the vehicle enters the tunnel when a current vehicle position is map-matched with a position information indicating that the current vehicle position is on a road link with a “tunnel” attribute, regardless of whether the actual GPS signal loss is detected or not. On the other hand, the moment it is determined that the vehicle enters the tunnel, the map matching module 40 starts the operation of providing the last matched in-tunnel position to the vehicle positioning module...” and [0056] “Specifically, the INS/GPS navigation system will determine whether the current vehicle position is map-matched with a road link of a tunnel. As noted above, each road may include a plurality of small road links or road segments where each road and its links are assigned with a corresponding attribute, such as a highway, freeway, one-way street, bridge, tunnel, etc. Each road link is also defined by its absolute position with respect to each end which is a node. Thus, in step 104, the INS/GPS navigation system checks the attribute of the road link or road segment that is currently map-matched so as to determine if the current vehicle position reaches the tunnel or arrives at a point on a link whose only successor link is a tunnel or arrives at a point that is within a predetermined threshold distance before the tunnel entrance. If the result in step 104 is negative, indicating that the vehicle is not on a tunnel link or close enough to the tunnel entrance, the INS/GPS navigation system will proceed to step 106 and use GPS(ti) to conduct measurement update in an iterated extended Kalman filter (IEKF). If the result in step 104 is affirmative, indicating that the vehicle is on a tunnel link or on a position close enough to the tunnel entrance, the INS/GPS navigation system will determine whether the tunnel status “IsTunnel” is true (step 105). Here, the tunnel status “IsTunnel=true” indicates that the vehicle has reached to the tunnel or within a threshold distance before the tunnel.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the activation of the map matching feedback module as disclosed by Meyer with a presence/absence of a junction such as taught by Ren with a reasonable expectation of success so as to determine when to transition from using satellite data to using dead reckoning and map matching techniques (see Ren at least [0056]).
Regarding claim 9, Meyer in view of Ren teach the location information obtaining apparatus of claim 8, wherein the second processor is further configured to deactivate the map matching based on that the junction exists in the GPS shaded section and the distance between the vehicle and the junction is within a predetermined distance from the junction (see Ren at least [0050] “The example of FIG. 3A further includes a map matching module 40 which matches the estimated current position with a road link which is a road segment on the estimated route derived from a map database…” and [0053] “In the present disclosure, the map matching module 40 is provided in order to assist solving this problem by matching the estimated position with the position defined by the map data as well as by providing feedback regarding the matched position to an input of the integration Kalman filter 36. In the embodiments of FIGS. 3A and 3B, the method of vehicle positioning is triggered as soon as the vehicle detects that the vehicle enters the tunnel when a current vehicle position is map-matched with a position information indicating that the current vehicle position is on a road link with a “tunnel” attribute, regardless of whether the actual GPS signal loss is detected or not. On the other hand, the moment it is determined that the vehicle enters the tunnel, the map matching module 40 starts the operation of providing the last matched in-tunnel position to the vehicle positioning module. This operation is switched back to a normal vehicle positioning mode of the integrated INS/GPS navigation system as soon as it is detected that the vehicle exits the tunnel link.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the location information obtaining apparatus as disclosed by Meyer with a deactivation of the map matching feedback module as taught by Ren with a reasonable expectation of success so as to avoid relying data that tends to be less reliable and/or accurate (see Ren at least [0005]).
Regarding claim 11, Meyer in view of Ren teach the location information obtaining apparatus of claim 1, further including:
the sensor device configured to detect wheel speed and direction of the vehicle (see Meyer at least col 7 lines 20-33),
wherein the navigation device is configured to obtain speed information and direction information of the vehicle based on information detected by the sensor device (see Meyer at least col 7 lines 20-33).
Regarding claim 12, Meyer in view of Ren teach the location information obtaining apparatus of claim 1, wherein the GPS shaded section is a tunnel or an underpass section (see Ren at least [0046] “FIGS. 3A and 3B are block diagrams of the loosely coupled INS/GPS navigation systems each showing a more detailed configuration than that of FIG. 2A. The block diagrams of FIGS. 3A and 3B are illustrated for explaining the method and apparatus of vehicle positioning by using map matching during a dead reckoning operation when the vehicle is in an area where GPS signal loss is likely to occur, such as a tunnel, downtown with many high-rise buildings, valley between tall mountain walls, etc. The loosely coupled INS/GPS navigation systems of FIGS. 3A and 3B are implemented by an off-board navigation system running on the smartphone and a plurality of vehicle sensors. The configurations of FIGS. 3A and 3B are similar to one another, where an embodiment of FIG. 3B includes additional components to that of FIG. 3A to improve gyroscope sensitivity with use of a secondary Kalman filter 37.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the location information obtaining apparatus as disclosed by Meyer with a GPS shaded section such as a tunnel as taught by Ren with a reasonable expectation of success since tunnels are a common location where signal dropout occurs (see Ren at least [0006]).
Regarding claim 14, Meyer in view of Ren teach the analogous material of that in claim 1 as recited in the instant claim and is rejected for similar reasons.
Regarding claim 18, Meyer in view of Ren teach the analogous material of that in claims 8 and 9 as recited in the instant claim and is rejected for similar reasons.
Regarding claim 19, Meyer in view of Ren teach the analogous material of that in claim 9 as recited in the instant claim and is rejected for similar reasons.
Regarding claim 20, Meyer in view of Ren teach the analogous material of that in claim 6 as recited in the instant claim and is rejected for similar reasons.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Meyer in view of Ren as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Negahban et al. (US-11,410,468; hereinafter Negahban; already of record) and Shiga et al. (US-2020/0117215; hereinafter Shiga; already of record).
Regarding claim 13, Meyer in view of Ren teach …
the location information obtaining apparatus of claim 1 (Meyer and Ren, see claim 1 above),
…
…
…
…
…
However, neither Meyer nor Ren explicitly disclose or teach the following:
…a taxi service providing system…
…wherein the second processor is configured to…
…be connected to, through a network, an operation server that provides a response to a request for a service received from a user terminal…
…determine whether to check dispatch call information by use of information linking a driving state of the vehicle, a user's boarding location, and heading direction information of the vehicle…
…determine a driving fee by use of the GPS information or wheel speed information of the vehicle…
…determine whether to change an output screen of the vehicle through gear state information of the vehicle…
Negahban, in the same field of endeavor, teaches the following:
…a taxi service providing system (see Negahban at least Abs)…
…wherein the second processor (see Negahban at least Fig 4, col 6 lines 49-59 “Turning now to the mobile meter app 300, FIG. 4 is a block diagram of a mobile meter app 300, according to an embodiment. The mobile meter app 300 may be downloadable to or remotely accessible via the mobile meter device 150. The mobile meter app 300 may include a mobile meter device authentication unit 302, a driver authentication unit 304, a fare calculating unit 306, and a notification and indicator unit 308. The fare calculating unit 306 may be configured to receive the fare attributes (e.g., from the remote or cloud-based administrative component 200 and to dynamically calculate a fare based on the fare attributes.”, and col 7 lines 50-55 “The fare calculating unit 306 may be configured to receive the first set of fare attributes (described above) from the administrative component 200 and to dynamically calculate a fare based on the first set of fare attributes and a second set of fare attributes entered via the GUI 310 of the mobile meter app 300.”) is configured to…
…be connected to, through a network, an operation server that provides a response to a request for a service received from a user terminal (see Negahban at least Fig 1, col 3 lines 1-27, col 14 lines 1-14, col 14 lines 39-54)…
…determine whether to check dispatch call information by use of information linking … a user's boarding location (see Negahban at least col 14 lines 32-38)…
…determine a driving fee by use of the GPS information or wheel speed information of the vehicle (see Negahban at least col 2 lines 48-67)…
…
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the location information obtaining apparatus as taught by Meyer in view of Ren with a taxi service providing system such as taught by Negahban with a reasonable expectation of success so as to provide users information with improved accuracy (see Negahban at least col 4 lines 31-48).
However, neither Meyer nor Ren nor Negahban explicitly disclose or teach the following:
…determine whether to check dispatch call information by use of information linking a driving state of the vehicle … and heading direction information of the vehicle…
…determine whether to change an output screen of the vehicle through gear state information of the vehicle…
Shiga, in the same field of endeavor, teaches the following:
…determine whether to check dispatch call information by use of information linking a driving state of the vehicle (see Shiga at least [0039] “The server 30 retrieves vehicles 2 that are present within a certain range from the present location of the user 4b, and selects an available vehicle 2 from the retrieved at least one vehicle 2. The server 30 sends a dispatch command to the vehicle 2 to move the vehicle 2 to the present location of the user 4b (step S202). Note that, when the vehicles 2 offer a ride sharing service or the like, other passengers 4 may already be riding in the vehicles 2. In this case, for example, the server 30 may select, from the retrieved at least one vehicle 2, a vehicle 2 containing other passengers 4 who are travelling to a destination that is in the same direction as the destination of the user 4b.”) … and heading direction information of the vehicle (see Shiga at least [0039] “The server 30 retrieves vehicles 2 that are present within a certain range from the present location of the user 4b, and selects an available vehicle 2 from the retrieved at least one vehicle 2. The server 30 sends a dispatch command to the vehicle 2 to move the vehicle 2 to the present location of the user 4b (step S202). Note that, when the vehicles 2 offer a ride sharing service or the like, other passengers 4 may already be riding in the vehicles 2. In this case, for example, the server 30 may select, from the retrieved at least one vehicle 2, a vehicle 2 containing other passengers 4 who are travelling to a destination that is in the same direction as the destination of the user 4b.”)…
…determine whether to change an output screen of the vehicle through gear state information of the vehicle (see Shiga at least [0073] “The touch display 215 is controlled by the vehicle-mounted device 20, and displays guidance for the passengers 4 riding in the vehicle 2. For example, when the vehicle 2 moves to a stop location, guidance of “this vehicle will stop at a bathroom in response to a passenger's request” and the like is displayed on the touch display 215. As described above, while the automatic driving control module 21 automatically controls the driving of the vehicle 2, guidance of “if you wish to stop at a bathroom, please operate the bathroom stop button on the ceiling” and the like is displayed on the touch display 215. Instead of the touch display 215, a speaker for announcing the same guidance to the interior of the vehicle, under the control of the vehicle-mounted device 20, or the like may be used.”)…
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the location information obtaining apparatus as taught by Meyer in view of Ren with driving state information and heading direction information of a vehicle such as taught by Shiga with a reasonable expectation of success so as to provide a mode of transportation that is accommodating to a passenger (see Shiga at least [0032]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Brodie et al. (US-2002/0128775) teaches a method of navigational map-matching in a vehicle that includes multiple processors.
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 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SEAN REIDY whose telephone number is (571) 272-7660. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 7:00 AM- 3:00 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, Abby Flynn can be reached on (571) 272-9855. 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.
/S.P.R./Examiner, Art Unit 3663
/ABBY J FLYNN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3663