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 .
Claims 1-20 are presented for examination.
Claims 1-20 are rejected.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 9-11, filed 12/13/2024, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-20 under 35 U.S.C. § 102 and 35 U.S.C. § 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Lagassey (US 20060092043 A1).
Claim Rejections - 35 U.S.C. § 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.
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 C.F.R. § 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 1-5, 7-17, and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Pelleg (US 20210201666 A1), in view of Lagassey (US 20060092043 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Pelleg discloses a vehicle system of a vehicle comprising a controller programmed to:
receive sensor data from one or more vehicle sensors as the vehicle drives along a road; [0026] “the sensor data can comprise camera data, video recorder data, audio recorder data, accelerometer data, gyroscope data, vehicle state sensor data, GPS data, outdoor temperature sensor data, moisture sensor data, laser line tracker sensor data, or any other appropriate sensor data.”
determine whether the vehicle is approaching a road anomaly based on the sensor data; [0030] “In other words, embodiments of the current disclosure can detect road anomaly events, such as potholes and other types of infrastructure decay, opportunistically, using low-cost and numerous sensors mounted or already existing in standard vehicles.” [0038] “the local aggregator 105 can then analyze the received data to determine (i.e., determining if the vehicle approaching the road anomaly) which events are actual road anomaly events based on whether the respective road anomaly events are above a predetermined confidence level.”
Pelleg does not appear to teach the full claim limitation regarding “and upon determination that the vehicle is approaching the road anomaly, begin recording audio and stop recording audio after the vehicle interacts with the road anomaly.”
However, Lagassey teaches equivalent teachings and upon determination that the vehicle is approaching the road anomaly, begin recording audio and stop recording audio after the vehicle interacts with the road anomaly. [0084] “the control unit continually receives input of acoustical data from the microphones. This acoustical data is processed in the control unit to determine if the acoustical data received from the microphones match the acoustical pattern of sounds that indicate a motor vehicle accident is about to occur ("preliminary sounds") or that a motor vehicle accident is occurring ("qualifying sounds"). For example, the sound of skidding tires is often followed by a collision of vehicles.” [0091] “If desired, the saving of audio and video data can be stopped after a predetermined amount of recording time passes, or upon command by the operator from a remote location. In this embodiment, the system is not dependent on preliminary sounds, and is designed to capture the events leading up to an accident. This can be particularly useful in determining the events leading up to the accident, the cause of the accident, assessing fault and determining liability.” [0151] “The recording of audio and video signals continues for a predetermined length of time. Therefore, the control unit 25 captures events leading up to, during and after the accident or event occurs.” Lagassey stops recording after a predetermined time window rather than explicitly “after the vehicle interacts with the road anomaly,” it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to implement Pelleg’s anomaly-event detection using Lagassey’s event-bounded buffering, and to define the recording window so that audio recording begins as the vehicle approaches the anomaly and stops after the anomaly interaction has occurred (e.g., when the anomaly event has ended).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date, to modify Pelleg’s vehicle-based road anomaly monitoring system to incorporate Lagassey’s event-triggered audio recording and bounded recording window around the anomaly. Both Pelleg and Lagassey address capturing data associated with roadway incidents/anomalies and transmitting it for analysis and response. Pelleg focuses on detecting road anomalies and reporting them to a central server; Lagassey focuses on when and how to record and preserve audio/video around an incident to create an efficient and evidentiary record.
A skilled person in the art would have been motivated to adopt Lagassey’s approach in Pelleg’s system to reduce storage and bandwidth by recording audio mainly around anomaly events to improve overall system operational effectiveness and cost [0046] “Accordingly, what is needed in the art is a vehicle accident detection and data recordation and transmission system that provides a cost effective manner of placing one or more video cameras, microphones and data collection and transmission apparatus in proximity to traffic intersections, or other desired locations, in order to detect and temporarily store accident-related images and sounds, together with other accident-related data such as time and location, and to transmit said data to a remote location where the information can be reviewed immediately for the purpose of screening false alarms, assessing the severity of the accident and dispatching an appropriate level of emergency response”
Regarding Claim 2, Pelleg in combination with Lagassey teaches the vehicle system of claim 1, wherein the controller is further programmed to: determine a location of the road anomaly based on the sensor data [0036] “the received data can include a location for each of the road anomaly events (e.g., 107, 109).” and transmit the location of the road anomaly to a remote computing device. [0031] “and then transmit those valid road anomaly event's location and type to a central server.”
Regarding Claim 3, Pelleg in combination with Lagassey teaches the vehicle system of claim 1, wherein the controller is further programmed to: determine a location of the road anomaly based on the sensor data [0036] “the received data can include a location for each of the road anomaly events (e.g., 107, 109).”
and transmit the location of the road anomaly to a second vehicle. [0031] “the central server can then send information regarding those valid road anomaly event's location and type to other vehicles.”
Regarding Claim 4, Pelleg in combination with Lagassey teaches the vehicle system of claim 1, wherein: the sensor data is indicative of driving behavior of a second vehicle [0031] “These embodiments provide a technological solution to the above technical problem by analyzing data regarding potential road anomaly events received from other vehicles to identify the real unsafe road anomaly event [] the central server can then send information regarding those valid road anomaly event's location and type to other vehicles.” [0038] “the local aggregator 105 can then analyze the received data to determine (i.e., determining if the vehicle approaching the road anomaly) which events are actual road anomaly events based on whether the respective road anomaly events are above a predetermined confidence level.”; and the controller is further programmed to determine whether the vehicle is approaching the road anomaly based on the driving behavior of the second vehicle. [0044] “In some embodiments, sensors (e.g., mounted onboard standard vehicles) can sense road bumps, sudden swerves, or emergency brakes.” The system relays and communicates information between vehicles (i.e., other vehicle) regarding the road anomalies which impacts the other vehicles behavior such as sudden swerves or emergency brakes (i.e., driving behavior). The “sensor data” received from other vehicles includes data reflecting those vehicles’ driving behavior (e.g., swerving or emergency braking in response to an anomaly). See also [0031] “These embodiments provide a technological solution to the above technical problem by analyzing data regarding potential road anomaly events received from other vehicles to identify the real unsafe road anomaly event.
Regarding Claim 5, Pelleg in combination with Lagassey teaches the vehicle system of claim 1, wherein the controller is further programmed to: determine a location of the anomaly based on the sensor data [0031] “and then transmit those valid road anomaly event's location and type to a central server.” [0036] “the received data can include a location for each of the road anomaly events (e.g., 107, 109).”
Pelleg does not teach “begin recording audio when a distance between the vehicle and the location of the anomaly is less than a predetermined threshold distance.”
However, Lagassey teaches equivalent teachings begin recording audio when a distance between the vehicle and the location of the anomaly is less than a predetermined threshold distance [0054] “control unit uses RAM as a buffer, “continually stores in the buffer all audio signals and video images overwriting that exceeds the specified period of time.” [0057] “when preliminary sounds are detected, the control unit begins storing audio signals and video images of the desired location ("the accident scene") in the RAM or data storage means. When qualifying sounds are detected within a predetermined amount of time after detection of preliminary sounds, the control unit continues storing audio signals and video images of the accident scene and also stores the time and location data from the satellite navigation receiver or other means for determining time and location, and the wireless transceiver or other communication means initiates contact with the designated remote location ("the monitoring center")” [0091] “If desired, the saving of audio and video data can be stopped after a predetermined amount of recording time passes, or upon command by the operator from a remote location. In this embodiment, the system is not dependent on preliminary sounds, and is designed to capture the events leading up to an accident. This can be particularly useful in determining the events leading up to the accident, the cause of the accident, assessing fault and determining liability.” In Pelleg, the controller has the vehicle’s current location (e.g., GPS data) and the anomaly location (road anomaly event location) and therefore can compute a separation distance between those two locations using routine navigation computations. Further, Pelleg also contemplates vehicle speed sensing such that the controller can equivalently express a trigger window either as a distance-to-anomaly threshold or a time-to-anomaly threshold derived from distance and speed (e.g., time-to-anomaly = distance-to-anomaly / speed). This is a predictable substitution because both triggers use the same available inputs (vehicle location, anomaly location, and optionally speed) and merely change the comparison variable from distance to time.
It would have been obvious to a person that is skilled in the art prior to the effective filling date to combine Pelleg and Lagassey teachings, given Pelleg’s teaching of vehicle position and anomaly location via GPS and well-understood kinematics to implement the event trigger using a distance threshold between the vehicle’s current location and the stored anomaly location where distance thresholds are a straightforward alternative to time thresholds for defining when an incident-related recording window should begin, especially in vehicle systems that already track position and speed as in Pelleg.
A skilled person in the art would have been motivated to adopt Lagassey’s approach in Pelleg’s system to reduce storage and bandwidth by recording audio mainly around anomaly events to improve overall system operational effectiveness and cost [0046] “Accordingly, what is needed in the art is a vehicle accident detection and data recordation and transmission system that provides a cost effective manner of placing one or more video cameras, microphones and data collection and transmission apparatus in proximity to traffic intersections, or other desired locations, in order to detect and temporarily store accident-related images and sounds, together with other accident-related data such as time and location, and to transmit said data to a remote location where the information can be reviewed immediately for the purpose of screening false alarms, assessing the severity of the accident and dispatching an appropriate level of emergency response”
Regarding Claim 7, Pelleg in combination with Lagassey teaches the vehicle system of claim 1,
Pelleg teaches the vehicle has traveled beyond the anomaly by at least a predetermined threshold distance [0026] “the sensor data can comprise camera data, video recorder data, audio recorder data, accelerometer data, gyroscope data, vehicle state sensor data, GPS data, outdoor temperature sensor data, moisture sensor data, laser line tracker sensor data, or any other appropriate sensor data.” [0036] “the received data can include a location for each of the road anomaly events (e.g., 107, 109).” [0054] “the method records the road anomaly event (e.g., 107, 109) on a vehicle. For example, the method can record the road anomaly event (e.g., 107, 109) on a vehicle via sensors or cameras.”;
Pelleg does not teach “wherein the controller is further programmed to: stop recording audio after.”
However, Lagassey teaches equivalent teachings wherein stopping the recording after [0054] “control unit uses RAM as a buffer, “continually stores in the buffer all audio signals and video images overwriting that exceeds the specified period of time.” [0058] “If a qualifying sound is not detected within a predetermined amount of time after a preliminary sound is detected, the stored audio and video signals that followed the preliminary sound may be discarded and the control unit resumes waiting” [0091] “saving of audio and video data can be stopped after a predetermined amount of recording time passes” Lagassey teaches that once the system determines an incident has occurred (qualifying sound), it records only for a bounded window and then stops, based on a predetermined threshold interval. Pelleg teaches that anomaly events have a known location that is transmitted/received and stored and Pelleg’s vehicle uses position sensing (e.g., GPS) as part of its sensor data. Therefore, once the vehicle has passed the anomaly location, the controller can determine that the vehicle has traveled “beyond the anomaly” by computing the current vehicle location relative to the stored anomaly location and comparing that separation distance to a predetermined threshold distance (i.e., “distance past the anomaly”). Lagassey further teaches event-bounded recording with a stopping condition (e.g., stopping/discarding buffered data when conditions are not met, and stopping after a predetermined recording interval) and thus provides the terminating recording based on a predetermined threshold condition. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to implement the Lagassey-type bounded recording termination in Pelleg using Pelleg’s known anomaly location and vehicle location to stop recording when the vehicle has traveled beyond the anomaly by at least the predetermined threshold distance.
It would have been obvious to a person that is skilled in the art prior to the effective filling date to combine Pelleg and Lagassey teachings to starting from Pelleg’s system that knows both the vehicle’s speed and location and the anomaly’s location and would recognize that a distance-based stopping condition (“beyond the anomaly by at least a predetermined threshold distance”) is a straightforward and equivalent design choice to a time-based window. The distance (threshold) is just speed × time; vehicle navigation and ADAS systems routinely convert time thresholds to distance thresholds. Thus, in view of Lagassey’s teaching of event-bounded recording with threshold-based stopping, it would have been obvious to implement Pelleg’s audio recording such that it stops when the vehicle has traveled beyond the anomaly by at least a predetermined threshold distance, thereby tailoring the recording window to the region in which the anomaly affects the vehicle.
A skilled person in the art would have been motivated to adopt Lagassey’s approach in Pelleg’s system to reduce storage and bandwidth by recording audio mainly around anomaly events to improve overall system operational effectiveness and cost [0046] “Accordingly, what is needed in the art is a vehicle accident detection and data recordation and transmission system that provides a cost effective manner of placing one or more video cameras, microphones and data collection and transmission apparatus in proximity to traffic intersections, or other desired locations, in order to detect and temporarily store accident-related images and sounds, together with other accident-related data such as time and location, and to transmit said data to a remote location where the information can be reviewed immediately for the purpose of screening false alarms, assessing the severity of the accident and dispatching an appropriate level of emergency response”
Regarding Claim 8, Pelleg in combination with Lagassey teaches the vehicle system of claim 1, Pelleg does not teach “wherein the controller is further programmed to: stop recording audio after the vehicle has traveled beyond the anomaly for at least a predetermined threshold amount of time.”However, Lagassey teaches equivalent teachings wherein the controller is further programmed to: stop recording audio after the vehicle has traveled beyond the anomaly for at least a predetermined threshold amount of time. [0058] “recording triggered by preliminary sounds stops, and the recorded data is discarded, if a predetermined amount of time elapses without a qualifying sound.” [0094] “similarly, if the predetermined time elapses without a qualifying sound, “the control unit stops recording audio data and video images and resumes normal operation.” [0091] “after a qualifying sound, “the control unit continues saving audio signals and video images If desired, the saving of audio and video data can be stopped after a predetermined amount of recording time passes” [0156] “the recording and storing of all accident-related data continues for a pre-determined length of time” [0171] “the recording can be stopped at a predetermined time after a qualifying sound has occurred instead of continuing until being reset.”
It would have been obvious to a person that is skilled in the art prior to the effective filling date to combine Pelleg and Lagassey teachings of vehicle anomaly-location and knowledge of when the vehicle reaches/passes the anomaly of Lagassey’s “predetermined length of time” to the moment when the vehicle passes the anomaly, so that audio recording continues for at least a predetermined threshold amount of time after the vehicle has traveled beyond the anomaly, then stops.
A skilled person in the art would have been motivated to adopt Lagassey’s approach in Pelleg’s system to reduce storage and bandwidth by recording audio mainly around anomaly events to improve overall system operational effectiveness and cost [0046] “Accordingly, what is needed in the art is a vehicle accident detection and data recordation and transmission system that provides a cost effective manner of placing one or more video cameras, microphones and data collection and transmission apparatus in proximity to traffic intersections, or other desired locations, in order to detect and temporarily store accident-related images and sounds, together with other accident-related data such as time and location, and to transmit said data to a remote location where the information can be reviewed immediately for the purpose of screening false alarms, assessing the severity of the accident and dispatching an appropriate level of emergency response”
Regarding Claim 9, Pelleg in combination with Lagassey teaches the vehicle system of claim 1, wherein the controller is further programmed to: receive a location of the anomaly from a remote computing device and when a distance between the vehicle and the location of the anomaly is less than a predetermined distance [0026] “the sensor data can comprise camera data, video recorder data, audio recorder data, accelerometer data, gyroscope data, vehicle state sensor data, GPS data, outdoor temperature sensor data, moisture sensor data, laser line tracker sensor data, or any other appropriate sensor data.” [0031] “and then transmit those valid road anomaly event's location and type to a central server.” [0036] “the received data can include a location for each of the road anomaly events (e.g., 107, 109).” [0054] “the method records the road anomaly event (e.g., 107, 109) on a vehicle. For example, the method can record the road anomaly event (e.g., 107, 109) on a vehicle via sensors or cameras.”;
Pelleg does not teach “begin recording audio based on some threshold.”
However, Lagassey teaches equivalent teachings begin recording audio [0054] “control unit uses RAM as a buffer, “continually stores in the buffer all audio signals and video images overwriting that exceeds the specified period of time.” [0057] “when preliminary sounds are detected, the control unit begins storing audio signals and video images of the desired location ("the accident scene") in the RAM or data storage means. When qualifying sounds are detected within a predetermined amount of time after detection of preliminary sounds, the control unit continues storing audio signals and video images of the accident scene and also stores the time and location data from the satellite navigation receiver or other means for determining time and location, and the wireless transceiver or other communication means initiates contact with the designated remote location ("the monitoring center")” Pelleg discloses receiving anomaly location information from a central server (remote computing device). Pelleg’s vehicle also has its own current position available via sensor data including GPS, the controller can compute a distance between the vehicle and the received anomaly location and compare that computed distance to a predetermined threshold to trigger recording. Lagassey teaches event-based recording/buffering triggered around an incident and saving a bounded window of audio/video upon detection, which teaches the concept of initiating/retaining recording based on an incident-related trigger. Thus, it would have been obvious to implement Pelleg’s anomaly-location-based trigger using a distance-to-anomaly threshold (computed from Pelleg’s GPS position and the received anomaly location) to begin recording audio.
It would have been obvious to a person that is skilled in the art prior to the effective filling date to combine Pelleg and Lagassey teachings to make the system begin recording audio when a distance between the vehicle and the location of the anomaly is less than a predetermined threshold distance.
A skilled person in the art would have been motivated to adopt Lagassey’s approach in Pelleg’s system to reduce storage and bandwidth by recording audio mainly around anomaly events to improve overall system operational effectiveness and cost [0046] “Accordingly, what is needed in the art is a vehicle accident detection and data recordation and transmission system that provides a cost effective manner of placing one or more video cameras, microphones and data collection and transmission apparatus in proximity to traffic intersections, or other desired locations, in order to detect and temporarily store accident-related images and sounds, together with other accident-related data such as time and location, and to transmit said data to a remote location where the information can be reviewed immediately for the purpose of screening false alarms, assessing the severity of the accident and dispatching an appropriate level of emergency response”
Regarding Claim 10, Pelleg in combination with Lagassey teaches the vehicle system of claim 1, wherein the controller is further programmed to: receive a location of the anomaly from a second vehicle [0031] “the central server can then send information regarding those valid road anomaly event's location and type to other vehicles (i.e., second vehicle).” [0036] “the received data can include a location for each of the road anomaly events (e.g., 107, 109).”
Pelleg does not teach “begin recording audio when a distance between the vehicle and the location of the anomaly is less than a predetermined distance.”
However, Lagassey teaches equivalent teachings begin recording audio when a distance between the vehicle and the location of the anomaly is less than a predetermined threshold distance [0054] “control unit uses RAM as a buffer, “continually stores in the buffer all audio signals and video images overwriting that exceeds the specified period of time.” [0057] “when preliminary sounds are detected, the control unit begins storing audio signals and video images of the desired location ("the accident scene") in the RAM or data storage means. When qualifying sounds are detected within a predetermined amount of time after detection of preliminary sounds, the control unit continues storing audio signals and video images of the accident scene and also stores the time and location data from the satellite navigation receiver or other means for determining time and location, and the wireless transceiver or other communication means initiates contact with the designated remote location ("the monitoring center")” Pelleg discloses that vehicles may receive anomaly location/type information that originated from other vehicles via the central server / distribution to other vehicles. Given Pelleg’s teaching that anomaly events have a location and the vehicle has its own GPS position as sensor data, the controller can compute a distance to the received anomaly location and compare it to a predetermined threshold distance to trigger recording. Lagassey teaches event-triggered recording/buffering around an incident. Therefore, it would have been obvious to configure Pelleg so that, upon receiving an anomaly location associated with a second vehicle’s report, the vehicle begins recording audio when within the predetermined threshold distance of that anomaly location.
It would have been obvious to a person that is skilled in the art prior to the effective filling date to combine Pelleg and Lagassey teachings to make the system receive a location of the anomaly from a second vehicle and begin recording audio when a distance between the vehicle and the location of the anomaly is less than a predetermined threshold distance.
A skilled person in the art would have been motivated to adopt Lagassey’s approach in Pelleg’s system to reduce storage and bandwidth by recording audio mainly around anomaly events to improve overall system operational effectiveness and cost [0046] “Accordingly, what is needed in the art is a vehicle accident detection and data recordation and transmission system that provides a cost effective manner of placing one or more video cameras, microphones and data collection and transmission apparatus in proximity to traffic intersections, or other desired locations, in order to detect and temporarily store accident-related images and sounds, together with other accident-related data such as time and location, and to transmit said data to a remote location where the information can be reviewed immediately for the purpose of screening false alarms, assessing the severity of the accident and dispatching an appropriate level of emergency response”
Regarding Claim 11, Pelleg discloses a vehicle system of a vehicle comprising a controller programmed to: ... record audio [0026] “the sensor data can comprise camera data, video recorder data, audio recorder data, accelerometer data, gyroscope data, vehicle state sensor data, GPS data, outdoor temperature sensor data, moisture sensor data, laser line tracker sensor data, or any other appropriate sensor data.” [0054] “the method records the road anomaly event (e.g., 107, 109) on a vehicle. For example, the method can record the road anomaly event (e.g., 107, 109) on a vehicle via sensors or cameras.”;
receive sensor data from one or more vehicle sensors; determine whether the vehicle has interacted with an anomaly based on the sensor data [0026] “the sensor data can comprise camera data, video recorder data, audio recorder data, accelerometer data, gyroscope data, vehicle state sensor data, GPS data, outdoor temperature sensor data, moisture sensor data, laser line tracker sensor data, or any other appropriate sensor data.” [0036] “the received data can include a location for each of the road anomaly events (e.g., 107, 109).” [0056] “the method can then add the road anomaly event to an in-vehicle event storage module.” [0056] “the method can then add the road anomaly event to an in-vehicle event storage module.” Pelleg’s controller determines, based on sensor data from the host vehicle, whether that vehicle has interacted with the anomaly based on sensor data.
Pelleg does not expressly disclose continuous audio buffering, storing “the most recent audio” in a buffer, or extracting a portion of that buffered audio upon determining an anomaly interaction.
However, Lagassey teaches equivalent teachings wherein extract a portion of the audio from the buffer [0084] “the control unit continually receives input of acoustical data from the microphones. This acoustical data is processed in the control unit to determine if the acoustical data received from the microphones match the acoustical pattern of sounds that indicate a motor vehicle accident is about to occur ("preliminary sounds") or that a motor vehicle accident is occurring ("qualifying sounds"). For example, the sound of skidding tires is often followed by a collision of vehicles.” [0055] “When a qualifying sound is detected, the system stops overwriting old information in the circular buffer, thereby saving audio signals and video images leading up to the qualifying sound, and continues saving subsequent audio and video” [0144] “the control unit 25 persistently stores the audio and video data that was buffered prior to the qualifying sound, and begins a sequence of events” [0111]: “The buffer may receive the audio output, and store a portion of the audio output representing the acoustic waves for a preceding period, including at least a period immediately prior to the determination of a likely occurrence of the vehicular incident up to a time of the determination” The combination teach that, upon determining that an event (incident/anomaly) has occurred, the system extracts/preserves the segment of audio stored in the buffer around the time of the event (i.e., a portion of the audio from the buffer). Lagassey expressly teaches using a circular buffer that continually overwrites until a triggering event occurs, at which point overwriting stops and buffered audio/video leading up to the event is preserved. Pelleg teaches recording road anomaly events using vehicle sensors (including audio recorder data) and storing the event in an in-vehicle event storage module. Thus, it would have been obvious to modify Pelleg’s event storage/recordation arrangement to use Lagassey’s circular buffer and event-based “freeze/preserve the buffered segment” technique so that the system retains the portion of audio corresponding to the anomaly interaction rather than recording without bound.
It would have been obvious to a person that is skilled in the art prior to the effective filling date to combine Pelleg and Lagassey to incorporate Lagassey’s circular-buffer and event-based segment extraction scheme into Pelleg’s road-anomaly detection system to stores and uses audio around road anomaly events capturing just the relevant window.
A skilled person in the art would have been motivated to adopt Lagassey’s approach in Pelleg’s system to reduce storage and bandwidth by recording audio mainly around anomaly events to improve overall system operational effectiveness and cost [0046] “Accordingly, what is needed in the art is a vehicle accident detection and data recordation and transmission system that provides a cost effective manner of placing one or more video cameras, microphones and data collection and transmission apparatus in proximity to traffic intersections, or other desired locations, in order to detect and temporarily store accident-related images and sounds, together with other accident-related data such as time and location, and to transmit said data to a remote location where the information can be reviewed immediately for the purpose of screening false alarms, assessing the severity of the accident and dispatching an appropriate level of emergency response”
Regarding Claim 12, Pelleg in combination with Lagassey teaches the vehicle system of claim 11, wherein the controller is further programmed to: determine a timing when the vehicle interacted with the anomaly based on the sensor data [0026] “the sensor data can comprise camera data, video recorder data, audio recorder data, accelerometer data, gyroscope data, vehicle state sensor data, GPS data, outdoor temperature sensor data, moisture sensor data, laser line tracker sensor data, or any other appropriate sensor data.” [0036] “the received data can include a location for each of the road anomaly events (e.g., 107, 109).” [0054] “a sensor attached to a vehicle can include, but is not limited to, a speedometer sensor, an accelerator pedal sensor, a brake pedal sensor” [0055] “When a qualifying sound is detected, the system stops overwriting old information in the circular buffer, thereby saving audio signals and video images leading up to the qualifying sound, and continues saving subsequent audio and video” [0144] “the control unit 25 persistently stores the audio and video data that was buffered prior to the qualifying sound, and begins a sequence of events” [0056] “the method can then add the road anomaly event to an in-vehicle event storage module.”
Pelleg does not appear to teach the full claim limitation regarding “extract a predetermined portion of the audio from the buffer based on the timing”
However, Lagassey teaches equivalent teachings “extract a predetermined portion of the audio from the buffer based on the timing. “
[0063] “there will be various timecodes, including those associated with images, but possibly also without associated images, such as a time of relevant traffic control device changes (such as the time a traffic light turns red), a time of detection of an acoustic signal representing a preliminary sound anticipating a vehicular incident or non-vehicular incident, a time of a determination that a vehicular or non-vehicular incident has occurred, or other times.” [0111] “The buffer may receive the audio output, and store a portion of the audio output representing the acoustic waves for a preceding period, including at least a period immediately prior to the determination of a likely occurrence of the vehicular incident up to a time of the determination, wherein the communication link selectively communicates the portion of the audio output stored in the buffer.” A person that is skilled in that art would use the known time at which Pelleg’s controller determines that the vehicle interacted with a road anomaly (from the anomaly event and sensor timestamps) to extract a predetermined portion of the buffered audio centered on that time from the buffer, so that the audio segment associated with the interaction is captured and stored/transmitted.
It would have been obvious to a person that is skilled in the art prior to the effective filling date to combine Pelleg and Lagassey to determine the time at which the vehicle interacts with a road anomaly based on Pelleg’s anomaly detection using sensor data and to extract a predetermined portion of audio from the buffer based on that timing.
A skilled person in the art would have been motivated to adopt Lagassey’s approach in Pelleg’s system to reduce storage and bandwidth by recording audio mainly around anomaly events to improve overall system operational effectiveness and cost [0046] “Accordingly, what is needed in the art is a vehicle accident detection and data recordation and transmission system that provides a cost effective manner of placing one or more video cameras, microphones and data collection and transmission apparatus in proximity to traffic intersections, or other desired locations, in order to detect and temporarily store accident-related images and sounds, together with other accident-related data such as time and location, and to transmit said data to a remote location where the information can be reviewed immediately for the purpose of screening false alarms, assessing the severity of the accident and dispatching an appropriate level of emergency response”
Regarding Claim 13, Pelleg in combination with Lagassey teaches the vehicle system of claim 12, Pelleg does not teach wherein the controller is further programmed to: extract a portion of the audio from the buffer beginning at a first predetermined period of time before the vehicle interacted with the anomaly and ending at a second predetermined period of time after the vehicle interacted with the anomaly.
However, Lagassey teaches equivalent teachings to extract a portion of the audio from the buffer beginning at a first predetermined period of time before the vehicle interacted with the anomaly and ending at a second predetermined period of time after the vehicle interacted with the anomaly [0055] “When a qualifying sound is detected, the system stops overwriting old information in the circular buffer, thereby saving audio signals and video images leading up to the qualifying sound, and continues saving subsequent audio and video” [0144] “the control unit 25 persistently stores the audio and video data that was buffered prior to the qualifying sound, and begins a sequence of events” [0056] “the method can then add the road anomaly event to an in-vehicle event storage module.” [0111] “The buffer may receive the audio output, and store a portion of the audio output representing the acoustic waves for a preceding period, including at least a period immediately prior to the determination of a likely occurrence of the vehicular incident up to a time of the determination, wherein the communication link selectively communicates the portion of the audio output stored in the buffer. The communication link may also communicate a stream of video images captured after the determination. The audio transducer comprises, for example, one or more microphones.” [0151] “The recording of audio and video signals continues for a predetermined length of time. Therefore, the control unit 25 captures events leading up to, during and after the accident or event occurs.” Lagassey teaches preserving buffered audio/video leading up to the triggering determination and continuing to record after the determination, for a bounded/predetermined duration. These teachings correspond to extracting (or preserving) a segment that begins a predetermined period before the interaction time and ends a predetermined period after the interaction time. Therefore, it would have been obvious to implement Pelleg’s anomaly-interaction event capture so that, once the interaction timing is determined, the controller extracts/preserves a buffered portion spanning a predetermined pre-event interval and a predetermined post-event interval, as taught by Lagassey’s buffered pre-event capture and predetermined post-event recording window.
It would have been obvious to a person that is skilled in the art prior to the effective filling date to combine Pelleg and Lagassey teachings to make the system teach wherein the controller is further programmed to extract a portion of the audio from the buffer beginning at a first predetermined period of time before the vehicle interacted with the anomaly and ending at a second predetermined period of time after the vehicle interacted with the anomaly.
A skilled person in the art would have been motivated to adopt Lagassey’s approach in Pelleg’s system to reduce storage and bandwidth by recording audio mainly around anomaly events to improve overall system operational effectiveness and cost [0046] “Accordingly, what is needed in the art is a vehicle accident detection and data recordation and transmission system that provides a cost effective manner of placing one or more video cameras, microphones and data collection and transmission apparatus in proximity to traffic intersections, or other desired locations, in order to detect and temporarily store accident-related images and sounds, together with other accident-related data such as time and location, and to transmit said data to a remote location where the information can be reviewed immediately for the purpose of screening false alarms, assessing the severity of the accident and dispatching an appropriate level of emergency response”
Regarding Claim 14, Pelleg in combination with Lagassey teaches the vehicle system of claim 11, wherein the controller is further programmed to: determine a location of the anomaly based on the sensor data [0036] “the received data can include a location for each of the road anomaly events (e.g., 107, 109).”; and transmit the location of the anomaly to a remote computing device. [0031] “and then transmit those valid road anomaly event's location and type to a central server.”
Regarding Claim 15, Pelleg in combination with Lagassey teaches the vehicle system of claim 11, wherein the controller is further programmed to: determine a location of the anomaly based on the sensor data [0036] “the received data can include a location for each of the road anomaly events (e.g., 107, 109).”; and transmit the location of the anomaly to a second vehicle. [0031] “the central server can then send information regarding those valid road anomaly event's location and type to other vehicles.”
Regarding Claim 16, The claim recites a method of the parallel limitations in claim 1, respectively for the reasons discussed above. Therefore, claim 16 is rejected using the same rational reasoning.
Regarding Claim 17, The claim recites a method of the parallel limitations in claim 5, respectively for the reasons discussed above. Therefore, claim 17 is rejected using the same rational reasoning.
Regarding Claim 19, The claim recites a method of the parallel limitations in claim 7, respectively for the reasons discussed above. Therefore, claim 19 is rejected using the same rational reasoning.
Regarding Claim 20, The claim recites a method of the parallel limitations in claim 8, respectively for the reasons discussed above. Therefore, claim 20 is rejected using the same rational reasoning.
Claims 6 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Pelleg (US 20210201666 A1), in view of Lagassey (US 20060092043 A1), and further in view of Smith (US 20210295459 A1).
Claim 6, Pelleg in combination with Lagassey teaches the vehicle system of claim 1, wherein the controller is further programmed to: determine a location of the anomaly based on the sensor data [0036] “the received data can include a location for each of the road anomaly events (e.g., 107, 109).”; determine a speed of the vehicle [0054] “a sensor attached to a vehicle can include, but is not limited to, a speedometer sensor, an accelerator pedal sensor, a brake pedal sensor” [0026] “the sensor data can comprise camera data, video recorder data, audio recorder data, accelerometer data, gyroscope data, vehicle state sensor data, GPS data, outdoor temperature sensor data, moisture sensor data, laser line tracker sensor data, or any other appropriate sensor data.”;
Pelleg and Lagassey do not appear to explicitly teach the full claim limitation “determine a time that the vehicle is estimated to reach the anomaly based on the location of the anomaly and …; and begin recording audio data when the estimated time before the vehicle reaches the anomaly is less than a predetermined threshold time.”
However, Smith teaches equivalent teachings to determine a time that the vehicle is estimated to reach the anomaly based on the location of the anomaly and …; and begin recording audio data when the estimated time before the vehicle reaches the anomaly is less than a predetermined threshold time [0004] “The notification includes the dangerous situation, and the data includes one or more of a speed, a direction, and a distance of the device from the transport. The dangerous situation is validated by consensus from one or more other devices proximate to the transport and one or more other transports proximate to the transport.” [0069] “For example, the transport 104 may determine a dangerous situation exists because the device data 120 indicates insufficient reaction time exists for a transport 104, 108 to avoid a pedestrian 114 in a crosswalk, due to limited visibility or night conditions.” [0082] “For example, a second transport 108 in the same space as a first transport 104 and less than two seconds later may be defined as a near-accident 146.” [0079] “In one embodiment, the server 112 may analyze timestamps associated with the primary data 132 and secondary data 134 in order to determine a severity of the event. Each of the primary 132 and secondary 134 data may include timestamps that reflect a time when the primary data 132 or the secondary data 134 was created.” Specifically, Smith discloses that when a parameter is “below a particular threshold for a particular period of time” (i.e., a parameter is less than a predetermined threshold time) that the sensor data monitoring (i.e., recording) is triggered. [Smith 0138]. Smith also discloses that the sensor data includes collected audio data. [Smith 0109]. Further, a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date would have recognized that when Smith was combined with Pelleg, the “anomaly” data of Pelleg would be the parameter used in the triggering of Smith. Therefore, the combination of Smith and Pelleg at least teaches the claimed limitation “begin recording audio data when the estimated time before the vehicle reaches the anomaly is less than a predetermined threshold time based on vehicle speed and location of the anomaly,” and use Pelleg’s “anomaly location” and “vehicle speed” to compute an estimated time-to-anomaly.
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person that is skilled in the art prior to the effective filling date to combine Pelleg, Lagassey, and Smith teachings to configure Pelleg’s controller using anomaly location and vehicle speed with Smith’s “parameter” that is compared to a predetermined threshold time and Lagassey’s event-triggered monitoring concepts to begin recording audio when the estimated time-to-anomaly drops below that threshold.
A person that is skilled in the art would have been motivated to combine Pelleg, Lagassey, and Smith teachings to improve system safety [Smith 0003] “This may give such transports and devices an ability to perform safety-related checks and calculations to aid in accident mitigation and response.”
Regarding Claim 18, The claim recites a method of the parallel limitations in claim 6, respectively for the reasons discussed above. Therefore, claim 18 is rejected using the same rational reasoning.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 C.F.R. § 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 C.F.R. § 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 HUSSAM ALZATEEMEH whose telephone number is (703)756-1013. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00-5:00 M-F.
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, Aniss Chad can be reached on (571) 270-3832. 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.
/HUSSAM ALDEEN ALZATEEMEH/Examiner, Art Unit 3662
/ANISS CHAD/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3662