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 .
Claim Objections
Claim 1 objected to because of the following informalities: Please check the spelling. For example of word “hight” should be “height”. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim(s) 1 and claims bellow are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over D1 US 20030028291 A1 in view of D2 US 10091303 B1( further in view D3 US 20180342160 A1) further in view of D0 US 10229596 B1 .
Regarding claim 1 D1 teaches
1. An overhead-structure recognition device for a vehicle, comprising:
an acquisition unit(2) configured to, based on received reflected light of laser[0002] light emitted from the vehicle(fig. 5, 7a,b) in each of a plurality of directions whose angles with respect to a vertical direction are different from each other(fig. 5), acquire range point cloud data including a plurality of pieces of range point data(implicit claim 13), each of the plurality of pieces of range point data being tuple data of a distance variable indicating a distance between the vehicle and an object reflecting the laser light(claim 15 measuring distance), a reflectance variable indicating a reflectance of the object(implicit as received light should be above some threshold in order to be detected and object recognized (fig. 4 13)) , and a distance variable indicating a direction in which the laser height was emitted;[0010](emission direction is tracked)
the direction variable comprising a direction plane identifier that identifies one of a plurality of vertical scan planes associated with said plurality of directions(implicit direction of beams are tracked)
a subdivision unit(implicit [0043] car cluster or overhead cluster) configured to, based on the distance variable and the direction variable of each of the pieces of range point data constituting the range point cloud data,
a determination unit configured to, based on the reflectance variable(implicit amplitude or reflectance above the threshold ), in response to a vertical distance between an object of interest and a high-reflectivity object being greater than or equal to
a predefined value of vertical distance[0009], the object of interest corresponding to a subset of interest among the plurality of subsets, the high-reflectivity object being an object other than the object of interest, among objects corresponding to the respective subgroups, whose reflectance is greater than or equal to a predefined value of reflectance, determine that the object of interest is an overhead structure which is a structure located above the vehicle that does not obstruct travel of the vehicle.[0011](implied but not explcit)
but does not teach while D2 teaches that clustering done by subdivide the range point cloud data into a plurality of subsets such that a distance between any pair of positions corresponding to pieces of rage point data belonging to a respective one of the plurality of subsets, from which the laser light was reflected, is less than or equal to a predefined value of distance(abstract)
D3 teaches
a determination unit configured to, based on the reflectance variable(implicit amplitude or reflectance above the threshold ), in response to a vertical distance between an object of interest and a high-reflectivity object being greater than or equal to
a predefined value of vertical distance(abstract), the object of interest corresponding to a subset of interest among the plurality of subsets, the high-reflectivity object being an object other than the object of interest, among objects corresponding to the respective subgroups, whose reflectance is greater than or equal to a predefined value of reflectance, determine that the object of interest is an overhead structure which is a structure located above the vehicle that does not obstruct travel of the vehicle.(abstract)
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art at the time of filing to modify teachings by D1 with teaching by D2 in order to identify clusters corresponding to different objects. And further modify using teachings by D3 in order to judge the height safety.
D0 teaches
(ii) determine a of vertical distance between the object of interest and the high- reflectivity object from the direction plane identifiers associated with range point data of the object of interest and the high-reflectivity object, and(iii) in response to the computed vertical distance between the object of interest and the high-reflectivity object being greater than or equal to a predefined value of vertical distance,
(i) identify, among obiects corresponding to the respective subsets, at least one i- response to a vertical distance between an object of interest and a high-reflectivity object located proximate a road surface and different from an object of interest, the high-reflectivity object having a reflectance greater than or equal to a predefined reflectance value,(fig. 2b identification of the ground feature above the threshold)
determine that the object of interest is an overhead structure which is a structure located above the vehicle that does not obstruct travel of the vehicle, the determination being performed without requiring estimation of a road surface height or 3-dimensional map based road surface data.(col 2 line 59- col 3 line 15 vertical distance between the overhead object and ground feature(fig. 2b))
It will be obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art to modify teachings taught by D1 with teachings by D0 in order to identify the overhead structure and calculate the height to it.
2. The overhead-structure recognition device according to claim 1, wherein the determination unit is configured to, in response to the subset indicating the high-reflectivity object including the pieces of range point data based on reflected light of the laser light emitted in two or more directions whose angles with respect to the vertical direction are different from each other, determine whether the vertical distance between the object of interest and the high- reflectivity object is greater than or equal to the predefined value of vertical distance, by selectively using the pieces of range point data corresponding to an upwardmost direction of the two or more directions.(D3 abstract)
3. The overhead-structure recognition device according to claim 1, further comprising:
a first limitation unit configured to limit the object of interest to be determined as to whether it is an overhead structure, to those whose speed is lower than or equal to a predefined speed.(implicit stationary units)
4. The overhead-structure recognition device according to claim 1, further comprising:
a second limitation unit configured to limit the high-
reflectivity object subjected to determination as to whether its vertical distance to the object of interest is greater than or equal to the predefined value of vertical distance to a high-reflectivity object whose horizontal distance to the object of interest is within a predefined distance.[0002] [0009]
10. The overhead-structure recognition device according to claim 1, wherein the predefined value of reflectance defining the reflectance of the high-reflectivity object is set based on a reflectance of a reflective member specified by a prescribed standard, which is present on a road.(obvious to set threshold depending on environmental condition(weather day time, night time) in order to avoid misidentification)
Claim(s) 5 and claims bellow are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over D1 US 20030028291 A1 in view of D2 US 10091303 B1( further in view D3 US 20180342160 A1) and D0 further in view of D4 US 20170363737 A1.
Regarding claim 5 D1 does not teach but D4 teaches
5. The overhead-structure recognition device according to claim 1, further comprising:
an update unit configured to repeatedly determine whether the vertical distance between the object of interest and the high- reflectivity object is greater than or equal to the predefined value of
vertical distance, and each time it is determined that the vertical distance between the object of interest and the high-reflectivity object is greater than or equal to the predefined value of vertical distance, increase a likelihood of the object of interest being an overhead structure, thereby updating the likelihood, wherein the determination unit is configured to, in response to the likelihood being greater than or equal to a criterion value, determine that the object of interest is the overhead structure. [0005], [0006], [0065], [0066], [0095], [0096]
6. The overhead-structure recognition device according to claim 5, wherein the determination unit is configured to, in response to the vertical distance between the object of interest and the high- reflectivity object is less than the predefined value of vertical distance, keep the likelihood unchanged. [0005], [0006], [0065], [0066], [0095], [0096]
7. The overhead-structure recognition device according to claim 5, wherein the update unit is configured to, regardless of whether the vertical distance between the object of interest and the high- reflectivity object is greater than or equal to the predefined value of vertical distance, increase the likelihood in response to a vertical distance between the object of interest and the vehicle being greater than or equal to a specified value. [0005], [0006], [0065], [0066], [0095], [0096]
In D1, a person skilled in the art could have easily applied D4 which belongs to the same technical field of vehicle-mounted overhead structure recognition devices and should improve the accuracy of "determining whether or not the target T is an overhead structure 3", and set a configuration wherein when it is determined "on the basis of the target height Ht, the road surface height Hrs, a threshold Ath, and prescribed relational expressions, that the target T is an overhead structure 3", a "reliability of the target" is decreased (corresponding to the "increasing the likelihood" of claim 5), and when it is determined that "the target T is not an overhead structure 3" (is a target with a possibility of a collision), the "reliability of the target" is maintained (corresponding to "keeping the likelihood" of claim 6).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art at the time of filing to modify teachings by D1 with teaching by D4 in order to identify possible hazard in vertical direction
8. The overhead-structure recognition device according to claim 7, wherein the update unit is configured to, in response to the subset of interest indicating the object of interest including the pieces of range point data based on reflected light of the laser light emitted in two or more directions whose angles with respect to the vertical direction are different from each other, determine whether a vertical distance between the object of interest and the vehicle is greater than or equal to the specified value, by selectively using the pieces of range point data corresponding to one of the two or more directions, to which the largest number of pieces of range point data correspond. (D3 object height above threshold means that the edge of the object is above the vehicle height for example .)
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art at the time of filing to modify teachings by D1 with teaching by D3 in order to in order to identify that the lower edge of the object is above safety limits.
Claim(s) 5 and claims bellow are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over D1 US 20030028291 A1 in view of D2 US 10091303 B1( further in view D3 US 20180342160 A1) further in view of D5 US 2006/0210113.
Regarding claim D1 does not teach but D5 teaches
9. The overhead-structure recognition device according to claim 1, further comprising:
a driving assistance unit configured to, based on the range
point cloud data, determine whether the object of interest is an overhead structure by taking into account not only a result of determination by the determination unit, but also signals other than the received reflected laser light, including at least one of a signal indicating an image of surroundings of the vehicle, a signal regarding reflected waves arising from emission of millimeter waves from the vehicle, and a signal indicating map information at a location of the vehicle.[0032-0043]
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art at the time of filing to modify teachings by D1 with teaching by D5 in order to provide alternative means of data for data fusion and more reliable object recognition and tracking.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HOVHANNES BAGHDASARYAN whose telephone number is (571)272-7845. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 7am - 5 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, Yuqing Xiao can be reached at (571) 270-3603. 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.
/HOVHANNES BAGHDASARYAN/Examiner, Art Unit 3645