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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on June 27, 2025, has been entered.
Status of Claims
This Office action is in response to the amendments filed on June 02, 2025. Claims 1-20 are currently pending, with Claims 1-8, and 14-20 being amended.
Response to Amendments
In response to Applicant’s amendments, filed June 02, 2025, the Examiner withdraws the previous claim interpretation, withdraws the previous 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejection, and withdraws the previous 35 U.S.C. 103 rejections.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed June 02, 2025, with respect to the rejections of Claims 1-20 under Lee, in view of Brandon, and Efland, have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new grounds of rejection is made in view of Lee, in view of Dyer, Bostick, Brandon, and Efland.
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 8, 14, and 19-20 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claims 1, 8, and 14 recite “within a present or a predetermined distance …” and should read “within a preset or a predetermined distance …”.
Claims 1, 8, and 14 recite “determine a location of one or more second vehicles within a ‘…’ distance of the one or more second vehicles to the occupant offboarding station …”. Recommend deleting the second reference of “the one or more second vehicles” and amending the claim language to say “determine a location of one or more second vehicles within a ‘…’ distance to the occupant offboarding station …”.
Claims 1, 8, and 14 recite “stop the first vehicle within a present or predetermined distance of the first vehicle to occupant offboarding location …”. Recommend amending the claim language to say “stop the first vehicle within the present or predetermined distance of the first vehicle to occupant offboarding location …”.
Claims 19 and 20 recite “within a present or predetermined distance of the first vehicle to the occupant offboarding station …”. Recommend amending the claim language to say “within the present or predetermined distance of the first vehicle to the occupant offboarding station …”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
Claims 1, 8, 14, and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. Claims 2-7, and 15-18 are also rejected due to their respective dependencies on Claims 1, 8, and 14. The claims contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 8, and 14 recite “within a present or predetermined distance of the one or more second vehicles to the occupant offboarding station …”. The Written Description does not provide information regarding determining if the second vehicles are within a present (which the Examiner interprets to mean “current”) or predetermined distance of the offboarding station. The Written Description only provides for determining the location of one or more second vehicles proximate to the offboarding station (see at least Paragraph [0135] of the instant specification), but does not provide detail about determining if the vehicles are within a specified distance of the offboarding location.
Similarly, Claims 1, 8, 14, and 19-20 recite “within a present or predetermined distance of the first vehicle to the occupant offboarding station …”. The Written Description does not provide information regarding determining if the first vehicle is within a present (which the Examiner interprets to mean “current”) or predetermined distance of other vehicles. The Written Description only provides for stopping the first vehicle proximate to the offboarding station when the stopping location is known (see at least Paragraph [0135] of the instant specification), but does not provide detail about determining if the first vehicle is within a specified distance of the offboarding location.
The Applicant does not adequately describe the support of a predetermined distance in a manner that demonstrates that the Applicant actually intended the claimed invention. Further, the Examiner will note that no reference for support of these limitations was provided in the arguments.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
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, 5, 7-9, 12, 14-15, 18, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Publication No. 2018/0147988 A1, to Lee, et al (hereinafter referred to as Lee; previously of record), in view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 2020/0111370 A1, to Dyer, et al (hereinafter referred to as Dyer; previously of record), and further in view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 2017/0076603 A1, to Bostick, et al (hereinafter referred to as Bostick; previously of record).
As per Claim 1, Lee discloses the features of a computer system for enhancing offboarding of occupants associated with autonomous vehicles through augmented reality (AR) (e.g. Abstract; Paragraphs [0045]-[0046], [0255]; where a vehicle may travel autonomously under control of a controller (170); and where when the vehicle (100) enters a set distance from a preset destination or receives a stop request, the vehicle may search for at least one available parking spot and display the information to a display unit or terminal; and the controller (170) may display a found available stopping area (1000) in augmented reality (AR)) comprising:
one or more processing devices (e.g. Paragraphs [0099]-[0100], [0178]; where the user interface (200) may include one or more processors, or may operate under control of the controller (170) or a processor inside the vehicle (100), and the vehicle drive device may include a processor);
one or more memory devices communicatively and operably coupled to the one or more processing devices (e.g. Paragraphs [0053], [0233]; where a memory (140) is connected to the controller (170) and may store data for controlling overall operation of the vehicle, such as programs for the processing or control of the controller (170));
an autonomous vehicles collaboration manager communicatively and operably coupled to the one or more processing devices (e.g. Paragraphs [0234], [0236]; where the vehicle controller (170) may be integrally formed with the memory, and may control the overall operation of each unit inside the vehicle, including performing autonomous control, determining the presence of an obstacle, pedestrian, or other vehicle, and may provide the information to the display); and
one or more AR devices communicatively and operably coupled to the autonomous vehicles collaboration manager (e.g. Paragraphs [0255]; where the controller (170) may display a found available stopping area (1000) in augmented reality (AR) using a HUD or a transparent display implemented in a windshield (i.e. AR devices)), the autonomous vehicles collaboration manager configured to:
identify that a first vehicle is approaching an occupant offboarding station (e.g. Abstract; Paragraphs [0045]-[0046], [0255]; where when the vehicle (100) enters a set distance from a preset destination or receives a stop request, the vehicle may search for at least one available parking spot and display the information to a display unit or terminal; and the controller (170) may display a found available stopping area (1000) in augmented reality (AR)),
wherein the first vehicle is an autonomous vehicle (e.g. Paragraphs [0045]; where the vehicle (100) may be an autonomous vehicle);
determine a location of one or more second vehicles within a present or a predetermined distance of the one or more second vehicles to the occupant offboarding station (e.g. Paragraphs [0246]-[0248], [0270]; Figures 9a-b, 12; where the controller (170) may search for at least one available stopping area based on acquired driving information, including detection of an obstacle, nearby vehicles, pedestrians; and the controller (170) may determine that the area is not an available stopping area because a nearby vehicle is present in the area);
identify a pattern for making autonomous vehicle stops in the occupant offboarding station (e.g. Paragraphs [0134], [0141], [0248]; Figures 9A-B, 12; where the system determines if the vehicle enters a set distance from the destination and determines locations of nearby vehicles, and determines if space is available based on detecting and tracking objects in acquired images, including distance and relative speed to the object, the object’s type, location, size, and moving path (i.e. driving pattern of other vehicles); and where the object information can indicate whether any nearby vehicle is traveling or stopped, and if the vehicle can stop in the vicinity of the other vehicle to determine if there is an available place to stop) ‘…’
determine, subject to the pattern and the location of the one or more second vehicles, an occupant offboarding location for the first vehicle within a present or predetermined distance of the first vehicle to the occupant offboarding station (e.g. Paragraphs [0294], [0299]; Figures 15, 16; where the controller (170) may determine that a particular area is a recommended and available stopping location that is the closest to the destination); ‘…’
ensure a minimum space utilization for the first vehicle to offboard (e.g. Paragraph [0265]; where the controller (170) may determine whether there is a space large enough for the vehicle to enter and stop, and may determine that an area having such a space is an available stopping area); and
stop the first vehicle within a present or a predetermined distance of the first vehicle to the occupant offboarding location through providing vehicular AR-based guidance to the first vehicle to stop (e.g. Paragraphs [0296]; where the controller (170) may control the vehicle (100) to move to and stop at a selected stopping location).
Lee fails to disclose every feature of identify a pattern for making autonomous vehicle stops in the occupant offboarding station such that a first autonomous vehicle stop of the first vehicle does not interfere with one or more second autonomous vehicle stops of the one or more second vehicles; and leverage optimization techniques to ensure a minimum space utilization for the first vehicle to offboard.
However, Dyer, in a similar field of endeavor, teaches the features of identify a pattern for making autonomous vehicle stops in the occupant offboarding station such that a first autonomous vehicle stop of the first vehicle does not interfere with one or more second autonomous vehicle stops of the one or more second vehicles.
Dyer teaches a method for controlling an autonomous vehicle to respond to queueing behaviors for picking up or dropping off riders, where the system may determine if the vehicle would interfere with loading or unloading by another vehicle, and the system identifies traffic patterns and changes in these patterns overtime and track progress of vehicles in the queue to determine if a queue exists at the location; and the may control the vehicle to perform pickup or drop-off outside the designated spot, or navigate to a lane that is closest to the designated spot, or decide if to join the queue based on if entering the queue would inconvenience other road users (e.g. Paragraphs [0005]-[0006], [0023]-[0024]).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the Applicant’s invention, with a reasonable expectation for success, to modify the autonomous vehicle system of Lee, with the feature of identifying a pattern of vehicles in the system of Dyer, in order to decrease the inconvenience of users at the location (See at least Paragraphs [0002] and [0020] of Dyer).
Bostick, in a similar field of endeavor, teaches the features of leverage optimization techniques to ensure a minimum space utilization for the first vehicle to offboard.
Bostick teaches a method for determining a parking position of a vehicle, where the system can determine an optimal parking position for a particular autonomous vehicle, such that the risk of being damaged by another vehicle in adjacent parking spaces is reduced (e.g. Paragraphs [0015], [0018], [0061]; Figure 4).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the Applicant’s invention, with a reasonable expectation for success, to further modify the autonomous vehicle system of Lee, in view of Dyer, with the optimizing parking spaces in the system of Bostick, in order to improve safety and reduce the risk of the vehicle being damaged (See at least Paragraph [0061] Bostick).
As per Claim 8, Lee discloses the features of a computer program product for enhancing offboarding of occupants associated with autonomous vehicles through augmented reality (AR) (e.g. Abstract; Paragraphs [0045]-[0046], [0255]; where a vehicle may travel autonomously under control of a controller (170); and where when the vehicle (100) enters a set distance from a preset destination or receives a stop request, the vehicle may search for at least one available parking spot and display the information to a display unit or terminal; and the controller (170) may display a found available stopping area (1000) in augmented reality (AR)) comprising:
one or more computer readable storage media (e.g. Paragraph [0233]; where the memory may store data for the vehicle and may store programs for the processing or control of the controller (170); and
program instructions collectively stored on the one or more computer storage media (e.g. Paragraphs [0178] [0233]; where the user interface (200) may include one or more processors, or may operate under control of the controller (170) or a processor inside the vehicle (100), and the vehicle drive device may include a processor; where the memory may store data for the vehicle and may store programs for the processing or control of the controller (170)), the program instructions comprising:
program instructions to identify that a first vehicle is approaching an occupant offboarding station, wherein the first vehicle is an autonomous vehicle (e.g. Abstract; Paragraphs [0045]-[0046], [0255]; where when the vehicle (100) enters a set distance from a preset destination or receives a stop request, the vehicle may search for at least one available parking spot and display the information to a display unit or terminal; and the controller (170) may display a found available stopping area (1000) in augmented reality (AR)),
wherein the first vehicle is an autonomous vehicle (e.g. Paragraphs [0045]; where the vehicle (100) may be an autonomous vehicle);
program instructions to determine a location of one or more second vehicles within a present or a predetermined distance of the one or more second vehicles to the occupant offboarding station (e.g. .g. Paragraphs [0246]-[0248], [0270]; Figures 9a-b, 12; where the controller (170) may search for at least one available stopping area based on acquired driving information, including detection of an obstacle, nearby vehicles, pedestrians; and the controller (170) may determine that the area is not an available stopping area because a nearby vehicle is present in the area);
program instructions to identify a pattern for making autonomous vehicle stops in the occupant offboarding station (e.g. Paragraphs [0134], [0141], [0248]; Figures 9A-B, 12; where the system determines if space is available based on detecting and tracking objects in acquired images, including distance and relative speed to the object, the object’s type, location, size, and moving path (i.e. driving pattern of other vehicles); and where the object information can indicate whether any nearby vehicle is traveling or stopped, and if the vehicle can stop in the vicinity of the other vehicle to determine if there is an available place to stop) ‘…’
program instructions to determine, subject to the pattern and location of the one or more second vehicles, an occupant offboarding location for the first vehicle within a present or a predetermined distance of the first vehicle to the occupant offboarding station (e.g. Paragraphs [0294], [0299]; Figures 15, 16; where the controller (170) may determine that a particular area is a recommended and available stopping location that is the closest to the destination); ‘…’
program instructions to ‘…’ ensure a minimum space utilization for the first vehicle to offboard (e.g. Paragraph [0265]; where the controller (170) may determine whether there is a space large enough for the vehicle to enter and stop, and may determine that an area having such a space is an available stopping area); and
program instructions to stop the first vehicle within a present or predetermined distance of the first vehicle to the occupant offboarding location through providing vehicular AR-based guidance to the first vehicle to stop (e.g. Paragraphs [0296]; where the controller (170) may control the vehicle (100) to move to and stop at a selected stopping location).
Lee fails to disclose every feature of program instructions to identify a pattern for making autonomous vehicle stops in the occupant offboarding station such that a first autonomous vehicle stop of the first vehicle does not interfere with one or more second autonomous vehicle stops of the one or more second vehicles; and program instructions to leverage optimization techniques to ensure a minimum space utilization for the first vehicle to offboard.
However, Dyer, in a similar field of endeavor, teaches the features of program instructions to identify a pattern for making autonomous vehicle stops in the occupant offboarding station such that a first autonomous vehicle stop of the first vehicle does not interfere with one or more second autonomous vehicle stops of the one or more second vehicles.
Dyer teaches a method for controlling an autonomous vehicle to respond to queueing behaviors for picking up or dropping off riders, where the system may determine if the vehicle would interfere with loading or unloading by another vehicle, and the system identifies traffic patterns and changes in these patterns overtime and track progress of vehicles in the queue to determine if a queue exists at the location; and the may control the vehicle to perform pickup or drop-off outside the designated spot, or navigate to a lane that is closest to the designated spot, or decide if to join the queue based on if entering the queue would inconvenience other road users (e.g. Paragraphs [0005]-[0006], [0023]-[0024]).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the Applicant’s invention, with a reasonable expectation for success, to modify the autonomous vehicle system of Lee, with the feature of identifying a pattern of vehicles in the system of Dyer, in order to decrease the inconvenience of users at the location (See at least Paragraphs [0002] and [0020] of Dyer).
Bostick, in a similar field of endeavor, teaches the features of program instructions to leverage optimization techniques to ensure a minimum space utilization for the first vehicle to offboard.
Bostick teaches a method for determining a parking position of a vehicle, where the system can determine an optimal parking position for a particular autonomous vehicle, such that the risk of being damaged by another vehicle in adjacent parking spaces is reduced (e.g. Paragraphs [0015], [0018], [0061]; Figure 4).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the Applicant’s invention, with a reasonable expectation for success, to further modify the autonomous vehicle system of Lee, in view of Dyer, with the optimizing parking spaces in the system of Bostick, in order to improve safety and reduce the risk of the vehicle being damaged (See at least Paragraph [0061] Bostick).
As per Claim 14, Lee discloses the features of a computer-implemented method for enhancing offboarding of occupants associated with autonomous vehicles through augmented reality (AR) (e.g. Abstract; Paragraphs [0045]-[0046], [0255]; where a vehicle may travel autonomously under control of a controller (170); and where when the vehicle (100) enters a set distance from a preset destination or receives a stop request, the vehicle may search for at least one available parking spot and display the information to a display unit or terminal; and the controller (170) may display a found available stopping area (1000) in augmented reality (AR)) comprising:
identifying that a first vehicle is approaching an occupant offboarding station (e.g. Abstract; Paragraphs [0045]-[0046], [0255]; where when the vehicle (100) enters a set distance from a preset destination or receives a stop request, the vehicle may search for at least one available parking spot and display the information to a display unit or terminal; and the controller (170) may display a found available stopping area (1000) in augmented reality (AR)),
wherein the first vehicle is an autonomous vehicle (e.g. Paragraphs [0045]; where the vehicle (100) may be an autonomous vehicle);
determining a location of one or more second vehicles within a present or a predetermined distance of the one or more second vehicles to the occupant offboarding station (e.g. Paragraphs [0246]-[0248], [0270]; Figures 9a-b, 12; where the controller (170) may search for at least one available stopping area based on acquired driving information, including detection of an obstacle, nearby vehicles, pedestrians; and the controller (170) may determine that the area is not an available stopping area because a nearby vehicle is present in the area);
identifying a pattern for making autonomous vehicle stops in the occupant offboarding station (e.g. Paragraphs [0134], [0141], [0248]; Figures 9A-B, 12; where the system determines if space is available based on detecting and tracking objects in acquired images, including distance and relative speed to the object, the object’s type, location, size, and moving path (i.e. driving pattern of other vehicles); and where the object information can indicate whether any nearby vehicle is traveling or stopped, and if the vehicle can stop in the vicinity of the other vehicle to determine if there is an available place to stop) ‘…’
determine, subject to the pattern and the location of the one or more second vehicles, an occupant offboarding location for the first vehicle within a present or predetermined distance of the first vehicle to the occupant offboarding station (e.g. Paragraphs [0294], [0299]; Figures 15, 16; where the controller (170) may determine that a particular area is a recommended and available stopping location that is the closest to the destination); ‘…’
ensure a minimum space utilization for the first vehicle to offboard (e.g. Paragraph [0265]; where the controller (170) may determine whether there is a space large enough for the vehicle to enter and stop, and may determine that an area having such a space is an available stopping area); and
stopping the first vehicle within a present or a predetermined distance of the first vehicle to the occupant offboarding location, comprising: providing vehicular AR-based guidance to the first vehicle to stop (e.g. Paragraphs [0296]; where the controller (170) may control the vehicle (100) to move to and stop at a selected stopping location).
Lee fails to disclose every feature of identifying a pattern for making autonomous vehicle stops in the occupant offboarding station such that a first autonomous vehicle stop of the first vehicle does not interfere with one or more second autonomous vehicle stops of the one or more second vehicles; and leveraging optimization techniques to ensure a minimum space utilization for the first vehicle to offboard.
However, Dyer, in a similar field of endeavor, teaches the features of identifying a pattern for making autonomous vehicle stops in the occupant offboarding station such that a first autonomous vehicle stop of the first vehicle does not interfere with one or more second autonomous vehicle stops of the one or more second vehicles.
Dyer teaches a method for controlling an autonomous vehicle to respond to queueing behaviors for picking up or dropping off riders, where the system may determine if the vehicle would interfere with loading or unloading by another vehicle, and the system identifies traffic patterns and changes in these patterns overtime and track progress of vehicles in the queue to determine if a queue exists at the location; and the may control the vehicle to perform pickup or drop-off outside the designated spot, or navigate to a lane that is closest to the designated spot, or decide if to join the queue based on if entering the queue would inconvenience other road users (e.g. Paragraphs [0005]-[0006], [0023]-[0024]).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the Applicant’s invention, with a reasonable expectation for success, to modify the autonomous vehicle system of Lee, with the feature of identifying a pattern of vehicles in the system of Dyer, in order to decrease the inconvenience of users at the location (See at least Paragraphs [0002] and [0020] of Dyer).
Bostick, in a similar field of endeavor, teaches the features of leveraging optimization techniques to ensure a minimum space utilization for the first vehicle to offboard.
Bostick teaches a method for determining a parking position of a vehicle, where the system can determine an optimal parking position for a particular autonomous vehicle, such that the risk of being damaged by another vehicle in adjacent parking spaces is reduced (e.g. Paragraphs [0015], [0018], [0061]; Figure 4).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the Applicant’s invention, with a reasonable expectation for success, to further modify the autonomous vehicle system of Lee, in view of Dyer, with the optimizing parking spaces in the system of Bostick, in order to improve safety and reduce the risk of the vehicle being damaged (See at least Paragraph [0061] Bostick).
As per Claim 2, and similarly for Claims 9 and 15, Lee, in view of Dyer and Bostick, teaches the features of Claims 1, 8, and 14, respectively, and Lee further teaches the features of wherein the autonomous vehicles collaboration manager is further configured to: provide occupant AR-based guidance to one or more occupants of the first vehicle to offboard the first vehicle (e.g. Paragraphs [0296]; where the controller (170) may control the vehicle (100) to move to and stop at a selected stopping location using an AR device).
As per Claim 5, and similarly for Claims 12 and 18, Lee, in view of Dyer and Bostick, teaches the features of Claims 1, 8, and 14, respectively, and Lee further teaches the features of wherein the autonomous vehicles collaboration manager is further configured to: provide the vehicular AR-based guidance as an overhead view display of the first vehicle (e.g. Paragraphs [0253], [0382]; Figures 9a, 12; where the controller (170) may display a top-view image, which is used to designate a stopping location).
As per Claim 7, Lee, in view of Dyer and Bostick, teaches the features of Claim 1, and Lee further teaches the features of wherein the autonomous vehicles collaboration manager is further configured to: provide the vehicular AR-based guidance as virtual objects configured to guide the first vehicle to the occupant offboarding location (e.g. Paragraphs [0255]; Figure 9b; where the user is able to see a specific mark (1000) shown in an available stopping area).
As per Claim 20, Lee, in view of Dyer and Bostick, teaches the features of Claim 14, and Lee further teaches the features of wherein the determining an occupant offboarding location for the first vehicle within a present or a predetermined distance of the first vehicle to the occupant offboarding station comprises: providing the vehicular AR-based guidance as virtual objects configured to guide the first vehicle to the occupant offboarding location (e.g. Figures 20-22; Paragraphs [0338]; where the controller (170) may determine an occupant disembarking location, and the occupant location information indicates the location of an occupant inside the vehicle (100), such as an occupant being located in a right rear side of the vehicle; and the system will display the location of the vehicle and where the passenger can disembark).
Claims 3, 6, 10, 13, 16, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable Lee, in view of Dyer and Bostick, as applied to Claims 1, 2, 8-9, and 14-15, above, and further in view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 2023/0054771 A1, to Brandon, et al (hereinafter referred to as Brandon; previously of record).
As per Claim 3, and similarly for Claims 10 and 16, Lee, in view of Dyer and Bostick, teaches the features of Claims 2, 9, and 15, respectively, but the combination of Lee, in view of Dyer and Bostick, fails to teach every feature of wherein the autonomous vehicles collaboration manager is further configured to: provide the occupant AR-based guidance as a first person view (FPV) through an AR device worn by the one or more occupants.
However, Brandon, in a similar field of endeavor, teaches an augmented reality system for an autonomous vehicle, where a first person view is provided to a user using augmented reality glasses worn by the user (e.g. Claims 3, 4; Figures 3, 4A-B).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the Applicant’s invention, with a reasonable expectation for success, to further modify the autonomous vehicle system of Lee, in view of Dyer and Bostick, with the feature of providing augmented reality through a wearable system in the system of Brandon, in order to increase situational awareness (See at least Paragraph [0043] of Brandon).
As per Claim 6, and similarly for Claim 19, Lee, in view of Dyer and Bostick, teaches the features of Claims 1 and 14, respectively, and Lee further discloses the features of wherein the autonomous vehicles collaboration manager is further configured to: induce the first vehicle to collaborate with the one or more second vehicles (e.g. Paragraphs [0147], [0153]; where the V2X communication unit (430) is configured to perform communications between a vehicle and a nearby vehicle).
Lee fails to disclose every feature of wherein at least a portion of the one or more second vehicles are autonomous vehicles.
However, Brandon, in a similar field of endeavor, teaches an augmented reality system for an autonomous vehicle, where the sensor suite (102) onboard the vehicle (110) can be used to detect nearby autonomous vehicles (e.g. Paragraph [0030]).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the Applicant’s invention, with a reasonable expectation for success, to further modify the autonomous vehicle system of Lee, in view of Dyer, with the feature of detecting other autonomous vehicles in the system of Brandon, in order track the movement of the vehicles and communicate with other vehicles (See at least Paragraphs [0030] and [0062] of Brandon).
As per Claim 13, Lee, in view of Dyer and Bostick, teaches the features of Claim 8, and Lee further teaches the features of wherein
the autonomous vehicles collaboration manager is further configured to: induce the first vehicle to collaborate with the one or more second vehicles (e.g. Paragraphs [0147], [0153]; where the V2X communication unit (430) is configured to perform communications between a vehicle and a nearby vehicle); and
program instructions to provide the vehicular AR-based guidance as virtual objects configured to guide the first vehicle to the occupant offboarding location (e.g. Figures 20-22; Paragraphs [0338]; where the controller (170) may determine an occupant disembarking location, and the occupant location information indicates the location of an occupant inside the vehicle (100), such as an occupant being located in a right rear side of the vehicle; and the system will display the location of the vehicle and where the passenger can disembark).
Lee fails to disclose every feature of wherein at least a portion of the one or more second vehicles are autonomous vehicles.
However, Brandon, in a similar field of endeavor, teaches an augmented reality system for an autonomous vehicle, where the sensor suite (102) onboard the vehicle (110) can be used to detect nearby autonomous vehicles (e.g. Paragraph [0030]).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the Applicant’s invention, with a reasonable expectation for success, to further modify the autonomous vehicle system of Lee, in view of Dyer and Bostick, with the feature of detecting other autonomous vehicles in the system of Brandon, in order track the movement of the vehicles and communicate with other vehicles (See at least Paragraphs [0030] and [0062] of Brandon).
Claims 4, 11, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee, in view of Dyer and Bostick, as applied to Claims 1, 8, and 14, above, and further in view of U.S. Patent No. 11,137,263 B1, to Efland (hereinafter referred to as Efland; previously of record).
As per Claim 4, and similarly for Claims 11 and 17, Lee, in view of Dyer and Bostick, teaches the features of Claims 1, 8, and 14, respectively, but the combination of Lee, in view of Dyer and Bostick, fails to disclose every feature of wherein the autonomous vehicles collaboration manager is further configured to: provide the vehicular AR-based guidance to one or more occupants of the first vehicle to onboard the first vehicle.
However, Efland, in a similar field of endeavor, teaches a system for providing virtual navigation guidance, where the user is provided with an augmented reality display for boarding a vehicle (e.g. Figures 1, 2A, 5A).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the Applicant’s invention, with a reasonable expectation for success, to further modify the autonomous vehicle system of Lee, in view of Dyer, with the feature of providing guidance for a user to board a vehicle in the system of Efland, in order to guide a user to the correct location or vehicle to board (See at least Col. 13 lines 50-64 of Efland).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Arnicar (U.S. 10,332,292 B1), which teaches a method for providing augmented vision for supplementing a person’s view for navigating an area, such as a parking lot.
Bryson, et al (U.S. 2017/0219362 A1), which teaches a method for picking and dropping off passengers at a location.
Harvey (U.S. 2015/0149022 A1), which teaches a method for managing parking and drop-off situations for multiple autonomous vehicles.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MERRITT E LEVY whose telephone number is (571)270-5595. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 0630-1600.
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, Helal Algahaim can be reached at (571) 270-5227. 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.
/MERRITT E LEVY/Examiner, Art Unit 3666
/HELAL A ALGAHAIM/SPE , Art Unit 3666