CTFR 18/071,272 CTFR 91072 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Response to Amendment Applicant’s amendment necessitated new grounds of rejection. This action is made final in view of the new grounds of rejection. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action: A person shall be entitled to a patent unless – 07-08-aia AIA (a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. 07-15 AIA Claim s 1-4, 6, 8-13, 15, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102( a)(1 ) as being anticipated by Evans et al. (US 11,200,429), hereinafter Evans . In re. claim 1, Evans teaches an object detection method of a vehicle LiDAR system, comprising: collecting LiDAR point data of a previous time point (200) (fig. 2A) and a current time point (202) of an object (206) to track (col. 6, ln. 38-49); obtaining contour information (step (304)) (fig. 3) from the LiDAR point data (contour of the vehicle) (col. 9, ln. 12-19); sampling (step (306)) (fig. 3), based on the contour information (tracking component 306 may identify ROI 214 as being associated with a previously detected object) (col. 11, ln. 17-19), data of an outline (210) of the object to track of the previous time point (fig. 2A) and an outline (214) of the object to track of the current time point (fig. 2B); calculating, based on the data of the object to track of the previous time point and the outline of the object to track of a the current time point, a representative vector value (224) (fig. 2D) representing a movement variation of the LiDAR point data from the previous time point to the current time point (col. 7, ln. 38-46); and extracting heading information of the object to track based on the representative vector value (generating the track comprises determining the heading) (col. 7, ln. 59-61). In re. claims 2 and 11, Evans teaches calculating, the representative vector value comprises: calculating a vector value capable of fitting sampling data of the previous time point based on sampling data of the current time point, as the representative vector value (Generating the track 218 may additionally or alternatively include determining characteristics associated with a transformation of a representation of the vehicle 206 between the two images such as, for example, a position, a distance, a velocity, an acceleration, a jerk, etc.) (col. 7, ln. 38-42). In re. claims 3 and 12, Evans teaches obtaining the contour information from the LiDAR point data comprises: obtaining information on a shape box of a three-dimensional coordinate system of the object to track (in at least some examples, the ROI may be a two-dimensional bounding box, a three-dimensional bounding box, a mask, or the like) (col. 2, ln. 64-66); and obtaining contour information of a three-dimensional coordinate system associated with the shape box of the three-dimensional coordinate system (col. 11, ln. 3-13). In re. claims 4 and 13, Evans teaches the object detection method according to claim 3, wherein the sampling of, based on the contour information, the data of the outline of the object to track of the previous time point and the outline of the object to track of the current time point comprises: converting the contour information of the three-dimensional coordinate system of each of the previous time point and the current time point into contour information of a two-dimensional coordinate system (three dimensional sensor data projected into a two-dimensional space) (col. 11, ln. 59-65)); and sampling the data of the outline based on the contour information converted into the two-dimensional coordinate system (generating new track) (col. 13, ln. 4-29). In re. claims 6 and 15, Evans teaches the calculating of the vector value capable of fitting the sampling data of the previous time point based on the sampling data of the current time point, as the representative vector value comprises: fixing the data of the outline of the current time point as reference data; and calculating a vector value enabling the data of the outline of the previous time point to be fitted to the data of the outline of the current time point (when generating new track with previous sensor data) (col. 13, ln. 4-29) while having a minimum error (similarity satisfy threshold), as the representative vector value (col. 12, ln. 50-58). In re. claims 8 and 17, Evans teaches the extracting of the heading information of the object to track based on the representative vector value comprises: setting the heading information to a direction the same as the representative vector value (when the track comprises the heading) (col. 5, ln. 21-24). In re. claim 9, Evans teaches a non-transitory computer-readable recording medium recorded with a program for executing an object detection method of a vehicle LiDAR system (col. 19, ln. 23-35), implementing: a function of collecting LiDAR point data of a previous time point (200) (fig. 2A) and a current time point (202) of an object (206) to track (col. 6, ln. 38-49); a function of obtaining contour information from the LiDAR point data (step (304)) (fig. 3) from the LiDAR point data (contour of the vehicle) (col. 9, ln. 12-19); a function of sampling (step (306)) (fig. 3), based on the contour information (tracking component 306 may identify ROI 214 as being associated with a previously detected object) (col. 11, ln. 17-19), data of an outline (210) of the object to track of the previous time point (fig. 2A) and an outline (214) of the object to track of the current time point (fig. 2B); a function of calculating, based on the data of the outline of the object to track of the previous time point and he data of the outline of the object to track of the current time point, a representative vector value (224) (fig. 2D) representing a movement variation of the LiDAR point data from the previous time point to the current time point (col. 7, ln. 38-46); and a function of extracting heading information of the object to track based on the representative vector value (generating the track comprises determining the heading) (col. 7, ln. 59-61). In re. claim 10, Evans teaches a vehicle LiDAR system (500) (fig. 5) comprising: a LiDAR sensor (506); and a LiDAR signal processing device configured to collect LiDAR point data of a previous time point (200) (fig. 2A) and a current time point (202) of an object (206) to track (col. 6, ln. 38-49); obtain contour information (step (304)) (fig. 3) from the LiDAR point data (contour of the vehicle) (col. 9, ln. 12-19); sample(step (306)) (fig. 3), based on the contour information (tracking component 306 may identify ROI 214 as being associated with a previously detected object) (col. 11, ln. 17-19), data of an outline (210) of the object to track of the previous time point (fig. 2A) and an outline (214) of the object to track of the current time point (fig. 2B); calculate, based on the data of the outline of the object to track of the previous time point and he data of the outline of the object to track of the current time point, a representative vector value (224) (fig. 2D) representing a movement variation of the LiDAR point data from the previous time point to the current time point (col. 7, ln. 38-46), and extract heading information of the object to track based on the representative vector value (generating the track comprises determining the heading) (col. 7, ln. 59-61) . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-22-aia AIA Claim s 5 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Evans as applied to claim s 4 and 13 respectively above, and further in view of Feser et al. (US 2021/0046940), hereinafter Feser . In re. claims 5 and 14, Evans fails to disclose the sampling of the data of the outline based on the contour information converted into the two-dimensional coordinate system comprises: sampling the data of the outline by performing Graham scan for the contour information. Feser teaches sampling of the data of the outline based on the contour information converted into the two-dimensional coordinate system comprises: sampling the data of the outline by performing Graham scan for the contour information (para [0009]). Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have modified Evans to incorporate the teachings of Feser to sample the data of the outline by performing Graham scan for the contour information in order to efficiently calculate the envelope around the object . 07-22-aia AIA Claim s 7 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Evans as applied to claim s 4 and 13 respectively above, and further in view of Ferguson et al. (US 9,043,069), hereinafter Ferguson . In re. claims 7 and 16, Evans fails to disclose the calculating of the vector value capable of fitting the sampling data of the previous time point based on the sampling data of the current time point, as the representative vector value comprises: inputting the data of the outline of the current time point and the data of the outline of the previous time point, as inputs of an iterative closest point (ICP) filter; and applying an output of the ICP filter as the representative vector value. Ferguson teaches the calculating of the vector value capable of fitting the sampling data of the previous time point based on the sampling data of the current time point, as the representative vector value comprises: inputting the data of the outline of the current time point and the data of the outline of the previous time point, as inputs of an iterative closest point (ICP) filter (col. 7, ln. 35-38) (fig. 4); and applying an output of the ICP filter as the representative vector value (at determination block (408)) (fig. 4). Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have modified Evans to incorporate the teachings of Ferguson to have the recited ICP filter, in order to iteratively shift an initial transformation until point to point correspondences between the first point cloud and the second point cloud converge to a minimum. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claims above have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. Conclusion 07-40 AIA 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 Christopher D. Hutchens whose telephone number is (571)270-5535. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5. 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, Kimberly Berona can be reached at 571-272-6909. 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. /C.D.H./ Primary Examiner Art Unit 3647 /Christopher D Hutchens/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3647 Application/Control Number: 18/071,272 Page 2 Art Unit: 3647 Application/Control Number: 18/071,272 Page 3 Art Unit: 3647 Application/Control Number: 18/071,272 Page 4 Art Unit: 3647 Application/Control Number: 18/071,272 Page 5 Art Unit: 3647 Application/Control Number: 18/071,272 Page 6 Art Unit: 3647 Application/Control Number: 18/071,272 Page 7 Art Unit: 3647 Application/Control Number: 18/071,272 Page 8 Art Unit: 3647
Prosecution Insights