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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 1/06/2026 has been entered.
Claim Status
This Office Action is in response to communications filed on 1/06/2026. Claims 1, 5, 20, 24, 38 were amended. Claims 4, 9, 12, 23, 28 and 31 remain canceled. Claim 39 was newly added. Likewise, claims 1-3, 5-8, 10-11, 13-22, 24-27, 29-30 and 32-39 are pending for examination.
Title 35, U.S. Code
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior office action.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claims 1-3, 5, 7-8, 16-19, 20-22, 24, 26-27 and 35-38 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin et al. (U.S. Patent 11,449,073) in view of Levkova et al. (U.S. Patent 10,703,268).
Regarding claims 1 and 20 (Currently Amended), Lin teaches an apparatus and method for wireless communications (Figs 1-2 & Fig 3, vehicle 328 with communication module 324with computer systems 302 & also Fig 6 with computer systems 602 and networks 616 as shown), the apparatus comprising:
at least one memory (col 14:54-67; Fig 6, memory 608); and
at least one processor coupled to the at least one memory (col 14:56-58; computer systems 602 that comprise a storage 604, one or more processor(s) 606, a memory 608, and an operating system 610) and configured to:
obtain sensor data of a plurality of vehicles, wherein the sensor data is associated with an object in an environment (Fig 2, col 1:29-34; environment for sharing obstacle data between vehicle(s), infrastructure device(s), and/or a central server, also see col 1:46-59; methods, apparatuses, and systems for sharing vehicle obstacle data between vehicles and/or between vehicles and a central server. Vehicles may include sensors capturing data… vehicles may continuously or periodically transmit data to other vehicles or infrastructure and/or the vehicles may transmit data in response to a triggering event… which may include…identification of an object or event (e.g., an obstacle such as a car, bicyclist, pedestrian, etc., or an accident or traffic violation);
determine based on the sensor data, a plurality of events from the plurality of vehicles, wherein the plurality of events are associated with driver distraction misbehavior by the object (col 1:46-59; methods, apparatuses, and systems for sharing vehicle obstacle data between vehicles and/or between vehicles and a central server. Vehicles may include sensors capturing data… vehicles may continuously or periodically transmit data to other vehicles or infrastructure and/or the vehicles may transmit data in response to a triggering event… which may include…identification of an object or event (e.g., an obstacle such as a car, bicyclist, pedestrian, etc., or an accident or traffic violation);
output a message to at one least one of a device or system corresponding to the plurality of events (col 2:6-24); and at least one location (col 2:33-36; transmitted data may include indications about a state of the transmitting vehicle, such as a current position).
Lin does not expressly teach being associated with at one least one location; and output, based on the association, a message to at one least one of a device or system corresponding to the plurality of events and the at least one location. Levkova from an analogous art teaches an apparatus for wireless communications (Fig 5; col 8:1-3; vehicle sensor data can be received from the vehicle through the vehicle data bus, wirelessly communicated from the vehicle, or otherwise received from the vehicle), the apparatus comprising:
at least one memory (inferred per Figs 1, 5-7; col 2:23-34; processing system); and
at least one processor (Fig 2, col 2:23-34; processing system (e.g., CPU, GPU); coupled to the at least one memory and configured to:
obtain sensor data of the vehicle (Fig 2, S110; sensor inputs of system) associated with an object in an environment (col 12:34-47; distraction factor values determined based on amount of driver's gaze overlap with an external object or based on the driver's anticipated gaze overlap with anticipated position of external object relative to vehicle);
determine based on the sensor data, a plurality of events associated with driver distraction misbehavior by the object (col 12:34-47; distraction factor values determined based on amount of driver's gaze overlap with an external object or based on the driver's anticipated gaze overlap with anticipated position of external object relative to vehicle… can include identifying external objects (e.g., from external images), assigning a collision risk to each identified object, determining driver's gaze direction (e.g., from images sampled by the internal-facing camera) and/or determining driver's field of view, and determining a distraction score based on amount of driver's gaze or field of view overlap with identified objects) and at least one location
determine, based on the plurality of events, an association (distraction score) between the driver distraction and the at least one location (col 13:14-30; distraction score); and
output, based on the association, a message to at one least one of a device or system corresponding to a plurality of events (Fig 6, element S140a, Fig 2 distraction parameter values) and at least one location (col 3:1-9; on-board system can transmit sensor measurements associated with the distraction event (e.g., sensor measurements recorded before, during, and/or after the distraction event), derivative information associated with the distraction event (e.g., derivative information generated from one or more sensor or other input types), distraction event parameter values (e.g., time, driver, location, severity, etc.), or any other suitable information to the remote computing system; also col 1:54-64). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the invention to combine the system of Lin with the concepts of an association distraction and the at least one location; and output, based on the association, a message to at one least one of a device or system corresponding to the plurality of events and the at least one location, as taught by Levkova, in order to further enhance the types of sensor data shared amongst vehicles and remotely based entities, i.e. via a central server, and the like.
Regarding claim 2 and 21, Lin and Levkova in combination teach the apparatus of claim 1 and method of claim 20, and Levkova further teaches wherein at least one vehicle of the plurality of vehicles includes at least one sensor located internal to the vehicle (col 12:43; internal-facing camera) or external to the vehicle (col 13:50; external-facing camera). The motivation is the same as claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 3 and 22, Lin and Levkova in combination teach the apparatus of claim 2 and method of claim 21, and Lin further teaches, wherein the at least one sensor includes a camera, a light detection and ranging (LIDAR) sensor, or a radar sensor (sensors capturing data including, but not limited to, speed, direction, acceleration, deceleration, LIDAR data, RADAR data, SONAR data, camera data, GPS data, etc).
Regarding claim 5 and 24 (Currently Amended), Lin and Levkova in combination teach the apparatus of claim 1 and method of claim 20, and Levkova teaches wherein the driver distraction misbehavior being distraction (col 12:34-47; distraction factor values determined based on amount of driver's gaze overlap with an external object or based on the driver's anticipated gaze overlap with anticipated position of external object relative to vehicle).
Regarding claim 6 and claim 25, Lin and Levkova in combination teach the apparatus of claim 1 and method of claim 20, and Levkova further teaches wherein the sensor data comprises a gaze angle of a driver (col 6:66 – col 7:2; image(s) can be used to optically identify and/or track the driver's head position, head movement, eye position (e.g., gaze direction), eye movement, parameters thereof (e.g., duration, angle, etc.; also see col 10:22-25; distraction factor value can include determining the parameters of the driver's gaze, such as gaze direction, gaze duration, gaze angle). The motivation is the same as claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 7 and 26, Lin and Levkova in combination teach the apparatus of claim 1 and method of claim 20, and Lin further teaches wherein the plurality of events includes a safety hazard in an environment of a vehicle (col 2:25-30; transmitted data may be based on a determination of the severity of the obstacle or event… a high level of detail may be provided for obstacles or events that may affect safety of vehicles and/or passengers (e.g., identification of a vehicle that may potentially collide with other vehicles).
Regarding claim 8 and 27, Lin and Levkova in combination teach the apparatus of claim 7 and method of claim 26, and Lin further teaches, wherein the safety hazard is the object in a road on which the vehicle is driven (col 2:25-30; transmitted data may… be provided for obstacles or events that may affect safety of vehicles and/or passengers (e.g., identification of a vehicle that may potentially collide with other vehicles).
Regarding claim 16 and claim 35, Lin and Levkova in combination teach the apparatus of claim 1 and method of claim 20, and Lin further teaches, wherein the at least one processor is configured to output the event and the location for transmission to one or more devices is one of user equipment (UE) or a server (see Fig 2).
Regarding claim 17 and claim 36, Lin and Levkova in combination teach the apparatus of claim 1 and method of claim 20, and Lin further teaches, wherein the apparatus is an onboard unit (OBU) of a vehicle of the plurality of vehicles (see Fig 3, col 7:52-53; architecture 300 for sharing and receiving obstacle data between vehicles and/or a central server).
Regarding claim 18 and claim 37, Lin and Levkova in combination teach the apparatus of claim 1, and Lin further teaches, wherein the apparatus is a vehicle of the plurality of vehicles (Fig 3, vehicle 328).
Regarding claim 19 and claim 38, Lin and Levkova in combination teach the apparatus of claim 1 and method of claim 20, and Lin further teaches comprising one or more sensors (see Fig 3, element 300).
Claims 10-15, 29-30, 32-34, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin et al. (U.S. Patent 11,449,073) in view of Levkova et al. (U.S. Patent 10,703,268) further in view of Yang (WIPO WO 2022/235973).
Regarding claim 10 and claim 29, Lin and Levkova in combination teach the apparatus of claim 1 and method of claim 20, but both are silent on wherein a processor is configured to determine an event of the plurality of events that is similar to another event of the plurality of events occurred at a corresponding location based on a map. Yang from an analogous art teaches an apparatus for wireless communications (¶003), the apparatus comprising:
at least one memory (¶022; Fig 12 elements 1240, 1260); and
at least one processor (¶252, ¶254, Fig 12 elements 1240, 1260) coupled to the at least one memory and configured to:
obtain sensor data of a plurality of vehicles (¶268-¶269, vehicles 1210 per Fig 12 with vehicular network 110 & access network 130); and
wherein a processor is configured to determine an event of the plurality of events that is similar to another event of the plurality of events occurred at a corresponding location based on a map (¶034; event categorization unit 304b can include one or more different categorization algorithms for processing different types of input data and/or detection data. In some implementations, the event categorization unit 304b classifies the aggregated data according to the categories in Table 1). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the invention to further combine the system of Lin with the concept wherein a processor is configured to determine an event of the plurality of events that is similar to another event of the plurality of events occurred at a corresponding location based on a map, as taught by Yang, in order to establish an additional form of recordation for sensed messages pertaining to specific events and their location.
Regarding claim 11 and claim 30, Lin, Levkova and Yang in combination teach the apparatus of claim 10 and method of claim 29, and Yang further teaches, wherein the at least one processor is configured to determine, based on the plurality of events, a trend associated with the event using at least one of statistical analysis or machine learning (¶182, ¶411). The motivation is the same as claim 10 above.
Regarding claim 13 and claim 32, Lin, Levkova and Yang in combination teach the apparatus of claim 11 and method of claim 30, and Yang further teaches, wherein the message includes an alert message, and wherein the at least one processor is configured to output the alert message for transmission to. (¶041; involves validating a certain event or perceived object based on a general agreement between neighboring ITS-Ss., or traffic infrastructure surrounding the location (¶202). Again, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the invention to use messaging of events based on alert messages, as where the claimed differences involved are to the substitution of interchangeable or replaceable equivalents and the reason for the selection of one equivalent for another was not to solve an existent problem, such substitution has been judicially determined to have been obvious. In re Ruff, 118, USPQ, 343 (CCPA 1958). The motivation to combine is the same as claim 11 above.
Regarding claim 14 and claim 33, Lin, Levkova and Yang in combination teach the apparatus of claim 11 and method of claim 31, and Yang further teaches wherein the message is an event report, and wherein the event report is transmitted to a government municipality agency related to a characteristic of the event and associated with an area surrounding the location(see ¶202). The motivation is the same as claim 11 above.
Regarding claim 15 and claim 34, Lin, Levkova and Yang in combination teach the apparatus of claim 11 and method of claim 31, and Yang teaches messaging (¶041, ¶202, but Yang doesn’t explicitly mention a marketing message, and wherein the marketing message is transmitted to one or more businesses related to a characteristic of the event and surrounding the location. However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the invention to use any messaging of events, including marketing messages, where the claimed differences involved are to the substitution of interchangeable or replaceable equivalents and the reason for the selection of one equivalent for another was not to solve an existent problem, such substitution has been judicially determined to have been obvious. In re Ruff, 118, USPQ, 343 (CCPA 1958). The motivation to combine again is the same as claim 11 above.
Claim 39 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin et al. (U.S. Patent 11,449,073) in view of Levkova et al. (U.S. Patent 10,703,268) further in view of Vijaya et al. (U.S. Publication Application 2022/0246031).
Regarding claim 39, (New), Lin and Levkova in combination teach the apparatus of claim 1, but both are silent on wherein the at least one processor is configured to identify a trend comprising the plurality of events and an additional event, wherein the additional event is associated with additional driver distraction misbehavior and is associated with the at least one location.
Vijaya from an analogous art teaches the concept wherein a processor is configured to identify a trend comprising the plurality of events and an additional event, wherein the additional event is associated with additional driver distraction misbehavior and is associated with the at least one location (Para. 031; controller 110 may perform detection and reporting of a misbehavior in V2I communication according to one or more embodiments. As detailed with reference to FIG. 2, the controller 110 may use V2V communication from one or more other vehicles 150 or information from one or more sensors 125 to detect the misbehavior in a given V2I message. The controller 110 may include a database to keep a count of each occurrence of a misbehavior at each location. The count may be used to determine whether or not a misbehavior should be reported (e.g., to the cloud server 180) via V2X communication or other communication). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the invention to further combine the system of Lin with the concepts wherein the at least one processor is configured to identify a trend comprising the plurality of events and an additional event, wherein the additional event is associated with additional driver distraction misbehavior and is associated with the at least one location, as taught by Vijaya, in order to further enhance the event types and their location from sensor data shared amongst remotely based entities.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s prior art arguments to claims 1-38 have been fully considered, but are moot because independent claims 1 and 20 and dependent claim 39 were amended by Applicant to include new features that were never previously presented. Therefore, the scope of the claims were changed and a new prior art rejection is applied to these claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MANCIL H LITTLEJOHN JR whose telephone number is (571)270-3718. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-5 (CST).
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, Quan-Zhen Wang can be reached at (571) 272-3114. 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.
/MANCIL LITTLEJOHN JR/Examiner, Art Unit 2685
/QUAN ZHEN WANG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2685
Prosecution Insights