Detailed Office Action
Status of Claims
This Office Action is in response to the Applicant’s amendments and remarks filed 11/20/2025. The applicant has amended claims 1, 4-5, 8-10 and 20. The applicant has cancelled claim 3. Claims 1-2, 4-6, and 8-20 are presently pending and are presented for examination.
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed 11/20/2025 has been entered. Claims 1-2, 4-6, and 8-20 remain pending in the application.
Reply to Applicant’s Remarks
Applicant’s remarks filed 11/20/2025 have been fully considered and are addressed as follows:
Claim Rejections Under 35 U.S.C. 103:
Applicant’s arguments, see Arguments/Remarks, filed 11/20/2025, with regard to the rejections of Claims 1, 17, and 20 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered but are respectfully not persuasive.
Regarding Claims 1 and 20, the applicant argues that Reiley does not teach “instantiating a group of user interfaces (UIs) to guide the assessment of the AV including: unlocking the AV; and inspecting for items left within the AV”. However, the Examiner respectfully disagrees.
The Examiner submits that Reiley teaches the above, for example:
Reiley teaches instantiating a group of user interfaces (UIs) to guide the assessment of the AV in the following disclosure (see at least Reiley [¶ 66] the user may still be in possession of her smartphone despite leaving this personal item in the autonomous vehicle, the autonomous vehicle can also transmit (or trigger the remote computer system to transmit) a text message or other electronic notification to the user's smartphone…the autonomous vehicle (or the remote computer system) can generate a text message or in-application notification that includes: a prompt to return to the autonomous vehicle to retrieve a personal item…a detected type of the personal item (e.g., a bag, a box, a purse, an umbrella, a sweater, a jacket, etc.); a region of the post-ride image in which this personal item was detected; a description of the autonomous vehicle).
The disclosure of generating either a text message or any other electronic notification to a user device is analogous to instantiating a group of user interfaces. Further, because the user interface generated in Reiley prompts the user to return to the AV to specifically retrieve an item from the AV while including specific information and instructions on the interface for how to locate such an item (description of the item, a region of the vehicle the item may be located, etc…) the disclosure is analogous to instantiating a group of user interfaces that are specifically used to guide the assessment of the AV (returning to the vehicle to search for items left within the AV).
Further, Reiley teaches including: unlocking the AV; and inspecting for items left within the AV (see at least Reiley [¶ 65-66, 81-82] the autonomous vehicle (or the remote computer system) can generate a text message or in-application notification that includes: a prompt to return to the autonomous vehicle to retrieve a personal item…autonomous vehicle (or the remote computer system) can send an access code to the user's mobile computing device, such as when the user requests a ride from the autonomous vehicle or when transmitting an electronic notification to the user's computing device in Block S152. The user may then enter this code at an exterior keypad on the autonomous vehicle to regain entry into the autonomous vehicle) In the disclosure, both the actions of searching the vehicle for items left behind and unlocking the AV are both done by a user who is being guided by a user interface on their user device (“in-application notification that includes: a prompt” and “an electronic notification to the user's computing device”).
Further, the applicant argues there is no motivation to combine Reiley with the remainder of the references, and that the Examiner relied on hindsight. The Examiner respectfully disagrees, as one of ordinary skill in the art, when designing such a method or system for unlocking and checking for missing items within an autonomous vehicles at a maintenance facility, may reasonably look to other existing methods for searching for forgotten items in autonomous vehicles, such as Reiley.
In response to applicant's argument that the examiner's conclusion of obviousness is based upon improper hindsight reasoning, it must be recognized that any judgment on obviousness is in a sense necessarily a reconstruction based upon hindsight reasoning. But so long as it takes into account only knowledge which was within the level of ordinary skill at the time the claimed invention was made, and does not include knowledge gleaned only from the applicant's disclosure, such a reconstruction is proper. See In re McLaughlin, 443 F.2d 1392, 170 USPQ 209 (CCPA 1971).
Regarding Claims 5 and 17, the applicant argues that Nielsen does not teach “determining that an accident of the AV occurred during a previous mission; determining a priority ingest is required based on the accident; ingesting data from an on-board memory with priority”, however, the Examiner respectfully disagrees.
The Examiner submits that Nielsen teaches the above, for example:
Nielsen teaches determining that an accident of the AV occurred during a previous mission (see at least Nielsen [¶ 20] FIG. 2 illustrates steps of an example process 200 for detecting and identifying damage to a vehicle. Process 200 begins with step 202, in which computing system 150 sends a vehicle command to a vehicle 102 to navigate to an inspection facility or site…a first vehicle may have identified that the first vehicle has encountered an impact incident that may result in damage)
Nielsen teaches determining a priority ingest is required based on the accident (see at least Nielsen [¶ 20] Thus, computing system 150 may prioritize the first vehicle)
Nielsen teaches ingesting data from an on-board memory with priority (see at least Nielsen [¶ 20, 30, 31, 34, 42] Thus, computing system 150 may prioritize the first vehicle. Accordingly, computing system 150 may send a vehicle command to a vehicle 102 after the vehicle 102 has identified an impact event. The vehicle command may also be effective to cause the vehicle 102 to navigate to a specific area within the inspection facility…logging metrics regarding data collected by sensor systems 404-406…The remote computing system 450 includes an analysis service 452 that is configured to receive data from autonomous vehicle 402 and analyze the data to train or evaluate machine learning algorithms for operating the autonomous vehicle 402. The analysis service 452 can also perform analysis pertaining to data associated with one or more errors or constraints reported by autonomous vehicle 402…computing system 150 may be the remote computing system 450…one aspect of the present technology is the gathering and use of data available from various sources to improve quality and experience) The disclosure in Nielsen discusses how the remote computer system that controls the inspection system receives data from the autonomous vehicle as part of vehicle analysis service, when this vehicle has been prioritized the data that is received during that time will have been received in an priority state, therefore the disclosure is analogous to ingesting data from an on-board memory with priority.
Please see detailed rejection below.
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.
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.
Claims 1-2, 4, 8-9, 11-12, 16, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DeRouen (US 20190378350 A1) in view of Brandon et al (US 20240029486 A1), Starkey et al (US 20240203168 A1), and Reiley et al (US 20190197325 A1). Hereafter referred to as DeRouen 350, Brandon, Starkey, and Reiley respectively.
Regarding Claim 1, DeRouen ‘350 teaches a system, comprising: a memory; and at least one processor coupled to the memory and configured to perform operations (see at least DeRouen 350, para.76, any suitable combination of hardware, software, or firmware may be used to implement the memory storage and processing unit)
operations comprising:
performing an assessment of an autonomous vehicle (AV) approaching or entering an AV multi-station maintenance facility for maintenance (see at least DeRouen 350, para.27, Once a vehicle has entered a service zone of the maintenance facility, the vehicle may transfer data such as service history, and diagnostics. The transferred data may be analyzed to determine the initial service requirements of the vehicle. Further, the vehicle may be instructed to proceed to a next station of the maintenance facility. Thereafter, a visual inspection may be performed to confirm the required service. This may allow the vehicle to travel through a series of maintenance stations addressing the specific needs of the vehicle)
assigning, based on the assessment, resources within the AV multi-station maintenance facility (see at least DeRouen 350, para.61-62, The vehicle decision making process algorithm may obtain Autonomous Vehicle On Board Data 604 to determine one or more parameters such as battery life of the autonomous vehicle. Further, the vehicle decision making process algorithm may obtain data related to previous inspections from a cloud server…At 608, the vehicle decision making process algorithm may determine and deliver potential maintenance requirement. For example, the maintenance requirement may include one or more of a regular service, a premium service, a safety service, an interim service, a full service, a car wash service, a car interior care service, a car exterior care service, a mechanical service, wheel alignments and balancing service, brake and clutch service, and tire service)
scheduling, based on the assigned resources, maintenance services for the AV during the AV multi-station maintenance cycle (see at least DeRouen 350, para.41, Further, the processing device 204 may be configured to generate the appointment reservation with the closest facility in the one or more facility locations based on the received one or more work schedules)
directing, based on scheduled maintenance services, self-navigating movement of the AV within the AV multi-station maintenance facility (see at least DeRouen 350, para.58 At 406, the method 400 may include navigating, using a processing device, the autonomous vehicle to a maintenance station corresponding to the at least one recommended service)
performing the maintenance services for the AV (see at least DeRouen 350 [¶ 72-73] Based on the determination of the algorithm, a service requirement may be communicated to a network (such as the centralized server 102) at 708. For example, the service requirement may include one or more of cleaning, check engine, and tire etc. A maintenance facility with corresponding services may send alert to the autonomous vehicle about the available wait times etc. Then, at 710, visual inspection may be performed to confirm the service requirement. Thereafter, the appropriate service may be performed).
instruct the AV to takeoff responsive to generating the mission launch authorization and detecting the vehicle being located in a designated takeoff zone (see at least DeRouen 350 [¶59, 65-68, 75] navigating, using a processing device…the autonomous vehicle (such as the autonomous car 116) to a maintenance station in one or more maintenance stations…At 614, the autonomous vehicle may move to the service lane based on data from inspection and service contract. For example, the service lane may be one of an air/vacuum service lane 804, a detail/vacuum service lane 806, a charging pass through lane 808 and a convenience pass through lane 810. Thereafter, at 616, the service complete vehicle may be dispatched to repeat the process... Finally, at 714, based on service contract the autonomous vehicle may be dispatched automatically and the evaluation may be given to the client…The autonomous vehicle is part of a fleet for a ride-hailing service) Disclosed in DeRouen is an autonomous vehicle that navigates itself and therefor knows is current position, the vehicle can navigate itself to different service stations, the final service stations it may travel to before being dispatched are the service lane and the detail lane, which if needing those services the vehicle will travel to before being instructed to be dispatched, making those stations analogous to a designated take off zone.
However, DeRouen 350 does not teach a system for testing to determine if the AV has completed the AV multi-station maintenance cycle.
Brandon, in the same field as the endeavor, teaches testing to determine if the AV has completed the AV multi-station maintenance cycle (see at least, Brandon, para.73, For example, AV maintenance facility 360 may capture and send photographs of the area corresponding to cleanliness issue 310 after cleaning or repair has been performed. In some instances, data center 350 may review feedback from AV maintenance facility 360 to ensure that cleanliness issue 310 has been resolved).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system set forth in DeRouen 350 to contain a system for testing to determine if the AV has completed the AV multi-station maintenance cycle with reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make such a modification for benefit of allowing for further remediation of a maintenance issue if the maintenance issue has not been resolved or completed by initial efforts as discussed by Brandon (see at least Brandon, para.61, In some examples, data center 350 may determine a revised remediation plan based on feedback received from AV maintenance facility 360. In some instances, the revised remediation plan may require further cleaning and/or maintenance at the same or a different AV maintenance facility 360).
Further, DeRouen 350 does not teach a system for generating a mission launch authorization for the AV responsive to a successful outcome of the testing.
Brandon, in the same field as the endeavor, teaches generating a mission launch authorization for the AV responsive to a successful outcome of the testing (see at least Brandon [¶ 64, 74 and FIG 4.] At step 422, the process 400 can include determining whether the cleanliness issue was resolved…If data center 350 determines that the cleanliness issue is not resolved, data center 350 may determine a revised remediation plan. In some cases, the revised remediation plan may direct the AV to the same or a different AV maintenance facility. For example, the revised remediation plan may direct the AV to a facility that can replace the seat in the AV upon determining that cleaning of the seat was not effective in resolving the cleanliness issue. In some aspects when the issue is resolved, the process 400 may proceed to step 424 in which the process returns to prior processing, which may include repeating the process 400…In some examples, process 400 may include step 404 in which the AV is dispatched. In some cases, dispatching the AV may include placing the AV in service for responding to requests for ridesharing services) Because after the AV passes the test for cleanliness and returns to step 424 which includes returning to the start of the process step 402 which flows into step 404 Dispatch Autonomous Vehicle, Brandon discloses a process for generating a mission launch authorization for the AV responsive to a successful outcome of the testing. Figure 4 (shown below) illustrates how a vehicle in Brandon can be tested to determine if a maintenance problem was resolved and, responsive to the successful outcome of the test, dispatch a vehicle to continue its mission
PNG
media_image1.png
590
852
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system set forth in DeRouen 350 to contain a system for generating a mission launch authorization for the AV responsive to a successful outcome of the testing with reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make such a modification for benefit of simply not dispatching a vehicle whose maintenance issues have not been resolved, a practice that is widely understood in the art.
Further, DeRouen does not explicitly teach wherein the maintenance services include deploying a software upgrade to the AV.
Starkey, in the same field as the endeavor, teaches wherein the maintenance services include deploying a software upgrade to the AV (see at least Starkey [¶ 33-35, 58] Operation 108 involves determining one or more potential actions to resolve the vehicle fault. An “action” may include, for example, a repair or replacement of a physical vehicle component…Another example of an action may include a software update for the vehicle...the action may be automatically performed to resolve the vehicle fault. For example, if the vehicle fault is associated with software of the vehicle, then a software update may automatically be transmitted to the vehicle. The software update may then be automatically installed by the vehicle to resolve the vehicle fault…operation 112 may also involve automated tasks to facilitate the resolution of the vehicle fault. For example, once a specific service facility is identified, a vehicle repair may automatically be scheduled with the service center. If the vehicle is an autonomous vehicle, navigation instructions may be provided to the vehicle and the vehicle may autonomously route to the service facility to perform the vehicle repair. If the action to resolve the vehicle fault involves a software update to the vehicle, then the software update may automatically be provided to the vehicle and installed in the vehicle. Any number of other automated tasks may also be performed).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system set forth in DeRouen to contain a system for wherein the maintenance services include deploying a software upgrade to the AV with reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make such a modification for benefit of automatically fixing a vehicle fault, as discussed in Starkey. If the only problem with the vehicle is caused by software issues, having the maintenance include updating or upgrading software is an effective way to complete the necessary maintenance.
Further, DeRouen does not explicitly teach instantiating a group of user interfaces (UIs) to guide the assessment of the AV including: unlocking the AV; and inspecting for items left within the AV.
Reiley, in the same field as the endeavor, teaches instantiating a group of user interfaces (UIs) to guide the assessment of the AV in the following disclosure (see at least Reiley [¶ 66] the user may still be in possession of her smartphone despite leaving this personal item in the autonomous vehicle, the autonomous vehicle can also transmit (or trigger the remote computer system to transmit) a text message or other electronic notification to the user's smartphone…the autonomous vehicle (or the remote computer system) can generate a text message or in-application notification that includes: a prompt to return to the autonomous vehicle to retrieve a personal item…a detected type of the personal item (e.g., a bag, a box, a purse, an umbrella, a sweater, a jacket, etc.); a region of the post-ride image in which this personal item was detected; a description of the autonomous vehicle) The disclosure of generating either a text message or any other electronic notification to a user device is analogous to instantiating a group of user interfaces. Further, because the user interface generated in Reiley prompts the user to return to the AV to specifically retrieve an item from the AV while including specific information and instructions on the interface for how to locate such an item (description of the item, a region of the vehicle the item may be located, etc…) the disclosure is analogous to instantiating a group of user interfaces that are specifically used to guide the assessment of the AV (returning to the vehicle to search for items left within the AV)
including: unlocking the AV; and inspecting for items left within the AV (see at least Reiley [¶ 65-66, 81-82] the autonomous vehicle (or the remote computer system) can generate a text message or in-application notification that includes: a prompt to return to the autonomous vehicle to retrieve a personal item…autonomous vehicle (or the remote computer system) can send an access code to the user's mobile computing device, such as when the user requests a ride from the autonomous vehicle or when transmitting an electronic notification to the user's computing device in Block S152. The user may then enter this code at an exterior keypad on the autonomous vehicle to regain entry into the autonomous vehicle) In the disclosure, both the actions of searching the vehicle for items left behind and unlocking the AV are both done by a user who is being guided by a user interface on their user device (“in-application notification that includes: a prompt” and “an electronic notification to the user's computing device”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system set forth in DeRouen to contain a system for a group of user interfaces (UIs) to guide the assessment of the AV comprising unlocking the AV; and inspecting for items left within the AV with reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make such a modification for benefit of improving the cleanliness of the interior of the vehicle as discussed in Reiley (see at least Reiley [¶ 13] ensure a clean interior environment for subsequent riders by selectively navigating to a cleaning station if a spill or debris is detected in the autonomous vehicle following conclusion of a ride; without involvement of a local or remote human operator to oversee operation of the autonomous vehicle).
Regarding Claim 2, DeRouen 350 in view of Brandon, Starkey, and Reiley teaches all limitations of Claim 1 as set forth above. DeRouen 350 further teaches wherein the one or more maintenance resources at the AV multi- station maintenance facility comprises: maintenance technicians, local or remote computer servers, communication equipment, cleaning equipment, software upload/download equipment, mobile data units, refueling equipment, recharging equipment, calibration equipment, repair services, or AV guidance equipment, wherein the maintenance services include cleaning the AV using the cleaning equipment (see at least DeRouen 350, para.62, the vehicle decision making process algorithm may determine and deliver potential maintenance requirement. For example, the maintenance requirement may include one or more of a regular service, a premium service, a safety service, an interim service, a full service, a car wash service, a car interior care service, a car exterior care service, a mechanical service, wheel alignments and balancing service, brake and clutch service, and tire service).
Regarding Claim 4, DeRouen 350 in view of Brandon, Starkey, and Reiley teaches all limitations of Claim 1 as set forth above. DeRouen 350 further teaches at least one processor further configured to perform operations to instantiate a group of user interfaces (UIs) to guide the assessment of the AV (see at least DeRouen 350, para.31, Further, the method includes sending one or more of the recommended service, the inspection report, the maintenance history profile, the plurality of service levels, the performance data, and the met maintenance criterion to the user computing device from the remote server. Further, the method includes prompting the user associated with the user account to select an at least one from the plurality of car services with the user computing device)
to include one or more of: determination of a software status of an on-board memory; determination of an on-board memory status; determination of motive reserves, wherein the motive reserves comprise a fuel level or a battery charge level; determination of a hardware status (see at least DeRouen 350 [¶ 27] system and method for responding to a need of an autonomous vehicle for guidance, inspection, cleaning and mechanical maintenance of fully autonomous (driver-less) vehicles through a maintenance facility is disclosed…Once a vehicle has entered a service zone of the maintenance facility, the vehicle may transfer data such as service history, and diagnostics…the vehicle may be instructed to proceed to a next station of the maintenance facility. Thereafter, a visual inspection may be performed to confirm the required service. This may allow the vehicle to travel through a series of maintenance stations addressing the specific needs of the vehicle. For example, the specific needs of the vehicle may include, but are not limited to, charging, fueling) The system in DeRouen describes an autonomous vehicle moving through a maintenance facility, receiving services that are selected by a user computing device (a UI), and goes through a determination/inspection step for the specific needs of the vehicle which include fueling and charging.
Regarding Claim 8, DeRouen 350 in view of Brandon, Starkey, and Reiley teaches all limitations of Claim 1 as set forth above. DeRouen 350 further teaches at least one processor further configured to perform operations to instantiate a group of user interfaces (UIs) to guide a cleaning service (see at least, DeRouen 350, para.29 and para.31, According to some embodiments, a method for communicating with and alerting fully autonomous (driverless) vehicles requiring service (cleaning, repair, inspection etc.) is disclosed…Further, the method includes sending one or more of the recommended services, the inspection report, the maintenance history profile, the plurality of service levels, the performance data, and the met maintenance criterion to the user computing device from the remote server. Further, the method includes prompting the user associated with the user account to select an at least one from the plurality of car services with the user computing device)
to include one or more of: exterior cleaning of the AV; interior cleaning of the AV; or sensor cleaning of the AV (see at least DeRouen 350, para.27, This may allow the vehicle to travel through a series of maintenance stations addressing the specific needs of the vehicle. For example, the specific needs of the vehicle may include, but are not limited to, charging, fueling, cleanliness, interior condition, exterior condition, mechanical condition and safety).
Regarding Claim 9, DeRouen 350 in view of Brandon, Starkey, and Reiley teaches all limitations of Claim 1 as set forth above. DeRouen 350 further teaches at least one processor further configured to perform operations to instantiate a group of user interfaces (UIs) to guide a motive reserve service (see at least, DeRouen 350, para.27 and para.31, This may allow the vehicle to travel through a series of maintenance stations addressing the specific needs of the vehicle. For example, the specific needs of the vehicle may include, but are not limited to, charging, fueling… Further, the method includes sending one or more of the recommended services, the inspection report, the maintenance history profile, the plurality of service levels, the performance data, and the met maintenance criterion to the user computing device from the remote server. Further, the method includes prompting the user associated with the user account to select an at least one from the plurality of car services with the user computing device)
to include one or more of: refueling the AV or recharging the AV (see at least DeRouen 350, para.65, At 614, the autonomous vehicle may move to the service lane based on data from inspection and service contract. For example, the service lane may be… a charging pass through lane 808).
Regarding Claim 11, DeRouen 350 in view of Brandon, Starkey, and Reiley teaches all limitations of Claim 1 as set forth above. DeRouen 350 further teaches at least one processor further configured to perform operations comprising any of: the AV self-navigating from station-to-station, indicating on a user interface (UI) that a depot technician should take the AV to a next scheduled station, or triggering a next stage of the AV multi-station maintenance cycle (see at least DeRouen 350, para.45, the processing device 204 may be configured to navigate the autonomous vehicle to a maintenance station corresponding to the at least one recommended service).
Regarding Claim 12, DeRouen 350 in view of Brandon, Starkey, and Reiley teaches all limitations of Claim 1 as set forth above. DeRouen 350 further teaches the directing further comprising accounting for one or more of the maintenance services that are not performed in a same sequence for the AV (see at least DeRouen 350, para.70-72, At 704, an algorithm may determine that full service is required at a maintenance facility. For example, the full service may include an exterior wash, shampoo, vacuum, and charging. Alternatively, at 706, the algorithm may determine that a partial service is required at the maintenance facility. For example, the partial service may include shampoo, vacuum and charging but the exterior wash is not required).
Regarding Claim 16, DeRouen 350 in view of Brandon, Starkey, and Reiley teaches all limitations of Claim 1 as set forth above. DeRouen 350 further teaches wherein the directing comprises optimizing the schedule based on any of: task, location, equipment or technician assignments (see at least DeRouen 350, para.6, Yet further, the method includes generating, using the processing device, an appointment reservation with the closest facility in the one or more facility locations based on the received one or more work schedules).
Regarding Claim 20, DeRouen 350 teaches a non-transitory computer-readable medium having instructions stored thereon (see at least DeRouen 350, para.84)
that, when executed by at least one computing device, cause the at least one computing device to perform operations comprising:
performing an assessment of an autonomous vehicle (AV) approaching or entering an AV multi-station maintenance facility for maintenance (see at least DeRouen 350, para.27, Once a vehicle has entered a service zone of the maintenance facility, the vehicle may transfer data such as service history, and diagnostics. The transferred data may be analyzed to determine the initial service requirements of the vehicle. Further, the vehicle may be instructed to proceed to a next station of the maintenance facility. Thereafter, a visual inspection may be performed to confirm the required service. This may allow the vehicle to travel through a series of maintenance stations addressing the specific needs of the vehicle)
assigning, based on the assessment, resources within the AV multi-station maintenance facility (see at least DeRouen 350, para.61-62, The vehicle decision making process algorithm may obtain Autonomous Vehicle On Board Data 604 to determine one or more parameters such as battery life of the autonomous vehicle. Further, the vehicle decision making process algorithm may obtain data related to previous inspections from a cloud server…At 608, the vehicle decision making process algorithm may determine and deliver potential maintenance requirement. For example, the maintenance requirement may include one or more of a regular service, a premium service, a safety service, an interim service, a full service, a car wash service, a car interior care service, a car exterior care service, a mechanical service, wheel alignments and balancing service, brake and clutch service, and tire service)
scheduling, based on the assigned resources, maintenance services for the AV during the AV multi-station maintenance cycle (see at least DeRouen 350, para.41, Further, the processing device 204 may be configured to generate the appointment reservation with the closest facility in the one or more facility locations based on the received one or more work schedules)
directing, based on scheduled maintenance services, self-navigating movement of the AV within the AV multi-station maintenance facility (see at least DeRouen 350, para.58 At 406, the method 400 may include navigating, using a processing device, the autonomous vehicle to a maintenance station corresponding to the at least one recommended service)
performing the maintenance services for the AV (see at least DeRouen 350 [¶ 72-73] Based on the determination of the algorithm, a service requirement may be communicated to a network (such as the centralized server 102) at 708. For example, the service requirement may include one or more of cleaning, check engine, and tire etc. A maintenance facility with corresponding services may send alert to the autonomous vehicle about the available wait times etc. Then, at 710, visual inspection may be performed to confirm the service requirement. Thereafter, the appropriate service may be performed).
instruct the AV to takeoff responsive to generating the mission launch authorization and detecting the vehicle being located in a designated takeoff zone (see at least DeRouen 350 [¶59, 65-68, 75] navigating, using a processing device…the autonomous vehicle (such as the autonomous car 116) to a maintenance station in one or more maintenance stations…At 614, the autonomous vehicle may move to the service lane based on data from inspection and service contract. For example, the service lane may be one of an air/vacuum service lane 804, a detail/vacuum service lane 806, a charging pass through lane 808 and a convenience pass through lane 810. Thereafter, at 616, the service complete vehicle may be dispatched to repeat the process... Finally, at 714, based on service contract the autonomous vehicle may be dispatched automatically and the evaluation may be given to the client…The autonomous vehicle is part of a fleet for a ride-hailing service) Disclosed in DeRouen is an autonomous vehicle that navigates itself and therefor knows is current position, the vehicle can navigate itself to different service stations, the final service stations it may travel to before being dispatched are the service lane and the detail lane, which if needing those services the vehicle will travel to before being instructed to be dispatched, making those stations analogous to a designated take off zone.
However, DeRouen 350 does not teach a system for testing to determine if the AV has completed the AV multi-station maintenance cycle.
Brandon, in the same field as the endeavor, teaches testing to determine if the AV has completed the AV multi-station maintenance cycle (see at least, Brandon, para.73, For example, AV maintenance facility 360 may capture and send photographs of the area corresponding to cleanliness issue 310 after cleaning or repair has been performed. In some instances, data center 350 may review feedback from AV maintenance facility 360 to ensure that cleanliness issue 310 has been resolved).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system set forth in DeRouen 350 to contain a system for testing to determine if the AV has completed the AV multi-station maintenance cycle with reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make such a modification for benefit of allowing for further remediation of a maintenance issue if the maintenance issue has not been resolved or completed by initial efforts as discussed by Brandon (see at least Brandon, para.61, In some examples, data center 350 may determine a revised remediation plan based on feedback received from AV maintenance facility 360. In some instances, the revised remediation plan may require further cleaning and/or maintenance at the same or a different AV maintenance facility 360).
Further, DeRouen 350 does not teach a system for generating a mission launch authorization for the AV responsive to a successful outcome of the testing.
Brandon, in the same field as the endeavor, teaches generating a mission launch authorization for the AV responsive to a successful outcome of the testing (see at least Brandon [¶ 64, 74 and FIG 4.] At step 422, the process 400 can include determining whether the cleanliness issue was resolved…If data center 350 determines that the cleanliness issue is not resolved, data center 350 may determine a revised remediation plan. In some cases, the revised remediation plan may direct the AV to the same or a different AV maintenance facility. For example, the revised remediation plan may direct the AV to a facility that can replace the seat in the AV upon determining that cleaning of the seat was not effective in resolving the cleanliness issue. In some aspects when the issue is resolved, the process 400 may proceed to step 424 in which the process returns to prior processing, which may include repeating the process 400…In some examples, process 400 may include step 404 in which the AV is dispatched. In some cases, dispatching the AV may include placing the AV in service for responding to requests for ridesharing services) Because after the AV passes the test for cleanliness and returns to step 424 which includes returning to the start of the process step 402 which flows into step 404 Dispatch Autonomous Vehicle, Brandon discloses a process for generating a mission launch authorization for the AV responsive to a successful outcome of the testing. Figure 4 (shown below) illustrates how a vehicle in Brandon can be tested to determine if a maintenance problem was resolved and, responsive to the successful outcome of the test, dispatch a vehicle to continue its mission
PNG
media_image1.png
590
852
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system set forth in DeRouen 350 to contain a system for generating a mission launch authorization for the AV responsive to a successful outcome of the testing with reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make such a modification for benefit of simply not dispatching a vehicle whose maintenance issues have not been resolved, a practice that is widely understood in the art.
Further, DeRouen does not explicitly teach wherein the maintenance services include upgrading one or more hardware of the AV.
Starkey, in the same field as the endeavor, teaches wherein the maintenance services include upgrading one or more hardware of the AV (see at least Starkey [¶ 33] Operation 108 involves determining one or more potential actions to resolve the vehicle fault. An “action” may include, for example, a repair or replacement of a physical vehicle component. For example, if a vehicle fault is associated with an engine of a vehicle, depending on the specific type of vehicle fault, an action may include replacing a camshaft of the vehicle, replacing an O2 sensor of the vehicle, and/or replacing any other types of physical vehicle engine component).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system set forth in DeRouen to contain a system for wherein the maintenance services include upgrading one or more hardware of the AV with reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make such a modification for benefit of including a method for maintaining the readiness of the vehicle by including a method for addressing vehicle faults that require a full replacement of a hardware component.
Further, DeRouen does not explicitly teach instantiating a group of user interfaces (UIs) to guide the assessment of the AV including: unlocking the AV; and inspecting for items left within the AV.
Reiley, in the same field as the endeavor, teaches instantiating a group of user interfaces (UIs) to guide the assessment of the AV in the following disclosure (see at least Reiley [¶ 66] the user may still be in possession of her smartphone despite leaving this personal item in the autonomous vehicle, the autonomous vehicle can also transmit (or trigger the remote computer system to transmit) a text message or other electronic notification to the user's smartphone…the autonomous vehicle (or the remote computer system) can generate a text message or in-application notification that includes: a prompt to return to the autonomous vehicle to retrieve a personal item…a detected type of the personal item (e.g., a bag, a box, a purse, an umbrella, a sweater, a jacket, etc.); a region of the post-ride image in which this personal item was detected; a description of the autonomous vehicle) The disclosure of generating either a text message or any other electronic notification to a user device is analogous to instantiating a group of user interfaces. Further, because the user interface generated in Reiley prompts the user to return to the AV to specifically retrieve an item from the AV while including specific information and instructions on the interface for how to locate such an item (description of the item, a region of the vehicle the item may be located, etc…) the disclosure is analogous to instantiating a group of user interfaces that are specifically used to guide the assessment of the AV (returning to the vehicle to search for items left within the AV)
including: unlocking the AV; and inspecting for items left within the AV (see at least Reiley [¶ 65-66, 81-82] the autonomous vehicle (or the remote computer system) can generate a text message or in-application notification that includes: a prompt to return to the autonomous vehicle to retrieve a personal item…autonomous vehicle (or the remote computer system) can send an access code to the user's mobile computing device, such as when the user requests a ride from the autonomous vehicle or when transmitting an electronic notification to the user's computing device in Block S152. The user may then enter this code at an exterior keypad on the autonomous vehicle to regain entry into the autonomous vehicle) In the disclosure, both the actions of searching the vehicle for items left behind and unlocking the AV are both done by a user who is being guided by a user interface on their user device (“in-application notification that includes: a prompt” and “an electronic notification to the user's computing device”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system set forth in DeRouen to contain a system for a group of user interfaces (UIs) to guide the assessment of the AV comprising unlocking the AV; and inspecting for items left within the AV with reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make such a modification for benefit of improving the cleanliness of the interior of the vehicle as discussed in Reiley (see at least Reiley [¶ 13] ensure a clean interior environment for subsequent riders by selectively navigating to a cleaning station if a spill or debris is detected in the autonomous vehicle following conclusion of a ride; without involvement of a local or remote human operator to oversee operation of the autonomous vehicle).
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DeRouen et al (US 20190378350 A1) in view of Brandon et al (US 20240029486 A1), Starkey et al (US 20240203168 A1), Reiley et al (US 20190197325 A1), and Wang et al (US 20220236729 A1). Hereafter referred to as DeRouen 350, Brandon, Starkey and Wang respectively.
Regarding Claim 10, DeRouen 350 in view of Brandon, Starkey, and Reiley teaches all limitations of Claim 9 as set forth above. However, the combination does not explicitly teach at least one processor further configured to perform operations to instantiate a group of user interfaces (UIs) to guide a sensor calibration cycle.
Wang, in the same field as the endeavor, teaches at least one processor further configured to perform operations to instantiate a group of user interfaces (UIs) to guide a sensor calibration cycle (see at least Wang, para.42 and para.62, user interface service 230 can receive input from a passenger at a computer interface, such as a pad within autonomous vehicle 202 or through a ridesharing application 234 on the passenger's mobile device. The passenger can indicate at the user interface service 230 that there is an issue with the operation of autonomous vehicle 202, like a quick stop, a jerky turn, etc. …In some embodiments, the autonomous vehicle can recalibrate its sensors. For example, a camera may not be properly detecting or seeing the world. This can indicate that it isn't properly calibrated. Depending on how far the current calibration values deviate from the expected range, a criticality of the calibration issue may be determined by the system. The autonomous vehicle may then be dispatched to drive to the closest place to recalibrate its sensors. In some embodiments, the autonomous vehicle may be routed to a checked billboard on a highway that enables the sensors within the autonomous vehicle to recalibrate).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system set forth in DeRouen 350 to contain a system for instantiating a group of user interfaces (UIs) to guide a sensor calibration cycle with reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make such a modification for benefit of the autonomous vehicle’s sensors to be properly detecting the environment around them as discussed in Wang (see at least Wang, para.62, a camera may not be properly detecting or seeing the world. This can indicate that it isn't properly calibrated).
Claims 13 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DeRouen et al (US 20190378350 A1) in view of Brandon et al (US 20240029486 A1), Starkey et al (US 20240203168 A1), Reiley et al (US 20190197325 A1), and DeRouen (US 20210264386 A1). Hereafter referred to as DeRouen 350, Brandon, Starkey and DeRouen 386 respectively.
Regarding Claim 13, DeRouen 350 in view of Brandon, Starkey, and Reiley teaches all limitations of Claim 1 as set forth above. However, the combination does not explicitly teach at least one processor further configured to perform operations implementing a call for the AV to return to the AV maintenance facility based on any of: regular maintenance intervals, after an AV event, after an AV failure, after an AV accident, or unscheduled work.
DeRouen 386, in the same field as the endeavor, teaches at least one processor further configured to perform operations implementing a call for the AV to return to the AV maintenance facility based on any of: regular maintenance intervals, after an AV event, after an AV failure, after an AV accident, or unscheduled work (see at least DeRouen 386, para.94, the system, disclosed herein, can receive a service request from an autonomous vehicle having a severe malfunction, at step 1110. For example, the system can receive a trouble code from an autonomous vehicle indicating an oil leak. Based on a predetermined algorithm, the system can rank the service request on a scale, for example between 1 to 10, at step 1120. In one case, the system ranks the service request “10” as mechanical failure, at step 1130. The scale can be of any range having a lowest value and a highest value, wherein values are increment from low value to the highest value. The lowest value may indicate the service request is having least criticality, while the highest value may indicate the service request is comparatively of higher criticality. Upon determining the level of the service request on the scale, the system can determine closest maintenance facility).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system set forth in DeRouen 350 to contain a system for calling the AV to a maintenance facility after an AV failure with reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make such a modification for benefit of simply allowing the autonomous vehicle to receive maintenance for a failed part or system as early as possible to avoid further malfunctions, loss of vehicle, or injuries to drivers or pedestrians as is widely known in the art.
Regarding Claim 14, DeRouen 350 in view of Brandon, Starkey, Reiley and DeRouen 386 teaches all limitations of Claim 13 as set forth above. However, DeRouen 350 does not explicitly teach wherein the call comprises any of: a location, real-world coordinates, or directions to the AV maintenance facility, and an expected time to return to the AV maintenance facility.
DeRouen 386, in the same field as the endeavor, teaches wherein the call comprises any of: a location, real-world coordinates, or directions to the AV maintenance facility, and an expected time to return to the AV maintenance facility (see at least DeRouen 386, para.94, Upon determining the level of the service request on the scale, the system can determine closest maintenance facility).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system set forth in DeRouen 350 to contain a system for calling the AV to a maintenance facility after an AV failure wherein the call contains directions to the facility with reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make such a modification for benefit of simply allowing the autonomous vehicle to be able to successfully navigate to the maintenance facility in order to receive maintenance for a failed part or system.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DeRouen et al (US 20190378350 A1) in view of Brandon et al (US 20240029486 A1), Starkey et al (US 20240203168 A1), Reiley et al (US 20190197325 A1), and Bonanni et al (CN 114063608 A). Hereafter referred to as DeRouen 350, Brandon, Starkey, and Bonanni respectively.
Regarding Claim 15, DeRouen 350 in view of Brandon, Starkey, and Reiley teaches all limitations of Claim 1 as set forth above. However, the combination does not explicitly teach at least one processor further configured to perform operations receiving from the AV, over a communicating network, periodic updates of a current status of the maintenance items.
Bonanni, in the same field as the endeavor, teaches at least one processor further configured to perform operations receiving from the AV, over a communicating network, periodic updates of a current status of the maintenance items (see at least, Bonanni, pg.22 paragraphs 2 and 5, At the visitor location 1608, the first customer uses the mobile device 1610 to authenticate with the AV computer system 1613 via the wireless communication link 1611. In the embodiment, the mobile device 1610 through wireless communication link 1609a AP 1607 (e.g., mobile phone transmitting tower) and network 1603 (e.g., Internet) and the central computing system 1601 for authentication…Once AV 1606 and client AV 1614 arrive at respective AV stations, the associated AV station system 1604 causes the associated system to perform a primary service. The AV station system 1604 also provides the central computing system 1601 with a status update of the primary service. In addition, as depicted in FIG. 14, the AV station system 1604 also provides one or more auxiliary services to be provided with respect to AV 1606 and/or client AV 1614. The AV station system 1604 also provides the central computing system 1601 with the status update of the auxiliary services (if any). In addition, in some examples, the AV station system 1604 may use software application associated with the system 1600 to communicate with the first customer and the second customer to receive approval of one or more auxiliary services).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system set forth in DeRouen 350 to contain a system for communicating over a network to provide periodic updates of a current status of the maintenance items with reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make such a modification for benefit of simply being able to monitor the progress of the different maintenance tasks from the convenience of a mobile device or similar devices.
Claims 17, 18, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DeRouen (US 20190378350 A1) in view of Brandon et al (US 20240029486 A1) and Nielsen et al (US 20210375078 A1). Hereafter referred to as DeRouen 350, Brandon, and Nielsen respectively.
Regarding Claim 17, DeRouen 350 teaches an autonomous vehicle maintenance method (see at least DeRouen 350, para.27)
The method comprising:
performing an assessment of an autonomous vehicle (AV) approaching or entering an AV multi-station maintenance facility for maintenance (see at least DeRouen 350, para.27, Once a vehicle has entered a service zone of the maintenance facility, the vehicle may transfer data such as service history, and diagnostics. The transferred data may be analyzed to determine the initial service requirements of the vehicle. Further, the vehicle may be instructed to proceed to a next station of the maintenance facility. Thereafter, a visual inspection may be performed to confirm the required service. This may allow the vehicle to travel through a series of maintenance stations addressing the specific needs of the vehicle)
assigning, based on the assessment, resources within the AV multi-station maintenance facility (see at least DeRouen 350, para.61-62, The vehicle decision making process algorithm may obtain Autonomous Vehicle On Board Data 604 to determine one or more parameters such as battery life of the autonomous vehicle. Further, the vehicle decision making process algorithm may obtain data related to previous inspections from a cloud server…At 608, the vehicle decision making process algorithm may determine and deliver potential maintenance requirement. For example, the maintenance requirement may include one or more of a regular service, a premium service, a safety service, an interim service, a full service, a car wash service, a car interior care service, a car exterior care service, a mechanical service, wheel alignments and balancing service, brake and clutch service, and tire service)
scheduling, based on the assigned resources, maintenance services for the AV during the AV multi-station maintenance cycle (see at least DeRouen 350, para.41, Further, the processing device 204 may be configured to generate the appointment reservation with the closest facility in the one or more facility locations based on the received one or more work schedules)
directing, based on scheduled maintenance services, self-navigating movement of the AV within the AV multi-station maintenance facility (see at least DeRouen 350, para.58 At 406, the method 400 may include navigating, using a processing device, the autonomous vehicle to a maintenance station corresponding to the at least one recommended service)
performing the maintenance services for the AV (see at least DeRouen 350 [¶ 72-73] Based on the determination of the algorithm, a service requirement may be communicated to a network (such as the centralized server 102) at 708. For example, the service requirement may include one or more of cleaning, check engine, and tire etc. A maintenance facility with corresponding services may send alert to the autonomous vehicle about the available wait times etc. Then, at 710, visual inspection may be performed to confirm the service requirement. Thereafter, the appropriate service may be performed).
However, DeRouen 350 does not teach a system for testing to determine if the AV has completed the AV multi-station maintenance cycle.
Brandon, in the same field as the endeavor, teaches testing to determine if the AV has completed the AV multi-station maintenance cycle (see at least, Brandon, para.73, For example, AV maintenance facility 360 may capture and send photographs of the area corresponding to cleanliness issue 310 after cleaning or repair has been performed. In some instances, data center 350 may review feedback from AV maintenance facility 360 to ensure that cleanliness issue 310 has been resolved).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system set forth in DeRouen 350 to contain a system for testing to determine if the AV has completed the AV multi-station maintenance cycle with reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make such a modification for benefit of allowing for further remediation of a maintenance issue if the maintenance issue has not been resolved or completed by initial efforts as discussed by Brandon (see at least Brandon, para.61, In some examples, data center 350 may determine a revised remediation plan based on feedback received from AV maintenance facility 360. In some instances, the revised remediation plan may require further cleaning and/or maintenance at the same or a different AV maintenance facility 360).
Further, DeRouen 350 does not teach a system for generating a mission launch authorization for the AV responsive to a successful outcome of the testing.
Brandon, in the same field as the endeavor, teaches generating a mission launch authorization for the AV responsive to a successful outcome of the testing (see at least Brandon [¶ 64, 74 and FIG 4.] At step 422, the process 400 can include determining whether the cleanliness issue was resolved…If data center 350 determines that the cleanliness issue is not resolved, data center 350 may determine a revised remediation plan. In some cases, the revised remediation plan may direct the AV to the same or a different AV maintenance facility. For example, the revised remediation plan may direct the AV to a facility that can replace the seat in the AV upon determining that cleaning of the seat was not effective in resolving the cleanliness issue. In some aspects when the issue is resolved, the process 400 may proceed to step 424 in which the process returns to prior processing, which may include repeating the process 400…In some examples, process 400 may include step 404 in which the AV is dispatched. In some cases, dispatching the AV may include placing the AV in service for responding to requests for ridesharing services) *because after the AV passes the test for cleanliness and returns to step 424 which includes returning to the start of the process step 402 which flows into step 404 Dispatch Autonomous Vehicle, Brandon discloses a process for generating a mission launch authorization for the AV responsive to a successful outcome of the testing. Figure 4 (shown below) illustrates how a vehicle in Brandon can be tested to determine if a maintenance problem was resolved and, responsive to the successful outcome of the test, dispatch a vehicle to continue its mission*
PNG
media_image1.png
590
852
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system set forth in DeRouen 350 to contain a system for generating a mission launch authorization for the AV responsive to a successful outcome of the testing with reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make such a modification for benefit of simply not dispatching a vehicle whose maintenance issues have not been resolved, a practice that is widely understood in the art.
Further, DeRouen does not explicitly teach wherein the assessment includes: determining that an accident of the AV occurred during a previous mission; determining a priority ingest is required based on the accident; ingesting data from an on-board memory with priority.
Nielsen, in the same field as the endeavor, teaches determining that an accident of the AV occurred during a previous mission (see at least Nielsen [¶ 20] FIG. 2 illustrates steps of an example process 200 for detecting and identifying damage to a vehicle. Process 200 begins with step 202, in which computing system 150 sends a vehicle command to a vehicle 102 to navigate to an inspection facility or site…a first vehicle may have identified that the first vehicle has encountered an impact incident that may result in damage)
determining a priority ingest is required based on the accident (see at least Nielsen [¶ 20] Thus, computing system 150 may prioritize the first vehicle)
ingesting data from an on-board memory with priority (see at least Nielsen [¶ 20, 30, 31, 34, 42] Thus, computing system 150 may prioritize the first vehicle. Accordingly, computing system 150 may send a vehicle command to a vehicle 102 after the vehicle 102 has identified an impact event. The vehicle command may also be effective to cause the vehicle 102 to navigate to a specific area within the inspection facility…logging metrics regarding data collected by sensor systems 404-406…The remote computing system 450 includes an analysis service 452 that is configured to receive data from autonomous vehicle 402 and analyze the data to train or evaluate machine learning algorithms for operating the autonomous vehicle 402. The analysis service 452 can also perform analysis pertaining to data associated with one or more errors or constraints reported by autonomous vehicle 402…computing system 150 may be the remote computing system 450…one aspect of the present technology is the gathering and use of data available from various sources to improve quality and experience) The disclosure in Nielsen discusses how the remote computer system that controls the inspection system receives data from the autonomous vehicle as part of vehicle analysis service, when this vehicle has been prioritized the data that is received during that time will have been received in an priority state, therefore the disclosure is analogous to ingesting data from an on-board memory with priority.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system set forth in DeRouen to contain a system for wherein the assessment includes: determining that an accident of the AV occurred during a previous mission; determining a priority ingest is required based on the accident; ingesting data from an on-board memory with priority with reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make such a modification for benefit of prioritizing the maintenance of a vehicle that is in a more critical condition over another vehicle. Thus, as explained in Nielsen, “gathering and use of data available from various sources to improve quality and experience” (see at least Nielsen [¶ 10]).
Regarding Claim 18, DeRouen 350 in view of Brandon and Nielsen teaches all limitations of Claim 17 as set forth above. DeRouen 350 further teaches wherein the one or more maintenance resources at the AV multi-station maintenance facility comprises: maintenance technicians, local or remote computer servers, communication equipment, cleaning equipment, software upload/download equipment, mobile data units, refueling equipment, recharging equipment, calibration equipment, repair services, or AV guidance equipment (see at least DeRouen 350, para.62, the vehicle decision making process algorithm may determine and deliver potential maintenance requirement. For example, the maintenance requirement may include one or more of a regular service, a premium service, a safety service, an interim service, a full service, a car wash service, a car interior care service, a car exterior care service, a mechanical service, wheel alignments and balancing service, brake and clutch service, and tire service).
Regarding Claim 19, DeRouen 350 in view of Brandon and Nielsen teaches all limitations of Claim 17 as set forth above. DeRouen 350 further teaches instantiating user interfaces (UIs) to collectively manage the AV in various stages of the AV multi-station maintenance cycle (see at least, DeRouen 350, para.31, the method includes sending one or more of the recommended services, the inspection report, the maintenance history profile, the plurality of service levels, the performance data, and the met maintenance criterion to the user computing device from the remote server. Further, the method includes prompting the user associated with the user account to select an at least one from the plurality of car services with the user computing device)
the UIs comprising one or more of: a first group to guide the assessment; a second group to guide a cleaning of the AV; a third group to ingest or upload data to/from computing systems on-board the AV; a fourth group to restore motive reserves; or a fifth group to calibrate sensors on the AV (see at least DeRouen 350, para.27, This may allow the vehicle to travel through a series of maintenance stations addressing the specific needs of the vehicle. For example, the specific needs of the vehicle may include, but are not limited to, charging, fueling, cleanliness, interior condition, exterior condition, mechanical condition and safety).
Claims 5, 6, and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DeRouen et al (US 20190378350 A1) in view of Brandon et al (US 20240029486 A1), Starkey et al (US 20240203168 A1), Reiley et al (US 20190197325 A1), and Nielsen et al (US 20210375078 A1). Hereafter referred to as DeRouen 350, Brandon, Starkey, Reiley and Nielsen respectively.
Regarding Claim 5, DeRouen 350 in view of Brandon, Starkey, and Reiley teaches all limitations of Claim 1 as set forth above. DeRouen 350 further teaches at least one processor further configured to perform operations to instantiate the group of UIs to guide a software service (see at least DeRouen 350, para.27 and para.31, The disclosed system may include a web-based software that may utilize data generated from one or more of the vehicle, weather conditions, historical data, maintenance schedules, maintenance contracts and client requirements…Further, the method includes sending one or more of the recommended service, the inspection report, the maintenance history profile, the plurality of service levels, the performance data, and the met maintenance criterion to the user computing device from the remote server. Further, the method includes prompting the user associated with the user account to select an at least one from the plurality of car services with the user computing device).
However, DeRouen does not explicitly teach wherein the operations include: determining that an event occurred during a previous mission; determining a priority ingest is required based on the event; and ingesting data from an on-board memory with priority.
Nielsen, in the same field as the endeavor, teaches determining that an accident of the AV occurred during a previous mission (see at least Nielsen [¶ 20] FIG. 2 illustrates steps of an example process 200 for detecting and identifying damage to a vehicle. Process 200 begins with step 202, in which computing system 150 sends a vehicle command to a vehicle 102 to navigate to an inspection facility or site…a first vehicle may have identified that the first vehicle has encountered an impact incident that may result in damage)
determining a priority ingest is required based on the accident (see at least Nielsen [¶ 20] Thus, computing system 150 may prioritize the first vehicle)
ingesting data from an on-board memory with priority (see at least Nielsen [¶ 20, 30, 31, 34, 42] Thus, computing system 150 may prioritize the first vehicle. Accordingly, computing system 150 may send a vehicle command to a vehicle 102 after the vehicle 102 has identified an impact event. The vehicle command may also be effective to cause the vehicle 102 to navigate to a specific area within the inspection facility…logging metrics regarding data collected by sensor systems 404-406…The remote computing system 450 includes an analysis service 452 that is configured to receive data from autonomous vehicle 402 and analyze the data to train or evaluate machine learning algorithms for operating the autonomous vehicle 402. The analysis service 452 can also perform analysis pertaining to data associated with one or more errors or constraints reported by autonomous vehicle 402…computing system 150 may be the remote computing system 450…one aspect of the present technology is the gathering and use of data available from various sources to improve quality and experience) The disclosure in Nielsen discusses how the remote computer system that controls the inspection system receives data from the autonomous vehicle as part of vehicle analysis service, when this vehicle has been prioritized the data that is received during that time will have been received in an priority state, therefore the disclosure is analogous to ingesting data from an on-board memory with priority.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system set forth in DeRouen to contain a system for wherein the assessment includes: determining that an accident of the AV occurred during a previous mission; determining a priority ingest is required based on the accident; ingesting data from an on-board memory with priority with reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make such a modification for benefit of prioritizing the maintenance of a vehicle that is in a more critical condition over another vehicle. Thus, as explained in Nielsen, “gathering and use of data available from various sources to improve quality and experience” (see at least Nielsen [¶ 10]).
Regarding Claim 6, DeRouen 350 in view of Brandon, Starkey, Reiley, and Nielsen teaches all limitations of Claim 5 as set forth above. DeRouen 350 further teaches at least one processor further configured to perform operations to interface with mobile data carts during the ingesting or the uploading (see at least DeRouen 350, para.61 and para.78-79, The vehicle decision making process algorithm may obtain Autonomous Vehicle On Board Data 604 to determine one or more parameters such as battery life of the autonomous vehicle. ...Computer storage media may include, but is not limited to...any other medium which can be used to store information and which can be accessed by computing device 900. Computing device 900 may also contain a communication connection 916 that may allow device 900 to communicate with other computing devices 918, such as over a network in a distributed computing environment, for example, an intranet or the Internet) because DeRouen discloses device 900’s ability to communicate with other computing devices and its ability to store information on any other medium that can be accessed by device 900 that the disclosure includes 900’s ability to interface with a mobile data cart. Additionally, because device 900 is used for the user interface that is used during transfer of On-Board Data, then the disclosure also teaches the use of a processor interfacing with a mobile data cart during the ingesting/uploading of data.
Regarding Claim 21, DeRouen in view of Brandon, Starkey, Reiley, and Nielsen teach all limitations of Claim 5 as set forth above. However, DeRouen does not explicitly teach wherein the event includes an accident of the AV.
Nielsen, in the same field as the endeavor, teaches wherein the event includes an accident of the AV (see at least Nielsen [¶ 20, 34, 37] FIG. 2 illustrates steps of an example process 200 for detecting and identifying damage to a vehicle. Process 200 begins with step 202, in which computing system 150 sends a vehicle command to a vehicle 102 to navigate to an inspection facility or site computing system 150 may send a vehicle command to a vehicle 102 after the vehicle 102 has identified an impact event. The vehicle command may also be effective to cause the vehicle 102 to navigate to a specific area within the inspection facility. For example, the inspection facility may have a specific area dedicated to inspecting the vehicle 102).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system set forth in DeRouen to contain a system for wherein the event includes an accident of the AV with reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make such a modification for benefit of including a method for maintaining the readiness of the vehicle by including a method for detecting vehicle faults that may require a full replacement or repair of a hardware components due to an event causing them damage during a prior drive.
Conclusion
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 JOSEPH A YANOSKA whose telephone number is (703)756-5891. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00am to 5:00pm (Pacific Time).
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, Rachid Bendidi can be reached on (571) 272-4896. 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.
/JOSEPH ANDERSON YANOSKA/Examiner, Art Unit 3664
/RACHID BENDIDI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3664