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 .
This is a Final Action on the Merits. Claims 1-19 are currently pending and are addressed below.
Response to Amendments
The amendment filed on December 15th, 2025 has been considered and entered. Accordingly, claims 1 and 11 have been amended.
Response to Arguments
The previous claim objections of claims 1 and 11 have been overcome due to the applicant’s amendments.
The applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-19 have been considered but are moot in view of the newly formulated grounds of rejection necessitated by the applicant’s amendments.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1 and 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ozaki (US 20160082978 A1) (“Ozaki”) in view of Maxim (Trilateration Localization for Multi-Robot Teams) (“Maxim”) (Attached) in view of Li (US 20210358308 A1) (“Li”).
With respect to claim 1, Ozaki teaches a platooning method performed by a platoon leader vehicle, the platooning method comprising:
selecting areas present in a path along which the platoon leader vehicle moves, using an Ultra WideBand (UWB) sensor mounted on the platoon leader vehicle; determining a location of a surrounding vehicle using the areas and an estimated distance between the UWB sensor and the surrounding vehicle (See at least Ozaki Paragraph 32 “The UWB radar 10 detects an object in the surroundings of the vehicle 100 corresponding to traveling of the vehicle 100. In the meantime, the object refers to general objects which exist in space with a specific shape regardless of whether it is a living object or non-living object. For example, on the road, a walking pedestrian as well as an automobile and a guard rail are included. Hereinafter, the object will be used with the same meaning in the specification, claims and the like. The UWB radar 10 is a surrounding object detection unit having a resolution capable of classifying a detected object (hereinafter referred to as detected object) to automobile, motorbike, bicycle and people.”).
Ozaki fails to explicitly disclose selecting three coordinates present in a path and determining a location of a surrounding vehicle using a trilateration technique based on the three coordinates and three estimated distance distances respectively corresponding to distances between the UWB sensor and the surrounding vehicle at the three coordinates; performing mutual authentication with the surrounding vehicle, based on the location of the surrounding vehicle; and performing platooning by including the surrounding vehicle in one or more platoon follower vehicles, when the mutual authentication is successful, wherein each of the platoon leader vehicle and the one or more platoon follower vehicles is provided with one or more UWB sensors, and wherein the three coordinates are selected using at least one of a speed, a direction, an angle, an absolute location, odometry data, a rotation speed, and a camera-based dep learning model of the platoon leader vehicle.
Maxim teaches selecting three coordinates present in a path and determining a location of a surrounding vehicle using a trilateration technique based on the three coordinates and three estimated distance distances respectively corresponding to distances between the UWB sensor and the surrounding vehicle at the three coordinates and wherein the three coordinates are selected using at least one of a speed, a direction, an angle, an absolute location, odometry data, a rotation speed, and a camera-based dep learning model of the platoon leader vehicle (See at least Maxim Pages 303 “Our trilateration approach to localization is illustrated in Figure 1. Assume two robots, shown as circles. An RF transceiver is in the center of each robot. Each robot has three acoustic transducers (also called base points), labeled A, B, and C. Note that the robot's local XY coordinate system is aligned with the L shaped configuration of the three acoustic transducers, as shown in the figure. Note, Y points to the front of the robot. C. In Figure 1, robot 2 simultaneously emits an RF pulse and an acoustic pulse from its transducer B. Robot1thenmeasuresthedistancesa, b, andc. With out loss of generality, assume that transceiver B of robot 1 is located at (x1B,y1B) = (0,0) (Heil, 2004).1 In other words, let A be at (0,d), B be at (0,0), and C be at (d,0), where d is the distance between A and B, and between B and C (see Figure 1). For robot1 to determine the position of B on robot 2within its own coordinate system, it needs to find the simultaneous solution of three nonlinear equations, the intersecting circles with centers located at A, B and C on robot 1 and respective radii of a, b, and c … By allowing robots to share coordinate systems, robots can communicate their information arbitrarily far throughout a robotic network. For example, sup pose robot 2 can localize robot 3. Robot 1 can local ize only robot 2. If robot 2 can also localize robot 1 (a fair assumption), then by passing this information to robot 1, robot 1 can now determine the position of robot 3. Furthermore, robot orientations can also be determined. Naturally, localization errors can com pound as the path through the network increases in length, but multiple paths can be used to alleviate this problem to some degree. Heil (Heil, 2004) provides details on these issues. In addition to localization, our trilateration system can also be used for data exchange. Instead of emit ting an RF pulse that contains no information but only performs synchronization, we can also append data to the RF pulse. Simple coordinate transformations al low robot 1 to convert the data from robot 2 (which is in the coordinate frame of robot 2) to its own coordinate frame.”).
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 method of Ozaki to include selecting three coordinates present in a path and determining a location of a surrounding vehicle using a trilateration technique based on the three coordinates and three estimated distance distances respectively corresponding to distances between the UWB sensor and the surrounding vehicle at the three coordinates and wherein the three coordinates are selected using at least one of a speed, a direction, an angle, an absolute location, odometry data, a rotation speed, and a camera-based dep learning model of the platoon leader vehicle, as taught by Fukuman as disclosed above, in order to ensure an accurate localization of surrounding vehicles to take into account for various vehicle functions (Maxim Page 1 “The ability of robots to quickly and accurately localize their neighbors is extremely important for robotic teams.”).
Ozaki in view of Maxim fail to explicitly disclose performing mutual authentication with the surrounding vehicle, based on the location of the surrounding vehicle; and performing platooning by including the surrounding vehicle in one or more platoon follower vehicles, in response that the mutual authentication is successful, wherein each of the platoon leader vehicle and the one or more platoon follower vehicles is provided with one or more UWB sensors.
Li teaches performing mutual authentication with the surrounding vehicle, based on the location of the surrounding vehicle; and performing platooning by including the surrounding vehicle in one or more platoon follower vehicles, based on the mutual authentication is successful (See at least Li FIGS. 1-2 and Paragraph 9 “Further, the method may include, prior to receiving the platooning request message transmitted by the vehicle-mounted device on the vehicle to join the platoon: receiving position information,” | Paragraphs 37-42 “At step 101, a platooning request message transmitted by a vehicle-mounted device on a vehicle to join a platoon is received. At step 102, based on the platooning request message, a first vehicle type and first kinematic information of the vehicle to join the platoon, a second vehicle type and second kinematic information of a vehicle currently at a tail of the platoon, first sensor operating status information of the vehicle to join the platoon, and second sensor operating status information of each vehicle in the platoon are obtained. At step 103, vehicle kinematic determination is performed based on the first vehicle type, the first kinematic information, the second vehicle type, and the second kinematic information, to obtain a kinematic determination result. At step 104, sensor determination is performed based on the first sensor operating status information and the second sensor operating status information, to obtain a sensor determination result. At step 105, a confirmation request message is transmitted to a vehicle-mounted device on a lead vehicle of the platoon when the kinematic determination result and the sensor determination result are both successful. At step 106, upon receiving a request approval message from the vehicle-mounted device on the lead vehicle of the platoon, the vehicle-mounted device on the vehicle to join the platoon is controlled to establish a V2V communication connection with a vehicle-mounted device on each vehicle in the platoon, such that the vehicle to join the platoon joins the platoon at the tail of the platoon.” | Paragraph 51 “At step 203, position information, destination information, and platoon information uploaded in real time by a vehicle-mounted device on each of several vehicles allowed for platooning are received.”).
wherein each of the platoon leader vehicle and the one or more platoon follower vehicles is provided with one or more sensors (See at least Li Paragraphs 70-71 “At step 211, a sensor operating status request message is transmitted to the vehicle-mounted device on the vehicle to join the platoon and the vehicle-mounted device on each vehicle in the platoon, first sensor operating status information obtained by the vehicle-mounted device on the vehicle to join the platoon from an electronic system of the vehicle to join the platoon is received, and second sensor operating status information obtained by the vehicle-mounted device on each vehicle in the platoon from an electronic system of the vehicle is received … Here, various sensors can be monitored to obtain the operation status and accuracy of each sensor. There are many specific schemes to achieve the purpose of monitoring, such as detecting periodic messages from the sensors. For example, many sensors can directly output their sensing accuracy. For example, many sensors can only output results, and additional algorithms are needed to evaluate the accuracy of the sensors …”).
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 method of Ozaki in view of Maxim to include performing mutual authentication with the surrounding vehicle, based on the location of the surrounding vehicle; and performing platooning by including the surrounding vehicle in one or more platoon follower vehicles, based on the mutual authentication is successful, wherein each of the platoon leader vehicle and the one or more platoon follower vehicles is provided with one or more sensors, as taught by Li as disclosed above, such that each vehicle is provided with one or more UWB sensors, in order to ensure accurate vehicle platooning (Li Paragraph 5 “The embodiments of the present disclosure provide a method, an apparatus, and a system for platooning, capable of platooning with security authentication independently of RSUs”).
With respect to claim 10, Ozaki in view of Maxim in view of Li teach a non-transitory computer readable storage medium on which a program for performing the method of claim 1 is recorded (See at least Ozaki Paragraph 39).
With respect to claim 11, Ozaki teaches a platooning apparatus comprising a memory and a plurality of processors, wherein at least one of the plurality of processors is configured to:
selecting areas present in a path along which the platoon leader vehicle moves, using an Ultra WideBand (UWB) sensor mounted on the platoon leader vehicle; determining a location of a surrounding vehicle using the areas and an estimated distance between the UWB sensor and the surrounding vehicle (See at least Ozaki Paragraph 32 “The UWB radar 10 detects an object in the surroundings of the vehicle 100 corresponding to traveling of the vehicle 100. In the meantime, the object refers to general objects which exist in space with a specific shape regardless of whether it is a living object or non-living object. For example, on the road, a walking pedestrian as well as an automobile and a guard rail are included. Hereinafter, the object will be used with the same meaning in the specification, claims and the like. The UWB radar 10 is a surrounding object detection unit having a resolution capable of classifying a detected object (hereinafter referred to as detected object) to automobile, motorbike, bicycle and people.”).
Ozaki fails to explicitly disclose selecting three coordinates present in a path and determining a location of a surrounding vehicle using a trilateration technique based on the three coordinates and three estimated distance distances respectively corresponding to distances between the UWB sensor and the surrounding vehicle at the three coordinates; performing mutual authentication with the surrounding vehicle, based on the location of the surrounding vehicle; and performing platooning by including the surrounding vehicle in one or more platoon follower vehicles, when the mutual authentication is successful, wherein each of the platoon leader vehicle and the one or more platoon follower vehicles is provided with one or more UWB sensors and wherein the three coordinates are selected using at least one of a speed, a direction, an angle, an absolute location, odometry data, a rotation speed, and a camera-based dep learning model of the platoon leader vehicle.
Maxim teaches selecting three coordinates present in a path and determining a location of a surrounding vehicle using a trilateration technique based on the three coordinates and three estimated distance distances respectively corresponding to distances between the UWB sensor and the surrounding vehicle at the three coordinates and wherein the three coordinates are selected using at least one of a speed, a direction, an angle, an absolute location, odometry data, a rotation speed, and a camera-based dep learning model of the platoon leader vehicle (See at least Maxim Pages 303 “Our trilateration approach to localization is illustrated in Figure 1. Assume two robots, shown as circles. An RF transceiver is in the center of each robot. Each robot has three acoustic transducers (also called base points), labeled A, B, and C. Note that the robot's local XY coordinate system is aligned with the L shaped configuration of the three acoustic transducers, as shown in the figure. Note, Y points to the front of the robot. C. In Figure 1, robot 2 simultaneously emits an RF pulse and an acoustic pulse from its transducer B. Robot1thenmeasuresthedistancesa, b, andc. With out loss of generality, assume that transceiver B of robot 1 is located at (x1B,y1B) = (0,0) (Heil, 2004).1 In other words, let A be at (0,d), B be at (0,0), and C be at (d,0), where d is the distance between A and B, and between B and C (see Figure 1). For robot1 to determine the position of B on robot 2within its own coordinate system, it needs to find the simultaneous solution of three nonlinear equations, the intersecting circles with centers located at A, B and C on robot 1 and respective radii of a, b, and c … By allowing robots to share coordinate systems, robots can communicate their information arbitrarily far throughout a robotic network. For example, sup pose robot 2 can localize robot 3. Robot 1 can local ize only robot 2. If robot 2 can also localize robot 1 (a fair assumption), then by passing this information to robot 1, robot 1 can now determine the position of robot 3. Furthermore, robot orientations can also be determined. Naturally, localization errors can com pound as the path through the network increases in length, but multiple paths can be used to alleviate this problem to some degree. Heil (Heil, 2004) provides details on these issues. In addition to localization, our trilateration system can also be used for data exchange. Instead of emit ting an RF pulse that contains no information but only performs synchronization, we can also append data to the RF pulse. Simple coordinate transformations al low robot 1 to convert the data from robot 2 (which is in the coordinate frame of robot 2) to its own coordinate frame.”).
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 method of Ozaki to include selecting three coordinates present in a path and determining a location of a surrounding vehicle using a trilateration technique based on the three coordinates and three estimated distance distances respectively corresponding to distances between the UWB sensor and the surrounding vehicle at the three coordinates and wherein the three coordinates are selected using at least one of a speed, a direction, an angle, an absolute location, odometry data, a rotation speed, and a camera-based dep learning model of the platoon leader vehicle, as taught by Fukuman as disclosed above, in order to ensure an accurate localization of surrounding vehicles to take into account for various vehicle functions (Maxim Page 1 “The ability of robots to quickly and accurately localize their neighbors is extremely important for robotic teams.”).
Ozaki in view of Maxim fail to explicitly disclose performing mutual authentication with the surrounding vehicle, based on the location of the surrounding vehicle; and performing platooning by including the surrounding vehicle in one or more platoon follower vehicles, in response that the mutual authentication is successful, wherein each of the platoon leader vehicle and the one or more platoon follower vehicles is provided with one or more UWB sensors.
Li teaches performing mutual authentication with the surrounding vehicle, based on the location of the surrounding vehicle; and performing platooning by including the surrounding vehicle in one or more platoon follower vehicles, based on the mutual authentication is successful (See at least Li FIGS. 1-2 and Paragraph 9 “Further, the method may include, prior to receiving the platooning request message transmitted by the vehicle-mounted device on the vehicle to join the platoon: receiving position information,” | Paragraphs 37-42 “At step 101, a platooning request message transmitted by a vehicle-mounted device on a vehicle to join a platoon is received. At step 102, based on the platooning request message, a first vehicle type and first kinematic information of the vehicle to join the platoon, a second vehicle type and second kinematic information of a vehicle currently at a tail of the platoon, first sensor operating status information of the vehicle to join the platoon, and second sensor operating status information of each vehicle in the platoon are obtained. At step 103, vehicle kinematic determination is performed based on the first vehicle type, the first kinematic information, the second vehicle type, and the second kinematic information, to obtain a kinematic determination result. At step 104, sensor determination is performed based on the first sensor operating status information and the second sensor operating status information, to obtain a sensor determination result. At step 105, a confirmation request message is transmitted to a vehicle-mounted device on a lead vehicle of the platoon when the kinematic determination result and the sensor determination result are both successful. At step 106, upon receiving a request approval message from the vehicle-mounted device on the lead vehicle of the platoon, the vehicle-mounted device on the vehicle to join the platoon is controlled to establish a V2V communication connection with a vehicle-mounted device on each vehicle in the platoon, such that the vehicle to join the platoon joins the platoon at the tail of the platoon.” | Paragraph 51 “At step 203, position information, destination information, and platoon information uploaded in real time by a vehicle-mounted device on each of several vehicles allowed for platooning are received.”).
wherein each of the platoon leader vehicle and the one or more platoon follower vehicles is provided with one or more sensors (See at least Li Paragraphs 70-71 “At step 211, a sensor operating status request message is transmitted to the vehicle-mounted device on the vehicle to join the platoon and the vehicle-mounted device on each vehicle in the platoon, first sensor operating status information obtained by the vehicle-mounted device on the vehicle to join the platoon from an electronic system of the vehicle to join the platoon is received, and second sensor operating status information obtained by the vehicle-mounted device on each vehicle in the platoon from an electronic system of the vehicle is received … Here, various sensors can be monitored to obtain the operation status and accuracy of each sensor. There are many specific schemes to achieve the purpose of monitoring, such as detecting periodic messages from the sensors. For example, many sensors can directly output their sensing accuracy. For example, many sensors can only output results, and additional algorithms are needed to evaluate the accuracy of the sensors …”).
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 method of Ozaki in view of Maxim to include performing mutual authentication with the surrounding vehicle, based on the location of the surrounding vehicle; and performing platooning by including the surrounding vehicle in one or more platoon follower vehicles, based on the mutual authentication is successful, wherein each of the platoon leader vehicle and the one or more platoon follower vehicles is provided with one or more sensors, as taught by Li as disclosed above, such that each vehicle is provided with one or more UWB sensors, in order to ensure accurate vehicle platooning (Li Paragraph 5 “The embodiments of the present disclosure provide a method, an apparatus, and a system for platooning, capable of platooning with security authentication independently of RSUs”).
Claims 2 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ozaki (US 20160082978 A1) (“Ozaki”) in view of Maxim (Trilateration Localization for Multi-Robot Teams) (“Maxim”) (Attached) in view of Li (US 20210358308 A1) (“Lu”) further in view of Kim (US 20190180629 A1) (“Kim”).
With respect to claim 2, and similarly claim 12, Ozaki in view of Maxim in view of Li teach receiving information related to the platooning from the one or more platoon follower vehicles (See at least Li FIG. 2 “203: “Receive position information, destination information, and platoon information uploaded in real time by a vehicle-mounted device on each of a number of vehicles allowed for platooning””).
Ozaki in view of Maxim in view of Li fail to explicitly disclose determining whether there is a risk of collision with the one or more platoon follower vehicles using at least one of location, speed, or direction of the one or more platoon follower vehicles and at least one of location, speed, or direction of the platoon leader vehicle, based on the information related to the platooning; giving a control command to the one or more platoon follower vehicles and controlling at least one of the speed or the direction of the platoon leader vehicle, based on a result of the determining whether there is the risk of the collision with the one or more platoon follower vehicles.
Kim, however, teaches determining whether there is a risk of collision with the one or more platoon follower vehicles using at least one of location, speed, or direction of the one or more platoon follower vehicles and at least one of location, speed, or direction of the platoon leader vehicle, based on the information related to the platooning and giving a control command to the one or more platoon follower vehicles and controlling at least one of the speed or the direction of the platoon leader vehicle, based on a result of the determining whether there is the risk of the collision with the one or more platoon follower vehicles (See at least Kim FIG. 6 and Paragraphs 69-74 “When the host vehicle is a leading vehicle, the following vehicle collision determining unit 260 determines a possibility of collision of a following vehicle that follows the leading vehicle. When the host vehicle is a leading vehicle, the longitudinal deceleration profile generating unit 270 generates a longitudinal deceleration profile for avoiding collision of the leading vehicle. The longitudinal deceleration profile includes vehicle speed information on a path for platooning. Accordingly, speed information or braking after the lane of the leading vehicle is changed through the avoidance control may be identified through the longitudinal deceleration profile. The collision avoidance path generating unit 280 generates a collision avoidance path for avoidance of collision when the host vehicle is a leading vehicle. Then, the collision avoidance path is a transverse path, and includes information for changing a lane by the leading vehicle for avoidance control. When it is possible for the host vehicle, which is a following vehicle, to collide with a front vehicle when the leading vehicle is fully braked longitudinally, the collision avoidance control unit 290 performs a control such that the host vehicle that is a following vehicle to travel to a collision avoidance path after the host vehicle that is a following vehicle is fully braked longitudinally first … The present disclosure allows a following vehicle to perform transverse control or longitudinal control independently from a leading vehicle according to a situation (whether the following vehicle collides with a front vehicle when the leading vehicle is fully braked longitudinally or whether collision may be avoided) of the leading vehicle in an emergent situation without simply following a control command received from the leading vehicle” | Paragraphs 78-80 “When it is determined that the leading vehicle may collide with a front obstacle when the leading vehicle is fully braked, the platooning control apparatus 200 of the leading vehicle determines whether collision may be avoided (S103). In other words, the platooning control apparatus 200 determines whether collision of the host vehicle may be avoided through transverse control of the vehicle in consideration of the speed of the host vehicle, the speeds of front and rear vehicles on the current lane and the lateral lanes, vehicle-to-vehicle distances, and lateral lane spaces through side radar devices. Accordingly, when it is determined that collision may be avoided, the platooning control apparatus 200 of the leading vehicle calculates whether the following vehicles FV1 and FV2 will collide, generates a longitudinal deceleration profile of the leading vehicle (current host vehicle), generates a transverse path of the leading vehicle (current host vehicle) for avoidance of collision, and transmits them to the following vehicles FV1 and FV2 (S104). Subsequently, the platooning control apparatuses 200 of the following vehicles FV1 and FV2 perform full braking as soon as receiving information on whether the following vehicles will collide from the leading vehicle LV. The platooning control apparatuses 200 of the following vehicles FV1 and FV2 then perform collision avoidance control of the host vehicle (following vehicle) according to a collision avoidance control direction of the leading vehicle (S105) (A).”).
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 method of Ozaki in view of Maxim in view of Li to include determining whether there is a risk of collision with the one or more platoon follower vehicles using at least one of location, speed, or direction of the one or more platoon follower vehicles and at least one of location, speed, or direction of the platoon leader vehicle, based on the information related to the platooning; giving a control command to the one or more platoon follower vehicles and controlling at least one of the speed or the direction of the platoon leader vehicle, based on a result of the determining whether there is the risk of the collision with the one or more platoon follower vehicles, as taught by Kim as disclosed above, in order to ensure safe platooning of vehicles (Kim Paragraph 74 “Accordingly, the present disclosure may allow the following vehicle to flexibly cope with an emergent situation while a transverse condition varies in real time.”).
Claims 3 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ozaki (US 20160082978 A1) (“Ozaki”) in view of Maxim (Trilateration Localization for Multi-Robot Teams) (“Maxim”) (Attached) in view of Li (US 20210358308 A1) (“Lu”) further in view of Mattingly (US 20190025817 A1) (“Mattingly”).
With respect to claim 3, and similarly claim 13, Ozaki in view of Maxim in view of Li fail to explicitly disclose that a spoofing attack from an external attacker is defended against through the mutual authentication.
Mattingly, however, teaches that a spoofing attack from an external attacker is defended against through the mutual authentication (See at least Mattingly Paragraph 45 “In step 420, the system authenticates the second vehicle. In some embodiments, the second vehicle may be authenticated based on fleet rules stored in a hash chain database. For example, the hash chain database may comprise a list of public keys associated with preauthorized vehicles and the second autonomous vehicle may be required to provide a signature signed by a corresponding private key to authenticate itself. In some embodiments, the hash chain database may comprise one or more of vehicle identifiers, manufacturer identifiers, owner identifiers, and capability identifiers associated with recognized vehicles/entities that can be used to authorize a new vehicle into the fleet”).
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 method of Ozaki in view of Maxim in view of Li so that a spoofing attack from an external attacker is defended against through the mutual authentication, as taught by Mattingly as disclosed above, in order to ensure safe and accurate vehicle platooning (Mattingly Paragraph 17 “Generally speaking, pursuant to various embodiments, systems, apparatuses and methods are provided herein for organizing autonomous product delivery vehicles”).
Claims 4-5 and 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ozaki (US 20160082978 A1) (“Ozaki”) in view of Maxim (Trilateration Localization for Multi-Robot Teams) (“Maxim”) (Attached) in view of Li (US 20210358308 A1) (“Lu”) further in view of Kim (US 20190180629 A1) (“Kim”) further in view of Pilkington (US 20180188745 A1) (“Pilkington”).
With respect to claim 4, and similarly claim 14, Ozaki in view of Maxim in view of Li in view of Kim fail to explicitly disclose that the information related to the platooning includes one or more of distance maintenance request information, merging request information, and separation request information.
Pilkington, however, teaches that the information related to the platooning includes one or more of distance maintenance request information, merging request information, and separation request information (See at least Pilkington FIG. 5 Paragraphs 70-74 “The control method 500 includes a first step 510 wherein the maximum following distance MMM is selected. In the example embodiment, the maximum following distance MMM is selected by retrieving a predetermined value of the maximum following distance MMM stored in the memory as described above. The value may take on any relative scale, ratio, etc. as may be necessary and/or desired, but in the example embodiment described the value of the maximum following distance MMM is in terms of multiples of a predetermined or otherwise known minimum following distance NNN … The inter-vehicle platoon distance management method 500 next in step 520 performs an assessment of the various external parameters … The inter-vehicle platoon distance management method 500 next in step 530 assigns a restriction weight to each of the various external parameters assessed in step 520. In the example embodiment, preferably, the range of restriction weights assigned to each of the various external parameters corresponds to the Platoon_Spacing_Factor assigned to the maximum following distance parameter MMM. In particular and with regard to the example embodiment, the range of the restrictions weights assigned to each of the various external parameters is from one (1) to ten (10) … The inter-vehicle platoon distance management method 500 next in step 540 determines the Platoon_Spacing_Factor by aggregating the assigned restriction weights and dividing the sum by the total number of external parameters assessed in step 520. It is to be noted that arbitration is selectively performed in the step 540 as may be necessary and/or desired to the largest “Platoon_Spacing_Factor” to get the greatest platooning distance for the current environment. Lastly, in step 550, the inter-vehicle platoon distance management method 500 determines the variable following distance VFD by multiplying the predetermined minimum following distance NNN by the Platoon_Spacing_Factor. For example, as shown in FIG. 2c , the variable following distance VFD is resolved by multiplying the predetermined minimum following distance NNN by the Platoon_Spacing_Factor of about ten (10) wherein VFD=NNN*Platoon_Spacing_Factor=NNN*10.”).
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 method of Ozaki in view of Maxim in view of Li in view of Kim to include that the information related to the platooning includes one or more of distance maintenance request information, merging request information, and separation request information, as taught by Pilkington as disclosed above, in order to ensure optimal platoon movement (Pilkington Paragraph 2 “More specifically, particular embodiments relate to inter-vehicle platoon distance management wherein parameters relating to environmental platoon conditions are aggregated by the vehicles of the platoon, and are used to adjust or otherwise modify a predetermined minimum following distance or spacing parameter for purposes of maximizing safety while still providing improved fuel savings and other efficiency benefits afforded by platoon participation”).
With respect to claim 5, and similarly claim 15, Ozaki in view of Maxim in view of Li in view of Kim in view of Pilkington teach that the distance maintenance request information is information requesting to maintain a distance between the platoon leader vehicle and the one or more platoon follower vehicles for preventing the collision between the platoon leader vehicle and the one or more platoon follower vehicles (See at least Pilkington FIG. 5 and Paragraph 39 “However, owing to the substantial spacing between the vehicles and even given that they are potentially travelling a high rate of speed while platooning as shown, the maximum following distance MMM ensures that the capabilities of the vehicles to be able to react in order avoid accidents based on following distance such as might be caused by changes in one or more variables external to the vehicles is not exceeded. ” | Paragraphs 70-74 “The control method 500 includes a first step 510 wherein the maximum following distance MMM is selected. In the example embodiment, the maximum following distance MMM is selected by retrieving a predetermined value of the maximum following distance MMM stored in the memory as described above. The value may take on any relative scale, ratio, etc. as may be necessary and/or desired, but in the example embodiment described the value of the maximum following distance MMM is in terms of multiples of a predetermined or otherwise known minimum following distance NNN … The inter-vehicle platoon distance management method 500 next in step 520 performs an assessment of the various external parameters … The inter-vehicle platoon distance management method 500 next in step 530 assigns a restriction weight to each of the various external parameters assessed in step 520. In the example embodiment, preferably, the range of restriction weights assigned to each of the various external parameters corresponds to the Platoon_Spacing_Factor assigned to the maximum following distance parameter MMM. In particular and with regard to the example embodiment, the range of the restrictions weights assigned to each of the various external parameters is from one (1) to ten (10) … The inter-vehicle platoon distance management method 500 next in step 540 determines the Platoon_Spacing_Factor by aggregating the assigned restriction weights and dividing the sum by the total number of external parameters assessed in step 520. It is to be noted that arbitration is selectively performed in the step 540 as may be necessary and/or desired to the largest “Platoon_Spacing_Factor” to get the greatest platooning distance for the current environment. Lastly, in step 550, the inter-vehicle platoon distance management method 500 determines the variable following distance VFD by multiplying the predetermined minimum following distance NNN by the Platoon_Spacing_Factor. For example, as shown in FIG. 2c , the variable following distance VFD is resolved by multiplying the predetermined minimum following distance NNN by the Platoon_Spacing_Factor of about ten (10) wherein VFD=NNN*Platoon_Spacing_Factor=NNN*10.”).
Claims 6-7 and 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ozaki (US 20160082978 A1) (“Ozaki”) in view of Maxim (Trilateration Localization for Multi-Robot Teams) (“Maxim”) (Attached) in view of Li (US 20210358308 A1) (“Lu”) further in view of Kim (US 20190180629 A1) (“Kim”) in view of Pilkington (US 20180188745 A1) (“Pilkington”) further in view of Kobayashi (US 20200298882 A1) (“Kobayashi”).
With respect to claim 6, and similarly claim 16, Ozaki in view of Maxim in view of Li in view of Kim in view of Pilkington fail to explicitly disclose that the merging request information is information that the one or more platoon follower vehicles request to merge from a lane.
Kobayashi, however, teaches that the merging request information is information that the one or more platoon follower vehicles request to merge from a lane (See at least Kobayashi FIG. 33-34 and Paragraphs 231-233 “FIG. 33 illustrates a method of merging vehicle platoons 200 and 201 in the system of the present embodiment. One vehicle platoon 201 is organized ahead of or behind the other vehicle platoon 200 to merge. A process flow at this time is illustrated in FIG. 34. When a request for platoon merging is received in step S60, history information of the drive unit control system 444 of each vehicle platoon that is a target of merging is obtained (S61). Then, the parameter values (of the overtaking acceleration, gross weight, and the like) of the target vehicle are calculated to determine possibility of platoon merging (S62). As the platoon merging method, if the terminals 42 and 44 are located near the platoons (Yes in S65), the platoon merging (S67) in the terminals 42 and 44 is performed. In contrast, if the terminals 42 and 44 are not located near the platoons (No in S65), the merging process is performed during traveling following step S69.”)
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 method of Ozaki in view of Maxim in view of Li in view of Kim in view of Pilkington to include that the merging request information is information that the one or more platoon follower vehicles request to merge from a lane, as taught by Kobayashi as disclosed above, in order to ensure efficient platoon movement (Kobayashi Paragraph 2 “Embodiments described herein relate generally to a transport service method of performing transport service of baggage, persons, and animals using cooperative drive in a plurality of self-driving vehicles”).
With respect to claim 7, and similarly claim 17, Ozaki in view of Maxim in view of Li in view of Kim in view of Pilkington fail to explicitly disclose that the separation request information is information that the one or more platoon follower vehicles request to separate from a lane.
Kobayashi, however, teaches that the separation request information is information that the one or more platoon follower vehicles request to separate from a lane (See at least Kobayashi FIG. 27 and Paragraph 209-211 “Another example of the process of overtaking in the vehicle platoons described with reference to FIG. 25 is illustrated in FIG. 27. An overtaking traveling platoon 508 approaches from behind a traveling platoon 504 leading as illustrated in FIG. 27 (a). When both the traveling platoons (vehicle platoons) 504 and 508 become closer than a predetermined distance, a mixed platoon 510 is temporarily organized as illustrated in FIG. 27 (b). Then, the command vehicle B 4 guides all of the vehicles in the mixed platoon 510. The conventional command vehicle A 2 is changed to a following vehicle D 18 in accordance with the organization of the mixed platoon 510. In addition, the following vehicles A 12 and B 14 are notified of the “change of the command vehicle A 2” prior to the change. In FIG. 27 (b), all of the vehicles constituting the mixed platoon 510 travel on a travel lane 502. Then, when the vehicle platoon overtaking process starts, the following vehicle B 14 of the tail end changes the lane and enters overtaking lane 506 as illustrated in FIG. 27 (c). At this time, only indication “change of lane to the overtaking lane 506” is sent from a command vehicle B (or the grouped vehicle guidance device) to the following vehicle B 14. When receiving this instruction, the following vehicle B 14 observes a condition of the overtaking lane 506 using an outside environmental monitoring unit 420 (FIG. 13) provided in the following vehicle B 14 and autonomously performs change of lanes at appropriate timing.”).
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 method of Ozaki in view of Maxim in view of Li in view of Kim in view of Pilkington to include that the separation request information is information that the one or more platoon follower vehicles request to separate from a lane, as taught by Kobayashi as disclosed above, in order to ensure efficient platoon movement (Kobayashi Paragraph 2 “Embodiments described herein relate generally to a transport service method of performing transport service of baggage, persons, and animals using cooperative drive in a plurality of self-driving vehicles”).
Claims 8 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ozaki (US 20160082978 A1) (“Ozaki”) in view of Maxim (Trilateration Localization for Multi-Robot Teams) (“Maxim”) (Attached) in view of Li (US 20210358308 A1) (“Lu”) further in view of Sam (KR 20160137442 A) (“Sam”) (Translation Attached).
With respect to claim 8, and similarly claim 18, Ozaki in view of Maxim in view of Li fail to explicitly disclose providing an image of the platoon leader vehicle and the one or more platoon follower vehicles driving to a terminal of a driver of the platoon leader vehicle.
Sam, however, teaches providing an image of the platoon leader vehicle and the platoon leader vehicle’s environment to a terminal of a driver of the platoon leader vehicle (See at least Sam FIG. 1 and Paragraph 19 “According to another embodiment of the present invention, a drone which provides information to a platoon composed of a leader vehicle and member vehicles whose operation is controlled by the leader vehicle, comprises: a sensing unit which senses the surrounding environment of the drone; a communication unit which transmits and receives information with an external communication device and receives platoon control information for adjusting the operating state of the platoon from the leader vehicle; and a control unit which controls each unit of the drone, selects an operation mode of the drone based on the received platoon control information, senses the surrounding environment according to the operation mode through the sensing unit, extracts key information which serves as a criterion for determining the surrounding situation from the surrounding environment sensing result, and transmits the surrounding situation information determined based on the key information to the leader vehicle” | Paragraph 41 “However, in the case of Fig. 1, when a car (200) is paired with a drone (100) equipped with various detection means, the user can easily check the situation around the car (200) by receiving various pieces of information detected by the drone (100). According to a preferred embodiment of the present invention, the drone (100) may include a camera capable of capturing still images and moving images as a sensing means, and may transmit image information captured through the camera to a car (200) in real time. In Fig. 1, the solid line va is a guide line indicating the field of view (θ) of the camera of the drone (100), and the dotted arrow line illustrates the flow of information between the drone (100) and the car (200). According to an embodiment of the present invention, the drone (100) may be equipped with a camera equipped with a wide-angle lens as a detection means, in which case it may be possible to perform photography for a wide field of view. Additionally, the drone (100) may be equipped with multiple cameras and may obtain real-time image information for multiple directions and provide it to the driver. According to a preferred embodiment of the present invention, the driver can also check the real-time image provided by the drone (100) through an output means such as a navigation screen of the car (200). According to the embodiment of Fig. 1, the driver can immediately check the driving conditions of the car 201 right in front and the car 202 in front of it, as well as the traffic conditions ahead, and can also easily respond to special events such as traffic lights (400), obstacles on the road, and accidents on the road.”).
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 method of Ozaki in view of Maxim in view of Li to include providing an image of the platoon leader vehicle and the platoon leader vehicle’s environment to a terminal of a driver of the platoon leader vehicle, as taught by Sam as disclosed above, such that an image of the one or more platoon follower vehicles is also provided to the platoon leader vehicle, in order to ensure accurate and safe movement of the platoon (Sam Paragraph 1 “The present invention relates to a drone and a control method thereof, and more particularly, to a technology for providing useful information to a specific target such as an automobile through a drone, and a device capable of effectively suppressing the flight of the drone and a control method thereof”).
Claims 9 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ozaki (US 20160082978 A1) (“Ozaki”) in view of Maxim (Trilateration Localization for Multi-Robot Teams) (“Maxim”) (Attached) in view of Li (US 20210358308 A1) (“Lu”) further in view of Lesher (US 20180188746 A1) (“Lesher”).
With respect to claim 9, and similarly claim 19, Ozaki in view of Maxim in view of Li fail to explicitly disclose offering a mileage or a reward point to the one or more platoon follower vehicles.
Lesher, however, teaches offering a mileage or a reward point to the one or more platoon follower vehicles (See at least Lesher Paragraph 45 “FIGS. 2a -2d illustrate self-ordering of fleet vehicles in a platoon wherein the driver having the highest driver quality rating (or “best” driver) among the platoon drivers is rewarded by locating the best driver in a most preferred or best position in the platoon in accordance with an example embodiment”).
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 method of Ozaki in view of Maxim in view of Li to include offering a mileage or a reward point to the one or more platoon follower vehicles, as taught by Lesher as disclosed above, in order to increase platoon efficiency (Lesher Paragraph 1 “ More specifically, particular embodiments relate to commercial highway vehicle platoon management wherein vehicle performance characteristic parameters are used to select an ordering of the vehicles within the platoon”).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to IBRAHIM ABDOALATIF ALSOMAIRY whose telephone number is (571)272-5653. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-5:30.
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, Faris Almatrahi can be reached at 313-446-4821. 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.
/IBRAHIM ABDOALATIF ALSOMAIRY/ Examiner, Art Unit 3667 /KENNETH J MALKOWSKI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3667
Prosecution Insights