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 .
Status of claims
Claims 1-2,4-7,9,11-13,15-17 and 20 are amended.
Claims 10, 18 and 21 are canceled.
Claims 23-25 are new claims.
Claims 1-7,9-18,20-25 are pending.
Response to arguments
With respect to Applicant’s remarks filed on 06/04/2026; Applicant's “Amendments and Remarks” have been fully considered. Applicant’s remarks will be addressed in sequential order as they were presented.
Applicant remarks:
Cited references fail to teach or suggest “determining, using…..candidate path”.
Office Response:
Please see the new mapping for independent clams.
The Office has supplied new grounds for rejection attached below in the FINAL office action and therefore the prior arguments are considered moot. The Office is still using most of the same cited prior art, thus the Office will attempt to address all remarks that remain relevant.
Applicant further argues that the other independent claims which recite similar features are allowable and the dependent claims are also allowable since they depend on allowable subject and the Office respectfully disagrees. It is the Office's stance that all of the claimed subject matter has been properly rejected; therefore, the Office's respectfully disagrees with applicant’s arguments.
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.
Claims 1-5,9-16 and 20-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatented over US20130103313A1 to Moore et al. (herein after “Moore”) in view of US2021300405A1 to Hyde et al. (herein after “Hyde”).
Regarding claim 1, Moore teaches A method, comprising: receiving, using a first processor, a request to navigate from an initial location to a goal location responsive to an input provided via a graphical user interface; (See Moore at least para[0084] Navigation module 1238 may at least function to calculate navigation routes based on at least a starting point and destination point (e.g., starting point 107 and destination point 109 of FIG. 1, claim 1 calculate a plurality of routes extending from a starting point to a destination point;)
generating, with the first processor, a plurality of candidate paths based on the goal location from an autonomous vehicle, wherein the at least one first processor is remote from the autonomous vehicle (See Moore para[0074] Attention is now directed towards embodiments of a system architecture that may be embodied within any portable or non-portable device including but not limited to a communication device (e.g. mobile phone, smart phone), a multi-media device (e.g., MP3 player, TV, radio), a portable or handheld computer (e.g., tablet, netbook, laptop), a desktop computer, an All-In-One desktop, a peripheral device, or any other system or device adaptable to the inclusion of system architecture 1200)
generating, using the first processor, a candidate path from first location to second location, wherein the generating the candidate path comprises optimizing at least one cost and at least one constraint associated with the candidate path; (figure 1, see Moore para[0048] For example, in addition to the distance and estimated travel time, a navigation tile may also include information regarding the cost of tolls along the route and traffic status with traffic pictorials 360, 361, and 362., para[0006] User preferences may indicate that a user would like to avoid toll roads, avoid traffic, minimize travel distance, minimize travel time, take a scenic route, etc)
However, Moore does not expressly disclose or otherwise teach receiving, using a second processor, the selected candidate path from the first processor, wherein the second processor is onboard the autonomous vehicle; generating, using the second processor, a route based on the selected candidate path, determining, using the second processor, that the route does not comply with a risk classification scheme, modifying, using the first processor and the graphical user interface, the selected candidate path to re-draw the selected candidate path in response to determining that the route does not comply with the risk classification scheme, generating, using the second processor, an updated route based on the re-drawn candidate path, causing to navigate, using the second processor, the autonomous vehicle from the initial location to the goal location based on the updated route. Nevertheless, Hyde same field of endeavor teaches receiving, using a second processor, the selected candidate path from the first processor, (See Hyde para[0078] Further, the one or more remote computing devices 106 can be used to determine and/or modify one or more states of the vehicle 102 including a location (e.g., a latitude and longitude), a velocity, acceleration, a trajectory, and/or a path of the vehicle 102 based in part on signals or data exchanged with the vehicle 102 .)
wherein the second processor is onboard the autonomous vehicle; (see Hyde para[0114] FIG. 4 depicts an example autonomous vehicle computing system including functional circuitry and monitoring circuitry according to example embodiments of the present disclosure. More particularly, autonomous vehicle computing system 400 includes two functional circuits (e.g., 402 and 404 ).
generating, using the second processor, a route based on the selected candidate path, (See Hyde para[0132] the outputs from the functional circuits 606 and 612 can be data that the motion plan can be based on (e.g., a pose, vehicle trajectory, object recognition, prediction, perception, etc.). )
determining, using the second processor, that the route does not comply with a risk classification scheme; (See Hyde para [0033] The autonomous vehicle compute architecture can include one or more monitoring circuits. A monitoring circuit can, in some implementations, include any and/or all of the hardware devices previously mentioned with regards to the functional circuit. As an example, a monitoring circuit can include a PCB, a CPU, memory, and storage device(s). Further, in some implementations, the components of the monitoring circuit can be assured to a specified functional safety standard (e.g., ASIL-D of ISO 26262, etc.). )
modifying, using the first processor and the graphical user interface (See Hyde para[0162] The assured functional circuitry 904 can generate an ASIL-D assured output 906 for a non-stochastic autonomous function of the autonomous vehicle (e.g., user interface generation, vehicle lighting controls, climate control, etc.), the selected candidate path to re-draw the selected candidate path in response to determining that the route does not comply with the risk classification scheme;(See Hyde para[0064] For example, by utilizing one or more implementations of the disclosed technology, a vehicle computing system can verify that an output (e.g., a prediction, perception, motion plan, etc.) is functionally correct by generating a plurality of outputs for a single task and comparing differences between the outputs. As such, the autonomous vehicle computing system can assure outputs that are generally considered to be non-assurable. By more accurately and efficiently assuring the outputs of the autonomous vehicle computing system, embodiments in accordance with the present disclosure can significantly increase the safe function of the autonomous vehicle computing system, therefore increasing the safety of the passengers of an autonomous vehicle.)
generating, using the second processor, an updated route based on the re-drawn candidate path (See Hyde para[0047] The non-faulting functional circuitry (e.g., the first functional circuitry) can be used to generate the emergency control signals to safely stop the vehicle.); and
causing to navigate, using the second processor, the autonomous vehicle from the initial location to the goal location based on the updated route. (see Hyde para[0036] Similarly, the monitoring circuitry can send an optimal output (e.g., a result of monitoring the output of the functional circuitries, etc.) to the communication switch. In some implementations, the communication switch can receive outputs from processing circuitries and send the outputs to other components and/or systems of the autonomous vehicle (e.g., a microcontroller unit, a vehicle integration module, a vehicle controller, etc.).)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to combine Moore’s device and method of comparing and selecting alternative navigation route with Hyde’s in vehicle processor and using the processor generate motion plan and control the vehicle based on the motion plan in order to allow to generate the emergency control signals to safely stop the vehicle (See Hyde para[0047]).
Regarding claim 2, Moore and Hyde remain applied as claim 1. Moore teaches wherein generating the plurality of candidate paths comprises: generating the plurality of candidate paths based on one or more visualization modes, each visualization mode providing a representation of a trajectory from the initial location to the goal location (See Moore para[0059] In step 805, navigation tiles can be displayed on a screen with the pictorial representation of a navigation route and details about the route.), or
generating the plurality of candidate paths based on a plurality of previously generated candidate paths within a predetermined radius of the initial location and/or the goal location. (See Moore Figure 1, para[0029] FIG. 1 shows an illustrative screen shot of map 100 with several alternative routes displayed simultaneously in accordance with various embodiments.).
Regarding claim 3, Moore and Hyde remain applied as claim 1. Moore teaches wherein the one or more visualization modes include a lane graph view, an intersection view, or a wireframe view. (See Moore para[0032] The route callouts in map 100 only display the names given to each route, but can, according to some embodiments, display more information, including distance and estimated travel time for the corresponding route. The amount of information displayed in a callout may be adjusted by the user. , figure 3).
Regarding claim 4, Moore and Hyde remain applied as claim 1. Moore teaches wherein generating the plurality of candidate paths based on the plurality of previously generated candidate paths within the predetermined radius of the initial location and/or the goal location further comprises generating the plurality of candidate paths based on at least one of blockages associated with the plurality of previously generated candidate paths, waypoints associated with the plurality of previously generated candidate paths, trajectory acceptance rates associated with the plurality of previously generated candidate paths, or an environment associated with the plurality of previously generated candidate paths. (See Moore para[0035] Sidebar 140 can provide the user with relevant, context-appropriate information in a manner that does not affect the readability of map 100. Sidebar 140 is located discretely on the side of the display and shows key information regarding five calculated routes that may allow a user to determine which route is best;, figure 1)
Regarding claim 5, Moore and Hyde remain applied as claim 1. Moore teaches wherein the at least one of the cost or the constraint associated with each corresponding candidate path is provided via the graphical user interface using a shade of a color. (See Moore para[0031] For example, each route may be highlighted in a different color. Roads displayed on map 100 that are not along any of the calculated routes may be displayed in a more discrete color and/or in thinner lines than roads that are along one or more routes, see para[0034] Calculated routes can be prioritized based on a set of user preferences. For example, the user preferences may indicate that a user would like to avoid toll roads, avoid traffic, minimize travel distance, minimize travel time, take a scenic route, travel on a particular road, or stop at a POI en route, figure 1).
Regarding claim 9, Moore and Hyde remain applied as claim 1. Moore teaches wherein the graphical user interface is configured to provide a visual representation of features present in an environment in which the autonomous vehicle is located, wherein the features are located within a predetermined distance from each candidate path. (See Moore figure 1, para[0036] Context-appropriate menu 142 can be accessed to perform various functions that are relevant to the currently displayed screen. While the device is in route-selection mode (i.e., as displayed on map 100) menu 142 may provide options to enter a list mode (discussed in detail below with respect to FIG. 3), hide the sidebar, show traffic, show POIs, and show terrain. If a user decides to show terrain, the roads and highlighted routes may be altered such that they remain easily visible and distinguishable. Menu 142 may be accessed in any suitable manner, including but not limited to tapping and holding the touch-screen display.).
Regarding claim 11, Moore and Hyde remain applied as claim 1. Moore teaches wherein the input is provided via the graphical user interface (see Moore para[0072] a graphical user interface (GUI).) responsive to a request for remote vehicle assistance (see claim 24 provide navigation assistance along one of the plurality of navigational routes) provided by the vehicle at the starting initial location. (See Moore para[0074] any portable or non-portable device including but not limited to a communication device (e.g. mobile phone, smart phone), a multi-media device (e.g., MP3 player, TV, radio), a portable or handheld computer (e.g., tablet, netbook, laptop), a desktop computer, an All-In-One desktop, a peripheral device, or any other system or device adaptable to the system architecture 1200 which include navigation module 1238)
Regarding claim 12, Moore teaches A system comprising: at least one non-transitory storage medium storing instructions that, when executed by one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to: (see Moore para[0077] Peripherals interface 1216 couples the input and output peripherals of the system to processor 1218 and computer-readable medium 1201. One or more processors 1218 communicate with one or more computer-readable mediums 1201 via controller 1220. Computer-readable medium 1201 can be any device or medium that can store code and/or data for use by one or more processors 1218. )
receive using a first processor, a request to navigate from an initial location to a goal location in response to an input provided via a graphical user interface; (See Moore at least para[0084] Navigation module 1238 may at least function to calculate navigation routes based on at least a starting point and destination point (e.g., starting point 107 and destination point 109 of FIG. 1, claim 1 calculate a plurality of routes extending from a starting point to a destination point;)
generate, using the first processor, a plurality of candidate paths from the initial location to the goal location for an autonomous vehicle, wherein the first processor is remote from the autonomous vehicle; (See Moore para[0074] any portable or non-portable device including but not limited to a communication device (e.g. mobile phone, smart phone), a multi-media device (e.g., MP3 player, TV, radio), a portable or handheld computer (e.g., tablet, netbook, laptop), a desktop computer, an All-In-One desktop, a peripheral device, or any other system or device adaptable to the system architecture 1200 which include navigation module 1238)
receive, using the first processor, a selection of a candidate path among the plurality of candidate paths based on at least one of a cost or a constraint associated with each candidate path; (figure 1, see Moore para[0048] For example, in addition to the distance and estimated travel time, a navigation tile may also include information regarding the cost of tolls along the route and traffic status with traffic pictorials 360, 361, and 362., para[0006] User preferences may indicate that a user would like to avoid toll roads, avoid traffic, minimize travel distance, minimize travel time, take a scenic route, etc)
However, Moore does not expressly disclose or otherwise teach receiving, using a second processor, the selected candidate path from the first processor, wherein the second processor is onboard the autonomous vehicle; generating, using the second processor, a route based on the selected candidate path, determining, using the second processor, that the route does not comply with a risk classification scheme, modifying, using the first processor and the graphical user interface, the selected candidate path to re-draw the selected candidate path in response to determining that the route does not comply with the risk classification scheme, generating, using the second processor, an updated route based on the re-drawn candidate path, causing to navigate, using the second processor, the autonomous vehicle from the initial location to the goal location based on the updated route. Nevertheless, Hyde same field of endeavor teaches receiving, using a second processor, the selected candidate path from the first processor, (See Hyde para[0078] Further, the one or more remote computing devices 106 can be used to determine and/or modify one or more states of the vehicle 102 including a location (e.g., a latitude and longitude), a velocity, acceleration, a trajectory, and/or a path of the vehicle 102 based in part on signals or data exchanged with the vehicle 102 .)
wherein the second processor is onboard the autonomous vehicle; (see Hyde para[0114] FIG. 4 depicts an example autonomous vehicle computing system including functional circuitry and monitoring circuitry according to example embodiments of the present disclosure. More particularly, autonomous vehicle computing system 400 includes two functional circuits (e.g., 402 and 404 ).
generating, using the second processor, a route based on the selected candidate path, (See Hyde para[0132] the outputs from the functional circuits 606 and 612 can be data that the motion plan can be based on (e.g., a pose, vehicle trajectory, object recognition, prediction, perception, etc.). )
determining, using the second processor, that the route does not comply with a risk classification scheme; (See Hyde para [0033] The autonomous vehicle compute architecture can include one or more monitoring circuits. A monitoring circuit can, in some implementations, include any and/or all of the hardware devices previously mentioned with regards to the functional circuit. As an example, a monitoring circuit can include a PCB, a CPU, memory, and storage device(s). Further, in some implementations, the components of the monitoring circuit can be assured to a specified functional safety standard (e.g., ASIL-D of ISO 26262, etc.). )
modifying, using the first processor and the graphical user interface (See Hyde para[0162] The assured functional circuitry 904 can generate an ASIL-D assured output 906 for a non-stochastic autonomous function of the autonomous vehicle (e.g., user interface generation, vehicle lighting controls, climate control, etc.), the selected candidate path to re-draw the selected candidate path in response to determining that the route does not comply with the risk classification scheme;(See Hyde para[0064] For example, by utilizing one or more implementations of the disclosed technology, a vehicle computing system can verify that an output (e.g., a prediction, perception, motion plan, etc.) is functionally correct by generating a plurality of outputs for a single task and comparing differences between the outputs. As such, the autonomous vehicle computing system can assure outputs that are generally considered to be non-assurable. By more accurately and efficiently assuring the outputs of the autonomous vehicle computing system, embodiments in accordance with the present disclosure can significantly increase the safe function of the autonomous vehicle computing system, therefore increasing the safety of the passengers of an autonomous vehicle.)
generating, using the second processor, an updated route based on the re-drawn candidate path (See Hyde para[0047] The non-faulting functional circuitry (e.g., the first functional circuitry) can be used to generate the emergency control signals to safely stop the vehicle.); and
causing to navigate, using the second processor, the autonomous vehicle from the initial location to the goal location based on the updated route. (see Hyde para[0036] Similarly, the monitoring circuitry can send an optimal output (e.g., a result of monitoring the output of the functional circuitries, etc.) to the communication switch. In some implementations, the communication switch can receive outputs from processing circuitries and send the outputs to other components and/or systems of the autonomous vehicle (e.g., a microcontroller unit, a vehicle integration module, a vehicle controller, etc.).)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to combine Moore’s device and method of comparing and selecting alternative navigation route with Hyde’s in vehicle processor and using the processor generate motion plan and control the vehicle based on the motion plan in order to allow to generate the emergency control signals to safely stop the vehicle (See Hyde para[0047]).
Regarding claim 13, Moore and Hyde remain applied as claim 12. Moore teaches wherein generating the plurality of candidate paths further cause the first processor to: generate the plurality of candidate paths based on one or more visualization modes, each visualization mode providing a representation of a trajectory from the initial location to the goal location (See Moore para[0059] In step 805, navigation tiles can be displayed on a screen with the pictorial representation of a navigation route and details about the route.),
or generate the plurality of candidate paths based on a plurality of previously generated candidate paths within a predetermined radius of the initial location and/or the goal location (See Moore Figure 1, para[0029] FIG. 1 shows an illustrative screen shot of map 100 with several alternative routes displayed simultaneously in accordance with various embodiments.).
Regarding claim 14, Moore and Hyde remain applied as claim 12. Moore teaches wherein the one or more visualization modes include a lane graph view, an intersection view, or a wireframe view. (See Moore para[0032] The route callouts in map 100 only display the names given to each route, but can, according to some embodiments, display more information, including distance and estimated travel time for the corresponding route. The amount of information displayed in a callout may be adjusted by the user, figure 3)
Regarding claim 15, Moore and Hyde remain applied as claim 12. Moore teaches wherein generating the plurality of candidate paths based on the plurality of previously generated candidate paths within a predetermined radius of the initial location and/or the goal location further cause the first processor to generate the plurality of candidate paths based on at least one of blockages associated with the plurality of previously generated candidate paths, waypoints associated with the plurality of previously generated candidate paths, trajectory acceptance rates associated with the plurality of previously generated candidate paths, or an environment associated with the plurality of previously generated candidate paths. (See Moore para[0035] Sidebar 140 can provide the user with relevant, context-appropriate information in a manner that does not affect the readability of map 100. Sidebar 140 is located discretely on the side of the display and shows key information regarding five calculated routes that may allow a user to determine which route is best;, figure 1)
Regarding claim 16, Moore and Hyde remain applied as claim 12. Moore teaches wherein the at least one of cost or the constraint associated with each corresponding candidate path is provided via the graphical user interface using a shade of a color. (See Moore para[0031] For example, each route may be highlighted in a different color. Roads displayed on map 100 that are not along any of the calculated routes may be displayed in a more discrete color and/or in thinner lines than roads that are along one or more routes.),[0034] para[0034] Calculated routes can be prioritized based on a set of user preferences. For example, the user preferences may indicate that a user would like to avoid toll roads, avoid traffic, minimize travel distance, minimize travel time, take a scenic route, travel on a particular road, or stop at a POI en route, figure 1).
Regarding claim 20, Moore teaches At least one non-transitory storage medium storing instructions that, when executed by at least one or more processors, cause the processors to: (see Moore para[0077] Peripherals interface 1216 couples the input and output peripherals of the system to processor 1218 and computer-readable medium 1201. One or more processors 1218 communicate with one or more computer-readable mediums 1201 via controller 1220. Computer-readable medium 1201 can be any device or medium that can store code and/or data for use by one or more processors 1218. )
receive using a first processor, a request to navigate from an initial location to a goal location in response to an input provided via a graphical user interface; (See Moore at least para[0084] Navigation module 1238 may at least function to calculate navigation routes based on at least a starting point and destination point (e.g., starting point 107 and destination point 109 of FIG. 1, claim 1 calculate a plurality of routes extending from a starting point to a destination point;)
generate, using the first processor, a plurality of candidate paths from the initial location to the goal location for an autonomous vehicle, wherein the first processor is remote from the autonomous vehicle; (See Moore para[0074] any portable or non-portable device including but not limited to a communication device (e.g. mobile phone, smart phone), a multi-media device (e.g., MP3 player, TV, radio), a portable or handheld computer (e.g., tablet, netbook, laptop), a desktop computer, an All-In-One desktop, a peripheral device, or any other system or device adaptable to the system architecture 1200 which include navigation module 1238)
receive, using the first processor, a selection of a candidate path among the plurality of candidate paths based on at least one cost and at least one constraint associated with each candidate path; (figure 1, see Moore para[0048] For example, in addition to the distance and estimated travel time, a navigation tile may also include information regarding the cost of tolls along the route and traffic status with traffic pictorials 360, 361, and 362., para[0006] User preferences may indicate that a user would like to avoid toll roads, avoid traffic, minimize travel distance, minimize travel time, take a scenic route, etc).
However, Moore does not expressly disclose or otherwise teach receiving, using a second processor, the selected candidate path from the first processor, wherein the second processor is onboard the autonomous vehicle; generating, using the second processor, a route based on the selected candidate path, determining, using the second processor, that the route does not comply with a risk classification scheme, modifying, using the first processor and the graphical user interface, the selected candidate path to re-draw the selected candidate path in response to determining that the route does not comply with the risk classification scheme, generating, using the second processor, an updated route based on the re-drawn candidate path, causing to navigate, using the second processor, the autonomous vehicle from the initial location to the goal location based on the updated route. Nevertheless, Hyde same field of endeavor teaches receiving, using a second processor, the selected candidate path from the first processor, (See Hyde para[0078] Further, the one or more remote computing devices 106 can be used to determine and/or modify one or more states of the vehicle 102 including a location (e.g., a latitude and longitude), a velocity, acceleration, a trajectory, and/or a path of the vehicle 102 based in part on signals or data exchanged with the vehicle 102 .)
wherein the second processor is onboard the autonomous vehicle; (see Hyde para[0114] FIG. 4 depicts an example autonomous vehicle computing system including functional circuitry and monitoring circuitry according to example embodiments of the present disclosure. More particularly, autonomous vehicle computing system 400 includes two functional circuits (e.g., 402 and 404 ).
generating, using the second processor, a route based on the selected candidate path, (See Hyde para[0132] the outputs from the functional circuits 606 and 612 can be data that the motion plan can be based on (e.g., a pose, vehicle trajectory, object recognition, prediction, perception, etc.). )
determining, using the second processor, that the route does not comply with a risk classification scheme; (See Hyde para [0033] The autonomous vehicle compute architecture can include one or more monitoring circuits. A monitoring circuit can, in some implementations, include any and/or all of the hardware devices previously mentioned with regards to the functional circuit. As an example, a monitoring circuit can include a PCB, a CPU, memory, and storage device(s). Further, in some implementations, the components of the monitoring circuit can be assured to a specified functional safety standard (e.g., ASIL-D of ISO 26262, etc.). )
modifying, using the first processor and the graphical user interface (See Hyde para[0162] The assured functional circuitry 904 can generate an ASIL-D assured output 906 for a non-stochastic autonomous function of the autonomous vehicle (e.g., user interface generation, vehicle lighting controls, climate control, etc.), the selected candidate path to re-draw the selected candidate path in response to determining that the route does not comply with the risk classification scheme;(See Hyde para[0064] For example, by utilizing one or more implementations of the disclosed technology, a vehicle computing system can verify that an output (e.g., a prediction, perception, motion plan, etc.) is functionally correct by generating a plurality of outputs for a single task and comparing differences between the outputs. As such, the autonomous vehicle computing system can assure outputs that are generally considered to be non-assurable. By more accurately and efficiently assuring the outputs of the autonomous vehicle computing system, embodiments in accordance with the present disclosure can significantly increase the safe function of the autonomous vehicle computing system, therefore increasing the safety of the passengers of an autonomous vehicle.)
generating, using the second processor, an updated route based on the re-drawn candidate path (See Hyde para[0047] The non-faulting functional circuitry (e.g., the first functional circuitry) can be used to generate the emergency control signals to safely stop the vehicle.); and
causing to navigate, using the second processor, the autonomous vehicle from the initial location to the goal location based on the updated route. (see Hyde para[0036] Similarly, the monitoring circuitry can send an optimal output (e.g., a result of monitoring the output of the functional circuitries, etc.) to the communication switch. In some implementations, the communication switch can receive outputs from processing circuitries and send the outputs to other components and/or systems of the autonomous vehicle (e.g., a microcontroller unit, a vehicle integration module, a vehicle controller, etc.).)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to combine Moore’s device and method of comparing and selecting alternative navigation route with Hyde’s in vehicle processor and using the processor generate motion plan and control the vehicle based on the motion plan in order to allow to generate the emergency control signals to safely stop the vehicle (See Hyde para[0047]).
Regarding claim 22, Moore and Hyde remain applied as claim 1. However, Moore does not expressly disclose or otherwise teach wherein the risk classification scheme is ASIL-D. Nevertheless, Hyde same field of endeavor teaches wherein the risk classification scheme is ASIL-D (See Hyde para [0003] Functional safety standards have been commonly utilized and relied upon in the automotive manufacturing industry. Some standards that are commonly followed in vehicle production, such as ISO 26262)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to combine Moore’s device and method of comparing and selecting alternative navigation route with Hyde’s in vehicle processor and using the processor generate motion plan and control the vehicle based on the motion plan in order to allow to generate the emergency control signals to safely stop the vehicle (See Hyde para[0047]).
Regarding claim 23, Moore and Hyde remain applied as claim 1. Moore teaches wherein each candidate path of the plurality of candidate paths comprises a plurality of editable waypoints, wherein modifying the selected candidate path comprises adjusting one or more editable waypoints among the plurality of editable waypoints. (See Moore para[0044] The POI section of sidebar 240 indicates that the user has chosen to display gas stations along the route., para[0011] The user may be given the option to reset the chosen POI as the new destination, or simply as a waypoint along the route. meaning the point of interest (same as waypoint) is editable).
Regarding claim 24, Moore and Hyde remain applied as claim 1. Moore teaches wherein adjusting the one or more editable waypoints comprises at least one of: altering a position of a waypoint, adding a new waypoint, or deleting an existing waypoint. (See Moore para[0044] Menu 242 can allow the user to set the location of icon 220 as either the new destination or add the location as a waypoint on the way to the original destination point (i.e., destination point 109 of FIG. 1).
Regarding claim 25, Moore and Hyde remain applied as claim 1. Moore teaches wherein at least one editable waypoint of the plurality of editable waypoints is visually associated with a representation of the cost or the constraint to guide the adjustment. (See Moore para[0048] For example, in addition to the distance and estimated travel time, a navigation tile may also include information regarding the cost of tolls along the route and traffic status with traffic pictorials 360, 361, and 362; para[0086] If embodied as a touch screen, touch I/O device 1212 displays visual output to the user in a GUI. The visual output may include text, graphics, video, and any combination thereof. Some or all of the visual output may correspond to user-interface objects).
Claims 6-7 and 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatented over US20130103313 A1 to Moore et al. (herein after “Moore”) in view of US20210300405 A1 to Hyde et al. (herein after “Hyde”) and US20210269056 A1 to Zhu (herein after “Zhu”).
Regarding claim 6, Moore and Hyde remain applied as claim 1. However, Moore and Hyde do not teach wherein the at least one constraint can include at least one of a buffer between a front of the vehicle and an object or a buffer between a side of the vehicle and an object. Nevertheless, Zhu same field of endeavor teaches wherein the at least one constraint can include at least one of a buffer between a front of the vehicle and an object or a buffer between a side of the vehicle and an object (See Zhu 5E, para[0029] The routing tables may further include an effective distance calculation table containing information describing distance penalties/rewards for a lane and/or driving maneuvers required to enter/exit the lane).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to combine Moore’s device and method of comparing and selecting alternative navigation route with Zhu’s constrain include buffer (effective distance) in order to allow to allow the vehicle to travel with minimal human interaction or in some cases without any passengers. which may or may not be included in the route and map information (e.g., new roads and lanes configuration) (See Zhu para[0002], [0028]).
Regarding claim 7, Moore and Hyde remain applied as claim 1. However, Moore and Hyde do not teach wherein the at least one cost can include a lane change cost or a curvature cost. Nevertheless, Zhu same field of endeavor teaches wherein the at least one cost can include a lane change cost or a curvature cost. (See Zhu paras[0033] a shape of the lane (e.g., straight or curvature, para[0048] referring to FIG. 5E, effective distances table 355 includes a number of name-value pairs for effective distances labels (or costs) to calculate an effective distance for a particular lane and/or road based on lane/road characteristics and/or types of lane transitions., figure 5E).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to combine Moore’s device and method of comparing and selecting alternative navigation route with Zhu’s constrain include buffer (effective distance) in order to allow to allow the vehicle to travel with minimal human interaction or in some cases without any passengers. which may or may not be included in the route and map information (e.g., new roads and lanes configuration) (See Zhu para[0002], [0028]).
Regarding claim 17, Moore and Hyde remain applied as claim 1. However, Moore and Hyde do not teach wherein the at least one constraint can include at least one of a buffer between a front of the vehicle and an object or a buffer between a side of the vehicle and an object. Nevertheless, Zhu same field of endeavor teaches wherein the at least one constraint can include at least one of a buffer between a front of the vehicle and an object or a buffer between a side of the vehicle and an object (See Zhu 5E), para[0029] The routing tables may further include an effective distance calculation table containing information describing distance penalties/rewards for a lane and/or driving maneuvers required to enter/exit the lane).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to combine Moore’s device and method of comparing and selecting alternative navigation route with Zhu’s constrain include buffer (effective distance) in order to allow to allow the vehicle to travel with minimal human interaction or in some cases without any passengers. which may or may not be included in the route and map information (e.g., new roads and lanes configuration) (See Zhu para[0002], [0028]).
Regarding claim 18, Moore and Hyde remain applied as claim 1. However, Moore and Hyde do not teach wherein the at least one cost can include a lane change cost or a curvature cost. Nevertheless, Zhu same field of endeavor teaches wherein the at least one cost can include a lane change cost or a curvature cost. (See Zhu paras[0033] a shape of the lane (e.g., straight or curvature, para[0048] referring to FIG. 5E, effective distances table 355 includes a number of name-value pairs for effective distances labels (or costs) to calculate an effective distance for a particular lane and/or road based on lane/road characteristics and/or types of lane transitions., figure 5E).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to combine Moore’s device and method of comparing and selecting alternative navigation route with Zhu’s constrain include buffer (effective distance) in order to allow to allow the vehicle to travel with minimal human interaction or in some cases without any passengers. which may or may not be included in the route and map information (e.g., new roads and lanes configuration) (See Zhu para[0002], [0028]).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 NAZIA AFRIN whose telephone number is (703)756-1175. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30-6.
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, Scott A Browne can be reached at 5712700151. 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.
/NAZIA AFRIN/Examiner, Art Unit 3666
/JESS WHITTINGTON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3666c
Prosecution Insights