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 the Claims
Claims 1-20 were previously pending and subject to a non-final office action mailed February 28, 2025. Claims 1, 10, and 13 were amended, claims 12 and 20 were canceled, and claims 2-9, 11, and 14-19 were left as originally presented in a reply filed May 15, 2025. Claims 1-11 and 13-19 are currently pending and subject to the final office action below.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the amendments of independent claim(s) 1 and 13 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
4. 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.
6. 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.
Claim(s) 1-7, 9-11, and 13-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kwon et. al (US 10,086,832 B2) in view of Aggarwal et. al (DE 10 2016 203 326 A1) and further in view of Son et al. (US 2023/0150527).
Regarding Claims 1 and 13, Kwon teaches a system and method for a host vehicle, comprising computer that includes a processor and a memory, the memory storing instructions executable by the processor including instructions to [See at least Kwon, Fig 4, Columns 11-12]:
Furthermore, Kwon also discloses a system and method which can determine that current ambient light is below a light activation threshold; [See at least Kwon, Column 2, Lines 4-14] (In accordance with another aspect of the present disclosure, a vehicle may include: an optical sensor configured to detect illumination around the vehicle, a detection sensor configured to detect an object around the vehicle to obtain information regarding at least one of position and speed of the object, a controller configured to transmit a control signal to operate a headlamp to irradiate light toward the object based on the information regarding the position of the object when the detected illumination is less than a predetermined value and a headlamp configured to irradiate light toward the object based on the control signal.)
While Kwon does not explicitly disclose a system and method which has a memory which contains instructions to detect a target vehicle with lights insufficiently activated for the current ambient light, Aggarwal discloses detecting a vehicle external to the one in use with insufficient lights activated for the current environment [See at least Aggarwal, ¶ 12] (In a preferred embodiment, the evaluation device is designed to evaluate an inadequate lighting state of the road user if a lighting intensity and/or a range of the headlight light of at least one illuminated headlight of the road user detected by the beam sensor unit falls below a predetermined threshold value).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to develop a lighting responsive vehicle control system that detects current ambient light intensity as disclosed in Kwon and the system which takes into consideration the lighting of another vehicle as disclosed in Aggarwal with a reasonable expectation of success in developing a better lighting responsive vehicle control system.
Additionally, Kwon discloses a system and method which will actuate a component of the host vehicle based on a location of the target vehicle to make distance and/or speed adjustments [See at least Kwon, Column 2, Lines 33-42] (controlling a vehicle may further include: acquiring a positioning image of the object on the direction of irradiating light from the front light to the object is detected, and based on the image information of the captured subject determining object type … controlling a vehicle can further include, based on the position and speed of the object obtained by the detection sensor in the at least one of the information and the image of the object captured by trap (e.g., imaging device, camera, etc.) to determine the object follows the collision control … method for controlling a vehicle may further include: adjusting the running speed of the vehicle based on TTC of the vehicle with the object, and adjusting the running speed of the vehicle based on the control signal.), but does not disclose that this target vehicle was detected with lights insufficiently activated.
However, we have already seen how it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the vehicle control system of Kwon to be improved by the system of Aggarwal which detects a target vehicle with lights insufficiently activated for current detected ambient light with reasonable expectation of success in developing a better lighting responsive vehicle control system. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the vehicle control system which actuates a component based on the location of a target vehicle of Kwon to be improved by the system of Aggarwal which detects a target vehicle with lights insufficiently activated for current detected ambient light with reasonable expectation of success in developing a better lighting responsive vehicle control system.
Kwon in view of Aggarwal does not explicitly teach but Son does teach a system and method that actuates a component of the host vehicle to make distance and/or speed adjustments based on input from a driver state monitoring system that provides gaze direction data to determine the distance and/or speed adjustments to account for an awareness by an operator of the host vehicle (Paragraphs 0016; 0055-0056) (Son discloses a vehicle smart cruise control that can take and relinquish automatic control of a vehicle based off of various factors includer driver gaze; Son discloses sensors including light quantity for driver pupil measurements).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to develop a vehicle control system that considers driver gaze information as disclosed in Son and the system which takes into consideration the lighting of another vehicle as disclosed in Kwan and Aggarwal and with a reasonable expectation of success in developing safer vehicle control. Kwan and Aggarwal disclose the targe vehicle has insufficient lighting as noted above.
Regarding Claims 2 and 14, a combination of Kwon and Aggarwal and Son disclose the system and method of claims 1 and 13 above,
Furthermore, Kwon discloses the instructions further including instructions to predict a trajectory of the target vehicle, wherein activating the component based on the location further includes activating the component based on the predicted trajectory. [See at least Kwon, Column 2, Lines 33-42] (The controller may be configured to determine the object to be subject to collision avoidance control based on information regarding at least one of position and speed of the object obtained by the detection sensor and the image of the object captured by the capturer. The controller may then be configured to adjust driving speed of the vehicle based on the TCC of the vehicle with the object. The vehicle may further include: a speed controller configured to adjust driving speed of the vehicle based on the control signal. The detection sensor may include one of a radar and a light detection and ranging). Here we see the speed controller changes the speed of the vehicle and thus actuates a component of the vehicle to do so based on a predicted trajectory of a target vehicle.
Regarding Claims 3 and 15, a combination of Kwon and Aggarwal and Son disclose the system and method of claims 1 and 13 above
Furthermore, Kwon discloses wherein actuating the component of the host vehicle based on the location of the target vehicle includes suppressing movement of the host vehicle until the target vehicle passes the host vehicle. [See at least Kwon, Column 2, Lines 33-42] (The controller may be configured to determine the object to be subject to collision avoidance control based on information regarding at least one of position and speed of the object obtained by the detection sensor and the image of the object captured by the capturer. The controller may then be configured to adjust driving speed of the vehicle based on the TCC of the vehicle with the object. The vehicle may further include: a speed controller configured to adjust driving speed of the vehicle based on the control signal. The detection sensor may include one of a radar and a light detection and ranging) Here we see that the speed controller is shifted as necessary in reaction to a detected target vehicle, which includes the suppression of speed in the situation the calculated TTC (Time To Collision) with a braking unit that receives signals from the controller.
Regarding Claims 4 and 15, a combination of Kwon and Aggarwal and Son disclose the system and method of claims 1 and 13 above.
Furthermore, Kwon discloses wherein actuating the component of the host vehicle based on the location of the target vehicle includes changing a lane of travel of the host vehicle and/ or maintaining the lane of travel of the host vehicle to attempt to avoid the target vehicle. [See at least Kwon Column 8, Lines 23- 28 Column 9, Lines 39-4] (Taking this into account, while the vehicle 1 is being driven in a particular direction along a particular road lane, the controller 100 of the vehicle 1 may be configured to determine whether there are moving objects in front of the vehicle 1, and front-left and front-right sides to the vehicle 1 … Specifically, when the vehicle 1 is about to change lanes, different alerts may be output to the driver according to different levels of danger). Here the actuated component is a display to push the driver to either change lanes or not change lanes based on a detected target vehicle.
Regarding Claims 5 and 15, a combination of Kwon and Aggarwal and Son disclose the system and method of claims 1 and 13 above.
Furthermore, Kwon discloses wherein actuating the component of the host vehicle based on the location of the target vehicle includes adjusting a speed of the host vehicle to increase a distance between the host vehicle and the target vehicle. [See at least Kwon, Column 2 Lines 33-42, Column 11 Lines 16-17] (The controller may be configured to determine the object to be subject to collision avoidance control based on information regarding at least one of position and speed of the object obtained by the detection sensor and the image of the object captured by the capturer. The controller may then be configured to adjust driving speed of the vehicle based on the TCC of the vehicle with the object. The vehicle may further include: a speed controller configured to adjust driving speed of the vehicle based on the control signal. The detection sensor may include one of a radar and a light detection and ranging) Here we see that the speed controller is shifted as necessary in reaction to a detected target vehicle, which includes the acceleration of speed in the situation the calculated TTC (Time To Collision), including the usage of an accelerator as mentioned by Kwon which implies increasing speed and increasing distance between a host vehicle and a target vehicle.
Regarding Claims 6 and 16, a combination of Kwon and Aggarwal and Son disclose the system and method of claims 1 and 13 above.
Furthermore, Kwon discloses wherein actuating the component of the host vehicle based on the location of the target vehicle includes adjusting a speed and/or distance setting of a driver assist system. [See at least Kwon, Column 2, Lines 33-4] (The controller may be configured to determine the object to be subject to collision avoidance control based on information regarding at least one of position and speed of the object obtained by the detection sensor and the image of the object captured by the capturer. The controller may then be configured to adjust driving speed of the vehicle based on the TCC of the vehicle with the object. The vehicle may further include: a speed controller configured to adjust driving speed of the vehicle based on the control signal. The detection sensor may include one of a radar and a light detection and ranging) where both speed is adjusted and a distance setting is adjusted in order to calculate a time to collision
Regarding Claims 7 and 17, a combination of Kwon and Aggarwal and Son disclose the system and method of claims 1 and 13 above.
Furthermore, Kwon discloses wherein the component of the vehicle is a propulsion, braking, or steering component. [See at least Kwon, Column 11, Lines 15-28] (Particularly, the speed controller 70 may be configured to adjust the speed of the vehicle 1 driven by the driver. The speed controller 70 may include an accelerator driver 71 and a brake driver 71. The accelerator driver 71 may be configured to increase speed of the vehicle 1 by activating the accelerator upon reception of a control signal from the controller 100, and the brake driver 72 may be configured to decrease speed of the vehicle by activating the brake upon reception of a control signal from the controller 100. The controller 100 may be further be configured to increase or decrease the driving speed of the vehicle 1 to increase or decrease the distance between the vehicle to an object based on the distance between the vehicle 1 and the object and a predetermined reference distance stored in the storage)
Regarding Claims 9 and 18, a combination of Kwon and Aggarwal and Son disclose the system and method of claims 1 and 13 above.
Furthermore, while Kwon does not disclose wherein the light activation threshold is dependent on a distance of the target vehicle from the host vehicle, Aggarwal discloses setting a detected light activation threshold according to the distance between a host vehicle and target vehicle. [See at least Aggarwal, ¶13, 17] (Against this background, it is preferable to set at least one of the predetermined threshold values as a function of a relative speed, a relative position, the size and/or the type of the detected road user in relation to the vehicle itself. For example, the relative speed, relative position, size and type of the detected road user can be determined based on the data provided by the beam sensor unit.) Here, Aggarwal discloses using relative speed and relative position which incorporates the distance of the target vehicle to configure the threshold. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to improve the combination disclosure of Kwon and Aggarwal of a lighting responsive vehicle control system for collision avoidance by implementing a light activation threshold which is calibrated according to the distance from a detected target vehicle to a host vehicle as disclosed by Aggarwal with a reasonable expectation of success in providing an improved lighting responsive vehicle control as disclosed by the combined disclosure of Kwon and Aggarwal.
Regarding Claims 10 and 19, a combination of Kwon and Aggarwal and Son disclose the system and method of claims 1 and 13 above.
Furthermore, while Kwon does not disclose wherein the light activation threshold is calibrated for a type of host vehicle, Aggarwal discloses setting a detected light activation threshold according to the distance between a host vehicle and target vehicle. [See at least Aggarwal, ¶13, 17] (Against this background, it is preferable to set at least one of the predetermined threshold values as a function of a relative speed, a relative position, the size and/or the type of the detected road user in relation to the vehicle itself. For example, the relative speed, relative position, size and type of the detected road user can be determined based on the data provided by the beam sensor unit.) Here, Aggarwal discloses using relative speed and relative position which incorporates the properties of the host vehicle to configure the threshold. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to improve the combination disclosure of Kwon and Aggarwal of a lighting responsive vehicle control system for collision avoidance by implementing a light activation threshold which is calibrated according to the properties of a host vehicle as disclosed by Aggarwal with a reasonable expectation of success in providing an improved lighting responsive vehicle control as disclosed by the combined disclosure of Kwon and Aggarwal.
Regarding Claims 11 and 19, a combination of Kwon and Aggarwal and Son disclose the system and method of claims 1 and 13 above.
Furthermore, Kwon discloses wherein the light activation threshold is calibrated for the current ambient light. [See at least Kwon, Column 14 Lines 1-5] (The controller 100 may be configured to determine illumination around the vehicle 1 by comparing the illumination around the vehicle 1 transmitted from the optical sensor 250 and predetermined illumination data stored beforehand in the storage 90.)
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kwon et. al (US 10,086,832 B2) in view of Aggarwal et. al (DE 10 2016 203 326 A1) and further in view of Son et al. (US 2023/0150527) as noted in the rejection of claim 1 above, and in further view of Fasihozaman (US 2020/0369265 A1).
Regarding Claim 8, a combination of Kwon and Aggarwal and Son disclose the system of claim 1.
While neither Kwon nor Aggarwal nor Son disclose wherein the component of the vehicle is a wireless transmitter, Fasihozaman discloses the usage of a wireless transmitter being actuated for the purpose of aiding in collision avoidance [See at least Fasihozaman, Claim 20] (The parked vehicle active collision avoidance and multimedia system, wherein the wireless transceiver is in communication with a cloud-based system). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the disclosed lighting responsive collision avoidance as disclosed by the combination of Kwon and Aggarwal with the actuating of a wireless transmitter for collision avoidance purposes as disclosed in Fasihozaman with a reasonable expectation of success in yielding an improved lighting responsive collision avoidance system that can communicate with external elements in order to provide a more well-coordinated collision avoidance maneuvering.
Closest Prior Art
Please also consider Nath et al. (US 10752253) (Column 9, lines 25-50) – Nath discloses a gaze direction vehicle control system that can take over vehicle control and also use vehicle to vehicle communication.
Conclusion
21. 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.
22. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRIAN M EPSTEIN whose telephone number is (571)270-5389. The examiner can normally be reached Mo-Fri 745-615.
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.
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.
BRIAN M. EPSTEIN
Supervisory Patent Examiner
Art Unit 3628
/BRIAN M EPSTEIN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3625
Prosecution Insights