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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant s arguments with respect to claims 1-23 have been considered but are moot because the arguments do not apply to the new combination/interpretation of references being used in the current rejection.
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.
Claim(s) 1-4, 11, 13, 18-19, and 23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pierfelice US20170217360 in view of Grossman et al. US20190204845, Wang US20170075359, and Yeh KR20110002288.
Regarding independent claim 1, Pierfelice discloses, in Figures 1-7,
A vehicle (Pierfelice; Fig. 1-7; ego-vehicle 9) comprising: a vehicle body (Pierfelice; Fig. the body of ego-vehicle 9); a range active light sensor (Pierfelice; [0058] position-detection means 101 that comprises a lidar system for lane-keeping) mounted to the vehicle body and configured to detect a lane boundary of a surface on which the vehicle is traveling (Pierfelice; [0058] position-detection means 101 that detects a lane boundary in order to determine whether the vehicle is traveling past/beyond the lane boundary and onto a roadside); and an advanced driver-assistance system (ADAS) configured to register a lane boundary detection by the range active light sensor (Pierfelice; [0058] position-detection means 101 that detects a lane boundary in order to determine whether the vehicle is traveling past/beyond the lane boundary and onto a roadside) and perform an action in response to the lane boundary detection (Pierfelice; [0058] position-detection means 101 that automatically activates the hazard lights when the system detects that the vehicle is traveling past/beyond the lane boundary and onto a roadside).
Pierfelice does not disclose a sub-short range active light sensor; a lane boundary detection by the sub-short range active light sensor; wherein the sub-short range active light sensor includes active light sensors.
Grossman teaches a sub-short range active light sensor (Grossman; short range, tall FOV LIDAR 402; [0036] short range LIDAR 402 that has a range of 0-20 meters; [0036] housing 302 comprises multiple sensors including long-range LIDAR, medium-range LIDAR, and short-range LIDAR; [0046] the short-range LIDAR provides coverage of the areas that are immediately adjacent to the side of the vehicle); wherein the sub-short range active light sensor includes active light sensors (Grossman; Fig. 5; [0047] short range LIDARs on both the left-side and the right-side of the vehicle with the smaller fields of view 508).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill at the effective filing date of the invention to modify the vehicle as taught by Pierfelice to additionally include multiple sub-short range active light sensors with FOV focused on the sides of the vehicle in combination with the other light sensor as taught by Grossman for the purpose of providing coverage of the area that is immediately adjacent to the sides of the vehicle (Grossman; [0046] the short-range LIDAR provides coverage of the areas that are immediately adjacent to the vehicle or at the immediate front of the vehicle) and for the purpose of improving the sensing/detection coverage to include the field of view FOV at the sides of the vehicle. By focusing the FOV to predominantly focus on the sides of the vehicle, it yields wherein a direction of travel of the vehicle is outside a field of view of the sub-short range active light sensor.
Modified Pierfelice does not teach a maximum range that is less than about 3 m; wherein the lane boundary detection is based on detection of a return signal intensity measurement or on a height/distance measurement performed by hardware that is part of the sub-short range active light sensor without passing the lane boundary detection results through a software stack of a perception component.
Wang teaches a maximum range that is less than about 3-m (Wang; [0031] “short range perception devices with a perception range of less than 1 meter such as, for example, short-range LIDAR” for the purpose of providing the desired device resolution and perception of targets/objects with respect to the device range and device resolution).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill at the effective filing date of the invention to modify the maximum range as taught by Modified Pierfelice to be less than 1-meter as taught by Wang for the purpose of providing the desired device resolution and perception of targets/objects (Wang; [0031] “short range perception devices with a perception range of less than 1 meter such as, for example, short-range LIDAR” for the purpose of providing the desired device resolution and perception of targets/objects with respect to the device range and device resolution).
Modified Pierfelice does not teach wherein the lane boundary detection is based on detection of a return signal intensity measurement or on a height/distance measurement performed by hardware that is part of the sub-short range active light sensor without passing the lane boundary detection results through a software stack of a perception component.
Yeh teaches wherein the lane boundary detection is based on detection of a return signal intensity measurement or on a height/distance measurement performed by hardware that is part of the sub-short range active light sensor without passing the lane boundary detection results through a software stack of a perception component (Yeh; page 4/29 “And a laser receiver for filtering and receiving only a high frequency laser signal from a signal reflected from the road surface and searching for a lane displayed on the road surface based on a change in intensity of the received laser signal, and a distance between the lane and the vehicle”; page 6/29 “unit 200 for receiving a laser beam reflected from the road surface and determining whether the lane is separated”; page 7/29 “Referring to Figure 4 in more detail with respect to the unit 200 for determining the lane departure, the unit 200 for determining whether the lane departure is laser receiver 210 for receiving a laser signal reflected back from the road surface And a lane determination unit 220 for detecting a lane by detecting a change in the intensity of the received laser signal, determining a distance between the lane and the vehicle”; page 7/29 “a distance calculator 223 for calculating a distance between the vehicle and the lane at the time when the intensity change of the reception laser starts and the time when the intensity change of the reception laser ends.”; Fig. 4 shows that unit 200 comprises laser receiver 210, lane determination unit 220, and distance calculator 223).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill at the effective filing date of the invention to modify the lane boundary detection as taught by Modified Pierfelice to include the detection of a return signal intensity measurement performed by hardware that is part of the sub-short range active light sensor without passing the lane boundary detection results through a software stack of a perception component as taught by Yeh for the purpose of avoiding the need, cost, and complexity of adding another, separate processing unit and to provide a single processing unit that performs both distance calculation and lane detection for simplicity .
Regarding claim 2, Modified Pierfelice teaches the invention substantially the same as described above, and The vehicle of claim 1, wherein the sub-short range active light sensor (Grossman; short range, tall FOV LIDAR 402; [0036] short range LIDAR 402 that has a range of 0-20 meters; [0036] housing 302 comprises multiple sensors including long-range LIDAR, medium-range LIDAR, and short-range LIDAR) is mounted.
Modified Pierfelice does not teach wherein the sub-short range active light sensor is mounted underneath the vehicle, at an end in a longitudinal direction of the vehicle, or at a side of the vehicle.
Grossman teaches wherein the sub-short range active light sensor is mounted at a side of the vehicle (Grossman; Fig. 3A; the short range LIDAR 402 located in housing 302 is mounted to the side of the vehicle with mounting element 304).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill at the effective filing date of the invention to modify the mounting of the sub-short range active light sensor as taught by Modified Pierfelice so that it is mounted at a side of the vehicle as taught by Grossman for the purpose of providing coverage of the lateral/side area of the vehicle (Grossman; [0046] the short-range LIDAR provides coverage of the areas that are immediately adjacent to the vehicle or at the immediate front of the vehicle).
Regarding claim 3, Modified Pierfelice teaches the invention substantially the same as described above, and The vehicle of claim 1, wherein the sub-short range active light sensor (Grossman; Fig. 3A; the short range LIDAR 402) is configured to detect a lane marking as the lane boundary (Pierfelice; [0058] position-detection means 101 that detects a lane boundary in order to determine whether the vehicle is traveling past/beyond the lane boundary and onto a roadside).
Regarding claim 4, Modified Pierfelice teaches the invention substantially the same as described above, and The vehicle of claim 1, wherein the sub-short range active light sensor (Grossman; Fig. 3A; the short range LIDAR 402) is configured to detect a road marker as the lane boundary (Pierfelice; [0058] position-detection means 101 that detects a lane boundary in order to determine whether the vehicle is traveling past/beyond the lane boundary and onto a roadside).
Regarding claim 11, Modified Pierfelice teaches the invention substantially the same as described above, and The vehicle of claim 1, wherein the lane boundary detection comprises at least one of detecting a lane boundary of the surface (Pierfelice; [0058] position-detection means 101 that detects a lane boundary in order to determine whether the vehicle is traveling past/beyond the lane boundary and onto a roadside), or detecting an absence of the lane boundary.
Regarding claim 13, Modified Pierfelice teaches the invention substantially the same as described above, and The vehicle of claim 1, wherein the ADAS is configured to generate an alert based on registering the lane boundary detection (Pierfelice; [0058] position-detection means 101 that automatically activates the hazard lights when the system detects that the vehicle is traveling past/beyond the lane boundary and onto a roadside).
Regarding claim 18, Modified Pierfelice teaches the invention substantially the same as described above, and The vehicle of claim 1, wherein the vehicle has sub-short range active light sensor, and wherein the lane boundary is detected using at least one of the sub-short range active light sensor (Grossman; Fig. 3A; the short range LIDAR 402).
Modified Pierfelice does not teach wherein the vehicle has multiple sub-short range active light sensors.
Grossman teaches wherein the vehicle has multiple range active light sensors (Grossman; Fig. 5; [0047] short range LIDARs on both the left-side and the right-side of the vehicle with the smaller fields of view 508).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill at the effective filing date of the invention to modify the vehicle sensor system with a sub-short range active light sensor as taught by Modified Pierfelice to comprise multiple sub-short range active light sensors as taught by Grossman for the purpose of improving the sensing/detection coverage and/or increasing the field of view FOV.
Also, in the case of In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960), it was determined that “mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced.” (MPEP 2144.04(VI)(B) Duplication of Parts; In re Harza; “mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced.”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention to modify the vehicle sensor system with a sub-short range active light sensor as taught by Modified Pierfelice to comprise multiple sub-short range active light sensors since doing so is an example of a mere duplication of parts in which “mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced.” (MPEP 2144.04(VI)(B) Duplication of Parts; In re Harza; “mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced.”). Similar to the obviousness of duplicating a single rib of a web in the In re Harza case law, it would have been obvious to duplicate the sub-short range active light sensor to yield environmental sensing at different sides/positions of the vehicle with no unexpected results. The purpose for making the modification is for the purpose of improving the sensing/detection coverage and/or increasing the field of view FOV.
Regarding claim 19, Modified Pierfelice teaches the invention substantially the same as described above, and The vehicle of claim 1, wherein the sub-short range active light sensor (Grossman; Fig. 3A; the short range LIDAR 402) includes a light source and a light detector, and wherein the light source and the light detector are positioned in a common housing (Grossman; [0036] housing 302).
Regarding independent claim 23, Modified Pierfelice teaches the invention substantially the same as described above in reference to independent claim 1, and A method comprising: detecting a lane boundary (Pierfelice; [0058] position-detection means 101 that detects a lane boundary in order to determine whether the vehicle is traveling past/beyond the lane boundary and onto a roadside) of a surface on which a vehicle (Pierfelice; Fig. 1-7; ego-vehicle 9) is traveling, the lane boundary detected using a sub-short range active light sensor (Grossman; short range, tall FOV LIDAR 402; [0036] short range LIDAR 402 that has a range of 0-20 meters; [0036] housing 302 comprises multiple sensors including long-range LIDAR, medium-range LIDAR, and short-range LIDAR; [0046] the short-range LIDAR provides coverage of the areas that are immediately adjacent to the vehicle or at the immediate front of the vehicle) mounted to the vehicle; and performing, using an advanced driver-assistance system, an action in response to the detection of the lane boundary (Pierfelice; [0058] position-detection means 101 that automatically activates the hazard lights when the system detects that the vehicle is traveling past/beyond the lane boundary and onto a roadside).
Pierfelice does not disclose a sub-short range active light sensor; a lane boundary detection by the sub-short range active light sensor; wherein the sub-short range active light sensor includes active light sensors.
Grossman teaches a sub-short range active light sensor (Grossman; short range, tall FOV LIDAR 402; [0036] short range LIDAR 402 that has a range of 0-20 meters; [0036] housing 302 comprises multiple sensors including long-range LIDAR, medium-range LIDAR, and short-range LIDAR; [0046] the short-range LIDAR provides coverage of the areas that are immediately adjacent to the side of the vehicle); wherein the sub-short range active light sensor includes active light sensors (Grossman; Fig. 5; [0047] short range LIDARs on both the left-side and the right-side of the vehicle with the smaller fields of view 508).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill at the effective filing date of the invention to modify the vehicle as taught by Pierfelice to additionally include multiple sub-short range active light sensors with FOV focused on the sides of the vehicle in combination with the other light sensor as taught by Grossman for the purpose of providing coverage of the area that is immediately adjacent to the sides of the vehicle (Grossman; [0046] the short-range LIDAR provides coverage of the areas that are immediately adjacent to the vehicle or at the immediate front of the vehicle) and for the purpose of improving the sensing/detection coverage to include the field of view FOV at the sides of the vehicle. By focusing the FOV to predominantly focus on the sides of the vehicle, it yields wherein a direction of travel of the vehicle is outside a field of view of the sub-short range active light sensor.
Modified Pierfelice does not teach a maximum range that is less than about 3 m; wherein the lane boundary detection is based on detection of a return signal intensity measurement or on a height/distance measurement performed by hardware that is part of the sub-short range active light sensor.
Wang teaches a maximum range that is less than about 3-m (Wang; [0031] “short range perception devices with a perception range of less than 1 meter such as, for example, short-range LIDAR” for the purpose of providing the desired device resolution and perception of targets/objects with respect to the device range and device resolution).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill at the effective filing date of the invention to modify the maximum range as taught by Modified Pierfelice to be less than 1-meter as taught by Wang for the purpose of providing the desired device resolution and perception of targets/objects (Wang; [0031] “short range perception devices with a perception range of less than 1 meter such as, for example, short-range LIDAR” for the purpose of providing the desired device resolution and perception of targets/objects with respect to the device range and device resolution).
Modified Pierfelice does not teach wherein the lane boundary detection is based on detection of a return signal intensity measurement or on a height/distance measurement performed by hardware that is part of the sub-short range active light sensor.
Yeh teaches wherein the lane boundary detection is based on detection of a return signal intensity measurement or on a height/distance measurement performed by hardware that is part of the sub-short range active light sensor without passing the lane boundary detection results through a software stack of a perception component (Yeh; page 4/29 “And a laser receiver for filtering and receiving only a high frequency laser signal from a signal reflected from the road surface and searching for a lane displayed on the road surface based on a change in intensity of the received laser signal, and a distance between the lane and the vehicle”; page 6/29 “unit 200 for receiving a laser beam reflected from the road surface and determining whether the lane is separated”; page 7/29 “Referring to Figure 4 in more detail with respect to the unit 200 for determining the lane departure, the unit 200 for determining whether the lane departure is laser receiver 210 for receiving a laser signal reflected back from the road surface And a lane determination unit 220 for detecting a lane by detecting a change in the intensity of the received laser signal, determining a distance between the lane and the vehicle”; page 7/29 “a distance calculator 223 for calculating a distance between the vehicle and the lane at the time when the intensity change of the reception laser starts and the time when the intensity change of the reception laser ends.”; Fig. 4 shows that unit 200 comprises laser receiver 210, lane determination unit 220, and distance calculator 223).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill at the effective filing date of the invention to modify the lane boundary detection as taught by Modified Pierfelice to include the detection of a return signal intensity measurement performed by hardware that is part of the sub-short range active light sensor without passing the lane boundary detection results through a software stack of a perception component as taught by Yeh for the purpose of avoiding the need, cost, and complexity of adding another, separate processing unit and to provide a single processing unit that performs both distance calculation and lane detection for simplicity .
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pierfelice US20170217360 in view of Grossman et al. US20190204845, Wang US20170075359, and Yeh KR20110002288as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Niki US20160101812.
Regarding claim 5, Modified Pierfelice teaches the invention substantially the same as described above, and The vehicle of claim 1, wherein the sub-short range active light sensor is configured to detect an elevation difference in the surface (Grossman; Fig. 3A; the short range LIDAR 402).
Modified Pierfelice is silent regarding wherein the sub-short range active light sensor is configured to detect an elevation difference in the surface as the lane boundary.
Niki teaches detect an elevation difference in the surface as the lane boundary (Niki; [0046] using lidar 12 to identify a lane curvature by detecting a curb in which the curb has an elevation difference).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill at the effective filing date of the invention to modify the sensor configuration as taught by Modified Pierfelice so that the detection of an elevation difference in the surface is the lane boundary as taught by Niki for the purpose of identifying/defining a lane curvature (Niki; [0046] using lidar 12 to identify a lane curvature by detecting a curb in which the curb has an elevation difference).
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pierfelice US20170217360 in view of Grossman et al. US20190204845, Wang US20170075359, and Yeh KR20110002288as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Heenan et al. US20060220912.
Regarding claim 6, Modified Pierfelice teaches the invention substantially the same as described above, and The vehicle of claim 1, wherein the sub-short range active light sensor generates a first output (Grossman; Fig. 3A; the short range LIDAR 402).
Modified Pierfelice does not teach a sensor mounted to the vehicle to generate a second output; and a sensor fusion component configured to fuse the first and second outputs with each other.
Heenan teaches a sensor mounted to the vehicle to generate a second output (Heenan; video camera 13; [0053-0055]; [0055] “other types of sensors could be provided”); and a sensor fusion component configured to fuse the first and second outputs with each other (Heenan; [0053-0055] data processor 17 combines/fuses sensor data from multiple sensors including from two different LIDAR sensors that have different characteristics; [0054] the “fusion ensures that the data from one sensor can take precedence over data from the other”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill at the effective filing date of the invention to modify the vehicle as taught by Modified Pierfelice to include a sensor and a sensor fusion component as taught by Heenan for the purpose of providing different sensor modes/characteristics and ensuring “that the data from one sensor can take precedence over data from the other” (Heenan; [0054] the “fusion ensures that the data from one sensor can take precedence over data from the other”).
Claim(s) 7-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pierfelice US20170217360 in view of Grossman et al. US20190204845, Wang US20170075359, Yeh KR20110002288, and Heenan et al. US20060220912 as applied to claim 6 above, and further in view of Zhu et al. US20140333468.
Regarding claim 7, Modified Pierfelice teaches the invention substantially the same as described above, but does not teach wherein the sensor includes an audio sensor and wherein the second output is based on detecting audio using the audio sensor.
Zhu teaches an audio sensor (Zhu; Fig. 1; microphone 131; [0040] microphone 131 captures environmental sound around vehicle 100).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill at the effective filing date of the invention to substitute the sensor as taught by Modified Pierfelice with the audio sensor as taught by Zhu for the purpose of providing different sensor modes/characteristics that can detect different environmental signals. Additionally, an audio sensor may help to compensate for the light-based sensor which may be adversely effected by foggy weather conditions.
Regarding claim 8, Modified Pierfelice teaches the invention substantially the same as described above, and The vehicle of claim 7, wherein the audio is generated by a wheel of the vehicle contacting a road marker on the surface (Pierfelice; ego-vehicle 9).
Claim(s) 9-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pierfelice US20170217360 in view of Grossman et al. US20190204845, Wang US20170075359, Yeh KR20110002288, and Heenan et al. US20060220912 as applied to claim 6 above, and further in view of Zhang US20200209859.
Regarding claim 9, Modified Pierfelice teaches the invention substantially the same as described above, but does not teach wherein the sensor includes a vibration sensor and wherein the second output is based on detecting vibration using the vibration sensor.
Zhang teaches a vibration sensor (Zhang; Fig. 2; vibration sensor 14; abstract: “detecting a roadway shoulder… comprising sensing a vibration within a vehicle”; [0011]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill at the effective filing date of the invention to substitute the sensor as taught by Modified Pierfelice with the vibration sensor as taught by Zhang for the purpose of providing different sensor modes/characteristics that can detect different environmental signals such as rumble strips of a roadway shoulder. Additionally, a vibration sensor may help to compensate for the light-based sensor which may be adversely effected by foggy weather conditions.
Regarding claim 10, Modified Pierfelice teaches the invention substantially the same as described above, and The vehicle of claim 9, wherein the vibration is generated by a wheel of the vehicle contacting a road marker on the surface (Pierfelice; ego-vehicle 9).
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pierfelice US20170217360 in view of Grossman et al. US20190204845, Wang US20170075359, and Yeh KR20110002288as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Kim US20190276013.
Regarding claim 12, Modified Pierfelice teaches the invention substantially the same as described above, but is silent regarding wherein the ADAS is configured to control motion of the vehicle based on registering the lane boundary detection.
Kim teaches wherein the ADAS is configured to control motion of the vehicle based on registering the lane boundary detection (Kim; [0075] based on detecting left lane and right lane information, control steering to ensure lane-keeping and to prevent lane departure of the vehicle).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill at the effective filing date of the invention to modify the ADAS configuration as taught by Modified Pierfelice to control motion of the vehicle as taught by Kim for the purpose of preventing lane departure (Kim; [0075] based on detecting left lane and right lane information, control steering to ensure lane-keeping and to prevent lane departure of the vehicle).
Claim(s) 14-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pierfelice US20170217360 in view of Grossman et al. US20190204845, Wang US20170075359, and Yeh KR20110002288 as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Silver et al. US9285230.
Regarding claim 14, Modified Pierfelice teaches the invention substantially the same as described above, and The vehicle of claim 1, wherein the sub-short range active light sensor performs scanning in dimension (Grossman; Fig. 3A; the short range LIDAR 402).
Modified Pierfelice is silent regarding wherein the sub-short range active light sensor performs scanning in one dimension only.
Silver teaches wherein the range active light sensor performs scanning in one dimension only (Silver; col. 7:36-38 “the LIDAR unit 132 may include a laser range finder reflected by a rotating mirror, and the laser is scanned around a scene being digitized, in one or two dimensions”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill at the effective filing date of the invention to modify the sensor scanning configuration as taught by Modified Pierfelice to perform scanning in one dimension only as taught by Silver for the purpose of simplifying the data output for processing.
Regarding claim 15, Modified Pierfelice teaches the invention substantially the same as described above, and The vehicle of claim 1, wherein the sub-short range active light sensor performs scanning in dimension (Grossman; Fig. 3A; the short range LIDAR 402).
Modified Pierfelice is silent regarding wherein the sub-short range active light sensor performs scanning in two dimensions.
Silver teaches wherein the range active light sensor performs scanning in one dimension only (Silver; col. 7:36-38 “the LIDAR unit 132 may include a laser range finder reflected by a rotating mirror, and the laser is scanned around a scene being digitized, in one or two dimensions”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill at the effective filing date of the invention to modify the sensor scanning configuration as taught by Modified Pierfelice to perform scanning in two dimensions as taught by Silver for the purpose of providing more detailed positional information of the detected items.
Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pierfelice US20170217360 in view of Grossman et al. US20190204845, Wang US20170075359, and Yeh KR20110002288 as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Wang US20230049679.
Regarding claim 16, Modified Pierfelice teaches the invention substantially the same as described above, and The vehicle of claim 1, wherein the sub-short range active light sensor includes a light ranging and detection device (Grossman; Fig. 3A; the short range LIDAR 402).
Modified Pierfelice does not teach wherein the sub-short range active light sensor includes a flash light ranging and detection device.
Wang ‘679 teaches a flash light ranging and detection device (Wang; [0050] the right side of Fig. 2A that shows flash LIDAR detection operation 222; [0049] LIDAR module 102 can include multiple LIDAR systems including both a scanning LIDAR and a flash LIDAR; [0037] flash LIDAR provides advantages which include “illuminating the entire FOV with a single laser pulse… which can avoid motion blurring in the image due to motion of the target subject”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill at the effective filing date of the invention to modify the sub-short range active light sensor as taught by Modified Pierfelice to additionally include a flash light ranging and detection device as taught by Wang ‘679 for the purpose of avoiding motion blurring (Wang; [0037] flash LIDAR provides advantages which include “illuminating the entire FOV with a single laser pulse… which can avoid motion blurring in the image due to motion of the target subject”).
Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pierfelice US20170217360 in view of Grossman et al. US20190204845, Wang US20170075359, and Yeh KR20110002288 as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Yang US20180190016.
Regarding claim 17, Modified Pierfelice teaches the invention substantially the same as described above, and The vehicle of claim 1, wherein the sub-short range active light sensor includes a light ranging and detection device (Grossman; Fig. 3A; the short range LIDAR 402).
Modified Pierfelice does not teach wherein the sub-short range active light sensor includes a triangulation light ranging and detection device.
Yang teaches a triangulation light ranging and detection device (Yang; [0084] triangulation 920; claim 20: “the 3D points representing scanner data collected by a light detection and ranging (LiDAR) sensor, performing triangulation to generate a set of 3D triangles… and generating a high definition map based on the plurality of interpolated 3D points, the high definition map for use in driving by one or more vehicles”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill at the effective filing date of the invention to modify the sub-short range active light sensor as taught by Modified Pierfelice to additionally include a triangulation light ranging and detection device as taught by Yang for the purpose of generating a high definition map for use in driving by a vehicle (Yang; claim 20: “generating a high definition map based on the plurality of interpolated 3D points, the high definition map for use in driving by one or more vehicles”).
Claim(s) 20-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pierfelice US20170217360 in view of Grossman et al. US20190204845, Wang US20170075359, and Yeh KR20110002288 as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Dubrovin US20030122704.
Regarding claim 20, Modified Pierfelice teaches the invention substantially the same as described above, and The vehicle of claim 1, wherein the sub-short range active light sensor includes a light source and a light detector (Grossman; Fig. 3A; the short range LIDAR 402).
Modified Pierfelice is silent regarding wherein the light source and the light detector are not positioned in a common housing.
Dubrovin teaches wherein the light source and the light detector are not positioned in a common housing (Dubrovin; Fig. 3; lidar emitter 14 has its own dedicated housing that is separate from the receiver 16 which has its own dedicated housing in which both housings are mounted along plate 5).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill at the effective filing date of the invention to modify the configuration of the light source and the light detector as taught by Modified Pierfelice so that they are not positioned in a common housing as taught by Dubrovin for the purpose of providing modularity of components to make them easier to maintain/repair/replace.
Regarding claim 21, Modified Pierfelice teaches the invention substantially the same as described above, and The vehicle of claim 20, wherein the sub-short range active light sensor (Grossman; Fig. 3A; the short range LIDAR 402).
Modified Pierfelice is silent regarding wherein the sub-short range active light sensor includes multiple light detectors, wherein the multiple light detectors are installed at different locations on the vehicle, and wherein light emission of the light source and operation of the multiple light detectors are synchronized with each other.
Grossman teaches wherein the sub-short range active light sensor includes multiple light detectors, wherein the multiple light detectors are installed at different locations on the vehicle (Grossman; Fig. 5; [0047] short range LIDARs on both the left-side and the right-side of the vehicle with the smaller fields of view 508), and wherein light emission of the light source and operation of the multiple light detectors are synchronized with each other (Grossman; [0033] computing device 202 processes the raw data from the sensor perception system 224).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill at the effective filing date of the invention to modify the vehicle sensor system with a sub-short range active light sensor as taught by Modified Pierfelice to comprise multiple sub-short range active light sensors that are synchronized as taught by Grossman for the purpose of improving the sensing/detection coverage and/or increasing the field of view FOV.
Also, in the case of In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960), it was determined that “mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced.” (MPEP 2144.04(VI)(B) Duplication of Parts; In re Harza; “mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced.”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention to modify the vehicle sensor system with a sub-short range active light sensor as taught by Modified Pierfelice to comprise multiple sub-short range active light sensors since doing so is an example of a mere duplication of parts in which “mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced.” (MPEP 2144.04(VI)(B) Duplication of Parts; In re Harza; “mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced.”). Similar to the obviousness of duplicating a single rib of a web in the In re Harza case law, it would have been obvious to duplicate the sub-short range active light sensor to yield environmental sensing at different sides/positions of the vehicle with no unexpected results. The purpose for making the modification is for the purpose of improving the sensing/detection coverage and/or increasing the field of view FOV.
Claim(s) 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable Pierfelice US20170217360 in view of Grossman et al. US20190204845, Wang US20170075359, Yeh KR20110002288, and Dubrovin US20030122704 as applied to claim 20 above, and further in view of Gilliland et al. US20120154785.
Regarding claim 22, Modified Pierfelice teaches the invention substantially the same as described above, and The vehicle of claim 20, wherein the light source (Grossman; Fig. 3A; the short range LIDAR 402) is a headlight of the vehicle (Pierfelice; Fig. 1-7; ego-vehicle 9).
Modified Pierfelice does not teach wherein the light source is integrated in a headlight of the vehicle.
Gilliland teaches wherein the light source is integrated in a headlight of the vehicle (Gilliland; Fig. 5; integrated and articulating ladar sensor and headlamp assembly 18; [0031] “an important feature of the integrated headlamp and ladar sensor we describe is the ability to steer the field of view of the ladar illumination pulse 11 along with the headlamps mechanically in the vertical and horizontal axes”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill at the effective filing date of the invention to modify the configuration of the light source and the headlight as taught by Modified Pierfelice so that the light source is integrated in the headlight and in which both are articulating together as taught by Gilliland for the purpose of providing “the ability to steer the field of view of the ladar illumination pulse 11 along with the headlamps mechanically in the vertical and horizontal axes” (Gilliland; Fig. 5; integrated and articulating ladar sensor and headlamp assembly 18; [0031] “an important feature of the integrated headlamp and ladar sensor we describe is the ability to steer the field of view of the ladar illumination pulse 11 along with the headlamps mechanically in the vertical and horizontal axes”).
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 JONATHAN MALIKASIM whose telephone number is (313)446-6597. The examiner can normally be reached M-F; 8 am - 5 pm (CST).
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Yuqing Xiao can be reached at 571-270-3603. 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.
/JONATHAN MALIKASIM/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3645 8/24/26
Prosecution Insights