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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 02/13/2026 has been entered.
Status of Claims
Claims 1, 3-12, and 14-20 filed on 02/09/2026 are presently examined. Claims 1,9, and 12 are amended. Claims 2 and 13 are cancelled.
Response to Arguments
Regarding 35 U.S.C. 103, Applicant’s arguments filed 02/09/2026 are moot. The rejections have changed from 35 USC 103 to 35 USC 102(a)(1) as anticipated by previously cited reference Kaufmann. Claims 8 and 20 remain rejected under 35 USC 103, as obvious over Kaufmann in view of previously cited reference Norris.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 3-7, 9-12, and 14-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kaufmann et al. (US 20040262063 A1).
Regarding claims 1, 9, and 12, Kaufmann discloses A system, comprising:
a processor; and a memory storing machine-readable instructions that, when executed by the processor, cause the processor to ([0035] “In order to perform … lane keeping and steering functions, control algorithm(s), and the like), controller 16 may include, but not be limited to, a processor(s), computer(s), DSP(s), memory, storage”):
receive an instruction that identifies a target operating mode of a vehicle; determine whether the target operating mode is different from a current operating mode of the vehicle ([0018] “lane keeping system provides two modes of operation, a helper or assist mode, and an autonomous mode” [0019] “lane keeping system warns the operator of an impending engagement of the autonomous mode with a chime, and then engages.”);
identify components of a unified architecture of the vehicle to activate while in the target operating mode and one or more other components of the unified architecture to deactivate while in the target operating mode, the unified architecture controlling the vehicle in a semi-autonomous mode and an autonomous mode and receiving inputs from input devices external to and separate from the components of the unified architecture ([0018] “In helper mode the operator is hands on, and the system provides audio warning(s) and/or tactic feedback warnings (for example, to simulate the noise/feel of a rumble strip) on the side of the vehicle that indicates the vehicle is approaching a lane marker.” In the assist mode, it activates the lane departure warning component, which is not active during autonomous mode. Input for both modes, external to the unified component(s): [0018] “in the helper (assist) mode, because application of torque nudges can cause the vehicle 1 to dart back and forth between lane markers 2 if the driver were not controlling the steering wheel” [0019] “The autonomous mode maintains the vehicle 1 in the lane and requires no operator input to control the vehicle 1”);
configuring the components based on operating parameters, wherein the operating parameters cause the components to function a first way in the semi-autonomous mode and a second way in the autonomous mode ([0040] “when in the helper mode, maintaining the vehicle 1 within a selected position tolerance in the lane” [0019] “The autonomous mode maintains the vehicle 1 in the lane and requires no operator input to control the vehicle 1. In an exemplary embodiment, the lane keeping system employs a left marker as the primary marker but can readily transition to the right marker or a center marker if the left marker cannot be identified.” The path planning component is configured differently between the assist and autonomous modes.); and
activate the components according to the target operating mode ([0018] “In helper mode the operator is hands on, and the system provides audio warning(s) and/or tactic feedback warnings (for example, to simulate the noise/feel of a rumble strip) on the side of the vehicle that indicates the vehicle is approaching a lane marker.” In the assist mode, it activates the lane departure warning component, which is not active during autonomous mode.).
Regarding claims 3, 10, and 14, Kaufmann discloses The system of claim 1, wherein the instructions to identify components comprise instructions to identify, when the target operating mode is the semi-autonomous mode, a driver state system ([0025] “When the driver attention monitoring device 170 ascertains that a driver is inattentive … or the driver attention monitoring device 170 does not indicate that the driver is awake, the lane keeping system may enter autonomous mode.”), a reactive pipeline ([0022] “The lane tracking system 112 may include but not be limited to, a camera system for detection of lane markers/markings and computing a lane position signal 114.” Which is used to track when the driver deviates from the lane.), a semi-autonomous manager ([0019] “In Autonomous mode the system is enabled after the operator has maintained the vehicle 1 within a tolerance band from the lane center for a selected period. The lane keeping system warns the operator of an impending engagement of the autonomous mode with a chime, and then engages.” This manager determines when to maintain or switch away from semi-autonomous mode), a human-machine interface (HMI) manager ([0018] “In helper mode the operator is hands on, and the system provides audio warning(s) and/or tactic feedback warnings (for example, to simulate the noise/feel of a rumble strip) on the side of the vehicle that indicates the vehicle is approaching a lane marker.”), a driver controller ([claim 1] “a driver input device disposed in the vehicle receptive to driver commands for directing the vehicle”), a platform driver ([0017] “lane keeping command may be integrated with existing steering commands.”), a planner ([0020] “When the vehicle 1 approaches a boundary line, the system … provides a torque nudge to the operator via the steering wheel in the direction away from the lane boundary line.”), and the controller ([0006] “The controller executes a lane keeping algorithm consisting of a single control loop based on at least one of the lane position and the lane position deviation.”) as the components of the unified architecture to activate, a subset of the components of the unified architecture also being identified when the target operating mode is the autonomous mode (Autonomous mode does not use the driver attention monitoring “driver state system,” driver lane deviation tracking “reactive pipeline,” the component used to determine when to switch from semi-autonomous to autonomous mode “semi-autonomous manager,” the HMI lane deviation warning and vibration or haptic controller.).
Regarding claims 4, 11, and 15, Kaufmann discloses The system of claim 1, wherein the instructions to identify components comprise instructions to identify, when the target operating mode is the autonomous mode when the target operating mode is the autonomous mode:
a platform driver, a planner, and the controller as the components of the unified architecture to be active (the shared “core” components between Kaufmann’s semi-autonomous and autonomous modes are the platform driver which executes lane keeping using steering input which gets configured differently between the two modes, the planner which maintains the vehicle trajectory within a lane, and the controller which executes all the above using stored instructions.); and
a driver-state system, a reactive pipeline, a semi-autonomous manager, a human-machine interface (HMI) manager, and a haptic controller of the controller as components of the unified architecture to be inactive (Semi-autonomous mode has all components active. Autonomous mode does not use the driver attention monitoring “driver state system” since it is only used in semi-autonomous mode; driver lane deviation tracking “reactive pipeline” since autonomous mode is not tracking when the driver deviates from the lane boundary; the component used to determine when to switch from semi-autonomous to autonomous mode “semi-autonomous manager”; the HMI lane deviation warning; and vibration or haptic controller, since both of these are used to warn the driver or nudge the steering wheel when the driver is deviating from the lane boundary. The autonomous mode fully controls the vehicles to stay within the lane without input from the driver.).
Regarding claims 5, and 16, Kaufmann discloses the planner comprises instructions executed by a processor ([0035] “In order to perform … lane keeping and steering functions, control algorithm(s), and the like), controller 16 may include, but not be limited to, a processor(s), computer(s), DSP(s), memory, storage”);
plan, via a planner of the unified architecture, a trajectory for the vehicle, wherein the instructions to configure the components comprises instructions to configure the planner, when the target operating mode is the autonomous mode, to output the trajectory without a safety boundary ([0019] “In Autonomous mode the system is enabled after the operator has maintained the vehicle 1 within a tolerance band from the lane center for a selected period.” [0019] “The autonomous mode maintains the vehicle 1 in the lane”).
Regarding claims 6 and 17, Kaufmann discloses the planner comprises instructions executed by a processor ([0035] “In order to perform … lane keeping and steering functions, control algorithm(s), and the like), controller 16 may include, but not be limited to, a processor(s), computer(s), DSP(s), memory, storage”);
plan, via a planner of the unified architecture, a trajectory for the vehicle ([0004] “In addition to driver feedback, the lane keeping system may also be integrated within the steering system of the vehicle to provide a corrective input thereto when a path deviation is detected.” [0006] “The controller provides a command to the actuator responsive to the intent of the driver, the lane position, and a desired lane position.” The path or lane determined to be desired by the driver is the planned trajectory for the vehicle.),
wherein the instructions to configure the components comprise instructions to configure the planner, when the target operating mode is the semi-autonomous mode, to output the trajectory with a safety boundary ([0020] “the lane keeping system responds only when the vehicle 1 is within some predefined distance from a boundary line. When the vehicle 1 approaches a boundary line, the system activates a visual warning lamp, audible warnings, and provides a torque nudge to the operator via the steering wheel in the direction away from the lane boundary line. Similarly, with the correction from center functionality, when the vehicle 1 deviates from the center of the lane by a selected offset, the lane keeping system provides a visual warning and torque nudge.”).
Regarding claims 7 and 18, Kaufmann teaches The system of claim 1, further comprising instructions to generate, via a controller of the unified architecture, a vehicle command, wherein:
the instructions to configure the components comprise instructions to configure the controller, when the target operating mode is the semi-autonomous mode, to receive a user input command from a user input device and convert the user input command into the vehicle command to be executed by a platform driver of the unified architecture ([0017] “present invention may be utilized in various types of vehicles employing electronic steering or steer by wire systems” [0018] “in the helper (assist) mode, because application of torque nudges can cause the vehicle 1 to dart back and forth between lane markers 2 if the driver were not controlling the steering wheel” [0017] “lane keeping command may be integrated with existing steering commands.” [0028] “Steering angle is measured through position sensor 32, which may be an optical encoding type sensor, variable resistance type sensor, or any other suitable type of position sensor, and supplies to the controller 16 a position signal 20.”); and
the instructions to configure the components comprise instructions to configure the controller, when the target operating mode is the autonomous mode, to receive an automated driving command from a planner of the unified architecture and convert the automated driving command to the vehicle command to be executed by the platform driver; the planner comprises instructions executed by the processor; and the platform driver comprises instructions executed by the processor ([0019] “The autonomous mode maintains the vehicle 1 in the lane and requires no operator input to control the vehicle 1.” [0017] “lane keeping command may be integrated with existing steering commands.”).
Regarding claim 19, Kaufmann discloses The method of claim 12, wherein receiving an instruction comprises: receiving, at a controller of the unified architecture, a user selection of the target operating mode while the vehicle is moving ([0040] “when in the helper mode, maintaining the vehicle 1 within a selected position tolerance in the lane for a selected duration enable transitioning to the autonomous mode.” [0041] “steering wheel force/pressure is employed as an indicator that the operator intends to be making steering corrections, and therefore is employed for selected mode transitions.”);
mapping the user selection to a first subset of available components of the unified architecture to activate while in the target operating mode (user is selecting the mode they want to drive in, and the related components are activated. In the above case when the user maintains the vehicle within tolerance, the autonomous mode engages, and the components activated are those relevant to autonomous mode. The assist mode components are no longer used in autonomous mode.).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 8 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kaufmann in view of Norris et al. (US 7894951 B2), hereinafter referred to as Norris.
Regarding claims 8 and 20, Kaufmann fails to disclose The system of claim 1, wherein the instructions to identify components of the unified architecture further comprise:
instructions to perform a validity check by determining that the components associated with the target operating mode are functioning and components not associated with the target operating mode are in an inactive mode; and
instructions to authorize activation of the components based on the validity check.
However, Norris teaches instructions to perform a validity check by determining that the components associated with the target operating mode are functioning ([column 22, lines 15-17] “In an autonomous mode, the electrical clutches 508 are electrically engaged, permitting robotic control of the vehicle.” [claim 1] “electrically actuated clutch capable of causing the mechanical vehicle control system to operate in an autonomous mode in response to a command for the vehicle to operate in the autonomous mode”) and components not associated with the target operating mode are in an inactive mode ([column 3, lines 55-67] “there may be a parking brake lever that is set in the "set position," so that the parking brake lever extends upwards and is visible from outside the vehicle. The vehicle's control system interprets the predetermined setting as permitting autonomous mode. There may be a disengaging mechanism that is responsive to signals sent by the control system. The disengaging mechanism disengages the mechanism preventing autonomous movement, yet leaves the control element in the predetermined setting that signifies disabled movement. So for example, the disengaging mechanism would release the brakes so that the vehicle can move, but would not release the parking brake lever, which would remain in the "set position."”); and
instructions to authorize activation of the components based on the validity check ([column 24, lines 25-27] “If the parking control remains in the position signifying a safety-parking configuration, this can signify readiness for autonomous mode” the electrical clutches may then be engaged engaged).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kaufmann with Norris’ teaching of the manual and autonomous mode transition system using the monitoring of components to determine readiness for autonomous mode. One would be motivated, with reasonable expectation of success, to check the component status of autonomous and manual components before switching between modes in order to use an overlapping control system that simplifies switching modes and improves operability and safety of the vehicle ([column 10, lines 37-38] “efficiently overlapping and combining components of autonomous control systems, manual mechanical control systems… simplifies processes of switching between autonomous and manual operations of a vehicle and enhances the operability and safety of vehicle use in either mode.”).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARK R HEIM whose telephone number is (571)270-0120. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-6 EST.
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, Fadey Jabr can be reached at 571-272-1516. 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.
/M.R.H./Examiner, Art Unit 3668
/Fadey S. Jabr/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3668