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 .
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis 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.
Status of Claims
This Office Action is in response to the Applicant’s Response dated 7/2/2026. Claims 1, 8, 11-12, and 15-18 are presently pending and are presented for examination.
Priority
This application discloses and claims only subject matter disclosed in prior Application No. PCT/CN2022/108794, filed 7/29/2022, and names the inventor or at least one joint inventor named in the prior application. Accordingly, this application may constitute a continuation or divisional. Should applicant desire to claim the benefit of the filing date of the prior application, attention is directed to 35 U.S.C. 120, 37 CFR 1.78, and MPEP § 211 et seq. The presentation of a benefit claim may result in an additional fee under 37 CFR 1.17(w)(1) or (2) being required, if the earliest filing date for which benefit is claimed under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c) and 1.78(d) in the application is more than six years before the actual filing date of the application.
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s amendments, see pages 6-10 of 11, filed 7/2/2026, with respect to claim objections and 101 rejections have been fully considered and are persuasive. The claim objections and 101 rejections of record have been withdrawn.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments, see page 6 of 11, filed 7/2/2026, have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The 112(b) indefiniteness rejections pertaining to the differentiation of “vehicle” and the multiple inconsistent recitations have not been appropriately addressed and are thus still rejected, depicted below in an updated rejection.
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 10-11, filed 7/2/2026, with respect to amended claim 1 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 1 is now rejected under Hehn et al. (US-2019/0349731; hereinafter Hehn; already of record) in view of Nguyen (US-2021/0314750) and Lekutai (US-2022/0277653; already of record).
A detailed rejection follows below.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1 as currently presented states “…the one or more of the plurality of vehicles…one or more of the plurality of vehicles…” to which the Examiner recommends updating to instead state “… one or more of the plurality of vehicles…the one or more of the plurality of vehicles…” similar to claim 15, so as to avoid potential misinterpretation.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claims 8, 11-12, and 16-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b), as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Independent claim 1 (and analogous claim 15) refer to the following terms:
“a plurality of vehicles”
“one or more of the plurality of vehicles”
“each of the one or more of the plurality of vehicles”
“at least one of the plurality of vehicles”
Claim 8 is dependent on claim 1, and refers to the following terms:
“the plurality of vehicles”
“a leader vehicle”
“each of the one or more of the plurality of vehicles”
“the vehicle”
Claim 11 is dependent on claim 1, and refers to the following terms:
“the vehicle”
Claim 12 is dependent on claim 8, and refers to the following terms:
“a vehicle”
Claim 16 is dependent on claim 15, and refers to the following terms:
“the plurality of vehicles”
“a leader vehicle”
“each of the plurality of vehicles”
“the vehicle”
Claim 17 is dependent on claim 16, and refers to the following terms:
“the vehicle”
“the leader vehicle”
Claim 18 is dependent on claim 15, and refers to the following terms:
“the plurality of vehicles”
“a leader vehicle”
“each of the one or more of the plurality of vehicles”
“the vehicle”
Claims 8 and 11 and similarly claims 16-18 each refer to “the vehicle” which is indefinite because there is insufficient antecedent basis for this term in the claims.
Claim 12 is also rejected since the claim is dependent on a previously rejected claim.
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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1, 8, 11-12, and 15-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hehn et al. (US-2019/0349731; hereinafter Hehn; already of record) in view of Nguyen (US-2021/0314750) and Lekutai (US-2022/0277653; already of record).
Regarding claim 1, Hehn discloses a data sharing method applied to a vehicle platoon, the vehicle platoon comprising a plurality of vehicles (see Hehn at least Abs and [0052]), and the data sharing method comprising:
obtaining, with a processor circuitry, status information of the one or more of the plurality of vehicles … each of the one or more of the plurality of vehicles comprising at least one sensor, the status information comprising sensor parameter information on each of the one or more of the plurality of vehicles (see Hehn at least Fig 1, Fig 2, [0029] "As shown in FIG. 1 the respective one or more interfaces 12, 52 are coupled to the respective control modules 14, 54 at the network component 10 and the apparatus 50. In embodiments the control modules 14, 54 may be implemented using one or more processing units, one or more processing devices, any means for processing, such as a processor, a computer or a programmable hardware component being operable with accordingly adapted software. In other words, the described functions of the control modules 14, 54 may as well be implemented in software, which is then executed on one or more programmable hardware components. Such hardware components may comprise a general purpose processor, a Digital Signal Processor (DSP), a micro-controller, etc." [0041] "The dynamic interface will be determined by all three contributing parties: vehicles 20, 30 of the vendor/owner A, vehicles 30 of the vendor/owner B and the common backend server 10. In this embodiment each vehicle 20, 30, 40 contributes some information about its capabilities. The information on the communication capabilities of the mobile transceivers 20, 30, 40 (vehicles in this scenario) may comprise one or more elements of the group of information on communication hardware available at the mobile transceiver 20, 30, 40, e.g. which kind of communication modems are available (data rates, latency, bandwidth, frequency, etc.), information on a sensor set of the mobile transceiver 20, 30, 40 (cameras, radar, lidar (light/lazer detection and ranging, etc.), information on a driving capability of the mobile transceiver 20, 30, 40 (speed limits, routes, driving preferences etc.), and information on an application processing power of the mobile transceiver 20, 30, 40 (processing capacity, e.g. video processing capability)." and [0060] "...When provided by a processor, the functions may be provided by a single dedicated processor, by a single shared processor, or by a plurality of individual processors, some of which may be shared..."), …
…
…
generating, with the processor circuitry, data sharing configuration information for the vehicle platoon according to the status information, the data sharing configuration information comprising one or more sensor data sharing strategies for the vehicle platoon (see Hehn at least [0028] "In embodiments the one or more interfaces 12, 52, may correspond to any means for obtaining, receiving, transmitting or providing analog or digital signals or information, e.g. any connector, contact, pin, register, input port, output port, conductor, lane, etc. which allows providing or obtaining a signal or information. An interface may be wireless or wireline and it may be configured to communicate, i.e. transmit or receive signals, information with further internal or external components..." [0041] "The dynamic interface will be determined by all three contributing parties: vehicles 20, 30 of the vendor/owner A, vehicles 30 of the vendor/owner B and the common backend server 10. In this embodiment each vehicle 20, 30, 40 contributes some information about its capabilities..." and [0052] "...This can be achieved by control mechanisms being active between the vehicles of the platoon. Vehicles of the platoon may exchange sensor data among each other using direct communication. The application interfaces or message interfaces used for this purpose can be defined based on the capabilities of the participating vehicles... According to an embodiment the message interfaces can be dynamically adapted to the traffic situation, the capabilities of the participants, and the properties of the platoon, e.g. size, number of vehicles route, etc...");
transmitting, with the processing circuitry, the data sharing configuration information to the one or more of the plurality of vehicles in the vehicle platoon … so that the one or more of the plurality of vehicles share sensor data of the one or more of the plurality of vehicles with the vehicle platoon according to the data sharing configuration information (see Hehn at least [0042] "For example, each vehicle 20, 30, 40 contributes information on the applications it intends to run with a corresponding vendor/owner to the back end server 10. The backend server 10 may consider its resulting overview and information on the current situation on the road. The control module 14 of the network component or backend server 10 is configured to determine information on an overall situation of the two or more vehicles on the road or in a traffic situation. Based on this information a message interface configuration can be determined for direct communication between the vehicles 20, 30, 40." and [0052] "...Vehicles of the platoon may exchange sensor data among each other using direct communication.. A heading vehicle may need/provide other information than a vehicle in the middle or at the tail end of the platoon. According to an embodiment the message interfaces can be dynamically adapted to the traffic situation, the capabilities of the participants, and the properties of the platoon, e.g. size, number of vehicles route, etc. For example, warning messages of an emergency break maneuver may be particularly provided to following vehicles at low latency, whereas the information on an emergency break maneuver may not be as delay critical for a vehicle driving ahead. Different interfaces can be configured for these scenarios."); and
…
However, while Hehn describes the platoon vehicles capable of V2V communication, which one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize as a form of communication which utilizes sidelink technology, Hehn does not explicitly disclose the following:
…a sidelink communication from one or more of the plurality of vehicles in the vehicle platoon…
…the sensor parameter information comprising at least one of following information:
…whether the each of the one or more of the plurality of vehicles is allowed to share sensor data, or…
…a type of the sensor data that the each of the one or more of the plurality of vehicles is allowed to share…
…the sidelink communication…
…controlling, with the processor circuitry, driving of at least one of the plurality of vehicles based on the shared sensor data…
Nguyen, in the same field of endeavor, teaches the following:
…a sidelink communication from one or more of the plurality of vehicles in the vehicle platoon (see Nguyen at least [0046] "The preferred embodiment in one form, resides broadly in system resource structure and configuration method for use in a vehicular communication system comprising a plurality of V2X-equipped vehicles capable of using the basic open loop V2X communications to share their status data, sensor data and intention data to assist the realisation of awareness/sensing driving applications. Among the said plurality of V2X-equipped vehicles, there are some V2X-vehicles capable of more advanced V2X communication to share and establish close loop communication for exchanging time-sensitive or time-intolerant intention data and/or coordination data reliably assisting the realisation of synchronised cooperative driving applications in short distance grouping and in long distance grouping i.e. dynamic platooning... The first logical resource pool further comprise indexed first sub-channels dedicated to open-loop V2X sidelink communication for further use in sharing driving related application data including but not being limited to status data, sensor data, and intention data. The second logical resource pool comprises indexed second sub-channels dedicated to closed loop V2X sidelink communication for further use in sharing time-sensitive coordination data and/or exchanging time-sensitive coordination data in short distance grouping (e.g. synchronised coordination driving) and long distance grouping (e.g. platooning).")…
…the sensor parameter information comprising at least one of following information:
…whether the each of the one or more of the plurality of vehicles is allowed to share sensor data (see Nguyen at least [0066] "FIG. 1 exemplarily illustrates a typical vehicular communication system (10) comprising plurality of V2X-equipped vehicles (e.g. 01, 02, 03, 04 and 05) which are all capable of using the first type of V2X communication (11) to share their status data, sensor data and intention data to assist the realisation of awareness/sensing driving applications (i.e. SAE application level 0, 1, or 2)..."), or…
…a type of the sensor data that the each of the one or more of the plurality of vehicles is allowed to share…
…the sidelink communication (see Nguyen at least [0046])…
…
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the inter-vehicle communications as disclosed by Hehn with sensor data exchanges by way of sidelink communication such as taught by Nguyen with a reasonable expectation of success so as to ensure direct communication amongst vehicles in a platoon (see Nguyen at least [0001] and [0046]).
However, neither Hehn nor Nguyen explicitly disclose or teach the following:
…controlling, with the processor circuitry, driving of at least one of the plurality of vehicles based on the shared sensor data…
Lekutai, in the same field of endeavor, teaches the following:
…controlling, with the processor circuitry, driving of at least one of the plurality of vehicles based on the shared sensor data (see Lekutai at least [0038]-[0039] "...For example, the memory 222 may include at least a module that is configured to generate driving instructions for one or more vehicles of a platoon (instruction generation module 224) and a module that is configured to enable automated driving by the vehicle 104 (autonomous control module 225)... In some embodiments, this may comprise receiving data from one or more sensors installed within the vehicle 104 that indicates conditions of an environment in which the vehicle is located. The instruction generation module 224 may then determine one or more appropriate actions for the vehicle to take based on the received sensor data...")…
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the vehicle platoon communication capabilities as disclosed by Hehn with corresponding vehicle controls such as taught by Lekutai with a reasonable expectation of success so as to allow for an accurate level of automation (see Lekutai at least [0005]-[0012]).
Regarding claim 8, Hehn in view of Nguyen and Lekutai teach the data sharing method according to claim 1, wherein the plurality of vehicles comprise a leader vehicle, and the data sharing method is performed by the leader vehicle (see Hehn at least [0052] "...A heading vehicle may need/provide other information than a vehicle in the middle or at the tail end of the platoon…"), and the transmitting the data sharing configuration information (see Hehn at least [0052] "...Vehicles of the platoon may exchange sensor data among each other using direct communication…") comprises:
for each of the one or more of the plurality of vehicles, determining a sensor data sharing strategy of the vehicle according to the data sharing configuration information (see Hehn at least [0041] "The dynamic interface will be determined by all three contributing parties: vehicles 20, 30 of the vendor/owner A, vehicles 30 of the vendor/owner B and the common backend server 10. In this embodiment each vehicle 20, 30, 40 contributes some information about its capabilities..."); and
distributing the sensor data sharing strategy of the vehicle to the vehicle (see Hehn at least [0041]-[0050] "The dynamic interface will be determined by all three contributing parties: vehicles 20, 30 of the vendor/owner A, vehicles 30 of the vendor/owner B and the common backend server 10. In this embodiment each vehicle 20, 30, 40 contributes some information about its capabilities...").
Regarding claim 11, Hehn in view of Nguyen and Lekutai teach the data sharing method according to claim 1, wherein the sensor parameter information on the vehicle comprises a type of a sensor installed on the vehicle (see Hehn at least [0041] "The dynamic interface will be determined by all three contributing parties: vehicles 20, 30 of the vendor/owner A, vehicles 30 of the vendor/owner B and the common backend server 10. In this embodiment each vehicle 20, 30, 40 contributes some information about its capabilities. The information on the communication capabilities of the mobile transceivers 20, 30, 40 (vehicles in this scenario) may comprise ... information on a sensor set of the mobile transceiver 20, 30, 40 (cameras, radar, lidar (light/lazer detection and ranging, etc.), ... ").
Regarding claim 12, Hehn in view of Nguyen and Lekutai teach the data sharing method according to claim 8, wherein the sensor data sharing strategy comprises at least one of following information:
a vehicle whose sensor data needs to be shared with (see Nguyen at least [0083] "As aforementioned, in a vehicular platooning, a platoon member only needs to communicate with one or two neighbouring members i.e. the one immediately in the front and/or the one immediately in the rear. Thus, it is desirable to have a mechanism enabling a platoon member to adjust its TX range on transmission basis so that its transmitted signal sufficiently reaches the intended neighbouring members for successful demodulation and decoding (e.g. 301—FIG. 10), and the undesirable residual TX power may appear as noise or interference that is cancellable or removable when it reaches non-intended members in the same platoon (e.g. 302—FIG. 10)."),
a type of the sensor data that needs to be shared, or
a frequency of sharing the sensor data.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the sensor parameter information as disclosed by Hehn with specific vehicles in communication with one another such as further taught by Nguyen with a reasonable expectation of success so as to ensure only intended platoon vehicles receive transmitted information (see Nguyen at least [0017]).
Regarding claim 15, Hehn in view of Nguyen and Lekutai teach the analogous material of that in claim 1 as recited in the instant claim and is rejected for similar reasons. Additionally, Hehn discloses the following:
…a memory operable to store computer-readable instructions (see Hehn at least [0059]-[0060] "…Herein, some embodiments are also intended to cover program storage devices, e.g., digital data storage media, which are machine or computer readable and encode machine-executable or computer-executable programs of instructions where said instructions perform some or all of the steps of methods described herein...")…
…a processor circuitry operable to read the computer-readable instructions (see Hehn at least Fig 1, [0029] "As shown in FIG. 1 the respective one or more interfaces 12, 52 are coupled to the respective control modules 14, 54 at the network component 10 and the apparatus 50. In embodiments the control modules 14, 54 may be implemented using one or more processing units, one or more processing devices, any means for processing, such as a processor, a computer or a programmable hardware component being operable with accordingly adapted software. In other words, the described functions of the control modules 14, 54 may as well be implemented in software, which is then executed on one or more programmable hardware components. Such hardware components may comprise a general purpose processor, a Digital Signal Processor (DSP), a micro-controller, etc." and [0060] "...When provided by a processor, the functions may be provided by a single dedicated processor, by a single shared processor, or by a plurality of individual processors, some of which may be shared...")…
Regarding claim 16, Hehn in view of Nguyen and Lekutai teach the apparatus according to claim 15, wherein the plurality of vehicles comprise a leader vehicle (see Hehn at least [0052] "Another application may relate to a platoon of vehicles... Vehicles of the platoon may exchange sensor data among each other using direct communication... A heading vehicle may need/provide other information than a vehicle in the middle or at the tail end of the platoon..."), and the processor circuitry is configured to:
transmit the data sharing configuration information to the leader vehicle, so that the leader vehicle parses the data sharing configuration information to obtain sensor data sharing strategies for each of the plurality of vehicles respectively (see Lekutai at least Fig 3 and [0045] "Upon receiving the instructions from the lead vehicle via signal 304, the platooning platform 116 may identify at least one additional vehicle 308 to transmit the instructions to via a long-range communication channel via a signal 310. In some cases, the at least one additional vehicle 308 may be a lead vehicle of a group of vehicles within a platoon. The additional vehicle may then transmit the instructions to another vehicle via a signal 312 (1) transmitted over a short-range communication channel, which are then relayed to another vehicle via a signal 312 (2). In this manner, the instructions may be transmitted from vehicle to vehicle."), and for each of the plurality of vehicles other than the leader vehicle, distributes a sensor data sharing strategy of the vehicle to the vehicle (see Hehn at least [0041]-[0050] "The dynamic interface will be determined by all three contributing parties: vehicles 20, 30 of the vendor/owner A, vehicles 30 of the vendor/owner B and the common backend server 10. In this embodiment each vehicle 20, 30, 40 contributes some information about its capabilities... In other words, the vehicles may provide information to the network component 10, for example information on communications hardware available, a sensor set available, driving capability, application processing power, etc.… Given all input, the backend server 10 creates the additional interface (determines an according message interface configuration) The backend server 10 conveys the interface to the two vehicles 20, 30.").
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the leader vehicle as disclosed by Hehn with data organization and transmission such as further taught by Lekutai with a reasonable expectation of success for the sake of allowing efficient communication between vehicles of a platoon (see Lekutai at least [0004]).
Regarding claim 17, Hehn in view of Nguyen and Lekutai teach the apparatus according to claim 16, wherein the processor circuitry is configured to:
receive the status information of the vehicle via the leader vehicle in the vehicle platoon (see Hehn at least [0041] "…In this embodiment each vehicle 20, 30, 40 contributes some information about its capabilities. The information on the communication capabilities of the mobile transceivers 20, 30, 40 (vehicles in this scenario) may comprise one or more elements of the group of information on communication hardware available at the mobile transceiver 20, 30, 40, e.g. which kind of communication modems are available (data rates, latency, bandwidth, frequency, etc.), information on a sensor set of the mobile transceiver 20, 30, 40 (cameras, radar, lidar (light/lazer detection and ranging, etc.), information on a driving capability of the mobile transceiver 20, 30, 40 (speed limits, routes, driving preferences etc.), and information on an application processing power of the mobile transceiver 20, 30, 40 (processing capacity, e.g. video processing capability). In other words, the vehicles may provide information to the network component 10, for example information on communications hardware available, a sensor set available, driving capability, application processing power, etc."), the status information of the vehicle being transmitted to the leader vehicle by the vehicle (see Hehn at least [0041] "…In this embodiment each vehicle 20, 30, 40 contributes some information about its capabilities. The information on the communication capabilities of the mobile transceivers 20, 30, 40 (vehicles in this scenario) may comprise one or more elements of the group of information on communication hardware available at the mobile transceiver 20, 30, 40, e.g. which kind of communication modems are available (data rates, latency, bandwidth, frequency, etc.), information on a sensor set of the mobile transceiver 20, 30, 40 (cameras, radar, lidar (light/lazer detection and ranging, etc.), information on a driving capability of the mobile transceiver 20, 30, 40 (speed limits, routes, driving preferences etc.), and information on an application processing power of the mobile transceiver 20, 30, 40 (processing capacity, e.g. video processing capability). In other words, the vehicles may provide information to the network component 10, for example information on communications hardware available, a sensor set available, driving capability, application processing power, etc.").
Regarding claim 18, Hehn in view of Nguyen and Lekutai teach the analogous material of that in claim 8 as recited in the instant claim and is rejected for similar reasons.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Nachnolkar et al. (US-2021/0171034) teaches vehicle platoon communication which allows for adaptive cruise control according to shared sensor information.
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SEAN REIDY whose telephone number is (571) 272-7660. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 7:00 AM- 3:00 PM.
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, Abby Flynn can be reached on (571) 272-9855. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/S.P.R./Examiner, Art Unit 3663
/JAMES M MCPHERSON/Examiner, Art Unit 3663
Prosecution Insights