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 .
This office action is in response to the request for continued examination filed on 10/01/2025, in which claims 11-20 are pending and addressed below.
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 09/17/2025 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 09/17/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
With respect to the 35 U.S.C. 103 rejections:
Applicant argues on pages 8-9 of the remarks that the Office action fails to “demonstrate where the art of record teaches to control a location of a vehicle relative to another vehicle.” Applicant further argues on pages 8-9 of the remarks that the prior art fails to teach “the sub controller performs a process to maintain a relative positioning relationship…before and after the detection controller detects the abnormality regarding the main control system” and “correcting a lateral position and a vertical position of the vehicle based on the detection result by the sensor when the lateral position and the vertical position operated by the sub controller between before and after the detection controller detects the abnormality regarding the main control system.”
In response to applicant’s arguments that the prior art fails to teach the above limitations, the examiner respectfully disagrees. Ochida discloses an alternative control signal can be used for traveling when an actuator experiences an abnormality that decreases performance (Ochida [0138]-[0140]). Ochida discloses the alternative control signal for speed assistance control or steering assistance control can be received from a plurality of sensors or actuators that function the same as or similar to sensors or actuators experiencing an abnormality (Ochida [0122], [0083]). Ochida further discloses the alternative control from a redundant system is used to continue stable traveling control when an abnormality occurs (Ochida [0156]), and the planned vehicle control includes lane keeping and maintaining an inter-vehicle distance (Ochida [0065]-[0067]). Therefore, Ochida discloses maintaining a relative positional relationship before and after abnormality is detected because the alternative control from the redundant system allows traveling control to continue with the planned events of lane keeping or maintaining an inter-vehicle distance when an abnormality occurs.
Applicant’s arguments have been fully considered and have been found not persuasive.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the “wherein the correcting the vertical position of the vehicle with the sub controller comprises: operating the relative position of the vehicle to the preceding vehicle on a same lane, which is the position of the vehicle along a traveling direction of the vehicle, as the vertical position; and operating a target braking value and a target steering value based on the vertical position to maintain a vehicle-to-vehicle distance to the preceding vehicle to a predetermined distance” limitation 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 Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitations use a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitations are:
“a main controller” (claims 11-12, 15, and 17-20)
“a sub controller” (claims 11, 16-17, and 20)
“a detection controller” (claims 11, 15-16, and 20)
“a storage device” (claim 15)
“a change-over device” (claim 16)
“a main steering controller” (claims 17 and 20)
“a sub steering controller” (claims 17 and 20)
“a first monitor controller” (claims 18-19)
“a second monitor controller” (claim 19)
Because these claim limitations are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, they are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification ([0026]: “The devices having the names of ECUs among the plurality of devices illustrated in Fig. 2 are configured by Read Only Memories (ROMs) storing programs for performing various control, Central Processing Units (CPUs) stored in the ROMs, and Random Access Memories (RAMs) that function as accessible storage devices. Each of the ECUs is what is called a computer, and in the following description, among the name of each ECU, the "ECU" part may be read differently as a "control device," a "controller," a "control unit," or a "processor.”) as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have these limitations interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitations to avoid them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitations recite sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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 11-14, 17, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ochida et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2021/0163026 A1 (hereinafter Ochida), in view of Oyama, U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2019/0039593 A1, and further in view of Ishibashi et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2021/0241001 A1 (hereinafter Ishibashi).
Regarding claim 11, Ochida discloses a redundant system mounted on a vehicle configured to autonomously travel (Ochida Fig. 1), comprising:
a first power supply system including a first battery (see at least Ochida [0032]: “The vehicle control system 1 includes…a first power supply PS1 that is configured to supply power to the autonomous driving control system 100”; a power supply can include a battery as evidenced by Ochida [0031]);
a second power supply system different from the first power supply system, including a second battery (see at least Ochida [0032]: “The vehicle control system 1 includes…a second power supply PS2 that is configured to supply power to the driving assistance control system 200…In addition, the first power supply PS1 and the second power supply PS2 are provided independently of each other.”; a power supply can include a battery as evidenced by Ochida [0031])
a main controller that performs a process to cause the vehicle to autonomously travel (see at least Ochida [0076]: “The autonomous driving mode is, for example, a driving mode in which the traveling driving force output device 130, the electric servo brake device 131, the transmission control device 132, the electromotive power steering device 300, and the like are controlled by the traveling controller 148 of the first control device 140.”);
a sub controller used instead of the main controller to cause the vehicle to autonomously travel, when an abnormality regarding the main controller is detected (see at least Ochida [0143]: “On the other hand, in a case where the performance of the actuator of the electric servo brake device 131 on the autonomous driving control system 100 side has decreased, the first determiner 152 of the first control device 140 determines that the operating state of the actuator of the electric servo brake device 131 satisfies the predetermined condition. In this case, the traveling controller 148 transmits the alternative control command signal to the second control device 240 [i.e., an operation control sub control device] through the second communication line L2 or the first communication line L1.”; [0083]: “The predetermined condition refers to, for example, a decrease in current performance of sensors or actuators due to various factors as compared to original performance.”);
a sensor that detects information around the vehicle (see at least Ochida [0040]: “The object recognition device 106 repeatedly acquires information indicating a detection result from each sensor in each detection period of the first camera 102 and the viewfinder 104 or a period longer than this detection period, and recognizes the position, type, speed, movement direction, or the like of an object such as a nearby vehicle.”),
the sensor outputting a detection result to the main controller and the sub controller (see at least Ochida [0119]-[0120]: “The second determiner 248 determines whether the operating states of various sensors and actuators on the driving assistance control system 200 side satisfy a predetermined condition. In addition, the second determiner 248 determines, for example, whether the operating states of various sensors and actuators on the autonomous driving control system 100 side satisfy the predetermined condition on the basis of information received from the first control device 140 through the first communication line L1.”);
and a detection controller that detects the abnormality regarding a main control system including the main controller (see at least Ochida [0143]: “On the other hand, in a case where the performance of the actuator of the electric servo brake device 131 on the autonomous driving control system 100 side has decreased, the first determiner 152 of the first control device 140 determines that the operating state of the actuator of the electric servo brake device 131 satisfies the predetermined condition.”),
wherein the main controller is connected to the first power supply system and is not connected to the second power supply system (see at least Ochida [0032]: “The vehicle control system 1 includes, for example, an autonomous driving control system 100, a driving assistance control system 200, a first power supply PS1 that is configured to supply power to the autonomous driving control system 100, and a second power supply PS2 that is configured to supply power to the driving assistance control system 200.”; Fig. 1 shows first control device (i.e., operation control main control device) is part of autonomous driving control system 100 which receives power from first power supply PS1 and is not connected to second power supply PS2),
the sub controller and the sensor are connected to the second power supply system and are not connected to the first power supply system (see at least Ochida [0032]: “The vehicle control system 1 includes, for example, an autonomous driving control system 100, a driving assistance control system 200, a first power supply PS1 that is configured to supply power to the autonomous driving control system 100, and a second power supply PS2 that is configured to supply power to the driving assistance control system 200.”; [0101]: “The second vehicle sensor 206 outputs information indicating a detection result to the second control device 240.”; Fig. 1 shows second control device (i.e., operation control sub control device) is part of driving assistance control system 200 which receives power from second power supply PS2 and is not connected to first power supply PS1),
and the sub controller performs a process to maintain a relative positional relationship between the vehicle and a lane borderline or the vehicle and a preceding vehicle between before and after the detection controller detects the abnormality regarding the main control system (see at least Ochida [0138]-[0140]: “On the other hand, in a case where it is determined by the first determiner 152 that the performance of any actuator has decreased, the traveling controller 148 stops control of the traveling driving force output device 130, the electric servo brake device 131, the transmission control device 132, and the electromotive power steering device 300 (step S110)…In addition, in a case where it is determined by the first determiner 152 that the alternative control designation signal has been received from the driving assistance control system 200 side in the above-described process of S100, the traveling controller 148 performs the alternative control (step S114).”; [0066]: “In a case where the planned event is a lane keeping event, the behavior plan generator 146 generates a target trajectory having trajectory points disposed at the lane center so as to maintain a host lane.”; [0067]: “In addition, in a case where the planned event is a following traveling event, the behavior plan generator 146 decides, for example, a target speed so that an inter-vehicle distance between a preceding vehicle and the host vehicle M becomes constant, and generates a target trajectory having trajectory points disposed at the lane center so as to maintain a host lane. In a case where the speed of a preceding vehicle is low like, particularly, during a traffic jam, and frequent stops occur, the behavior plan generator 146 may reduce a target speed to zero in accordance with a stop of a preceding vehicle, and decide the target speed so as to be equal to the speed of the preceding vehicle in a case where it starts.”),
Ochida fails to expressly disclose correcting a lateral position and a vertical position of the vehicle when the positions do not match the initial positions before an abnormality. However, Oyama teaches
wherein the process to maintain the relative positional relationship comprises: correcting a lateral position and a vertical position of the vehicle based on the detection result by the sensor when the lateral position and the vertical position operated by the main controller do not match the lateral position and the vertical position operated by the sub controller between before and after the detection controller detects the abnormality regarding the main control system (This limitation is taught through the combination of Ochida and Oyama. Ochida discloses maintaining a relative positional relationship before and after the detection controller detects the abnormality regarding the main control system (Ochida [0138]-[0140], [0066]-[0067]). Ochida fails to expressly disclosing correcting a lateral position and a vertical position based on the detection result. However, Oyama teaches correcting a lateral position and a vertical position based on the detection result when the lateral position and vertical position do not match the positions after a switch is operated due to positioning error (see at least Oyama [0050]: “In step S9, the lateral position adjustment calculator 11a may store the positioning error Δz in the memory in the steering controller 11, and correct the own vehicle position information, e.g., the coordinates such as the latitude or the longitude, on the basis of the positioning error Δz.”; [0004]: “The position detector is configured to acquire own vehicle position information on the basis of a position signal received from positioning satellites…The controller is configured to correct the own vehicle position information in accordance with the relative moving operation received by the operation unit.”; [0043]-[0044]: Oyama teaches positioning error is minor when the leftward switch and rightward switch are not operated, but when one of the switches are operated the lateral position adjustment calculator performs adjustment to correct the vehicle position). Therefore, the combination of Ochida and Oyama teach the entirety of this limitation.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the system disclosed by Ochida with the correction taught by Oyama with reasonable expectation of success. Oyama is directed towards the related field of a driver assist apparatus. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to combine the system disclosed by Ochida with the correction taught by Oyama to correct positioning errors when a camera experiences difficulty detecting lane lines (see at least Oyama [0020]-[0021]: “Position information acquired on the basis of a position signal received from positioning satellites involves a positioning error. Therefore, it may be necessary to so correct the positioning error by initial setting that an own vehicle travels in the middle of a traveling lane, for example. Upon correcting the positioning error, when a camera is mounted on the own vehicle, it is possible to recognize lane lines that define left and right edges of the traveling lane by the camera mounted on the own vehicle and thereby so correct the positioning error that the own vehicle travels in the middle of the recognized lane lines…It may be also difficult to correct the position error even when the camera is mounted on the own vehicle, for example, in a case where any of the left and right lane lines are covered with snow and therefore unrecognizable, or in a case where any of the left and right lane lines are faded and therefore unrecognizable.”).
Ochida in view of Oyama fail to expressly disclose the sub controller correcting the vertical position by operating the relative position of the vehicle to the preceding vehicle on a same lane. However, Ishibashi teaches
wherein the correcting the vertical position of the vehicle with the sub controller comprises: operating the relative position of the vehicle to the preceding vehicle on a same lane, which is the position of the vehicle along a traveling direction of the vehicle, as the vertical position (see at least Ishibashi [0173]: “Accordingly, even when either one of the first or second signal system has an abnormality, this allows continuous cruise control based on the area in front of the vehicle 100 (e.g., control for maintaining an appropriate distance from other vehicles traveling in front of the subject vehicle) and control based on the area diagonally backward right of the vehicle 100 and the area diagonally backward left of the vehicle 100 (e.g., control for sensing critical situations when the subject vehicle performs lane changing).”; [0116]: “Specifically, the selector F115 selects the output from the vehicle motion energy setting unit F113 when no abnormality (e.g., a fault) occurs in the main arithmetic unit F1, and selects the output from the vehicle motion energy setting unit F310 of the backup functional unit F3 when an abnormality occurs in the main arithmetic unit F1.”; Ishibashi teaches correcting a relative vertical position by continuing cruise control to maintain an appropriate distance between a preceding vehicle);
and operating a target braking value and a target steering value based on the vertical position to maintain a vehicle-to-vehicle distance to the preceding vehicle to a predetermined distance (see at least Ishibashi [0141]: “The backup functional unit F3 then determines the target motion of the vehicle 100 based on the target route of the vehicle 100 and outputs a control signal based on the target motion of the vehicle 100.”; [0111]: “The vehicle motion energy setting unit F113 calculates driving torque required for the drive actuator, steering torque required for the steering actuator, and braking torque required for the braking actuator based on an output from the target motion determination unit F112.”; [0173]: “Accordingly, even when either one of the first or second signal system has an abnormality, this allows continuous cruise control based on the area in front of the vehicle 100 (e.g., control for maintaining an appropriate distance from other vehicles traveling in front of the subject vehicle) and control based on the area diagonally backward right of the vehicle 100 and the area diagonally backward left of the vehicle 100 (e.g., control for sensing critical situations when the subject vehicle performs lane changing).”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the system disclosed by Ochida in view of Oyama with Ishibashi with reasonable expectation of success. Ishibashi is directed towards the related field of a vehicle control system to allow continuous cruise control. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to combine the system disclosed by Ochida in view of Oyama with Ishibashi to improve continuity of cruise control when an abnormality occurs (see at least Ishibashi [0003]-[0004]: “However, when a signal system including the cameras has an abnormality, it becomes difficult to continuously perform cruise control of the vehicle based on the output from the cameras…The technique disclosed herein has been made in view of this point, and an object thereof is to improve continuity of cruise control of the vehicle.”).
Regarding claim 12, Ochida in view of Oyama and Ishibashi teach all elements of the redundant system according to claim 11 as explained above. Ochida further discloses
wherein the abnormality regarding the main control system includes at least one of an abnormality regarding the main controller, an abnormality of the first power supply system, and an abnormality regarding the sensor (see at least Ochida [0143]: “On the other hand, in a case where the performance of the actuator of the electric servo brake device 131 on the autonomous driving control system 100 side has decreased, the first determiner 152 of the first control device 140 determines that the operating state of the actuator of the electric servo brake device 131 satisfies the predetermined condition.”; [0083]: “The first determiner 152 determines whether the operating states of various sensors and actuators on the autonomous driving control system 100 side satisfy a predetermined condition. The predetermined condition refers to, for example, a decrease in current performance of sensors or actuators due to various factors as compared to original performance.”).
Regarding claim 13, Ochida in view of Oyama and Ishibashi teach all elements of the redundant system according to claim 12 as explained above. Ochida further discloses
wherein the sensor detects the lane borderline as the information around the vehicle, and the lane borderline is a boundary between a lane on which the vehicle travels and one other than the lane on which the vehicle travels (see at least Ochida [0061]: “The first host vehicle position recognizer 144 refers to, for example, high-accuracy map information indicated by a route in which a recommended lane is decided by the recommended lane decision device 120 and compares a pattern of a road division line (for example, an array of solid lines and broken lines) of the route in which the recommended lane is decided with a pattern of a road division line located in the vicinity of the host vehicle M which is recognized from an image captured by the first camera 102, to thereby recognize which of one or more lanes included in the route is a traveling lane. The first host vehicle position recognizer 144 recognizes, for example, the position and posture of the host vehicle M with respect to a traveling lane.”).
Regarding claim 14, Ochida in view of Oyama and Ishibashi teach all elements of the redundant system according to claim 12 as explained above. Ochida further discloses
wherein the sensor detects the preceding vehicle as the information around the vehicle, and the preceding vehicle travels ahead of the vehicle on the same lane on which the vehicle travels (see at least Ochida [0089]: “For example, in a case where a nearby vehicle present in front of the host vehicle M (hereinafter referred to as a preceding vehicle) is detected from an image captured by the first camera 102, and a time to collision TTC obtained by dividing an inter-vehicle distance between the preceding vehicle and the host vehicle M by a relative speed between the preceding vehicle and the host vehicle M is set to be equal to or less than a first predetermined time”).
Regarding claim 17, Ochida in view of Oyama and Ishibashi teach all elements of the redundant system according to claim 11 as explained above. Ochida further discloses the system comprising:
a main steering controller that controls steering of the vehicle based on a target steering value input from the main controller or the sub controller (see at least Ochida [0116]: “In addition, the steering assistance control performed by the traveling assistance controller 246 involves controlling the electromotive power steering device 300 connected to the second bus BS2.”; [0055]: “In this case, the first steering ECU 300a drives the electric motor with the amount of operation according to steering angle of the steering wheel. The electric motor changes the direction of a turning wheel, for example, by causing a force to act on a rack and pinion mechanism.”);
and a sub steering controller used instead of the main steering controller when the abnormality regarding the main steering controller is detected (see at least Ochida [0149]: “As in the shown example, in a case where the performance of the second steering ECU 300b of the electromotive power steering device 300 has decreased, the second determiner 248 of the second control device 240 determines that the operating state of an inverter to be controlled by the second steering ECU 300b or a stator that receives supply of power from the inverter satisfies the predetermined condition. In this case, the traveling assistance controller 246 transmits the alternative control command signal to the first control device 140 through the second communication line L2 or the first communication line L1. Receiving this, the traveling controller 148 performs the steering control using the first steering ECU 300a having a function that is the same as or similar to that of the second steering ECU 300b.”),
wherein the main steering controller is connected to the second power supply system and is not connected to the first power supply system (see at least Ochida [0095]: “The driving assistance control system 200 includes…the second steering ECU 300b for driving the electric motor of the electromotive power steering device 300”; Fig. 1 shows driving assistance control system 200 is connected to second power supply PS2 and is not connected to first power supply PS1),
and the sub steering controller is connected to the first power supply system and is not connected to the second power supply system (see at least Ochida [0034]: “The autonomous driving control system 100 includes…a first steering ECU 300a for driving an electric motor of an electromotive power steering device 300”; Fig. 1 shows autonomous driving control system 100 is connected to first power supply PS1 and is not connected to second power supply PS2).
Regarding claim 20, Ochida discloses a redundant system mounted on a vehicle configured to autonomously travel (Ochida Fig. 1), comprising:
a first power supply system including a first battery (see at least Ochida [0032]: “The vehicle control system 1 includes…a first power supply PS1 that is configured to supply power to the autonomous driving control system 100”; a power supply can include a battery as evidenced by Ochida [0031]);
a second power supply system different from the first power supply system, including a second battery (see at least Ochida [0032]: “The vehicle control system 1 includes…a second power supply PS2 that is configured to supply power to the driving assistance control system 200…In addition, the first power supply PS1 and the second power supply PS2 are provided independently of each other.”; a power supply can include a battery as evidenced by Ochida [0031])
a main controller that performs a process to cause the vehicle to autonomously travel (see at least Ochida [0076]: “The autonomous driving mode is, for example, a driving mode in which the traveling driving force output device 130, the electric servo brake device 131, the transmission control device 132, the electromotive power steering device 300, and the like are controlled by the traveling controller 148 of the first control device 140.”);
a sub controller used instead of the main controller when an abnormality regarding the main controller is detected (see at least Ochida [0143]: “On the other hand, in a case where the performance of the actuator of the electric servo brake device 131 on the autonomous driving control system 100 side has decreased, the first determiner 152 of the first control device 140 determines that the operating state of the actuator of the electric servo brake device 131 satisfies the predetermined condition. In this case, the traveling controller 148 transmits the alternative control command signal to the second control device 240 [i.e., an operation control sub control device] through the second communication line L2 or the first communication line L1.”);
a sensor that detects information around the vehicle (see at least Ochida [0040]: “The object recognition device 106 repeatedly acquires information indicating a detection result from each sensor in each detection period of the first camera 102 and the viewfinder 104 or a period longer than this detection period, and recognizes the position, type, speed, movement direction, or the like of an object such as a nearby vehicle.”),
the sensor outputting a detection result to the main controller and the sub controller (see at least Ochida [0119]-[0120]: “The second determiner 248 determines whether the operating states of various sensors and actuators on the driving assistance control system 200 side satisfy a predetermined condition. In addition, the second determiner 248 determines, for example, whether the operating states of various sensors and actuators on the autonomous driving control system 100 side satisfy the predetermined condition on the basis of information received from the first control device 140 through the first communication line L1.”);
a detection controller that detects the abnormality regarding a main control system including the main controller (see at least Ochida [0143]: “On the other hand, in a case where the performance of the actuator of the electric servo brake device 131 on the autonomous driving control system 100 side has decreased, the first determiner 152 of the first control device 140 determines that the operating state of the actuator of the electric servo brake device 131 satisfies the predetermined condition.”);
a main steering controller that controls steering of the vehicle based on a target steering value input from the main controller or the sub controller (see at least Ochida [0116]: “In addition, the steering assistance control performed by the traveling assistance controller 246 involves controlling the electromotive power steering device 300 connected to the second bus BS2.”; [0055]: “In this case, the first steering ECU 300a drives the electric motor with the amount of operation according to steering angle of the steering wheel. The electric motor changes the direction of a turning wheel, for example, by causing a force to act on a rack and pinion mechanism.”);
and a sub steering controller used instead of the main steering controller when an abnormality regarding the main steering controller is detected (see at least Ochida [0149]: “As in the shown example, in a case where the performance of the second steering ECU 300b of the electromotive power steering device 300 has decreased, the second determiner 248 of the second control device 240 determines that the operating state of an inverter to be controlled by the second steering ECU 300b or a stator that receives supply of power from the inverter satisfies the predetermined condition. In this case, the traveling assistance controller 246 transmits the alternative control command signal to the first control device 140 through the second communication line L2 or the first communication line L1. Receiving this, the traveling controller 148 performs the steering control using the first steering ECU 300a having a function that is the same as or similar to that of the second steering ECU 300b.”),
wherein the main controller and the sub steering controller are connected to the first power supply system and are not connected to the second power supply system (see at least Ochida [0032]: “The vehicle control system 1 includes, for example, an autonomous driving control system 100, a driving assistance control system 200, a first power supply PS1 that is configured to supply power to the autonomous driving control system 100, and a second power supply PS2 that is configured to supply power to the driving assistance control system 200.”; [0034]: “The autonomous driving control system 100 includes…a first steering ECU 300a for driving an electric motor of an electromotive power steering device 300”; Fig. 1 shows first control device (i.e., operation control main control device) is part of autonomous driving control system 100 which receives power from first power supply PS1 and is not connected to second power supply PS2),
and the sub controller and the main steering controller are connected to the second power supply system and are not connected to the first power supply system (see at least Ochida [0032]: “The vehicle control system 1 includes, for example, an autonomous driving control system 100, a driving assistance control system 200, a first power supply PS1 that is configured to supply power to the autonomous driving control system 100, and a second power supply PS2 that is configured to supply power to the driving assistance control system 200.”; [0101]: “The second vehicle sensor 206 outputs information indicating a detection result to the second control device 240.”; [0095]: “The driving assistance control system 200 includes…the second steering ECU 300b for driving the electric motor of the electromotive power steering device 300”; Fig. 1 shows second control device (i.e., operation control sub control device) is part of driving assistance control system 200 which receives power from second power supply PS2 and is not connected to first power supply PS1),
and the sub controller performs a process to maintain a relative positional relationship between the vehicle and a lane borderline or the vehicle and a preceding vehicle between before and after the detection controller detects the abnormality regarding the main control system (see at least Ochida [0138]-[0140]: “On the other hand, in a case where it is determined by the first determiner 152 that the performance of any actuator has decreased, the traveling controller 148 stops control of the traveling driving force output device 130, the electric servo brake device 131, the transmission control device 132, and the electromotive power steering device 300 (step S110)…In addition, in a case where it is determined by the first determiner 152 that the alternative control designation signal has been received from the driving assistance control system 200 side in the above-described process of S100, the traveling controller 148 performs the alternative control (step S114).”; [0066]: “In a case where the planned event is a lane keeping event, the behavior plan generator 146 generates a target trajectory having trajectory points disposed at the lane center so as to maintain a host lane.”; [0067]: “In addition, in a case where the planned event is a following traveling event, the behavior plan generator 146 decides, for example, a target speed so that an inter-vehicle distance between a preceding vehicle and the host vehicle M becomes constant, and generates a target trajectory having trajectory points disposed at the lane center so as to maintain a host lane. In a case where the speed of a preceding vehicle is low like, particularly, during a traffic jam, and frequent stops occur, the behavior plan generator 146 may reduce a target speed to zero in accordance with a stop of a preceding vehicle, and decide the target speed so as to be equal to the speed of the preceding vehicle in a case where it starts.”),
Ochida fails to expressly disclose correcting a lateral position and a vertical position of the vehicle when the positions do not match the initial positions before an abnormality. However, Oyama teaches
wherein the process to maintain the relative positional relationship comprises: correcting a lateral position and a vertical position of the vehicle based on the detection result by the sensor when the lateral position and the vertical position operated by the main controller do not match the lateral position and the vertical position operated by the sub controller between before and after the detection controller detects the abnormality regarding the main control system (This limitation is taught through the combination of Ochida and Oyama. Ochida discloses maintaining a relative positional relationship before and after the detection controller detects the abnormality regarding the main control system (Ochida [0138]-[0140], [0066]-[0067]). Ochida fails to expressly disclosing correcting a lateral position and a vertical position based on the detection result. However, Oyama teaches correcting a lateral position and a vertical position based on the detection result when the lateral position and vertical position do not match the positions after a switch is operated due to positioning error (see at least Oyama [0050]: “In step S9, the lateral position adjustment calculator 11a may store the positioning error Δz in the memory in the steering controller 11, and correct the own vehicle position information, e.g., the coordinates such as the latitude or the longitude, on the basis of the positioning error Δz.”; [0004]: “The position detector is configured to acquire own vehicle position information on the basis of a position signal received from positioning satellites…The controller is configured to correct the own vehicle position information in accordance with the relative moving operation received by the operation unit.”; [0043]-[0044]: Oyama teaches positioning error is minor when the leftward switch and rightward switch are not operated, but when one of the switches are operated the lateral position adjustment calculator performs adjustment to correct the vehicle position). Therefore, the combination of Ochida and Oyama teach the entirety of this limitation.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the system disclosed by Ochida with the correction taught by Oyama with reasonable expectation of success. Oyama is directed towards the related field of a driver assist apparatus. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to combine the system disclosed by Ochida with the correction taught by Oyama to correct positioning errors when a camera experiences difficulty detecting lane lines (see at least Oyama [0020]-[0021]: “Position information acquired on the basis of a position signal received from positioning satellites involves a positioning error. Therefore, it may be necessary to so correct the positioning error by initial setting that an own vehicle travels in the middle of a traveling lane, for example. Upon correcting the positioning error, when a camera is mounted on the own vehicle, it is possible to recognize lane lines that define left and right edges of the traveling lane by the camera mounted on the own vehicle and thereby so correct the positioning error that the own vehicle travels in the middle of the recognized lane lines…It may be also difficult to correct the position error even when the camera is mounted on the own vehicle, for example, in a case where any of the left and right lane lines are covered with snow and therefore unrecognizable, or in a case where any of the left and right lane lines are faded and therefore unrecognizable.”).
Ochida in view of Oyama fail to expressly disclose the sub controller correcting the vertical position by operating the relative position of the vehicle to the preceding vehicle on a same lane. However, Ishibashi teaches
wherein the correcting the vertical position of the vehicle with the sub controller comprises: operating the relative position of the vehicle to the preceding vehicle on a same lane, which is the position of the vehicle along a traveling direction of the vehicle, as the vertical position (see at least Ishibashi [0173]: “Accordingly, even when either one of the first or second signal system has an abnormality, this allows continuous cruise control based on the area in front of the vehicle 100 (e.g., control for maintaining an appropriate distance from other vehicles traveling in front of the subject vehicle) and control based on the area diagonally backward right of the vehicle 100 and the area diagonally backward left of the vehicle 100 (e.g., control for sensing critical situations when the subject vehicle performs lane changing).”; [0116]: “Specifically, the selector F115 selects the output from the vehicle motion energy setting unit F113 when no abnormality (e.g., a fault) occurs in the main arithmetic unit F1, and selects the output from the vehicle motion energy setting unit F310 of the backup functional unit F3 when an abnormality occurs in the main arithmetic unit F1.”; Ishibashi teaches correcting a relative vertical position by continuing cruise control to maintain an appropriate distance between a preceding vehicle);
and operating a target braking value and a target steering value based on the vertical position to maintain a vehicle-to-vehicle distance to the preceding vehicle to a predetermined distance (see at least Ishibashi [0141]: “The backup functional unit F3 then determines the target motion of the vehicle 100 based on the target route of the vehicle 100 and outputs a control signal based on the target motion of the vehicle 100.”; [0111]: “The vehicle motion energy setting unit F113 calculates driving torque required for the drive actuator, steering torque required for the steering actuator, and braking torque required for the braking actuator based on an output from the target motion determination unit F112.”; [0173]: “Accordingly, even when either one of the first or second signal system has an abnormality, this allows continuous cruise control based on the area in front of the vehicle 100 (e.g., control for maintaining an appropriate distance from other vehicles traveling in front of the subject vehicle) and control based on the area diagonally backward right of the vehicle 100 and the area diagonally backward left of the vehicle 100 (e.g., control for sensing critical situations when the subject vehicle performs lane changing).”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the system disclosed by Ochida in view of Oyama with Ishibashi with reasonable expectation of success. Ishibashi is directed towards the related field of a vehicle control system to allow continuous cruise control. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to combine the system disclosed by Ochida in view of Oyama with Ishibashi to improve continuity of cruise control when an abnormality occurs (see at least Ishibashi [0003]-[0004]: “However, when a signal system including the cameras has an abnormality, it becomes difficult to continuously perform cruise control of the vehicle based on the output from the cameras…The technique disclosed herein has been made in view of this point, and an object thereof is to improve continuity of cruise control of the vehicle.”).
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ochida in view of Oyama and Ishibashi, and further in view of Gokhale et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2020/0263996 A1 (hereinafter Gokhale).
Regarding claim 15, Ochida in view of Oyama and Ishibashi teach all elements of the redundant system according to claim 12 as explained above. Ochida in view of Oyama and Ishibashi fails to expressly disclose storing a past arithmetic operation result and estimating a position of the vehicle based the past arithmetic operation result when a sensor abnormality is detected. However, Gokhale teaches wherein the main controller:
includes a storage device that stores a past arithmetic operation result by the main controller (see at least Gokhale [0043]: “When both the arrays S.sub.C,k and S.sub.L,k are populated (both not empty), the sensor array S.sub.k, is updated with S.sub.C,k and S.sub.L,k at 202, wherein the sensor data is sent for time k and v