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 .
Status of Claims
The rejections of claims 1, 2, 4-10, 13, 14, 15, and 17, 18, and 20 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been withdrawn in light of the Applicants’ arguments.
Claims 1, 2, 13, 14, 15, 18, and 20 have been amended and claims 3, 11, 12, 16, and 19 have been cancelled. Thus, claims 1, 2, 4-10, 13, 14, 15, and 17, 18, and 20 are presented for examination.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 8, 9, 10, 13, 14, 15, and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kato et al. [Japanese Patent Application 2012-145989] in view of Uchida [Japanese Patent Application 2019-159458], and in further view of Wolterman [U.S. Patent Publication 2006/0181433]
With regard to claim 1, Kato et al. meets the limitation of:
a traffic monitoring device comprising a memory [alternate-traffic signal devices having a processing device that operates by program control (paragraph 0011) where one with ordinary skill in the art would deduce the program used to control the processor is stored upon a memory device]
measuring speed of the vehicle [a speed detection sensor used for detecting a speed of a vehicle (paragraph 0012)]
setting a traffic light facing the vehicle to a light color indicating permission to go forward in a case where the speed of the vehicle is within a prescribed range [the display of a green lamp to signal a vehicle operator to proceed through an intersection (paragraph 0020)]
in a case where the speed of the vehicle exceeds a limit value, setting the traffic light facing the vehicle to a light color indicating prohibition to go forward [a speed sensor determining if a vehicle’s speed is equal to or higher than a predetermined speed (paragraph 0022) and a light changing to blue to signal the vehicle to be on standby when the speed of the vehicle has been detected (paragraph 0007)]
However, Kato et al. fails to disclose of configured to store instructions to perform acquiring time-series image data showing a vehicle. In the field of traffic management systems, Uchida teaches:
store instructions to perform acquiring time-series image data showing a vehicle [a traffic control signal device comparing photographed images of a vehicle and analyzing them for detecting a moving object that enters an intersection and extracting the speed from the said images (paragraph 0017)]
It would be obvious to one with ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date to combine the elements of Kato et al. and Uchida to create a traffic monitoring device where the device determines the speed of a vehicle from the sequentially captured pictures taken of the vehicle when it passes through an intersection in order to determine if the traffic control devices should be adjusted to allow a more efficient flow of traffic through an intersection. However, the combination of Kato et al. and Uchida fails to disclose of setting a traffic light facing an intersecting vehicle traveling in a direction intersecting with the vehicle to a light color indicating prohibition to go forward. In the field of traffic control systems, Wolterman et al. teaches:
setting a traffic light facing an intersecting vehicle traveling in a direction intersecting with the vehicle to a light color indicating prohibition to go forward [a traffic light being changed for a vehicle by an AI analyzer to prevent the possibility of a collision (paragraph 0007, 0012, and 0076)]
It would be obvious to one with ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date to combine the elements of Kato et al., Uchida, and Wolterman et al. to create a traffic monitoring device where the device determines the speed of a vehicle from the sequentially captured pictures taken of the vehicle when it passes through an intersection in order to determine if the traffic control devices should be adjusted to allow a more efficient and safe flow of traffic through an intersection wherein the motivation to combine is to create a system for regulating traffic (Kato et al., paragraph 0001).
With regard to claim 2, Kato et al. meets the limitation of:
the at least one processor is configured to execute the instructions to perform setting a traffic light facing an intersecting vehicle traveling in a direction intersecting with the vehicle to a light color indicating prohibition to go forward [alternate-traffic signal devices having a processing device that operates by program control (paragraph 0011) where one with ordinary skill in the art would deduce the program used to control the processor is stored upon a memory device and a red signal being used to prohibit a vehicle from entering a lane (paragraph 0005)]
setting the traffic light facing the vehicle to the light color indicating permission to go forward [the display of a green lamp to signal a vehicle operator to proceed through an intersection (paragraph 0020)]
With regard to claim 8, Kato et al. meets the limitations of:
the speed of the vehicle exceeds a limit value [a speed sensor determining if a vehicle’s speed is equal to or higher than a predetermined speed (paragraph 0022)]
setting all of the traffic lights to a light color indicating prohibition to go forward [a light changing to blue to signal the vehicle to be on standby when the speed of the vehicle has been detected (paragraph 0007)]
setting the traffic light facing the intersecting vehicle traveling in a direction intersecting with the vehicle to the light color indicating permission to go forward [the display of a green lamp to signal a vehicle operator to proceed through an intersection (paragraph 0020)]
With regard to claim 9, Kato et al. meets the limitations of:
the speed of the vehicle exceeds a limit value [a speed sensor determining if a vehicle’s speed is equal to or higher than a predetermined speed (paragraph 0022)]
setting the traffic light facing the vehicle to a light color indicating prohibition to go forward [a light changing to blue to signal the vehicle to be on standby when the speed of the vehicle has been detected (paragraph 0007)]
determining whether the vehicle has stopped before an intersection [detecting if a vehicle has stopped before a stop line (paragraph 0007)]
in a case where the vehicle stops before the intersection, setting the traffic light facing the vehicle to the light color indicating permission to go forward [a vehicle stopping at a stop line (paragraph 0022) and the display of a green lamp to signal a vehicle operator to proceed through an intersection (paragraph 0020)]
With regard to claim 10, Kato et al. meets the limitations of:
in a case where the speed of the vehicle is within the prescribed range, setting the traffic light facing the intersecting vehicle traveling in a direction intersecting with the vehicle to a light color indicating prohibition to go forward [a light changing to blue signal the vehicle to be on standby when the speed of the vehicle has been detected (paragraph 0007)]
setting the traffic light facing the vehicle to the light color indicating permission to go forward [the display of a green lamp to signal a vehicle operator to proceed through an intersection (paragraph 0020)]
With regard to claim 13, Kato et al. meets the limitation of:
a traffic monitoring method comprising [alternate-traffic signal devices having a processing device that operates by program control (paragraph 0011) where one with ordinary skill in the art would deduce the program used to control the processor is stored upon a memory device]
measuring speed of the vehicle [a speed detection sensor used for detecting a speed of a vehicle (paragraph 0012)]
setting a traffic light facing the vehicle to a light color indicating permission to go forward in a case where the speed of the vehicle is within a prescribed range [the display of a green lamp to signal a vehicle operator to proceed through an intersection (paragraph 0020)]
in a case where the speed of the vehicle exceeds a limit value, setting the traffic light facing the vehicle to a light color indicating prohibition to go forward [a speed sensor determining if a vehicle’s speed is equal to or higher than a predetermined speed (paragraph 0022) and a light changing to blue to signal the vehicle to be on standby when the speed of the vehicle has been detected (paragraph 0007)]
However, Kato et al. fails to disclose of acquiring time-series image data showing a vehicle. In the field of traffic management systems, Uchida teaches:
acquiring time-series image data showing a vehicle [a traffic control signal device comparing photographed images of a vehicle and analyzing them for detecting a moving object that enters an intersection and extracting the speed from the said images (paragraph 0017)]
It would be obvious to one with ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date to combine the elements of Kato et al. and Uchida to create a traffic monitoring device where the device determines the speed of a vehicle from the sequentially captured pictures taken of the vehicle when it passes through an intersection in order to determine if the traffic control devices should be adjusted to allow a more efficient flow of traffic through an intersection. However, the combination of Kato et al. and Uchida fails to disclose of setting a traffic light facing an intersecting vehicle traveling in a direction intersecting with the vehicle to a light color indicating prohibition to go forward. In the field of traffic control systems, Wolterman et al. teaches:
setting a traffic light facing an intersecting vehicle traveling in a direction intersecting with the vehicle to a light color indicating prohibition to go forward [a traffic light being changed for a vehicle by an AI analyzer to prevent the possibility of a collision (paragraph 0007, 0012, and 0076)]
It would be obvious to one with ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date to combine the elements of Kato et al., Uchida, and Wolterman et al. to create a traffic monitoring device where the device determines the speed of a vehicle from the sequentially captured pictures taken of the vehicle when it passes through an intersection in order to determine if the traffic control devices should be adjusted to allow a more efficient and safe flow of traffic through an intersection wherein the motivation to combine is to create a system for regulating traffic (Kato et al., paragraph 0001).
With regard to claim 14, Kato et al. meets the limitation of:
a traffic monitoring device comprising a memory [alternate-traffic signal devices having a processing device that operates by program control (paragraph 0011) where one with ordinary skill in the art would deduce the program used to control the processor is stored upon a memory device]
measuring speed of the vehicle [a speed detection sensor used for detecting a speed of a vehicle (paragraph 0012)]
setting a traffic light facing the vehicle to a light color indicating permission to go forward in a case where the speed of the vehicle is within a prescribed range [the display of a green lamp to signal a vehicle operator to proceed through an intersection (paragraph 0020)]
in a case where the speed of the vehicle exceeds a limit value, setting the traffic light facing the vehicle to a light color indicating prohibition to go forward [a speed sensor determining if a vehicle’s speed is equal to or higher than a predetermined speed (paragraph 0022) and a light changing to blue to signal the vehicle to be on standby when the speed of the vehicle has been detected (paragraph 0007)]
However, Kato et al. fails to disclose of configured to store instructions to perform acquiring time-series image data showing a vehicle. In the field of traffic management systems, Uchida teaches:
store instructions to perform acquiring time-series image data showing a vehicle [a traffic control signal device comparing photographed images of a vehicle and analyzing them for detecting a moving object that enters an intersection and extracting the speed from the said images (paragraph 0017)]
It would be obvious to one with ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date to combine the elements of Kato et al. and Uchida to create a traffic monitoring device where the device determines the speed of a vehicle from the sequentially captured pictures taken of the vehicle when it passes through an intersection in order to determine if the traffic control devices should be adjusted to allow a more efficient flow of traffic through an intersection. However, the combination of Kato et al. and Uchida fails to disclose of setting a traffic light facing an intersecting vehicle traveling in a direction intersecting with the vehicle to a light color indicating prohibition to go forward. In the field of traffic control systems, Wolterman et al. teaches:
setting a traffic light facing an intersecting vehicle traveling in a direction intersecting with the vehicle to a light color indicating prohibition to go forward [a traffic light being changed for a vehicle by an AI analyzer to prevent the possibility of a collision (paragraph 0007, 0012, and 0076)]
It would be obvious to one with ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date to combine the elements of Kato et al., Uchida, and Wolterman et al. to create a traffic monitoring device where the device determines the speed of a vehicle from the sequentially captured pictures taken of the vehicle when it passes through an intersection in order to determine if the traffic control devices should be adjusted to allow a more efficient and safe flow of traffic through an intersection wherein the motivation to combine is to create a system for regulating traffic (Kato et al., paragraph 0001).
With regard to claim 15, Kato et al. meets the limitation of:
in a case where the speed of the vehicle is within the prescribed range, setting a traffic light facing an intersecting vehicle traveling in a direction intersecting with the vehicle to a light color indicating prohibition [alternate-traffic signal devices having a processing device that operates by program control (paragraph 0011) where one with ordinary skill in the art would deduce the program used to control the processor is stored upon a memory device and a red signal being used to prohibit a vehicle from entering a lane (paragraph 0005)]
setting the traffic light facing the vehicle to the light color indicating permission to go forward [the display of a green lamp to signal a vehicle operator to proceed through an intersection (paragraph 0020)]
With regard to claim 18, Kato et al. meets the limitations of:
in a case where the speed of the vehicle is within the prescribed range, setting a traffic light facing an intersecting vehicle traveling in a direction intersecting with the vehicle to a light color indicating prohibition to go forward [a light changing to blue to signal the vehicle to be on standby when the speed of the vehicle has been detected (paragraph 0007)]
then setting the traffic light facing the vehicle to the light color indicating permission to go forward [the display of a green lamp to signal a vehicle operator to proceed through an intersection (paragraph 0020)]
Claim(s) 4-7, 17, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kato et al. [Japanese Patent Application 2012-145989] in view of Uchida [Japanese Patent Application 2019-159458], and in further view of Wolterman [U.S. Patent Publication 2006/0181433] and Toyama [Japanese Patent Application JPH05143892]
With regard to claim 4, Kato et al. fails to disclose of reporting a violation of traffic law by the vehicle to police. In the field of traffic management systems, Toyama teaches:
reporting a violation of traffic law by the vehicle to police [a vehicle's driving status and license plate will be recorded and reported to the police box, police station or police car (paragraph 0011)]
It would be obvious to one with ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date to combine the elements of Kato et al., Uchida, Wolterman, and Toyama to create a traffic monitoring device where the device determines the speed of a vehicle from the sequentially captured pictures taken of the vehicle when it passes through an intersection and reported to the police when the vehicle is traveling through the intersection when it does not have the right of way in order to enforce traffic rules wherein the motivation to combine is to create a system for regulating traffic (Kato et al., paragraph 0001).
With regard to claim 5, Kato et al. meets the limitation of:
an excess of a speed limit by the vehicle [a speed sensor determining if a vehicle’s speed is equal to or higher than a predetermined speed (paragraph 0022)]
However, the combination of Kato et al., Uchida, and Wolterman fails to disclose of reporting to the police. In the field of traffic management systems, Toyama teaches:
reporting to the police [a vehicle's driving status and license plate will be recorded and reported to the police box, police station or police car (paragraph 0011)]
It would be obvious to one with ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date to combine the elements of Kato et al., Uchida, Wolterman, and Toyama to create a traffic monitoring device where the device determines the speed of a vehicle from the sequentially captured pictures taken of the vehicle when it passes through an intersection and reported to the police when the vehicle is traveling through the intersection when it does not have the right of way in order to enforce traffic rules wherein the motivation to combine is to create a system for regulating traffic (Kato et al., paragraph 0001).
With regard to claim 6, Kato et al. meets the limitation of:
the traffic light facing the vehicle to a light color indicating prohibition to go forward [a light changing to blue signal the vehicle to be on standby when the speed of the vehicle has been detected (paragraph 0007)]
However, Kato et al. fails to disclose of determining whether the vehicle has stopped before an intersection using the time-series image data and reporting ignoring of a traffic light by the vehicle to the police in a case where the vehicle does not stop before the intersection. In the field of traffic management systems, Uchida teaches:
whether the vehicle has stopped before an intersection using the time-series image data [a traffic control signal device comparing photographed images of a vehicle and analyzing them for detecting a moving object that enters an intersection (paragraph 0017)]
It would be obvious to one with ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date to combine the elements of Kato et al. and Uchida to create a traffic monitoring device where the device determines the speed of a vehicle from the sequentially captured pictures taken of the vehicle when it passes through an intersection in order to determine if the vehicle has stopped prior to entering an intersection. However, the combination of Kato et al. and Uchida fails to disclose of reporting ignoring of a traffic light by the vehicle to the police. In the field of traffic management systems, Toyama teaches:
reporting ignoring of a traffic light by the vehicle to the police [a vehicle's driving status and license plate will be recorded and reported to the police box, police station or police car (paragraph 0011)]
It would be obvious to one with ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date to combine the elements of Kato et al., Uchida, Wolterman, and Toyama to create a traffic monitoring device where the device determines the speed of a vehicle from the sequentially captured pictures taken of the vehicle when it passes through an intersection and reported to the police when the vehicle is traveling through the intersection when it does not have the right of way in order to enforce traffic rules wherein the motivation to combine is to create a system for regulating traffic (Kato et al., paragraph 0001).
With regard to claim 7, the combination of Kato et al., Uchida, and Wolterman fails to disclose of further acquiring identification information of the vehicle and reporting the violation of traffic law by the vehicle to the police and transmitting, to the police, the identification information of the vehicle acquired. In the field of traffic management systems, Toyama teaches:
acquiring identification information of the vehicle and reporting the violation of traffic law by the vehicle to the police and transmitting, to the police, the identification information of the vehicle acquired [a vehicle's driving status and license plate will be recorded and reported to the police box, police station or police car (paragraph 0011)]
It would be obvious to one with ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date to combine the elements of Kato et al., Uchida, Wolterman, and Toyama to create a traffic monitoring device where the device determines the speed of a vehicle from the sequentially captured pictures taken of the vehicle when it passes through an intersection and reported to the police when the vehicle is traveling through the intersection when it does not have the right of way in order to enforce traffic rules wherein the motivation to combine is to create a system for regulating traffic (Kato et al., paragraph 0001).
With regard to claim 17, the combination of Kato et al., Uchi, and Wolterman fails to disclose of reporting a violation of traffic law by the vehicle to police. In the field of traffic management systems, Toyama teaches:
reporting a violation of traffic law by the vehicle to police [a vehicle's driving status and license plate will be recorded and reported to the police box, police station or police car (paragraph 0011)]
It would be obvious to one with ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date to combine the elements of Kato et al., Uchida, Wolterman, and Toyama to create a traffic monitoring device where the device determines the speed of a vehicle from the sequentially captured pictures taken of the vehicle when it passes through an intersection and reported to the police when the vehicle is traveling through the intersection when it does not have the right of way in order to enforce traffic rules wherein the motivation to combine is to create a system for regulating traffic (Kato et al., paragraph 0001).
With regard to claim 20, the combination of Kato et al., Uchi, and Wolterman fails to disclose of reporting a violation of traffic law by the vehicle to police. In the field of traffic management systems, Toyama teaches:
reporting a violation of traffic law by the vehicle to police [a vehicle's driving status and license plate will be recorded and reported to the police box, police station or police car (paragraph 0011)]
It would be obvious to one with ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date to combine the elements of Kato et al., Uchida, Wolterman, and Toyama to create a traffic monitoring device where the device determines the speed of a vehicle from the sequentially captured pictures taken of the vehicle when it passes through an intersection and reported to the police when the vehicle is traveling through the intersection when it does not have the right of way in order to enforce traffic rules wherein the motivation to combine is to create a system for regulating traffic (Kato et al., paragraph 0001).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to November 3, 2025 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The previous rejection has been withdrawn.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PAMESHANAND MAHASE whose telephone number is (571) 270-7223. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday- Friday 8:00AM - 5:00PM. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Davetta Goins can be reached on 571-272-2957. 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 http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. 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.
/PAMESHANAND MAHASE/Examiner, Art Unit 2689
/DAVETTA W GOINS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2689