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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This action is in response to the applicant’s filing on September 17, 2025. Claims 1, 3-10 are pending.
Response to Amendment and Arguments
In response to applicant's amendments, claims rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph is hereby withdrawn.
In respond to applicant's arguments based on the filed amendment with respect to 35 U.S.C. 102 rejections of said previous office action have been fully considered; however, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made.
Claim Objections
Claim 3 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 3 depends on the cancelled claim 2. Appropriate correction is required.
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 for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102 of this title, 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:
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 1, 3-7, 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sato US2013/0144516 (“Sato”) in view of Salemi et al. US2020/0401784 (“Salemi”).
Regarding claim(s) 1, 9, 10. Sato discloses a traffic monitoring apparatus comprising: at least one memory configured to store instructions (abstract); and at least one processor configured to execute the instructions to perform operations comprising:
detecting a front position of congestion on a road (para. 36, road-to-vehicle communication, the vehicle ECU 24 transmits identification information, running information, communication standard information, and the like. The identification information includes an ID of a transmission source vehicle and an ID of a vehicle group to which the transmission source vehicle belongs. The running information is composed of pieces of information on measurement values about the running of the own vehicle, such as a current position, a traveling direction (a bearing), a running speed, a running acceleration, a jerk, a vehicle-to-vehicle distance, a vehicle-to-vehicle time interval, and the like.); and
outputting, when movement of the detected front position satisfies a previously determined criterion, congestion information according to the criterion (para. 42, Upon recognizing the vehicle group 100, the infrastructure device 12 provides the driver of the leading vehicle 101 of the vehicle group 100 with information. This provision of information relates to at least one of the formation of the vehicle group 100 with the vehicle 101 at the head and a driving operation of suppressing a growth of the vehicle group 100. The vehicle group 100 may induce traffic congestion.).
Sato does not explicitly disclose:
wherein the criterion comprises a first criterion comprising a fact that a moving direction of the front position is a direction opposite to a traveling direction of the road, and wherein the operations further comprise, in a case where movement of the detected front position satisfies the first criterion, outputting the congestion information according to the first criterion. Instead, Sato further teaches the infrastructure device 12 transmits to the leading vehicle 101 the information with which the driver is to be provided, through road-to-vehicle communication. It should be noted that the leading vehicle 101 can be identified in road-to-vehicle communication on the basis of a time when the passage of the leading vehicle of the vehicle group 100 is measured by the traffic volume measuring device 11 and a time when the vehicle 101 passes the measurement spot 51, which is acquired through road-to-vehicle communication.
Salemi teaches methods and structures providing wide-area traffic monitoring based on distributed fiber-optic sensing (DFOS) that employs deep neural network(s) for denoising noisy waterfall traces measured by the DFOS. Specifically, wherein the criterion comprises a first criterion comprising a fact that a moving direction of the front position is a direction opposite to a traveling direction of the road, and wherein the operations further comprise, in a case where movement of the detected front position satisfies the first criterion, outputting the congestion information according to the first criterion (Fig. 5B, [0032-0053] [0032] A schematic illustration of measured Time vs. Distance waterfall traces produced by the illustrative DFOS system is shown in the figure. In addition to a corresponding traffic snapshot at time instant to, an aggregate of all the vibrations along each section of the roadway at each time instant is represented as the time-distance graph, which is described in the art as a waterfall trace. During operation, as a vehicle traverses along the roadway, its corresponding vibration pattern can be observed from the waterfall trace. Vehicles passing closer to the optical fiber cable (travelling left to right in the figure) have stronger vibration patterns as compared to the vehicles travelling in the opposite direction. Also, vehicles travelling towards the start and end of the cable will generate trace(s) exhibiting opposite inclinations. The instantaneous speed of a vehicle can be estimated using slope of its vibration pattern at any instant of time or location. Advantageously, the total number of such patterns indicates the total number of vehicles travelling along a roadway.).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system and method of Sato by incorporating the applied teaching of Salemi to improve the accuracy of vehicle positioning and to improve the efficiency of traffic management system. Furthermore, the claimed invention is merely a combination of old, well known elements of vehicle positioning for traffic management and as such and one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have recognized that the results of the combination would have been predictable.
Regarding claim(s) 3. Sato discloses wherein the first criterion further includes a fact that a moving velocity of the front position is faster than a previously determined first threshold value (para. 16, the predetermined running state may be running at a speed lower than a predetermined speed set in advance, and the information may be provided by providing a driver of a predetermined vehicle running at the speed lower than the predetermined speed with information on at least one of predictable formation of a vehicle group with the predetermined vehicle at a head and a driving operation of restraining the vehicle group from being formed with the predetermined vehicle at the head.)
Regarding claim(s) 4. Sato discloses wherein the criterion includes a second criterion including a fact that a moving direction of the front position is a traveling direction of the road, and, when movement of the detected front position satisfies the second criterion, outputting the congestion information according to the second criterion (para. 36, The identification information includes an ID of a transmission source vehicle and an ID of a vehicle group to which the transmission source vehicle belongs. The running information is composed of pieces of information on measurement values about the running of the own vehicle, such as a current position, a traveling direction (a bearing)).
Regarding claim(s) 5. Sato discloses wherein the second criterion further includes a fact that a moving velocity of the front position is slower than a previously determined second threshold value (para. 16, the predetermined running state may be running at a speed lower than a predetermined speed set in advance, and the information may be provided by providing a driver of a predetermined vehicle running at the speed lower than the predetermined speed with information on at least one of predictable formation of a vehicle group with the predetermined vehicle at a head and a driving operation of restraining the vehicle group from being formed with the predetermined vehicle at the head.)
Regarding claim(s) 6. Sato discloses wherein detecting the front position includes generating history information indicating a history of a vehicle position on the road, and detecting, based on the history information, a front position of congestion on the road (para. 30-31, he predetermined running state indicates, for example, a running state constituting a cause of traffic congestion on the road. In this embodiment of the invention, a case where the predetermined running state is defined as running at the head of a vehicle group will be described. It is preferable that the predetermined running state be determined as a running state constituting a cause of traffic congestion on the road. It should be noted that the running state constituting a cause of traffic congestion indicates, for example, a running state tending to constitute a cause of the occurrence of traffic congestion or a running state tending to promote ongoing traffic congestion.).
Regarding claim(s) 7. The traffic monitoring apparatus according to claim 1, wherein, when the road includes a plurality of lanes for traveling in a same direction, detecting the front position includes a front position of congestion in each lane of the road (para. 40, the infrastructure device 12 recognizes a group of vehicles successively running in a longitudinal direction at a vehicle-to-vehicle time interval shorter than the predetermined vehicle-to-vehicle time interval, as the vehicle group 100.)
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sato US2013/0144516 (“Sato”) in view of Salemi et al. US2020/0401784 (“Salemi”) and further in view of Matsui et al. US2002/0145541 (“Matsui”).
Regarding claim(s). Sato does not explicitly disclose an optical fiber being laid on the road, and having one end subjected to termination processing that suppresses reflection of an optical signal; and a sensing apparatus that inputs an optical signal to the optical fiber, and also observes a change amount of optical interference intensity being intensity of light in which beams of backscattered light generated due to the input of the optical signal interfere with each other, wherein detecting the front position acquiring a vehicle position on the road acquired based on a change amount of the optical interference intensity observed by the sensing apparatus, and detects a front position of congestion on the road, based on the vehicle position.
Matsui teaches another traffic monitoring system and an optical fiber being laid on the road, and having one end subjected to termination processing that suppresses reflection of an optical signal; and a sensing apparatus that inputs an optical signal to the optical fiber, and also observes a change amount of optical interference intensity being intensity of light in which beams of backscattered light generated due to the input of the optical signal interfere with each other, wherein detecting the front position acquiring a vehicle position on the road acquired based on a change amount of the optical interference intensity observed by the sensing apparatus, and detects a front position of congestion on the road, based on the vehicle position (para. 7, para. 21-24, par. 52-55, directionality of the transceiver antennas provided on said roadside wireless device suppresses side lobes, and forms a pattern wherein the wireless signal intensity at the boundary with adjacent lanes is 20-40 dB lower than that at the center of the traffic lane, and also, in the exchange of signals with the vehicle-mounted wireless ID device of the traveling vehicle, a spatial arrangement is adopted that prevents the interference of radio signals including those of different traveling vehicles and malfunctions due thereto.)
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the combination system and method of Sato and Salemi by incorporating the applied teaching of Matsui to improve the accuracy of vehicle positioning and to improve the efficiency of traffic management system. Furthermore, the claimed invention is merely a combination of old, well known elements of vehicle positioning for traffic management and as such and one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have recognized that the results of the combination would have been predictable.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any 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.
Inquiry
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TRUC M DO whose telephone number is (571)270-5962. The examiner can normally be reached on 9AM-6PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Ramón Mercado, Ph.D. can be reached on (571) 270-5744. 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.
/TRUC M DO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3658
Prosecution Insights