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 .
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 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.
Claims 1-4 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Spiegel (US 2015/0198714 A1) and Kreiss (US 2020/0209346 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Spiegel teaches an object detection device comprising:
an acquisition unit configured to acquire distance information indicating a distance from a transmission and reception unit to an object based on a time until an ultrasonic wave transmitted from the transmission and reception unit is reflected by the object and returns [[abstract] determining the distance of a vehicle from an obstacle, an ultrasound received signal is received by at least one ultrasound receiver subscriber of a data bus, after a burst transmission signal comprising a plurality of ultrasound pulses and having a burst length has been transmitted by at least one ultrasound transmitter subscriber of the data bus];
an output unit configured to output the distance information [[0013] signal processing unit is operative to determine, for each time section, a peak value of the received signal]; and
an adjustment unit configured to adjust the number of pieces of distance information [[abstract] peak value for each time section of the ultrasound received signal is transmitted via the data bus to a central control and evaluation unit], which is output from the output unit in each of a plurality of divided periods set to divide a measurement cycle in which the ultrasonic wave is transmitted and received once by a predetermined time width [[abstract] ultrasound received signal is subdivided into time sections which are substantially equal to half the burst length.], to be equal to or less than a predetermined first upper limit value [[abstract] on the basis of the peak values of the received signal for each time section, taking into account threshold value tracking, it is determined in the control and evaluation unit whether the ultrasound received signal has time sections in which the ultrasound received signal is greater than the tracked threshold value or equal to the tracked threshold value; [0011] received signal being divided, from the start of an emission of the ultrasound burst transmission signal, into individual time sections ( so-called cells) of a length substantially equal to half of the burst length.].
Spiegel does not explicitly teach and yet Kreiss teaches wherein the reflected signal exceeds a threshold [[0016] an object of the disclosure to further increase the degree of data compression in an ultrasonic sensor of a vehicle, without thereby compromising the reliability of the recognition of obstacles and of the type of obstacles. It is a further object to further decrease the need for bus bandwidth; [0022] the amount of time between the signal profile object and another signal profile object preceding or trailing in the echo signal the peak and in particular the maximum peak of the signal profile object, the time of the peak and in particular the time of the maximum peak of the signal profile object within the temporal extent thereof and/or the size of the area of the echo signal section belonging to the signal profile object and in particular the size of the proportion of the area of the echo signal section belonging to the signal profile object above a threshold value or a threshold signal profile, and wherein the echo signal section belonging to the signal profile object can be reconstructed from the identifier of the signal profile; [0205] a double peak with a saddle point (60) above the threshold value signal is recognized].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to modify the peak detection as taught by Spiegel, with the peak detection with a threshold as taught by Kreiss so that a shape of the signal may be transmitted from the ultrasonic receiver to a vehicle controller in a compressed form to save data (Kreiss) [[0002][0204-0205]].
Regarding claim 2, Spiegel teaches the object detection device according to claim 1, wherein the adjustment unit adjusts the number of pieces of distance information output from the output unit in the measurement cycle to be equal to or less than a predetermined second upper limit value [[0011] received signal being divided, from the start of an emission of the ultrasound burst transmission signal, into individual time sections ( so-called cells) of a length substantially equal to half of the burst length.].
Regarding claim 3, Spiegel teaches the object detection device according to claim 1, wherein when the distance information larger than the first upper limit value is acquired in one of the divided periods, the adjustment unit outputs the distance information having a shortest elapsed time from transmission of the ultrasonic wave [[0021] received ultrasound signal will be subdivided into individual time sections, so-called cells, which are substantially equal to half of the burst length. This subdividing of the received signal is carried out at the start of the emission of the ultrasound burst transmission signal.].
Regarding claim 4, Spiegel teaches the object detection device according to claim 1, wherein when the distance information larger than the first upper limit value is acquired in one of the divided periods, the adjustment unit preferentially outputs the distance information in which an intensity of a reflected wave from the object is highest [[0022] transmission of the data from the ultrasound receiver subscribers to the control and evaluation unit is reduced. Namely, each ultrasound receiver subscriber will substantially transmit only the peak value of the received signal for each cell. The peak values for each cell are sufficient for performing an automatic threshold value computation and tracking in the control and evaluation unit.].
Regarding claim 7, Spiegel does not explicitly teach and yet Kreiss teaches an object detection system comprising: the objection detection device according to claim 1, further comprising: an engine control unit, wherein the output unit is configured to output the distance information to the engine control unit [[0016] an object of the disclosure to further increase the degree of data compression in an ultrasonic sensor of a vehicle, without thereby compromising the reliability of the recognition of obstacles and of the type of obstacles. It is a further object to further decrease the need for bus bandwidth for the transmission of measuring data from an ultrasonic sensor system to a computer system or to increase the efficiency of the data transmission].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to modify the peak detection as taught by Spiegel, with the peak detection with a threshold as taught by Kreiss so that a shape of the signal may be transmitted from the ultrasonic receiver to a vehicle controller in a compressed form to save data (Kreiss) [[0002][0204-0205]].
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 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.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Spiegel (US 2015/0198714 A1) and Kreiss (US 2020/0209346 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Max (US 2020/0193731 A1).
Regarding claim 5, Spiegel does not explicitly teach and yet Buerkle teaches the object detection device according to claim 1, wherein the plurality of divided periods are set so as to unequally divide the measurement cycle [[0069] non - uniform occupancy grids can account for these differences in the precision - requirements. According to an aspect of the disclosure, and occupancy grid may include two or more areas of differing cell densities / cell resolutions / cell sizes. The occupancy grid manager may selected areas and / or the cell densities / resolutions / sizes according to any desired criteria, without limitation. As a non - limiting example, the occupancy grid may include a higher cell density / higher resolution / lower cell size in an area surrounding or near to the vehicle, and the occupancy grid may include a lower cell density / lower resolution /greater cell size in an area farther away from the vehicle].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention toe modify the time cells as taught by Spiegel, with the non-uniform time cells as taught by Max so that power may be reduced during time periods when resolution requirements are lower (Max) [[0005][0066]].
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Spiegel (US 2015/0198714 A1), Kreiss (US 2020/0209346 A1), and Max (US 2020/0193731 A1 as applied to claim 5 above, and further in view of Buerkle (US 2020/0225622 A1).
Regarding claim 6, Spiegel does not explicitly teach and yet Buerkle teaches the object detection device according to claim 5, wherein the plurality of divided periods are shorter as an elapsed time from transmission of the ultrasonic wave is shorter [[0033] data profile ascertained by a vehicle is first divided into individual routes, i.e., sections. At least one message should be generated for each section. To reduce the amount of data, each section is then divided into segments, for example into eight segments, wherein one feature and if applicable one piece of context information on the feature is ascertained for each segment. Expressed otherwise, an abstraction of the data profile is carried out. The data reduced in this matter are combined into one data block per section, i.e., into a message. The resulting message may, e.g., be transferred to the back end. By processing the data accordingly, the desired forwarding of the data to the back end may be realized with a much smaller data volume.; [0050] In the following, some embodiments will be described with reference to FIGS. 5 to 9. In these embodiments, the sensor data are distance data that are ascertained by means of the ultrasonic sensors of a park assist.; [0052] distance scan is divided into a series of routes. or respectively sections WS that were each traveled over a specific time by the vehicle during the measurement; [0062]].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention toe modify the time cells as taught by Spiegel, with the non-uniform time cells as taught by Buerkle so that power may be reduced during time periods when resolution requirements are lower (Buerkle) [[0005][0066]].
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pgs. 5-, filed 12, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1 under 35 U.S.C. 102 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Kreiss (US 2020/0209346 A1).
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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JONATHAN D ARMSTRONG whose telephone number is (571)270-7339. The examiner can normally be reached M - F 9am-5pm.
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, Isam Alsomiri can be reached at 571-272-6970. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JONATHAN D ARMSTRONG/ Examiner, Art Unit 3645