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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 04/13/2023 was filed. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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(s) 1-8,10-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stenneth et al (U.S.2023/0303111), Okamoto (U.S.12,246,751) and further in view of Allard et al (2007/0193798).
1. As per claims 1,20 Stenneth disclosed a computer comprising a processor and a memory, the memory storing instructions executable by the processor to: receive sensor data indicating an environment around a vehicle while the vehicle is traveling forward along a driving surface to a location on the driving surface (Paragraph. 0100); identify at least one elevation drop based on the sensor data (Paragraph. 0024); wherein the at least one elevation drop has a slope above a threshold angle measured from horizontal (Paragraph. 00126);
However, Stenneth did not disclose generated while the vehicle was traveling forward to the location on the driving surface, the planned trajectory beginning at the location on the driving surface.
In the same field of endeavor Okamoto disclosed Vehicle 420 performs the bidirectional maneuver by entering the parking location along the first trajectory 108 and, without physically moving vehicle 420 in the parking location, switches its front, while in the parking location 453, from a direction of the first trajectory 451 to a direction of the second trajectory 452, such that vehicle 420 is traveling forward when leaving the parking location along the second trajectory 452. In some examples, vehicle 420 may control one or more lights of the vehicle to change a color of the lights of head lights to tail lights, and vice versa, in connection with the bidirectional parking maneuver (col.10, lines 64-67 & col.11, lines 1-8).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date was made to have incorporated Vehicle 420 performs the bidirectional maneuver by entering the parking location along the first trajectory 108 and, without physically moving vehicle 420 in the parking location, switches its front, while in the parking location 453, from a direction of the first trajectory 451 to a direction of the second trajectory 452, such that vehicle 420 is traveling forward when leaving the parking location along the second trajectory 452. In some examples, vehicle 420 may control one or more lights of the vehicle to change a color of the lights of head lights to tail lights, and vice versa, in connection with the bidirectional parking maneuver as taught by Okamoto in the method and system of Stenneth to optimize the travel plan system.
However, Stenneth-Okamoto did not explicitly disclose, “generate a map of the environment from the sensor data the map including at least one elevation drop; and in generate a planned trajectory for the vehicle to travel in reverse and avoid the at least one elevation drop based on the map generated while the vehicle was traveling forward to the location on the driving surface and at least one of (1) autonomously or semi-autonomously actuate at least one of a steering system or a brake system of the vehicle according to the planned trajectory or (2) while an operator of the vehicle actuates at least one of the steering system or the brake system while traveling in a reverse over the driving surface, display instructions via a user interface of the vehicle to the operator to follow the planned trajectory.
In the same field of endeavor Allard disclosed, “The rear sensor assembly can execute a rear range scan to obtain near data representing obstacles or objects at least behind the vehicle. The robotic control unit can receive the forward and rear data and generating an obstacle map based on the forward and rear data” (Paragraph. 0007). “An obstacle map may be calculated, based on information obtained from sensors, such as the front and rear laser beams, including the presence and location of obstacles. The obstacle map may be provided to the drive arbiter component as a limit on the trajectory sets. Under the "Follow Me" mode, obstacle avoidance information, detection, or responsive behaviors as described herein may be interpreted by the robotic control system to alter the trajectories in the trajectory set or change preferences among trajectories to: (1) avoid obstacles; (2) prefer trajectories farther from the middle trajectory if the middle trajectory is interpreted to include obstacles, such as negative obstacles, including holes or elevation drops, or positive obstacles, such as a structure or tree, or exclude candidate objects to follow; (3) change or lower the maximum allowed speed; (4) change or increase the pre-selected stopping distance; and (5) otherwise alter instructions carried out in "Follow Me" mode to account for obstacles” (Paragraph. 0104). The RCU architecture 2200 includes an application layer 2202 having a following (semi-autonomous mode) 2204 application that can take obstacle data from the obstacle map to locate a leader and output a trajectory set for use by the drive arbiter. The following (semi-autonomous mode) 2204 executes by including a follow behavior 2216 function that receives data from a drive configuration 2212 and a 2D obstacle map 2214 via shared memory. The follow behavior 2216 also receives a follow behavior, such as from an operating system 2208 or from an outside device, such as an OCU. The follow behavior 2216 generates a trajectory set based on the received data and provides the trajectory set to a drive arbiter 2218 (Paragraph. 0075).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date was made to have incorporated rear sensor assembly can execute a rear range scan to obtain near data representing obstacles or objects at least behind the vehicle. The robotic control unit can receive the forward and rear data and generating an obstacle map based on the forward and rear data. An obstacle map may be calculated, based on information obtained from sensors, such as the front and rear laser beams, including the presence and location of obstacles. The obstacle map may be provided to the drive arbiter component as a limit on the trajectory sets. Under the "Follow Me" mode, obstacle avoidance information, detection, or responsive behaviors as described herein may be interpreted by the robotic control system to alter the trajectories in the trajectory set or change preferences among trajectories to: (1) avoid obstacles; (2) prefer trajectories farther from the middle trajectory if the middle trajectory is interpreted to include obstacles, such as negative obstacles, including holes or elevation drops, or positive obstacles, such as a structure or tree, or exclude candidate objects to follow; (3) change or lower the maximum allowed speed; (4) change or increase the pre-selected stopping distance; and (5) otherwise alter instructions carried out in "Follow Me" mode to account for obstacles. The RCU architecture 2200 includes an application layer 2202 having a following (semi-autonomous mode) 2204 application that can take obstacle data from the obstacle map to locate a leader and output a trajectory set for use by the drive arbiter. The following (semi-autonomous mode) 2204 executes by including a follow behavior 2216 function that receives data from a drive configuration 2212 and a 2D obstacle map 2214 via shared memory. The follow behavior 2216 also receives a follow behavior, such as from an operating system 2208 or from an outside device, such as an OCU. The follow behavior 2216 generates a trajectory set based on the received data and provides the trajectory set to a drive arbiter 2218. as taught by Allard in the method and system of Stenneth-Okamoto to optimize the travel plan system.
2. As per claim 2 Stenneth-Okamoto-Allard disclosed wherein the instructions further include instructions to record control inputs that actuate the vehicle while the vehicle is traveling forward along the driving surface, and generate the planned trajectory based on the recorded control inputs (Okamoto, col. 10, lines 64-67 & col. 11, lines 1-8). The claim 2 has the same motivation as to claim 1.
3. As per claim 3 Stenneth-Okamoto-Allard disclosed wherein the instructions further include instructions to determine reversed control inputs defining the planned trajectory based on the recorded control inputs (Okamoto, col. 10, lines 64-67 & col. 11, lines 1-8). The claim 3 has the same motivation as to claim 3.
4. As per claim 4 Stenneth-Okamoto=Allard disclosed wherein the instructions further include instructions to actuate the vehicle according to the reversed control inputs to follow the planned trajectory (Okamoto, col. 10, lines 64-67 & col. 11, lines 1-8). The claim 4 has the same motivation as to claim1.
5. As per claim 5 Stenneth-Okamoto-Allard disclosed wherein the instructions further include instructions to display the reversed control inputs to an operator of the vehicle (Stenneth, Paragraph. 0153).
6. As per claim 6 Stenneth-Okamoto-Allard disclosed wherein the recorded control inputs include recorded steering inputs in a temporal order, and the reversed control inputs include the recorded steering inputs in a reverse of the temporal order (Stenneth, Paragraph. 0156).
7. As per claim 7 Stenneth-Okamoto-Allard disclosed wherein the recorded control inputs include recorded speeds of the vehicle in a temporal order (Stenneth, Paragraph. 0156), and the reversed control inputs include the recorded speeds in a reverse of the temporal order (Srenneth, Paragraph. 0161).
8. As per claim 8 Stenneth-Okamoto-Allard disclosed wherein the instructions further include instructions to, in response to the vehicle crossing the at least one elevation drop while the vehicle is traveling forward along the driving surface, discard the recorded control inputs (Stenneth, Paragraph. 0126).
9. As per claim 10 Stenneth-Okamoto-Allard disclosed wherein the instructions further include instructions to determine that a projected trajectory of the vehicle traveling in reverse along the driving surface intersects the at least one elevation drop (Stenneth, Paragraph. 0126), and upon determining that the projected trajectory intersects the at least one elevation drop, actuate the vehicle to avoid the at least one elevation drop (Stenneth, Paragraph. 0117).
10. As per claim 11 Stenneth-Okamoto-Allard disclosed wherein the instructions to actuate the vehicle to avoid the at least one elevation drop include instructions to actuate the brake system (Stenneth, Paragraph. 0126).
11. As per claim 12 Stenneth-Okamoto-Allard disclosed wherein the instructions further include instructions to, upon the vehicle stopping from actuating the brake system to avoid the at least one elevation drop, output an instruction for the vehicle to travel forward (Stenneth, Paragraph. 0126).
12. As per claim 13 Stenneth-Okamoto-Allard disclosed wherein the instructions further include instructions to, upon the vehicle stopping from actuating the brake system to avoid the at least one elevation drop (Stenneth, Paragraph. 0126), determine that a second planned trajectory is unavailable for the vehicle traveling in reverse to avoid the at least one elevation drop (Stenneth, Paragraph. 0117), and upon determining that the second planned trajectory is unavailable, output an instruction for the vehicle to travel forward (Okamoto, col. 10, lines 64-67 & col. 11, lines 1-8). The claim 13 has the same motivation as to claim 1.
13. As per claim 14 Stenneth-Okamoto-Allard disclosed wherein the instructions to actuate the vehicle to avoid the at least one elevation drop include instructions to actuate a steering system (Stenneth, Paragraph. 0117).
14. As per claim 15 Stenneth-Okamoto-Allard disclosed wherein the instructions further include instructions to display an image to an operator of the vehicle, the image highlighting the planned trajectory and the at least one elevation drop (Okamoto, col. 10, lines 64-67 & col. 11, lines 1-8 & col. 15, lines 3-10). The claim 15 has the same motivation as to claim 1.
15. As per claim 16 Stenneth-Okamoto-Allard disclosed wherein the image includes a camera image of the environment behind the vehicle and superimposed indications of the planned trajectory and the at least one elevation drop (Okamoto, col. 10, lines 64-67 & col. 11, lines 1-8). The claim 16 has the same move motivation as to claim 1.
16. As per claim 17 Stenneth-Okamoto-Allard disclosed wherein the instructions further include instructions to determine planned control inputs for actuating the vehicle to follow the planned trajectory, and display the planned control inputs to the operator of the vehicle (Okamoto, col. 10, lines 64-67 & col. 11, lines 1-8). The claim 17 has the same motivation as to claim 1.
17. As per claim 18 Stenneth-Okamoto-Allard disclosed wherein the instructions further include instructions to display actual control inputs being provided by the operator to the vehicle alongside the planned control inputs (Stenneth, 0100).
18. As per claim 19 Stenneth-Okamoto-Allard disclosed wherein the planned control inputs include a planned steering-wheel angle, and the actual control inputs include an actual steering-wheel angle (Stenneth, Paragraph. 0126).
Response to Arguments
19. Applicant's arguments filed 05/19/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Response to applicant’s argument as follows.
A. Applicant argued that prior art did not disclose wherein the at least one elevation drop has a slope above a threshold angle measured from horizontal.
As to applicant’s argument Stenneth disclosed, “In another example, a road topology criteria may indicate that if, according to the corresponding map data, a curve in the TME or a turn to be made at an intersection is greater than a first angle or less than a second angle, it is expected that the sensors 29 will not be able to capture sensor data sufficient for operating in a sensor-based navigation mode as a corresponding vehicle 5 traverses the corresponding curve or turn. Similarly, various combinations of road way topology and static feature dimensions and placement may be determined to result in the sensors 29 will not be able to capture sensor data sufficient for operating in a sensor-based navigation mode in the vicinity of the static feature (Paragraph. 0126). Examiner interpreted the criteria as threshold meaning a particular value that represent particular dimensions representing curve/turns.
B. Applicant argued that prior art did not disclose, “wherein the image includes a camera image of the environment behind the vehicle and superimposed indications of the planned trajectory and the at least one elevation drop”.
As to applicant’s argument Okamoto disclosed, “cameras or other image sensors, ultrasonic sensors to acoustically detect objects in the surroundings of the drive system, lidar sensors, radar sensors, etc. Some sensors, such as the wheel encoders can be unique to the drive system(s) 714. In some cases, the sensor system(s) 706 on the drive system(s) 714 can overlap or supplement corresponding systems of the vehicle 702 (e.g., sensor system(s) 706) (col. 15, lines 3-10).
Conclusion
20. THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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.
21. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communication from the
examiner should be directed to Adnan Mirza whose telephone number is (571)-272-3885.
22. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday to Friday during normal
business hours. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the
examiner’s supervisor, Faris Almatrahi can be reached on (313)-446-4821.
23. 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 un published 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).
/ADNAN M MIRZA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3667
Prosecution Insights