DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-4, 6-10, 12-16 and 18 are considered in this office action. Claims 1-4, 6-10, 12-16 and 18 are pending examination.
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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 07/21/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In view of 103 rejection, the applicant simply argues that “Wang, et al. does not teach "wherein the vehicle, vessel, or aircraft includes a multimodal modulation engine (MMME) configured to integrate data received from the plurality of sensors; wherein the MMME enforces a hierarchical intelligence model (HIM) routine. Wang et al., may discuss a hierarchical model; however, Wang does not teach, disclose, nor indicate using a multimodal modulation engine (herein "MMME") to enforce a hierarchical intelligence model (HIM). Rather, Wang solely discusses the hierarchical model without depicting the shortcomings of the technology.", the examiner is citing Gall prior to teach the Multimodal Modulation engine where multiple sensors data is being fused together to make autonomous decision for the vehicle. And after that Wang is being used to disclose the Hierarchical intelligence model which would be able to utilize by Gall reference to further optimize the autonomous operation.
The applicant also argues that “The Office Action, on page 4 that Gall teaches a "plurality of sensors, comprising at least RADAR and LIDAR, adapted to obtain information about surroundings of the vehicle, vessel, or aircraft." While Gall may teach a plurality of sensors, Gall fails to teach the fusion of data of received from the plurality of sensors. Thus, in order to advance prosecution, Applicant has amended claim 1 specify fusing data collected from the plurality of sensors using a multimodal modulation engine (herein "MMME").” Again the examiner respectfully disagree with the applicant assertion. The Gall reference clearly teaches receiving input data from multiple sensors 102, 104 and 106 and determination unit #126 fusing the data as disclosed in Col.6 Line 3-20.
The examiner believes he has responded to all the arguments presented by the applicant at this time. However, if the applicant believes that the examiner has missed any arguments to respond, the applicant is invited to call the examiner directly to expedite the process.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-4, 6-10, 12-16 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
“Self-aware”: the claim recites a self-aware mobile system. The specification discusses autonomy and intelligence conceptually but does not reasonably convey possession of a concrete implementation of self-awareness. Instead, the specification described theoretical intelligence hierarchies and behavior models rather than specific algorithm implementing self-awareness.
“Multimodal Modulation Engine”: The specification introduces the MMME as functional engine for integrating information. However, no algorithm, architecture, processing flow or implementation details are discloses demonstrating how multimodal modulation is actually performed. The specification therefore fails to demonstrate possession of the full scope of the claimed engine.
“Hierarchical Intelligence Model”: The HIM is described primarily through conceptual behavioral hierarchies and mathematical expressions. The specification does not disclose: execute algorithms, software architecture, decision logic, machine learning implementation neural network structure, inference engine and state transitions necessary to implement the claimed HIM across the full scope of the claims.
“Artificial Vision”: The claim broadly recites generate artificial vision data. The specification does not adequately describe reconstruction algorithms, occupancy mapping, SLAM, semantic segmentation, object detection, image synthesis or any other specific process for generating artificial vision. The claim is therefore encompassed substantially more than is described in the pending specification.
“Combat Response”: The claim recites when normal operations escalate into a combat response. The specification does not disclose objective criteria determining: combat conditions, escalation thresholds, decision policies, threat evaluation. Instead, the claim merely recites the desire result.
Claims 1-4,6-10, 12-16 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the enablement requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to enable one skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and/or use the invention. The claim broadly encompass: aircraft, vessels, ground vehicles, military systems, autonomous navigation, multimodal sensing, artificial vision. Hierarchical intelligence, secure communications. The specification contains conceptual discussions of autonomous intelligence but does not teach how to implement these concepts throughout the full breadth of the claimed genus without undue experiment.
Accordingly, the specification fails both the written description and enablement requirements.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION. —The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-4,6-10, 12-16 and 18 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
The term “self-aware” has no established meaning in the autonomous vehicle arts. The specification does not provide objective boundaries defining what constitutes a self-aware vehicle. For the compact prosecution the term is being interpreted as autonomous vehicle.
The term “Artificial Vision” is not defined with reasonably certainty. It is unclear whether the term refers to computer vision, reconstructed imagery, occupancy maps, point clouds, semantic models, synthetic images or other forms of machine perception. For the compact prosecution the term is being interpreted as sensor system.
The term “Normal Operations” is a relative term. No objective baseline is provided.
The term “combat response” depends upon mission context and is not objectively defined. Different operators could reasonably interpret the term differently.
The term “enforces a hierarchical intelligence model” fails to identify what actions constitute enforcement or how compliance is measured. The limitation therefore recites only a desired result.
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, 7 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yeshurun (US20180341262A1) in view of Gall et al. (US11643116B2) and in further view of Wang et al. (“Towards a Theoretical Framework of Autonomous Systems Underpinned by Intelligence and Systems Sciecnes”, IEEE/CAA Journal of Automatica Sinica, Vol.8 No.1 January 2021) and in further view of Getman (US20210229805A1) and in further view of McLaughlin et al. (US20230023246) and herein after will be referred as Yeshurun, Gall, Wang, Getman and McLaughlin respectively.
Regarding Claim 1, Yeshurun teaches a self-aware mobile system (Fig.1 #10) comprising:
a vehicle, vessel, or aircraft comprising (Para [0031] “As illustrated in FIG. 1, there is provided a system, which is generally indicated at 10. The system 10 is configured to facilitate active protection of a target such as a vehicle 12, which may be a tank, a personnel carrier, a marine vehicle, an airborne vehicle, etc., from an incoming threat.”):
Yeshurun also teaches wherein the vehicle, vessel, or aircraft is a military or tactical vehicle and the artificial vision data is further communicated with a human vehicle commander regarding when normal operations of a vehicle escalate into a combat response (Para [0043]: “Alternatively or additionally, one or more of the UAVs 14 may comprise surveillance equipment 20 configured to facilitate detection of an incoming threat. The UAV 14 may be configured to transmit data gathered by the surveillance equipment 20 to the platform controller and/or the UAV controller for further processing (i.e., to identify the type of or specific threat, and/or to identify whether the threat's trajectory, and assess the likelihood of it impacting the vehicle and/or where on the vehicle the impact is likely to occur). The surveillance equipment 20 may comprise one or more of an optical sensor, infrared sensor, a motion sensor, a thermal sensor, and a pulse-Doppler radar. The surveillance equipment 20 may additionally or alternatively comprise any other device which is suitable to facilitate detection of an oncoming threat.”)
Gall teaches a plurality of sensors, comprising at least RADAR and LIDAR, adapted to obtain information about surroundings of the vehicle, vessel, or aircraft (Col.5 Line 28-36: “Vehicle 100 includes a multitude of sensor units 102, 104. 106. In the representation of FIG. 1, only three sensor units 102, 104, 106 are shown by way of example. For example, a first sensor unit 102 is designed as a radar sensor for detecting surroundings of vehicle 100, a second sensor unit 104 is, for example, designed as a camera for detecting the surroundings of vehicle 100, and a third sensor unit 106 is, for example, designed as a LIDAR sensor for detecting the surroundings of vehicle 100.”);
and
at least one computer system configured to receive data from the plurality of sensors, perform fusion of the received data to generate artificial vision data representing the surroundings of the vehicle, vessel, or aircraft, and to use the artificial vision data to provide autonomous functioning of the vehicle, vessel, or aircraft (Col.5 Line 58-64: “Vehicle 100 furthermore includes a device 120 for operating, or operating device 120. Device 120 is connected to sensor units 102, 104, 106 in a signal transmission-capable manner. Device 120 is designed to generate a fusion signal 129, which is usable for operating vehicle 100, using sensor data 112, 114, 116 and sensor state data 113, 115, 117 as input data 121.”).
Gall also teaches wherein the vehicle, vessel, or aircraft includes a multimodal modulation engine (MMME) configured to integrate data received from the plurality sensors 120 is designed to read in sensor data 112, 114, 116 and sensor state data 113, 115, 117 from sensor units 102, 104, 106 as input data 121. According to the exemplary embodiment shown here, device 120 includes a generation unit 124 and a determination unit 126, as well as an input interface 122 and an output interface 128. Device 120 is designed to read in input data 121 from input interface 122 to sensor units 102, 104, 106. Generation unit 124 is designed to generate a potential field, using input data 121. Generation unit 124 is designed to use input data 121 as attractive potentials and repulsive potentials of the potential field during the generation of the potential field. In particular, generation unit 124 is designed to provide potential field data 125, which represent the generated potential field, to determination unit 126. Determination unit 126 is designed to generate fusion signal 128, using potential field data 125. For this purpose, determination unit 126 is, more precisely, designed to determine a trajectory through the potential field in order to generate fusion signal 129, using the trajectory, for fusing input data 121 for a sensor data fusion for the highly automated driving operation of vehicle 100. Within the scope of the sensor data fusion, sensor data 112, 114, 116 are weighted, for example, using fusion signal 129…. According to the exemplary embodiment shown here, device 120 is furthermore designed to provide fusion signal 129 for output-to-output interface 128 to a unit 132 of a system 130 for sensor data fusion of vehicle 100. According to the exemplary embodiment shown here, vehicle 100 also includes system 130. System 130 includes at least unit 132. Unit 132 is connected to sensor units 102, 104, 106 in a signal transmission-capable manner. According to one exemplary embodiment, device 120 is implemented as part of system 130. According to another exemplary embodiment, device 120 is implemented separately from system 130 and connected to system 130 in a signal transmission-capable manner.” Here data fusion unit 132 is being interpreted as MMME which integrating data from several sensors unit 102,104 and 106).
And Wang teaches a hierarchical intelligence model routine (Pages 54-56).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Yeshurun to incorporate the teachings of Gall to include autonomous vehicle and autonomous sensors for operating the vehicle in autonomous mode and the vehicle, vessel, or aircraft includes a multimodal modulation engine (MMME) for enforcing a hierarchical intelligence model routine. Doing so would optimize providing security for autonomous vehicles as well as disclosed in Yeshurun.
Getman teaches wherein the vehicle, vessel, or aircraft includes at least two attachments for a charging point and/or a refueling point (Para [0138] Fig.5: “FIG. 5 illustrates how a forward door 54 a can assist in drone takeoff. A rearward door 54 b can be completely opened. Then, the forward door 54 a moves so that it is only partly opened. Its unopened portion may block wind to permit the drone 10 to have more stable lift off conditions. The respective docking systems 16 and 22 of the vehicle 20 and the drone 10 may utilize, for example, docking mechanisms that employ magnetic charging contacts 56 and/or magnetic feet 58 that also serve as part of the respective external charging station 26 and the on-board charge-receiving system 36. The charging contacts 56 may be flush with the surface of a landing pad 60 of the docking system 16, or they may be recessed (or elevated) to provide for a more stability while docked (or accessibility during docking).”);
Getman also teaches wherein the at least one computer system receives the data from the plurality of sensors via at least one communications link ([0141]: “The drone 10 may also include a communication system, such as a mobile or cellular system. A communication system may additionally or alternatively include one or more of visual (strobe frequency, Morse code, binary), thermal, audio, tactical chemical signals, laser, lidar, or radar. The communication system may relay instructions and data to a discrete remote device, such as a vehicle computer, a stationary computing system, an artificial intelligence system, a cell phone, or other device equipped to receive communications. Some specific examples of communication with remote devices are provided later.”);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Yeshurun and Gall to incorporate the teachings of Getman to include the vehicle, vessel, or aircraft includes at least two attachments for a charging point and/or a refueling point and the at least one computer system receives the data from the plurality of sensors via at least one communications link. Doing so would optimize operation of the mobile system.
McLaughlin wherein the at least one communications link is encrypted to provide secure communications for the at least one computer system and/or the plurality of sensors (Para [0043] and Fig.6).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Yeshurun, Gall and Getman to incorporate the teachings of McLaughlin to include the at least one communications link is encrypted to provide secure communications for the at least one computer system and/or the plurality of sensors. Doing so would optimize secure operation of the mobile system.
Similarly Claims 7 and 13 are rejected on the similar rational.
Claims 2-4, 8-10, 12,14-16 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yeshurun in view of Gall and in further view of Wang and in further view of Getman and in further view of McLaughlin and in further view of Chen et al. (11042163B2) and herein after will be referred as Chen.
Regarding Claim 2, Yeshurun in view of Gall and in further view of Wang and in further view of Getman and in further view of McLaughlin teaches the system of claim 1.
Chen teaches wherein the plurality of sensors further comprises at least one of: a GPS receiver, a tachometer, an altimeter, a gyroscope, a camera, and an ultrasonic sensor (Col.31. Line 19-37: “The controller(s) 836 may provide the signals for controlling one or more components and/or systems of the vehicle 140 in response to sensor data received from one or more sensors (e.g., sensor inputs). The sensor data may be received from, for example and without limitation, global navigation satellite systems sensor(s) 858 (e.g., Global Positioning System sensor(s)), RADAR sensor(s) 860, ultrasonic sensor(s) 862, LIDAR sensor(s) 864, inertial measurement unit (IMU) sensor(s) 866 (e.g., accelerometer(s), gyroscope(s), magnetic compass(es), magnetometer(s), etc.), microphone(s) 896, stereo camera(s) 868, wide-view camera(s) 870 (e.g., fisheye cameras), infrared camera(s) 872, surround camera(s) 874 (e.g., 360 degree cameras), long-range and/or mid-range camera(s) 898, speed sensor(s) 844 (e.g., for measuring the speed of the vehicle 140), vibration sensor(s) 842, steering sensor(s) 840, brake sensor(s) (e.g., as part of the brake sensor system 846), and/or other sensor types.”
Col. 49 Line 16-22: “The vehicle 140 may further include an instrument cluster 832 (e.g., a digital dash, an electronic instrument cluster, a digital instrument panel, etc.). The instrument cluster 832 may include a controller and/or supercomputer (e.g., a discrete controller or supercomputer). The instrument cluster 832 may include a set of instrumentation such as a speedometer, fuel level, oil pressure, tachometer, odometer, turn indicators, gearshift position indicator, seat belt warning light(s), parking-brake warning light(s), engine-malfunction light(s), airbag (SRS) system information, lighting controls, safety system controls, navigation information, etc. In some examples, information may be displayed and/or shared among the infotainment SoC 830 and the instrument cluster 832”
Col. 45 Line 25-31: “In some embodiments, the IMU sensor(s) 866 may be implemented as a miniature, high performance GPS-Aided Inertial Navigation System (GPS/INS) that combines micro-electro-mechanical systems (MEMS) inertial sensors, a high-sensitivity GPS receiver, and advanced Kalman filtering algorithms to provide estimates of position, velocity, and altitude”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Yeshurun and Gall to incorporate the teachings of Chen to include autonomous vehicle and autonomous sensors for operating the vehicle in autonomous mode. Doing so would optimize providing security for autonomous vehicles as well as disclosed in Yeshurun.
Similarly Claims 8 and 14 are rejected on the similar rational.
Regarding Claim 3, Yeshurun in view of Gall and in further view of Wang and in further view of Getman and in further view of McLaughlin teaches the system of claim 1.
Chen also teaches wherein the plurality of sensors further comprises a GPS receiver, a tachometer, an altimeter, a gyroscope, a camera, and an ultrasonic sensor (Col.31. Line 19-37: “The controller(s) 836 may provide the signals for controlling one or more components and/or systems of the vehicle 140 in response to sensor data received from one or more sensors (e.g., sensor inputs). The sensor data may be received from, for example and without limitation, global navigation satellite systems sensor(s) 858 (e.g., Global Positioning System sensor(s)), RADAR sensor(s) 860, ultrasonic sensor(s) 862, LIDAR sensor(s) 864, inertial measurement unit (IMU) sensor(s) 866 (e.g., accelerometer(s), gyroscope(s), magnetic compass(es), magnetometer(s), etc.), microphone(s) 896, stereo camera(s) 868, wide-view camera(s) 870 (e.g., fisheye cameras), infrared camera(s) 872, surround camera(s) 874 (e.g., 360 degree cameras), long-range and/or mid-range camera(s) 898, speed sensor(s) 844 (e.g., for measuring the speed of the vehicle 140), vibration sensor(s) 842, steering sensor(s) 840, brake sensor(s) (e.g., as part of the brake sensor system 846), and/or other sensor types.”
Col. 49 Line 16-22: “The vehicle 140 may further include an instrument cluster 832 (e.g., a digital dash, an electronic instrument cluster, a digital instrument panel, etc.). The instrument cluster 832 may include a controller and/or supercomputer (e.g., a discrete controller or supercomputer). The instrument cluster 832 may include a set of instrumentation such as a speedometer, fuel level, oil pressure, tachometer, odometer, turn indicators, gearshift position indicator, seat belt warning light(s), parking-brake warning light(s), engine-malfunction light(s), airbag (SRS) system information, lighting controls, safety system controls, navigation information, etc. In some examples, information may be displayed and/or shared among the infotainment SoC 830 and the instrument cluster 832”
Col. 45 Line 25-31: “In some embodiments, the IMU sensor(s) 866 may be implemented as a miniature, high performance GPS-Aided Inertial Navigation System (GPS/INS) that combines micro-electro-mechanical systems (MEMS) inertial sensors, a high-sensitivity GPS receiver, and advanced Kalman filtering algorithms to provide estimates of position, velocity, and altitude”).
Similarly Claims 9 and 16 are rejected on the similar rational.
Regarding Claim 4, Yeshurun in view of Gall and in further view of Wang and in further view of Getman and in further view of McLaughlin teaches the system of claim 1.
Chen also teaches wherein the artificial vision data is displayed to a human operator of the vehicle, vessel, or aircraft to provide automation assistance (Col.31 Line 49-55: “One or more of the controller(s) 836 may receive inputs (e.g., represented by input data) from an instrument cluster 832 of the vehicle 140 and provide outputs (e.g., represented by output data, display data, etc.) via a human-machine interface (HMI) display 834, an audible annunciator, a loudspeaker, and/or via other components of the vehicle 140. The outputs may include information such as vehicle velocity, speed, time, map data (e.g., the HD map 822 of FIG. 8C), location data (e.g., the vehicle's 140 location, such as on a map), direction, location of other vehicles (e.g., an occupancy grid), information about objects and status of objects as perceived by the controller(s) 836, etc. For example, the HMI display 834 may display information about the presence of one or more objects (e.g., a street sign, caution sign, traffic light changing, etc.), and/or information about driving maneuvers the vehicle has made, is making, or will make (e.g., changing lanes now, taking exit 34B in two miles, etc.).”).
Similarly Claims 10 and 15 are rejected on the similar rational.
Regarding Claim 6, Yeshurun in view of Gall and in further view of Wang and in further view of Getman and in further view of McLaughlin teaches the system of claim 1.
Gall also teaches wherein the artificial vision data is used to provide full automation of the vehicle, vessel, or aircraft (Col.5 Line 58-64: “Vehicle 100 furthermore includes a device 120 for operating, or operating device 120. Device 120 is connected to sensor units 102, 104, 106 in a signal transmission-capable manner. Device 120 is designed to generate a fusion signal 129, which is usable for operating vehicle 100, using sensor data 112, 114, 116 and sensor state data 113, 115, 117 as input data 121.”).
Similarly Claims 12 and 18 are rejected on the similar rational.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ABDHESH K JHA whose telephone number is (571)272-6218. The examiner can normally be reached M-F:0800-1700.
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, James J Lee can be reached on 571-270-5965. 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.
/ABDHESH K JHA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3668
Prosecution Insights