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
As noted in the interview summary, the previous grounds of rejections are withdrawn. The previous mappings and explanations were incorrected in that they reversed the “first” and “second” sensing devices of Yan et al in the mapping to the claims.
As such the updated grounds of the rejections still relies on the same paragraphs, however the “second” sensing device of Yan (camera) is mapped to lane monitoring system location determination of the claims and the ”first” sensing device of Yan (IMU) is now mapped to the heading angle-second travel distance location determination of the claims.
While the same paragraphs are cited as the previous rejection the new mapping is such that this is a new grounds of rejection and this action is made non-final to allow the applicant proper opportunity to respond to the new rejections not necessitated by amendment.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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 13 and 15 are 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.
Regarding Claims 13 and 15 they recite calculating the longitudinal and transverse coordinates using “a first” and “a second” formula respectively, however the claims do not define the formulas the claims then however then go one to recite that the (respective coordinates) are based on three parameters; it is unclear if this determination (based on the parameters) is modifying the formula or if it is merely disclosing an implicit relationship of the coordinate points and those parameters. In short is it unclear if the “first” and “second” formula need the respective parameters or not to infringe on the claims.
Regarding Claim 13 the limitation “wherein aggregating the distances comprises: determining a sum of longitudinal distances using a first formula, the sum of longitudinal distances determined based on the multiple travel segments, the corresponding vehicle curvatures, and a longitudinal coordinate of the first location; determining a sum of transverse distances using a second formula, the sum of transverse distances determined based on the multiple travel segments, the corresponding vehicle curvatures, and a transverse coordinate of the first location;” (underline bold to emphasize the at issue limitations) it is unclear if this is claiming that the “first formula” is a formula which must be a formula which makes use of/calculates the sum based on all three of the multiple travel segments, curvatures, and the longitudinal coordinate of the first location or not. There is a similar lack of clarity regard the “second formula” is its required (or not required) parameters.
Put another way it is unclear if claim 13 is requiring that the first and second formulas require that the multiple travel segments, corresponding curvatures, and coordinates are used (i.e. inputted into) the formula or if they are merely saying that inherently the “sum” is based on these parameters (which logically/from geometry would always be it true that any formula would satisfy this requirement given that any travel distance/subsequent location is geometrically based on a previous point (starting point), a total distance travelled from that starting point by sub-segments, and the sum of headings (curvature) for the various for each subsegment?)
Regarding Claim 15 it has the same issue in that is unclear if the first and formulas must have the recited (“based on”) parameters as inputs/variables as part of the formulas or not; or if the claim is merely reciting that the coordinates are implicitly based on these parameters but that the formulas themselves could derive the position (coordinates) using any one of (or none of) those parameters explicitly.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-3, 6-7, 10, 14-20, 22-25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 20200150281 A1, “MULTIPLE-POSITIONING-SYSTEM SWITCHING AND FUSED CALIBRATION METHOD AND DEVICE THEREOF”, Yan et al. (Ref cited in IDS 03/11/2025)
Regarding Claim 1, Yan et al teaches “. A method comprising: determining that a vehicle is at a first location; controlling motion of the vehicle using an advanced driver assistance system (ADAS);”( [0033] Please refer to FIGS. 4 and 5, which show the operation of obtaining the aforementioned weight distribution table. The system for establishing the weight distribution table is described in reference with FIG. 4. The weight distribution table establishing system 2 is also installed in the vehicle and can establish the weight distribution tables corresponding to the map information of different locations when the vehicle moves to different locations. The weight distribution table establishing system 2 comprises a plurality of sensing devices 20 comprising the first sensing device 10 and the second sensing device 12 above-mentioned. A standard positioning device 22 can be, for example, a real time kinematic (RTK) positioning device. The standard positioning device 22 can detect the current position to generate standard positioning information. Furthermore, the standard positioning device 22 can be the inertial positioning device or the optical positioning device. When satellite is shielded and the real-time kinematic signal is affected, it causes the inability of calculating the distance error value to generate the confidence parameter; in this case, the inertial positioning device or the optical positioning device can be used to generate the standard positioning information. Therefore, the standard positioning device 22 of the present invention is not limited to the real-time kinematic positioning device, and can also be the inertial positioning device or the optical positioning device. The central processor 24 can be a computer device which is electrically connected to the plurality of sensing devices 20 and the standard positioning device 22 and serves as a data processing device.” The standard positioning device is used (RTK GPS) as part the automatic driving (ADAS) [0007]);” determining a second location for the vehicle based on lane sensing information of a lane monitoring system of the vehicle and a first travel distance of the vehicle since the first location, the lane sensing information reflecting a lane curvature;”([0026] second sensing device is/includes optical cameras (detecting features to derive vehicle position which from [0030] is known to include lane markings, these marking inherently reflect the curvature of the lane; the a feature map for the second sensing device ( which is selected the distance/updated position is determined) i.e. is based on the calculated travel distance of the “first” sensing device (IMU) as seen in S14 of figure 2);” determining a third location for the vehicle based on a heading angle of the vehicle and a second travel distance of the vehicle since the first location;”([0026] first sensing device (used to derive a third location/updated position from an original (First location)) as seen in figure 2, is/can be an IMU which from [0005] is known to include detecting/calculating position based on sensed (heading) angle and distance travelled.);” determining a fourth location for the vehicle by fusing the second and third locations with each other; “(S22 of Fig. 2 fourth position is a fusion of the first sensing device (S10) + second sensing device’s (S20), from [0026] it is known that the first and second sensing devices can be any (at least one of) optical (i.e. lane curvature/lane sensing as disclosed in [0030]) and/or IMU (which from [0005] is known to detect angle (heading) of the vehicle and distance travelled) );”and controlling the motion of the vehicle using the ADAS based on the fourth location”([0007] the calibrated information is used/sent to driver assistance systems/automatic driving systems (ADAS)).
PNG
media_image1.png
668
462
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 2, Yan et al teaches “The method of claim 1, wherein determining that the vehicle is at the first location comprises receiving, by a satellite signal having at least a threshold signal strength, satellite navigation information indicating that the vehicle is at the first location, the method further comprising performing a first detection that the satellite signal no longer has the threshold signal strength, wherein the ADAS is configured to determine the second, third, and fourth locations in response to the first detection.”( [0033] Please refer to FIGS. 4 and 5, which show the operation of obtaining the aforementioned weight distribution table. The system for establishing the weight distribution table is described in reference with FIG. 4. The weight distribution table establishing system 2 is also installed in the vehicle and can establish the weight distribution tables corresponding to the map information of different locations when the vehicle moves to different locations. The weight distribution table establishing system 2 comprises a plurality of sensing devices 20 comprising the first sensing device 10 and the second sensing device 12 above-mentioned. A standard positioning device 22 can be, for example, a real time kinematic (RTK) positioning device. The standard positioning device 22 can detect the current position to generate standard positioning information. Furthermore, the standard positioning device 22 can be the inertial positioning device or the optical positioning device. When satellite is shielded and the real-time kinematic signal is affected, it causes the inability of calculating the distance error value to generate the confidence parameter; in this case, the inertial positioning device or the optical positioning device can be used to generate the standard positioning information. Therefore, the standard positioning device 22 of the present invention is not limited to the real-time kinematic positioning device, and can also be the inertial positioning device or the optical positioning device. The central processor 24 can be a computer device which is electrically connected to the plurality of sensing devices 20 and the standard positioning device 22 and serves as a data processing device.” The system weights/uses non-gps positions when the gps signal is shielded (below a threshold strength/quality), implicitly as this is a repeating processes when the gps signal strength is again above a quality its derived position is again used + as seen in figure 4 the “standard” position is the GPS with the sensing device(s) being the backup/fallback for when GPS fails);
PNG
media_image2.png
574
408
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 3, Yan et al teaches “The method of claim 2, wherein the satellite navigation information is generated by a global navigation satellite system.”([0004] forms of sat nav are taught which include GPS, GLONASS, Beidou, and Galileo (all forms of GNSS).)
Regarding Claim 6, Yan et al teaches “The method of claim 2, further comprising: performing, after controlling the motion of the vehicle using the ADAS based on the fourth location, a second detection that the satellite signal again has the threshold signal strength; and in response to the second detection, again controlling the motion of the vehicle using the ADAS based on the satellite navigation information.”( [0033] Please refer to FIGS. 4 and 5, which show the operation of obtaining the aforementioned weight distribution table. The system for establishing the weight distribution table is described in reference with FIG. 4. The weight distribution table establishing system 2 is also installed in the vehicle and can establish the weight distribution tables corresponding to the map information of different locations when the vehicle moves to different locations. The weight distribution table establishing system 2 comprises a plurality of sensing devices 20 comprising the first sensing device 10 and the second sensing device 12 above-mentioned. A standard positioning device 22 can be, for example, a real time kinematic (RTK) positioning device. The standard positioning device 22 can detect the current position to generate standard positioning information. Furthermore, the standard positioning device 22 can be the inertial positioning device or the optical positioning device. When satellite is shielded and the real-time kinematic signal is affected, it causes the inability of calculating the distance error value to generate the confidence parameter; in this case, the inertial positioning device or the optical positioning device can be used to generate the standard positioning information. Therefore, the standard positioning device 22 of the present invention is not limited to the real-time kinematic positioning device, and can also be the inertial positioning device or the optical positioning device. The central processor 24 can be a computer device which is electrically connected to the plurality of sensing devices 20 and the standard positioning device 22 and serves as a data processing device.” The system weights/uses non-gps positions when the gps signal is shielded (below a threshold strength/quality), implicitly as this is a repeating processes when the gps signal strength is again above a quality its derived position is again used + as seen in figure 4 the “standard” position is the GPS with the sensing device(s) being the backup/fallback for when GPS fails.)
Regarding Claim 7, Yan et al teaches “The method of claim 1, further comprising performing localization of the vehicle based on the fourth location and map information.”(S22 of Figure 2 posted above is localizing with fourth (i.e. s22 repeats and the vehicle’s new position (localization) is determine based on map information))
Regarding Claim 10, Yan et al teaches “The method of claim 1, wherein the lane sensing information reflects a distance between the vehicle and a lane marker.”([0030] teaches detecting and determining of position relative to features, the detected feature includes lane lines (Markers), determining of the position relative to a marker is inherently reflects the “distance” between the vehicle and marker)
Regarding Claim 14, Yan et al teaches “The method of claim 1, wherein multiple travel segments are determined, wherein a corresponding heading angle is determined for each of the multiple travel segments, and wherein the third location is determined based on the multiple travel segments and the corresponding heading angles.”( [0005] The inertial positioning system uses an inertial sensor, such as an acceleration sensor, an angular velocity sensor or a wheel speed sensor to detect data of distance, angle or speed, and calculates a relative distance according to the above-mentioned data and previous time point, so as to generate positioning information. The inertial positioning system is not affected when the satellite signal is shielded, or not affected by multipath effect, but the continuous positions are calculated based on the movement of the vehicle, and it gradually causes a cumulative error after long-term usage.” IMU position calculations includes deriving the new position based on angle (heading) and from cumulative long term use error it is known that this position derivation is/can be over multiple “segments” + from the repeating nature of figure 2 posted above, (arrow from S22 back into S12) the IMU derived position (and segment 1) is used with subsequent IMU detected distances/positions (i.e. segment 2) to derive a subsequent current vehicle position over-time)
Regarding Claim 15, Yan et al teaches “The method of claim 14, wherein determining the third location comprises: determining a longitudinal coordinate using a first formula, the longitudinal coordinate based on the multiple travel segments, the corresponding heading angles, and a longitudinal coordinate of the first location; determining a transverse coordinate using a second formula, the transverse coordinate calculated based on the multiple travel segments, the corresponding heading angles, and a transverse coordinate of the first location; and associating the longitudinal coordinate and the transverse coordinate with each other.”( [0005] The inertial positioning system uses an inertial sensor, such as an acceleration sensor, an angular velocity sensor or a wheel speed sensor to detect data of distance, angle or speed, and calculates a relative distance according to the above-mentioned data and previous time point, so as to generate positioning information. The inertial positioning system is not affected when the satellite signal is shielded, or not affected by multipath effect, but the continuous positions are calculated based on the movement of the vehicle, and it gradually causes a cumulative error after long-term usage.” The IMU derived position (i.e. third position) is determined by adding a travelled distance (distance, angle or speed) to a previous point, the cumulative error building is implicitly teaching that the derived position is the sum of multiple segments during long-term usage. (From distance + speed and angle it is known that this derived position is in two dimensions (longitude and transverse X/Y)))
Regarding Claim 16, Yan et al teaches “The method of claim 1, wherein determining the third location comprises compensating the second location using the lane sensing information.”( [0030]-[0031] the “second sensing” device includes detecting image feature (i.e. compensating) to determine a third location (of the vehicle) which is based on the detected travel distance (which is used to select the corresponding feature map); based on this feature map the position (third location) of the vehicle is determined relative to (compensated with) the detected feature, from [0030] it is known that that the feature can be the lane line)
Regarding Claim 17, Yan et al teaches “The method of claim 1, wherein the first travel distance is identical to the second travel distance.”( (Fig. 2 posted below + [0029]-[0030] the first and second position information S12-S22 is performed within the same cycle i.e. they are determined in a “common sampling cycle” as such they would be calculated/have the same travel distance)
Regarding Claim 18, Yan et al teaches “The method of claim 17, wherein the second and third locations are determined in a common sampling cycle of the ADAS.”(Fig. 2 posted below + [0029]-[0030] the first and second position information S12-S22 is performed within the same cycle i.e. they are determined in a “common sampling cycle”)
Regarding Claim 19, Yan et al teaches “wherein fusing the second and third locations with each other comprises calculating an average of the second and third locations.”( [0010] According to an embodiment, the present invention provides a multiple-positioning-system switching and fused calibration method, and the method comprises steps of: (a) selecting and using at least one first sensing device to generate first sensing information, and calculating a current position according to a starting position and the first sensing information, to generate first positioning information; (b) transmitting the first positioning information to a cloud database; (c) downloading corresponding map information corresponding to the first positioning information, from the cloud database; (d) using at least one second sensing device to detect whether at least one feature object exists in ambient environment, and when no feature object exists in ambient environment, returning to the step (a), and when at least one feature object exists in ambient environment, obtaining distance information between the detected feature object and the current position, and selecting the corresponding map information comprising the detected feature object; (e) according to a position of the feature object in the map information and the distance information, calculating the current position in the map information, and generating second positioning information according to the current position; and (f) obtaining weight values corresponding to the first sensing device and the second sensing device according to the at least one weight distribution table, and performing fused calculation on the first positioning information and the second positioning information according to the weight values, to generate new first positioning information for replacing the first positioning information, and return to the step (b).” The weighted fusion of the first sensing device position (third position of applicant’s claims) and second sensing device position (second position of applicants claims) is a form of determining a (weighted) average.)
Regarding Claim 20, Yan et al teaches “The method of claim 1, wherein fusing the second and third locations with each other comprises weighting at least one of the second or third locations in determining the fourth location.”( [0010] According to an embodiment, the present invention provides a multiple-positioning-system switching and fused calibration method, and the method comprises steps of: (a) selecting and using at least one first sensing device to generate first sensing information, and calculating a current position according to a starting position and the first sensing information, to generate first positioning information; (b) transmitting the first positioning information to a cloud database; (c) downloading corresponding map information corresponding to the first positioning information, from the cloud database; (d) using at least one second sensing device to detect whether at least one feature object exists in ambient environment, and when no feature object exists in ambient environment, returning to the step (a), and when at least one feature object exists in ambient environment, obtaining distance information between the detected feature object and the current position, and selecting the corresponding map information comprising the detected feature object; (e) according to a position of the feature object in the map information and the distance information, calculating the current position in the map information, and generating second positioning information according to the current position; and (f) obtaining weight values corresponding to the first sensing device and the second sensing device according to the at least one weight distribution table, and performing fused calculation on the first positioning information and the second positioning information according to the weight values, to generate new first positioning information for replacing the first positioning information, and return to the step (b).” The position information (first and second) are weighted to determine the new (Current) first (fourth position))
Regarding Claims 22-23 they are a non-transitory computer readable medium and vehicle equivalents of claim 1, Yan et al is a computerized system (implicitly a non-transitory computer readable medium with instructions) implemented on a vehicle as such they have the same grounds of rejection as claim 1.
Regarding Claims 24-25 they are vehicle equivalents to method claims 2 (for claim 24) and claims 17+18 (for claim 25) respectively. They have the same grounds of rejection as their respective equivalents above.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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) 4-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yan et al as applied to claim 2 and further in view of US 20130116921 A1, “VEHICLE NAVIGATION SYSTEM WITH DEAD RECKONING”, Hocking et al. (Ref Cited in IDS 03/11/2025)
Regarding Claims 4-5, Yan et al teaches using of the first and second sensing (optical and/or IMU devices) to derive the position in response to the RTK-GPS being shielded. However it does not teach specifically that the GPS signal being shielded can be determined/detected through “determining that the satellite navigation information contains information from less than a threshold number of satellites.” (Claim 4) or “satellite navigation information that indicates the vehicle being at the first location is a most recent satellite navigation information when the satellite signal no longer has the threshold signal strength.”
Hocking et al teaches a similar vehicle positioning system which determines that GPS signal has been lost/is inadequate when the when there is a too few (below a threshold number) of GPS satellites viewable/receivable and if the GPS signal strength falls below a threshold. (Column 5, lines 37-42, “The accuracy of information received from the GPS module 122 may depend on the quality of the available GPS satellite signals. Thus, in some cases, such as in a parking garage or where buildings or the landscape obstructs the GPS module's 122 view of the sky, GPS satellite signals may be insufficient to locate the vehicle 102 with accuracy.” + Column 6, lines 14-25 “data 302 may include information indicative of one or more of: whether data from the GPS satellites 124 has been established, strength of the GPS signal, current vehicle latitude and longitude, a current time, and a margin of error for the GPS location fix. The compass data 304 may include information indicative of magnetic vehicle 102 heading. The stability control data 306 may include information indicative of one or more of: yaw rate, vehicle 102 speed, vehicle 102 lateral acceleration, vehicle 102 vertical acceleration, vehicle 102 roll angular rate, vehicle 102 hand wheel position, vehicle”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the application, to modify Yan et al to implement the determining of the sky view (Number of satellites) and/or signal strength monitoring of Hocking to determine if it has lost GPS signal as generally taught in Yan. Such a modification would be obvious under the KSR rational “Combining Prior Art Elements According to Known Methods To Yield Predictable Results”. (I) Yan teaches the base invention but lacks the specifically claimed ways of determining if GPS signal has been lost/is inadequate, Hocking teaches the specific ways in the same context of determining if adequate GPS signal/data is available for vehicle positioning purposes. (II) the combination could be achieved through known programming methods, the underlying sensors are already equipped to the vehicle of Yan, in the combination the teachings of Hocking is still being for the same purpose (to determine GPS signal quality/if it is adequate) in the combination as it is in the original teachings. (III) The combination is merely implementing a specific way of determining GPS data quality onto the general teachings for such called for in Yan, as such no underlying principles of operation are being changed by the combination therefore the results would function as expected/predictably to one of ordinary skill in the art. (IV) Hocking is the same use case (determining of vehicle position) as Yan as such the underlying scenario/environment of operation between the two is the same and thus would have a reasonable expectation of success for applying the teachings of Hocking into Yan’s system.
Claim(s) 8 and 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yan as applied to claims 1 and 7 above, and further in view of US 20230101472 A1, “Methods And Systems For Estimating Lanes For A Vehicle”, Colling et al.
Regarding Claim 8, Yan does not explicitly teach that the localization is a global position/coordinate, i.e. it does not teach “further comprising performing global position alignment with regard to the vehicle based on the localization.”
Colling et al teaches a vehicle localization which includes sensor fusion of IMU and optical/radar (detecting lane lines/curvature) to localize the vehicle which includes “performing global position alignment with regard to the vehicle based on the localization.”( [0080] The lanes obtained may be cross-checked by physical sanity checks, for example of the trails of other road users. Jitter introduced from the sub-optimal localization system may be filtered out when aggregating the trails in the map. This may be done by making reasonable physical assumptions about the driving behavior of other vehicles, such as maximum accelerations, braking's, yaw rates, and similar. Additionally, the trails of other vehicles coming out of the detection method may be first transformed into the global coordinate system (using the simple localization info available) and then may be tracked in this coordinate frame using a tracker. The use of the tracker after the data is transformed in the global map coordinate system may smooth and reduces the introduced jitter.” + [0085-[0086])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the application, to modify Yan to implement the global coordinate based localization based on its sensor readings as taught by Colling et al. Such a modification is obvious under the KSR rational of “Combining Prior Art Elements According to Known Methods To Yield Predictable Results”. (1) Yan teaches the base device but lacks global position alignment specifically., Colling et al teaches a vehicle positioning system which includes global position alignment based on the same sensors/data inputs as Yan. (2) In the combination the change is that it is specifically localizing itself in a global coordinate frame, The teachings of Colling are being used in the same way/for the same function (to localize a vehicle in the global frame) in the combination as they are in the original teachings. (3) As no underlying principles of operation are being changed by this combination the results of the combination would function predictably/as expected to one of ordinary skill in the art (4)In the combination the underlying requirement to perform the combination is the transformation of sensor data from the local/vehicle coordinate frame to the global coordinate frame, implicitly as Yan already teaches such a transformation, because Yan teaches fusion of vehicle sensor data from the IMU and/or camera (which would be first generated within a vehicle coordinate frame) with GPS data (which is latitude/longitude i.e. within the world coordinate frame) this transformation between a global and vehicle coordinate frames (or vice-versa) is known to be performed implicitly and to be within the capabilities/knowledge of one of ordinary skill in the art (when the transformation is recited/implied at a high level of generality).
Regarding Claim 21, Yan et al does not teach that the position (second, third, and fourth) locations are determined with regard to the center of gravity.
Colling et al teaches a vehicle positioning system in which the derived position of the vehicle is its center of gravity. ([0009] According to an embodiment, the method may further comprise the following step carried out by the computer hardware components: determining the location of the vehicle. The location of the vehicle may be a position of the vehicle described in a coordinate system. The position (and/or the location) may be a point or an area. The accuracy of the position or the location of an object may be dependent on the method used for determining the position or the location of the object. The position or the location of the vehicle may refer to a center of gravity of the vehicle or another defined point of the vehicle, for example, a location of a sensor mounted at the vehicle. The coordinate system may be a world coordinate system (WCS), wherein the world coordinate system may be a geographic coordinate system. The geographic coordinate system may allow to define a geographic position of an object, i.e., the position of the object on Earth. The geographic positions may be described by spherical coordinates (latitude, longitude, and elevation), or by map coordinates projected onto a plane, or by earth-centered, earth-fixed (ECEF) Cartesian coordinates in three dimensions.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the application to modify Yan et al to include setting the derived position of the vehicle at its Center of Gravity.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the application, to modify Yan to teach determining the position of the vehicle position as specifically relative to/at the center of gravity as taught by Colling et al. Such a modification is obvious under the KSR rational of “Combining Prior Art Elements According to Known Methods To Yield Predictable Results”. (1) Yan teaches the base device, (vehicle determining the second-fourth locations) however it is mute as to the position being specifically at the center of gravity of the vehicle. Colling teaches a vehicle positioning system, using the same sensors/inputs, which the derived position of the vehicle is specifically at its center of gravity. (2) The teachings of Colling are being used in the same way/for the same function (to determine the position of a vehicle based on GPS and/or sensor inputs) in the combination as they are in the original teachings. (3) As no underlying principles of operation are being changed by this combination the results of the combination would function predictably/as expected to one of ordinary skill in the art (4) Colling in [0009] teaches generally that any position/part of the vehicle can be set/derived as such, given that Yan already teaches determining the position of the vehicle (implicitly some part of the vehicle is known/positioned) then the transforming of a derived position of a different part (e.g. camera) of the vehicle to the vehicle’s center of gravity would have a reasonable expectation of success given that Collings [0009] general teachings indicate that the transforming between points/parts of the vehicle does not change the underlying principles of operation of vehicle positioning.
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yan as applied to claim 8 above, and further in view of US 20230278563 A1, “POSITIONING METHOD AND RELATED APPARATUS”, Xiao.
Regarding Claim 9, modified Yan (as modified in claim 8 above) while teaching the use of map data (Yan [0010], [0026]) does not teach that the maps are specifically “standard definition map”
Xiao teaches a vehicle positioning system in which the position of the vehicle is derived in part by fusing standard data map information with (lane line) sensing information of the vehicle ([0096]-[0097])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the application, to further modify Yan to implement the use of standard definition maps, as taught by Xiao, as the source of map information taught in Yan. One would be motivated to implement standard definition maps in order to reduce operating costs as such maps are cheaper and more readily available compared to high-definition maps. Xiao teaches this motivation in ([0097] “For example, the processing device may match to a corresponding road position according to the positioning point information of the target vehicle, and then acquire conventional road map data, such as Standard Definition (SD) data, of the road position. The conventional road map data is used for recording basic attributes of the road, such as basic information including a road length, a quantity of lanes, a road direction, and a lane topological relationship. The conventional road map data is low in manufacture cost and less difficult to obtain.”)
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 11-12 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Regarding Claim 11, no prior art was found to teach/render obvious the determining of the vehicle’s curvature at the second position, claim 12 depend on claim 11 and thus inherit the same potentially allowable subject matter.
Regarding Claim 13, while rejected under 112(b) is has the same allowable subject matter as claim 11 due to its inheritance, should the 112(b) rejection be overcome it would also be objected to but potentially allowable as dependent on upon a rejected base claim due its to dependency on claim 11.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 20180024562 A1
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KENNETH MICHAEL DUNNE whose telephone number is (571)270-7392. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs 8:30-6:30.
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, Navid Z Mehdizadeh can be reached at (571) 272-7691. 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.
/KENNETH M DUNNE/Examiner, Art Unit 3669