DETAILED ACTION
Response to Amendment
This office action regarding application number 18/364,830, filed August 3, 2023, is in response to the applicants arguments and amendments filed 3/10/2026. Claims 1, 8, and 15 have been amended. Claims 1-20 are currently pending and are addressed below.
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 filed on 8/7/2026 and 7/29/2026 is being considered by the examiner.
Response to Arguments
The applicants arguments and amendments to the application have overcome some of the objections previously set forth in the Final action mailed April 29, 2026. Applicants amendments to claims 1, 8, and 15 have been deemed sufficient to overcome the previous 35 USC 103 rejections through the inclusion of “the one or more automatic trajectory plot points comprise a sequence of trajectory plot points generated at predetermined time intervals” therefore the rejections are withdrawn. However as this changes the scope of the claims, new art rejections have been made based on the changes in scope. Additionally the applicants arguments have been fully considered but are not fully persuasive for the reasons seen below.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 8, and 15 and specifically with regards to the Nabbe and Sandberg references and trajectory plot points such as the “First … Second … Third … Fourth” arguments on pages 12-15 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
On page 11 the applicant argues “The Examiner further cites Sandberg in the rejection of independent claims 1, 8, and 15. Sandberg teaches planning and validation systems 168, including a first planning system 620 and a second planning system 630 and a validation system 610. However, critically, both planning systems 620 and 630 in Sandberg are located onboard the autonomous vehicle 100 as part of the vehicle's computing devices 110. Sandberg is silent as to a remote station system that is located remotely from the vehicle and that generates a remote trajectory command. Sandberg is entirely directed to onboard trajectory validation, not remote trajectory generation.”, the examiner respectfully disagrees.
MPEP 2142-2144 discusses the requirements for a case of obviousness using 35 USC 103 and provides examples of such cases. MPEP 2111 discusses Broadest Reasonable Interpretation and the interpretation of claims.
In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
Here, as is discussed in the rejections below, the rejection is based on the combination of both the Nabbe and Sandberg references. In particular here Sandberg is not relied upon to teach a remote trajectory generation. Nabbe teaches a remote trajectory command comprising one or more driving actions (Paragraph [0036-0037], "VNS 110 includes a set of modules which are configured to enable VNS 110 to cause the vehicle 100 to be navigated through an environment based on remote driving control of the vehicle. Remote driving control can be based on one or more remote driving command signals, also referred to herein as remote driving commands, received at VNS 110 from one or more remote control systems via one or more interfaces 116. VNS 110 includes an remote control request module 122 which determines whether to generate a remote control request signal which, when received at a remotely located remote control system, is processed as a request, by VNS 110, for the remote control system to engage remote driving control of the VNS 110 via one or more interfaces 116.").
The system of Sandberg which is directed towards trajectory validation could reasonably be applied to a remotely generated trajectory such as the one taught by Nabbe.
Therefore the combination of Nabbe, Yasui, and Sandberg teaches a remote station system that is located remotely from the vehicle and that generates a remote trajectory command.
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, 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 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.
Claim 1-2, 4-9, 11-16, and 18-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nabbe (US-20230356692) in view of Yasui (US-20210150772) in view of Sandberg (US-20240017741).
Regarding claim 1, Nabbe teaches a system for controlling a vehicle comprising a vehicle (Paragraph [0005], "Some embodiments provide a vehicle navigation system which can navigate a vehicle through an environment based on driving commands")
one or more sensors, coupled to the vehicle, configured to generate one or more data points pertaining to one or more of: an environment of the vehicle and one or more system component measurements of the vehicle (Paragraph [0033], "Vehicle 100 includes a set of one or more external sensor devices 113, also referred to as external sensors 113, which can monitor one or more aspects of an external environment relative to the vehicle 100. Such sensors can include camera devices, video recording devices, infrared sensor devices, radar devices, depth camera devices which can include one or more light-scanning devices including LIDAR devices")
one or more actuation controls configured to enable the vehicle to perform one or more driving actions (Paragraph [0029], "VNS 110 is communicatively coupled to at least some of the control elements 112 of the vehicle 100 and is configured to control one or more of the elements 112 to navigate the vehicle 100,” here the system uses control elements/actuation controls to enable the vehicle to navigate and perform driving actions)
a controller, comprising a processor, configured to: (See Figure 9, showing processors 910)
automatically generate an automatic trajectory command based on the one or more data points generated from the one or more sensors (Paragraph [0026], "The VNS, in some embodiments, includes an autonomous navigation system (ANS) which is configured to autonomously generate autonomous driving control commands which control various control elements of the vehicle to autonomously navigate the vehicle along one or more driving routes.")
generate driving actions based on a trajectory (Paragraph [0031], “As used herein, autonomous navigation of the vehicle 100 refers to controlled navigation (“driving”) of vehicle 100 along at least a portion of a route based upon autonomous driving control, by VNS 110, of the control elements 112 of the vehicle 100, including steering control elements, throttle control elements, braking control elements, transmission control elements, etc.”)
wherein the one or more driving actions correlate to one or more actuator commands configured to cause the vehicle to be positioned in accordance with the one or more automatic trajectory (Paragraph [0026], "The VNS, in some embodiments, includes an autonomous navigation system (ANS) which is configured to autonomously generate autonomous driving control commands which control various control elements of the vehicle to autonomously navigate the vehicle along one or more driving routes.") (Paragraph [0031], “As used herein, autonomous navigation of the vehicle 100 refers to controlled navigation (“driving”) of vehicle 100 along at least a portion of a route based upon autonomous driving control, by VNS 110, of the control elements 112 of the vehicle 100, including steering control elements, throttle control elements, braking control elements, transmission control elements, etc.”)
and a remote station system, located remotely from the vehicle (Paragraph [0005], “the remote control system can generate remote driving commands which cause the vehicle to be navigated to a particular location without requiring the occupant associated with the health emergency to manually navigate the vehicle”)
configured to receive the one or more data points generated by the one or more sensors (Paragraph [0038], "Module 122 can monitor one or more aspects of the interior and exterior of the vehicle, via sensor data generated by one or more sensors 113-114")
and generate a remote trajectory command comprising one or more driving actions (Paragraph [0036-0037], "VNS 110 includes a set of modules which are configured to enable VNS 110 to cause the vehicle 100 to be navigated through an environment based on remote driving control of the vehicle. Remote driving control can be based on one or more remote driving command signals, also referred to herein as remote driving commands, received at VNS 110 from one or more remote control systems via one or more interfaces 116. VNS 110 includes an remote control request module 122 which determines whether to generate a remote control request signal which, when received at a remotely located remote control system, is processed as a request, by VNS 110, for the remote control system to engage remote driving control of the VNS 110 via one or more interfaces 116.")
wherein the one or more driving actions correlate to one or more actuator commands configured to cause the vehicle to perform the one or more driving actions (Paragraph [0040], "The driving route can be generated at module 124 based on input commands received from an interface 115, data received from one or more interfaces 116, etc. In another example, where VNS 110 is in a remote driving control mode, module 124 can generate control signals based on remote control commands received from a remote control system via one or more interfaces 116.")
and the controller is further configured to determine whether the remote trajectory command is present for a predetermined timeframe (Paragraph [0041], "Module 124 can switch the VNS 110 to a remote driving control mode based on one or more of generation of an remote control request signal at module 122, receipt of one or more remote driving commands from a remote control system via an interface 116, generation of an authorization signal at module 125, receipt of an authorization confirmation signal from a remote control system via an interface 116, some combination thereof, etc," here the system can switch to a remote driving mode based on whether a remote trajectory command is present by detecting receipt of one or more remote driving commands)
when the remote trajectory command is present for the predetermined timeframe (Paragraph [0140], “The remote control device can be configured to deactivate in the absence of receiving a command … within a certain period of elapsed time,” here the remote trajectory is only active when commands are received for a predetermined timeframe/period).
However Nabbe does not explicitly teach wherein the automatic trajectory command comprises automatic trajectory instructions which comprise one or more automatic trajectory plot points; and each automatic trajectory plot point, of the one or more automatic trajectory plot points, comprises position coordinates for the vehicle to be at a specific time; the one or more automatic trajectory plot points comprise a sequence of trajectory plot points generated at predetermined time intervals; and generate based on the or more automatic trajectory plot points, one or more driving actions.
Yasui teaches an automated vehicle equipped with an automated driving control unit including
wherein the automatic trajectory command comprises automatic trajectory instructions which comprise one or more automatic trajectory plot points (Paragraph [0138], “Then, the automated driving control unit 350 generates trajectory points for the vehicle traveling along the recommended lane to the maximum extent while avoiding obstacles, and controls a part or all of the drive force output device 360, the brake device 362, and the steering device 364 such that the vehicle travels along the trajectory points (and an accompanying speed profile), as shown in the lower diagram.”)
and each automatic trajectory plot point, of the one or more automatic trajectory plot points, comprises position coordinates for the vehicle to be at a specific time (Paragraph [0137], “Each trajectory point may be a position at which the vehicle is to arrive at a sampling clock time for each predetermined sampling time. In this case, information of the target speed and the target acceleration is expressed as intervals of the trajectory points.”)
the one or more automatic trajectory plot points comprise a sequence of trajectory plot points generated at predetermined time intervals (Paragraph [0137], “The automated driving control unit 350 generates a target trajectory along which the vehicle 200 travels in the future. The target trajectory includes, for example, a speed element. For example, the target trajectory is expressed as points (trajectory points) at which the vehicle is to arrive being aligned in order. The trajectory points are points at which the vehicle is to arrive at each predetermined traveling distance, and separately from these, a target speed and a target acceleration for each sampling time (for example, about 0 and several split seconds) are generated as a part of the target trajectory. Each trajectory point may be a position at which the vehicle is to arrive at a sampling clock time for each predetermined sampling time. In this case, information of the target speed and the target acceleration is expressed as intervals of the trajectory points.”)
and generate based on the or more automatic trajectory plot points, one or more driving actions (Paragraph [0138], “Then, the automated driving control unit 350 generates trajectory points for the vehicle traveling along the recommended lane to the maximum extent while avoiding obstacles, and controls a part or all of the drive force output device 360, the brake device 362, and the steering device 364 such that the vehicle travels along the trajectory points (and an accompanying speed profile), as shown in the lower diagram.”).
Nabbe and Yasui are analogous art as they are both generally related to systems for controlling autonomous vehicles according to a planned trajectory.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to include wherein the automatic trajectory command comprises automatic trajectory instructions which comprise one or more automatic trajectory plot points; and each automatic trajectory plot point, of the one or more automatic trajectory plot points, comprises position coordinates for the vehicle to be at a specific time; the one or more automatic trajectory plot points comprise a sequence of trajectory plot points generated at predetermined time intervals; and generate based on the or more automatic trajectory plot points, one or more driving actions of Yasui in the system for controlling an autonomous vehicle of Nabbe with a reasonable expectation of success in order to improve the safety of the system by sequentially planning the trajectory of the vehicle to handle various road events and avoid obstacles (Paragraph [0136], “The automated driving control unit 350 causes the vehicle 200 to automatically travel so as to avoid contact with objects, the positions and the speeds of which have been input from the outside monitoring unit 310, on the basis of a principle that the vehicle 200 travels along the recommended lane determined by the recommended lane determination device 340. The automated driving control unit 350 sequentially executes various events, for example. The events include a constant-speed traveling event of traveling along the same traveling lane at a constant speed, a following traveling event of following a vehicle traveling ahead, a lane changing event, an interflowing event, a branching event, an emergency stop event, a toll gate event of passing through a toll gate, and a handover event of ending automated driving and switching it to non-automated driving.”).
However the combination does not explicitly teach when the remote trajectory command is present for the predetermined timeframe, determine whether the remote trajectory command is different from the automatic trajectory command and when the remote trajectory command is different from the automatic trajectory command, cause the vehicle, via the one or more actuation controls, to perform the one or more driving actions during the predetermined timeframe in accordance with the remote trajectory command.
Sandberg teaches a vehicle system which uses a plurality of trajectories in order to validate a trajectory and control a vehicle including
wherein the automatic trajectory command comprises automatic trajectory instructions which comprise one or more automatic trajectory plot points (Paragraph [0067], “Each planned trajectory may provide a planned path and other instructions for an autonomous vehicle to follow for some brief period of time into the future, such as 10 seconds or more or less. In this regard, the trajectories may define the specific characteristics of acceleration, deceleration, speed, direction, etc. to allow the vehicle to follow the route towards reaching a destination location. A control system software module of computing devices 110 may be configured to control movement of the vehicle, for instance by controlling braking, acceleration and steering of the vehicle, in order to follow a trajectory.”) (See also figures 8-12 showing generated trajectory plot points)
when the remote trajectory command is present for the predetermined timeframe, determine whether the remote trajectory command is different from the automatic trajectory command (Paragraph [0089], “If the second trajectory would now bring the autonomous vehicle within a threshold distance of a predicted location (according to a behavior prediction generated by the behavior modeling system 176) of another road, the first trajectory may be validated. In this regard, the second trajectory may be used to validate the first trajectory,” here the system is determining if the first trajectory can be validated by comparing the result of the second trajectory to the predicted location of the first trajectory)
and when the remote trajectory command is different from the automatic trajectory command, cause the vehicle, via the one or more actuation controls, to perform the one or more driving actions during the predetermined timeframe in accordance with the remote trajectory command (Paragraph [0006], “when the first trajectory is determined not to be validated, continuing to generate and use trajectories generated by the second planning system to control the autonomous vehicle until the autonomous vehicle is no longer in a driving situation which caused the second trajectory not to be validated,” here when the first commanded trajectory is not validated/different from the second trajectory, then the system controls the vehicle according to the second trajectory, here while it is not explicitly taught that the first system is onboard the vehicle and the second system is remote, this same methodology of switching from a first trajectory planning system to a second trajectory planning system could reasonably be applied to the autonomous and remote planning systems of Nabbe).
Nabbe, Yasui, and Sandberg are analogous art as they are both generally related to systems for controlling autonomous vehicles according to a planned trajectory.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to include teach when the remote trajectory command is present for the predetermined timeframe, determine whether the remote trajectory command is different from the automatic trajectory command and when the remote trajectory command is different from the automatic trajectory command, cause the vehicle, via the one or more actuation controls, to perform the one or more driving actions during the predetermined timeframe in accordance with the remote trajectory command of Sandberg in the system for controlling an autonomous vehicle of Nabbe and Yasui with a reasonable expectation of success in order to improve the safety of the system by confirming that a first planning system can operate safely (Paragraph [0030], “As such, in each planning iteration, the validation system confirms that the first planning system can plan safely, so that if there is a problem, the validation system can switch the autonomous vehicle to the second planning system even in the worst case.”).
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Nabbe, Yasui and Sandberg teaches the system as
discussed above in claim 1, Yasui further teaches wherein the remote trajectory command comprises trajectory instructions which comprise one or more trajectory plot points (Paragraph [0138], “Then, the automated driving control unit 350 generates trajectory points for the vehicle traveling along the recommended lane to the maximum extent while avoiding obstacles, and controls a part or all of the drive force output device 360, the brake device 362, and the steering device 364 such that the vehicle travels along the trajectory points (and an accompanying speed profile), as shown in the lower diagram.”)
each trajectory plot point, of the one or more trajectory plot points, comprises position coordinates for the vehicle to be at a specific time (Paragraph [0137], “Each trajectory point may be a position at which the vehicle is to arrive at a sampling clock time for each predetermined sampling time. In this case, information of the target speed and the target acceleration is expressed as intervals of the trajectory points.”)
and the one or more driving actions are generated based on the one or more trajectory plot points (Paragraph [0138], “Then, the automated driving control unit 350 generates trajectory points for the vehicle traveling along the recommended lane to the maximum extent while avoiding obstacles, and controls a part or all of the drive force output device 360, the brake device 362, and the steering device 364 such that the vehicle travels along the trajectory points (and an accompanying speed profile), as shown in the lower diagram.”).
Nabbe and Yasui are analogous art as they are both generally related to systems for controlling autonomous vehicles according to a planned trajectory.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to include wherein the automatic trajectory command comprises automatic trajectory instructions which comprise one or more automatic trajectory plot points; and each automatic trajectory plot point, of the one or more automatic trajectory plot points, comprises position coordinates for the vehicle to be at a specific time; and generate based on the or more automatic trajectory plot points, one or more driving actions of Yasui in the system for controlling an autonomous vehicle of Nabbe with a reasonable expectation of success in order to improve the safety of the system by sequentially planning the trajectory of the vehicle to handle various road events and avoid obstacles (Paragraph [0136], “The automated driving control unit 350 causes the vehicle 200 to automatically travel so as to avoid contact with objects, the positions and the speeds of which have been input from the outside monitoring unit 310, on the basis of a principle that the vehicle 200 travels along the recommended lane determined by the recommended lane determination device 340. The automated driving control unit 350 sequentially executes various events, for example. The events include a constant-speed traveling event of traveling along the same traveling lane at a constant speed, a following traveling event of following a vehicle traveling ahead, a lane changing event, an interflowing event, a branching event, an emergency stop event, a toll gate event of passing through a toll gate, and a handover event of ending automated driving and switching it to non-automated driving.”).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Nabbe, Yasui and Sandberg teaches the system as discussed above in claim 1, Sandberg further teaches wherein the controller is further configured to, when the remote trajectory command is present for the predetermined timeframe and is not different from the automatic trajectory command, cause the vehicle, via the one or more actuation controls, to perform the one or more driving actions during the predetermined timeframe in accordance with the automatic trajectory command (Paragraph [0006], “when the first trajectory is determined not to be validated, continuing to generate and use trajectories generated by the second planning system to control the autonomous vehicle until the autonomous vehicle is no longer in a driving situation which caused the second trajectory not to be validated,” here when the first commanded trajectory is validated with the second trajectory, then the system controls the vehicle according to the first trajectory, here while it is not explicitly taught that the first system is onboard the vehicle and the second system is remote, this same methodology of switching from a first trajectory planning system to a second trajectory planning system could reasonably be applied to the autonomous and remote planning systems of Nabbe).
Nabbe and Sandberg are analogous art as they are both generally related to systems for controlling autonomous vehicles according to a planned trajectory.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to include wherein the controller is further configured to, when the remote trajectory command is present for the predetermined timeframe and is not different from the automatic trajectory command, cause the vehicle, via the one or more actuation controls, to perform the one or more driving actions during the predetermined timeframe in accordance with the automatic trajectory command of Sandberg in the system for controlling an autonomous vehicle in the system for controlling an autonomous vehicle of Nabbe with a reasonable expectation of success in order to improve the safety of the system by confirming that a first planning system can operate safely (Paragraph [0030], “As such, in each planning iteration, the validation system confirms that the first planning system can plan safely, so that if there is a problem, the validation system can switch the autonomous vehicle to the second planning system even in the worst case.”).
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Nabbe, Yasui and Sandberg teaches the system as discussed above in claim 1, Nabbe further teaches wherein the one or more sensors comprise a Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR) sensor and a camera (Paragraph [0033], “Such sensors can include camera devices, video recording devices, infrared sensor devices, radar devices, depth camera devices which can include one or more light-scanning devices including LIDAR devices,”)
and the one or more data points comprise a LiDAR point cloud generated by the LiDAR sensor and an image captured by the camera (Paragraph [0114], “Sensor data can include images captured by one or more camera devices”).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Nabbe, Yasui and Sandberg teaches the system as discussed above in claim 1, Nabbe further teaches wherein the remote station system comprises one or more remote actuation controls configured to generate the one or more driving actions of the remote trajectory command (Paragraph [0036-0037], "VNS 110 includes a set of modules which are configured to enable VNS 110 to cause the vehicle 100 to be navigated through an environment based on remote driving control of the vehicle. Remote driving control can be based on one or more remote driving command signals, also referred to herein as remote driving commands, received at VNS 110 from one or more remote control systems via one or more interfaces 116. VNS 110 includes an remote control request module 122 which determines whether to generate a remote control request signal which, when received at a remotely located remote control system, is processed as a request, by VNS 110, for the remote control system to engage remote driving control of the VNS 110 via one or more interfaces 116.").
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Nabbe, Yasui and Sandberg teaches the system as discussed above in claim 1, Nabbe further teaches wherein the one or more actuation controls comprise one or more of a brake pedal, an accleration pedal, a gear shift control, and a steering wheel (Paragraph [0031], “As used herein, autonomous navigation of the vehicle 100 refers to controlled navigation (“driving”) of vehicle 100 along at least a portion of a route based upon autonomous driving control, by VNS 110, of the control elements 112 of the vehicle 100, including steering control elements, throttle control elements, braking control elements, transmission control elements, etc. independently of manual driving control input commands receiving from a user of the vehicle via user interaction with one or more user interfaces 115.”).
Regarding claim 8, Nabbe teaches a system for controlling a vehicle comprising a vehicle (Paragraph [0005], "Some embodiments provide a vehicle navigation system which can navigate a vehicle through an environment based on driving commands")
one or more sensors, coupled to the vehicle, configured to generate one or more data points pertaining to one or more of: an environment of the vehicle and one or more system component measurements of the vehicle (Paragraph [0033], "Vehicle 100 includes a set of one or more external sensor devices 113, also referred to as external sensors 113, which can monitor one or more aspects of an external environment relative to the vehicle 100. Such sensors can include camera devices, video recording devices, infrared sensor devices, radar devices, depth camera devices which can include one or more light-scanning devices including LIDAR devices")
one or more actuation controls configured to enable the vehicle to perform one or more driving actions (Paragraph [0029], "VNS 110 is communicatively coupled to at least some of the control elements 112 of the vehicle 100 and is configured to control one or more of the elements 112 to navigate the vehicle 100,” here the system uses control elements/actuation controls to enable the vehicle to navigate and perform driving actions)
a computing device, comprising a processor and a memory, coupled to the vehicle, configured to store programming instructions that, when executed by the processor, are configured to cause the processor to (See figure 9, showing processors, memory) (Paragraph [0146], “System memory 920 may be configured to store program instructions, data, etc. accessible by processor 910.”)
automatically generate an automatic trajectory command based on the one or more data points generated from the one or more sensors (Paragraph [0026], "The VNS, in some embodiments, includes an autonomous navigation system (ANS) which is configured to autonomously generate autonomous driving control commands which control various control elements of the vehicle to autonomously navigate the vehicle along one or more driving routes.")
generate driving actions based on a trajectory (Paragraph [0031], “As used herein, autonomous navigation of the vehicle 100 refers to controlled navigation (“driving”) of vehicle 100 along at least a portion of a route based upon autonomous driving control, by VNS 110, of the control elements 112 of the vehicle 100, including steering control elements, throttle control elements, braking control elements, transmission control elements, etc.”)
wherein the one or more driving actions correlate to one or more actuator commands configured to cause the vehicle to be positioned in accordance with the one or more automatic trajectory plot points (Paragraph [0026], "The VNS, in some embodiments, includes an autonomous navigation system (ANS) which is configured to autonomously generate autonomous driving control commands which control various control elements of the vehicle to autonomously navigate the vehicle along one or more driving routes.") (Paragraph [0031], “As used herein, autonomous navigation of the vehicle 100 refers to controlled navigation (“driving”) of vehicle 100 along at least a portion of a route based upon autonomous driving control, by VNS 110, of the control elements 112 of the vehicle 100, including steering control elements, throttle control elements, braking control elements, transmission control elements, etc.”)
and a remote station system, located remotely from the vehicle (Paragraph [0005], “the remote control system can generate remote driving commands which cause the vehicle to be navigated to a particular location without requiring the occupant associated with the health emergency to manually navigate the vehicle”)
configured to receive the one or more data points generated by the one or more sensors (Paragraph [0038], "Module 122 can monitor one or more aspects of the interior and exterior of the vehicle, via sensor data generated by one or more sensors 113-114")
and generate a remote trajectory command comprising one or more driving actions (Paragraph [0036-0037], "VNS 110 includes a set of modules which are configured to enable VNS 110 to cause the vehicle 100 to be navigated through an environment based on remote driving control of the vehicle. Remote driving control can be based on one or more remote driving command signals, also referred to herein as remote driving commands, received at VNS 110 from one or more remote control systems via one or more interfaces 116. VNS 110 includes an remote control request module 122 which determines whether to generate a remote control request signal which, when received at a remotely located remote control system, is processed as a request, by VNS 110, for the remote control system to engage remote driving control of the VNS 110 via one or more interfaces 116.")
wherein the one or more driving actions correlate to one or more actuator commands configured to cause the vehicle to perform the one or more driving actions (Paragraph [0040], "The driving route can be generated at module 124 based on input commands received from an interface 115, data received from one or more interfaces 116, etc. In another example, where VNS 110 is in a remote driving control mode, module 124 can generate control signals based on remote control commands received from a remote control system via one or more interfaces 116.")
wherein the programming instructions, when executed by the processor, are further configured to cause the processor to: determine whether the remote trajectory command is present for a predetermined timeframe (Paragraph [0041], "Module 124 can switch the VNS 110 to a remote driving control mode based on one or more of generation of an remote control request signal at module 122, receipt of one or more remote driving commands from a remote control system via an interface 116, generation of an authorization signal at module 125, receipt of an authorization confirmation signal from a remote control system via an interface 116, some combination thereof, etc," here the system can switch to a remote driving mode based on whether a remote trajectory command is present by detecting receipt of one or more remote driving commands)
when the remote trajectory command is present for the predetermined timeframe (Paragraph [0140], “The remote control device can be configured to deactivate in the absence of receiving a command … within a certain period of elapsed time,” here the remote trajectory is only active when commands are received for a predetermined timeframe/period).
However Nabbe does not explicitly teach wherein the automatic trajectory command comprises automatic trajectory instructions which comprise one or more automatic trajectory plot points; and each automatic trajectory plot point, of the one or more automatic trajectory plot points, comprises position coordinates for the vehicle to be at a specific time; the one or more automatic trajectory plot points comprise a sequence of trajectory plot points generated at predetermined time intervals; and generate based on the or more automatic trajectory plot points, one or more driving actions.
Yasui teaches an automated vehicle equipped with an automated driving control unit including
wherein the automatic trajectory command comprises automatic trajectory instructions which comprise one or more automatic trajectory plot points (Paragraph [0138], “Then, the automated driving control unit 350 generates trajectory points for the vehicle traveling along the recommended lane to the maximum extent while avoiding obstacles, and controls a part or all of the drive force output device 360, the brake device 362, and the steering device 364 such that the vehicle travels along the trajectory points (and an accompanying speed profile), as shown in the lower diagram.”)
and each automatic trajectory plot point, of the one or more automatic trajectory plot points, comprises position coordinates for the vehicle to be at a specific time (Paragraph [0137], “Each trajectory point may be a position at which the vehicle is to arrive at a sampling clock time for each predetermined sampling time. In this case, information of the target speed and the target acceleration is expressed as intervals of the trajectory points.”)
the one or more automatic trajectory plot points comprise a sequence of trajectory plot points generated at predetermined time intervals (Paragraph [0137], “The automated driving control unit 350 generates a target trajectory along which the vehicle 200 travels in the future. The target trajectory includes, for example, a speed element. For example, the target trajectory is expressed as points (trajectory points) at which the vehicle is to arrive being aligned in order. The trajectory points are points at which the vehicle is to arrive at each predetermined traveling distance, and separately from these, a target speed and a target acceleration for each sampling time (for example, about 0 and several split seconds) are generated as a part of the target trajectory. Each trajectory point may be a position at which the vehicle is to arrive at a sampling clock time for each predetermined sampling time. In this case, information of the target speed and the target acceleration is expressed as intervals of the trajectory points.”)
and generate based on the or more automatic trajectory plot points, one or more driving actions (Paragraph [0138], “Then, the automated driving control unit 350 generates trajectory points for the vehicle traveling along the recommended lane to the maximum extent while avoiding obstacles, and controls a part or all of the drive force output device 360, the brake device 362, and the steering device 364 such that the vehicle travels along the trajectory points (and an accompanying speed profile), as shown in the lower diagram.”).
Nabbe and Yasui are analogous art as they are both generally related to systems for controlling autonomous vehicles according to a planned trajectory.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to include wherein the automatic trajectory command comprises automatic trajectory instructions which comprise one or more automatic trajectory plot points; and each automatic trajectory plot point, of the one or more automatic trajectory plot points, comprises position coordinates for the vehicle to be at a specific time; the one or more automatic trajectory plot points comprise a sequence of trajectory plot points generated at predetermined time intervals; and generate based on the or more automatic trajectory plot points, one or more driving actions of Yasui in the system for controlling an autonomous vehicle of Nabbe with a reasonable expectation of success in order to improve the safety of the system by sequentially planning the trajectory of the vehicle to handle various road events and avoid obstacles (Paragraph [0136], “The automated driving control unit 350 causes the vehicle 200 to automatically travel so as to avoid contact with objects, the positions and the speeds of which have been input from the outside monitoring unit 310, on the basis of a principle that the vehicle 200 travels along the recommended lane determined by the recommended lane determination device 340. The automated driving control unit 350 sequentially executes various events, for example. The events include a constant-speed traveling event of traveling along the same traveling lane at a constant speed, a following traveling event of following a vehicle traveling ahead, a lane changing event, an interflowing event, a branching event, an emergency stop event, a toll gate event of passing through a toll gate, and a handover event of ending automated driving and switching it to non-automated driving.”).
However the combination does not explicitly teach when the remote trajectory command is present for the predetermined timeframe, determine whether the remote trajectory command is different from the automatic trajectory command and when the remote trajectory command is different from the automatic trajectory command, cause the vehicle, via the one or more actuation controls, to perform the one or more driving actions during the predetermined timeframe in accordance with the remote trajectory command.
Sandberg teaches a vehicle system which uses a plurality of trajectories in order to validate a trajectory and control a vehicle including
wherein the automatic trajectory command comprises automatic trajectory instructions which comprise one or more automatic trajectory plot points (Paragraph [0067], “Each planned trajectory may provide a planned path and other instructions for an autonomous vehicle to follow for some brief period of time into the future, such as 10 seconds or more or less. In this regard, the trajectories may define the specific characteristics of acceleration, deceleration, speed, direction, etc. to allow the vehicle to follow the route towards reaching a destination location. A control system software module of computing devices 110 may be configured to control movement of the vehicle, for instance by controlling braking, acceleration and steering of the vehicle, in order to follow a trajectory.”) (See also figures 8-12 showing generated trajectory plot points)
when the remote trajectory command is present for the predetermined timeframe, determine whether the remote trajectory command is different from the automatic trajectory command (Paragraph [0089], “If the second trajectory would now bring the autonomous vehicle within a threshold distance of a predicted location (according to a behavior prediction generated by the behavior modeling system 176) of another road, the first trajectory may be validated. In this regard, the second trajectory may be used to validate the first trajectory,” here the system is determining if the first trajectory can be validated by comparing the result of the second trajectory to the predicted location of the first trajectory)
and when the remote trajectory command is different from the automatic trajectory command, cause the vehicle, via the one or more actuation controls, to perform the one or more driving actions during the predetermined timeframe in accordance with the remote trajectory command (Paragraph [0006], “when the first trajectory is determined not to be validated, continuing to generate and use trajectories generated by the second planning system to control the autonomous vehicle until the autonomous vehicle is no longer in a driving situation which caused the second trajectory not to be validated,” here when the first commanded trajectory is not validated/different from the second trajectory, then the system controls the vehicle according to the second trajectory, here while it is not explicitly taught that the first system is onboard the vehicle and the second system is remote, this same methodology of switching from a first trajectory planning system to a second trajectory planning system could reasonably be applied to the autonomous and remote planning systems of Nabbe).
Nabbe, Yasui, and Sandberg are analogous art as they are both generally related to systems for controlling autonomous vehicles according to a planned trajectory.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to include teach when the remote trajectory command is present for the predetermined timeframe, determine whether the remote trajectory command is different from the automatic trajectory command and when the remote trajectory command is different from the automatic trajectory command, cause the vehicle, via the one or more actuation controls, to perform the one or more driving actions during the predetermined timeframe in accordance with the remote trajectory command of Sandberg in the system for controlling an autonomous vehicle of Nabbe and Yasui with a reasonable expectation of success in order to improve the safety of the system by confirming that a first planning system can operate safely (Paragraph [0030], “As such, in each planning iteration, the validation system confirms that the first planning system can plan safely, so that if there is a problem, the validation system can switch the autonomous vehicle to the second planning system even in the worst case.”).
Regarding claim 9, claim 9 is similar in scope to claim 2 and therefore is rejected under similar rationale.
Regarding claim 11, claim 11 is similar in scope to claim 4 and therefore is rejected under similar rationale.
Regarding claim 12, claim 12 is similar in scope to claim 5 and therefore is rejected under similar rationale.
Regarding claim 13, claim 13 is similar in scope to claim 6 and therefore is rejected under similar rationale.
Regarding claim 14, claim 14 is similar in scope to claim 7 and therefore is rejected under similar rationale.
Regarding claim 15, Nabbe teaches a method for controlling a vehicle comprising (Paragraph [0005], "Some embodiments provide a vehicle navigation system which can navigate a vehicle through an environment based on driving commands")
generating one or more data points from one or more sensors coupled to a vehicle, wherein the one or more data points pertain to one or more of: an environment of the vehicle; and one or more system component measurements of the vehicle (Paragraph [0033], "Vehicle 100 includes a set of one or more external sensor devices 113, also referred to as external sensors 113, which can monitor one or more aspects of an external environment relative to the vehicle 100. Such sensors can include camera devices, video recording devices, infrared sensor devices, radar devices, depth camera devices which can include one or more light-scanning devices including LIDAR devices")
via a controller, comprising a processor (See Figure 9, showing processors 910)
automatically generating an automatic trajectory command based on the one or more data points generated from the one or more sensors (Paragraph [0026], "The VNS, in some embodiments, includes an autonomous navigation system (ANS) which is configured to autonomously generate autonomous driving control commands which control various control elements of the vehicle to autonomously navigate the vehicle along one or more driving routes.")
generate driving actions based on a trajectory (Paragraph [0031], “As used herein, autonomous navigation of the vehicle 100 refers to controlled navigation (“driving”) of vehicle 100 along at least a portion of a route based upon autonomous driving control, by VNS 110, of the control elements 112 of the vehicle 100, including steering control elements, throttle control elements, braking control elements, transmission control elements, etc.”)
and generating one or more driving actions, wherein the one or more driving actions correlate to one or more actuator commands configured to cause the vehicle to be positioned in accordance with the one or more automatic trajectory (Paragraph [0026], "The VNS, in some embodiments, includes an autonomous navigation system (ANS) which is configured to autonomously generate autonomous driving control commands which control various control elements of the vehicle to autonomously navigate the vehicle along one or more driving routes.") (Paragraph [0031], “As used herein, autonomous navigation of the vehicle 100 refers to controlled navigation (“driving”) of vehicle 100 along at least a portion of a route based upon autonomous driving control, by VNS 110, of the control elements 112 of the vehicle 100, including steering control elements, throttle control elements, braking control elements, transmission control elements, etc.”)
via a remote station system located remotely from the vehicle: (Paragraph [0005], “the remote control system can generate remote driving commands which cause the vehicle to be navigated to a particular location without requiring the occupant associated with the health emergency to manually navigate the vehicle”)
receiving the one or more data points generated by the one or more sensors (Paragraph [0038], "Module 122 can monitor one or more aspects of the interior and exterior of the vehicle, via sensor data generated by one or more sensors 113-114")
and generating a remote trajectory command comprising one or more driving actions (Paragraph [0036-0037], "VNS 110 includes a set of modules which are configured to enable VNS 110 to cause the vehicle 100 to be navigated through an environment based on remote driving control of the vehicle. Remote driving control can be based on one or more remote driving command signals, also referred to herein as remote driving commands, received at VNS 110 from one or more remote control systems via one or more interfaces 116. VNS 110 includes an remote control request module 122 which determines whether to generate a remote control request signal which, when received at a remotely located remote control system, is processed as a request, by VNS 110, for the remote control system to engage remote driving control of the VNS 110 via one or more interfaces 116.")
wherein the one or more driving actions correlate to one or more actuator commands configured to cause the vehicle to perform the one or more driving actions (Paragraph [0040], "The driving route can be generated at module 124 based on input commands received from an interface 115, data received from one or more interfaces 116, etc. In another example, where VNS 110 is in a remote driving control mode, module 124 can generate control signals based on remote control commands received from a remote control system via one or more interfaces 116.")
and the controller is further configured to determine whether the remote trajectory command is present for a predetermined timeframe (Paragraph [0041], "Module 124 can switch the VNS 110 to a remote driving control mode based on one or more of generation of an remote control request signal at module 122, receipt of one or more remote driving commands from a remote control system via an interface 116, generation of an authorization signal at module 125, receipt of an authorization confirmation signal from a remote control system via an interface 116, some combination thereof, etc," here the system can switch to a remote driving mode based on whether a remote trajectory command is present by detecting receipt of one or more remote driving commands)
when the remote trajectory command is present for the predetermined timeframe (Paragraph [0140], “The remote control device can be configured to deactivate in the absence of receiving a command … within a certain period of elapsed time,” here the remote trajectory is only active when commands are received for a predetermined timeframe/period).
However Nabbe does not explicitly teach wherein the automatic trajectory command comprises automatic trajectory instructions which comprise one or more automatic trajectory plot points; and each automatic trajectory plot point, of the one or more automatic trajectory plot points, comprises position coordinates for the vehicle to be at a specific time; the one or more automatic trajectory plot points comprise a sequence of trajectory plot points generated at predetermined time intervals; and generate based on the or more automatic trajectory plot points, one or more driving actions.
Yasui teaches an automated vehicle equipped with an automated driving control unit including
wherein the automatic trajectory command comprises automatic trajectory instructions which comprise one or more automatic trajectory plot points (Paragraph [0138], “Then, the automated driving control unit 350 generates trajectory points for the vehicle traveling along the recommended lane to the maximum extent while avoiding obstacles, and controls a part or all of the drive force output device 360, the brake device 362, and the steering device 364 such that the vehicle travels along the trajectory points (and an accompanying speed profile), as shown in the lower diagram.”)
and each automatic trajectory plot point, of the one or more automatic trajectory plot points, comprises position coordinates for the vehicle to be at a specific time (Paragraph [0137], “Each trajectory point may be a position at which the vehicle is to arrive at a sampling clock time for each predetermined sampling time. In this case, information of the target speed and the target acceleration is expressed as intervals of the trajectory points.”)
the one or more automatic trajectory plot points comprise a sequence of trajectory plot points generated at predetermined time intervals (Paragraph [0137], “The automated driving control unit 350 generates a target trajectory along which the vehicle 200 travels in the future. The target trajectory includes, for example, a speed element. For example, the target trajectory is expressed as points (trajectory points) at which the vehicle is to arrive being aligned in order. The trajectory points are points at which the vehicle is to arrive at each predetermined traveling distance, and separately from these, a target speed and a target acceleration for each sampling time (for example, about 0 and several split seconds) are generated as a part of the target trajectory. Each trajectory point may be a position at which the vehicle is to arrive at a sampling clock time for each predetermined sampling time. In this case, information of the target speed and the target acceleration is expressed as intervals of the trajectory points.”)
and generate based on the or more automatic trajectory plot points, one or more driving actions (Paragraph [0138], “Then, the automated driving control unit 350 generates trajectory points for the vehicle traveling along the recommended lane to the maximum extent while avoiding obstacles, and controls a part or all of the drive force output device 360, the brake device 362, and the steering device 364 such that the vehicle travels along the trajectory points (and an accompanying speed profile), as shown in the lower diagram.”).
Nabbe and Yasui are analogous art as they are both generally related to systems for controlling autonomous vehicles according to a planned trajectory.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to include wherein the automatic trajectory command comprises automatic trajectory instructions which comprise one or more automatic trajectory plot points; and each automatic trajectory plot point, of the one or more automatic trajectory plot points, comprises position coordinates for the vehicle to be at a specific time; the one or more automatic trajectory plot points comprise a sequence of trajectory plot points generated at predetermined time intervals; and generate based on the or more automatic trajectory plot points, one or more driving actions of Yasui in the system for controlling an autonomous vehicle of Nabbe with a reasonable expectation of success in order to improve the safety of the system by sequentially planning the trajectory of the vehicle to handle various road events and avoid obstacles (Paragraph [0136], “The automated driving control unit 350 causes the vehicle 200 to automatically travel so as to avoid contact with objects, the positions and the speeds of which have been input from the outside monitoring unit 310, on the basis of a principle that the vehicle 200 travels along the recommended lane determined by the recommended lane determination device 340. The automated driving control unit 350 sequentially executes various events, for example. The events include a constant-speed traveling event of traveling along the same traveling lane at a constant speed, a following traveling event of following a vehicle traveling ahead, a lane changing event, an interflowing event, a branching event, an emergency stop event, a toll gate event of passing through a toll gate, and a handover event of ending automated driving and switching it to non-automated driving.”).
However the combination does not explicitly teach when the remote trajectory command is present for the predetermined timeframe, determine whether the remote trajectory command is different from the automatic trajectory command and when the remote trajectory command is different from the automatic trajectory command, cause the vehicle, via the one or more actuation controls, to perform the one or more driving actions during the predetermined timeframe in accordance with the remote trajectory command.
Sandberg teaches a vehicle system which uses a plurality of trajectories in order to validate a trajectory and control a vehicle including
wherein the automatic trajectory command comprises automatic trajectory instructions which comprise one or more automatic trajectory plot points (Paragraph [0067], “Each planned trajectory may provide a planned path and other instructions for an autonomous vehicle to follow for some brief period of time into the future, such as 10 seconds or more or less. In this regard, the trajectories may define the specific characteristics of acceleration, deceleration, speed, direction, etc. to allow the vehicle to follow the route towards reaching a destination location. A control system software module of computing devices 110 may be configured to control movement of the vehicle, for instance by controlling braking, acceleration and steering of the vehicle, in order to follow a trajectory.”) (See also figures 8-12 showing generated trajectory plot points)
when the remote trajectory command is present for the predetermined timeframe, determine whether the remote trajectory command is different from the automatic trajectory command (Paragraph [0089], “If the second trajectory would now bring the autonomous vehicle within a threshold distance of a predicted location (according to a behavior prediction generated by the behavior modeling system 176) of another road, the first trajectory may be validated. In this regard, the second trajectory may be used to validate the first trajectory,” here the system is determining if the first trajectory can be validated by comparing the result of the second trajectory to the predicted location of the first trajectory)
and when the remote trajectory command is different from the automatic trajectory command, cause the vehicle, via the one or more actuation controls, to perform the one or more driving actions during the predetermined timeframe in accordance with the remote trajectory command (Paragraph [0006], “when the first trajectory is determined not to be validated, continuing to generate and use trajectories generated by the second planning system to control the autonomous vehicle until the autonomous vehicle is no longer in a driving situation which caused the second trajectory not to be validated,” here when the first commanded trajectory is not validated/different from the second trajectory, then the system controls the vehicle according to the second trajectory, here while it is not explicitly taught that the first system is onboard the vehicle and the second system is remote, this same methodology of switching from a first trajectory planning system to a second trajectory planning system could reasonably be applied to the autonomous and remote planning systems of Nabbe).
Nabbe, Yasui, and Sandberg are analogous art as they are both generally related to systems for controlling autonomous vehicles according to a planned trajectory.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to include teach when the remote trajectory command is present for the predetermined timeframe, determine whether the remote trajectory command is different from the automatic trajectory command and when the remote trajectory command is different from the automatic trajectory command, cause the vehicle, via the one or more actuation controls, to perform the one or more driving actions during the predetermined timeframe in accordance with the remote trajectory command of Sandberg in the system for controlling an autonomous vehicle of Nabbe and Yasui with a reasonable expectation of success in order to improve the safety of the system by confirming that a first planning system can operate safely (Paragraph [0030], “As such, in each planning iteration, the validation system confirms that the first planning system can plan safely, so that if there is a problem, the validation system can switch the autonomous vehicle to the second planning system even in the worst case.”).
Regarding claim 16, claim 16 is similar in scope to claim 2 and therefore is rejected under similar rationale.
Regarding claim 18, claim 18 is similar in scope to claim 4 and therefore is rejected under similar rationale.
Regarding claim 19, claim 19 is similar in scope to claim 6 and therefore is rejected under similar rationale.
Regarding claim 20, claim 20 is similar in scope to claim 7 and therefore is rejected under similar rationale.
Claims 3, 10, and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nabbe (US-20230356692) in view of Yasui (US-20210150772) in view of Sandberg (US-20240017741) and further in view of Houshmand (US-20220194419).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Nabbe and Sandberg teaches the system as discussed above in claim 1, however the combination does not explicitly teach wherein the one or more trajectory plot points comprise trajectory plot points generated in 0.1 second intervals.
Houshmand teaches wherein the one or more trajectory plot points comprise trajectory plot points generated in 0.1 second intervals (Paragraph [0018], “a smooth path output by the trajectory generation component 114 may comprise such points at a 10 or 100 millisecond interval, which may correspond to a time interval associated with the trajectory 118”).
Nabbe, Sandberg, and Houshmand are analogous art as they are both generally related to systems for controlling autonomous vehicles according to a planned trajectory.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to include wherein the one or more trajectory plot points comprise trajectory plot points generated in 0.1 second intervals of Houshmand in the system for controlling an autonomous vehicle of Nabbe and Sandberg with a reasonable expectation of success in order to improve the safety of the system by generating trajectories with a high enough resolution to control the vehicle at highway speeds (Paragraph [0013], “The techniques may additionally or alternatively enable teleoperation assistance to an autonomous vehicle moving at highway speeds. These improvements may increase the safety of the autonomous vehicle, improve the passenger experience, and increase the number of scenarios that the autonomous vehicle may navigate without needing to stop for more involved teleoperator input.”).
Regarding claim 10, claim 10 is similar in scope to claim 3 and therefore is rejected under similar rationale.
Regarding claim 17, claim 17 is similar in scope to claim 3 and therefore is rejected under similar rationale.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Foil (US-12221098) teaches operations to detect an object that is moving; identifying, by the processor, detected behavior of the object that constitutes an unrecognized behavior; predicting, by the processor, future movement of the object based on a circle having a radius that is function of a velocity of the object; and controlling operations of the robot based on the predicting. Vandapel (US 12012097) teaches receiving information comprising an active trajectory of an AV that the AV intends to following for a planning horizon. The methods also include using the active trajectory to identify one or more regions in an environment of the AV such as a fallback monitoring region (FMR) and an active monitoring region (AMR), and generating one or more instructions for causing the AV to execute a collision mitigation action in response to an object being detected within the AMR. Wright (US-11904902) teaches a routing system may be used by computing devices in order to generate a route to a destination using map information. Planning system may be used by computing device in order to generate short-term trajectories that allow the vehicle to follow routes generated by the routing system.
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 CHRISTOPHER FEES whose telephone number is (303)297-4343. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 7:30 - 5:30 MT.
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, Aniss Chad can be reached at (571) 270-3832. 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.
/CHRISTOPHER GEORGE FEES/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3662
Prosecution Insights