DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 01/20/2026 has been entered.
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.
Claims 1-6, 8-13, 15-16, 18 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Agarwal (US 20210174545 A1 – cited in IDS) in view of Shepard (US 20210316580 A1 – cited in IDS) and Jenquin (US 5442810 A – cited in IDS).
Regarding claim 1, Agarwal discloses a system for measuring a pose of a trailer connected to an autonomous truck (abstract, [0001]), the system comprising:
a trailer pose sensor configured to detect a motion of the trailer ([0044], [0091] teaches various sensors including cameras and LiDAR sensors mounted on the autonomous truck; [0083] when the truck and the trailer are aligned, as illustrated in FIG. 12A, the camera can be calibrated in this configuration and establish a reference feature point set by observing the target on the opposing surface and identify a plurality of features points in the target. Such reference feature point set detected during calibration may be used to estimate a transformation between reference target feature points and a future target feature points based on planar homography. Such a transformation (rotation and translation) may then be used to estimate the pose of trailer 1220; [0092] an inertial measurement unit may be used in connection with the camera which reports the camera's pose; [0088] motion parameters of the camera may then be used to convert to the trailer's rotation (R′) and translation (t′). Such determined motion parameters for the trailer may then be used to compute the pose of the trailer); and
an autonomy computing system communicatively coupled to the trailer pose sensor, the autonomy computing system comprising a processor coupled to a memory, the memory storing executable instructions that (fig. 17; abstract, “method, system, medium, and implementations for trailer pose estimation”; [0001] “autonomous driving”; [0104] “Computer 1700 also includes a central processing unit (CPU) 1720, in the form of one or more processors, for executing program instructions. The exemplary computer platform includes an internal communication bus 1710, program storage and data storage of different forms (e.g., disk 1770, read only memory (ROM) 1730, or random access memory (RAM) 1740), for various data files to be processed and/or communicated by computer 1700, as well as possibly program instructions to be executed by CPU 1720.”; [0100] obtain on a continuous basis the updated pose of the trailer and use such dynamic pose information to control the autonomous driving), upon execution by the processor, configure the processor to:
compute a first pose of the trailer ([0100] As shown herein, there are two poses of the trailer 1220, one having a center point at CFS at the initial pose and the other having a center point at CFS' at a second pose. As discussed herein, based on the camera transformation [R, t] estimated based on two sets of feature points, any critical point(s) on the trailer at the initial pose may be mapped to transformed position(s) using [R′, t′], which represents trailer transformation computed from [R, t] to derive the current pose of the trailer.) and store in the memory ([0098] With the camera calibrated and the calibration results (calibration parameters) and reference features stored, when the truck and attached trailer are in motion, such stored information can be used to estimate trailer's pose on-the-fly in order to facilitate vehicle control to ensure proper behavior of the truck and trailer, e.g., traveling in the same lane.);
receive a first measurement of the motion from the trailer pose sensor ([0083] the camera can be calibrated in this configuration and establish a reference feature point set by observing the target on the opposing surface and identify a plurality of features points in the target. Such a transformation (rotation and translation) may then be used to estimate the pose of trailer 1220; [0088] Such motion parameters of the camera may then be used to convert to the trailer's rotation (R′) and translation (t′). Such determined motion parameters for the trailer may then be used to compute the pose of the trailer. Therefore, the “motion parameters of the camera” taught by Agarwal reads on the claimed “first measurement of the motion” and “the camera” taught by Agarwal reads on the claimed “the trailer pose sensor”);
compute a second pose based at least in part on the first measurement received from the trailer pose sensor and the first pose ([0100] As shown herein, there are two poses of the trailer 1220, one having a center point at CFS at the initial pose and the other having a center point at CFS' at a second pose. As discussed herein, based on the camera transformation [R, t] estimated based on two sets of feature points, any critical point(s) on the trailer at the initial pose may be mapped to transformed position(s) using [R′, t′], which represents trailer transformation computed from [R, t] to derive the current pose of the trailer. In the other words, “second pose” is derived based on the “motion parameters of the camera” and the “initial pose.”); and
store the second pose in the memory ([0098] With the camera calibrated and the calibration results (calibration parameters) and reference features stored, when the truck and attached trailer are in motion, such stored information can be used to estimate trailer's pose on-the-fly in order to facilitate vehicle control to ensure proper behavior of the truck and trailer, e.g., traveling in the same lane.).
However, Agarwal does not expressly disclose (1) the trailer pose sensor coupled to a connector configured to rigidly mate with a trailer connector on the trailer; and (2) a connection extending from the autonomous truck and configured to connect with different types of trailers, the connection including a flexible member and a connector, the flexible member including a first end and a second end opposite the first end, the flexible member including at least one of an existing air hose connection or an existing electrical cable connection, the first end coupled to the autonomous truck, the second end coupled to the connector, the trailer pose sensor coupled to the connector.
In an analogous art, Shepard teaches a trailer sensor (fig. 3 elements 31/32) coupled to a connector (figs. 2-3 elements 20/21/22) configured to rigidly mate with a trailer connector (fig. 3 illustrates a trailer coupler rigidly mated with the hitch receiver 20) on the trailer (figs. 2-3; [0016], [0018], and [0031]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Shepard’s rigidly mounted hitch-connector sensor arrangement into Agarwal’s trailer pose-estimation system to improve the stability and accuracy of motion measurements. Shepard teaches that mounting a motion-sensing device directly on the trailer-side coupler provides a rigid mechanical reference frame and improves the fidelity of sensed motion during trailer articulation (Shepard [0016]; [0031]). Agarwal likewise teaches using inertial measurements in conjunction with its camera-based pose estimation (Agarwal [0092]). Therefore, incorporating a known rigid trailer-mounted sensor configuration into the multi-sensor framework already contemplated by Agarwal represents the predictable use of a known technique to enhance measurement reliability. This modification merely adds an additional motion sensor at an art-recognized stable mounting location and does not alter Agarwal’s principle of operation, which already relies on fusing heterogeneous sensor data, including inertial measurements, to compute trailer pose.
However, Agarwal in view of Shepard does not expressly disclose a connection extending from the autonomous truck and configured to connect with different types of trailers, the connection including a flexible member and a connector, the flexible member including a first end and a second end opposite the first end, the flexible member including at least one of an existing air hose connection or an existing electrical cable connection, the first end coupled to the autonomous truck, the second end coupled to the connector, the trailer pose sensor coupled to the connector.
In analogous art, Jenquin teaches an existing flexible connection between a tractor (truck) and trailer in the form of an air hose/air brake hose assembly with end connectors used to couple between the tractor and the trailer (col 4 ln 3–12; Fig. 2), including a first end coupled to the tractor and a second end coupled to a connector at the trailer end that mates with a trailer-mounted connector/plate (col 4 ln 62–68; fig. 2-3). Jenquin further teaches that the hose assembly includes a metallic sheath / conductors forming an electrical path through the hose assembly to carry electrical signals between the trailer side and tractor side, including for trailer-mounted sensors (col 5 ln 10–17; col 6 ln 13–36; figs. 2-4). Therefore, Jenquin teaches the claimed “connection extending from the autonomous truck,” the “flexible member,” and that the flexible member includes “at least one of an existing air hose connection or an existing electrical cable connection” (air hose with integrated conductive path / electrical coupling), with the first end coupled to the truck and second end coupled to the connector that mates at the trailer interface.
Accordingly, the combination teaches the amended claim’s “connection/flexible member” limitations (Jenquin) together with the “sensor coupled to the connector / rigid mating trailer connector” interface limitations (Shepard), while Agarwal supplies the pose estimation computing and memory operations.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to implement Agarwal’s trailer pose sensor communication and interface using the existing tractor–trailer connection hardware taught by Jenquin (air hose and/or electrical cable connection) and to locate/couple the motion sensor at the rigid connector interface as taught by Shepard, because doing so would have predictably: leveraged existing, standardized, flexible tractor–trailer connections (air hose/electrical cable) to support connection to different types of trailers and simplify installation and interchangeability (Jenquin, col. 4–6; Fig. 2-3); provided a protected, dedicated pathway for transmitting sensor-related signals between the trailer interface and the truck-side autonomy system (Jenquin, col. 5–6); and improved measurement fidelity by coupling the motion sensing device to a rigid mechanical reference at the vehicle–trailer connector interface (Shepard, [0016], [0031]), while keeping Agarwal’s pose computation framework unchanged (Agarwal, [0098], [0100]). The modification is a predictable integration of known coupling and signal-routing structures (Jenquin) with a known rigid sensor mounting at the trailer interface (Shepard) in a system already directed to trailer pose estimation for autonomous control (Agarwal).
Regarding claim 2, Agarwal in view of Shepard and Jenquin discloses the system of claim 1 further comprising a truck inertial measurement unit (IMU) coupled to the autonomous truck and configured to generate at least one inertial measurement for the autonomous truck, and wherein the processor is further configured to compute the second pose by computing the second pose based at least in part on the at least one inertial measurement from the truck IMU (Agarwal teaches that inertial measurements from a truck-mounted IMU may be used in conjunction with the trailer-pose sensor to compute pose information (Agarwal [0092]: “an inertial measurement unit may be used in connection with the camera which reports the camera’s pose…”). Agarwal further teaches using such inertial measurements to compute updated trailer poses ([0090]–[0093]; [0100]). As discussed with respect to claim 1, Shepard teaches the connector-mounted trailer pose sensor. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate Agarwal’s truck-mounted IMU measurements into the combined system to improve pose estimation accuracy, for the same reasons articulated in the motivation to combine for claim 1.)
Regarding claim 3, Agarwal in view of Shepard and Jenquin discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the trailer pose sensor comprises at least one inertial measurement unit (IMU) coupled to the connector (Agarwal teaches the use of inertial measurements in connection with the trailer pose sensor (Agarwal [0092]). Shepard teaches an IMU 32 mounted directly to the trailer-side connector (e.g., the trailer tongue coupler) via mounting arm 34, thereby providing an IMU coupled to the connector as claimed (Shepard Fig. 3; [0016]). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to use Shepard’s known trailer-mounted IMU configuration within Agarwal’s pose-estimation system for the same reasons discussed with respect to claim 1—namely, to improve motion-measurement fidelity by incorporating a rigid-mounted inertial sensor arrangement known in the art.).
Regarding claim 4, Agarwal in view of Shepard and Jenquin discloses the system of claim 3, wherein the at least one IMU comprises at least one accelerometer (Shepard teaches that IMU 32 includes a 3-axis accelerometer and optionally a 3-axis gyroscope (Shepard [0016]). A 3-axis gyroscope is well known in the art to measure angular velocity about three orthogonal axes (pitch, roll, and yaw). Thus, Shepard teaches the limitations of claim 4. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate Shepard’s IMU configuration into the system for the same reasons discussed with respect to the motivation to combine for claim 1.).
Regarding claim 5, Agarwal in view of Shepard and Jenquin discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the trailer pose sensor comprises a camera (Agarwal teaches that the trailer pose sensor may comprise a camera used to capture feature points of the trailer and compute its pose (Agarwal [0080]–[0093]; [0100]). As discussed with respect to claim 1, Shepard teaches a sensor mounted to a connector rigidly mated with the trailer connector (Shepard Fig. 3; [0016]). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate Agarwal’s camera-based pose sensing into the connector-mounted sensor arrangement of Shepard for the reasons stated in the motivation to combine for claim 1—namely, to improve trailer-motion sensing by using a known rigidly mounted sensor configuration within Agarwal’s pose-estimation framework.).
Regarding claim 6, Agarwal in view of Shepard and Jenquin discloses the system of claim 1 further comprising an air hose assembly comprising: the connector configured to rigidly mate with the trailer connector on the trailer; and at least one conductor configured to electrically couple the trailer pose sensor to a sensor interface on the autonomous truck (Agarwal teaches a trailer pose sensor and an autonomy computing system but does not disclose a connector rigidly mating with the trailer connector. Shepard teaches mounting a trailer-side sensor (IMU 32) directly on the trailer tongue coupler/hitch connector using rigid mounting arm 34 (FIG. 3; [0016]). Jenquin teaches an air-hose-based connector assembly used between a tractor and trailer (col. 4 ln 3–12; FIG. 2), wherein the hose assembly includes a metallic sheath 36 and conductors forming an electrical transmission path between the tractor and trailer. Jenquin further teaches that additional wiring within or through the air-brake hose may couple sensors inside or outside the trailer to the tractor’s sensor interface (col 5 ln 10–17; col 6 ln 13–36). Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of first filing of the claimed invention to incorporate the known air-hose-based conductor arrangement of Jenquin into the combined system of Agarwal and Shepard to provide a robust, protected electrical path between the trailer pose sensor and the truck computing system. Jenquin expressly teaches using the air-brake hose assembly as a dedicated transmission path between trailer-mounted sensors and the tractor (col 6 ln 31–36). Integrating this known wiring technique with the rigid trailer-mounted sensor taught by Shepard and the pose-estimation framework of Agarwal represents the predictable use of known components to provide established benefits—namely, reliable electrical coupling and protected routing of sensor signals. The modification does not change the principle of operation of Agarwal, which already teaches the use of trailer-mounted sensors communicating measurements to the truck’s autonomy computing system.).
Regarding claim 8, Agarwal discloses a system for measuring a pose of a trailer connected to an autonomous truck (abstract, [0001]), the system comprising:
a trailer pose sensor configured to detect a motion of the trailer ([0044], [0091] teaches various sensors including cameras and LiDAR sensors mounted on the autonomous truck; [0083] when the truck and the trailer are aligned, as illustrated in FIG. 12A, the camera can be calibrated in this configuration and establish a reference feature point set by observing the target on the opposing surface and identify a plurality of features points in the target. Such reference feature point set detected during calibration may be used to estimate a transformation between reference target feature points and a future target feature points based on planar homography. Such a transformation (rotation and translation) may then be used to estimate the pose of trailer 1220; [0092] an inertial measurement unit may be used in connection with the camera which reports the camera's pose; [0088] motion parameters of the camera may then be used to convert to the trailer's rotation (R′) and translation (t′). Such determined motion parameters for the trailer may then be used to compute the pose of the trailer); and
an autonomy computing system communicatively coupled to the trailer pose sensor, the autonomy computing system comprising a processor coupled to a memory, the memory storing executable instructions that (fig. 17; abstract, “method, system, medium, and implementations for trailer pose estimation”; [0001] “autonomous driving”; [0044], [0091] teaches various sensors including cameras and LiDAR sensors mounted on the autonomous truck; 0092] an inertial measurement unit may be used in connection with the camera which reports the camera's pose; [0100] to obtain on a continuous basis the updated pose of the trailer and use such dynamic pose information to control the autonomous driving; [0104] “Computer 1700 also includes a central processing unit (CPU) 1720, in the form of one or more processors, for executing program instructions. The exemplary computer platform includes an internal communication bus 1710, program storage and data storage of different forms (e.g., disk 1770, read only memory (ROM) 1730, or random access memory (RAM) 1740), for various data files to be processed and/or communicated by computer 1700, as well as possibly program instructions to be executed by CPU 1720.”), upon execution by the processor, configure the processor to:
compute a first pose of the trailer ([0100] As shown herein, there are two poses of the trailer 1220, one having a center point at CFS at the initial pose and the other having a center point at CFS' at a second pose. As discussed herein, based on the camera transformation [R, t] estimated based on two sets of feature points, any critical point(s) on the trailer at the initial pose may be mapped to transformed position(s) using [R′, t′], which represents trailer transformation computed from [R, t] to derive the current pose of the trailer.) and store in the memory ([0098] With the camera calibrated and the calibration results (calibration parameters) and reference features stored, when the truck and attached trailer are in motion, such stored information can be used to estimate trailer's pose on-the-fly in order to facilitate vehicle control to ensure proper behavior of the truck and trailer, e.g., traveling in the same lane.);
receive a first measurement of motion from the trailer pose sensor ([0083] the camera can be calibrated in this configuration and establish a reference feature point set by observing the target on the opposing surface and identify a plurality of features points in the target. Such a transformation (rotation and translation) may then be used to estimate the pose of trailer 1220; [0088] Such motion parameters of the camera may then be used to convert to the trailer's rotation (R′) and translation (t′). Such determined motion parameters for the trailer may then be used to compute the pose of the trailer. Therefore, the “motion parameters of the camera” taught by Agarwal reads on the claimed “first measurement of the motion” and “the camera” taught by Agarwal reads on the claimed “the trailer pose sensor”.);
compute a second pose based at least in part on the first measurement received from the trailer pose sensor and the first pose ([0100] As shown herein, there are two poses of the trailer 1220, one having a center point at CFS at the initial pose and the other having a center point at CFS' at a second pose. As discussed herein, based on the camera transformation [R, t] estimated based on two sets of feature points, any critical point(s) on the trailer at the initial pose may be mapped to transformed position(s) using [R′, t′], which represents trailer transformation computed from [R, t] to derive the current pose of the trailer.); and
store the second pose in the memory ([0098] With the camera calibrated and the calibration results (calibration parameters) and reference features stored, when the truck and attached trailer are in motion, such stored information can be used to estimate trailer's pose on-the-fly in order to facilitate vehicle control to ensure proper behavior of the truck and trailer, e.g., traveling in the same lane.).
However, Agarwal does not expressly disclose (1) the trailer pose sensor coupled to a connector configured to rigidly mate with a trailer connector on the trailer; and (2) an air hose assembly comprising a connector configured to mate with a trailer connector on the trailer, the connector configured to mate with different types of trailers, the connector configured to couple with an existing air hose connection, the existing air hose connection including a first end and a second end opposite the first end, the first end coupled to the autonomous truck, the second end coupled to the connector; and at least one conductor configured to electrically couple the trailer pose sensor to a sensor interface on the autonomous truck, .
Nonetheless, in an analogous art, Shepard teaches a motion-sensing device comprising IMU 32 rigidly mounted to the trailer-side connector (e.g., trailer tongue coupler) using mounting arm 34, which mates with the hitch ball mount on the tow vehicle (Shepard [0016]; Fig. 3). Shepard therefore teaches a trailer-mounted sensor rigidly coupled to the trailer connector and configured to detect trailer motion.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Shepard’s rigidly mounted hitch-connector sensor arrangement into Agarwal’s trailer pose-estimation system to improve the stability and accuracy of motion measurements. Shepard teaches that mounting a motion-sensing device directly on the trailer-side coupler provides a rigid mechanical reference frame and improves the fidelity of sensed motion during trailer articulation (Shepard [0016]; [0031]). Agarwal likewise teaches using inertial measurements in conjunction with its camera-based pose estimation (Agarwal [0092]). Therefore, incorporating a known rigid trailer-mounted sensor configuration into the multi-sensor framework already contemplated by Agarwal represents the predictable use of a known technique to enhance measurement reliability. This modification merely adds an additional motion sensor at an art-recognized stable mounting location and does not alter Agarwal’s principle of operation, which already relies on fusing heterogeneous sensor data, including inertial measurements, to compute trailer pose.
However, Agarwal in view of Shepherd does not expressly disclose an air hose assembly comprising the connector configured to mate with the trailer connector on the trailer, the connector configured to mate with different types of trailers, the connector configured to couple with an existing air hose connection, the existing air hose connection including a first end and a second end opposite the first end, the first end coupled to the autonomous truck, the second end coupled to the connector; and at least one conductor configured to electrically couple the trailer pose sensor to a sensor interface on the autonomous truck.
In an analogous art, Jenquin teaches an air hose assembly between a tractor and trailer, including a connector at the trailer end that mates with a trailer-mounted connector (col 4 ln 3–12; col 4 ln 62–68; Fig. 2-4). Jenquin further teaches the air hose assembly as an existing air hose connection between tractor and trailer, having a first end coupled to the tractor (truck) and a second end coupled to the connector at the trailer end (col. 4 ln 3–12; Fig. 2-3). Jenquin also teaches at least one conductor providing an electrical transmission path between tractor and trailer via the hose assembly, including a metallic sheath / electrical line coupled to tractor electronics and used as part of the electrical path to/from trailer components (col 5 ln 10–17; col 6 ln 13–36). Jenquin expressly teaches that additional wires may connect a trailer transmitter unit to sensors inside or outside the trailer and provide the information via the hose electrical path to tractor-side receiving electronics (col 6 ln 13–36). Thus, Jenquin teaches the claimed “at least one conductor configured to electrically couple the trailer pose sensor to a sensor interface on the autonomous truck.” With respect to the language “the connector configured to mate with different types of trailers,” Jenquin’s tractor–trailer air-hose coupling arrangement is directed to tractor/trailer interoperability using standard coupling hardware at the trailer interface (col 4; Fig. 2-4), and it would have been obvious to implement the claimed connector as a standardized trailer-side mating connector so that the same truck-side air-hose assembly can be used across different trailer types that use the same conventional air-hose interface, which is a known objective of tractor–trailer connector systems (col 4–6; Fig. 2-4).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to incorporate Jenquin’s air hose assembly with an electrical conductor path into Agarwal’s trailer pose-estimation system, and to couple the trailer pose sensor at the trailer-connector interface as taught by Shepard, because doing so would have predictably: use an existing tractor–trailer air hose connection to provide a practical, already-present physical interface between truck and trailer (Jenquin, col 4; Fig. 2-3), provide a protected, dedicated electrical path for transmitting sensor measurements between the trailer-side sensor and the truck-side sensor interface/autonomy computing system (Jenquin, col 5–6; Fig. 2-4), and improve motion measurement stability/fidelity by coupling the motion sensor to a rigid connector interface at the vehicle–trailer coupling region (Shepard [0016], [0031]), while leaving Agarwal’s underlying pose computation and storage flow unchanged (Agarwal [0098], [0100]). The combination is a predictable integration of known tractor–trailer coupling hardware and signal-routing (Jenquin) with known rigid connector-mounted motion sensing (Shepard) in a system directed to trailer pose estimation for autonomous control (Agarwal).
Regarding claim 9, Agarwal in view of Shepard and Jenquin discloses the system of claim 8 wherein the processor is further configured to receive at least one inertial measurement from a truck inertial measurement unit (IMU) coupled to the autonomous truck, and wherein the processor is further configured to compute the second pose by computing the second pose based at least in part on the at least one inertial measurement from the truck IMU (Agarwal teaches using inertial measurements from a truck-mounted IMU in conjunction with the trailer pose sensor to compute pose information (Agarwal [0092]: “an inertial measurement unit may be used in connection with the camera which reports the camera’s pose with respect to the trailer’s surface or edge points”). Agarwal further teaches computing an updated pose based in part on inertial measurements ([0100]). As explained with respect to claim 8, Shepard teaches the rigid trailer-mounted sensor configuration and Jenquin teaches the air-hose-based connector assembly and electrical coupling between trailer-mounted sensors and the truck. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate Agarwal’s truck-mounted IMU measurements within the combined system to improve pose estimation accuracy, for the same reasons discussed in the motivation to combine for claim 8.)
Regarding claim 10, Agarwal in view of Shepard and Jenquin discloses the system of claim 8, wherein the trailer pose sensor comprises at least one inertial measurement unit (IMU) coupled to the connector (Agarwal teaches a trailer pose sensor incorporated into a trailer-pose-estimation system but does not disclose the sensor being coupled to a connector. Shepard, however, teaches an IMU 32 rigidly mounted to the trailer-side connector (the trailer tongue coupler/hitch connector) using mounting arm 34 (Shepard [0016]; Fig. 3). Shepard further teaches that IMU 32 may be a 3-, 6-, or 9-DOF IMU including accelerometers, gyroscopes, and magnetometers for detecting trailer motion. Thus, the combination of Agarwal and Shepard teaches the limitation of claim 10. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate Shepard’s trailer-connector-mounted IMU arrangement into Agarwal’s pose-estimation system to improve the stability and fidelity of trailer-motion measurements, for the same reasons set forth in the motivation to combine for claim 8.)
Regarding claim 11, Agarwal in view of Shepard and Jenquin discloses the system of claim 10, wherein the processor is further configured to receive the first measurement of motion including an acceleration and angular velocity for each of a pitch axis, a roll axis, and a yaw axis (Shepard teaches an IMU 32 rigidly mounted to the trailer-side connector ([0016]; Fig. 3). Shepard further teaches that IMU 32 may comprise a 3-axis accelerometer and a 3-axis gyroscope ([0016]). A 3-axis accelerometer provides acceleration measurements about pitch, roll, and yaw axes, and a 3-axis gyroscope provides angular-velocity measurements about pitch, roll, and yaw axes—sensor functionality that was well-known to those of ordinary skill in the art at the time. Accordingly, Shepard teaches receiving an inertial measurement including acceleration and angular velocity for each of the pitch, roll, and yaw axes. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to configure the processor in Agarwal to receive the full 6-DOF inertial measurements provided by the IMU structure taught by Shepard, for the same reasons set forth in the motivation to combine for claim 10 (incorporation of Shepard’s rigidly mounted IMU to improve stability and fidelity of motion measurements.)).
Regarding claim 12, Agarwal in view of Shepard and Jenquin discloses the system of claim 8, wherein the trailer pose sensor comprises a camera coupled to the connector, the camera configured to capture a frame including the autonomous truck (Agarwal teaches a trailer pose sensor comprising a camera configured to detect motion of the trailer and capture images including the autonomous truck or fiducial markers mounted thereon (Agarwal [0044], [0083], [0091]). Agarwal therefore teaches the claimed camera functionality. However, Agarwal does not expressly teach mounting the camera on a connector configured to rigidly mate with a trailer connector. Shepard, in an analogous art, teaches rigidly mounting a trailer-motion sensor directly on the trailer tongue coupler/hitch connector using a rigid mounting structure (Shepard Fig. 3; [0016]). Shepard teaches that rigid mounting of a motion sensor at the coupler provides a stable mechanical reference frame and improves accuracy and fidelity of motion measurements (Shepard [0016], [0031]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to mount Agarwal’s trailer-mounted camera at the same rigid trailer-connector location taught by Shepard, in order to obtain the same known benefits of improved stability, reduced vibration, and enhanced measurement fidelity. The modification represents a predictable use of a known stable mounting location (the rigid trailer connector) to improve sensor performance in a system that already uses camera-based trailer pose estimation (Agarwal [0083], [0091]).
Regarding claim 13, Agarwal in view of Shepard and Jenquin discloses the system of claim 12, wherein the processor is further configured to compute the first pose of the trailer based at least in part on the frame captured by the camera (Agarwal teaches computing the pose of a trailer based at least in part on images (frames) captured by a camera mounted on the truck or trailer. Agarwal [0082]–[0084] describe detecting and tracking feature points in frames captured by the camera to compute the transformation (rotation R and translation t) between the vehicle and trailer surfaces. Agarwal [0091] teaches that the camera captures visual features of a target or fiducial marker on the opposing surface and uses those detected features to estimate trailer pose. Agarwal [0100] further teaches deriving the trailer’s current pose based on the transformation computed from the camera-generated feature-point sets. Accordingly, Agarwal teaches computing the first pose of the trailer based at least in part on the frame captured by the camera. The additional limitations of claim 13 are therefore taught by Agarwal, and the combination rationales applied for claim 12—incorporating the rigid trailer-connector mounting location of Shepard—remain applicable.).
Regarding claim 15, Agarwal discloses a method of measuring a pose of a trailer connected to an autonomous truck (abstract, [0001]), the method comprising:
storing a first pose of the trailer in a section of memory ([0100] As shown herein, there are two poses of the trailer 1220, one having a center point at CFS at the initial pose and the other having a center point at CFS' at a second pose. As discussed herein, based on the camera transformation [R, t] estimated based on two sets of feature points, any critical point(s) on the trailer at the initial pose may be mapped to transformed position(s) using [R′, t′], which represents trailer transformation computed from [R, t] to derive the current pose of the trailer; [0098] With the camera calibrated and the calibration results (calibration parameters) and reference features stored, when the truck and attached trailer are in motion, such stored information can be used to estimate trailer's pose on-the-fly in order to facilitate vehicle control to ensure proper behavior of the truck and trailer, e.g., traveling in the same lane.);
receiving a first inertial measurement of motion of the trailer from an inertial measurement unit (IMU) ([0092] an inertial measurement unit may be used in connection with the camera which reports the camera's pose with respect to the trailer's surface or edge points.);
computing a second pose based at least in part on the first inertial measurement received from the IMU and the first pose ([0091] To estimate the transformation, the opposing surfaces of the truck 1210 and the trailer 1220 may be used to place a camera on one of the opposing surfaces that is to observe visual features (or changes thereof) of a target or a fiducial marker present on the other surface; [0092] an inertial measurement unit may be used in connection with the camera which reports the camera's pose with respect to the trailer's surface or edge points; [0100] As shown herein, there are two poses of the trailer 1220, one having a center point at CFS at the initial pose and the other having a center point at CFS' at a second pose. As discussed herein, based on the camera transformation [R, t] estimated based on two sets of feature points, any critical point(s) on the trailer at the initial pose may be mapped to transformed position(s) using [R′, t′], which represents trailer transformation computed from [R, t] to derive the current pose of the trailer.); and
storing the second pose in the section of memory ([0098] With the camera calibrated and the calibration results (calibration parameters) and reference features stored, when the truck and attached trailer are in motion, such stored information can be used to estimate trailer's pose on-the-fly in order to facilitate vehicle control to ensure proper behavior of the truck and trailer, e.g., traveling in the same lane.).
However, Agarwal does not expressly disclose (1) an inertial measurement unit (IMU) coupled to a connector rigidly mated with a trailer connector on the trailer, the first inertial measurement of motion including an acceleration and angular velocity for each of a pitch axis, a roll axis, and a yaw axis; and (2) a connection extending from the autonomous truck and configured to connect with different types of trailers, the connection including a flexible member and a connector, the flexible member including a first end and a second end opposite the first end, the flexible member including at least one of an existing air hose connection or an existing electrical cable connection, the first end coupled to the autonomous truck, the second end coupled to the connector , the inertial measurement unit coupled to the connector.
In an analogous art, Shepard teaches an IMU 32 mounted directly on the trailer-side connector using mounting arm 34 (Shepard [0016]; Fig. 3), thus teaching an IMU coupled to a connector rigidly mated with the trailer connector. Shepard further teaches that IMU 32 includes a 3-axis accelerometer and optionally a 3-axis gyroscope ([0016]). A 3-axis accelerometer is well known to measure acceleration along pitch, roll, and yaw axes, and a 3-axis gyroscope is well known to measure angular velocity along those same three axes.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Shepard’s rigid trailer-mounted IMU arrangement into Agarwal’s trailer pose-estimation method to improve accuracy and stability of motion measurements. Shepard teaches that mounting an IMU directly on the trailer coupler provides a rigid mechanical reference frame and improves inertial measurement fidelity ([0016]; [0031]). Agarwal teaches using inertial measurements in conjunction with visual inputs to update trailer pose ([0092]). Combining Shepard’s rigidly mounted IMU with Agarwal’s pose-update process represents the predictable use of a known technique to improve sensor fidelity and reference-frame stability and does not change the principle of operation of Agarwal’s system.
However, Agarwal in view of Shepard does not expressly disclose a connection extending from the autonomous truck and configured to connect with different types of trailers, the connection including a flexible member and a connector, the flexible member including a first end and a second end opposite the first end, the flexible member including at least one of an existing air hose connection or an existing electrical cable connection, the first end coupled to the autonomous truck, the second end coupled to the connector , the inertial measurement unit coupled to the connector.
In analogous art, Jenquin teaches an existing flexible connection between a tractor (truck) and trailer in the form of an air hose/air brake hose assembly with end connectors used to couple between the tractor and the trailer (col 4 ln 3–12; Fig. 2), including a first end coupled to the tractor and a second end coupled to a connector at the trailer end that mates with a trailer-mounted connector/plate (col 4 ln 62–68; fig. 2-3). Jenquin further teaches that the hose assembly includes a metallic sheath / conductors forming an electrical path through the hose assembly to carry electrical signals between the trailer side and tractor side, including for trailer-mounted sensors (col 5 ln 10–17; col 6 ln 13–36; figs. 2-4). Therefore, Jenquin teaches the claimed “connection extending from the autonomous truck,” the “flexible member,” and that the flexible member includes “at least one of an existing air hose connection or an existing electrical cable connection” (air hose with integrated conductive path / electrical coupling), with the first end coupled to the truck and second end coupled to the connector that mates at the trailer interface.
Accordingly, the combination teaches the amended claim’s “connection/flexible member” limitations (Jenquin) together with the “sensor coupled to the connector / rigid mating trailer connector” interface limitations (Shepard), while Agarwal supplies the pose estimation computing and memory operations.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to implement Agarwal’s trailer pose sensor communication and interface using the existing tractor–trailer connection hardware taught by Jenquin (air hose and/or electrical cable connection) and to locate/couple the motion sensor at the rigid connector interface as taught by Shepard, because doing so would have predictably: leveraged existing, standardized, flexible tractor–trailer connections (air hose/electrical cable) to support connection to different types of trailers and simplify installation and interchangeability (Jenquin, col. 4–6; Fig. 2-3); provided a protected, dedicated pathway for transmitting sensor-related signals between the trailer interface and the truck-side autonomy system (Jenquin, col. 5–6); and improved measurement fidelity by coupling the motion sensing device to a rigid mechanical reference at the vehicle–trailer connector interface (Shepard, [0016], [0031]), while keeping Agarwal’s pose computation framework unchanged (Agarwal, [0098], [0100]). The modification is a predictable integration of known coupling and signal-routing structures (Jenquin) with a known rigid sensor mounting at the trailer interface (Shepard) in a system already directed to trailer pose estimation for autonomous control (Agarwal).
Regarding claim 16, Agarwal in view of Shepard and Jenquin discloses the method of claim 15 further comprising computing the first pose based on initial position measurements of the trailer (Agarwal teaches computing an initial pose of the trailer based at least in part on an initial set of feature-point measurements (i.e., initial position measurements) derived from a frame captured during camera calibration. Specifically, Agarwal [0083] discloses establishing a “reference feature point set” during the initial alignment of the truck and trailer. Agarwal [0100] further teaches that this reference feature-point set is used to compute the initial pose of the trailer (“the initial pose having a center point at CFS”), which serves as the basis for computing later poses. These initial reference feature points constitute the claimed “initial position measurements of the trailer.” Accordingly, Agarwal teaches computing the first pose based on initial position measurements of the trailer. Same motivation to combine as in claim 15.)
Regarding claim 18, Agarwal in view of Shepard and Jenquin discloses the method of claim 15 further comprising receiving at least one inertial measurement from a truck IMU coupled to the autonomous truck, and wherein computing the second pose further comprises computing the second pose based at least in part on the at least one inertial measurement from the truck IMU (Agarwal teaches using an inertial measurement unit associated with (or mounted on) the truck to provide inertial measurements used in trailer pose estimation. Specifically, Agarwal [0092] teaches that an inertial measurement unit (IMU) may be used in conjunction with the camera, where the IMU reports motion of the camera with respect to the truck/trailer surfaces. Agarwal [0091] further indicates that motion parameters of the sensor platform (truck-mounted camera system) are used as part of the pose-estimation process. Agarwal [0100] teaches computing updated trailer pose (the “second pose”) based on transformations derived from dynamic measurements, which include inertial and visual measurements. Accordingly, Agarwal teaches receiving at least one inertial measurement from a truck-mounted IMU and computing the second pose based at least in part on such measurement. Same motivation to combine as claim 15.)
Regarding claim 21, Agarwal in view of Shepard and Jenquin discloses the method of claim 15 further comprising, after storing the second pose, deleting the first pose from the memory (Agarwal teaches computing a second pose of the trailer and storing that second pose in memory ([0098], [0100]). Agarwal further teaches that pose information is updated continuously during operation to maintain current trailer-pose data for use by downstream autonomy modules (Agarwal [0100]: “obtain on a continuous basis the updated pose of the trailer”). Continuous update of stored pose data inherently requires replacing prior pose information with newer pose information so that the system maintains the most current state. Such continuous updating of state variables is a well-understood memory-management practice in autonomous-system control loops. Thus, while Agarwal in view of Shepard does not expressly recite the step of “deleting the first pose from the memory,” Agarwal teaches storing updated (second) pose information in place of prior pose values and using the updated pose for subsequent operations (Agarwal [0098], [0100] describes stored calibration and reference data being updated when new pose information becomes available). Deleting earlier pose values after storing updated pose information would have been an obvious implementation detail in view of Agarwal’s explicit teaching that only the current pose needs to be maintained and used for control purposes. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to delete or overwrite prior pose values after computing and storing the updated second pose, in order to maintain a current state estimate and conserve memory resources. Such deletion or overwriting is a routine and predictable memory-management practice in feedback-control and pose-estimation systems, and its implementation in the combined Agarwal–Shepard system would have been straightforward. The modification does not change the principle of operation of Agarwal, which continuously updates the trailer pose for autonomous-vehicle planning and control (Agarwal [0077]; [0100]).
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Agarwal (US 20210174545 A1) in view of Shepard (US 20210316580 A1) and Jenquin (US 5442810 A) as applied to claim 6 above, further in view of Bowen (US 20200319638 A1 – cited in IDS).
Regarding claim 7, Agarwal in view of Shepard and Jenquin discloses the system of claim 6, wherein at least one data conductor for conducting communication signals between the trailer pose sensor and the autonomy computing system (Agarwal figs. 4A-4B, 12A & 17; [0104]. Also see Jenquin col 6 ln 13-36).
However, Agarwal in view of Shepard and Jenquin does not expressly disclose the at least one conductor includes a plurality of conductors for supplying power to the trailer pose sensor; nonetheless, in an analogous art, Bowen teaches a plurality of conductors for supplying power to a trailer pose sensor ([0048], In addition to detecting objects in the environment external to the vehicle, these sensors may be used to determine the vehicle's actual pose including, e.g., the orientation of the trailer to the tractor unit of a cargo vehicle; [0045], The ECU 252 may also be operatively coupled to a perception system 268 with one or more sensors for detecting objects in the trailer's environment and a power system 270 (for example, a battery power supply) to provide power to local components.)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of first filing of the claimed invention to have the system taught by Agarwal in view of Shepard and Jenquin include a plurality of conductors for supplying power to the trailer pose sensor as taught by Bowen. The motivation for doing so would have been to provide power to local components, determine factors that may impact driving in an autonomous mode, and to relay that information to the processing system (as suggested in [0045] of Bowen).
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Agarwal (US 20210174545 A1) in view of Shepard (US 20210316580 A1) and Jenquin (US 5442810 A) as applied to claim 8 above, further in view of Hiller (US 20190337499 A1 - cited in IDS) and Huang et al. (US 20210118218 A1 – cited in IDS).
Regarding claim 14, Agarwal in view of Shepard and Jenquin discloses the system of claim 8 but does not expressly disclose the system further comprising: receiving a second measurement of motion from a second IMU coupled to a second connector rigidly mated with a second trailer connector on the trailer; computing an average of the first measurement and the second measurement; and computing the second pose based at least in part on the average.
Nonetheless, in an analogous art, Hiller teaches a towing/trailer configuration having multiple connectors and hitch-mounted components rigidly secured to the trailer structure (Hiller [0003], [0048]; Figs. 1–3). Hiller discloses trailer-side components and connector structures that are rigidly secured to the trailer and used for mounting trailer-related components on the trailer side for mounting sensors or other components involved in trailer-related functions.
Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of first filing of the claimed invention that if a trailer-mounted pose or motion sensor (as in Shepard) provides improved fidelity due to rigid mechanical mounting, then adding a second such rigid connector—as taught by Hiller—enables the installation of a second motion-sensing module at a similarly stable reference point on the trailer structure. Doing so would have provided the known benefit of adding an additional independent motion reference point on the trailer for improved sensing and redundancy, without changing Agarwal’s principle of operation.
However, Agarwal in view of Shepard, Jenquin, and Hiller does not expressly disclose receiving a second measurement of motion from a second IMU; computing an average of the first measurement and the second measurement; and computing the second pose based at least in part on the average; nonetheless, in an analogous art, Huang teaches systems with multiple IMUs providing respective motion measurements (Huang [0088]), and Huang teaches combining or averaging multiple IMU measurements to obtain improved motion estimates (Huang [0096]). Huang further teaches that such averaging improves pose estimation accuracy and stability (Huang [0066], [0089], [0096]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of first filing of the claimed invention to incorporate Huang’s multi-IMU averaging technique into Agarwal’s trailer pose-estimation process—particularly once a second connector-mounted IMU is added as taught by Shepard and Hiller—to improve accuracy, reduce noise, and enhance robustness of pose estimation using redundant inertial measurements. This modification represents a predictable use of known sensor-fusion techniques (Huang [0089]) to improve performance in a system that already uses inertial measurements (Agarwal [0092]).
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Agarwal (US 20210174545 A1) in view of Shepard (US 20210316580 A1) and Jenquin (US 5442810 A) as applied to claim 15 above, further in view of Huang et al. (US 20210118218 A1).
Regarding claim 17, Agarwal in view of Shepard and Jenquin discloses the method of claim 15 but does not expressly disclose the method further comprising: receiving a second inertial measurement from a second IMU; computing an average of the first inertial measurement and the second inertial measurement; and computing the second pose based at least in part on the average. Specifically, Agarwal in view of Shepard teaches receiving a first inertial measurement from an IMU associated with the motion of the trailer (Agarwal [0092]; Shepard [0016]) and using such inertial information to update the trailer pose (Agarwal [0091]–[0092], [0100]).
Nonetheless, in an analogous art, Huang teaches systems that receive inertial motion measurements from multiple IMUs (Huang [0088]), compute an average or fused inertial measurement from multiple IMU signals (Huang [0066], [0096]), and compute an updated pose estimate based at least in part on the averaged inertial measurement (Huang [0066], [0096]). Huang further explains that such averaging improves stability and accuracy by reducing noise and drift (Huang [0089]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of first filing of the claimed invention to modify the trailer-pose measurement method of Agarwal in view of Shepard and Jenquin to receive a second inertial measurement from a second IMU, compute an average of the first and second measurements, and compute the second pose based at least in part on the averaged measurement, as taught by Huang. The motivation for doing so would have been to improve trailer-motion estimation accuracy, reduce noise, and enhance robustness of pose estimation during dynamic operation, consistent with the goals of Agarwal’s autonomous trailer-pose update framework.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Agarwal (US 20210174545 A1) in view of Shepard (US 20210316580 A1) and Jenquin (US 5442810 A) as applied to claim 15 above, further in view of Wang et al. (US 20220153298 A1 – cited in IDS).
Regarding claim 20, Agarwal in view of Shepard and Jenquin discloses the method of claim 15 further comprising gaining access, by a behavior and planning module, to the second pose in the section of memory and instructing a control module to modify control of the autonomous truck (Agarwal [0098], [0100] teaches computing and storing an updated pose of a trailer in memory and using such dynamically updated pose data in the autonomy stack responsible for vehicle planning and behavior. Agarwal [0077] describes the autonomous-driving behavior and planning modules that use trailer pose information to determine appropriate vehicle maneuvers, and [0100] teaches adjusting autonomous driving behavior based on updated trailer pose estimates to ensure coordinated motion of the truck and trailer. Accordingly, Agarwal in view of Shepard teaches gaining access, by a behavior and planning module, to the stored second pose and using that pose to determine appropriate control actions.); however, Agarwal in view of Shepard does not expressly disclose a control module to modify acceleration control or steering control of the autonomous truck.
Nonetheless, in an analogous art, Wang teaches an autonomous-vehicle control architecture in which a control module is configured to modify the vehicle’s steering and acceleration based on planning outputs and environmental or pose information (Wang [0050], [0076]). Wang explains that such control modules adjust torque, throttle, brake actuation, and steering commands to execute planned maneuvers.
Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of first filing of the claimed invention to incorporate, into the system taught by Agarwal in view of Shepard and Jenquin, a control module configured to modify acceleration and steering of the autonomous truck, as taught by Wang. Integrating a control module that executes the motion plans derived from updated trailer-pose information would have been a predictable improvement that enables the autonomous truck to perform coordinated motion in accordance with the behavior-planning outputs, consistent with the autonomy objectives of Agarwal (Agarwal [0001], [0077]). Wang teaches that such a control module allows the vehicle to autonomously travel within and respond to the surrounding environment (Wang [0076]), directly aligning with the needs of Agarwal’s autonomous-driving system.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 01/20/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that the prior art of record does not teach or suggest “a connection extending from the autonomous truck and configured to connect with different types of trailers, the connection including a flexible member and a connector, the flexible member including a first end and a second end opposite the first end, the flexible member including at least one of an existing air hose connection or an existing electrical cable connection, the first end coupled to the autonomous truck, the second end coupled to the connector, the trailer pose sensor coupled to the connector”; however the examiner respectfully disagrees.
Jenquin teaches an existing flexible connection between a tractor (truck) and trailer in the form of an air hose/air brake hose assembly with end connectors used to couple between the tractor and the trailer (col 4 ln 3–12; Fig. 2), including a first end coupled to the tractor and a second end coupled to a connector at the trailer end that mates with a trailer-mounted connector/plate (col 4 ln 62–68; fig. 2-3). Jenquin further teaches that the hose assembly includes a metallic sheath / conductors forming an electrical path through the hose assembly to carry electrical signals between the trailer side and tractor side, including for trailer-mounted sensors (col 5 ln 10–17; col 6 ln 13–36; figs. 2-4). Therefore, Jenquin teaches the claimed “connection extending from the autonomous truck,” the “flexible member,” and that the flexible member includes “at least one of an existing air hose connection or an existing electrical cable connection” (air hose with integrated conductive path / electrical coupling), with the first end coupled to the truck and second end coupled to the connector that mates at the trailer interface.
Accordingly, the combination teaches the amended claim’s “connection/flexible member” limitations (Jenquin) together with the “sensor coupled to the connector / rigid mating trailer connector” interface limitations (Shepard), while Agarwal supplies the pose estimation computing and memory operations.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to implement Agarwal’s trailer pose sensor communication and interface using the existing tractor–trailer connection hardware taught by Jenquin (air hose and/or electrical cable connection) and to locate/couple the motion sensor at the rigid connector interface as taught by Shepard, because doing so would have predictably: leveraged existing, standardized, flexible tractor–trailer connections (air hose/electrical cable) to support connection to different types of trailers and simplify installation and interchangeability (Jenquin, col. 4–6; Fig. 2); provided a protected, dedicated pathway for transmitting sensor-related signals between the trailer interface and the truck-side autonomy system (Jenquin, col. 5–6); and improved measurement fidelity by coupling the motion sensing device to a rigid mechanical reference at the vehicle–trailer connector interface (Shepard, [0016], [0031]), while keeping Agarwal’s pose computation framework unchanged (Agarwal, [0098], [0100]). The modification is a predictable integration of known coupling and signal-routing structures (Jenquin) with a known rigid sensor mounting at the trailer interface (Shepard) in a system already directed to trailer pose estimation for autonomous control (Agarwal).
For at least these reason, Applicant’s arguments are not persuasive, and the rejection of claims 1, 8, and 15 are maintained.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 20190337344 A1– teaches a method for autonomously maneuvering a tow vehicle. The method includes receiving images from one or more cameras positioned on a back portion of the tow vehicle and receiving sensor data from an inertial measurement unit supported by the tow vehicle. The method also includes determining a pixel-wise intensity difference between a current received image and a previous received image. The method includes determining a camera pose and a trailer pose with respect to a world coordinate system. The camera pose and the trailer pose are based on the images, the sensor data, and the pixel-wise intensity difference. The method includes determining a tow vehicle path based on the camera pose and the trailer pose. The method also includes instructing a drive system supported by the tow vehicle to autonomously maneuver along the tow vehicle path in a reverse direction causing the tow vehicle to hitch with the trailer.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RAJSHEED O BLACK-CHILDRESS whose telephone number is (571)270-7838. The examiner can normally be reached M to F, 10am to 5pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Quan-Zhen Wang can be reached at (571) 272-3114. 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.
/RAJSHEED O BLACK-CHILDRESS/ Examiner, Art Unit 2685