DETAILED ACTION
The following is a Non-Final Office Action in response to communications filed on May 21st , 2026. Claims 1-20 are pending.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Arguments/Amendments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to rejection of claim(s) 1-20 under 35 USC 103 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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wallis et al. (US 2018/0350161) in view of Liu et al. (US 2022/0194415) and further in view of Goldman et al. (US 2021/0109524).
Regarding claim 1, Wallis teaches a method comprising:
acquiring first status information of vehicles (Para. [0058]… server 54 will generate an output corresponding to this available status (i.e., a first output)…this first output is subsequently communicated to vehicle controls device 222);
selecting, from the first status information, second status information corresponding to an available state associated with a first task (Para. [0058-0059]… Server 54 also determines whether the vehicle resources meets a certain threshold requirement. For
example, whether the SoC for power source 218 is above or equal to forty percent ( 40%) charge (i.e., battery life); alternatively, whether the fuel tank has more than or equal to ¼ of a tank of remaining fuel. Server 54 will further provide an "available status" (i.e., a first status) for the vehicle when it is determined that the remaining vehicle resources in fact meet the designated threshold requirement.); and sending, to the first vehicle indication information instructing the first vehicle to execute the first task (Para. [0058]… server 54 will generate an output corresponding to this available status (i.e., a first output). One aspect of this first output includes appropriately formatted instructions designed to instruct controls device 222 to command vehicle 12 to reposition itself so as to perform another rideshare system task (i.e., a second rideshare system task).)
Wallis fails to teach wherein the second status information indicates a first visible state of a first vehicle, and wherein the first visible state indicates whether a second vehicle appears online or offline to a third-party server.
However, Liu teaches wherein the second status information indicates a first visible state of a first vehicle, and wherein the first visible state indicates whether the second vehicle appears online or offline to a third-party server (Liu, Para. [0119]…the third party computing system 325 can be configured to manage the third party autonomous vehicles 315 (e.g., of the associated fleet, etc.). A third party computing system 325 can manage the vehicle service assignments, other vehicle tasks, dispatch, maintenance, online/offline status, etc. of its associated third party autonomous vehicles..)
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the claimed invention to modify the vehicle resource management system as taught by Wallis with the system for improved autonomous vehicle operation as taught by Liu to improve the
performance capabilities for an autonomous vehicle navigating a region (Liu, Para. [0020]).
Further, Wallis fails to wherein the first visible state is based on a predicted work efficiency of executing the first task by the first vehicle.
However, Goldman teaches wherein the first visible state is based on a predicted work efficiency of executing the first task by the first vehicle (Goldman, Para. [0123]…the service entity computing system 204 can also, or alternatively, obtain data indicative of the past, present, and/or future (predicted) supply of vehicles that are online with the service entity 301 and available to perform those vehicle services. The service entity computing system 204 (and/or another computing system) can determine whether it would be more valuable for an autonomous vehicle 302, 304 to be available to perform requested vehicle services and/or another task than perform a refueling task. (Para. [0122-0123]…the operational capabilities 310 can indicate that the first autonomous vehicle can autonomously perform a U-tum maneuver and an unprotected left turn maneuver. The service entity computing system 204 can obtain data indicative of one or more operational capabilities 310 of a second autonomous vehicle. The operational capabilities 310 of the second autonomous vehicle can indicate that the second autonomous vehicle cannot autonomously perform a U-tum maneuver or an unprotected left turn maneuver. Based at least in part on the operational capabilities 310, the service entity computing system 204 can determine that the first autonomous vehicle should be allocated a first refueling task 410D because the first autonomous vehicle is likely to be able to take more efficient vehicle routes and, thus, perform other vehicle tasks without its energy level falling below the second threshold 465B. Additionally, or alternatively, the service entity computing system 204 can determine that the second autonomous vehicle should be allocated a second refueling task 410A because the second autonomous vehicle is likely to be able to take less efficient vehicle routes given the restrictions on its autonomy capability and, thus, is more likely to fall below the second threshold 465B if assigned another vehicle task.
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the vehicle resource management system as taught by Wallis in view Liu with the system for energy based autonomous vehicle control as taught by Goldman to improve the ability of an autonomous vehicle to effectively provide vehicle services to others and support the various members of the community in which the autonomous vehicle is operating (Goldman, Para. [0009]).
Regarding Claim 2, Wallis in view of Liu and Goldman teach the method according of claim 1, wherein the first status information or the second status information comprises at least one of: an online state; a healthy state; or a task-receivable state. (Liu, Para. [0086].. the
operations computing system 190A can determined which autonomous vehicle(s) are online with the service entity 185 (e.g., available for a vehicle service assignment, addressing a vehicle service assignment, etc.) to help identify which autonomous vehicle(s) would be able to provide the vehicle service..)
Regarding claim 3, Wallis in view of Liu and Goldman teach the method of claim 1, wherein the first task is based on a first resource of the first vehicle and availability of the first resource, and wherein the first resource comprises at least one of: a charging pile location, a maintenance location, a parking location, or a work location (Wallis, Para. [0060]… vehicle 12 can traverse itself to an available vehicle charge station ( charge hub) to recharge power source 218 such that it has an SoC of an optimized charge or one above at least the threshold requirement.)
Regarding claim 4, Wallis in view of Liu and Goldman teach the method of claim 1, wherein the first task is from a third party or a task reported the second vehicle (Wallis, Para. [0031]… Mobile device 57 may also be configured to provide services according to a subscription agreement with a third-party facility.)
Regarding claim 5, Wallis in view of Liu and Goldman teach the method of claim 1, wherein the first task is a charging task, a parking task, or a work task (Wallis, Para. [0060]…. second output may include appropriately formatted instructions designed to instruct controls device 222 to command vehicle 12 to reposition itself so as to replenish its vehicle resource to again meet the threshold requirement. For example, vehicle 12 can traverse itself to an available vehicle charge station ( charge hub) to recharge power source 218 such that it has an SoC of an optimized charge or one above at least the threshold requirement.)
Regarding claim 6, Wallis in view of Liu and Goldman teach the method of claim 1, further comprising sending to a server, reported information after execution of the first task (Wallis, Para. [0061]… after the vehicle resource has been deemed adequately replenished, vehicle 12 will transmit a resource data update to server 54. The updated resource data lets server 54 know vehicle 12 again has enough vehicle resources to adequately carry out a rideshare system task.
Regarding claim 7, please refer to the rejection of claim 1, which is commensurate in scope.
Regarding claim 8, Wallis in view of Liu and Goldman teach the apparatus according of claim 7, wherein the at least one processor is further configured to execute the programming instructions to cause the apparatus to determine the second status information from the first status information (Wallis, Para. [0059]).
Regarding claims 9, Wallis in view of Liu and Goldman teach the apparatus of claim 7, wherein the first status information or the second status information comprises at least one of: a travelable state; a charging state ; or a remote control state. (Wallis, Para. [0058])
Regarding claims 10-12, please refer to the rejection of claims 3-5 which are commensurate in scope.
Regarding claim 13, Wallis in view of Liu and Goldman teach the apparatus according of claim 7, wherein the at least one processor is further configured to execute the programming instructions, to cause the apparatus to determine that the second vehicle is in the available state (Wallis, Para. [0058]… Server 54 will further provide an "available status" (i.e., a first status) for the vehicle when it is determined that the remaining vehicle resources in fact meet the designated threshold requirement.)
Regarding claim 14, please refer to the rejection of claims 6, which is commensurate in scope.
Regarding claims 15, please refer to the rejection of claim 1 which are commensurate in scope.
Regarding claim 16, Wallis in view of Liu and Goldman teach the apparatus of claim 15, wherein the first status information or the second status information comprises at least one of: a charging-task state or a second visible state of a third vehicle (Liu, Para. [0086].. the operations computing system 190A can determined which autonomous vehicle(s) are online with the service entity 185 (e.g., available for a vehicle service assignment, addressing
a vehicle service assignment, etc.) to help identify which autonomous vehicle(s) would be able to provide the vehicle service..)
Regarding claims 17-20, please refer to the rejection of claims 3-6 which are commensurate in scope.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JODI M JONES whose telephone number is (571)272-0107. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30am-5:00pm.
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, Anne Antonucci can be reached at (313) 446-6519. 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.
/JODI JONES/Examiner, Art Unit 3666
/ANNE MARIE ANTONUCCI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3666
Prosecution Insights