DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Status
2. Claims 21-54 are currently pending in this application.
Priority
3. No foreign priority has been claimed. This application is a continuation of application 17/957,161 now US Pat # 11887377 filed 9/30/2022 which is a CON of 16/367,740 now US Pat # 11482011 filed 03/28/2019.
Information Disclosure Statement
4. No information disclosure statement (IDS) was submitted with the previous response.
Drawings
5. The drawings submitted on 1/04/2024 are in compliance with 37 CFR § 1.81 and 37 CFR § 1.83 and have been accepted by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
6. 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.
7. The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
8. Claims 21, 28, 35 39, 45 and 51 (as best understood) is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Hiei et al. 2018/0118219.
With regards to claims 21, 28, 35 39, 45 and 51, Hiei et al. 2018/0118219 teaches systems, methods and non-transitory machine-readable storage mediums for setting an autonomy level for host vehicle navigation, comprising:
a system monitor configured to provide status information associated with an autonomous driving system of the host vehicle (paragraph 0060);
one or more sensors configured to obtain condition data related to one or more conditions of an environment in which the host vehicle is traveling;(paragraph 0003)
a processor (20, 400; figure 5) configured to: receive the condition data; based on the condition data, determine an autonomy level for host vehicle navigation; and cause a host vehicle to operate at the determined autonomy level. (paragraph 0006-0007 & 0062-0063)
9. Claims 21-61 (as best understood) is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by May et al. 2017/0277182.
With regards to claims 21, 28, 35 39, 45 and 51, May et al. 2017/0277182 teaches systems, methods and non-transitory machine-readable storage mediums for setting an autonomy level for host vehicle navigation, comprising:
a system monitor configured to provide status information associated with an autonomous driving system of the host vehicle (Page 4, claim 2 );
one or more sensors configured to obtain condition data related to one or more conditions of an environment in which the host vehicle is traveling;(paragraph 0048-0049 & 0051)
a processor (paragraph 0050) configured to: receive the condition data; based on the condition data, determine an autonomy level for host vehicle navigation; and cause a host vehicle to operate at the determined autonomy level. (paragraph 0004& 0012)
With regards to claims 22, 29, 43 and 49, May et al. 2017/0277182 teaches the autonomy level for host vehicle navigation is selected from among level 0, level 1, level 2, level 3, level 4, and level 5. (paragraph 0003)
With regards to claims 23, 30 and 36, May et al. 2017/0277182 teaches one or more sensors comprise one or more of a RADAR, a LiDAR, an image sensor, a thermal sensor, a weather sensor, an ultrasound sensor, and an acoustic sensor. (paragraph 0051)
With regards to claims 24 and 31, May et al. 2017/0277182, teaches the condition data includes one or more of weather conditions and traffic conditions. (traffic sign recognition; paragraph 0017)
With regards to claims 25, 32, 37, 41 and 47, May et al. 2017/0277182 teaches causing the host vehicle to operate at the determined autonomy level includes using one or more autonomous actuators to manipulate driving controls, and wherein the one or more autonomous actuators comprise a steering actuator, an acceleration actuator, and a braking actuator. (page 4, claim 12)
With regards to claims 26, 33, 38, 44, 50 and 54, May et al. 2017/0277182 teaches the processor is configured to, prior to causing the host vehicle to operate at the selected autonomy level, provide an indication to a passenger of the host vehicle.(paragraph 0015)
With regards to claims 27 and 34, May et al. 2017/0277182 teaches the indication includes a request that the passenger take control of the host vehicle. (automatically appropriate level of control; paragraph 0012)
With regards to claim 40, May et al. 2017/0277182 teaches the status information includes one or more of operational status for each of one or more sensors and status for one or more autonomous actuators of the host vehicle. (paragraph 0048-0050)
With regards to claim 42, May et al. 2017/0277182 teaches the processor is further configured to, in response to detecting, based on the status information, that one or more sensors have been compromised, select an autonomy level of level 2 or below. (adaptable AI; paragraph 0047)
With regards to claim 55, May et al. 2017/0277182 teaches the plurality of autonomous-driving levels differ according to respective driving functions of a plurality of driving functions performed by the host vehicle and respective driving functions of the plurality of driving functions performed by a human driver. (Paragraph 0003)
With regards to claim 56, May et al. 2017/0277182 teaches the plurality of driving functions comprise at least two or more of steering, braking, and acceleration. (Paragraph 0003 & 0012)
With regards to claim 57, May et al. 2017/0277182 teaches at least one autonomous-driving level of the plurality of autonomous-driving levels is defined based on a set of traffic conditions, environmental conditions, or driving scenarios in which the host vehicle is configured to perform one or more driving functions autonomously. (automatically provide an appropriate level of control; paragraph 0012)
With regards to claim 58, May et al. 2017/0277182 teaches the processor is configured to toggle between the plurality of autonomous-driving levels based on one or more conditions affecting a roadway or the autonomous driving system of the host vehicle. (automatically provide an appropriate level of control; paragraph 0012)
With regards to claim 59, May et al. 2017/0277182 teaches the processor is configured to select an autonomous-driving level of the plurality of autonomous-driving levels based on an input received from a driver of the host vehicle. (paragraph 0012)
With regards to claim 60, May et al. 2017/0277182 teaches toggling between the plurality of autonomous- driving levels comprises toggling from a first autonomous-driving level to a second autonomous- driving level in response to the status information indicating that one or more components of the autonomous driving system are unavailable or compromised. (automatically provide an appropriate level of control ;paragraph 0012)
With regards to claim 61, May et al. 2017/0277182 teaches the second autonomous-driving level involves a human driver in performing at least one driving function that is performed autonomously by the host vehicle at the first autonomous-driving level.(paragraph 0003)
Examiner's Note:
10. Examiner has cited particular columns and line numbers in the references applied to the claims above for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings of the art and are applied to specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested from the applicant in preparing responses, to fully consider the references in their entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the Examiner.
11. In the case of amending the claimed invention, Applicant is respectfully requested to indicate the portion(s) of the specification which dictate(s) the structure relied on for proper interpretation and also to verify and ascertain the metes and bounds of the claimed invention.
Response to Arguments
12. Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 7/13/2026 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.
With regards to the USC 112, the rejection has been withdrawn as the invention is directed to switching between levels and not directed to the levels themselves. The USC 101 rejection has been withdrawn in light of applicant’s amendments.
Conclusion
13. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Aheng et al. US Pub 2019/0187701 teaches a method and system for drive mode switching based on self- aware capability parameters in hybrid driving.
14. 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).
15. 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.
16. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ADITYA S BHAT whose telephone number is (571)272-2270. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 8 am-6pm.
17. 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.
18. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Shelby Turner can be reached on 571-272-6334. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
19. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/ADITYA S BHAT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2857 October 5, 2026
