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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Seimiya et al. (2020/0406890)
Regarding applicant claim 1, Seimiya discloses a method for performing a fail-safe function using an apparatus for performing the fail-safe function, the method comprising:
determining whether there is a replacement component to perform a function of a failed component in response to failure of one or more components installed in a vehicle ([0048] when any one of the sonars 104a to 104l malfunctions, it is possible to improve accuracy in three-dimensional recognition of an object by the cameras 103a to 103d’)
determining an operation mode of a remote smart parking assist (RSPA) controller based on a result of determining whether there is the replacement component ([0049] “when any of the cameras 103a to 103d or any of the sonars 104a to 104l malfunctions and when the distance between the vehicle 300 and the obstacle is within the determined threshold, the automatic parking is desirably stopped. When the vehicle does not approach any obstacle in processing, the process proceeds to processing”); and
operating the RSPA controller or a cooperative controller based on the operation mode wherein the cooperative controller is separate from the RSPA controller and is configured to independently generate control commands when the RSPA controller is not operated ([0068] “operational effects”; [0069] “parking assistance apparatus control device configured to control the automatic parking based on the external recognition devices”).
Regarding applicant claim 2, Seimiya discloses wherein the one or more components installed in the vehicle comprise at least one component selected from the group consisting of the RSPA controller, a braking device, a steering device, communication device, an ultrasonic device, an imaging device, a lidar, a driving device, a transmission device, and a remote device ([0026] “image capturing device, for example a camera; distance sensor for example, a sonar, a millimeter wave radar, a laser radar, an infrared sensor, or an ultrasonic sensor”).
Regarding applicant claim 3, Seimiya discloses wherein, in a state in which the RSPA controller is not operated yet and there is no replacement component to perform the function of the failed component, determining the operation mode of the RSPA controller comprises determining the operation mode of the RSPA controller based on whether the RSPA controller is operable with limited functions ([0049] “when any of the cameras 103a to 103d or any of the sonars 104a to 104l malfunctions and when the distance between the vehicle 300 and the obstacle is within the determined threshold, the automatic parking is desirably stopped. When the vehicle does not approach any obstacle in processing, the process proceeds to processing”).
Regarding applicant claim 4, Seimiya discloses wherein in a state in which the RSPA controller is not operated yet and the replacement component is present to perform the function of the failed component, determining the operation mode of the RSPA controller comprises: determining whether the vehicle may be stopped in a case in which the replacement component fails; and determining the operation mode of the RSPA controller based on a result of determining whether the vehicle may be stopped ([0049] “when any of the cameras 103a to 103d or any of the sonars 104a to 104l malfunctions and when the distance between the vehicle 300 and the obstacle is within the determined threshold, the automatic parking is desirably stopped. When the vehicle does not approach any obstacle in processing, the process proceeds to processing”).
Regarding applicant claim 5, Seimiya discloses wherein:
in a state in which a driver is in the vehicle, the RSPA controller is in operation, and there is no replacement component to perform the function of the failed component, determining the operation mode of the RSPA controller comprises determining the operation mode of the RSPA controller based on whether the RSPA controller is operable with limited functions ([0028] “warning device so that a driver receives the information output as a display or an alarm”); and
in a state in which the RSPA controller is in operation and the replacement component is present to perform the function of the failed component, the operation mode of the RSPA controller is determined such that the RSPA controller controls the replacement component ([0069] “parking assistance control device changes to perform control in accordance with the other external recognition device the image capturing device or the distance sensor that does not malfunction”).
Regarding applicant claim 6, Seimiya discloses wherein:
in a state in which the RSPA controller is not operable with limited functions, determining the operation mode of the RSPA controller comprises determining the operation mode of the RSPA controller and the operation mode of the cooperative controller based on whether the RSPA controller may perform the fail-safe function; and
in a state in which the RSPA controller is operable with the limited functions, the operation mode of the RSPA controller is determined such that the RSPA controller is operated with the limited functions ([0049] “when any of the cameras 103a to 103d or any of the sonars 104a to 104l malfunctions and when the distance between the vehicle 300 and the obstacle is within the determined threshold, the automatic parking is desirably stopped. When the vehicle does not approach any obstacle in processing, the process proceeds to processing”).
Regarding applicant claim 7, Seimiya discloses wherein, in a state in which a driver is not in the vehicle, the RSPA controller is in operation, and the replacement component is present to perform the function of the failed component, determining the operation mode of the RSPA controller comprises:
determining whether the vehicle may be stopped in a case in which the replacement component fails; and determining the operation mode of the RSPA controller based on a result of determining whether the vehicle may be stopped ([0049] “when any of the cameras 103a to 103d or any of the sonars 104a to 104l malfunctions and when the distance between the vehicle 300 and the obstacle is within the determined threshold, the automatic parking is desirably stopped. When the vehicle does not approach any obstacle in processing, the process proceeds to processing”).
Regarding applicant claim 8, Seimiya discloses wherein, in a state in which a driver is not in the vehicle, the RSPA controller is in operation, and there is no replacement component to perform the function of the failed component, determining the operation mode of the RSPA controller comprises:
determining the operation mode of the RSPA controller and the operation mode of the cooperative controller based on whether the RSPA controller may perform the fail-safe function in a case in which the RSPA controller is not operable with limited functions ([0049] “when any of the cameras 103a to 103d or any of the sonars 104a to 104l malfunctions and when the distance between the vehicle 300 and the obstacle is within the determined threshold, the automatic parking is desirably stopped. When the vehicle does not approach any obstacle in processing, the process proceeds to processing”); and
in a state in which the RSPA controller is operable with the limited functions, the operation mode of the RSPA controller is determined such that the RSPA controller is operated with the limited functions ([0069]-[0070] “even when one of the external recognition devices malfunctions, it is possible to continue the automatic parking by using the other external recognition device”).
Regarding applicant claim 9, Seimiya discloses wherein the cooperative controller comprises at least one controller selected from the group consisting of a braking controller, a steering controller, a communication controller, a driving controller, a transmission controller, and a remote controller ([0025] “braking force control device, a driving force control device, a shift control device, and a steering control device”).
Regarding applicant claim 10, Seimiya discloses wherein whether the RSPA controller performs the fail-safe function and whether the cooperative controller performs the fail-safe function are determined based on a failure severity of the vehicle ([0049] “when any of the cameras 103a to 103d or any of the sonars 104a to 104l malfunctions and when the distance between the vehicle 300 and the obstacle is within the determined threshold, the automatic parking is desirably stopped. When the vehicle does not approach any obstacle in processing, the process proceeds to processing”).
Regarding applicant claim 11, Seimiya discloses an apparatus for performing a fail-safe function, the apparatus comprising: one or more processors; and a storage device storing a program to be executed by the one or more processors, the program including instructions for:
determining whether there is a replacement component to perform a function of a failed component in response to failure of one or more components installed in a vehicle ([0048] when any one of the sonars 104a to 104l malfunctions, it is possible to improve accuracy in three-dimensional recognition of an object by the cameras 103a to 103d’)
determining an operation mode of a remote smart parking assist (RSPA) controller based on a result of determining whether there is the replacement component ([0049] “when any of the cameras 103a to 103d or any of the sonars 104a to 104l malfunctions and when the distance between the vehicle 300 and the obstacle is within the determined threshold, the automatic parking is desirably stopped. When the vehicle does not approach any obstacle in processing, the process proceeds to processing”); and
operating the RSPA controller or a cooperative controller based on the operation mode wherein the cooperative controller is separate from the RSPA controller and is configured to independently generate control commands when the RSPA controller is not operated ([0068] “operational effects”; [0069] “parking assistance apparatus control device configured to control the automatic parking based on the external recognition devices”).
Regarding applicant claim 12, Seimiya discloses wherein the one or more components installed in the vehicle comprise at least one component selected from the group consisting of the RSPA controller, a braking device, a steering device, communication device, an ultrasonic device, an imaging device, a lidar, a driving device, a transmission device, and a remote device ([0026] “image capturing device, for example a camera; distance sensor for example, a sonar, a millimeter wave radar, a laser radar, an infrared sensor, or an ultrasonic sensor”).
Regarding applicant claim 13, Seimiya discloses wherein, in a state in which the RSPA controller is not operated yet and there is no replacement component to perform the function of the failed component, determining the operation mode of the RSPA controller comprises determining the operation mode of the RSPA controller based on whether the RSPA controller is operable with limited functions ([0049] “when any of the cameras 103a to 103d or any of the sonars 104a to 104l malfunctions and when the distance between the vehicle 300 and the obstacle is within the determined threshold, the automatic parking is desirably stopped. When the vehicle does not approach any obstacle in processing, the process proceeds to processing”).
Regarding applicant claim 14, Seimiya discloses wherein in a state in which the RSPA controller is not operated yet and the replacement component is present to perform the function of the failed component, determining the operation mode of the RSPA controller comprises: determining whether the vehicle may be stopped in a case in which the replacement component fails; and determining the operation mode of the RSPA controller based on a result of determining whether the vehicle may be stopped ([0049] “when any of the cameras 103a to 103d or any of the sonars 104a to 104l malfunctions and when the distance between the vehicle 300 and the obstacle is within the determined threshold, the automatic parking is desirably stopped. When the vehicle does not approach any obstacle in processing, the process proceeds to processing”).
Regarding applicant claim 15, Seimiya discloses wherein:
in a state in which a driver is in the vehicle, the RSPA controller is in operation, and there is no replacement component to perform the function of the failed component, determining the operation mode of the RSPA controller comprises determining the operation mode of the RSPA controller based on whether the RSPA controller is operable with limited functions ([0028] “warning device so that a driver receives the information output as a display or an alarm”); and
in a state in which the RSPA controller is in operation and the replacement component is present to perform the function of the failed component, the operation mode of the RSPA controller is determined such that the RSPA controller controls the replacement component ([0069] “parking assistance control device changes to perform control in accordance with the other external recognition device the image capturing device or the distance sensor that does not malfunction”).
Regarding applicant claim 16, Seimiya discloses wherein:
in a state in which the RSPA controller is not operable with limited functions, determining the operation mode of the RSPA controller comprises determining the operation mode of the RSPA controller and the operation mode of the cooperative controller based on whether the RSPA controller may perform the fail-safe function; and
in a state in which the RSPA controller is operable with the limited functions, the operation mode of the RSPA controller is determined such that the RSPA controller is operated with the limited functions ([0049] “when any of the cameras 103a to 103d or any of the sonars 104a to 104l malfunctions and when the distance between the vehicle 300 and the obstacle is within the determined threshold, the automatic parking is desirably stopped. When the vehicle does not approach any obstacle in processing, the process proceeds to processing”).
Regarding applicant claim 17, Seimiya discloses wherein, in a state in which a driver is not in the vehicle, the RSPA controller is in operation, and the replacement component is present to perform the function of the failed component, determining the operation mode of the RSPA controller comprises:
determining whether the vehicle may be stopped in a case in which the replacement component fails; and determining the operation mode of the RSPA controller based on a result of determining whether the vehicle may be stopped ([0049] “when any of the cameras 103a to 103d or any of the sonars 104a to 104l malfunctions and when the distance between the vehicle 300 and the obstacle is within the determined threshold, the automatic parking is desirably stopped. When the vehicle does not approach any obstacle in processing, the process proceeds to processing”).
Regarding applicant claim 18, Seimiya discloses wherein, in a state in which a driver is not in the vehicle, the RSPA controller is in operation, and there is no replacement component to perform the function of the failed component, determining the operation mode of the RSPA controller comprises:
determining the operation mode of the RSPA controller and the operation mode of the cooperative controller based on whether the RSPA controller may perform the fail-safe function in a case in which the RSPA controller is not operable with limited functions ([0049] “when any of the cameras 103a to 103d or any of the sonars 104a to 104l malfunctions and when the distance between the vehicle 300 and the obstacle is within the determined threshold, the automatic parking is desirably stopped. When the vehicle does not approach any obstacle in processing, the process proceeds to processing”); and
in a state in which the RSPA controller is operable with the limited functions, the operation mode of the RSPA controller is determined such that the RSPA controller is operated with the limited functions ([0069]-[0070] “even when one of the external recognition devices malfunctions, it is possible to continue the automatic parking by using the other external recognition device”).
Regarding applicant claim 19, Seimiya discloses wherein the cooperative controller comprises at least one controller selected from the group consisting of a braking controller, a steering controller, a communication controller, a driving controller, a transmission controller, and a remote controller ([0025] “braking force control device, a driving force control device, a shift control device, and a steering control device”).
Regarding applicant claim 20, Seimiya discloses an apparatus for performing a fail-safe function, the apparatus comprising: one or more processors; and a storage device storing a program to be executed by the one or more processors, the program including instructions for:
determining whether there is a replacement component to perform a function of a failed component in response to failure of one or more components installed in a vehicle ([0048] when any one of the sonars 104a to 104l malfunctions, it is possible to improve accuracy in three-dimensional recognition of an object by the cameras 103a to 103d’)
determining an operation mode of a remote smart parking assist (RSPA) controller based on a result of determining whether there is the replacement component ([0049] “when any of the cameras 103a to 103d or any of the sonars 104a to 104l malfunctions and when the distance between the vehicle 300 and the obstacle is within the determined threshold, the automatic parking is desirably stopped. When the vehicle does not approach any obstacle in processing, the process proceeds to processing”); and
operating the RSPA controller or a cooperative controller based on the operation mode wherein the cooperative controller is separate from the RSPA controller and is configured to independently generate control commands when the RSPA controller is not operated ([0068] “operational effects”; [0069] “parking assistance apparatus control device configured to control the automatic parking based on the external recognition devices”).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 03/05/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that Seimiya (2020/0406890) discloses a single parking assistance control device but does not disclose a “cooperative controller that is separate from the RSPA controller and is configured to independently generate commands when the RSPA is not operated”.
Examiner disagrees with this assessment. Seimiya discloses in [0037] that when any one of the external recognition devices is determined as malfunctioning during the automatic parking, automatic parking control is performed in accordance with the malfunction of the external recognition device… In processing S405 other existing operations than the automatic parking are controlled. See also Fig. 4. It is clear that alongside automatic parking, there are other existing control operations that work in cooperation.
Conclusion
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 WAE LENNY LOUIE whose telephone number is (571)272-5195. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 6AM-3PM.
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, PETER D NOLAN can be reached at 571-270-7016. 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.
/W.L.L/Examiner, Art Unit 3661
/PETER D NOLAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3661
Prosecution Insights