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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 07/09/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed 06/09/2026 is being entered. Claims 1-3, 8-10, and 15-17 are amended. Claims 1-20 are pending, and rejected as detailed below.
Response to Arguments
Claim Rejections under 35 U.S.C. §102
Independent Claim 1
Applicant respectfully submits that Allen does not teach or suggest, inter alia:
receiving a new vehicle event from a vehicle component of the vehicle; based on the receiving the new vehicle event from the vehicle component of the vehicle, adding the new vehicle event to an event log. More specifically, in Allen, the host vehicle (10) does not receive the BSMs, interpreted by the Office as the claimed vehicle event, from a vehicle component of the host vehicle. Rather, the host vehicle (10) receives the BSMs from a first remote vehicle (14), not a vehicle component of the host vehicle (10). See Allen at [0040]. Accordingly, Allen does not disclose "receiving a new vehicle event from a vehicle component of the vehicle."
Further, even assuming arguendo that the host vehicle (10) receives the BSMs from a
component of the host vehicle (10), Allen still does not disclose "based on the receiving the new vehicle event from the vehicle component of the vehicle, adding the new vehicle event to an event log." At most, Allen discloses saving the temporary identification of the first remote vehicle (14) when the host vehicle (10) receives a BSM from the first remote vehicle (14) for the first time. Allen does not disclose adding the BSMs themselves, or any corresponding vehicle event, to an event log. For at least the foregoing reasons, Applicant respectfully submits that independent claim 1 is patentable over Allen.
Applicant’s arguments, as amended herein, with respect to the rejections of claims 1 under 35 U.S.C. §102 have been fully considered and not persuasive. More specifically, Allen [para. 0031] disclosed that the wireless communications system 26 that facilitate the vehicular communication with vehicle 10, 14, and 16 so that the basic safety message (BSM) can be received or sent. Furthermore, Fig. 2 clear shows that the wireless communications system 26 is a sub vehicular component of the collision warning system 12. As a result, Allen disclosed “receiving a new vehicle event from a vehicle component of the vehicle”. Furthermore, Allen [para. 0033] disclosed a storage device 30 that stores remote vehicle information and identification of remote vehicle. Furthermore, Allen [para. 0033] disclosed that the stored remote vehicle information can be accessed and updated by the controller 24 when necessary. As a result, Allen disclosed “based on the receiving the new vehicle event from the vehicle component of the vehicle, adding the new vehicle event to an event log.” In addition to recording he temporary identification of the remote vehicle.
Independent Claims 8 and 15
To the extent that independent claims 8 and 15 recite features similar to the above-noted features of claim 1, Applicant submits that claims 8 and 15 are patentable for at least reasons similar to those discussed above with respect to claim 1.
Applicant’s arguments, as amended herein, with respect to the rejections of claims 8 and 15 under 35 U.S.C. §102 have been fully considered and not persuasive in relation the aforementioned similar response related to claim 1.
Dependent Claims
Applicant respectfully submits that the dependent claims are patentable due to their respective dependencies, as well as for their additional features recited therein.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the rejections of dependent claims have been fully considered and not persuasive as claim 1 is anticipated by Allen.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1, 8, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Applicant has mentioned “a vehicle event” in claims 1, 8, and 15 with reference to the limitation “determining that a vehicle event in the event log belongs to an unregistered event type”. However, applicant mentioned “a new vehicle event” in paragraph [0056] with reference to the same limitation “determining that a vehicle event in the event log belongs to an unregistered event type”. Even though applicant use the vehicle event and the new vehicle event in the specification, applicant fails to provide any additional information how the vehicle event is different from the new vehicle event.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1, 4, 8, 11, 15, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
The term “vehicle event” in claims 1, 4, 8, 11, 15, and 18 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “vehicle event” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention.
More specifically, “a new vehicle event” is introduced in claim 1 line 3. Then, “a vehicle event” is introduced in claim 1 line 6 with reference to the limitation “determining that a vehicle event in the event log belongs to an unregistered event type”. However, applicant also disclosed “At operation 420, it may be determined as to whether the new vehicle event which was added to the event log belongs to an unregistered event type.” in para. 0056. Therefore, it is unclear that the disclosed “a new vehicle event” and “a vehicle event” are referring to two different vehicles events or the same vehicle event.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claims 2, 9, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends.
Claims 2, 9, and 16 merely state the same limitation of claims 1, 8, and 15, respectively and does not further narrow what is claimed in claim 1, 8, and 15. Following italic, bold, and underline features illustrate the similarities between the claims.
Claim 1; based on the receiving the new vehicle event from the vehicle component of the vehicle, adding the new vehicle event to an event log;
determining that a vehicle event in the event log belongs to an unregistered event type;
generating a temporary event identifier (ID) based on at least one characteristic of the vehicle event;
claim 2; adding the new vehicle event received from the vehicle component of the vehicle to the event log; and
determining whether the new vehicle event belongs to the unregistered event type based on the temporary event ID.
Claim 8; based on the new vehicle event from the vehicle component of the vehicle being received, add the new vehicle event to an event log;
determine that a vehicle event in the event log belongs to an unregistered event type;
generate a temporary event identifier (ID) based on at least one characteristic of the vehicle event;
claim 9; add the new vehicle event received from the vehicle component of the vehicle to the event log; and
determine whether the new vehicle event belongs to the unregistered event type based on the temporary event ID.
Claim 15; based on the receiving the new vehicle event from the vehicle component of the vehicle, adding the new vehicle event to an event log;
determining that a vehicle event in the event log belongs to an unregistered event type;
generating a temporary event identifier (ID) based on at least one characteristic of the vehicle event;
claim 16; adding the new vehicle event received from the vehicle component of the vehicle to the event log; and
determining whether the new vehicle event belongs to the unregistered event type based on the temporary event ID.
Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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) 1-2, 4, 6, 8-9, 11, 13, 15-16, 18, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by ALLEN (US 20220319324 A1).
Regarding claim 1, ALLEN teaches (currently amended) A method for managing vehicle event data (ALLEN, at least one para. 0001; “the present invention relates to a collision warning system and method that defines a traveling path of a host vehicle based on data transmission from a first remote vehicle, and determines whether to generate a warning based on the traveling path and a heading of a second remote vehicle.”) performed by an electronic control unit (ECU) of a vehicle (ALLEN, at least one para. 0029; “As shown in more detail in FIG. 2, the collision warning system 12 includes an application controller 24 that can be referred to simply as an electronic controller or controller 22. ”), the method comprising:
receiving a new vehicle event (ALLEN, at least one para. 0040; “The vehicle detection process illustrated in the flowchart of FIG. 6 begins with determining whether vehicle dynamics information of a basic safety message (BSM) is received from the first remote vehicle 14 (FIG. 12) by the host vehicle 10. When the collision warning system 12 (FIG. 2) receives the BSM from the first remote vehicle 14 in step S100, the process proceeds to step S110 in which the position of the first remote vehicle 14 relative to the host vehicle is calculated. “) from a vehicle component of the vehicle (ALLEN, at least one para. 0031; “The wireless communications system 26 can include an omni-directional antenna and a multi-directional antenna, as well as communication interface circuitry that connects and exchanges information with a plurality of the remote vehicles 14 and 16 that are similarly equipped”, wherein the communication system 26 is the vehicular component of the vehicle);
based on the receiving the new vehicle event from the vehicle component of the vehicle, adding the new vehicle event to an event log (ALLEN, at least one para. 0031; “The storage device 30 can store the remote vehicle information as discussed above, such as positional information of the remote vehicle and identification of the remote vehicle.”);
determining that a vehicle event in the event log belongs to an unregistered event type (ALLEN, at least one para. 0065; “When the first remote vehicle is determined to be greater than the predetermined distance away from the host vehicle in steps S140 of FIG. 6, the process proceeds to step S150 to determine whether the temporary identification received from the first remote vehicle 14 is the first instance of receiving the basic safety message from the first remote vehicle 14. When the basic safety message is the first received from the first remote vehicle 14, the process moves to step S160 and saves the temporary identification of the first remote vehicle, such as in the storage device 30 (FIG. 2), and moves to step S165 and initializes a first index counter i to 0.”, wherein the vehicle event is registered after the BSM is received for the first instant. Therefore, the detection of the vehicle 14 is an unregistered event type before the first instant.);
generating a temporary event identifier (ID) based on at least one characteristic of the vehicle event (ALLEN, at least one para. 0065; “When the first remote vehicle is determined to be greater than the predetermined distance away from the host vehicle in steps S140 of FIG. 6, the process proceeds to step S150 to determine whether the temporary identification received from the first remote vehicle 14 is the first instance of receiving the basic safety message from the first remote vehicle 14.”, wherein the identification of the first remote vehicle received via the BSM is the characteristic of the vehicle event);
storing the temporary event ID in a database (ALLEN, at least one para. 0065; “When the basic safety message is the first received from the first remote vehicle 14, the process moves to step S160 and saves the temporary identification of the first remote vehicle, such as in the storage device 30 (FIG. 2), and moves to step S165 and initializes a first index counter i to 0.”) with a timestamp (ALLEN, at least one para. 0031; “a BSM includes information in accordance with SAE Standard J2735 as can be appreciated by one skilled in the art.”, it is inherent timestamping is a standard component of BSM and the SAE Standard J2735);
determining whether a number of vehicle events in the event log with the same temporary event ID as the temporary event ID of the vehicle event exceed a predetermined threshold value (ALLEN, at least one para. 0067; “When the temporary identification is the same as the stored identification, the latitude (φ), longitude (θ), and heading (δ) of the first remote vehicle 14 is stored in the path table in step 5220.”) and (ALLEN, at least one para. 0067; “the first index counter i is checked to determine whether the first index counter is equal to a predetermined number M. When the first index counter i is less than the predetermined number M, the process continues to loop back to the main process flow of FIG. 5 and re-enter this process to accumulate GPS positional points, or information, from the first remote vehicle 14 with the same temporary identification until the first index counter i is equal to the predetermined number M at which point the traveling path of the first remote vehicle 14 has been successfully created as shown in FIG. 12.”) and (ALLEN, at least one para. 0064; “The predetermined distance can be any suitable distance, such as 100 meters. When the first remote vehicle 14 is not at least the predetermined distance away from the host vehicle 10, the process moves to step S170 in which a no result is returned to step S10 of the flowchart of FIG. 5.”); and
based on determining that the number of vehicle events exceeds the predetermined threshold value, triggering a response for the vehicle associated with the temporary event ID (ALLEN, at least one para. 0116; “When a crossing path is detected, as shown in FIG. 4, the collision warning system 12 proceeds to step S70 in which a warning is issued, or generated. When a crossing path is not detected in step S60, then the process moves to step S80.”).
Regarding claim 2, ALLEN teaches (currently amended) The method of claim 1, further comprising: adding the new vehicle event received from (ALLEN, at least one para. 0040; “The vehicle detection process illustrated in the flowchart of FIG. 6 begins with determining whether vehicle dynamics information of a basic safety message (BSM) is received from the first remote vehicle 14 (FIG. 12) by the host vehicle 10. When the collision warning system 12 (FIG. 2) receives the BSM from the first remote vehicle 14 in step S100, the process proceeds to step S110 in which the position of the first remote vehicle 14 relative to the host vehicle is calculated.”) the vehicle component of the vehicle (ALLEN, at least one para. 0031; “The wireless communications system 26 can include an omni-directional antenna and a multi-directional antenna, as well as communication interface circuitry that connects and exchanges information with a plurality of the remote vehicles 14 and 16 that are similarly equipped”) to the event log (ALLEN, at least one para. 0031; “The storage device 30 can store the remote vehicle information as discussed above, such as positional information of the remote vehicle and identification of the remote vehicle.”); and
determining whether the new vehicle event belongs to the unregistered event type (ALLEN, at least one para. 0065; “When the first remote vehicle is determined to be greater than the predetermined distance away from the host vehicle in steps S140 of FIG. 6, the process proceeds to step S150 to determine whether the temporary identification received from the first remote vehicle 14 is the first instance of receiving the basic safety message from the first remote vehicle 14. When the basic safety message is the first received from the first remote vehicle 14, the process moves to step S160 and saves the temporary identification of the first remote vehicle, such as in the storage device 30 (FIG. 2), and moves to step S165 and initializes a first index counter i to 0.”, wherein the vehicle event is registered after the BSM is received for the first instant. Therefore, the detection of the vehicle 14 is an unregistered event type before the first instant.) based on the temporary event ID (ALLEN, at least one para. 0065; “When the first remote vehicle is determined to be greater than the predetermined distance away from the host vehicle in steps S140 of FIG. 6, the process proceeds to step S150 to determine whether the temporary identification received from the first remote vehicle 14 is the first instance of receiving the basic safety message from the first remote vehicle 14.”).
Regarding claim 4, ALLEN teaches (original) The method of claim 1, wherein generating the temporary event ID is based on a hash (ALLEN, at least one para. 0042; “The collision warning system 12 (FIG. 2) can define a series of mathematical expressions that provide specific information regarding the longitudinal, lateral, elevation and heading of the first remote vehicle 14 relative to the host vehicle 10. These equations are used to determine the position of the first remote vehicle 14 relative to the host vehicle 10 and to determine whether the first remote vehicle is ahead of the host vehicle 10 in steps S110 and S120 of FIG. 6.”) using at least one of a source vehicle component of the vehicle (ALLEN, at least one para. 0031; “The wireless communications system 26 can include an omni-directional antenna and a multi-directional antenna, as well as communication interface circuitry that connects and exchanges information with a plurality of the remote vehicles 14 and 16 that are similarly equipped.”), distance of the source vehicle component from safety and security infrastructure in the vehicle, and a message in the vehicle event (ALLEN, at least one para. 0027; “An exemplary type of vehicle to vehicle communication is a basic safety message (BSM), which is configured to be broadcast by a vehicle. The BSM is received by another vehicle within a predetermined distance of the transmitting vehicle. The BSM is a packet of data that includes information about the position, heading, speed, identification, steering wheel angle, and other information relating to positional information of the transmitting vehicle.”).
Regarding claim 6, ALLEN teaches (original) The method of claim 1, wherein the predetermined threshold value (ALLEN, at least one para. 0064; “When the heading angle of the first remote vehicle 14 is not constant in step S130 of FIG. 6, the process proceeds to step S140 to determine whether the first remote vehicle 140 is at least a predetermined distance away from the host vehicle. The predetermined distance can be any suitable distance, such as 100 meters.”, wherein it is inherent that threshold value is stored in the database otherwise the predetermined distance cannot be calculated) and the response for the vehicle associated with the temporary event ID are stored in the database (ALLEN, at least one para. 0118; “When a crossing path is not detected in step S60, the process moves to step S80 in which a determination is made whether an active warning exists. When there is no active warning, the process end.”, wherein it is inherent that the active warning is stored in the database. otherwise, step S80 cannot be completed).
Regarding claim 8, ALLEN teaches (currently amended) An apparatus for managing vehicle event data, (ALLEN, at least one para. 0001; “the present invention relates to a collision warning system and method that defines a traveling path of a host vehicle based on data transmission from a first remote vehicle, and determines whether to generate a warning based on the traveling path and a heading of a second remote vehicle.”) performed by an electronic control unit (ECU) of a vehicle (ALLEN, at least one para. 0029; “As shown in more detail in FIG. 2, the collision warning system 12 includes an application controller 24 that can be referred to simply as an electronic controller or controller 22. ”), the apparatus comprising:
at least one memory storing computer-executable instructions; and at least one processor configured to execute the computer-executable instructions to (ALLEN, at least one para. 0029; “The electronic controller 24 includes other conventional components such as an input interface circuit, an output interface circuit, and storage devices such as a ROM (Read Only Memory) device and a RAM (Random Access Memory) device.”):
receive a new vehicle event (ALLEN, at least one para. 0040; “The vehicle detection process illustrated in the flowchart of FIG. 6 begins with determining whether vehicle dynamics information of a basic safety message (BSM) is received from the first remote vehicle 14 (FIG. 12) by the host vehicle 10. When the collision warning system 12 (FIG. 2) receives the BSM from the first remote vehicle 14 in step S100, the process proceeds to step S110 in which the position of the first remote vehicle 14 relative to the host vehicle is calculated. “) from a vehicle component of the vehicle (ALLEN, at least one para. 0031; “The wireless communications system 26 can include an omni-directional antenna and a multi-directional antenna, as well as communication interface circuitry that connects and exchanges information with a plurality of the remote vehicles 14 and 16 that are similarly equipped”, wherein the communication system 26 is the vehicular component of the vehicle);
based on the receiving the new vehicle event from the vehicle component of the vehicle, add the new vehicle event to an event log (ALLEN, at least one para. 0031; “The storage device 30 can store the remote vehicle information as discussed above, such as positional information of the remote vehicle and identification of the remote vehicle.”);
determine that a vehicle event in the event log belongs to an unregistered event type (ALLEN, at least one para. 0065; “The vehicle detection process illustrated in the flowchart of FIG. 6 begins with determining whether vehicle dynamics information of a basic safety message (BSM) is received from the first remote vehicle 14 (FIG. 12) by the host vehicle 10. When the collision warning system 12 (FIG. 2) receives the BSM from the first remote vehicle 14 in step S100, the process proceeds to step S110 in which the position of the first remote vehicle 14 relative to the host vehicle is calculated.”, wherein the vehicle event is registered after the BSM is received for the first time thus determining the detection of the vehicle 14 as an unregistered event type);
generate a temporary event identifier (ID) based on at least one characteristic of the vehicle event (ALLEN, at least one para. 0065; “When the first remote vehicle is determined to be greater than the predetermined distance away from the host vehicle in steps S140 of FIG. 6, the process proceeds to step S150 to determine whether the temporary identification received from the first remote vehicle 14 is the first instance of receiving the basic safety message from the first remote vehicle 14.”, wherein the identification of the first remote vehicle received via the BSM is the characteristic of the vehicle event);
store the temporary event ID in a database (ALLEN, at least one para. 0065; “When the basic safety message is the first received from the first remote vehicle 14, the process moves to step S160 and saves the temporary identification of the first remote vehicle, such as in the storage device 30 (FIG. 2), and moves to step S165 and initializes a first index counter i to 0.”) with a timestamp (ALLEN, at least one para. 0031; “a BSM includes information in accordance with SAE Standard J2735 as can be appreciated by one skilled in the art.”, it is inherent timestamping is a standard component of BSM and the SAE Standard J2735);
determine whether a number of vehicle events in the event log with the same temporary event ID as the temporary event ID of the vehicle event exceed a predetermined threshold value (ALLEN, at least one para. 0067; “When the temporary identification is the same as the stored identification, the latitude (φ), longitude (θ), and heading (δ) of the first remote vehicle 14 is stored in the path table in step 5220.”) and (ALLEN, at least one para. 0067; “the first index counter i is checked to determine whether the first index counter is equal to a predetermined number M. When the first index counter i is less than the predetermined number M, the process continues to loop back to the main process flow of FIG. 5 and re-enter this process to accumulate GPS positional points, or information, from the first remote vehicle 14 with the same temporary identification until the first index counter i is equal to the predetermined number M at which point the traveling path of the first remote vehicle 14 has been successfully created as shown in FIG. 12.”) and (ALLEN, at least one para. 0064; “The predetermined distance can be any suitable distance, such as 100 meters. When the first remote vehicle 14 is not at least the predetermined distance away from the host vehicle 10, the process moves to step S170 in which a no result is returned to step S10 of the flowchart of FIG. 5.”); and
based on determining that the number of vehicle events exceeds the predetermined threshold value, trigger a response for the vehicle associated with the temporary event ID (ALLEN, at least one para. 0116; “When a crossing path is detected, as shown in FIG. 4, the collision warning system 12 proceeds to step S70 in which a warning is issued, or generated. When a crossing path is not detected in step S60, then the process moves to step S80.”).
Regarding claim 9, ALLEN teaches (currently amended) The apparatus of claim 8, wherein the at least one processor is further configured to execute the computer-executable instructions to: add the new vehicle event received from (ALLEN, at least one para. 0040; “The vehicle detection process illustrated in the flowchart of FIG. 6 begins with determining whether vehicle dynamics information of a basic safety message (BSM) is received from the first remote vehicle 14 (FIG. 12) by the host vehicle 10. When the collision warning system 12 (FIG. 2) receives the BSM from the first remote vehicle 14 in step S100, the process proceeds to step S110 in which the position of the first remote vehicle 14 relative to the host vehicle is calculated.”) the vehicle component of the vehicle (ALLEN, at least one para. 0031; “The wireless communications system 26 can include an omni-directional antenna and a multi-directional antenna, as well as communication interface circuitry that connects and exchanges information with a plurality of the remote vehicles 14 and 16 that are similarly equipped”) to the event log (ALLEN, at least one para. 0031; “The storage device 30 can store the remote vehicle information as discussed above, such as positional information of the remote vehicle and identification of the remote vehicle.”); and
determine whether the new vehicle event belongs to the unregistered event type (ALLEN, at least one para. 0065; “When the first remote vehicle is determined to be greater than the predetermined distance away from the host vehicle in steps S140 of FIG. 6, the process proceeds to step S150 to determine whether the temporary identification received from the first remote vehicle 14 is the first instance of receiving the basic safety message from the first remote vehicle 14. When the basic safety message is the first received from the first remote vehicle 14, the process moves to step S160 and saves the temporary identification of the first remote vehicle, such as in the storage device 30 (FIG. 2), and moves to step S165 and initializes a first index counter i to 0.”, wherein the vehicle event is registered after the BSM is received for the first instant. Therefore, the detection of the vehicle 14 is an unregistered event type before the first instant.) based on the temporary event ID (ALLEN, at least one para. 0065; “When the first remote vehicle is determined to be greater than the predetermined distance away from the host vehicle in steps S140 of FIG. 6, the process proceeds to step S150 to determine whether the temporary identification received from the first remote vehicle 14 is the first instance of receiving the basic safety message from the first remote vehicle 14.”).
Regarding claim 11, ALLEN teaches (original) The apparatus of claim 8, wherein the at least one processor is configured to generate the temporary event ID based on a hash (ALLEN, at least one para. 0042; “The collision warning system 12 (FIG. 2) can define a series of mathematical expressions that provide specific information regarding the longitudinal, lateral, elevation and heading of the first remote vehicle 14 relative to the host vehicle 10. These equations are used to determine the position of the first remote vehicle 14 relative to the host vehicle 10 and to determine whether the first remote vehicle is ahead of the host vehicle 10 in steps S110 and S120 of FIG. 6.”) using at least one of a source vehicle component of the vehicle (ALLEN, at least one para. 0031; “The wireless communications system 26 can include an omni-directional antenna and a multi-directional antenna, as well as communication interface circuitry that connects and exchanges information with a plurality of the remote vehicles 14 and 16 that are similarly equipped.”), distance of the source vehicle component from safety and security infrastructure in the vehicle, and a message in the vehicle event (ALLEN, at least one para. 0027; “An exemplary type of vehicle to vehicle communication is a basic safety message (BSM), which is configured to be broadcast by a vehicle. The BSM is received by another vehicle within a predetermined distance of the transmitting vehicle. The BSM is a packet of data that includes information about the position, heading, speed, identification, steering wheel angle, and other information relating to positional information of the transmitting vehicle.”).
Regarding claim 13, ALLEN teaches (previously presented) The apparatus of claim 8, wherein the predetermined threshold value (ALLEN, at least one para. 0064; “When the heading angle of the first remote vehicle 14 is not constant in step S130 of FIG. 6, the process proceeds to step S140 to determine whether the first remote vehicle 140 is at least a predetermined distance away from the host vehicle. The predetermined distance can be any suitable distance, such as 100 meters.”, wherein it is inherent that threshold value is stored in the database otherwise the predetermined distance cannot be calculated) and the response for the vehicle associated with the temporary event ID are stored in the database (ALLEN, at least one para. 0118; “When a crossing path is not detected in step S60, the process moves to step S80 in which a determination is made whether an active warning exists. When there is no active warning, the process end.”, wherein it is inherent that the active warning is stored in the database. otherwise, step S80 cannot be completed).
Regarding claim 15, ALLEN teaches (currently amended) A non-transitory computer-readable recording medium having recorded thereon instructions to perform (ALLEN, at least one para. 0029; “The electronic controller 24 includes other conventional components such as an input interface circuit, an output interface circuit, and storage devices such as a ROM (Read Only Memory) device and a RAM (Random Access Memory) device.”) a method for managing vehicle event data (ALLEN, at least one para. 0001; “the present invention relates to a collision warning system and method that defines a traveling path of a host vehicle based on data transmission from a first remote vehicle, and determines whether to generate a warning based on the traveling path and a heading of a second remote vehicle.”) performed by an electronic control unit (ECU) of a vehicle (ALLEN, at least one para. 0029; “As shown in more detail in FIG. 2, the collision warning system 12 includes an application controller 24 that can be referred to simply as an electronic controller or controller 22. ”), the method comprising:
receiving a new vehicle event (ALLEN, at least one para. 0040; “The vehicle detection process illustrated in the flowchart of FIG. 6 begins with determining whether vehicle dynamics information of a basic safety message (BSM) is received from the first remote vehicle 14 (FIG. 12) by the host vehicle 10. When the collision warning system 12 (FIG. 2) receives the BSM from the first remote vehicle 14 in step S100, the process proceeds to step S110 in which the position of the first remote vehicle 14 relative to the host vehicle is calculated. “) from a vehicle component of the vehicle (ALLEN, at least one para. 0031; “The wireless communications system 26 can include an omni-directional antenna and a multi-directional antenna, as well as communication interface circuitry that connects and exchanges information with a plurality of the remote vehicles 14 and 16 that are similarly equipped”, wherein the communication system 26 is the vehicular component of the vehicle);
based on the receiving the new vehicle event from the vehicle component of the vehicle, adding the new vehicle event to an event log (ALLEN, at least one para. 0031; “The storage device 30 can store the remote vehicle information as discussed above, such as positional information of the remote vehicle and identification of the remote vehicle.”);
determining that a vehicle event in the event log belongs to an unregistered event type (ALLEN, at least one para. 0065; “When the first remote vehicle is determined to be greater than the predetermined distance away from the host vehicle in steps S140 of FIG. 6, the process proceeds to step S150 to determine whether the temporary identification received from the first remote vehicle 14 is the first instance of receiving the basic safety message from the first remote vehicle 14. When the basic safety message is the first received from the first remote vehicle 14, the process moves to step S160 and saves the temporary identification of the first remote vehicle, such as in the storage device 30 (FIG. 2), and moves to step S165 and initializes a first index counter i to 0.”, wherein the vehicle event is registered after the BSM is received for the first instant. Therefore, the detection of the vehicle 14 is an unregistered event type before the first instant.);
generating a temporary event identifier (ID) based on at least one characteristic of the vehicle event (ALLEN, at least one para. 0065; “When the first remote vehicle is determined to be greater than the predetermined distance away from the host vehicle in steps S140 of FIG. 6, the process proceeds to step S150 to determine whether the temporary identification received from the first remote vehicle 14 is the first instance of receiving the basic safety message from the first remote vehicle 14.”, wherein the identification of the first remote vehicle received via the BSM is the characteristic of the vehicle event);
storing the temporary event ID in a database (ALLEN, at least one para. 0065; “When the basic safety message is the first received from the first remote vehicle 14, the process moves to step S160 and saves the temporary identification of the first remote vehicle, such as in the storage device 30 (FIG. 2), and moves to step S165 and initializes a first index counter i to 0.”) with a timestamp (ALLEN, at least one para. 0031; “a BSM includes information in accordance with SAE Standard J2735 as can be appreciated by one skilled in the art.”, it is inherent timestamping is a standard component of BSM and the SAE Standard J2735);
determining whether a number of vehicle events in the event log with the same temporary event ID as the temporary event ID of the vehicle event exceed a predetermined threshold value (ALLEN, at least one para. 0067; “When the temporary identification is the same as the stored identification, the latitude (φ), longitude (θ), and heading (δ) of the first remote vehicle 14 is stored in the path table in step 5220.”) and (ALLEN, at least one para. 0067; “the first index counter i is checked to determine whether the first index counter is equal to a predetermined number M. When the first index counter i is less than the predetermined number M, the process continues to loop back to the main process flow of FIG. 5 and re-enter this process to accumulate GPS positional points, or information, from the first remote vehicle 14 with the same temporary identification until the first index counter i is equal to the predetermined number M at which point the traveling path of the first remote vehicle 14 has been successfully created as shown in FIG. 12.”) and (ALLEN, at least one para. 0064; “The predetermined distance can be any suitable distance, such as 100 meters. When the first remote vehicle 14 is not at least the predetermined distance away from the host vehicle 10, the process moves to step S170 in which a no result is returned to step S10 of the flowchart of FIG. 5.”); and
based on determining that the number of vehicle events exceeds the predetermined threshold value, triggering a response for the vehicle associated with the temporary event ID (ALLEN, at least one para. 0116; “When a crossing path is detected, as shown in FIG. 4, the collision warning system 12 proceeds to step S70 in which a warning is issued, or generated. When a crossing path is not detected in step S60, then the process moves to step S80.”).
Regarding claim 16, ALLEN teaches (currently amended) The non-transitory computer-readable recording medium of claim 15, the method further comprising: adding the new vehicle event received from (ALLEN, at least one para. 0040; “The vehicle detection process illustrated in the flowchart of FIG. 6 begins with determining whether vehicle dynamics information of a basic safety message (BSM) is received from the first remote vehicle 14 (FIG. 12) by the host vehicle 10. When the collision warning system 12 (FIG. 2) receives the BSM from the first remote vehicle 14 in step S100, the process proceeds to step S110 in which the position of the first remote vehicle 14 relative to the host vehicle is calculated.”) the vehicle component of the vehicle (ALLEN, at least one para. 0031; “The wireless communications system 26 can include an omni-directional antenna and a multi-directional antenna, as well as communication interface circuitry that connects and exchanges information with a plurality of the remote vehicles 14 and 16 that are similarly equipped”) to the event log (ALLEN, at least one para. 0031; “The storage device 30 can store the remote vehicle information as discussed above, such as positional information of the remote vehicle and identification of the remote vehicle.”); and
determining whether the new vehicle event belongs to the unregistered event type (ALLEN, at least one para. 0065; “When the first remote vehicle is determined to be greater than the predetermined distance away from the host vehicle in steps S140 of FIG. 6, the process proceeds to step S150 to determine whether the temporary identification received from the first remote vehicle 14 is the first instance of receiving the basic safety message from the first remote vehicle 14. When the basic safety message is the first received from the first remote vehicle 14, the process moves to step S160 and saves the temporary identification of the first remote vehicle, such as in the storage device 30 (FIG. 2), and moves to step S165 and initializes a first index counter i to 0.”, wherein the vehicle event is registered after the BSM is received for the first instant. Therefore, the detection of the vehicle 14 is an unregistered event type before the first instant.) based on the temporary event ID (ALLEN, at least one para. 0065; “When the first remote vehicle is determined to be greater than the predetermined distance away from the host vehicle in steps S140 of FIG. 6, the process proceeds to step S150 to determine whether the temporary identification received from the first remote vehicle 14 is the first instance of receiving the basic safety message from the first remote vehicle 14.”).
Regarding claim 18, ALLEN teaches (original) The non-transitory computer-readable recording medium of claim 15, wherein generating the temporary event ID is based on a hash (ALLEN, at least one para. 0042; “The collision warning system 12 (FIG. 2) can define a series of mathematical expressions that provide specific information regarding the longitudinal, lateral, elevation and heading of the first remote vehicle 14 relative to the host vehicle 10. These equations are used to determine the position of the first remote vehicle 14 relative to the host vehicle 10 and to determine whether the first remote vehicle is ahead of the host vehicle 10 in steps S110 and S120 of FIG. 6.”) using at least one of a source vehicle component of the vehicle (ALLEN, at least one para. 0031; “The wireless communications system 26 can include an omni-directional antenna and a multi-directional antenna, as well as communication interface circuitry that connects and exchanges information with a plurality of the remote vehicles 14 and 16 that are similarly equipped.”), distance of the source vehicle component from safety and security infrastructure in the vehicle, and a message in the vehicle event (ALLEN, at least one para. 0027; “An exemplary type of vehicle to vehicle communication is a basic safety message (BSM), which is configured to be broadcast by a vehicle. The BSM is received by another vehicle within a predetermined distance of the transmitting vehicle. The BSM is a packet of data that includes information about the position, heading, speed, identification, steering wheel angle, and other information relating to positional information of the transmitting vehicle.”).
Regarding claim 20, ALLEN teaches (original) The non-transitory computer-readable recording medium of claim 15, wherein the predetermined threshold value (ALLEN, at least one para. 0064; “When the heading angle of the first remote vehicle 14 is not constant in step S130 of FIG. 6, the process proceeds to step S140 to determine whether the first remote vehicle 140 is at least a predetermined distance away from the host vehicle. The predetermined distance can be any suitable distance, such as 100 meters.”, wherein it is inherent that threshold value is stored in the database otherwise the predetermined distance cannot be calculated) and the response for the vehicle associated with the temporary event ID are stored in the database (ALLEN, at least one para. 0118; “When a crossing path is not detected in step S60, the process moves to step S80 in which a determination is made whether an active warning exists. When there is no active warning, the process end.”, wherein it is inherent that the active warning is stored in the database. otherwise, step S80 cannot be completed).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 3, 5, 10, 12, 17, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ALLEN (US 20220319324 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of EVANS (US 20250108670 A1).
Regarding claim 3, ALLEN teaches (currently amended) The method of claim 2, wherein determining whether the new vehicle event belongs to a registered event type based on the temporary event ID is performed using a machine learning (ML) model (ALLEN, at least one para. 0029; “As shown in more detail in FIG. 2, the collision warning system 12 includes an application controller 24 that can be referred to simply as an electronic controller or controller 22. The electronic controller 24 preferably includes a microcomputer with a control program that controls the components of the collision warning system 12 as discussed below. The electronic controller 24 includes other conventional components such as an input interface circuit, an output interface circuit, and storage devices such as a ROM (Read Only Memory) device and a RAM (Random Access Memory) device. The microcomputer of the controller 24 is at least programmed to control the collision warning system 12 in accordance with the flow chart of FIG. 4 as discussed below. It will be apparent to those skilled in the art from this disclosure that the precise structure and algorithms for the controller 24 can be any combination of hardware and software that will carry out the functions of the present invention.”).
Even though ALLEN teaches that the determining the registered event type based on the temporary event ID based on computer algorithms, ALLEN does not explicitly teach a machine learning (ML) model.
However, EVANS, in the same field of endeavor (EVANS, at least one para. 0001; “The present disclosure relates generally to vehicle systems, and more particularly to vehicle systems for detecting and locating vehicle events, such as road hazards, and providing such data to other systems, such as routing and/or mapping systems.”) teaches a machine learning (ML) model (EVANS, at least one para. 0022; “Determining a vehicle event can include any suitable vehicle processing circuits, including the execution of algorithms that compare sensor readings to limits, as well as the use of statistical models created with machine learning to determine the occurrence of a road event in response to vehicle sensor data.”).
ALLEN and EVANS are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both of them are in the same field of collecting vehicular data to determine an output as the claimed invention. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to have modified determining process of the new vehicle event being belong to the registered event type of the ALLEN with teaching of EVANS. One of the ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification so that the determination process can include a statistical model that continues to learn and/or is updated periodically to get accurate results (EVANS; 0050).
Regarding claim 5, ALLEN teaches (original) The method of claim 1, further (ALLEN, at least one para. 0001; “the present invention relates to a collision warning system and method that defines a traveling path of a host vehicle based on data transmission from a first remote vehicle, and determines whether to generate a warning based on the traveling path and a heading of a second remote vehicle.”) comprising:
adding a registered event type and a response for the vehicle associated with the registered event type to the database.
ALLEN does not explicitly teach adding a registered event type and a response for the vehicle associated with the registered event type to the database.
However, EVANS, in the same field of endeavor (EVANS, at least one para. 0001; “The present disclosure relates generally to vehicle systems, and more particularly to vehicle systems for detecting and locating vehicle events, such as road hazards, and providing such data to other systems, such as routing and/or mapping systems.”) teaches adding a registered event type and a response for the vehicle associated with the registered event type to the database (EVANS, at least one para. 0099; “If it is determined that an event has occurred (Y from 1180-6), a method can geolocate the event with vehicle circuits 1180-7 and then store event and related data 1180-9. Event and related data can include any such data as described herein, including but not limited to, sensor type/ID, a sensor reading/value, location and/or timestamp.”).
ALLEN and EVANS are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both of them are in the same field of collecting vehicular data to determine an output as the claimed invention. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to have modified the overall method of the ALLEN with teaching of EVANS. One of the ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification so that the method can determine the correct response for collected dataset when a registered event is not occurred, such as collecting tire pressure data during the recalibrating process of the tire sensors (EVANS; 0098).
Regarding claim 10, ALLEN teaches (currently amended) The apparatus of claim 9, wherein the at least one processor is configured to determine whether the new vehicle event belongs to a registered event type based on the temporary event ID by using a machine learning (ML) model (ALLEN, at least one para. 0029; “As shown in more detail in FIG. 2, the collision warning system 12 includes an application controller 24 that can be referred to simply as an electronic controller or controller 22. The electronic controller 24 preferably includes a microcomputer with a control program that controls the components of the collision warning system 12 as discussed below. The electronic controller 24 includes other conventional components such as an input interface circuit, an output interface circuit, and storage devices such as a ROM (Read Only Memory) device and a RAM (Random Access Memory) device. The microcomputer of the controller 24 is at least programmed to control the collision warning system 12 in accordance with the flow chart of FIG. 4 as discussed below. It will be apparent to those skilled in the art from this disclosure that the precise structure and algorithms for the controller 24 can be any combination of hardware and software that will carry out the functions of the present invention.”).
Even though ALLEN teaches that the determining the registered event type based on the temporary event ID based on computer algorithms, ALLEN does not explicitly teach a machine learning (ML) model.
However, EVANS, in the same field of endeavor (EVANS, at least one para. 0001; “The present disclosure relates generally to vehicle systems, and more particularly to vehicle systems for detecting and locating vehicle events, such as road hazards, and providing such data to other systems, such as routing and/or mapping systems.”) teaches a machine learning (ML) model (EVANS, at least one para. 0022; “Determining a vehicle event can include any suitable vehicle processing circuits, including the execution of algorithms that compare sensor readings to limits, as well as the use of statistical models created with machine learning to determine the occurrence of a road event in response to vehicle sensor data.”).
ALLEN and EVANS are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both of them are in the same field of collecting vehicular data to determine an output as the claimed invention. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to have modified determining process of the new vehicle event being belong to the registered event type of the ALLEN with teaching of EVANS. One of the ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification so that the determination process can include a statistical model that continues to learn and/or is updated periodically to get accurate results (EVANS; 0050).
Regarding claim 12, ALLEN teaches (original) The apparatus of claim 8, wherein the at least one processor is further configured to execute the computer-executable instructions to (ALLEN, at least one para. 0001; “the present invention relates to a collision warning system and method that defines a traveling path of a host vehicle based on data transmission from a first remote vehicle, and determines whether to generate a warning based on the traveling path and a heading of a second remote vehicle.”):
add a registered event type and a response for the vehicle associated with the registered event type to the database.
ALLEN does not explicitly teach add a registered event type and a response for the vehicle associated with the registered event type to the database.
However, EVANS, in the same field of endeavor (EVANS, at least one para. 0001; “The present disclosure relates generally to vehicle systems, and more particularly to vehicle systems for detecting and locating vehicle events, such as road hazards, and providing such data to other systems, such as routing and/or mapping systems.”) teaches add a registered event type and a response for the vehicle associated with the registered event type to the database (EVANS, at least one para. 0099; “If it is determined that an event has occurred (Y from 1180-6), a method can geolocate the event with vehicle circuits 1180-7 and then store event and related data 1180-9. Event and related data can include any such data as described herein, including but not limited to, sensor type/ID, a sensor reading/value, location and/or timestamp.”).
ALLEN and EVANS are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both of them are in the same field of collecting vehicular data to determine an output as the claimed invention. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to have modified the overall method of the ALLEN with teaching of EVANS. One of the ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification so that the method can determine the correct response for collected dataset when a registered event is not occurred, such as collecting tire pressure data during the recalibrating process of the tire sensors (EVANS; 0098).
Regarding claim 17, ALLEN teaches (currently amended) The non-transitory computer-readable recording medium of claim 16, wherein determining whether the new vehicle event belongs to a registered event type based on the temporary event ID is performed using a machine learning (ML) model (ALLEN, at least one para. 0029; “As shown in more detail in FIG. 2, the collision warning system 12 includes an application controller 24 that can be referred to simply as an electronic controller or controller 22. The electronic controller 24 preferably includes a microcomputer with a control program that controls the components of the collision warning system 12 as discussed below. The electronic controller 24 includes other conventional components such as an input interface circuit, an output interface circuit, and storage devices such as a ROM (Read Only Memory) device and a RAM (Random Access Memory) device. The microcomputer of the controller 24 is at least programmed to control the collision warning system 12 in accordance with the flow chart of FIG. 4 as discussed below. It will be apparent to those skilled in the art from this disclosure that the precise structure and algorithms for the controller 24 can be any combination of hardware and software that will carry out the functions of the present invention.”).
Even though ALLEN teaches that the determining the registered event type based on the temporary event ID based on computer algorithms, ALLEN does not explicitly teach a machine learning (ML) model.
However, EVANS, in the same field of endeavor (EVANS, at least one para. 0001; “The present disclosure relates generally to vehicle systems, and more particularly to vehicle systems for detecting and locating vehicle events, such as road hazards, and providing such data to other systems, such as routing and/or mapping systems.”) teaches a machine learning (ML) model (EVANS, at least one para. 0022; “Determining a vehicle event can include any suitable vehicle processing circuits, including the execution of algorithms that compare sensor readings to limits, as well as the use of statistical models created with machine learning to determine the occurrence of a road event in response to vehicle sensor data.”).
ALLEN and EVANS are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both of them are in the same field of collecting vehicular data to determine an output as the claimed invention. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to have modified determining process of the new vehicle event being belong to the registered event type of the ALLEN with teaching of EVANS. One of the ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification so that the determination process can include a statistical model that continues to learn and/or is updated periodically to get accurate results (EVANS; 0050).
Regarding claim 19, ALLEN teaches (original) The non-transitory computer-readable recording medium of claim 15, the method further (ALLEN, at least one para. 0001; “the present invention relates to a collision warning system and method that defines a traveling path of a host vehicle based on data transmission from a first remote vehicle, and determines whether to generate a warning based on the traveling path and a heading of a second remote vehicle.”) comprising:
adding a registered event type and a response for the vehicle associated with the registered event type to the database.
ALLEN does not explicitly teach adding a registered event type and a response for the vehicle associated with the registered event type to the database.
However, EVANS, in the same field of endeavor (EVANS, at least one para. 0001; “The present disclosure relates generally to vehicle systems, and more particularly to vehicle systems for detecting and locating vehicle events, such as road hazards, and providing such data to other systems, such as routing and/or mapping systems.”) teaches adding a registered event type and a response for the vehicle associated with the registered event type to the database (EVANS, at least one para. 0099; “If it is determined that an event has occurred (Y from 1180-6), a method can geolocate the event with vehicle circuits 1180-7 and then store event and related data 1180-9. Event and related data can include any such data as described herein, including but not limited to, sensor type/ID, a sensor reading/value, location and/or timestamp.”).
ALLEN and EVANS are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both of them are in the same field of collecting vehicular data to determine an output as the claimed invention. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to have modified the overall method of the ALLEN with teaching of EVANS. One of the ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification so that the method can determine the correct response for collected dataset when a registered event is not occurred, such as collecting tire pressure data during the recalibrating process of the tire sensors (EVANS; 0098).
Claim(s) 7 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ALLEN (US 20220319324 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of WOLF (US 20240212396 A1).
Regarding claim 7, ALLEN teaches (original) The method of claim 1, wherein the triggering the response for the vehicle comprises sending a message to a cloud network (ALLEN, at least one para. 0028; “The base station 22 sends and receives signals to and from the collision warning system 12 of the host vehicle 10 and the first and second remote vehicles 14 and 16 via a network of the roadside units 20, or any other suitable two-way wireless communications network.”).
Even though ALLEN teaches about sending data to a remote server, ALLEN does not explicitly teach wherein the triggering the response for the vehicle comprises sending a message to a cloud network.
However, WOLF, in the same field of endeavor (WOLF, at least one para. 0001; “Aspects of the present disclosure generally relate to on-vehicle sensor event and location data fusion with rate control and adaptive event thresholding.”) teaches wherein the triggering the response for the vehicle comprises sending a message to a cloud network (WOLF, at least one para. 0036; “In an example, the collection of event messages 126 may be performed in an event-based manner, in which the vehicles 102 send the event messages 126 to the cloud server 124 responsive to occurrence of the event.”).
ALLEN and WOLF are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both of them are in the same field of collecting vehicular data to determine an output as the claimed invention. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to have modified the triggering the response of ALLEN with teaching of WOLF. One of the ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification so that the cloud server can maintain a query for the vehicle based on the event occurrence with all the necessary contextual information (WOLF; 0035-36).
Regarding claim 14, ALLEN teaches (original) The apparatus of claim 8, wherein the at least one processor is configured to trigger the response for the vehicle by sending a message to a cloud network (ALLEN, at least one para. 0028; “The base station 22 sends and receives signals to and from the collision warning system 12 of the host vehicle 10 and the first and second remote vehicles 14 and 16 via a network of the roadside units 20, or any other suitable two-way wireless communications network.”).
Even though ALLEN teaches about sending data to a remote server, ALLEN does not explicitly teach wherein the at least one processor is configured to trigger the response for the vehicle by sending a message to a cloud network.
However, WOLF, in the same field of endeavor (WOLF, at least one para. 0001; “Aspects of the present disclosure generally relate to on-vehicle sensor event and location data fusion with rate control and adaptive event thresholding.”) teaches wherein the at least one processor is configured to trigger the response for the vehicle by sending a message to a cloud network (WOLF, at least one para. 0036; “In an example, the collection of event messages 126 may be performed in an event-based manner, in which the vehicles 102 send the event messages 126 to the cloud server 124 responsive to occurrence of the event.”).
ALLEN and WOLF are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both of them are in the same field of collecting vehicular data to determine an output as the claimed invention. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to have modified the triggering the response of ALLEN with teaching of WOLF. One of the ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification so that the cloud server can maintain a query for the vehicle based on the event occurrence with all the necessary contextual information (WOLF; 0035-36).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to UPUL P CHANDRASIRI whose telephone number is (703)756-5823. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8.30 am 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, Christian Chace can be reached at 571-272-4190. 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.
/U.P.C./Examiner, Art Unit 3665 /CHRISTIAN CHACE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3665
Prosecution Insights