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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed 01/14/2026 is being entered. Claims 1, 8, 13, and 15 are amended. Claims 1-20 are pending, and rejected as detailed below. This action is final as necessitated by amendment.
Claim Objections
Amendment to claims 13 is entered. Therefore the claim objection for claim 13 has been withdrawn.
Response to Arguments
Claim Rejections under 35 U.S.C. §102 and 103
Independent Claim 1
Applicant argues that Allen fails to teach following limitation, “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; and”. Applicant respectfully submits, as described in Allen with reference to Figs. 6 and 11, upon a first instance of receiving a basic safety message (BSM) from a first remote vehicle (RV1), the host vehicle (HV) may save a temporary identification for that RV1 and initialize an index counter i to 0. Allen then increments i as additional BSMs are received from that same RV1 and as corresponding positional data points are stored in a path table. Allen continues accumulating successive positional data points until i reaches a predetermined number M, at which point Allen deems that a sufficient number of positional samples has been collected to define the RV1 travel path. Critically, Allen's index counter i is merely a bookkeeping mechanism for ensuring that a sufficient number of consecutive positional samples have been gathered from a single identified remote vehicle to construct the travel path. The counter i therefore measures the number of positional data points (or BSM samples) accumulated for path definition, not the number of occurrences of a vehicle event type (what the Office construes as the first instance of receiving a BSM from the RV1) and certainly not the number of events sharing a temporary event ID.
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, applicant is incorrect about Allen then increments i as additional BSMs are received from that same RV1 and as corresponding positional data points are stored in a path table. Allen continues accumulating successive positional data points until i reaches a predetermined number M. Allen clearly mentioned that number of time BMS are accumulated based on step 200 and step 210 (not based on successive positional data points), and if the step 210 not completed, the process will loop back to main process (Allen 0067; “The electronic controller 24 decodes the BSM from the first remote vehicle 14 (FIG. 12) in step S200 of FIG. 11. The process moves to step S210 and checks whether the temporary identification of the first remote vehicle contained in the BSM from step S200 matches the temporary identification stored in step S160 of the flowchart of FIG. 6. When the temporary identification is not the same as the stored identification, the process moves to step S250 and a no result is returned to step S20 of FIG. 5, which ends the process. 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. The process moves to step S230 and increments the first index counter i by 1. In step S240, 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.”). Furthermore, Allen’s index counter is based number of vehicle event occurrence that includes information about the position, heading, speed, identification, steering wheel angle, and other information relating to positional information of the transmitting vehicle. In other words, position, heading, speed, steering wheel angle, and other information relating to positional information of the transmitting vehicle are directly related to the safety infrastructure of the vehicle.
Independent Claims 8 and 15
Applicant respectfully argues that independent claims 8 and 15 are patentable over the cited references, at least for similar reasons set forth above with respect to independent 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 argues that the dependent claims are patentable over the cited references, at least for their respective dependencies.
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.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 01/08/2026. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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:
determining that a vehicle event in an event log belongs to an unregistered event type (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.”, 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);
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);
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 (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.”) exceed a predetermined threshold value (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 (original) The method of claim 1, further comprising: adding a new vehicle event received from a vehicle component of the vehicle (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.”) to the event log (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”); and
determining whether the new vehicle event belongs to the unregistered event type based on the temporary event ID (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. The process then proceeds to step S180 and returns a yes result to step S10 of the flowchart of FIG. 5. When the temporary identification of the first remote vehicle 14 is already saved in step S150, the process moves to step S180 and returns a yes result to step S10 of the flowchart of FIG. 5.”).
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.”):
determine that a vehicle event in an event log belongs to an unregistered event type (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.”, 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);
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 (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.”) exceed a predetermined threshold value (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 (original) The apparatus of claim 8, wherein the at least one processor is further configured to execute the computer-executable instructions to: add a new vehicle event received from a vehicle component of the vehicle (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.”) to the event log (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”); and
determine whether the new vehicle event belongs to the unregistered event type based on the temporary event ID (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. The process then proceeds to step S180 and returns a yes result to step S10 of the flowchart of FIG. 5. When the temporary identification of the first remote vehicle 14 is already saved in step S150, the process moves to step S180 and returns a yes result to step S10 of the flowchart of FIG. 5.”).
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 (currently amended) 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:
determining that a vehicle event in an event log belongs to an unregistered event type (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.”, 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);
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);
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 (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.”) exceed a predetermined threshold value (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 (original) The non-transitory computer-readable recording medium of claim 15, the method further comprising: adding a new vehicle event received from a vehicle component of the vehicle (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.”) to the event log (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”); and
determining whether the new vehicle event belongs to the unregistered event type based on the temporary event ID (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. The process then proceeds to step S180 and returns a yes result to step S10 of the flowchart of FIG. 5. When the temporary identification of the first remote vehicle 14 is already saved in step S150, the process moves to step S180 and returns a yes result to step S10 of the flowchart of FIG. 5.”).
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 (original) The method of claim 2, wherein determining whether the new vehicle event belongs to the 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 (original) The apparatus of claim 9, wherein the at least one processor is configured to determine whether the new vehicle event belongs to the 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 (original) The non-transitory computer-readable recording medium of claim 16, wherein determining whether the new vehicle event belongs to the 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
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 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