DETAILED ACTION
This is the first Office action on the merits and is responsive to the papers filed 01/24/2024. Claims 1-17 are currently pending and examined below.
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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 01/24/2024 and 12/15/2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements have been considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because
Step 1: Claims 1-17 are directed to a position detection apparatus or a position detection method. The claims fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because the claims recite an apparatus (a machine) or a method (a process). Step 1: Yes.
Step 2A – prong 1: Claims 1 and 17 recite the limitations, of detecting, for each of a plurality of periphery information detectors, relative positions of a plurality of object parts existing around an ego vehicle with respect to the ego vehicle, based on detection information of the periphery information detector; setting a first periphery information detector and a second periphery information detector to be determined, from the plurality of periphery information detectors; setting the relative positions of the plurality of object parts which were detected based on the detection information of the first periphery information detector, as a plurality of first relative positions; setting the relative positions of the plurality of object parts which were detected based on the detection information of the second periphery information detector, as a plurality of second relative positions; and calculating a difference amount between the first relative position and the second relative position, for each of pairs of the first relative position and the second relative position in which relative positions correspond with each other; and determining a group of a plurality of the difference amounts calculated for the same object, based on a plurality of the difference amounts, and determining whether or not a reliability of the first relative positions and the second relative positions corresponding to the plurality of difference amounts of the same object is high, based on the plurality of difference amounts of the same object of one group which was determined to be calculated for the same object. These limitations, as drafted, are simple processes that, under the broadest reasonable interpretation, cover performance of the limitations in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components. That is, other than “by a processor (which is the structure encompassing the different modules: a periphery information acquisitor for detecting, a difference amount calculator for setting (as in selecting) and calculating and a reliability determiner for determining)” nothing in the claims preclude the steps from practically being performed in the mind. For example, other than “by a processor” language, the claims encompass a person looking at data collected, selecting and performing calculations and forming a judgement. The mere nominal recitation of “by a processor” does not take the claim limitations out of the mental process grouping. Thus, claims 1 and 17 are directed to a mental process. Step 2A – Prong 1: Yes.
Step 2A- Prong 2: Claims 1 and 17 recite an additional element of a processor that is used to perform detecting, selecting, calculating and calculating steps. The processor is recited at a high level of generality, therefore acting as a generic computer to perform the abstract idea. The processor is claimed generically and is operating in its ordinary capacity and does not use the judicial exception in a manner that imposes a meaningful limit on the judicial exception, such that the claims are more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a computer. Accordingly, even in combination, the additional element does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. Step 2A – Prong 2: No.
Step 2B: As discussed with respect to step 2A Prong Two, the additional element in the claims amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components. The same analysis applies here in 2B, i.e., mere instructions to apply an exception using generic computer components cannot integrate a judicial exception into a practical application at Step 2A or provide an inventive concept in Step 2B. The claims are ineligible. Step 2B: No.
Therefore, claims 1 and 17 are ineligible under 35 U.S.C 101.
Claims 2-16 do not contain limitations that render them subject matter eligible under 35 U.S.C. 101.
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 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.
Claims 1, 5-12, 14-15 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Adachi et al. (JP 2015152991 A; hereinafter Adachi) in view of Kiyohara et al. (US 20230243657 A1; hereinafter Kiyohara).
Regarding claim 1, Adachi discloses:
A position detection apparatus (Fig. 4: self-position estimation apparatus 400) comprising at least one processor configured to implement:
a periphery information acquisitor (Fig. 4: acquisition unit 401 and calculation unit 403) that detects, for each of a plurality of periphery information detectors, relative positions of a plurality of object parts existing around an ego vehicle with respect to the ego vehicle, based on detection information of the periphery information detector ([0045] The acquisition unit 401 acquires relative coordinate information (relative circular coordinates) of relative positions of a plurality of objects with respect to the position of the host vehicle via a sensor (millimeter wave radar or the like); [0046] The calculation unit 403 searches the database for a plurality of candidates corresponding to the selected object based on the selected relative coordinate information and the database in which the absolute coordinate information of the absolute position of the object is stored in advance, and the retrieved candidates Is converted into relative coordinates with respect to the position of the host vehicle);
a difference amount calculator (Fig. 4: selection unit 402 and calculation unit 403) that sets a first periphery information detector and a second periphery information detector to be determined, from the plurality of periphery information detectors; sets the relative positions of the plurality of object parts which were detected based on the detection information of the first periphery information detector, as a plurality of first relative positions ([0045] selection unit 402 selects relative coordinate information of one object from the acquired relative coordinate information of a plurality of objects); sets the relative positions of the plurality of object parts which were detected based on the detection information of the second periphery information detector, as a plurality of second relative positions ([0046] The calculation unit 403 searches the database for a plurality of candidates corresponding to the selected object based on the selected relative coordinate information and the database in which the absolute coordinate information of the absolute position of the object is stored in advance, and the retrieved candidates Is converted into relative coordinates with respect to the position of the host vehicle); and calculates a difference amount between the first relative position and the second relative position, for each of pairs of the first relative position and the second relative position in which relative positions correspond with each other ([0046] The estimation unit 404 uses the absolute coordinate information of the candidate and a predetermined algorithm (EKF algorithm) as the candidate of the smallest difference candidate corresponding to the selected object among the plurality of calculated differences. It is to estimate the self position.); and
a determiner (Fig. 4: estimation unit 404) that determines a group of a plurality of the difference amounts calculated for the same object, based on a plurality of the difference amounts ([0046] The estimation unit 404 uses the absolute coordinate information of the candidate and a predetermined algorithm (EKF algorithm) as the candidate of the smallest difference candidate corresponding to the selected object among the plurality of calculated differences. It is to estimate the self position.).
Adachi does not specifically disclose:
a reliability determiner determines whether or not a reliability of the first relative positions and the second relative positions corresponding to the plurality of difference amounts of the same object is high, based on the plurality of difference amounts of the same object of one group which was determined to be calculated for the same object.
However, Kiyohara discloses:
a reliability determiner determines whether or not a reliability of the first relative positions and the second relative positions corresponding to the plurality of difference amounts of the same object is high ([0106] where the reliability of the relative position estimation unit 12 is high), based on the plurality of difference amounts of the same object of one group which was determined to be calculated for the same object ([0107] calculate the correction amount for the position information obtained from a plurality of markers, beacons, or the like based on a statistics value of the observation result).
Adachi and Kiyohara are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of vehicle positioning. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Adachi’s vehicle positioning to further incorporate Kiyohara’s vehicle positioning for the advantage of determining reliability for appropriately learning a correction amount which results in improved positioning estimation (Kiyohara’s [0006]-[0009]).
Regarding claim 5, Adachi does not specifically disclose:
wherein, when deviations between a plurality of difference amounts whose relative positions are close with each other are less than or equal to a deviation determination value, the reliability determiner determines that the plurality of difference amounts whose relative positions are close are the difference amounts calculated for the same object.
However, Kiyohara discloses:
wherein, when deviations between a plurality of difference amounts whose relative positions are close with each other are less than or equal to a deviation determination value, the reliability determiner determines that the plurality of difference amounts whose relative positions are close are the difference amounts calculated for the same object ([0107] calculate the correction amount for the position information obtained from a plurality of markers, beacons, or the like based on a statistics value of the observation result…a maximum likelihood estimation method may be used. In this way, instability of an external recognition result can be removed, and an effect of improving reliability of the estimated position can be expected).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Adachi’s vehicle positioning to further incorporate Kiyohara’s vehicle positioning for the advantage of determining the difference amount and its reliability for appropriately learning a correction amount which results in improved positioning estimation (Kiyohara’s [0006]-[0009]).
Regarding claim 6, Adachi does not specifically disclose:
wherein the reliability determiner continuously sets a pair of the two difference amounts whose relative positions are close with each other from the plurality of difference amounts, while overlapping relative positions between the pairs; for each of the pairs of the two difference amounts, when a deviation between the two difference amounts is less than or equal to a deviation determination value, determines that the two difference amounts are the difference amounts calculated for the same object; and determines the group of the plurality of difference amounts calculated for the same object among the plurality of pairs of the two difference amounts whose relative positions are overlapped continuously.
However, Kiyohara discloses:
wherein the reliability determiner continuously sets a pair of the two difference amounts whose relative positions are close with each other from the plurality of difference amounts, while overlapping relative positions between the pairs ([0106] The learning unit 15 accumulates the amount of the difference calculated by the difference computation unit 14 as time-series data, and calculates the correction amount for the absolute position estimation unit 11 based on the accumulated time-series data); for each of the pairs of the two difference amounts, when a deviation between the two difference amounts is less than or equal to a deviation determination value, determines that the two difference amounts are the difference amounts calculated for the same object ([0107] calculate the correction amount for the position information obtained from a plurality of markers, beacons, or the like based on a statistics value of the observation result…a maximum likelihood estimation method may be used. In this way, instability of an external recognition result can be removed, and an effect of improving reliability of the estimated position can be expected); and determines the group of the plurality of difference amounts calculated for the same object among the plurality of pairs of the two difference amounts whose relative positions are overlapped continuously ([0107] a maximum likelihood estimation method may be used. In this way, instability of an external recognition result can be removed, and an effect of improving reliability of the estimated position can be expected).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Adachi’s vehicle positioning to further incorporate Kiyohara’s vehicle positioning for the advantage of determining the difference amount and its reliability for appropriately learning a correction amount which results in improved positioning estimation (Kiyohara’s [0006]-[0009]).
Regarding claim 7, Adachi does not specifically disclose:
wherein the reliability determiner sets an acceptable range, based on the plurality of difference amounts of the same object; and determines whether or not the reliability of the first relative positions and the second relative positions corresponding to the plurality of difference amounts of the same object is high, based on a comparison result between the plurality of difference amounts of the same object, and the acceptable range.
However, Kiyohara discloses:
wherein the reliability determiner sets an acceptable range, based on the plurality of difference amounts of the same object ([0107] a maximum likelihood estimation method may be used. In this way, instability of an external recognition result can be removed, and an effect of improving reliability of the estimated position can be expected); and determines whether or not the reliability of the first relative positions and the second relative positions corresponding to the plurality of difference amounts of the same object is high, based on a comparison result between the plurality of difference amounts of the same object, and the acceptable range ([0072] The absolute position and the traveling direction are calculated by consolidating the relative relationship to the marker, the beacon, or the like obtained in Step S2 with the absolute position and installation orientation of the marker, the beacon, or the like obtained in Step S3 at the same timing. In a case of the two-dimensional barcode, it is sufficient if the reliability index is defined as a function in which the reliability is high if there is no difference between the data portion and an error correction code portion using a Reed-Solomon code or the like, and the reliability decreases as the number of bits for which information restoration is performed by error correction processing increases).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Adachi’s vehicle positioning to further incorporate Kiyohara’s vehicle positioning for the advantage of determining the difference amount and its acceptable range to increase reliability for appropriately learning a correction amount which results in improved positioning estimation (Kiyohara’s [0006]-[0009]).
Regarding claim 8, Adachi does not specifically disclose:
wherein the reliability determiner calculates a variation degree of the plurality of difference amounts of the same object; and sets the acceptable range, based on the plurality of difference amounts of the same object and the variation degree.
However, Kiyohara discloses:
wherein the reliability determiner calculates a variation degree of the plurality of difference amounts of the same object; and sets the acceptable range, based on the plurality of difference amounts of the same object and the variation degree ([0107] calculate the correction amount for the position information obtained from a plurality of markers, beacons, or the like based on a statistics value of the observation result…a maximum likelihood estimation method may be used. In this way, instability of an external recognition result can be removed, and an effect of improving reliability of the estimated position can be expected).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Adachi’s vehicle positioning to further incorporate Kiyohara’s vehicle positioning for the advantage of determining the difference amount and its acceptable range to increase reliability for appropriately learning a correction amount which results in improved positioning estimation (Kiyohara’s [0006]-[0009]).
Regarding claim 9, Adachi does not specifically disclose:
wherein the reliability determiner sets an upper limitation value and a lower limitation value, based on a detection characteristic of the first relative position by the first periphery information detector, and a detection characteristic of the second relative position by the second periphery information detector; and upper and lower limits the acceptable range with the upper limitation value and the lower limitation value.
However, Kiyohara discloses:
wherein the reliability determiner sets an upper limitation value and a lower limitation value, based on a detection characteristic of the first relative position by the first periphery information detector, and a detection characteristic of the second relative position by the second periphery information detector; and upper and lower limits the acceptable range with the upper limitation value and the lower limitation value ([0107] calculate the correction amount for the position information obtained from a plurality of markers, beacons, or the like based on a statistics value of the observation result…a maximum likelihood estimation method may be used. In this way, instability of an external recognition result can be removed, and an effect of improving reliability of the estimated position can be expected).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Adachi’s vehicle positioning to further incorporate Kiyohara’s vehicle positioning for the advantage of determining the difference amount and its acceptable range to increase reliability for appropriately learning a correction amount which results in improved positioning estimation (Kiyohara’s [0006]-[0009]).
Regarding claim 10, Adachi does not specifically disclose:
wherein the reliability determiner determines whether or not the plurality of difference amounts of the same object are normal values as the difference amounts of the same object; and sets the acceptable range to a preliminarily set specified range, when determining to be not normal values.
However, Kiyohara discloses:
wherein the reliability determiner determines whether or not the plurality of difference amounts of the same object are normal values as the difference amounts of the same object; and sets the acceptable range to a preliminarily set specified range, when determining to be not normal values ([0107] calculate the correction amount for the position information obtained from a plurality of markers, beacons, or the like based on a statistics value of the observation result…a maximum likelihood estimation method may be used. In this way, instability of an external recognition result can be removed, and an effect of improving reliability of the estimated position can be expected).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Adachi’s vehicle positioning to further incorporate Kiyohara’s vehicle positioning for the advantage of determining the difference amount and its acceptable range to increase reliability for appropriately learning a correction amount which results in improved positioning estimation (Kiyohara’s [0006]-[0009]).
Regarding claim 11, Adachi does not specifically disclose:
wherein the reliability determiner calculates the final acceptable range by correcting the acceptable range of present calculation which is the acceptable range set based on the plurality of difference amounts of the same object calculated in a present calculation cycle, by the acceptable range calculated in a past calculation cycle for this same object.
However, Kiyohara discloses:
wherein the reliability determiner calculates the final acceptable range by correcting the acceptable range of present calculation which is the acceptable range set based on the plurality of difference amounts of the same object calculated in a present calculation cycle, by the acceptable range calculated in a past calculation cycle for this same object ([0114] In a case where the correction amount output from the learning unit 15 has greatly been changed by the threshold value or more from the correction amounts up to the previous time (Yes branch), the processing proceeds to Step S15. In Step S15, the position correction unit 16 adds the correction amount obtained by interpolating the previous correction amount and the current correction amount to an absolute position estimation amount and outputs the addition result in order to alleviate a correction amount variation).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Adachi’s vehicle positioning to further incorporate Kiyohara’s vehicle positioning for the advantage of applying a stable correction amount which results in a better accuracy index and improved positioning estimation (Kiyohara’s [0118]).
Regarding claim 12, Adachi does not specifically disclose:
wherein the reliability determiner calculates the final acceptable range by correcting the acceptable range of present calculation so as to suppress a change in the final acceptable range of the same object from the acceptable range calculated in the past calculation cycle for the same object.
However, Kiyohara discloses:
wherein the reliability determiner calculates the final acceptable range by correcting the acceptable range of present calculation so as to suppress a change in the final acceptable range of the same object from the acceptable range calculated in the past calculation cycle for the same object ([0114] In a case where the correction amount output from the learning unit 15 has greatly been changed by the threshold value or more from the correction amounts up to the previous time (Yes branch), the processing proceeds to Step S15. In Step S15, the position correction unit 16 adds the correction amount obtained by interpolating the previous correction amount and the current correction amount to an absolute position estimation amount and outputs the addition result in order to alleviate a correction amount variation).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Adachi’s vehicle positioning to further incorporate Kiyohara’s vehicle positioning for the advantage of applying a stable correction amount which results in a better accuracy index and improved positioning estimation (Kiyohara’s [0118]).
Regarding claim 14, Adachi does not specifically disclose:
wherein the plurality of periphery information detectors include any two or more of a position detection apparatus which detects a current position of the ego vehicle, one or more kinds of periphery monitoring apparatuses which monitor around the ego vehicle, a roadside machine which monitors a road, and a peripheral vehicle which exists around the ego vehicle.
However, Kiyohara discloses:
wherein the plurality of periphery information detectors include any two or more of a position detection apparatus which detects a current position of the ego vehicle ([0030] The host vehicle position estimation unit 10 estimates a host vehicle position based on vehicle information from the vehicle information receiving unit 1 a, absolute position information from the absolute position acquisition sensor 1 b, and relative position information from the relative position acquisition sensor 1 c), one or more kinds of periphery monitoring apparatuses ([0046] C2X device and the marker reading device) which monitor around the ego vehicle ([0046] The C2X device refers to a beacon receiver that recognizes a beacon transmitter arranged in an environment, The marker reading device detects marker information such as a type, a position, and a posture of the marker such as a characteristic mark or sign, or a magnetic tag arranged in an environment), a roadside machine which monitors a road ([0046] a device for road-to-vehicle communication with an access point device such as wireless local area network (LAN) communication or Bluetooth communication), and a peripheral vehicle which exists around the ego vehicle ([0046] a vehicle-to-vehicle communication device for receiving information from another vehicle).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Adachi’s vehicle positioning to further incorporate Kiyohara’s vehicle positioning for the advantage of including a variety of periphery detectors for appropriately learning a correction amount which results in improved positioning estimation (Kiyohara’s [0006]-[0009]).
Regarding claim 15, Adachi does not specifically disclose:
further comprising
a vehicle controller that controls a traveling of vehicle using the first relative positions and the second relative positions which were determined that the reliability is high.
However, Kiyohara discloses:
further comprising
a vehicle controller (Fig. 1: automated driving control unit 40) that controls a traveling of vehicle ([0033] controls the actuator 1 d) using the first relative positions and the second relative positions which were determined that the reliability is high ([0107] calculate the correction amount for the position information obtained from a plurality of markers, beacons, or the like based on a statistics value of the observation result…a maximum likelihood estimation method may be used. In this way, instability of an external recognition result can be removed, and an effect of improving reliability of the estimated position can be expected).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Adachi’s vehicle positioning to further incorporate Kiyohara’s vehicle positioning for the advantage of determining the difference amount and its reliability for appropriately learning a correction amount which results in improved positioning estimation for vehicle navigation (Kiyohara’s [0006]-[0009]).
Regarding claim 17, Adachi discloses:
A position detection method that makes an arithmetic processor (Fig. 4: self-position estimation apparatus 400) perform each following step, comprising:
a periphery information acquisition step (Fig. 4: acquisition unit 401 and calculation unit 403) of detecting, for each of a plurality of periphery information detectors, relative positions of a plurality of object parts existing around an ego vehicle with respect to the ego vehicle, based on detection information of the periphery information detector ([0045] The acquisition unit 401 acquires relative coordinate information (relative circular coordinates) of relative positions of a plurality of objects with respect to the position of the host vehicle via a sensor (millimeter wave radar or the like); [0046] The calculation unit 403 searches the database for a plurality of candidates corresponding to the selected object based on the selected relative coordinate information and the database in which the absolute coordinate information of the absolute position of the object is stored in advance, and the retrieved candidates Is converted into relative coordinates with respect to the position of the host vehicle);
a difference amount calculation step (Fig. 4: selection unit 402 and calculation unit 403) of setting a first periphery information detector and a second periphery information detector to be determined, from the plurality of periphery information detectors; setting the relative positions of the plurality of object parts which were detected based on the detection information of the first periphery information detector, as a plurality of first relative positions ([0045] selection unit 402 selects relative coordinate information of one object from the acquired relative coordinate information of a plurality of objects); setting the relative positions of the plurality of object parts which were detected based on the detection information of the second periphery information detector, as a plurality of second relative positions ([0046] The calculation unit 403 searches the database for a plurality of candidates corresponding to the selected object based on the selected relative coordinate information and the database in which the absolute coordinate information of the absolute position of the object is stored in advance, and the retrieved candidates Is converted into relative coordinates with respect to the position of the host vehicle); and calculating a difference amount between the first relative position and the second relative position, for each of pairs of the first relative position and the second relative position in which relative positions correspond with each other ([0046] The estimation unit 404 uses the absolute coordinate information of the candidate and a predetermined algorithm (EKF algorithm) as the candidate of the smallest difference candidate corresponding to the selected object among the plurality of calculated differences. It is to estimate the self position.);
a determination step (Fig. 4: estimation unit 404) of determining a group of a plurality of the difference amounts calculated for the same object, based on a plurality of the difference amounts ([0046] The estimation unit 404 uses the absolute coordinate information of the candidate and a predetermined algorithm (EKF algorithm) as the candidate of the smallest difference candidate corresponding to the selected object among the plurality of calculated differences. It is to estimate the self position.).
Adachi does not specifically disclose:
a reliability determination step of determining whether or not the reliability of the first relative positions and the second relative positions corresponding to the plurality of difference amounts of the same object is high, based on the plurality of difference amounts of the same object of one group which was determined to be calculated for the same object.
However, Kiyohara discloses:
a reliability determination step of determining whether or not the reliability of the first relative positions and the second relative positions corresponding to the plurality of difference amounts of the same object is high ([0106] where the reliability of the relative position estimation unit 12 is high), based on the plurality of difference amounts of the same object of one group which was determined to be calculated for the same object ([0107] calculate the correction amount for the position information obtained from a plurality of markers, beacons, or the like based on a statistics value of the observation result).
Adachi and Kiyohara are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of vehicle positioning. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Adachi’s vehicle positioning to further incorporate Kiyohara’s vehicle positioning for the advantage of determining reliability for appropriately learning a correction amount which results in improved positioning estimation (Kiyohara’s [0006]-[0009]).
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Adachi, in view of Kiyohara and in view of Ikeda et al. (US 20210256728 A1; hereinafter Ikeda).
Regarding claim 13, Adachi and Kiyohara do not specifically disclose:
wherein the reliability determiner determines whether or not the reliability of the first relative positions and the second relative positions corresponding to the plurality of difference amounts of the same object is high, based on a ratio of a number of the difference amounts which became within the acceptable range, with respect to a total number of the plurality of difference amounts of the same object.
However, Ikeda discloses:
wherein the reliability determiner determines whether or not the reliability of the first relative positions and the second relative positions corresponding to the plurality of difference amounts of the same object is high, based on a ratio of a number of the difference amounts which became within the acceptable range, with respect to a total number of the plurality of difference amounts of the same object ([0042] The candidate points 300 present outside the detection ranges 200 of the respective millimeter-wave radars 2 and the candidate points 302, each within at least one of the detection ranges 200 but with a low density of other candidate points therearound, are determines as virtual images and removed from the candidate points.).
Ikeda is analogous to the claimed invention because it pertains to the same field of vehicle positioning. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Adachi’s vehicle positioning as currently modified to further incorporate Ikeda’s vehicle positioning for the advantage of determining reliability for the candidate points based on the density therearound which results in removal of the candidate points and reduced processing load (Ikeda’s [0024]).
Potentially Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-4 and 16 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 101 set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PAYSUN WU whose telephone number is (571)272-1528. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8AM-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, Hunter Lonsberry can be reached on (571)272-7298. 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.
/PAYSUN WU/Examiner, Art Unit 3665
/DONALD J WALLACE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3665